Car Tech forum

General discussion

My non-Hybrid Honda Civic got 72 mpg...

by Skyhawk007 / May 24, 2007 8:18 AM PDT

Yes, that is right- I got 72 mpg from my 1995 Civic VX hatchback.
The car was rated at 49 city/56 hwy to begin with, and I actually got better mpg than that.
I don't see what the big deal is with Hybrids, quite frankly. My non-Hybrid 1995 Civic got 72 highway MPG, and it didn't cost the $23,000 that Hybrids go for today. I bought my Civic VX for only $10,000 brand new.
The truth of the matter is, Honda USED to make the Non-Hybrid gasoline engine that would get phenomenal mpg, but no longer does.
This makes no sense to me at all. I do not understand why Honda abandoned their Civic high mpg Vtech-E gas engine years ago. With gas prices almost at $4.00 a gallon, we need to have this kind of technology available to us once again right now.
Can someone please explain to me why Honda Motor corp was so foolish and abandoned this high mpg engine without any thought?
Anyone who wants to drive a tremendously high gas mileage Honda can buy one off the used car lots today and get even better mileage than any hybrid ever made.
Spending $23,000 for a new hybrid simply makes zero sense to me at all, when Honda Motor can simply make their non-hybrids with this V-Tech E engine and make it available to anyone who wants it for half the price of a hybrid.
Why is Honda Motor company doing this?
Is it because of silly profit at the expense of reason?

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: My non-Hybrid Honda Civic got 72 mpg...
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: My non-Hybrid Honda Civic got 72 mpg...
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
it's all about$$
by gravrdr / May 25, 2007 7:38 AM PDT

Having actually trained and worked at a Honda dealership in MD I can safly tell you it's about $$. That engine and gas milage estimate are not even spoken of in the industry anymore. I totally agree with you that it makes no sense. We (Americans) should have been using Hydrogen, Natural gas, or even straight electric powered vehicals for the last 15 or more years. It is the big oil companys using $$$$ to influence the Federal and State gov't (IE: Lobbiests)Our Nation is in a sad state of affairs untill a decent/ honest person is elected president. ( a decent-honest person would ever be eleceted. Pardon me for being a bit pessamistic)

Collapse -
You are right about that...
by Skyhawk007 / May 25, 2007 8:25 AM PDT
In reply to: it's all about$$

When we see our elected President doing absolutely NOTHING about trying to get the oil companies to reduce their price-gouging at the pumps, you know that we have MAJOR problems here in the US. Why should we be surprised at this anyways? The entire Bush and Cheney families have long been connected to Big Oil, and that is whom got them elected in the first place. President Bush is an oil man first and foremost, and wants to see much higher prices at the pumps, because he and his family is profiting from the skyrocketing gas prices.
This is the truth.
What just galls me to no end, is that we have not heard even so much as a whisper from his administration about stopping the oil profiteering from the Big oil companies- Chevron, Exxon, and Union.
These companies are racking up billion dollar profits every quarter, and President Bush does nothing to stop it.
I am miffed at the Honda Corp, too, for abandoning the high mpg Vtech-E engine, and instead making these dopey hybrids that are just too expensive to own, and don't even get nearly the gas mileage that the non-hybrid Hondas were getting in the mid 1990's.
I would take my Civic 1995 VX any day over the over-priced and over-hyped hybrids that they sell now.

Collapse -
Where do these people come from?
by Andy77e / May 26, 2007 8:30 AM PDT

Is this the communist forum? What exactly do you want Bush and Cheney to do? If GM doesn't want to build a car for whatever reason, is that not their right? If you want a communist government, say it openly. If not, shut up about trying to force companies to build whatever you think they should.

Furhter, if a car company chooses to make an electric car, what do you think the oil company can do about it? Nothing.

And get off your dumb politcal crap. Al Gore openly supported high gas prices. He even wrote about it in that crappy book of his. Further, the oil companies made billions in the 90s, what did Captain Underpants Clinton do to stop it? And even more importantly, why should either do anything about it? Where do you think it's the job of government to prevent companies from making profit?

This is America. There is a free market. Government has no right to demand or dictate what is sold, or what is bought. You want government dictating your life, move to Cuba.

Collapse -
Typical response...
by Skyhawk007 / May 26, 2007 9:46 AM PDT

Look, the government ALREADY has it's hands on the free market system that is looked upon as good or bad, depending on your p.o.v.
Ever heard of farm subsidies?
If not, did you also know that the price of a gallon of milk is ALSO subsidized by the Federal government? It is, and has been for decades.
Since you didn't already know that, then you must enjoy living in a semi-communistic country right now.
I am not for total government mandates on everything we buy in a supposed free-market system. That would be impractical. What I am saying, is that the consumer needs more choices, and that the government MUST have some oversight in that. That is part of the role of government as defined by rule of law. We DO need government oversight on many things, to keep the balance of things squarely in the middle. We need to ensure that things we cannot control even in a "free market system" won't get corrupted by greed. In short, we need to government to ensure that greedy oil companies don't gouge the consumer beyond what is fair. That needs to happen now, because there is price-gouging going on right now, and has been for years because our government has been asleep at the wheel.
It might surprise you, but I am a conservative Republican in my political stance and have been for two decades, yet I am tired of seeing the status quo being delivered to the consumer by a party who is too concerned and co-opted by the wealthy elite who control vital essentials in our daily lives.
Gasoline is the largest one, because it is apart of an economic multiplier that impacts almost everything have and do from cars to food prices to everything we buy.
I am not against any company making a profit. I want them all to.
However, there is a point at which these companies- who have ZERO oversight from anyone, can cross the line, and they are doing it now with price gouging at the pumps.
When you see Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, and other major oil companies raking in hundreds of billions of dollars collectively each year, there must be new rules and laws to prevent them from doing such.
The entire point of this thread was to point out that high fuel mileage cars DO EXIST right now, and we don't need to foolishly spend an extra $10,000 on them to reap the benefits of fuel savings.
My 1995 Honda Civic got better gas mileage than ANY hybrid on the road today- from either Toyota or Honda hybrids.
We need to ENCOURAGE these companies to re-think their greedy and narrow-minded policies of today, by going back to the ideas of decades past when they actually made cars that were far more fuel friendly.
Btw, your point about Bush and Cheney is laughable. They both got us into a needless and pointless war all because of the large Iraqi oil reserves that they wanted so badly to control. No, I don't credit Clinton or Gore on this matter, either. It is the job of the Presidency to see problem areas and try to correct them.
Since Bush/Cheney have been in office, they have done little to nothing to try to fix a potential nightmare the awaits us all very shortly with $5 a gallon gas.

Collapse -
typical brainless reaction
by rob5361 / May 27, 2007 12:20 AM PDT
In reply to: Typical response...

Ok, lets all STOP listening to the media, and actually do alittle home work.. you will find on the web at the energy department a list of oil reserves for the past 10+ years.. There you will see that we AREN'T short of OIL. We have had this much on hand in 1999 when gas was 0.99 per gallon.. We had this much on hand last year when prices dipped below $2.00.. The pricing isn't frmo the OIL COMPANIES.. is from the SPECULATORS that keep feeding us this CRAP that we are in a shortage so they can drive the price up.

Don't blame the government, President Bush or VP Cheney.. they don't run the stock market.. BLAME THE LAZY MAINSTREAM MEDIA for not doing any research on claims by these jokers.

Collapse -
Typical my *** Who else has responded like that here?
by Andy77e / May 27, 2007 3:31 PM PDT
In reply to: Typical response...

