is this "bike hauling" news? Honda killing Element?

[eddief]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2010/12/honda-is-killing-off-the-element.html

[victoryfactory]

Too bad.
The CRV is no element.
I was car shopping 3 years ago and checked out the element
My dream was for a new version 6" longer and a little higher for
better off road use. Maybe a slightly bigger engine. Didn't happen.
So I went for a Forester.

VF

[johnnymossville]

Yep, the Element is a good bike hauler. I don't have one, but know a few guys in the club that do.

The crv isn't even close to appealing for me.

The vehicle I'm thinking about now is the Transit Connect. Ford is going to be making a more consumer-ish model very shortly.

[jeo99]

"Honda killing Element?"

Good riddance! One of the ugliest cars since the Pontiac Aztec.

IMO
:banana: :banana:

[1happygirl]

Not a Honda fan, but that's a shame. It was my second choice for bike hauling, but went with a van. Wind noise and the lack of choice in interiors -the main reason (it was a Henry Ford moment, I could have any interior color as long as it was black). I just looked at a used one a while back.

Love the Transit Connect - just so noisy too.

Thought they were popular?, after ya go looking you notice a bunch of them on the streets.
Were they suicide doors? That might have been my con too.

The family said if I got one they would have a hard time riding in it----We all agree on the functional but ugggghhh lee

[shiftyfixedgear]

Isn't this a bike forum ?

[veloduffer]

I thought the Element was produced by Rubbermaid? :p

Seemed practical and although it was originally targeted for young folks, I know a lot of seniors purchased this. It wasn't great for long trips but a kind of pickup truck with a cap.

If I needed a new vehicle, I'd be looking at the Ford Flex. Square is hip! :hello:

[avalonracing]

Anything interesting or unique gets killed. See the demise of the Honda S2000 and the Toyota FJ Cruiser. Meanwhile everything else looks more and more alike.

[jeo99]

Toyota FJ Cruiser

Another on my top ten list of ugly cars. It was expensive as well.

:beer: :beer:

[veloduffer]

Anything interesting or unique gets killed. See the demise of the Honda S2000 and the Toyota FJ Cruiser. Meanwhile everything else looks more and more alike.

The Miata is still going strong. However, some vehicles deserve an early death - like the Pontiac Aztek. You could build a nicer looking vehicle with Lego blocks.

With the revival of a lot of older cars, any chance for the Chevy El Camino car/truck (also Ford Ranchero Subaru Brat) returning? :p

[RPS]

Isn't this a bike forum ?
The "other" Honda mini-van would be a great bike hauler if only imported to US, and could do most things an Element does, plus haul more people when needed.

This thread is actually about cars made to haul bikes. ;)

[sg8357]

The Element turned out to be the shipping container for the Fit.
The new official car for the bikie.

Note to Honda, I'd really like a Fit Si, 150hp would be fine.
Zooom, Zooom.

[Ralph]

I love my 2010 Element. It was cheap to buy. It's cheap to maintain and insure. It will be cheap to fix forever. It's basically Honda Accord engine and transmission. It's easy to keep clean with it's rubber floors. I don't need to haul people, just stuff (Home Depot stuff also). I like to haul my bike or bikes inside on trips. I'm leaving on a trip in April (12 year old grandson and myself) to the Dakota's. Think I'll take it.

It allows me to spend more for the other vehicles at our home. A sporty car I don't drive much. Nice sedan for wife, etc. If I need to haul people and stuff....I'd have a minivan. The Element is the best simple inside bike hauler I've seen....especially for the price....if all you want to haul is two people and their bikes and gear. There might be some good deals on the last ones. I bought mine at invoice from a dealership. He did it for the hold back.

RE the driving dynamics....Considering it's a box on wheels, it's not too bad. It is what it is. But not a 335.

[don'TreadOnMe]

If only the Element had room for 3 people/seatbelts in the back.
If Honda would bring that smaller minivan here (or the accord wagon), would be a good thing.

Yeah, this thread is really about bike haulers though, you're right!

[Crazy Chris]

If Honda would build a vehicle that eliminated most of the road noise, I might consider looking at the line-up.

[Louis]

If Honda would build a vehicle that eliminated most of the road noise, I might consider looking at the line-up.

I gladly put up with a little road noise in my Integra in exchange for a car that seems like it will run forever (208k miles and counting). (plus it's a great bike and stuff hauler)

[eddief]

That was my experience with and early Legend Coupe.

[sevencyclist]

I love my Honda Element, especially the manual transmission which makes driving a little more fun.

The car handles good enough. This car replaced my Audi A4, and I have no complaints.

Does not cost a lot to maintain. Gas mileage is roughly 21-22 miles per gallon, so not a huge deal for me who puts on roughly 7500 miles yearly.

[dmurphey]

The Honda Odessey van can take 3 adults in comfort, and roll in 3 bikes with wheels on, standing upright in the back, and their stuff. The lift over height is low. You do not get much attention, however. My van is gone. I have a rack on my S2000, which is a bit sacrilegious, but convenient. My wife has a CRV and it is only good for bikes with a rack on the back.

[veloduffer]

If Honda would build a vehicle that eliminated most of the road noise, I might consider looking at the line-up.

I agree. We had an Odyssey and replaced it with a Toyota Sienna. It is much quieter. Even my 2004 Highlander is quieter than my neighbor's 2009 Accord.

A little noise insulation would go a long way.

[flickwet]

When great vehicles get cancelled...For me The Isuzu Trooper was the absolute best combination of room, maneuverability, utility and off road prowess ever devised. I have been through 5 of them, 200,000 miles each, now used ones are getting old and hard to find. but its a vehicle that I could put bikes on the spare tire rack, yet access the back by just opening the door, the biggest back seat in SUV history, locking center diff with posi rear end NEVER gets stuck, biggest factory sunroof ever, good seats, great visibilty, just a blast to drive. And don't get me goin' about Suburbans, 3 of those so far, 3 kids 2 goldens, and gear... off to the beach in nothin' else.

