Gasoline usage in the USA.....hopeless.

Bluefront · Post by **Bluefront** » Wed May 23, 2007 2:42 am

There's no hope for us. The last gallon of $10 gasoline will be dumped into some SUV for a useless joy-ride.

I just saw a recent list of things that USA car buyers use to evaluate a prospective new car purchase. Fuel economy was #37 on the list, right behind "number of cup-holders". It's been like this since I first got into the car business. Every time a company produces a low-line economy car, one that gets good mileage, it doesn't sell. The company immediately starts adding bling, a bigger engine, larger wheels, etc. We give lip service to good fuel economy.....nothing else.

floffe · Post by **floffe** » Wed May 23, 2007 3:42 am

Eh, it'll rise with the prices.

Trip · Post by **Trip** » Wed May 23, 2007 3:57 am

Taxes will affect consumers, but America is more spread out than Europe and it also has a lot of suburbs. If gas became unaffordable, I suppose suburbanites would be forced to move into the city and local areas would learn to provide for themselves. The global economy would collapse, but as long as the environment can take it, we'll be fine.

Of course, after oil we'll move on to coal

Bluefront · Post by **Bluefront** » Wed May 23, 2007 3:57 am

Usage hasn't changed since I've been driving cars....a long time. Every time there's an upper limit placed on gas price before usage will slow, it's exceeded immediately. About $3.25 now without any significant usage change. Econo cars still are bad-mouthed.......

Trip · Post by **Trip** » Wed May 23, 2007 4:05 am

That doesn't mean there isn't a price point percentage of wages that won't lead to a dramatic decline in usage.

Gas is fairly inelastic, but at some point it will snap. At some point workers will have to move closer to their jobs and buy cheaper products made locally.

"Economists" claim now that gas is less inelastic than previously thought, so usage is affected by price.

---

Gas guzzlers seem to be useful: SUVs for hauling boats, 4X4 SUVs for dirt roads, vans for hauling children, and boosting machismo. A similar snapping point will be reached with these.

---

Fossil fuels are limited resources. At present our economies depend a great deal upon them for... fuel and fertilizer come to mind.

jaganath · Post by **jaganath** » Wed May 23, 2007 5:05 am

America is more spread out than Europe and it also has a lot of suburbs.

translation: the entire US infrastructure is built around and for the car (&trucks). lucky for you guys you will never run out of oil (or other liquid transportation fuel), otherwise your entire civilisation would collapse overnight.

Of course, after oil we'll move on to coal

maybe, but oil from coal is a lot more expensive.

"Economists" claim now that gas is less inelastic than previously thought, so usage is affected by price.

Europe is a very obvious example of this. Here in the UK we pay about $7.60 for a US gallon of petrol (gas), and little cars that get great mileage are the best-selling models. of course there are still maniacs with more money than sense who buy Hummers etc, but I suspect they are only 5-10% of the motoring population.

mention $8 gas to any American and they'll likely have a heart attack; but that's what it takes, it seems.

mr. poopyhead · Post by **mr. poopyhead** » Wed May 23, 2007 6:01 am

the problem is that politicians are trying to keep gas prices DOWN... no sane politician would ever expect to get a single vote based on a platform of "let's tax the hell out of gas and find alternative energy sources"...

personally, i think they should triple the gas prices... give people a wake up call.

our cheap oil isn't going to last very long... china and india are now burgeoning economies and they want a piece of the north american lifestyle...

GamingGod · Post by **GamingGod** » Wed May 23, 2007 9:59 am

I love my 99' Honda Civic HX. I get close to 40mpg. Last semester I would put $20 a week into it as opposed to $40 a week I was spending on my 99 malibu. Maybe one day the rap videos will start sporting economy cars and all the sheep in the USA will change their tune. Before rap got big SUV's were fairly uncommon.

AZBrandon · Post by **AZBrandon** » Wed May 23, 2007 10:16 am

Bluefront wrote:I just saw a recent list of things that USA car buyers use to evaluate a prospective new car purchase. Fuel economy was #37 on the list, right behind "number of cup-holders".

Can you provide a link? I get the feeling you just said that for dramatic effect, not based on a real article/study.

GamingGod wrote:I love my 99' Honda Civic HX. I get close to 40mpg. Last semester I would put $20 a week into it as opposed to $40 a week I was spending on my 99 malibu. Maybe one day the rap videos will start sporting economy cars and all the sheep in the USA will change their tune. Before rap got big SUV's were fairly uncommon.