Arrogant and wrong. "Since you didn't know that already.." Bull I didn't know it. I was well aware of it long ago.

Ugh... NO we do not need government to pamper and watch over us like big brother. NO we do not need controls over our lives and the free market. How... HOW can you not see that your attempt to "make sure the free market won't get corrupted by greed" is EXACTLY what causing it to be so! You really trust politicians? You really think giving them control over the market is a way to prevent greed from taking over? Are you kidding? No, there are no greedy politicians... no of course not. We can trust them with our livelyhood... You are NUTS!

Here you are whining about gas prices, yet you don't see the same thing is happening to us with farm subsidies! They are taking money from you and me... and giving it to Ted Turner... so that he can pocket the cash and sell us milk for $1.29. Oh gee, milk is cheap... of course you pay how much in taxes every year? The only difference between your gallon of milk and Ted Turner, and your gallon of gas and Exxon, is that you can actually see what the gas is costing you. You have no idea how much you're really paying for that milk.

Do you not realize that greed is exactly what's motivating governments control over the free market? You know that in the 90s Repulicans revoked farm subsidies? Did you also know that when Democrats got control over government, they re-enacted subsidies, and the one who benefited the most, was also the largest donator of money to the Democrats... namely Ted Turner? Figure it out. By giving government control, you are making greed the mainstay of the market.

Prices gouging... unbelievable. Do you realize in other countries, the UK for example, is paying $7.68 per gallon? You think we are getting gouged? I wish I could wake you people up. In the rest of the world, where government has more control over the market, they are paying a TON more. We pay so unbelievably little. Yet in the name of "price gouging" we give our government more and more control, and the price goes up and up. GET A CLUE! The people we are foolishly voting for, are trying to raise the price of gas, while we complain about the evil corporations that are giving us the cheapest fuel in the @#$*& WORLD!

You are ignorant about fuel prices and completely clueless about the war. I'm glad there's more of us that know why we're in Iraq than you fools. Of course high mileage cars exist. High mileage cars have existed in Europe for years. They don't sell here. The car companies build cars that sell, not cars people don't want. Further, they build cars that government lets them build. GM had a 100 mpg car in the 80s. No big deal. Problem was it was plastic. In order to meet government regulations, it wouldn't get that awesome gas mileage. Does no one pay attention in physics class? Or is it another failure by government to make school teach kids things? You can't get 100 mpg in a metal heavy car. You can in plastic, but that's not safe. You can only choose one, not both.

That whole post is sad. Here you want to give government more control, and government is going to do exactly what you claim will happen if they don't do something. Government does not want cheap fuel. Despite your foolish theory about why we're in Iraq, they do not want us getting cheap oil. If they wanted that, we'd be getting the oil in our own back yard!

The largest untapped source of oil in the world right now, is in our land, and we haven't even explored all of our land for oil. Why the hell would Exxon or anyone want us getting Iraqi oil that would cost thousands to ship here and cause political trouble, when it would be far cheaper and less hassle and more profitable to get our own oil? Only a MORON things oil is why we're in Iraq.

Government wants high fuel prices. Government wants people to not be able to afford to drive. Government wants to set themselves up as the solution to the problem they are creating. Why do you think Ethanol is subsidized and tax free? Cause government wants credit for this great thing. We helpped produce Ethanol which will be cheaper than oil soon because of our policies. Aren't we great? Hydrogen is the future, arn't we great? Doesn't matter that our hydrogen comes from oil, it's that we did this. Government is your friend. Give us more control over the market, and we'll fix everything. You are a dumb bunch of sheep. This is Al Gore's "I helpped in creating the internet".

While you demand more choices, it will be from politicians getting paid off by rich people who want subsidies for those choices. You'll think it's great while Ted Turner walks off with your tax money, and Ted Kennedy walks off with thousands in donations and your vote for giving you such a great choice. Meanwhile, nothing improves and you all sit here thinking how great it is we got those greedy corporations, and you play right into their hands...

Collapse -
Calm down...
by Skyhawk007 / May 28, 2007 3:15 AM PDT

You made any assertions in your post that are not valid. First, I am NOT for "big government" as you claim. I want just the opposite. That being said, we DO need government to play a role in keeping the balance in this and other messes that the supposed "free-market" economics plays in all of this. I am not for more government to get in the way, because they have shown that more is not better. The Federal Government has to play a balancing role in all of this, because I do NOT trust big corporations to play fair no matter what you or anyone says.
I short, I don't trust anyone on either side.
I don't trust bigger government, and I certainly don't trust the likes of Ted Turner.
Secondly, I am not advocating price subsidies on everything. Again, their has to be a balance between the free market and the realities of what the private sector can and will do when it goes unchecked.
My point was, we have had farm and dairy subsidies for decades, and it has made some products more affordable for the consumer. You can look at the benefits- either positive or negative with that, depending on your point of view.
I am for some of the things that we use to be federally subsidized, because the free market system is not perfect, and it cannot be trusted in all cases.
Gasoline should be price-controlled, because it does not fit into the free market system like other products that we have in our nation.
We as individuals cannot grow nor produce this product. It is in the hands of a very small group of individuals who can set the price to whatever they want to. Big Oil has almost no oversight and no competition in the free marketplace. I cannot go out and start my own business making oil, unlike other products that I can produce and sell on my own.
I have a much better understanding of this than most do, because I was in a family-run business with my father who worked for Standard Oil for almost half a century.
Since our entire economy is oil-based, we need to have some price controls placed upon it so that it can still be made affordable to everyone. Since we all need to use some kind of transportation to get from place to place, this is a great idea. The economic multiplier effect stretches into the gas we buy at the pump, to the buses we take to work everyday, to the food we buy and eat.
That higher fuel price we pay at the pump or when we buy a bus ticket is passed on to the consumer. It makes our food prices higher, and eats into the remaining monies that we have in our smaller paychecks.
With what the federal government has paid so far with this idiotic war in Iraq- which is soon to be OVER 650 BILLION of our American tax dollars, they could have EASILY used that money instead to help defray the cost of gas subsidies at the pump, and everywhere else.
It makes economic sense to do this.
Thirdly, I never implied that the politicians can be trusted. For the most part, they cannot be. IMO, most of them can't. They are to some extent compromised by the system we have, in such a way that they think of themselves first, and someone else second.
We all know that the system that we have is not perfect, and it has to be tweaked from time to time.
Again, this entire post is about Auto manufacturers who ALREADY have the means and technology to produce high MPG cars at an affordable cost, yet now fail to do so, because of their stupidity and greed.
You say that if the American Big Three wanted to make them, they would, but don't because no one wants them?
Lol. That is a laugh. You need to get a clue, and take a look around you sometime. Have you not noticed that Toyota is now the number one auto manufacturer in the world?
Why is that? It is because they sell more cars! Why do they sell more cars? Because people buy them. Why do people buy them? Because they have cars that people want to buy from them. What do they have? The Prius and the Corolla, for example, that get great gas mileage, and the hottest selling cars in America, are what they sell, and what people want because they are apart of a long line of cars that they sell that get great gas mileage!
If Ford, Chrysler, and GM made better cars that got better gas mileage, they also would sell more cars like Honda and Toyota.
This is why Chrysler is going under, and why Ford and GM are losing billions of dollars every year to their Japanese competitors.
The Japanese auto makers are far smarter than the dopey American companies because Japan build high mpg cars that people want to own.
I don't why you cannot see this. It is fairly obvious to anyone.
It is in the best interests of the Big Three to build high mileage cars, but they don't want to, and it is killing them financially.
It is because of very poor leadership from their so-called leaders which is doing this to them.
Again, all my Honda cars that I have owned all got at least 44 mpg on the highway, and they weren't over-priced and over-hyped Hybrids.
They weren't plastic, either. This is why Honda and Toyota sell more cars than the Big Three do, and that is a reflection upon Detroit's outdated stupidity for allowing that to happen.