[csm]

I'm on my second E. I'd say they're is the best vehicles I've ever owned overall.
I've had Various Jeeps, Mazdas, a Subaru sti, couple VWs, a pickup, some quirky european scrap...
and the Element does what I want a car to do. it is ugly in a Japanese ice cream truck kinda way, it isn't plush but... I like it.

[sherok]

I had the Element and it was perfect for loading bikes in, I'm driving a Jeep now and it works great too for interior bike hauling but not as easy as the Element. I wish I could have as many cars as I do bikes. I want the new Chevy Camaro... not a good car for hauling bikes.

[binxnyrwarrsoul]

The Miata is still going strong. However, some vehicles deserve an early death - like the Pontiac Aztek. You could build a nicer looking vehicle with Lego blocks.

With the revival of a lot of older cars, any chance for the Chevy El Camino car/truck (also Ford Ranchero Subaru Brat) returning? :p
That would be sweet, base it on the Pontiac G8, add AWD, and they wouldn't be able to keep up with demand, IMO.

[binxnyrwarrsoul]

I agree. We had an Odyssey and replaced it with a Toyota Sienna. It is much quieter. Even my 2004 Highlander is quieter than my neighbor's 2009 Accord.

A little noise insulation would go a long way.
Agreed, got a '06 Civic, perfect car, MPG, power, reliability, room, etc. but that road noise is ridiculous.

[Elefantino]

If Honda would bring that smaller minivan here (or the accord wagon), would be a good thing.

Yeah, this thread is really about bike haulers though, you're right!
The Freed, which debuted in Japan in ’08 and just debuted elsewhere in Asia, is rumored to be coming here as a hybrid, although time is uncertain.

http://www.autotodays.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/new-2010-honda-freed-pictures.jpg

It will likely come to the U.S. with a 2-2-3 configuration.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/__FnMf3mA5CE/S8nvCmx30NI/AAAAAAAADyo/2iVt-_7yryI/s1600/`.jpg

And it's a bike-hauler, too.

http://images.paultan.org/images/Honda_Freed_MPV_32.jpg

And then there is the not-so-rumored-but-actual Toyota Prius minivan, (http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2010/09/2012-toyota-prius-alpha-hybrid-minivan.html) which will be here in 2012.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_FoXyvaPSnVk/TKEuwypnh1I/AAAAAAADWWU/dhO2S-suQQs/s800/2012-Toyota-Prius-Minivan-01.jpg

[ultraman6970]

Nothing like a minivan anyways, you can get an old minivan for 1000 bucks, continue beating the crap out of it and you have room for dogs, kids, bikes, wife and the lover if you want to bring her too :P

[RPS]

The Freed, which debuted in Japan in ’08 and just debuted elsewhere in Asia, is rumored to be coming here as a hybrid, although time is uncertain.

http://www.autotodays.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/new-2010-honda-freed-pictures.jpg
That's a cool tiny minivan -- seems based on something about the size of a Fit. The latest Japanese Odyssey which came out about the same time seems a little bigger; but probably too close in size to US Odyssey to ever be imported here.

http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2008/10/honda-reveals-all-new-odyssey-mpv-in.html

[Louis]

The Freed, which debuted in Japan in ’08 and just debuted elsewhere in Asia, is rumored to be coming here as a hybrid, although time is uncertain.

It might be a great car in a number of ways, but unlike say, the Mazda 3 hatch, (which proves that a five-door need not be hideous) that thing is downright painful to the eyes.

[RPS]

It might be a great car in a number of ways, but unlike say, the Mazda 3 hatch, (which proves that a five-door need not be hideous) that thing is downright painful to the eyes.
That's funny considering I like it -- looks a lot like a stretched Fit. I'd have to see it from many angles to decide for sure.

[rice rocket]

The Element turned out to be the shipping container for the Fit.
The new official car for the bikie.

Note to Honda, I'd really like a Fit Si, 150hp would be fine.
Zooom, Zooom.
Yeah, the Fit has an amazing amount of space for how small it is.

I have a CR-V, parents have a Fit...I'd reason that the Fit has more usable space in it!

[Louis]

looks a lot like a stretched Fit

Agreed. And I don't like the Fit either. :)

[Ralph]

When I praised my Element higher up in this tread as a terrific bike hauler and decent all around driver, I was rating it based on it cost new (EX model....$21,600) to me. I'm always a cash buyer in everything I do, so I think it's a lot of car for the money, considering it's utility value. I have other vehicles for hauling the family.

However....it obviously is not as nice as a $30,000-$45,000 minivan, or many of the other vehicles it gets compared to. After I drove some other much nicer vehicles (which weren't better bike hauler for my use), I just decided I preferred the Element and enough cash left over to own (or keep) 1000-1500 shares of F, to some of the nicer vehicles.

My son has a Fit, which also is a terrific bike hauler, which only cost him a little over $15,000, and he has the utility of the Fit, plus many thousands of dollars left over. It is even more crude than the Element....but he doesn't care. It will last him a long time as his commuter and bike hauler. Another son has an Odyssey, with well over 100,000 miles, which has been a terrific family vehicle and hauler.

So sure....a BMW wagon, hi end Sienna, or Touring Odyssey is nicer, better driving, quieter, more refined, etc than my Element. But I look at the overall cost of things, and the value of not having money in things that depreciate. That's why I prefer a Centaur group and a 1000 shares of a $10-$12 stock to a Record group. Different strokes, etc. I guess we are just a thrifty family. But I retired early with everything paid for, while my co horts at work with a couple of $50,000 cars and $500,000 and up mortgages are still working.

I really wish Honda (or someone), would make something along the lines of the Element, but just a tad larger, with a small diesel. The Transit Connect comes that way in Europe with manual trans. These vehicles will never be car like, but sure are useful for folks with active lifestyles.

[Dekonick]

Thats how I feel about the Ridgeline. A lot of truck for the $$ when you consider a similar Avalanche costs 40+k compared to 25-33K...

I considered an Element but went with the Ridge because it is so versatile.

