Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

Why don't GM, Chrysler & Ford build high MPG vehicles?

2»

Comments

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    They have more models than anyone else that get's over 30 mpg. Once they get their 2 stage hybrid on-line they will blow both Toyota and Honda out of the water in fuel efficency as a whole. :D

    Rocky
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Claims like this are fun for me....so quick, name those models.

    I will bet you a Big Mac I can name more Toyota models that accomplish the same feat.

    And certainly as a percentage of the fleet, by model or by number of sales, both Honda and Toyota blow the General out of the water as far as over-30-mpg goes. ;-)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I will bet you a Big Mac I can name more Toyota models that accomplish the same feat.

    Remember we have established that Toyota vehicles in real world mileage are not very close to the EPA estimates. I will not speculate on the reasons. I do know that the Malibu gets closer to the EPA than the Camry, by real world drivers. Toyota trucks & SUVs are poor on mileage compared to GM.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I don't know what we have established, but I know this, rocky was referring to EPA figures, as any other number would be meaningless.

    And I'm surprised he didn't reply.

    My car, an '02 Echo, gets me 40 mpg around town and was rated 34/41. My truck, an '00 4Runner, gets me around 19.5 mpg week in and week out, originally rated 16/20. It gets me 22-23 mpg on the highway, while the Echo can break 45+ out on the interstate without a sweat.

    My previous Toyota, an '03 Matrix automatic, was rated 27/33 and got me 31-32 mpg around town all the time.

    An '02 Celica I had before that was also rated 27/33 IIRC, and got me 31 mpg all the time.

    My previous 4Runner, a miled-up '90 V-6 4WD, got me 18.5 mpg on the tires it came with new, and 16.5 after I put oversize tires on it. That truck was also rated around 16/20 or 15/19, something like that, when it was new.

    You may have established something about the fuel economy of Toyotas generally speaking, But I cannot agree that it matches my experience with multiple vehicles.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    You are obviously a conservative driver. Our discussion and research was more along the hybrid vehicle line. The Toyota vehicles were further from EPA than Honda or Ford. Which leads one to believe the testing was flawed. My own experience with Toyota PU trucks were both 4C MT. One was a 4X4 the other 2WD. It was tough getting 19 MPG out on the highway with either one. Now that is driving a normal 70 MPH. Around town they would hang around 15 MPG. Just not good enough for the poor ride and cramped cabin. I would much rather own a GMC truck getting 14 MPG than a Tacoma getting 19 MPG. I just think that the Toyota green image is so much baseless propaganda.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    it's just weird to me - after college I used to deliver videos for a while - those were long routes with a ton of low-speed driving and idling, as I never turned off the truck when I went to put the movies in the boxes. And I used my roommate's truck at the time, which was, you guessed it, a Toyota. Specifically, a '93 Tacoma 4-cyl 2WD extended cab stick shift. And I know, because I had to gas it up all the time, that it pulled low 20s in mpg under those conditions. How could your experience have been so different from mine?

    Now I didn't realize you were talking about hybrids, because the remarks I first took exception to made no mention of hybrids. But it is true that the very design of Toyota's HSD system lends to its ability to fool the EPA mileage tests into falsely high readings.

    Still, after all the fooling is done, the Prius is pulling 47 mpg for average drivers, significantly better than even competing diesels, and way better than all competing gas cars.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    I saw a report on this topic a few months back that said GM had more models that got over 30 mpg (EPA) than any other car manufactor. Toyota had the best overall scores per average. GM simpily has more models, thus making it have more cars "models" getting over 30 mpg highway.

    We are both correct. ;)

    Rocky
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Oh, I see what you mean. Yes, GM has something like 70 models right? Compare that to Toyota's 30 or so among all three brands, and I guess GM wins by cloning! :-P

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Whatever :P It takes to win :P

    Sometimes we gotta win at something so badly, we can justify a way to win. :D

    Rocky
  • turboshadowturboshadow Member Posts: 338
    Winning is winning. That's why statistics are so darn fun!
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Are building high-mileage cars. Read what the 2007' behemoth hybrid Escalade got on the HWY. Over 30 mpg according to edmunds. Isn't that enough to tickel your fancy ? :P

    Rocky
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I had forgotten all about this thread - it was originated quite a long time ago, wasn't it? I mean, GM and Chrysler were dragged kicking and screaming into the hybrid biz, and the hybrid Escalade wasn't ready for the model turnover, years and years after other companies were selling multiple hybrids.