The bottomline is this- yes, there IS price gouging going on with the oil companies, and yes, the Big Three are losing this war in the marketplace, because they are building cars that hardly anyone wants.
We need to have Federal oversight to make sure that things of this nature are handled in a just and fair way. If we didn't, then Big Oil could do whatever they want, and get away with it.
In all honesty, that is exactly what is happening right now.

Collapse -
I'm completely calm, just amazed at American ignorance.
by Andy77e / May 28, 2007 5:54 AM PDT
In reply to: Calm down...

You are for Big Government. I want government to control the free market, but I'm not for big government... what is that?

The point is farm subsidies are costing us millions every year and you think it's great because food is cheap. It isn't cheap, you just don't know how much your paying for it.

Oil companies have tons of competition from here and abroad. If they didn't we wouldn't be importing any oil. What is this! Elementary school logic?

Subsidies are a horrible system of politicians getting money donations from rich people, in order to get tax payer hand outs from the government. Anyone who supports that, is an eliteists best friend. You say you don't trust Ted Turner, yet you support him getting your money. Bravo.

Gasoline should not be price controlled. We pay the least per gallon than almost any other nation. Further, price controls always cause problems. Have we learned NOTHING from California? Are we all this ignorant? CA put price controls in place, resulting in rolling black out. Are we this stupid? We actually want to have gasoline shortages? Sheeple.

Your cheap gas means nothing if Iran and Terrorist get control of the most technologicly advanced nation in the middle east and begin exporting terrorist to the US. Save a few dollars and watch more planes fly into buildings, or dirty bombs go off in our subways. We must win the war in Iraq, no question.

Foolishness. Of course auto makers have means to make high mileage cars. Hell, I can make a car right now that will get over 100 mpg. But being able to make it, and being able to sell it, are two different things. Regardless of your personal uninformed opinion, there are reasons GM, Ford and Chrysler do not make those cars. They can't make money on them or their customer base doesn't want them. Possibly both. Why is that? Likely because of idiots who vote in morons who add so many regulations that make it impossible to make money on small cars. Maybe it is because of the huge tax burden that the government puts on companies to pay subsidies for your cheap food. Maybe it's because of unions that price labor so high they can't make money on small cars.

The problem is, you ignorantly claim GM doesn't make small high mileage cars because of greed. What 2nd rate back water college did you come from? They need to be closed down. Does no one teach logical thinking anymore? If GM could make money on a plastic bannana 4 wheeled scooter mobile, they'd make it and sell it. All companies are about making money. If they can make money on something, they'll do it. Any fool should know this.

You talk about what people want to own, yet the best sellers are Large trucks, large sedans like Chryslers 300M (It's on my list to buy), F-series, Dodge Ram and other large autos. Yes many are buying smaller cars, but even the Honda civic isn't always being choosen for it's gas mileage. The hottest thing to do with a Civic is put on a huge 3" exhaust, put on a turbo, add some NOx, and fly down the track. Not exactly a high gas mileage deal here.

And btw, they are plastic. I have been hit twice. One was a Honda civic. His whole front end was bashed in like a bull dogs face. Not even a *scratch* on my chrome metal bumper. It is plastic. Sorry to break it to you.

There is no price gouging. We pay a fraction of what other nations do. When the UK is paying $7.69 a gallon, and we pay a whooping $3.50 or less, how in the world do you think that's gouging? You want to lower prices, getting government involved is not the answer. They are the reason prices are high to begin with. Let's get the oil in our own land, and prices will drop. Get the EPA out of regulating our gas, and prices will drop. You get government more involved, and prices will go up, or they'll subsidize it so that your taxes go up but the prices at the pump goes down so that you ignorantly think your saving money.

BTW, why can't you open your own oil well? Answer: Government. You could if government didn't stop you. You could drill your own well, pump your own crude, and open a small refiniery and sell gas. But Government has 100 miles of red tape to prevent you from doing that. Why is that? Namely because of people like you that want government involved in the free market. Thus they control it so only rich people can open oil companies. You people shoot your own foot off and blame "big whatever" for it. Get a clue.

Figure it out people. Government has caused the price of gas to go up. And now it sets itself up as the solution to the problem it created. Now you support more government intervention, which is exactly what it wants. You play right into their hands like a puppet, supporting the greedy people you were trying to stop.

Collapse -
Reading comprehension 101
by Skyhawk007 / May 28, 2007 7:11 AM PDT

The list for your absurd assumptions goes on and on. One, I never said I want big government. I don't. Government must play a role, however, in oversight to protect the consumer from the illegal acts done by the private sector. Wanting that doesn't mean desiring what you proclaim is "Big Government".
That is what the Federal Government is SUPPOSED to do. No one wants to have them involved in everything, but they should and MUST be there to protect us from those who want to monopolize the marketplace.
What college did you go to?
This is what you learn in school as checks and balances. We don't want too much on any one thing or another.
When the scales are not balanced, and are tilted too far on one side or the other, there has to be a means to right that imbalance. That is one of the jobs of the government as we define it to be.
I don't like the inherent idea of price controls any more than you do.
But we all have limits to what we can do as consumers in the marketplace. You have hundreds of different stores you can shop at, as well as hundreds of different restaurants to eat at. But you only have about 3 or 4 gasoline stations to fill your tank at. We are limited to what we can do, and where we have choices with.
That is the power of big oil. They control where and how much.

I don't want the government at any level dictating what someone can sell a product for. However, I also don't want an all-too powerful entity who has TOTAL control over a product dictating what price we must pay for their product. The oil companies control the product in this country, and have monopolistic control over the price as well.
When you see each company record MASSIVE profits each QUARTER, then you can easily see just what kind of problem that we have.
Look at what Exxon records as profits each quarter. It is in the BILLIONS of dollars. Just where do you think they are getting this from? Thin air?
They do this because they can get away with this year after year.
They have NO oversight from anyone. They control the game.
Record profits at the expense of the consumer. Wow. What a great idea!
We are paying more than $3.50 a gallon for gas right now, and that is about $2.00 more than it should cost.
The problem with the supposed free market system, is that it is corrupt with greedy people who create false speculations that drive the price up even more. We need controls on that, so as to not see the kinds of wild and ridiculous price increases that we have seen in the last several years.
To answer your question, there is NO free market system for all things. I can't start my own oil company, and neither can you. No one can, because these companies have total and complete control over this market, and thus can market their prices any way they want to without oversight. It's not just because of the government, either.
Big Oil has been around for almost 100 years now. They control the product, the price, and who can pump it. Do you think that you can just start your own Chevron Station?
You can't, because they control who, what, where, and why on that.
I know this from personal experience. You don't decide, they do. You have to come up with almost one million dollars in up front money, and then they or any other Big Oil company will then decide if you can pump gas or not.
You can start your own grocery store, your own toy store, your own whatever-you-want store, but you cannot do the same with oil. The costs associated with that are astronomical, and make it impossible to start your own oil company. This is why they have a stranglehold over this product, and why they always are making massive profits at our expense. They can dictate their terms however they like it, and there is nothing we can do about it.