[nm87710]

i'm always a cash buyer in everything i do
.
.
.
But i look at the overall cost of things, and the value of not having money in things that depreciate.
.
.
.
But i retired early with everything paid for, while my co horts at work with a couple of $50,000 cars and $500,000 and up mortgages are still working.


+1

[RPS]

As I understand the Honda lineup, the most likely reason they are stopping the Element model is because it is based on a modified Civic platform as is the CR-V, and both the Civic and CR-V are due for a significant redesign (not just a rebody on same platform) for around 2012. I expect that Honda would have to invest in a completely new Element if they decided to keep that model; and the low Element volume probably doesn’t justify the cost.

[RPS]

I really wish Honda (or someone), would make something along the lines of the Element, but just a tad larger, with a small diesel. The Transit Connect comes that way in Europe with manual trans. These vehicles will never be car like, but sure are useful for folks with active lifestyles.
The Ford Transit (not the Transit Connect) in short wheelbase and low roof probably comes close to what you are asking for. It is now built and sold in Mexico in addition to Europe and other parts of the world except US. Many credible sources have stated that the next generation of the Ford Transit will replace the Ford E full-size van in a few years, which means it will be available in the US. We can only hope that it will be available in numerous lengths and roof heights as is normally the case in other markets. By the way, in Mexico it is available with small diesel and front wheel drive; the small version not much bigger than Honda Element.

[Ralph]

As I understand the Honda lineup, the most likely reason they are stopping the Element model is because it is based on a modified Civic platform as is the CR-V, and both the Civic and CR-V are due for a significant redesign (not just a rebody on same platform) for around 2012. I expect that Honda would have to invest in a completely new Element if they decided to keep that model; and the low Element volume probably doesn’t justify the cost.


That's the reason.

[csm]

I'm surprised that they didn't do a new design element based on the new crv/civic.
glad I got mine....

[fourflys]

With the revival of a lot of older cars, any chance for the Chevy El Camino car/truck (also Ford Ranchero Subaru Brat) returning? :p

Subaru did bring the Brat back a few years ago and then killed it as well... the newer Brat had 4 doors and really short bed.. never tried to put a bike in one, but I'm not sure it would fit well...

just found a pic, it's called the Baja and I guess a bike kind of fits...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Subaru_Baja_1.jpg

[fourflys]

Nothing like a minivan anyways, you can get an old minivan for 1000 bucks, continue beating the crap out of it and you have room for dogs, kids, bikes, wife and the lover if you want to bring her too :P

and the gas milage is as bad as the Element or a full size pick-up... I had minivan when we had the baby and it was great for hauling bikes, but horrible on gas...

[Ahneida Ride]

"Honda killing Element?"

Good riddance! One of the ugliest cars since the Pontiac Aztec.

IMO
:banana: :banana:

I thought so too. Two months later I purchased one.
some of us have chit we have to haul around.

A very practical car indeed. :beer:

[Ralph]

I hate to keep bragging on the Element, because it is only what it is. Reasonable value for the money.

But I think it gets a bad rap about fuel economy. It's a box.

Mine gets 27-28 MPG on road trips at 65-70 MPH. Go faster, and mileage drops fast. In hilly country, with air on, maybe 25-26. Around town, 22-23.

Up thru Eisenhour tunnel.....drive something else with more power that struggles less. I worked a rental Mazda 5 wagon (small minivan) hard getting thru there going to Vail and back recently with 3 adults. It has roughly same power as Element.

[RPS]

With the revival of a lot of older cars, any chance for the Chevy El Camino car/truck (also Ford Ranchero Subaru Brat) returning? :p
According to rumors (see link below for Montana) it may be possible. IMO existing small pickups do not get much better MPG than larger and more modern full-size ½-ton pickups equipped with base engines, and are therefore being phased out in USA by Ford and GM if you believe their 2011 and 2012 plans. It would not surprise me if smaller FWD unitized pickups (in lieu of RWD body-on-frame) replace them. GM already has FWD small pickups in South America, and Ford recently switched the Explorer (which previously shared much with Ranger trucks) to FWD car-based platform. Seems fuel economy goals will force a lot of industry change towards smaller and lighter vehicles which may include car-like trucks.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/06/could-the-chevrolet-montana-replace-the-chevy-colorado-in-the-us.html#more

And on existing car-based Montana pickup:

http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/stories/small-trucks/chevrolet-tornado/falling-in-luv-again.html

[dd74]

http://images.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/Supervan%203.jpg

http://images.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/Espace%20F1%201.jpg

Bike haulers... :beer:

[Tom]

Interesting. I'm thinking about unloading the Element based on use. It doesn't make a lot of sense as a daily driver to work and a ride support vehicle less than a half a dozen times a year. I was disappointed at how little weight it would carry - for something with that much volume a 750 pound total payload is kind of small, but I knew I wasn't buying a truck. It is unstoppable in snow, however, I sure like that part.

Next car's a Volvo C30 with a roof rack. I'm saving my pennies. I refuse to go into debt for a car.

[jeo99]

]Next car's a Volvo C30 with a roof rack. I'm saving my penniesI refuse to go into debt for a car.[/QUOTE]

That's unAMERICAN!

:no: :no:

[54ny77]

blah blah blah bet yer family trucksters don't do this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pesw8qG6YUY&feature=player_embedded#!

[Louis]

Next car's a Volvo C30 with a roof rack.

Tom,

That's one of the cars on my short list.

I don't consider it a "true" hatchback because it looks to me like the back glass is the only thing that opens up.

1) I assume you've test driven one. What were your thoughts?

2) Have you tried to put a bike in through the rear opening (with front wheel removed)? If so, what was that like?

I'm not a fan of roof racks and would much rather put it inside. If I have to carry more than one I go with hitch-mounted systems. That approach has worked well for me with my Integra.

Louis

[PaulE]

After the redesigned Civic is released there will be a new model with a new name that replaces both the CR-V and the discontinued Element.

