By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
10, 8, 5, 4, 3 and 2?
Units are gallons per 100 miles. How do you feel about 5 and 4 in that company? as bad as 20 and 25? 8 sounds a heck lot better than 10 as it indeed is in terms of fuel consumption. Of course if a 10 can be made into a 2, that's all the better, but economics is about making the best of what resources are available, not the pie in the sky discussion about what's ideal. Presumably, people drive the cars that they do for a reason. Convincing every HELC driver (8) into driving a Prius (3 and 2) is a different topic altogether. If fuel savings is the goal, it's far more important to make the 10's and 8's into 5's and 4's, than improving a 3 into a 2.
Thanks for you understanding. English is not my first language, and I seem to suffer a bit from dyslexia when typing :-)
However, if I have two cars in my garage, being used for different purposes, one getting 15mpg, and the other getting 30mpg, both types of vehicles are necessarily and/or preferred for their respective designate purpose; and I use them for roughly the same number of miles each year. When it comes time to replacing one of them, as there's only money enough to replace one of them, it makes economic sense to replace the 15mpg car with a 20mpg car first before replacing the 30mpg car with a 40mpg car.
That's the issue the industry faces: which end of the spectrum should the fuel saving R&D be directed first. Consumer spending patterns will have an impact on how manufactuers allocate their R&D resources. Turning the mpg system into gallons-per-hundred-miles (or per thousand miles if people are uncomfortable with decimal numbers) will help the efficient alloation of R&D resources.
There's also Bentley, but it depends how you look at that. Bentley has created some amazing machines using VW's cash, but if you value ultra-exclusivity over product, it's not for you.
'06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet • '04 Lexus RX330
If he is any indication of the kind of people Toyota hire, it is no wonder other company's drowned in the wake of Toyota's ever increasing market share.
He was both friendly, and knowledgeable, while not being pushy at all.
While I am NOT a Toyota person, a Landcruiser may very well be the Mrs. next car [she's always wanted one] and if decided upon, will be promptly purchased from non other than the good physician himself.
A pleasure to meet you you Doc, and good luck at Tejas Toyota. May all your customers have a beacon of at least 720
DrFill
Now open your eyes. :surprise:
DrFill
10, 20, (30, 40,) 50 mpg
2, (3, 4,) 5, (6, 7, 8, 9,) 10 gallons per 100miles
Is 20 closer to 10 or 50? Conversely, is 5 closer to 2 or to 10? Notice, the two series are exactly swapped in terms of whether the left side or the right side is more fuel efficient. That's where human perception comes in, and why a national mindset trapped in mpg mode is detrimental in reducing overall fuel consumption.
I agree that both 10 and 12 mpg are bad. However, there is a degree to badness that is being obscured by the small numbers resulting from the 1/x math inherent to mpg numbers. Giving (insert your favorite type here) fuel saving technology to a 10mpg car to make it 12mpg saves more fuel than giving two 25mpg cars the same technology and make them 30mpg, assuming each car gets driven the same number of miles each year.
Creating a different division from scratch however would be a different story.
It's true that Lambo created a race brand from its humble farm tractor origins, but Lambo never intended to market a mainstream car. It's relatively easy to create a sensation in the rarefied field of supercars 'cuz it's easier to pack more horsepowers than to foster long term reputation in the minds of mainstream consumers.
In THAT secenario, whereby the vehicle type, size and weight itself can NOT be changed, then you are correct as to the impact the improvement in mileage would render. If, however, a subsititution can be made to a vehicle that reduces size and weight, then the increase in fuel savings is even greater.
We agree on the accuracy of your math. I have said so from the start.
But I believe that many vehicle types are not an absolute necessity, but a preference. If the vehicle type preference itself can be modified, then that would thrust many people into smaller and lighter and MUCH less wasteful vehicles, which would have much more impact than just improving the often too-large and too-heavy vehicles of "yester-year".