About the Big Three auto makers- my original point is correct and valid. They CAN make a profit producing fuel efficient cars, but they don't know how to. Not only that, but they also don't care to, and this is why they are failing and falling further behind in the race.
They are all poorly lead companies who are missing the boat by a country mile on this issue.
The Japanese and Germans created fuel efficient gas and diesel engines here in this country, yet Detroit learns NOTHING from it. They would instead try to appeal to the dim-witted rednecks who all want 350 horsepower gas guzzlers, go from zero to 60 in three seconds, and LOVE to spend $100 each week on gas.
Most of us, however, don't want to do that because we cannot afford that, and this is why we buy Hondas and Toyotas that cost less to own.
Also, to your point about plastics- yes, every car has plastics in them and on them. That is not the point, however. All cars have to meet Federally mandated safety limits on protection, whether they have all plastic body panels or not.
Cars today are far more lightweight than they used to be in the 1950's, due to the use of plastics and styrofoam. Every car has some styrofoam in the bumper sections- both front and back to reduce overall weight. As long as they meet or beat FHTSA crash requirements, what do I care about how much plastic is used?
I feel safe in my Honda. That is what is important to those of us who own them. It gets a 4-5 star crash rating despite some plastic usage.

As long as the dimwitted Big Three car companies continue to produce and market their gas hogs, they will continue to slip further and further behind, and then they will have only themselves to blame for that. Again, this one of the reasons why GM has fallen to second place to Toyota, and eventually will probably even take a seat behind Honda as well.
When people soon start paying $100 dollars to fill their Chrysler 300M's or Cadillacs each week, maybe then they will start to re-think their positions about this issue.
They had better think quickly, because those days are right around the corner...

Collapse -
You have a envy/greed problem.
by Andy77e / May 28, 2007 10:17 AM PDT

And you have no sense of logic. If you support government taking more control over markets... you support Big Government, no matter what else you say. The two are in fact mutually exclusive. You can NOT say that you don't want big government, but you want more controls, more oversight, more regulations. That does not fit. On this ONE single point, if you can not grasp this, then you are too stupid, too ignorant for me to countine chatting with you. You can't have it both ways. It's either Big Government, or less regulations.

Yes, Federal government is supposed to punish Illegal acts. Please explain how a private sector company selling a legal product for however much it desires, is illegal? If I make wooden widgets, they are MINE... I can sell them for however much I CHOOSE TO. *MY* product, *MY* choice to sell it, *MY* choice to price it. You and the government has NO RIGHT to tell ANYONE how much they can sell ANYTHING. If it cost me 30 cents to make a widget, and I choose to sell it for $30 dollars, that is my right. You can shove your socialist crap someplace else. This is America. There is Freedom here.

You ask me where I went to College, yet you don't know what "checks and balanaces" refers to. It isn't government verse the private sector, it's the 3 arms of government balanced against themselves. I really want to know where you went to school, you seem to know absolutly nothing. Whatever school it is, needs to close.

I don't care if you "like" price controls or not. They are not legal, they only cause problems, they are against everything that made America the greatest nation on Earth. You're wimpy opinion of whether you "like" it or not, is not even relevant. Every time it's tried it causes problems. Clearly your dumb school didn't teach you history, or you'd know that. What fools refuse to learn from the past, will only fall into the mistakes of the past. Welcome to idiots 101.

Shell, BP, Super America, Flying-J, Get-n-Go, Certified, Citgo, Pilot and the list goes on and on. So much for that theory.

Now the envy and greed comes out. Oh are they making massive profits? Oh how horrible. So is Wendy's, let's attack them next. Toyota is making massive profits too, let's stick government on those ******** as well. I don't care how much any of them are making, it isn't relevant. Just because someone is making money doesn't mean it's illegal or needs to be stopped. You have no point, you're just stuck on greed yourself.

In fact, the gasoline business makes one of the lowest margin of profit of any of the major industries out there.

Of course you can't just open your own Chevron station. That's their name, you can't just open up a store and put Wendy's on top of it either. Hell, if I opened a shop called "Widget Store" you can't open your own store and call it the same thing either.. oh I guess I'm a big evil corporation that controls the whole market. But if you think you can't open your own gas station, you are wrong, I know someone who did just that, and there's nothing an oil company can do about it. It's still open today.

There only one reason you can't open your own oil company. It has nothing to do with Big Oil... it's Big Government. There are so many laws and restrictions and legal red tape around doing so, you'd never be able to do it. And it's people like you that gave government the power to make it impossible to do it. You shoot your own foot off, and blame "big whatever" for you own stupid choices.

You original point is nothing more than hot air based on opinion. You have yet to make any solid point at all. Prove that the Big Three can make money on these cars you suggest? What real evidence do you have? You make many claims, yet information thus far suggest you full of it. In fact, the last time I read from the investor market, it said the Big Three lose money on every low end car they sell. The still do it because they need high mileage cars to balance out their SUV in order to avoide CAFE fines.

Right right, your 5 stars mean alot to me. Like I said before. I've been hit twice. Both times, they rolled away with bashed up plastic junk, while I didn't even have a scratch. You just count your stars when you crash or someone rolls through your plastic bannana. Oh I guess I should be unhappy at my small tank because it doesn't have as many stars as that beat up bull dogs face of a car that just ran into me.

You know what, some people actually think driving something cool is fun, even if it costs a bit more in gas. Just yesterday in fact, I saw an H3 towing a Corvette on the back. Talking about horrible gas mileage, but I'd have a much more enjoyable time driving those than a crappy Honda Accord. But this is the best part. *You* are not in control, and this is America, so I can drive whatever I want, and so can that dude in the H3 with the Corvette on the back.

Collapse -
We're not communists
by azima11 / July 16, 2007 5:44 AM PDT

If you want to know what your government can do about fuel efficiency, rent the "Who Killed the Electric Car?" DVD. President Bush overturned Calif. legislation aimed at getting gas guzzlers off the road. Then he went and gave huge tax breaks (around $26,000) to any Hummer owner who could even loosely say he needed the monstrosity for "business purposes" (e.g., riding around looking cool to get clients??). Ultimately, it was an oil company that purchased the rights to the improved battery technology that might have saved the electric car. In my state, I get zero tax breaks for purchasing a new fuel efficient vehicle (so I bought an old one). By the way, it's easy to call someone a communist, it's tougher to take time to get educated about what your government is doing, then taking them to task for implementing policies that hurt everyone but the wealthy. I'm not a communist - just a member of the disappearing middle class.

Collapse -
by Andy77e / July 22, 2007 6:17 PM PDT
In reply to: We're not communists

The public killed the electric car. No one would pay for it. GM couldn't afford to keep making them at such a low cost, so they stopped. Everything else in the film is irrelevant. If you can't make money on a product, you'll go bankrupt.

I don't agree with tax breaks, only because I don't believe in income tax. No one should pay more or less tax than anyone else for any reason.

No it would not have saved any electric car. No one would purchase an EV that gets 120 miles a charge, at $60,000 dollars, that can only hold 2 people, and only has 10 foot of cargo space, takes 6 hours to recharge, and requires a $1500 charger. GM was eating all that cost, and it was killing them. If they passed that cost onto the customer, no one would buy it. GM lost $400 million in the EV1 project. No battery would have saved it.

If you believe government should dictate what product a private sector company should make, that is a communistic view. California had no right whatsoever to tell anyone what product they must sell. GM should have refused to even try and make an EV on the moral, and constitutional grounds alone.

Collapse -
captain underpants
by batman823 / July 18, 2007 11:34 PM PDT

What people are saying when they refer to the infamous **** and bush regime is that they want a president who doesn't have previous obligations. The fact that mr. pres himself benifits greatly from price gouging says that he's not going to do anything about anything that hurts the average american.