The Mazda Sport 3 is a slightly roomier, 4 door version of the Volvo C30 built on the same platform. Who knows what direction each model will take after Volvo's new models come out under Geely ownership and Ford sells its stake in Mazda as just announced?

Whenever you see someone driving a Pontiac Aztec, you should feel a little bit sorry for them, they got sucked into what they probably thought was going to be the next big thing and didn't trust their own judgement as to just how fugly that vehicle is. :)

[Louis]

After the redesigned Civic is released

How old is the current Civic? I thought it came out just recently.

So do we know when will the CR-V / Element be out?

My '97 Integra won't last forever....

[PaulE]

How old is the current Civic? I thought it came out just recently.

So do we know when will the CR-V / Element be out?
C
My '97 Integra won't last forever....

My Honda friend mentioned something yesterday, I think he said 2012, but I forgot already. I'll ask him next time I see him. He mentioned the new model has "Cross" in the name, like Cross Tour.

[dd74]

I want my next hauler to be diesel. But the Audi and M-B cost far too much. I guess a diesel Jetta wagon might be the way to go, but I hear they're expensive too.

Sheesh! In Europe, diesel hatchbacks and little SUVs are plentiful and very affordable. Not to mention the fact diesel is just hands down a better power plant option than gasoline.

[paulh]

Crosstour is already taken. It looks like it's an AWD Accord Hatchback.

http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-crosstour/


My Honda friend mentioned something yesterday, I think he said 2012, but I forgot already. I'll ask him next time I see him. He mentioned the new model has "Cross" in the name, like Cross Tour.

[gt6267a]

I am in the market for something with good cargo volume and milage. This seems to be a difficult combination. An Element or Subaru outback with a small diesel would fit the ticket if they existed. The only vehicle I have found is the VW Jetta SportWagon which should be a winner but the local dealer is so miserable its not an option.

[RPS]

After the redesigned Civic is released there will be a new model with a new name that replaces both the CR-V and the discontinued Element.
Considering that the CR-V is one of the most popular, if not the most popular, small SUV in the US I find it difficult to believe they will change the name to encompass the relatively unpopular Element. They could do a slight modification of the name in some form of letter progression but I’m sure it would still have a direct link to the very popular CR-V -- in my opinion of course.

[RPS]

How old is the current Civic? I thought it came out just recently.

So do we know when will the CR-V / Element be out?

My '97 Integra won't last forever....
The current Civic has been around since 2006 which is a long time by Honda standards. The current eight generation is the first I know of which has been around for 6 years. One report I recall stated the delay is due to the new president asking that the design go back to the drawing board to make it more fuel efficient in keeping with what made Honda stand out originally. Apparently he wants to take Honda back closer to its roots. As an example, the new CR-V derived from the same platform reportedly will have a smaller 2.0 liter engine in addition to the existing 2.4L. I just hope they don’t offer it as a turbo, but rather as a NA with less HP for better MPG. From what I've read we should probably expect them next year as a 2012 model.

[avalonracing]

The only vehicle I have found is the VW Jetta SportWagon which should be a winner but the local dealer is so miserable its not an option.

Jettas are well designed and have nice handling, however the reliability is horrendous. I've had a few friends who have owned them and each of them have said "never again". (FYI they were 2005, 2006 and 2008 model years).

[rice rocket]

The late 90's-mid-2000's were a particularly low point for VW in terms of reliability. Not to say that I would buy one now, but that was the era when Audi technology/electronics/complexity infiltrated the VW lineup and things went awry. I was a 2000 Passat owner, and nothing major went wrong...but still, never again.

Jetta TDI wagon would be a neat hauler, if it were reliable. I'm still patiently waiting for Subaru to drop their diesels in...

[snah]

I am in the market for something with good cargo volume and milage. This seems to be a difficult combination. An Element or Subaru outback with a small diesel would fit the ticket if they existed. The only vehicle I have found is the VW Jetta SportWagon which should be a winner but the local dealer is so miserable its not an option.

Subaru Forester, not a bad option also.

[pjm]

Driving past the local Kia store, this really caught my eye....
http://www.carshowp.com/2011-kia-forte-hatchback/2011-kia-forte-hatchback-side-view/
Its a handsome little hatchback, to my eye. Kia hired an ex-Audi guy as their head stylist.

Honda, sadly, refuses to give us a hatchback Civic, or better yet, a little wagon.

[PaulE]

Crosstour is already taken. It looks like it's an AWD Accord Hatchback.

http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-crosstour/

No I'm not talking about the Cross Tour. The CR-V and Element combined replacement that comes out in 2012 will be the Cross-something else. Cross is the new Fixed and all that.

[Louis]

Driving past the local Kia store, this really caught my eye....
http://www.carshowp.com/2011-kia-forte-hatchback/2011-kia-forte-hatchback-side-view/
Its a handsome little hatchback, to my eye. Kia hired an ex-Audi guy as their head stylist.

The Kia Pro Ceed is pretty nifty, but I don't think it's available in the US

http://images.thecarconnection.com/lrg/kia-pro-ceed-01-jpg_100203939_l.jpg

[nm87710]

honda, sadly, refuses to give us a hatchback civic, or better yet, a little wagon.

+1

[1happygirl]

Wow everyone on the forum has cool vehicles. Just got into sailing and been looking at the RAV 4 Toyota to tow stuff (1,500 lbs max). I didn't know about the Freed or Prius Van. Looks like some good stuff. Thanks. How bout one of these? LOL. 3 cyl.?

http://cajunminitrucks.com/mini_truck_photos.htm

three cyl. dont let the url fool u. cajuns are for everyone.

Where would I get the tires.

[snah]

"Honda killing Element?"

Good riddance! One of the ugliest cars since the Pontiac Aztec.

IMO
:banana: :banana:

Beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but if you think the Element is ugly, it's nothing compared to this, my opinion.

Not sure the photos going to load, if not, see Nissan Cube in the attached story.