I purchased a 97 Civic HX 5-speed in February of 1997. I still have it to this day and although I suspect the engine is getting worn out since the fuel economy is now "only" 35-38mpg usually, I still feel it's one of the smartest economic decisions I've made.

As for SUV's and rap, that's a causality thing - kind of like people who think buying a chess set makes you smart. It doesn't, however smart people tend to own chess sets. Rap is all about ego, so once SUV's became a symbol of ego, they were popular in rap videos. Ego is a big thing for all of humanity, so anything that can be used to build the ego of selfish people gets popular. Until the smugness of owning a fuel efficient car outshines the manliness of owning an overpriced truck, things will remain as they our.

My personal prediction is the same as all the major analysts: Gas/diesel will need to reach about $6/gallon in the USA to have a major impact on our usage, be it in the form of vehicle purchasing decisions or miles driven. We already know that every cent has a small impact, but in order to make a large impact, I don't think that will happen until about $6/gallon.

JazzJackRabbit · Post by **JazzJackRabbit** » Wed May 23, 2007 10:41 am

Bluefront wrote:The last gallon of $10 gasoline will be dumped into some SUV for a useless joy-ride.

I've always steered away from "americans should drive less for recreation" threads, but this just seems wrong. The "spend less gas - buy more efficient vehicles" crowd is just too daft to understand their arguments are full of holes.

First the argument buy more fuel efficient car, the latest hype is hybrid. Well, guess what, I don't want to buy a hybrid because they are all economy cars with cheap interior, horrible styling (new civic interior styling is probably the ugliest styling I have ever seen in a production car, it's worse than Hyundai and kia for cristsake), they are too small (I hate cars when I can reach left side from the driving seat without leaning), they have less engine vibration dampening, they have less road noise dampening, the list just goes on and on...

So is it any wonder that hybrid cars are failing in the US when they are badly made with quality and styling of dodge neon and pricetag of honda/toyota? Take a look at the pricing. New Hybrid Civic costs 22K MSRP, Nissan Altima 2.5s with CVT transmission for smoother, more comfortable ride (with better mileage too) costs 20K MSRP. Why would I pay more for a lesser car? Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, better mileage, but guess what, I just don't want to ride in a cheap car that makes me cringe every time I get into it. I have Nissan Altima 2005 2.5sl, it's a good car for the money and I will keep it (for I don't know how long), it gets much better mileage than my dads nissan maxima, but it also has cheap interior and too much road noise, and I don't want to have the same issues with my next car, so all these civics and priuses are out of the question. Make a better hybrid car with quality interior and styling, don't reserve the good looks only for the higher end cars, and I just may consider it.

Another stupid argument is "useless joy-rides".
(1) I think it's stupid to consider my recreation time as useless. So what am I supposed to do? Stay at home and do nothing? Geez, I'm so looking forward to it.
(2) Gas usage from recreational driving is minimal. I live at Chicago suburbs and I can get everywhere I want in less than 15 minutes. The longest trip would be to AMC theater which is 20-25 minutes (there are closer theaters). So how much money do I spend on gas on an average night out? Two gallons at most, which comes out to $7. So let's see, two night outs, $14 at most compared to $50-60 (based on Chicagoland area prices) average american spends each week on gas to drive to work and on errands such as grocery shopping/laudry.

The entire argument "go buy a hybrid" is stupid. People suggest solutions that sound easy but in reality are hard to do. Similar to "move closer to work if you want to save on gas" or "you shouldn't have moved into this area if you wanted DSL/cable/dish". If I move closer to work to save on gas, I might save on gas, but I will also pay higher rent, so it evens out in the end and moving closer to work won't make any sense. What about people who don't rent, but own, should they incure time and monetary penalty every time they sell their existing house and buy a new house closer to work? Suppose their current home is only 5 miles from work which is already close enough, a new house opens up for sale 2 miles from work, should they move? Where does it end? What if there is a house close to work but the area is not as good and children would have to change schools? Same with buy hybrid/or just more efficient vehicles. No reasonable person would sell their perfectly functioning car at a loss due to depreciation, and then buy a new economy car with a premium pricetag which may turn out a lemon.