The pres is looking out for #1. Most people should, but the pres should be looking out for america.

I do realize that it's impossible to have an official elected that's not biased. But when has a president not been criticized? If it were somebody else(like al gore when he actually won the election in 2000) then he would be criticized for everything he does too. Clinton was criticized for everything, so was bush and so was reagan.

But the federal gov't and every state has taxes that the people have no say in. Most states don't let you smoke anywhere now. All states have 'sin taxes' like the ones on cigarettes and alcohol. But you and others like you seem to think that all those things are OK as long as the "free market" is preserved by showing major companies making major profits. But what about the mom-and-pop stores going out of business because a walmart comes to town? I know it's a free market and that's just one of the many results, good or bad it's the way it should be.

The point most of these people are trying to make is that our policy-makers and "the decider" should not have corporate interests in mind as a priority over the interests of the american people. That's what the Founding Fathers wanted and that's exactly what's not happening today. But since you don't like the idea of a socialist or communist society with total government rule, you should start looking for another company(country) to live in.

BTW Al Gore supports high gas prices to discourage people from driving, which would be yet another 'sin tax'. But that money could actually be used for a purpose worth having. Not some useless and endless war. But the **** and bush simpletons support high gas prices due to personal profit from their connection with big oil. That means the money we happily fork out for the gas-guzzling beast you drive and all the SUVs goes to the stock-holders, not to fixing the roads or subsidizing desparately needed public transportation, or maybe health-care. God forbid that somebody who makes less than $60k/yr gets health care. Yes you and I are both in that category. The only difference is that I get health care from the gov't because I'm in the military. But the other 350mil people in america aren't. So what should they do?

Collapse -
by Andy77e / July 22, 2007 7:42 PM PDT
In reply to: captain underpants

Al Bore never won the election from any point of view. He lost all 5 recounts, and was never ahead at any time.

You are such a hypocrite! First you said in another post we are not gouged, because other nations pay a ton more for gas. Now you claim we are gouged, yet you said you support higher prices! Then you claim that Bush benefits from price gouging, yet you want higher taxes which would benefit government most! You are UNBELIEVABLE! You talk in circles constantly!

Now you talk about taxes we have no say in, that's bad, but taxes on fuel, that's good! Huh? You talk about the 'sin tax' on smokes and alcohol. Then claim I support that because it's free market. Where did I ever claim to support the sin tax?

Then you bring up Walmart and mom-n-pop shops closing. Ok, is anyone *forcing* people to go to Walmart instead of the local mom-n-pop shop? No. So they are choosing to. What exactly are you against here? You mention free market, but the opposite would be a closed market, prevent a mom-n-pop shop from ever being allowed to open. It would be government controlled. Mom-n-pop shops would never have the money to be able to get government approval to open. So what is your point?

You still don't get it. People in Canada come here to get treatment. Missionaries are sent home when health trouble strikes because our health care is the best system in the world. The vast majority of all medical breakthroughs and advancements happen here. Do you not know how many people come here from all over the world because of how good our system is? If you socialize the medical sector, I will promise you, in the long run our system will decline, advancements will fall, service will become crap. Do you realize the best doctors LEAVE government controlled health care system around the world to practice here? You really want the good doctors to leave the USA instead of coming to the USA?

Finely, you say a president should be looking out for America. Al Bore would support a huge hike on gas taxes, which would benefit him. He would also support Kyoto which would benefit him. Both would cause havoc in the economy and cause millions of jobs to be lost, while he would make millions. You talk about sin tax, while Al bore made millions off of tobacco.

And hey, is Gore really not looking out for number one? How about this: In 1995 Al Gore recommended that the Elk Hills in central California, once a federally protected historic land, be sold. Out of all the various ways it could be sold, it was exclusively sold to Occidental... that would be Occidental Petroleum! *GASP* Did you know that Al Gore has owns over $500 hundred thousand to one million in Occidental company stock?

Of course he's not looking out for number one. We know this because Al Gores father Gore Sr. stopped FBI investigation of then CEO of Occidental, Armand Hammer. Not only was long time friend Armand Hammer convicted of providing hush money during watergate, but he was being investigated for other matters as well. Gore Sr, lost his senate seat, but that's ok, Armand Hammer gave Gore Sr a six figure income with a no-show position. I wonder why...

But that doesn't apply to Gore Jr, our beloved environmentalist who sold federal property to an oil company he had stock worth a millions in. No no, see Armand Hammer was no longer CEO, instead Ray Irani, who spent a night in the Lincoln bedroom. Irani also wrote out a nice cheap $100,000 check, and coughed up an additional $50,000 during one of Al Gores infamous white house fund raising calls. Al Gore isn't looking out for number one, he's got whats best for America in mind, that's why he spend his time in his elected office shaking down people for money!

But Al Gore didn't just make tiny wad of cash from a federal land sale to a oil company he had stock in. See Gore also has this neat zinc mine in Carthage Tenn. How'd he get that? Well it seems that Armand Hammer, purchased the land for $160,000 in 1972, and sold it a year later for exactly the same amount to Gore, but Gore Sr, and now Jr, get the $20,000 royalties. What a nice oil baron. Of course Gore isn't looking out for number one.

Oh and by the way, it seems the company running the zinc mine, has been nailed twice by the EPA for pollution violation, involving zinc being leaked into Caney Fork River. But hey, Gore Jr has made $500,000 off the mine, screw the environment.

So you tell me, is he looking out for himself? Let's not talk about Clinton/Gore's ties to Worldcom, or Enron... (gasp! yes Enron had ties to Clinton/Gore) Get off it.

There is so much double standard here, it is sickening. You attack one person over 'whatever' yet give someone else a pass, who is just as bad or worse. Ya'll need to wise up and learn about who you support before opening your mouth.

Collapse -
once again you missed the point.
by batman823 / July 24, 2007 12:16 AM PDT
In reply to: Unbelievable.

I said that gore stuff because of the florida elections being faulted. We both have our opinions and it's in the past. I dislike our current president and his policies. But we've both agreed before that we would be hard pressed to find a politician who didn't have #1 in mind. But I was saying that we should have a president who at the very least has the middle and lower class in mind when he writes policy and signs bills.

You called clinton a reed-in-the-wind and I call bush a light-pole. He has already taken his shape and decided what he wants to do, after all he's the self-proclaimed "decider". He is like a light-pole because he doesn't sway in any direction regardless of what influence is put on him. He's done about as good of a job of running the country as a lightpole could as well.

But really Al Gore had more votes than bush in the first election but bush got more elector college votes because of the areas that were stupid enough to believe he wouldn't be the worst president in the history of America.

I brought up the Walmart stuff just to make a point. I also said that it's a free market and that's the way it should be. People choose to get cheaply made stuff because it's cheaper than stuff that mom-and-pop stores offer. Small businesses suffer because of the consumer choices and I just don't like it. I wouldn't change it but I don't like it. A small business gets harder and harder to keep running but that's just the way our market runs. People will choose the one-stop-shopping and sacrifice quality for lower prices.

I'm not saying that Al Gore is perfect, or even good. But anybody would be better than what we have for our current administration

Collapse -
Yeah I guess I did.
by Andy77e / July 25, 2007 2:17 PM PDT

To me, there was no question in the election. Bush won, Gore lost.

See I believe Bush is thinking about all Americans. I may not agree with him on all his policies.