Hit this story yesterday on Yahoo.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/01/ugliest-cars-autos-2010-lifestyle-vehicles-design_slide.html?partner=yahooautos

[RPS]

Wow everyone on the forum has cool vehicles. Just got into sailing and been looking at the RAV 4 Toyota to tow stuff (1,500 lbs max). I didn't know about the Freed or Prius Van. Looks like some good stuff. Thanks. How bout one of these? LOL. 3 cyl.?

http://cajunminitrucks.com/mini_truck_photos.htm

three cyl. dont let the url fool u. cajuns are for everyone.

Where would I get the tires.
Don't laugh, 3 will soon become the new 4. You can only scale cylinder size down so much before it becomes too inefficient. Very efficient three-cylinder Cadillac concept at LA auto show below:

http://www.motorward.com/2010/11/cadillac-urban-luxury-concept/

[veloduffer]

Beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but if you think the Element is ugly, it's nothing compared to this, my opinion.

Not sure the photos going to load, if not, see Nissan Cube in the attached story.

Hit this story yesterday on Yahoo.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/01/ugliest-cars-autos-2010-lifestyle-vehicles-design_slide.html?partner=yahooautos

Looks kind of like my Sony Dream Machine alarm clock

[jeo99]

Could not agree more! The Cube is also on my list. I should publish my list and really get people going. I have a top ten list(or five) for most all MFGs. Coming from the auto industry I have some qualifications but as you said "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder". On a plus note the Cube has better fuel economy than the Element. In-fact my old GM van had better fuel economy than the Element.

IMHO,
:beer:


Beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but if you think the Element is ugly, it's nothing compared to this, my opinion.

Not sure the photos going to load, if not, see Nissan Cube in the attached story.

Hit this story yesterday on Yahoo.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/01/ugliest-cars-autos-2010-lifestyle-vehicles-design_slide.html?partner=yahooautos

[Tom]

Uh oh. That Acura wagon is going to give the Volvo some competition on my list. It'll depend how big it is. Being a Honda driver leaving the fold is a little tough to take. It looks like we're now going with the C30, Audi A3 and Acura short list when it comes time to look.

[Louis]

Uh oh. That Acura wagon is going to give the Volvo some competition on my list. It'll depend how big it is. Being a Honda driver leaving the fold is a little tough to take. It looks like we're now going with the C30, Audi A3 and Acura short list when it comes time to look.

No Subaru?

[Louis]

All this car stuff is crazy. I know I sound like a broken record, but I'll say it again:

My needs have not changed. I want another one exactly like what I have now, except new, but I can't get it because stupid Acura no longer makes the Integra / RSX. Apparently they're too busy making luxo-sedans. 209,xxx miles and counting...

[eddief]

think it is your next ride. Fits well with your practical, low key needs. Actually, in person I thought it looked pretty cool. I know that is not the majority opinion, but so what.

[97CSI]

Am thinking the new Ford Edge, which gets better mileage than anything mentioned, might be the ticket. Only problem is trying to find one without all the crap electronics they put in vehicles today. Just more distractions from driving that make our time on the road more dangerous.

[97CSI]

Am thinking the new Ford Edge, which gets better mileage than anything mentioned, might be the ticket. Only problem is trying to find one without all the crap electronics they put in vehicles today. Just more distractions from driving that make our time on the road more dangerous.

[97CSI]

Am thinking the new Ford Edge, which gets better mileage than anything mentioned, might be the ticket. Only problem is trying to find one without all the crap electronics they put in vehicles today. Just more distractions from driving that make our time on the road more dangerous.

[gt6267a]

On the gas mileage front, where are the Subaru Outback, Honda crv, Toyota rav4, bmw x3, mb glk … diesels or 3cyl gas engines? All these vehicles seem to get very peppy engines. What about a nice vehicle with excellent gas mileage? For example, the Subaru Outback, the 4 and 6 cylinder are too similar. If I am going to take a hit in performance, how about getting something in return like 40 or 60 mpg? If it takes me 20 sec to get to 60mph that is fine with a 60mpg vehicle.

When talking with car dealers, they argue that no one is interested in the slower vehicles with better gas mileage. To my eyes, they have not offered a substantial enough trade off. Thoughts?

[fourflys]

On the gas mileage front, where are the Subaru Outback, Honda crv, Toyota rav4, bmw x3, mb glk … diesels or 3cyl gas engines? All these vehicles seem to get very peppy engines. What about a nice vehicle with excellent gas mileage? For example, the Subaru Outback, the 4 and 6 cylinder are too similar. If I am going to take a hit in performance, how about getting something in return like 40 or 60 mpg? If it takes me 20 sec to get to 60mph that is fine with a 60mpg vehicle.

When talking with car dealers, they argue that no one is interested in the slower vehicles with better gas mileage. To my eyes, they have not offered a substantial enough trade off. Thoughts?


you gotta move to Europe to get a normal sized vehicle with a diesel engine... I was amazed at all the "normal" cars over there with diesel power... someday I hope the US will see the practicality of it... on a side note, I think Jeep was putting a 5 cyl diesel in their small SUV a couple of years ago, not sure if it's still available...

[gt6267a]

you gotta move to Europe to get a normal sized vehicle with a diesel engine... I was amazed at all the "normal" cars over there with diesel power... someday I hope the US will see the practicality of it... on a side note, I think Jeep was putting a 5 cyl diesel in their small SUV a couple of years ago, not sure if it's still available...

normal sized vehicles, diesel, and manual trans. when working in the uk and holland, i loved all the vehicle options.

[snah]

you gotta move to Europe to get a normal sized vehicle with a diesel engine... I was amazed at all the "normal" cars over there with diesel power... someday I hope the US will see the practicality of it... on a side note, I think Jeep was putting a 5 cyl diesel in their small SUV a couple of years ago, not sure if it's still available...

Couldn't agree more, go to Europe, you'll see diesel from all the bigger manufacturers, Ford, GM, Honda, Toyota, Subaru and Nissan. Here we're given minimal choices, Mercedes, VW and Audi. Think Porsche now also.

Believe you're correct about Jeep, but I think they offered it in the Grand Cherokee.