Why don't we make some calculations. Right now, if I drive only to work and nowhere else I have to gas up every two weeks, at approximately $50 per tank of gas (that's what it cost me last time to fill up the tank), which means I spend $1300 yearly on gas, also suppose hybrid will give me twice more mileage compared to my Altima (which is very very optimistic) which will cut my gas costs in half to $650. If I sell my car now and buy a civic hybrid I will be out $6K-8K. It will take 10 years, just to recoup the costs incurred. There is absolutely no incentive for me to switch to a smaller less powerful and cheaper made hybrid now while forfeiting $8000 which won't be recouped until 10 years from now. All those hysterical people crying save environment and save on gas money at the same time and such just can't understand it. It's useless arguing with them. They are fanatics without a shred of reason. They can't realize that there are no simple solutions to the problem.

Devonavar · Post by **Devonavar** » Wed May 23, 2007 11:36 am

Wow, nice rant.

A few point form responses:

I don't want to buy a hybrid because they are all economy cars

From Wikipedia's list of hybrid cars:

- Honda Accord
- Ford Escape
- Chevy Silverado / GMC Sierra (I believe this is a pickup...?)
- Lexus RX400h
- Mercury Mariner
- Toyota Highlander (large SUV)
- Lexus GS450h
- Nissan Altima (your vehicle)

As you can see, not all hybrids are econoboxes, though I will admit the selection is still limited.

I think by "useless joyrides", Bluefront means driving for fun, not driving to get to recreation. He's not saying you shouldn't entertain yourself, he's saying there's more environmentally conscious ways of doing it than driving for pleasure.

If I move closer to work to save on gas, I might save on gas, but I will also pay higher rent, so it evens out in the end and moving closer to work won't make any sense.

And a shorter commute isn't a benefit? I agree that living where you work is far from simple, but it has benefits beyond just saving gas.

JazzJackRabbit · Post by **JazzJackRabbit** » Wed May 23, 2007 12:59 pm

Devonavar wrote:As you can see, not all hybrids are econoboxes, though I will admit the selection is still limited.

Not only limited but also much more expensive. The GS450 is rumored to cost 100K+, somehow I doubt that people who can drop that much money on a car will worry about the price of gas. That is a fashion statement car for rich enviromentally active people.

But anyway, coming back to normal people car. Those are more affordable, but still cost much more than non hybrid versions, and given the cars of the same size the gas saving is not that great. People often compare Accord with Civic Hybrid saying the latter gets twice the mileage but it is not a fair comparison because accord is much heavier and has bigger engine for faster acceleration. People who like Accord will not move to a smaller vehicle, so if you are going to compare hybrid to a normal vehicle, compare the same models. And same models, say Civic Hybrid against Civic or Altima Hybrid (41mpg) vs Altima (24mpg) only get 50% more mileage. I spend $1300 a year on gas (just commuting to work, not including recreation), so suppose I didn't have any vehicle and went with hybrid, I would have had 40 percent gas saving, or $520 per year. On the other hand Nissan Altima Hybrid starts with 25K, while regular one starts with 20K. That's 5K difference, and with my style of driving it would still take 10 years to recoup the costs. This hardly saves me any money especially considering I can put those 5K extra in CDs to earn interest or just have them readily available for an emergency. It's the same with PSUs. I don't really save any money on my energy bill by going 80+ certified PSU because extra pocket cost that I pay right away outweighs any energy savings. I buy 80+ PSUs because they are generally better made (not the same with cars) and because they generate less heat which makes cooling easier.

Whenever car manufacturers will come up with technology that will allow for a much better mileage for a mid to full sized sedan while keeping the same price and power, then I will switch. Until then, I'm not willing to drop more money for a smaller cheaply made car. As of right now, there is very little incentive buying a hybrid.

Devonavar wrote:I think by "useless joyrides", Bluefront means driving for fun, not driving to get to recreation. He's not saying you shouldn't entertain yourself, he's saying there's more environmentally conscious ways of doing it than driving for pleasure.

I don't know any people who drive just for joy. If I'm driving, it means I'm driving somewhere. Sure, I may enjoy the fact of driving on a good night with fresh air and sunroof down, but don't drive just because I want to drive. So I don't really understand what is "enviromentally conscious way" of driving.

Devonavar wrote:And a shorter commute isn't a benefit? I agree that living where you work is far from simple, but it has benefits beyond just saving gas.