In other words, staying with a big SUV that has "improved" from 15 to 20 mpg is certainly good, but not as good as downsizing to... let's say, a smaller crossover vehicle that gets 25 mpg. So, it's just common sense to consider that the higher the mpg rating, the better the result... and it doesn't need to get all too complicated.
I completely agree that as a national strategy goes, a good approach to saving fuel would be to take all those large existing vehicles and make them 25% more efficient. But again, if society can embrace smaller vehicles (as it is starting to do!), then the savings will be even greater.
BTW, if English isn't your first language... what is?
TagMan
Notice that when I posted the picture of the Imperial, I never said I liked it, or disliked it. It is a concept, and it is a variant of the 300 theme, obviously.
It seems that Chrysler is one company that understands certain buyers' affection with a large and/or distinctive front grill. Mercedes has known this for years, especially if you review their history. Of course, the RR grill is practically an historical icon. Bentley's grill is distictinve as well.
The latest generation of Dodge Ram pickups became successful largely because Dodge made a major front grill statement that lent itself to the look of a downsized front grill of an 18-wheeler semi truck. The more recent 300 sedan has had that "Bentley" front end appearance.
BTW, GM gets credit for the Escalade's significant front end.
Heck, we see conversion kits that make those front grills even MORE pronounced than they already are.
THAT's largely the appeal of the 300, and the Imperial concept shows that same approach.
Also noteworthy regarding the 300, the upcoming Imperial, and other Chrysler and Dodge vehicles is the significantly higher beltline.
Anyway, the point I was making was that Chrysler is about to unleash 20 new vehicles within the next few years... and we can only hope that the end of the PT Cruiser is near. LOL!
TagMan
Super cars are about pushing the envelope of what's possible. That means mega horsepower, barely road legal slick tires, and RWD. If it's raining, don't drive it.
I'll drink to that! I can't stand that THING!
I'm not sure I buy that. The Civic essentially doesn't have a grill, and it's doing just fine.
When it launched, there was a long wait list to get one. Pretty hard to imagine that now eh
I'll re-word my post to say "some", "certain", or "many" buyers... but I think it would have been implied that it wouldn't have meant "all" buyers.
TagMan
Same here!
TagMan
Chinese was my first language. German was my second, but quickly superceded by English when I was still little.
Chinese was my first language. German was my second, but quickly superceded by English when I was still little.
Are you Chinese? Of course, don't answer if you are not comfortable to do so. Me?... I am 3rd generation American with German ancestry... no wonder I like those Porsches!! It's in my blood. LOL. (Unfortuantely, I don't speak German as you do! BTW, I believe that an American that can speak Chinese is one of today's tickets to large sums of $$$)
My youngest son is in 1st grade. One of his best friends in his class is Chinese. It's cute to see the two of them together. Try to visualize this: My son is big for his age with long wavy blond hair, and his Chinese friend is very tiny with short black hair and glasses. They are beyond "Starsky and Hutch" in appearance when they play together!
TagMan
The owners of those cars should take a Claritin before driving!... or pop one in the gas tank. :P
Sorry, couldn't resist.
TagMan
Interesting. Mandarin or Cantonese? I'm guessing the latter, because Hong Kong & the environs would be more consistent with a confrontational approach. Most of the people I've worked with from the middle kingdom seek consensus, or at least offer a way out to the other party -- face, and all that.
Either way, your opinions & posts are much of what keeps this board hot while the HELC board is dying on the vine.
I'm not buying that rear drive is always faster at the track.
Look at Motor Trends track test of the big 3 super sedans. The horsepower and less weight advantage for the M5 all but got negated with only a 10th of a second advantage around the track. A victory for sure, but to me it was more telling of the advantage of all wheel drive than it's inferiority.
Once again, as all wheel drive evolves, and gets lighter, it will prove to be faster IMO. Not more fun [in a DSG kind of way] but faster [in a DSG kind of way]
Why has it been banned from so many classes of racing? Not because it was unsafe, or slow.