How about Marc Rich? Here's a rich guy, traitor to the country, and in violation of tax laws, avoids prosecution by fleeing the country, was on FBIs most wanted list for years, suddenly his wife shows up at Clinton/Gore "Hotel White House" free secret service room service, and donates thousands, poof presidential pardon. Now again, how do you think that's better than Bush? You really think Clinton/Gore was looking out for whats best for the country? Did you forget the pardons arranged by Hillary for terrorist? Want to cover Travel Gate? Coal Gate? China Gate? File Gate? How many scandals do you want to cover? Each one is about Clinton/Gore using the oval office for their own benefit. In my eyes, having been through Clinton/Gore, Bush is practically a saint.

I guess, based on what you've said, I'd go for the light-pole for sure. I would even trust Gore, and most democrats, more, if I knew what they stood for. Gore and Clinton both have changed their positions on so many issues, so many times, it's clear they have no core values or things they believe in, other than themselves. They change their views on a whim, not because of right or wrong, or best for the country, or core conviction, but simply whatever is most beneficial to themselves at the time.

Well... I guess it'd be nice if I could open my own little shop with a tiny selection, and high prices and yet have everyone come there instead of Walmart... but my guess is they won't. As far sacrificing quality, I couldn't tell ya. I just bought a sweeper from Walmart, and the thing is flat out awesome. As for mom-n-pop shops, my grandmother went to one when she was alive. The prices were high, the selection was meager, and quality... ah a banana is a banana. Maybe other people can tell, but it tasted just like a banana to me, it just cost more. There are small businesses all over the place where I live.

Although I agree opening a business is getting harder. But again, I'd blame that on government. Red type, file forms, EPA, taxes, regulations, BWC. When I sub-contracted, it was a nightmare all the paper work, and it's 10 times worse if you have employees. (I didn't)

Collapse -
sweeper vs furniture.
by batman823 / July 25, 2007 11:18 PM PDT
In reply to: Yeah I guess I did.

You can buy a swiffer at many department stores, it's the same everywhere and about the same price. I'm referring to electronics and furniture, that sort of thing. You can't find a single piece of furniture at walmart that's made of solid wood. they're all made of low-grade aluminum or fiberboard. Of course it's going to cost less but I'd rather have real wood for furniture than glue and wood chips. But I completely agree about the banana or other items you can find anywhere.

For the Gore election, he won the popular vote, but bush got more electoral college votes, after the Florida scandal. But we've discussed that before so let's not get back into that. As for the other scandals, there aren't many presidents who don't have scandals. That's not OK, that's just the way it is. This pres just misuses "executive privelage" so he can threaten anybody who wants to speak out against them. For the clinton-terrorist thing. The offer was to pardon some 3rd and 4th tier terrorist associates to get the big-dogs, which bush is doing now too. That's pretty familiar to me, the deployment I got injured on involved that kind of thing. It sounds like what police and the coast gaurd do with informants and the like. But I fully admit that clinton-gore had their own discrepancies. He wasn't perfect, but he was infinitely better than what we have now. But that's just my opinion. It's really a battle for who's the least damaging evil and people's opinions are going to change depending on who's crooked values line up best with theirs.

Collapse -
What is going on with you ignorant fools?
by organik_1 / June 27, 2008 6:01 PM PDT
In reply to: Unbelievable.

Bush never won a presidential election legitimately. Not in 2000, not in 2004. Believe it. I am 100% sure of it. Bush was and is the corporate president, elected by the corporate election machine (e-voting), to do the will of the corporations (endless Military Industrial Complex profit via Afghanistan and Iraq, also money for big oil via the same two). Also, there is no so called "free market". Not in this country, not in any, because to have a free market you need real competition, and real competition is dependent on having real media reporting news. Since corporate owned media reports the news, it is slanted to represent the wishes of its corporate masters, therefore, no free market. It takes little more than a grade school education to understand this, and yet day in day out these blathering fools afraid of "big government" chime in about taxes and various other subjects they know little to nothing about. The US goverment for the most part is full of well meaning people that are bought and sold by the corporations, so they can be "elected" next time to feed their families. Don't think in terms of "big government". Think in terms of absolute power. Who has the most, and what do they want next? That would be multi-national corporations, hands down. The "owners" of all of us. In honor of the late great George Carlin, I say wake the **** up people, before it's too late. It's no coincidence that an oil man became president, and gas prices shot through the roof.

Collapse -
by Ragazi / July 20, 2008 12:59 PM PDT
In reply to: Unbelievable.

Don't you gals have anything to say about the topic at hand here????

Collapse -
by It starts from the top / June 24, 2008 10:59 AM PDT

When someone accuses someone of being a communist they usually work for the government. My friend is a cop and loves to do just that. Either works for the gov or is an idiot Republican that loves to swing on Rush Limbaughs nut sack1
Is that true? You must have a lobbyist in your back pocket too right?

Talking down to innocent citizens that only want a choice for a car that is credible in getting better gas mileage. Pathetic. Anyways you made absolutely no sense but to yourself trying to talk to people like they're sheep. You'll see.

When the Bush Family has a representative from the Bin Laden family coming to regular family barbques I think there is a problem. Especially when the whole family gets to leave the country immediately after 9/11 without being questioned at all. Like, where the "F" is Osama? Before Bin Laden's name was even mentioned over broadcast! The police state will be next, that is if their total slavery plan doesn't pan out. They're all in bed together too, I'm no democrat. It's just like Alex Jones says, it's been out there in the open before him. All of our wars for the past 100 years have been for false reasons, it is only to get our econmy moving and for them to start doing things to direct our attention from what is really going on. The chip is next

Collapse -
This is why GM is in trouble now
by superdav42 / August 21, 2009 1:33 AM PDT

I guess this is why GM and the others are in so much trouble now. They simply did not want to make the efficient cars that people wanted to buy. People don't want to pay lots of money for the gas every month when they can get a car that is twice as efficient from a different company.
Any Dog Breed

Collapse -
upgraded honda civic parts
by mustang_racer88 / April 23, 2010 9:48 PM PDT
In reply to: it's all about$$

Did you have any of the honda civic parts upgraded? If yes, what are these parts? Thanks for any response?

Collapse -
VW Rabbit
by RSEASE1014 / May 25, 2007 12:20 PM PDT

I had a VW diesel rabbit in the 70's that got 40/55 all the time. If VW had put a 5 speed transmission in it the milege would have probably been 50/65.
It is about the money and because Chrysler abandoned the Turbine car for the same reasons. Only one moving part, one spark plug, little iol usuage and high mileage.
So far, Hillary is the only one driving a green vehicle.

Collapse -
Pure greed by big oil companies and the Auto makers
by Skyhawk007 / May 26, 2007 2:38 AM PDT
In reply to: VW Rabbit

I am so angry at the both of them, along with our dopey president for getting away with this!
This situation is the same as being told by your doctor that you need to have needless and expensive surgery, when all you really need to do, is just to take a vitamin pill every day. The parallels are the same here.
Instead of being told the truth in the first place that just taking an inexpensive pill will solve the problem, your greedy doctor and hospital just lied to you and kept the truth from you.
The bottom line is this- we don't need $27,000 Toyota or Honda Hybrids being built and sold in this country, because we have far less expensive models that WERE built decades ago that got BETTER gas mileage than any hybrid could have.
All these car companies need to do, is to just offer us what they did a decade ago, and our problems would be solved.
Another problem that could be solved is a government that isn't totally corrupted by greedy politicians who are too quick to line their pockets with the illegal payoffs from greedy big corporations who want to keep this inexpensive technology away from us.
This is criminal, and it should mean that these people should be prosecuted and thrown in jail because of what they are doing to our country.
Since GM, Ford, and Chrysler are all going bankrupt soon, maybe that is just a fitting end to their stupidity and bad leadership.
It is too bad that Exxon, Mobil, and Chevron can't join the American car makers, and all go out of business too.
It would serve them all right for what they are doing to us.