    But yes, I foresee great things for the GMT900 hybrids, if early reports bear out in the real world. So far, it would seem people will buy hybrid cars but will not buy hybrid SUVs (Escape and Highlander gathering dust) unless they are luxury brands (wait lists for the Lexus RX400H), so Escalade should pay the General back handsomely for spending the development money.

    Meanwhile, Ford's highest-mpg model is the Focus with the 2.0 (34 mpg), GM's champ is the Aveo (35 mpg), and the best Chrysler can do is the Caliber (32 mpg). Honda has 3 cars at 40 or more, Toyota has 4.

    Or, looked at another way, the most popular models at T/H get way better mileage than the domestics. Camry gets 33 mpg in its most popular configuration (4-cyl auto) and has a 40 mpg version available. Accord gets 34 mpg in the same configuration.

    Ford's most popular model is the F-150, which of course gets terrible gas mileage by most standards, and even if you look at its most popular midsize sedan (which is the Taurus, I think, because of all the fleet sales), it is way off!
    Ditto Chevy, and perhaps Chrysler too? I am not sure if Ram leads Chrysler group sales, or if it is something else.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    GM and Chrysler were dragged kicking and screaming into the hybrid biz

    I believe you can trace the Dodge Intrepid ESX hybrid back to 1986. The Chrysler hybrid met the 80 MPG goal set for it by 1998. Chrysler did not build it because the cost difference was more than they felt the buying public would absorb.

    I think the sales of Camry and Accord attest to better mileage than the domestic equivalents.

    Comparing PU truck mileage to midsize cars is hardly fair. If you compare the domestic PU trucks to Japanese they are as good or better. Ford and Chevy 1/2 ton PU trucks get better mileage than either Nissan or Toyota.

    When you consider both Ford and GM sell many more trucks than Toyota, Honda & Nissan sell cars. It is good that they are bringing the mileage up. If they were allowed to put diesel engines into the 1/2 ton models you would see dramatic mileage increases. I don't think it would be tough to build a 1/2 ton PU with a 5-6 cylinder diesel that would get 30+ MPG and tow as much as the current V8 gassers.

    As long as buyers and the media rate cars by their 0-60 times it will be difficult to get the automakers interested in FE.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    "Comparing PU truck mileage to midsize cars is hardly fair"

    I hear you - I was trying to compare each carmaker's most popular model.

    But if you consider that Ford's most popular midsize car is the Taurus, at 27 mpg highway, it's definitely off the pace in cars. Chevy does a better job, with Impala as its most popular family-size car, making 31 mpg highway, with more power than Toyota's most frugal Camry (excepting the hybrid for a minute), but a 10% deficit in combined mpg.

    The thing is, the domestics often design their base models with more power than the Japanese do (certainly true of the Impala and Taurus), so that the most popular configurations of the domestics' most popular cars always make less mpg in normal driving. Once Fusion becomes Ford's most popular car (when they stop producing Taurus early next year), Ford will step up to the 30 mark too, but they sell the majority of Fusions as V-6s, so that their real-world numbers (of the cars actually sold and being driven around) are lower than they might otherwise be.

    Now, why do Americans shop the domestics for V-6s and the Japanese for 4-cyl cars? I have no idea, but the converse is certainly true - the mix of V-6s among CamCords remains steady at a fairly low 20% or so of all cars sold. 4 in 5 are 4-cyl cars.