So, you are of Chinese ancestry? Wow, I am so narrow-minded to have never considered that possibility. I apologize for that. I would bet that you have very interesting stories about your childhood in China. More to the point, I know that I would find them VERY interesting (particularly with a couple of German beers
Thanks.
TagMan
What ever happened to Merc1 anyway? I hope he is OK.
TagMan
It's $50k pricetag is hard to swallow given it's loss of versatility and practicality only to gain that all too-important performance.
For instance, Tag I'm sure your MDX is pretty easy to climb into the third seat. Well due to the redesign, the sloping roof and all, forces one to stoop to almost acrobatic levels. Grandma ain't havin it.
This leaves the GL, Enclave(shockingly enough, she likes the styling of the GMC Acadia better, but the Buick is full zoot in the interior department), Q7, and Range Rover Supercharged.
I've got a couple of offers for my "highly-modified-barely-street-legal SRT-8 JGC. So we're going to have to move pretty swift.
Just wish that MB would've dropped the new diesels in the GL by now and also the same with Audi, cuz it wouldn't have even been a question.
The '06 MDX that my wife drives has been great for her needs... an incredibly versatile vehicle... but I caution you that the MDX is not in the same luxury league as the GL, Range Rover, or the Q7. I'm glad you've ruled it out for that reason, but sorry to learn that they messed up the third row seat. Hpowders reported to us that BMW totally messed up the third row seat in the X5, that it is miniscule.
Anyway, my wife already wants a "nicer" SUV than the MDX, and we're waiting for the new models to come out.
Diesel in the GL... Not in your state?
TagMan
For instance, with Daimler selling it's majority stake in the Chrysler brand, it may be no longer obligated to share such things as subframes and powertrains with the lesser Chrysler cars. This in turn keeps investors/consumers relatively happy and also it keeps the value stronger overall on the more expensive Mercedes-Benz cars.
I do believe, however, that even though Daimler is mostly finished with the company, they still have some overlaping business to settle.
For instance, the upcoming LY Chrysler platform, if I'm correct, is based again on the E-Class rear underpinnings and this time will have Airmatic DC suspension. And some cars were to get the outstanding 7G-tronic MB tranny. This will definetely affect the next-gen 300, Charger, and Magnum full-size models.
It all sounded good last week, but with me poking around and eeking out some of the details, Daimler and Benz still has some worries, particularly 19.9% of Chrysler Holdings if all is good just as well if it's all bad.
Factor in some of the powertrain sharing(really no biggie with me as the 6-speed ZF tranny is shared with no fewer than 16 vehicles ranging from the 7-Series BMW to the Maserati QP Automatica and beyond) and the continued use of platform underpinning sharing, and it's still a shotgun marriage....
And since there is less "worry", can we please do the same QC scrub that you did on your German factories over here in America and fix some of the niggles that seem to be affecting the ML SUV and put a real interior in it in the process?
I figured that out a long time ago when I first glanced at that enormous plastic grille and the cheapish interior(only when compared to these ute's).
I have to give MT there props on the review of the MDX in a comparo of it and the Acadia and CX-9. While it does have to performance to compete, it's just doesn't have the polish to compete in the luxury arena.
Factor in the sea of buttons(40 on the dash alone), unsettling ride, and yester-tech 5-speed autobox(FROM A JAPANESE COMPANY!?!?), and the $50k seems even harder to justify.
The others on the otherhand, makes this choice even harder.
I don't have to tell you that the Range is mack-daddy, king of the hill of SUV's, no question. And this is still a huge player in our book, especially since we here that Land Rover has cleaned up in quality pretty damn good(thank heavens Jaguar rubbed some it's mojo off on the LR brand) and has added a plusher interior.
I hear that MB and Audi has started production of the GL Bluetecs and the Audi Q7 TDI's to be ready for the fall. If I can hold the "boss" off longer, I will. As witnessed by our combined gasoline bills of over $300 bucks last week, she may be abliged.