Yes, it does have benefit of lower commute time which means more time for family/so and it's not as stressful. However how many times people change jobs in their lifetime? 3, 5, 6? Are they supposed to move each time they change the job? That's a bit unrealistic. What if you have SO who is also changing jobs? Sure, there can be compromises, for example if you expect to stay with the company 10+ years and it's 40 miles away, but selling house/buying house/moving is never simple. It takes time and money and moreover married people with children may not be willing to move for the sake of the children.

That's not to mention that typically you can get a much nicer house farther from work. My parents are looking at the houses in Chicago suburbs (roughly 40 miles out close to railroad station). A ranch style house with one story, 25+ years old, fairly close to a major road (noise and pollution) cost 250K+. A nice new two stories houses start with 500K+. That's fucking insane (no blue/white collar worker can afford that). A friend of my sister bought a house in one of the developed communities 30 minutes away that's huge, bigger than many of the 600K houses here and cost significantly less than that. So yeah, you can move closer to work, but housing quality is likely to go down.

AZBrandon · Post by **AZBrandon** » Wed May 23, 2007 1:50 pm

Could someone print the per-capita transportation fuel growth for Europe for the last 20 years? I bet Europe's consumption per-capita is growing just as fast as the USA, but since their population isn't growing, that's why consumption isn't growing.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Wed May 23, 2007 3:52 pm

Hello,

Is this too difficult to deal with? Is saving gas too much trouble? Has your reality check bounced?

Has any of the complainers ever driven a Prius? I can assure you, it is a solid vehicle. I am 6'-4" (1.93m) and my brother is 6'-7" (2m), and my 9-year old son is 5'-1" (1.55m) -- and all three of us sat in the back seat. It was not overly wide, I'll grant you, but there is plenty of leg and head room, and there is a large hatch area.

Bluefront · Post by **Bluefront** » Wed May 23, 2007 3:56 pm

AZBrandon.....I got that little list thing off a week-end NBC TV program on the subject. I believe every word of it. #2 on the list was "quality of the audio system". This just confirms what I've seen over the years. My company sells Nissans. Guess what? The cheapest, most fuel efficient model sells the worst...by far. That's a Sentra, which I drive.

No politician will ever advocate higher gas taxes to limit gas usage.....He would be hanged on the spot.

The last time I remember seeing a study on the subject, large SUVs and vans, were driven with only the driver in the car......90% of the time. This rich country is pouring it's wealth into a gas tank, and no doubt will do so till the last dollar is gone, or till the last gallon of gas is used.

qviri · Post by **qviri** » Wed May 23, 2007 4:57 pm

JazzJackRabbit wrote:People suggest solutions that sound easy but in reality are hard to do.

Since when is change easy?

Bluefront · Post by **Bluefront** » Wed May 23, 2007 5:28 pm

Oh.....and Neil. My brother-in-law drives a Prius, which I have driven. This is a great car which I would own if I could. It truly gets 52mpg around town. I've seen the numbers/calculations, because I didn't believe it, and checked it myself. But I wouldn't want to ride in the back seat for very far......I'm 6'5".

psiu · Post by **psiu** » Wed May 23, 2007 7:54 pm

Well...I love our 2003 Pontiac Vibe. Got 38mpg on our vacation trip these last 2 weeks (drive up to the Keweenaw from Detroit, and then down and to Pittsburgh also).

Roomy, plenty of power when I mash the pedal and make that 1.8L I4 cry. Great mileage and pretty much the perfect car for my wife and I. All the options, comfy seats (I can sit behind myself), plenty of headroom, and great cargo ability (flat folding seats for carrying stuff up to 10' long, roof rack, and I can add a hitch).

For a second vehicle someday, I would want an XJ.

Trip · Post by **Trip** » Wed May 23, 2007 9:08 pm

I'll get a Toyota Prius when my '98 ES 300 breaks. I don't trust the Americans and Mexicans to build a decent car; I'm all about buying American, but there's just nothing American to buy. Some toyotas are made here though

I'm only 6'1" or 6'2" so I should be fine

Post by **Rusty075** » Wed May 23, 2007 9:38 pm

JazzJackRabbit wrote: I don't know any people who drive just for joy. If I'm driving, it means I'm driving somewhere.

Have you never heard of NASCAR?

Recreational gasoline use (boats, ATV's, race cars, snowmobiles, etc) in the US accounts for 7.5 billion gallons of gasoline consumption a year. Although that is only about 5% of the total consumption of gas. But still, 7.5 billion gallons is 7.5 billion gallons.