    One reason might be that the domestic 4-cyl variants are fairly low on power compared to the Japanese competition, and save very little gas vs the V-6. These days, the 4-cyls at Toyota/Honda don't save that much gas vs their V-6 models either. But their 4-cylinder engines are powerful enough to be more than adequate, so that people feel less inclined to ante up the extra $$ for the V-6.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • lmkarinlmkarin Member Posts: 1
    Hi there. Not a regular. I have been patiently driving my 1994 volvo wagon, waiting in the hopes of a hybrid or otherwise fuel efficient 7 adult seater (minivan) In Europe I noticed that minivans are small but still fit 7 passengers. I guessed that their gas milage might be better than our minivans. Today I found out that the 7 passenger minivan Galaxy that is made by our own Ford and marketed in UK and Europe gets up to 35/50 mpg and it is not a hybrid and it is not too puny. Check it out:
    http://www.ford.co.uk/ie/galaxy/-/glx_specs/-/-/-/-
    Why can't we have that? No hybrid needed. If you like the steering wheel on our side and you can read German, it is also available to the Germans. But to the Americans....
  • drvroomvroom1drvroomvroom1 Member Posts: 1
    This is a subject where people seem to conviently
    misunderstand a few things..first if you count all the
    astro vans still going in fleets around the world, there
    shouldn't be any doubt about durability..add to that
    the full size savana's and there is no soft touch feel
    necesary for the long lasting motors 4.3L ...GM dominates
    this area..just look around and see..do you see any toys or likewise with 3 hundred thousand miles..and still going? The full size van is now the mainstay of zillions of company's..whats up with that..?well..the big GM is not going to be passed by toy any time soon..the tahoe's are dominating the SUV market..there everywhere...I look forward to you supplying whatever you have that disputes this..
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I don't know what I said to which your comments could have possibly been a response, but as far as "GM being passed by Toy", I might repost this link here:

    http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060821/SUB/60819026/1111

    GM at 14% in California retail sales, Toyota at 26%.

    However, in line with this thread, I question the examples of the Astro and the Savana (aren't they both now dead and buried?) as demonstrating the domestics stepping up to provide vehicles with high fuel efficiency. The Astro was an extremely tough, durable vehicle, agreed, but FE CERTAINLY wasn't one of its strong points. Those vans were trucks for people who really needed a TRUCK.

    Oh, PS, yes I've seen 300K Toyotas and Hondas still going, and they weren't trucks, they were Civics and Corollas still pulling 35 mpg even after driving the equivalent of more than 12 times around the earth. Tacomas too (the 300K part, not the 35 mpg part! :-P)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,022
    The Astro was an extremely tough, durable vehicle, agreed, but FE CERTAINLY wasn't one of its strong points. Those vans were trucks for people who really needed a TRUCK.

    My stepdad looked at the Astro when it came out way back in 1985. He was thinking about starting his own plumbing business and wanted a work truck. He liked the idea of the Astro, being smaller and more maneuverable than a real van, and theoretically more economical than a real van too.

    However, the reality of it was that the 4.3 V-6 got about the same fuel economy as a 350 in a "real" van. It wasn't much less expensive. And while it had the most cargo capacity of any minivan out there at the time, it was still nowhere in the league of a real van.

    He ended up getting a Chevy van. And then he got a gov't job and gave up his dream of running his own plumbing company, and I think the van got sold to a friend about 14-15 years later, with maybe 20,000 miles on it and still looking brand-new.

    Oh, I know this doesn't count as ultra-high mileage, but a buddy of mine recently snagged a 1997 Saturn S-series sedan for $2500. I think it now has about 170,000 miles on it. It actually looks surprisingly good for that kind of miles. The interior fabrics have held up well. There's nothing soft-touch to warp and crack, though...everything's covered in either fabric or hard plastic. About the only nasty noise it made was a funny rattle when it was idling.
  • gnusman53gnusman53 Member Posts: 3
    Also don't Forget FIESTA.....

    Advertised at 42mpg EPA highway.......

    I got 49.9 mpg on a highway trip shortly after I bought one.

    As to the Metro..... My 94 got 54mpg highway....and my current 99 (with AC) has gotten 52.9 on the highway.....

    :)
  • gnusman53gnusman53 Member Posts: 3
    My 1978 Ford FIESTA.....

    Advertised at 42mpg EPA highway.......

    I got 49.9 mpg on a highway trip shortly after I bought one.

    And that was with a 1.6liter Kent engine...... and Fiesta had four smaller engines at the time......but none of them were available in the US

    As to the Metro..... My 94 got 54mpg highway....and my current 99 (with AC) has gotten 52.9 on the highway.....

    NAME ONE NON-HYBRID car US has on the market that gets 42mpg or higher????

    So mileage has gotten worse in the last 25 years.....for all US built cars.....

    My next car will have to get in the 40s......and be affordable to buy.