Collapse -
What? Huh?
by Andy77e / May 26, 2007 8:42 AM PDT

No one is forced to buy anything. If you choose to buy a hybrid, you buy a hybrid. If you don't, don't.

Government is ALWAYS corupt with greedy politicians. Serve them right? You realize how many thousand of people would be out of work, how many thousand would be on welfare and government assistance? You realize how much more taxes would come from *your* paycheck to pay for that? Are you trying to shoot your foot off?

Further, there are reasons why older cars got better gas mileage. Older cars had fewer regulations and emission requirements. Maybe you don't realize this, but smog regulations kill gas mileage. Let me give you just one example. In order to reduce NOx, they implemented EGR valve, which is exhauste gas recirclation. By sending exhaust back through the engine, you reduce NOx, but you also reduce power, meaning MPG goes down too. That's one of dozens of examples. Point is, we, by our government regulation, have killed gas mileage. The car makers can't come out with the cars they did so many years ago.

Beyond that, people do not want Hunda 600s, or VW 1 liter Diesels. People don't like driving slugs. I don't either. I don't like getting passed by school busses because I have no acceleration. (this actually happened once. very sad) Yeah car makers can make a car that gets 100 MPG easy... but no one wants it. Or very few. Maybe the crazy people here would, but not enough would want it for GM to mass produce it.

Collapse -
Not quite true...
by Skyhawk007 / May 26, 2007 10:22 AM PDT
In reply to: What? Huh?

The egr valve has been around for quite a while now. My Honda had one, and yet still got 72 mpg on the highway. I would still have it today, if not for some car thieves who stole it from me.
Cars are a little more fuel-efficient now due to many things that have come around over the last several decades- synthetic oil products, fuel injection, vehicle weight reductions, and technological advancements from the Japanese auto companies.
The technology exists right now to get cars higher mpg, yet the Big Three auto makers here in America simply don't have the collective smarts to make it happen.
This is why they are going broke and laying off tens of thousands of people. Just take a look at GM. They are no longer the #1 car maker in the world. This is because of terrible and inept leadership at the top. They still make cars with very poor fuel efficiencies, despite higher gas prices, and the available examples from Japan.
Also, take a look at the fuel stats from the Japanese auto makers of Toyota and Honda. They ALWAYS best anything that is comparable to what America puts out.
That is because they are always looking for ways to save the customers money, as opposed to Ford, Chrysler and GM, who are more concerned about making high horsepower cars that only get 15 mpg.
They are still marketing their cars with what I call the "Red-neck" marketing agenda. That is, market and sell your cars because it goes from zero to 60 in 3 seconds, and it has a "hemi" under the hood.
This is why they are not selling many cars these days, and why the Japanese car companies are.
As far as Hybrids go, people are now finding out that the supposed high mpg's that these cars were getting was nothing but a lie and exaggeration. Now these poor saps are finding out that it will take them almost 30 years or so to finally see a return on their initial investment from the extra $7,000-10,000 dollars that they had to spend to get a hybrid.
They would not need to if our government had the guts to mandate that ALL cars get 40+ mpg like they should. All cars can get this, because Honda and Toyota pioneered this technology almost two decades ago.
Even my 2003 Civic EX Automatic- which is NOT a hybrid, gets 44 highway mpg, even with all the added exhaust requirements that you speak of.
In fact, my car is very fuel efficient, and it has almost ZERO exhaust pollutants.
Having tough federal emission mandates and high fuel mpg's are NOT
mutually exclusive!!!
Both Honda and Toyota proved this decades ago.
It is the government's job to see to it that it can find solutions to the many problems that we face as Americans. They are not doing that now, and this is why we are seeing more of a threat to our economy and way of life by those Muslim Terrorists who wish to do us harm.

Collapse -
Yippy skip
by Andy77e / May 27, 2007 4:05 PM PDT
In reply to: Not quite true...

Yes I know the EGR has been around for a long time, and I know that your Honda get's good gas mileage. I don't really care. You can look back at vehicles and the engines that went through the smog-revolution, and see clearly where power and fuel efficiency dropped as more emission control were added on. Case and point. Now auto manufactures have done an amazing job climbing out of that hole.

You are making broad assumptions that you know nothing about. Not everyone wants a cheap high gas mileage slug mobile. I don't, and many I know do not. Some do, that's your group.

Every car can not get 40 mpg. You are full of it. Go learn some physics. You need X amount of energy, to move Y amount of weight, Z distance. You can't just bend the laws of physics because you just know, because you know, that "all cars can get this.." no they can't.

People want a powerful engine. They don't like getting passed on the highway by school busses. They want to push the gas and feel the car launch. Yeah there's a few that would ride a lawn mower to work just to get 5 more miles per gallon, but you are the minority.

Not everyone cares soley about fuel stats. I don't care a wit about fuel stats. I love my luxobarge car. Yeah it get's 17 MPG and I enjoy every minute. I hate those tiny plastic 4 wheeled mopeds. I would take a 300M over almost anything Japan has ever offered. I would like an RX-8... likely not for the mileage.

So why do GM, Chrysler and Ford not make tiny plastic bannana eco-box 4 wheeled scooters? Because people like me, aka customer base, wouldn't buy one if it was the only thing they produced! But what about people like you? Why don't they build a few for your group?

Well opinions differ, but the answer isn't the crazy stuff you came up with. GM would sell a renamed Yugo if they could make money off it. GM doesn't care a wit as long as they can earn some money. The problem is, they can't make money. Why? This is where opinions differ. Some say Japanese autos are made with cheaper labor for their lowend cars. Some say the unions have raised the cost of labor so they can't make money on econo-cars. Some say regulations or taxes by our government make econo-cars unaffordable to make. Some even say that Japan's government helps subsidize domestic auto production.

No matter the case, you will never see our domestic companies making cheap econo-box plastic bannana 4 wheeled scooters, until they can make money doing so. As soon as it becomes profitable, you'll see them pour effort into them. Until then they will only build what they can make money on and sell. If people are not willing to buy, or if they can sell them but only at a loss, then they will not make them.

Collapse -
Broad assumptions? LOL!
by Skyhawk007 / May 28, 2007 4:48 AM PDT
In reply to: Yippy skip