[97CSI]

On the gas mileage front, where are the Subaru Outback, Honda crv, Toyota rav4, bmw x3, mb glk … diesels or 3cyl gas engines? All these vehicles seem to get very peppy engines. What about a nice vehicle with excellent gas mileage? For example, the Subaru Outback, the 4 and 6 cylinder are too similar. If I am going to take a hit in performance, how about getting something in return like 40 or 60 mpg? If it takes me 20 sec to get to 60mph that is fine with a 60mpg vehicle.

When talking with car dealers, they argue that no one is interested in the slower vehicles with better gas mileage. To my eyes, they have not offered a substantial enough trade off. Thoughts?Last trip to watch the TdF we rented a 1Series BMW 'shooting brake' with a diesel and 6-spd tranny. 55 mpg and it had no trouble at all keeping up with traffic and cruising at 120+mph. A delightful car, as was the 4-door Alfa we had the previous trip. We definitely need similar over here.

[RPS]

On the gas mileage front, where are the Subaru Outback, Honda crv, Toyota rav4, bmw x3, mb glk … diesels or 3cyl gas engines? All these vehicles seem to get very peppy engines. What about a nice vehicle with excellent gas mileage? For example, the Subaru Outback, the 4 and 6 cylinder are too similar. If I am going to take a hit in performance, how about getting something in return like 40 or 60 mpg? If it takes me 20 sec to get to 60mph that is fine with a 60mpg vehicle.

When talking with car dealers, they argue that no one is interested in the slower vehicles with better gas mileage. To my eyes, they have not offered a substantial enough trade off. Thoughts?
They are mostly right because incremental “trade offs” are not linear. To make “substantial” improvements in fuel economy require a lot of compromise which most of us aren’t willing to accept.

Take vehicle size for instance. The best conventional Honda Civic is rated at 36 MPG highway, yet the much larger Honda Accord is rated at 34 MPG highway – not a lot of difference there. If you were going to go after 50 MPG based on size alone the vehicle would have to be so small that very few would buy it. In that sense they are right.

Smaller engines yield improved fuel economy too – mostly in city driving -- but only to a point. For highway driving most engines can be run slow enough with 6-speed transmissions to make them nearly as efficient unless grossly oversized in the first place.

Diesels in the past held a great advantage over gasoline engines because they could run relatively more efficiently at low loads, so when cruising at low speeds or idling they could out perform gasoline by a wide margin. That is no longer the case because of technology improvements which have narrowed the gap. Direct injection with and without turbo charging, variable valve timing, displacement on demand, and shutting engines off during deceleration and idling are threatening diesels’ advantage. In some ways direct injection makes a gasoline engine run similar to diesels, and with many of the advantages.

I could go on but you get the point. It’s not easy getting 50 MPG in cars we’d buy otherwise they’d already be doing it.

[brians647]

Take vehicle size for instance. The best conventional Honda Civic is rated at 36 MPG highway, yet the much larger Honda Accord is rated at 34 MPG highway – not a lot of difference there. If you were going to go after 50 MPG based on size alone the vehicle would have to be so small that very few would buy it. In that sense they are right.

Smaller engines yield improved fuel economy too – mostly in city driving -- but only to a point. For highway driving most engines can be run slow enough with 6-speed transmissions to make them nearly as efficient unless grossly oversized in the first place.

You're correct on the size front, but you haven't addressed the performance angle.
I bet that both those cars are faster/more powerful than most users need. Slow them down, and keep the size.

Of course, contradictory to that, my wife's CRV somehow puts out 225hp, but is (relatively) slow as molasses with the a/c on. When I was in high school the Ford Mustang put out 225hp and went 0-60 in 6.5 seconds. I know that safety equipment adds a lot of weight, but something else is amiss.

[goonster]

something else is amiss.
CR-V:
- peak power achieved very high in the rev range
- greater drivetrain losses

'86 ~ '93 Mustang GT:
- peak torque reached at low revs
- RWD favors 0-60 times
- power ratings for the Ford V8's were very conservative

Weight actually seems to be fairly similar.

HP figures, by themselves, are a poor general indicator of overall vehicle performance.

[rice rocket]

The CR-V makes 225hp now? I don't think that is true, or was ever true. They've been on 2.4L i-4 K24's for the past 2 chassis, and 2.0L's before then.

If it's really an issue, there's a supercharger kit on the market. Makes your i-4 into a torque monster. I've had one on my CR-V for the last 11 years. ;)

[brians647]

The CR-V makes 225hp now? I don't think that is true, or was ever true. They've been on 2.4L i-4 K24's for the past 2 chassis, and 2.0L's before then.

You're right! :o I don't know where I got that number from. They only make 180. No wonder they're so damned slow! :D

[goonster]

Believe you're correct about Jeep, but I think they offered it in the Grand Cherokee.
There were CRD engines available in both the Liberty and Grand Cherokee. Neither one sold very well, but Chrysler didn't try too hard, imho.

[AngryScientist]

There were CRD engines available in both the Liberty and Grand Cherokee. Neither one sold very well, but Chrysler didn't try too hard, imho.

jeep is the only thing keeping chrysler afloat. they havent tried hard at anything in years. the CRDs were plagued with problems.

[gt6267a]

They are mostly right because incremental “trade offs” are not linear. To make “substantial” improvements in fuel economy require a lot of compromise which most of us aren’t willing to accept.

Take vehicle size for instance. The best conventional Honda Civic is rated at 36 MPG highway, yet the much larger Honda Accord is rated at 34 MPG highway – not a lot of difference there. If you were going to go after 50 MPG based on size alone the vehicle would have to be so small that very few would buy it. In that sense they are right.

Smaller engines yield improved fuel economy too – mostly in city driving -- but only to a point. For highway driving most engines can be run slow enough with 6-speed transmissions to make them nearly as efficient unless grossly oversized in the first place.