    At least the carmakers should offer engine choices....including a high-mileage engine to choose from...
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    gets close: 41 mpg in suburban driving. On the highway, I have gotten up to 49 mpg without using A/C, 46 with, in long stints. It's not a hybrid. And that's with the 1.5L engine. Imagine if they sold it here with the 1.3L engine available in other markets. 50 mpg would be achievable on a regular basis, I would think.

    The new Yaris should be able to get very close - virtually identical powertrain, and while it is 200 pounds heavier, it is also a little more aerodynamic.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • kapbotkapbot Member Posts: 113
    I used to have an '02 Dodge Dakota Club Cab pickup. It was 2WD, 4 speed auto 4.7 V-8. My best ever mileage was about 18.5. That was a highway only, no load situation.

    My boss bought a new 2006 Chevy Silverado Extended cab 2WD with the 5.3, auto. His truck is massive compared to the Dakota, and gas mileage at worst is better than my best.
  • pernaperna Member Posts: 521
    This thread title is ludicrous. It might have been reasonable in 1982 or so, but American-made cars and trucks have been reliable for YEARS now. Maybe not the most fun to drive or styled, but you can't really knock the reliability.

    Some are better than others, of course. All manufacturers lay eggs here and there.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,242
    I think we're talking about high MPG rather than reliability, perna.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
    Review your vehicle

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    General Motors had the most fuel efficient fleet of cars and trucks ?????

    GM, has more fuel efficient cars getting over 30 mpg than even Toyota, and when they get the 2-mode hybrid on board SUV's and Trucks will be able to obtain 30 mpg HWY via the Escalade test mule shown on this site a few months back which got over 30 mpg hwy ;)

    Rocky
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Rocky GM has the most fuel efficient cars because they have the most cars rebadged as something else and some of their high volume trucks aren't even rated by the EPA

    Remember anything over 8,500 GVWR is not rated by the EPA...

    How many different versions of the SAAB 9-3, 9-5 epsilon platform?
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    I agree some our rebadged but many aren't unless you counting the European rebadges ?

    Rocky
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Rocky, because of rebadging GM has more MODELS making 30 mpg or more highway (which I consider a very unimpressive figure, be it GM or Toyota that achieves it). Despite that, Toyota sells more cars making that figure or more, and Toyota's car fleet average (using "combined" fuel economy figures) is about 3 points higher than GM's.

    Now ask yourself how many models any of the domestics have making an EPA-rated 40 mpg, either city or highway. I can't think of any.

    Toyota has four right now, Honda has only two, if you consider the Civic hybrid separate from the gas model. Until a few months ago, they had a third - the Insight.

    What is significant to me is that two of the Toyotas and one of the Hondas make that figure just using regular old 87 unleaded, without the aid of batteries and electrics, etc.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    The GEO Metro, prism, EV-1, Ford Fiesta, and didn't one of the early Saturns like SC-1 get 40 mpg ??? :P :P :P

    This is all going to change over the next few years because GM-DCX-BMW's 2-mode hybrid is superior to the Japanese offerings. ;)

    Rocky
  • lemonhaterlemonhater Member Posts: 110
    I wouldn't say that. Toyota's hybrids are even more dangerous now. They have experince with hybrid technology. They could use the experince to lower their price OR better their own technology. This is a moving target. I don't expect GM to have a realistic chance of bettering Toyota's hybrids until maybe the 3rd. generation comes out assuming GM and Hybrid technology last that long.

    By the way how many of thoose 40mpg models are still in production?
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    By the way how many of thoose 40mpg models are still in production?

    Okay you got me !!!! :P I just new you'd ask that :P

    Rocky
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Also the Prizm was just a corolla.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    the Metro was a Suzuki, the Fiesta was a Kia (?), the...

    Rocky gets credit for the 1992 Saturn SC, a car with no equipment and no power, that made 40 mpg highway I believe. Of course, (A) it has been out of production for some time, and no Saturn has been rated 40 or better in at least a decade, and (B) the SC's peers at the time made 45-50 mpg, like the Civic HF/VX/HX, Corolla FX, etc.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Bipartisan plans for fuel efficiency, energy independence mean Detroit must move fast.

    http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070124/AUTO02/701240347/- 1148/AUTO01

    Rocky
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Did he push them to change? Or did he basically say that ethanol will solve all our ills (a patently absurd statement). After all, he knows that works in their favor - they are already readying flex-fuel vehicles en masse. Never mind that ethanol is 30% less efficient by volume, even more so by the measure of total energy consumption.