I never implied that all cars can get that kind of MPG. They can't.
You proclaim about broad assumptions. It is your assumptions that people want bigger cars that get 25 mpg or worse. This is not true at all, if you look at the fact that Toyota which builds high mpg cars is now the number one car company in the world, that proves my point.
People want to own and drive fuel efficient cars, and which are not econo boxes, either.
NO one bought the Yugo when it came out, because it was a p.o.j.
I drove one at a job twenty years ago, and it was the worst car I ever drove.
Your assumption that fuel efficient cars need to be like that, is incorrect. The Hugo didn't sell because it was garbage.
The Honda and Toyota lines DO sell, because they are well-built, get great gas mileage, are very safe, and are appealing to many hundreds of thousands of people worldwide. That is why both Honda and Toyota now have plants here in the U.S producing cars.
People want them, are buying them.
They are built with enough power to get them safely from place to place, without resorting to having the push their cars from behind.
My Honda EX has 127 horsepower, which is more than enough. I don't have any problems passing any buses, to answer your concern.
My car, along with other Honda cars are NOT slugs. They are fast and fuel efficient. Having both is not mutually exclusive, btw.
My car gets 44 mpg on the highway, and has high h.p for anyone.
Cars like the Corolla, the Accord, the Civic, and the Camry are great examples of high MPG cars that can be made without the loss of power and acceleration.
You simply don't need to have a car with 350 horsepower on the road that gets 20 mpg. That's ridiculous.
It's something that the Big Three simply have not understood yet, and it why they are losing right now.
The exceptions are for bigger vehicles like trucks. They are limited to what mpg they can get.
However, that is not to say that more cars and trucks cannot make this standard. There are ways to reduce fuel consumption even in trucks.
It can happen with technologies that already exist right now.
We don't need to have highly expensive gas guzzlers and over-hyped Hybrids on the market. What we do need, is for the Big Three to get off their redneck agendas, and listen to what is going on around them, and build far more fuel efficient cars and trucks like they should be doing.
They are LOSING the race to the Japanese companies, and they are simply not caring enough to do something about it. That is because of very poor leadership at the tops of the companies.
Once again, this thread is about the need to have the auto companies respond to the wishes of the car buying public, and to have them look at what is going on around them. Gas prices are going way, way up, and no one is going to force the oil companies into being honest about that, so we as consumers must have more choices in what we want.
We will see gas at $5.00 a gallon very soon, if not by next Spring.
The Civic Vtech-E engine is something Honda needs to bring back, and expand it's use into more lines of cars. Moreover, it is something that the Big Three needs to look at very closely, and then join with Honda in producing a line of fuel efficient cars that Americans have been long been waiting for. Once they do that, they will sell more cars, because right now, they aren't.
If people like you love spending $100 a week on filling up your gas-guzzling cars and trucks, then good for you. If you enjoy spending your money each week so that you can make the Middle East, OPEC, and the greedy oil companies happy- then good for you.
Have fun with that.
We on the other hand, would like to have more choices on what to buy, and have our own companies here in America do better financially than what they are doing now. They CAN and WILL make money doing so.
Toyota and Honda are selling more cars then the Big Three are, and they are doing so selling fuel efficient cars.
They have proven that it can work. They can make fuel efficient cars, and be profitable at the same time.
The fact is, the Big Three can make big money making these kinds of cars, and we as consumers would benefit in the short/long runs.
It is a win-win for everyone involved.
Do you remember what Iacocca did in 1980? He saw that Chrysler was going belly up, and came up with a new and novel approach to help his company become important once again in Detroit, and become profitable at the same time. He came up with an idea and agenda to make a kind of affordable car- the K car, and won back more people.
His plan worked. They made and sold the cars that people wanted, made money, and he was able to pay off his HUGE government loan.
The same thing can be done again, but this time market a high mpg car with the great VTech-E engine, like what is comparable to the Corolla or Civic. Make it affordable, make it safe, and make it appealing to the American car consumer.
Think about what kind of impact and message that this would send to the auto world. We need to hear that message again right now.
It is long overdue.

Collapse -
Yes, 90% of what you say is just broad assumptions
by Andy77e / May 28, 2007 6:23 AM PDT

No actually it doesn't prove your point. You assume everyone chooses Toyota because of gas mileage. Unless you can prove this, prove that everyone who buys a Toyota, does so because of gas mileage, then you have proved nothing.

You missed my point and I'm begining to wonder if you even have a point. The point wasn't that all cars that get good gas mileage have to be junk. The point was it is stupid beyond logic to think if GM could make any car, and earn money on it, they wouldn't because it got good gas mileage. If they could sell a renamed yugo, and make money, they would.

Well I was in one crap car that had no power, and I litteraly got passed by a bus on the highway. With pedal floored, I could not get out of this busses way. He flashed his lights at me and passed. Gas mileage was great, but I'll never drive such a slug of a car again.

Simply don't need? Oh, so now your going to dictate to everyone what they need? Welcome back the Yugo. Let's just switch to comunism then. Maybe you missed it, but this is America. We have something called "freedom". It means that if I want a Dodge Viper V12 with 600 HP and gets 6 miles to the gallon, I can do that. What you think about what others "need" doesn't matter in the slightest. You want to move to cuba where Castro tells everyone what they can have and what they can't, by all means get out of our country. Your socialist crap isn't welcome here.

Yeah ok Miss Cleo. Maybe we'll see $5 per gallon, and maybe not. I heard the same thing back in the 90s and the price dropped to $0.78 per gallon.

You have tons of assumption, and uninformed opinions. Do you know for sure the big three can make money on these kinds of cars? Funny, last report on the Cobalt was GM lost money on each one sold. Huh... that doesn't square with your baseless opinion. Broad assumptions. That's all you have.

The K car! lol What junk! That's what you want to move us to? Short term gain, long term pain. Yeah it sold, but look where Chrysler is now. Yeah that K car plan really worked in the long run huh?

When the big three can make money off the type of car your talking about, they'll make it. The Cobalt isn't a top seller, and customer surveys have not shown up until very recently, that gas mileage was the prime mover. Making an even weaker smaller, slug of a plastic car, will not sell. At least not for enough for GM to make money on it. When they do, GM will sell them.

Collapse -
Pointless myopic thinking on your part
by Skyhawk007 / May 28, 2007 7:46 AM PDT

Since you don't bother to read my posts, much less understand them, I will close this thread with this point (which you will not understand, either...)
Car companies CAN make a profit MARKETING a high mpg car. They have with Honda and Toyota, and have for years.
The big three don't, because they either don't want to, and they don't know how to.
Have you not been listening?
Toyota and Honda outsell GM on fuel efficient cars. People are buying Prius hybrids by the tens of thousands each year.
They are the hottest car selling in America right now.
This is why they (Toyota) are now going to make them in the US next year, as per their timetables from what they just announced.
People LIKE fuel efficient vehicles, and this is why they buy them, and why Toyota is now outselling GM.
GM can do this, too, if they were to create a MARKETING campaign similar to what Iacocca did with the 'K' cars in the early 1980's.
I did NOT say that they should create them again. I said that Iacocca's idea was to create attention to what they were trying to do when they were in tremendously bad financial condition back then.
He did so with MARKETING a product that got people's attention.
They can do so again with MARKETING a product that will get people's attention to newer and far more fuel efficient products that they will make and sell.
It has worked for Honda and Toyota. It can work for Ford, Chrysler and GM as well. It has made Honda and Toyota a great deal of money, and it can do the same for the big three.
If you haven't been paying attention, what they (the big three) are doing now, and have been doing, IS NOT WORKING!
They (the big three) are ALL financially struggling now, and have been so for many years. They all need a new and fresh alternative to their failed leadership that got them in this situation in the first place.
The technology ALREADY EXISTS to do that now. They can make it work with leadership and MARKETING their products BETTER. It worked for Lee Iacocca in 1980, and the same ideas and concepts can work again now.
They can either stay the course and go bankrupt, or they change course, and re-think the way they produce cars and then MARKET them to the consumer here in the U.S.
If they are smart, then they can change the course of their companies in a similar fashion to what Lee Iacocca did in 1980.
They can make and MARKET a car that stands apart from what they have done in the past. Make it affordable, safe, fun to drive, and most importantly very fuel efficient (40+ mpg) and people WILL BUY IT!
Make it comparable to the Corolla and Civic.
It worked then, and it can work again.

That is my point and I have made it very clear.

What part of this are you not understanding?

Popular Forums
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
Laptops 19,436 discussions
Security 30,426 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
Windows 10 360 discussions
Phones 15,802 discussions
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions


CNET bought a house!

Take a look inside the house where we will be testing connected locks, thermostats and other smart home products so we can tell a complete story.