Diesels in the past held a great advantage over gasoline engines because they could run relatively more efficiently at low loads, so when cruising at low speeds or idling they could out perform gasoline by a wide margin. That is no longer the case because of technology improvements which have narrowed the gap. Direct injection with and without turbo charging, variable valve timing, displacement on demand, and shutting engines off during deceleration and idling are threatening diesels’ advantage. In some ways direct injection makes a gasoline engine run similar to diesels, and with many of the advantages.

I could go on but you get the point. It’s not easy getting 50 MPG in cars we’d buy otherwise they’d already be doing it.

as brians647 pointed out, instead of reducing the vehicle size, what about reducing the engine hp? the current civic gets 36 mpg and 0-60 in about 9sec. What reduction in HP / increase in 0-60 time would it take to get 50mpg? Is it a 15 sec 0-60 @ 50mpg?

The point is that I find lower performance acceptable, but I want something for it. That something is better fuel economy.

[RPS]

as brians647 pointed out, instead of reducing the vehicle size, what about reducing the engine hp? the current civic gets 36 mpg and 0-60 in about 9sec. What reduction in HP / increase in 0-60 time would it take to get 50mpg? Is it a 15 sec 0-60 @ 50mpg?

The point is that I find lower performance acceptable, but I want something for it. That something is better fuel economy.
I tried to address the issue of lower performance indirectly by instead addressing smaller engines because I wanted to avoid getting into a lot of details, but since you both asked:

In the context of conventional vehicles (not hybrids), the kind of improvement you are asking about would likely also require a significant reduction in speed. Engine size, vehicle speed, and fuel consumption are very dependent.

To discuss lower performance we’d first have to define what that means – and I’m certain that means something different to everyone. Having said that, purely from a technical standpoint (versus say marketing), engine size in cars is dominated by instantaneous capacity to generate power for fast acceleration and/or climbing (just like bike riding) and not so much by ability to generate modest power in order to maintain moderate and legal cruising speeds.

When driving at freeway speeds in the order of 70+ MPH, making a CR-V engine smaller would do little to enhance fuel economy because the engine is already running at near its optimum efficiency. This has been accomplished in large part by using taller gearing which runs the engine much slower, thereby increasing BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) and hence reducing fuel consumption for the same power output. In order to benefit significantly from having an even smaller engine, vehicle power requirement would have to be reduced to the point that the larger engine can no longer be made to run as efficiently. The typical scenario for this to happen is when vehicle speed is reduced which has a huge effect on needed engine power (just like a bike at 15 MPH requires much less power than one at 25 MPH). When a vehicle is traveling slowly, say around 35 to 45 MPH or slower, a large engine can’t be made to run slow enough and still be efficient. It is under low-power conditions a smaller engine will be much more efficient compared to a larger one. At idle the difference is quite pronounced.

Keep in mind that for city driving much of the energy used is dependent on vehicle mass because it has to be accelerated every time the vehicle comes to a stop. Assuming the driver accelerates at the same rate, then a smaller engine would simply run faster to generate the same horsepower to get the same job done. A 1-liter engine at 3,000 RPM isn’t really working all that differently or more efficient than a 2-liter engine running at 1,500 RPM if generating the same HP. It’s even very likely the larger 2L engine may be more efficient that the 1L under some real-world conditions. Anyway, the advantage of having the larger 2L engine instead of a 1L is that it has greater reserve HP to accelerate and/or climb when the driver wants more “performance”.

Basically I’m stating that the greatest improvement we can get from “smaller” engines is when the driver is committed to driving very conservatively. I always get the smallest engine offered in order to improve MPG. However, if a person was always going to drive at 80 to 100 MPH, a V-6 should almost do as well as a smaller I-4. To answer your question directly, we don’t have enough people in the US who are willing to drive even slower to warrant the manufacture of automobiles with 2-cylinder engines what could get us from point A to point B in comfort and reasonable time. Technically it is very doable but there is no market for such cars (not yet anyway). As I wrote a while back, even a 1-liter modern engine can produce more power than many cars in the 60s and 70s which hauled people around without problems. The biggest difference is that back then basic economy cars did 0 to 60 in 15 seconds or longer and that was considered normal, and today many would consider it dangerously underpowered. Perceptions and expectations have changed drastically.

[Louis]

think it is your next ride. Fits well with your practical, low key needs. Actually, in person I thought it looked pretty cool. I know that is not the majority opinion, but so what.

Eddie, I can see you in one of those. :cool:

But can it haul your recumbent?

[dd74]

you gotta move to Europe to get a normal sized vehicle with a diesel engine... I was amazed at all the "normal" cars over there with diesel power... someday I hope the US will see the practicality of it... on a side note, I think Jeep was putting a 5 cyl diesel in their small SUV a couple of years ago, not sure if it's still available...
Don't know about new diesels in CA. I've heard California's Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) has diesels on its short list of vehicles to eventually ban in the state.

[dd74]

as brians647 pointed out, instead of reducing the vehicle size, what about reducing the engine hp? the current civic gets 36 mpg and 0-60 in about 9sec. What reduction in HP / increase in 0-60 time would it take to get 50mpg? Is it a 15 sec 0-60 @ 50mpg?

The point is that I find lower performance acceptable, but I want something for it. That something is better fuel economy.
Won't happen because horsepower is a marketing tool in automobiles, just as low weight and stiffness is a marketing tool in cycling.

In fact, manufacturers, particularly Porsche, is well-known for underselling the hp. in their models. A recent example is the new Ford Mustang GT. The car has been measured at far above its' reported 412 hp. Something close to 425 or 430 hp is what I've read.

IMO, if you want to keep hp at a minimum but raise performance, more transmission gears at closer ratios, and lighter-weight materials is the way to go. But again, that isn't as sexy as huge horsepower.

[avalonracing]

You want a car that can go from 0-60mph in 15 seconds? At full throttle??? (which people don't like to do from stops)


PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, do not pull out in front of me! Better yet, keep your four wheeled moped on the shoulder with the hazards on.

[RPS]

You want a car that can go from 0-60mph in 15 seconds? At full throttle??? (which people don't like to do from stops)


PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, do not pull out in front of me! Better yet, keep your four wheeled moped on the shoulder with the hazards on.
To put it in context of reality, "normal traffic" flow has cars accelerating from 0 to about 47 MPH in about 15 seconds.