    While ethanol will make us less dependent on foreign oil, since we can grow lots of corn, it is at best a stopgap, since not much of our consumption of foreign oil can be replaced by it.

    And of course, it is just one more crutch for ALL the automakers to lean on that won't reduce the energy use of the American fleet at all. At least GM and Honda never gave up on hydrogen-based powertrains and both have a plug-in hybrid in the works as well.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    While I agree with your post I will just say we have the capacity to make more. Ethanol, can be made out of pretty much any green crop, grass, etc, I think until we get serious it will like you said be at best a stop gap. The 30% less efficient is a big obstacle to over come if they are going to charge more than gasoline. If they could get Ethanol prices down $0.75 cheaper than gasoline a gallon it might work. ;) The 30% is the obstacle and unless it's cheaper than gas like I said it will not sell in quantity.
    :(

    Rocky
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Yes, but my point is that from the little plant being born, through to harvesting, fuel production, and burning and shooting out the tailpipe, ethanol consumes more energy (production + consumption) than gasoline! That may shift us away from being at the mercy of the middle eastern oil barons, but it doesn't do anything to reduce our energy consumption or greenhouse gas emissions.

    It does reduce smog-forming pollutants in the air, which is good. Whether we should achieve that goal at the expense of increased energy use and greenhouse emissions is a topic for the public forum.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • ux149ux149 Member Posts: 18
    I had a 1981 Pontiac Grand Prix with a 5.7 liter diesel. Yes, a diesel Grand Prix! They also offered in in '82. The only one I've ever seen was the one I owned. It averaged over 32 mpg highway and over 20 in the city. 25 years later, cars that get over 30 are "fuel efficient"? Come on, the big three have used the "we don't want to ruin your resale value" excuse long enough. They could have and should have produced far more efficient vehicles by now.

    In 2005, I wanted a Chrysler 300 AWD with several options. The only way to get some of those options was to buy the 300C, a gas gussling hemi that averages only 17 mpg in my mixed use. The same options should have been available with the six cylinder!
  • ux149ux149 Member Posts: 18
    Rockylee, Are you forgetting that the mash by-product of ethanol is sold and used for use in livestock feed. So the grain isn't really planted or harvested for fuel at all. It is just diverted on its way to the feed mills.

    And wouldn't it be great to NOT pay farmers NOT to plant vast acres, and instead pay them for fuel?
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    today to hear GM's latest radio ad around fuel efficiency, and they have modified it in a way that, while still slightly deceptive, is much more to my liking.

    Namely, they now specify they are the leader in the number of truck models that get over 20 mpg highway (they actually SAY highway in the ad now, I like that), and they beat Honda and Nissan in number of car models making 30 mpg highway (they say highway again there, I like that too!:-)).

    Now of course, with a gazillion divisions to Honda and Nissan's two apiece, GM doesn't have to produce very many 30-mpg powertrains to beat H&N in number of models exceeding that rating, but it is specific, and it is true.

    IMO, and echoing ux149 above, 30 mpg aint that impressive. Certainly not to me. Also, Honda could counter with an ad saying that the number of Accords it sells with the 4-cyl powertrain each year (making 34 mpg highway) exceeds the sales of ALL GM's models making the same figure. So even though GM has more models, Honda sells way more CARS making 30+ mpg. Personally, I think the bar for all of them should be 40 mpg these days.

    Toyota has four models currently making 40 mpg, Honda has two, now with the Altima hybrid just released, Nissan has one also. Given their histories, all three of these carmakers should have more, although I understand Nissan's focus since Ghosn's arrival has been away from its roots and more towards flash and horsepower.

    Chrysler, GM, Ford, no models rated at 40 mpg that I can think of.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    The bottom line is it takes a lot of energy to grow corn. The only way to grow crops for Ethanol that doesn't require the mass amount of energy is growing crops that use little water compared to corn in irrigated parts of the country. Milo/Maze is just one crop that uses half the energy of corn which means that you get a 80% return on your energy investment. Corn is only 60% return. Corn, is a fine crop to grow if your climate gets a lot of precipitation in the summer. ;)

    Rocky
This discussion has been closed.