Gas-guzzling cars will eventually go the way of the beaver-pelt top hat. Eventually the demand/supply curve will shift until the alternatives are more attractive than maintaining the fashion status quo. But nothing will change until the prices get high enough. The nice thing is that the prices are likely to rise gradually, which will slowly provide the market incentives to develop the alternatives and the advancements in technology.

Hybrid are probably a stop-gap measure until better technology comes along. But then again, that technology is advancing at a really fast rate right now too. Their price will come down, and the performance will go up. Time will tell.

Until then, I'm investing my entire portfolio in Big Oil stocks.

Trip · Post by **Trip** » Thu May 24, 2007 2:20 am

Whether we consume limited fossil fuels quickly or slowly, the consumption is still occurring.

Whether a total consumption (or some other level) will be devastating for the environment or not, new technology will need to come along to replace fossil fuels or else a decline in population and consumption per capita. And of course if the result is devastating to the environment then nations will need to deal with their environments as best they can.

Of course, by increasing demand for efficient cars, perhaps we encourage progress towards future real solutions.

And, I can't resist adding that if the US truly cared about reducing its pollution it would reduce its immigration. That is the source of most of its growing population, and it's people who pollute. If not allowed into the US, the immigrants or their children would run out of resources and cease to exist or at least pollute far less than they do in the US. Each international state probably ought to reduce its own pollution since current levels generally, save Iceland and maybe a few others, seems unsustainable, and it's near impossible to do so if population is exploding.

I like Exxon

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Thu May 24, 2007 2:35 am

Hello,

Personally, I drive a Scion xA (a division of Toyota) and it has averaged 38mpg year round. It has peaked at 42.5mpg, and the low was 32mpg.

I fit in the back and in the front -- four 6' + adults can fit. It is lacking a bit in storage in the hatch; though I can fit a week's groceries okay. I got it with side air bags (front and rear) and a 100,000 bumper to bumper for just over $16k.

If I was to buy today, I would buy a Honda Fit: more people room, and loads more storage -- the back seat is amazing! This car is a Tardis (bigger on the inside than it is on the outside!

) And, it should get better mileage than my xA (better highway gearing, and better aerodynamics.)

Oh, and the 2008 Toyota Prius may get as high as 94mpg, because of new lighter weight and more powerful lithium ion batteries. It will operate all-electric up to a higher speed than the current car -- and maybe it'll be a plug-in? Electricity overnight is better than gas anytime.

Bluefront · Post by **Bluefront** » Thu May 24, 2007 3:26 am

Of course the one big problem with battery driven cars.....the cost of a replacement battery set. Should a person ever have to replace the batteries at his own cost, any savings in gas expense, would be lost. I doubt this factor will be overcome till gasoline prices go up somewhat. If you get a large 100k warranty on your new Prius, and trade the car in before the warranty has expired......you might make out ok, as long as the used Prius prices stay high. (no doubt they will) But for a mechanic-type person like myself, buying such a car is foolish. My $100 Sentra which I bought with a blown-up engine, and fixed for about $500 or so.......works perfectly. 32mpg is fine by me.

mexell · Post by **mexell** » Thu May 24, 2007 4:29 am

Just a little side note:
I own a 2006 Volkswagen Passat, which you would all call a hatchback, I think. It has ample space for just anything I want to load in including my two kids. It has got a 105hp engine, which is not quite a racecar, but enough to drive comfortably 150km/h with cruise control on the autobahn (top speed should be ~190, never tried this).

It consumes 5.8l/100km, which is 40.5 mpg for you over there. And remember: It's a full-sized car with lots of cupholders, navigation, audio system, xenon light, etc...
It is quiet, fast and comfortable. I'm 1,94m and I can easily sit in the back for hours even when my brother is driving (he's even a little taller than me)

The only downside (but not for me, actually, only for the other side of the big pond): It consumes diesel

In my eyes, it's complete nonsense to buy a Prius, when there are diesel cars available which consume less and offer way more.

This kind of cars is very popular here in good old Europe, you can get similar Renaults, Peugeots, Volkswagens, Opels, even BMW and Mercedes are offering quite efficient diesel engines.