Yes! What excuse is there for the QC issues that PLAGUE certain MBZ models? NO EXCUSE, IMO. I am a great defender of MB, as you know, but when the reliability is off-the-scale-bad, then I shake my head in disappointment.
And while we're talking about this, Land Rover needs to pay better attention as well. You know that I really like LR, but it forces me to overlook that utterly disgraceful reliability rating of theirs. If it's improved, as you indicated, then I am very glad to learn of that.
blkhemi - you need to know that there is a strong possibility that the Land Rovers will all face a major interior upgrade, possibly starting with '08 models. (this comes from corporate - and it's mostly on RR Sport & LR3, not as much on standard RR)
TagMan
I love the way BMWs drive, but I do not like the way BMW corporate nickels and dimes you with stuff that should come STANDARD! These nickels and dimes are starting to add up to serious money!
My theory is that Merc1 quit, waited a bit and then rejoined as Brightness04, carefully avoiding anything MB to prolong the joke on us! :surprise:
I for one would swallow my pride a bit to get an SUV that could actually make cornering fun. Which is more important-driving a lumbering elephant that has real wood vs an agile SUV with an incredible 37.6 ft. turning circle, but fake wood?
All the reviewers marvel at the driveability of the MDX Sport. It and the X3 are the only 2 SUVs I will be driving in 2008. Sometimes luxury for its own sake has to take a back seat to fun.
This thought of course represents the viewpoint of someone who possesses one vehicle at a time. For those of you who have a stable of vehicles, my post is probably irrelevant.
Agree 100%. But, MB is also guilty of too many add-ons for too much $$. I've been complaining about it for quite some time. And recently, when I was online pricing out that X3 we were talking about, I was surprised to see the price so quickly escalate into the stratosphere. Your lease deal would be the best way to get it.
TagMan
You mean we can't have BOTH?... Luxury AND fun? :sick:
TagMan
I have been reading quite a bit about jerky throttle issues on various BMW threads re the X3. Seems to hesitate at first, then shoot forward. This is happening more frequently with many vehicles as engineers continue to "refine" steering, braking and transmissions with unnecessary computerized, electronic aids.
I seem to be reading a lot these days about automatics that get confused and can't seem to find the right gear. Heck this was never a problem with my primitive 1967 Impala, 1969 Cougar and 1973 Gold Duster! :surprise:
Of course, the key is not harboring hard feelings towards each other afterwards regardless how vehemently we disagree on specific issues.
I do hope the best for the company tho. The Range Rover is a great full-size ute, but I think that it has way to many problems. And that what keeps us from buying one. Yes, I know you can warranty the thing out to 100k miles(you'd be a fool not to), but it's just the thought of not driving your vehicle for WEEKS on in. But I continue to say that it sets the town for the class for overall luxury and bling factor, and this includes truck and car-based models.
I thank you for the update info.
In that vein, I'm not entirely sure the Chrysler spin-off helps as far as reliability is concerned. I'm not saying the spin-off is a bad idea; it helps preserving MB brand integrity, not having to share parts with a far lesser brand (the Imperial is too little too late; otherwise, Chrysler was supposed to move upmarket, etc. . . but it's all spilt milk now).
Ich auch.
I did not know we had so much in common. I speak German, my wife is Chinese but not a Confucian and I ignored the legal beer drinking age when I was in my teens.
Amazing and all this time I thought I was arguing with Danny DeVito :surprise:
Sorry, brightness. While you do tend to apply mathematical explanations to a LOT of things (too many, IMO, as I must be honest with you )... I can NOT let you apply what I consider a form of narrow-mindedness on my part, to the ranks of "statistical fluke". It was as I said... narrow-mindedness.
And yes, my apology was necessary... at least from my perspective, because my personal view of life and faith compels me to ask for forgiveness once in a while, because I believe I have been forgiven.
Now THAT having been said, what can we argue about next?
TagMan