Just my 0,02â‚¬...

klankymen · Post by **klankymen** » Thu May 24, 2007 5:01 am

I agree with you. my neighbour drives a BMW 535d (turbocharged 3l diesel engine) with 275HP, and he drives like a madman (think triple digits starting with a 2 on the highway) yet he averages 8l / 100km (30mpg for you non-metric-system-users).

And I think it's safe to say that you'll have trouble finding a better designed or more featured car than a high-end BMW without looking at bentleys or RRs.
And rap guys can get their ego with one of these cars, if necessary.

Remember, 30mpg.

jhhoffma · Post by **jhhoffma** » Thu May 24, 2007 5:15 am

JazzJackRabbit wrote:I don't know any people who drive just for joy. If I'm driving, it means I'm driving somewhere.

Don't forget the "Sunday drivers" and my fiancee. She gets bored when there's nothing on TV and wants to drive around somewhere. Thanks to you guys (and $3.69 for gas this week), I cringe everytime. Now I say, if you want to go, we're taking your car. It's a '99 Saturn SC2 which gets good, not great, mileage. It's no Prius Hybrid, but it's much better than my '02 Escape V6 4wd. Unfortunately, when we travel the Saturn just doesn't have the space for a lot of our stuff, and forget seating anyone but children int he back. The only time I've tried to sit back there is when I was changing her rear speakers, and even with the front seats folded all the way forward I barely fit. I'm 6'3", but I'm no giant. Even driving that car is too hard because my head constantly touches the roof, unless I recline the seat into a gangsta lean.

But then again, my Escape's seats are too small for me as well, as the lumbar adjustments are too low as well as the headrests.

jaganath · Post by **jaganath** » Thu May 24, 2007 5:24 am

The nice thing is that the prices are likely to rise gradually

I dunno about that,if you look at the oil price over the last 30-40 yrs the word that springs to mind is 'volatile'. It's cyclical rather than rising in a smooth slope.

Trip, about limiting immigration, that seems rather unfair for all those poor people who just want to make a better life for themselves and their families. IMO reducing per capita consumption would be easier,cheaper and fairer; IIRC USians use something like 5 times as much energy per capita as Europeans.

Unfortunately in the US the restrictions on diesel emissions are crazy strict, which combined with the poor rep diesels have from the rubbish GM made in the 70's, means no 275hp,30mpg diesels for the Yanks; we don't mind keeping them for ourselves.

mexell · Post by **mexell** » Thu May 24, 2007 5:33 am

Diesel emissions were also a topic here, but with newer legislation and newer cars (like mine

) that's not an issue anymore. They've got zero particle emissions anymore and almost the same gases going out as gasoline driven cars.

Edit: Maybe nowadays starting to sell diesel cars in America would be a bit of a chicken-egg-problem. You know, no one buys diesel cars if there are no gas stations, but also no one equips his gas station with diesel because no diesel cars are around...

mexell · Post by **mexell** » Thu May 24, 2007 6:27 am

I've got a question to my fellow forum members in America:

Don't you think that diesel cars would sell as hell in the USA? I mean, you can break it down to the same power with consumption reduced by a third and torque up a third, compared to gasoline...

jojo4u · Post by **jojo4u** » Thu May 24, 2007 7:10 am

Some words from a german student:
I got a Skoda compact car, which nearly fits all my household. I'm driving 80 mph on the Autobahn at 40 mpg. On rural roads I get 45 mpg. Gas price is 7 $/gallon at the moment.

I once was a fan of diesel technology, and it's very popular in Germany because the tax on gas is lower but the yearly tax is higher. But I can see now that diesel has disadvantages:
1 l gasoline produces 23,2 g of CO2/km, 1 l diesel produces 26,2 g of CO2/km (113% of gasoline). The large german community sprimonitor.de with 30000+ cars lists 28 mpg for gasoline cars and 33 mpg (85,5% of gasoline) average for diesel cars. 1,13 * 0,85 = 95,5 %. So the carbondioxide advantage for diesel is quite slim

Diesel are more expensive and require turbos, particle filters and nitric oxide catalysators which makes them even more expensive.

On the plus side they are nice to drive because of the torque, and have a cost advantage for frequent drivers.

Today's cars are just not made fuel efficient since it's to expensive. The new BMW 1 series has reduced fuel consumption by 15 % with a bundle of actions which seem logical. There is a start-stop automatic, an intelligent generator control, a gear change indicator, 2nd gen direct fuel injection and aerodynamics depending on speed.