50 MPH is "normally" reached in about 18 seconds in typical traffic conditions. Willingness to accept lower acceleration performance isn't as absurd as you appear to think. ;)

[97CSI]

Give me a Ford Explorer with a 125hp turbo-diesel that gets 35mpg and I'm happy. Comfort, room and economy in a usefully sized package that can go into 4WD low for those trips up the mining trails and time on the beach. I don't need to go faster than 75-80 at the most and 0-60 in 15s will definitely keep up with traffic.

[goonster]

Give me a Ford Explorer with a 125hp turbo-diesel that gets 35mpg and I'm happy.
Too heavy. Closest analogy would be the Liberty CRD (160 hp, 295 ft*lb), which was rated at 21/26, but underperformed that consistently.

The new VW TDI may be a better example of today's state-of-the-art diesel four-banger: 140 hp, 235 ft*lb, rated to 30/39 in the manual Jetta. No way that would get close to 35 mpg in a slushbox 4WD truck.

[rice rocket]

Jetta actually goes up to 41 mpg according to the EPA. And if you drive conservatively (and live somewhere flat), people have it all the way up to 50 mpg.

Hybrid what?

[goonster]

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, do not pull out in front of me! Better yet, keep your four wheeled moped on the shoulder with the hazards on.
Ridiculous. You share the roads with buses and trucks far slower than that all day, every day.

Someone on this forum commented recently that the current 230hp BMW 328i is "barely adequate for daily commuting". Preposterous. My 90 hp diesel isn't holding anyone up either.

[RPS]

Jetta actually goes up to 41 mpg according to the EPA. And if you drive conservatively (and live somewhere flat), people have it all the way up to 50 mpg.

Hybrid what?
Chevy Cruze Eco with 1.4 turbo gasoline and manual transmission will be rated at 42 MPG highway. :beer:

Considering diesel fuel has much more energy per gallon than gasoline, economy differences for highway driving between diesel and gasoline isn't great any more.

http://gas2.org/2010/11/11/chevy-cruze-eco-earns-42-mpg-highway-rating/

[97CSI]

Chevy Cruze Eco with 1.4 turbo gasoline and manual transmission will be rated at 42 MPG highway. :beer: Wonder when the idiots in marketing will offer this in a station wagon with rails? Never, is my guess. Dont' want to steal sales from the more profitable SUVs.

[thwart]

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, do not pull out in front of me! Better yet, keep your four wheeled moped on the shoulder with the hazards on. I know it's not meant this way, but... not too far from:

'Those g*d-damn bikers are slowing me down, too... get off the f*cking road! Stick to the paths my taxes are paying for!'

[gt6267a]

To put it in context of reality, "normal traffic" flow has cars accelerating from 0 to about 47 MPH in about 15 seconds.

50 MPH is "normally" reached in about 18 seconds in typical traffic conditions. Willingness to accept lower acceleration performance isn't as absurd as you appear to think. ;)

i suppose this is my point. a vehicle that is able to get to 60 in a reasonable amount of time is a worthwhile option.

examples ...

the audi a2 sold in europe that never made it to the states. ranging in gas mileage from 50 to 80 mpg. 0-60 in 9-11 sec. more than adequate.

mb a class. 50mpg, 0-60 in 8-10 sec.

[RPS]

i suppose this is my point. a vehicle that is able to get to 60 in a reasonable amount of time is a worthwhile option.

Trust me; I understand your point completely. However, putting it in the context of the Element in the OP, it has to be difficult for a company like Honda which built its reputation on fuel economy to have a vehicle which only gets 25 MPG when 40 MPG is becoming the industry’s new 30 MPG. The Element is too boxy and has poor aerodynamics to do much better than 25 MPG highway regardless of what size gasoline engine they put in it. Honda could downsize the Element’s engine and it would become slower for sure but highway economy wouldn’t improve. There would be an incremental improvement in city driving but not enough to make the vehicle viable to enough people IMHO.

Sometimes downsizing the engine isn't enough. :(

[Ralph]

I just returned from a trip from just N of Orlando to N Fort Myers, with my Element. About 360 miles of driving. Nearest I can calculate, I got 29-30 MPG runing in the 60-65 MPH range with AC off (It's cold here). Took 12.07 gal to fill it up after going 355 miles.

I usually get 27-28 MPG going 65-70 on Flat Interstate with AC on. Usually get 25-26 on hilly Interstate with AC on. Usually get 22-23 around town. That's real world experience over many tanks. I know it's rating is only about 25 MPG under new way they rate gas mileage.

Something to consider when discussing engine efficiency, size, power, etc. Large non aero efficient vehicles like the Element usually have hi capacity AC compressors. So while my Element may have the same basic engine as an Accord, not only is aero in efficiency hurting fuel economy, so is the AC compressor that has a cool a much larger interior volume. So all in all, I think the fuel Economy of the Element is excellent, considering it's shape and it's interior volume, and how much the AC compressor has to do.

It's difficult to have it both ways. Ultra efficient engines, best possible Trans and trans axle gearing, aero shape, etc and....boxy roomy interior shape, powerful AC, enough RPM's to pull all this up a long hill. etc. But my point is don't knock the fuel efficiency of the Element without considering the package. If you need to haul people plus stuff, plenty of minivans get similar mileage as my Element....plus $10,000-$20,000 or so.

[dd74]

Considering diesel fuel has much more energy per gallon than gasoline, economy differences for highway driving between diesel and gasoline isn't great any more.

http://gas2.org/2010/11/11/chevy-cruze-eco-earns-42-mpg-highway-rating/
There is, however, more to diesel than fuel economy. The incomparable torque of diesel engines compared to gasoline engines, is perfect for city and highway driving in regard to inherent large amounts of low-end torque. If you've read any reviews of the BMW 335d, you will understand how diesels in a six-speed manual sedan make the necessity to downshift to pass nonexistent. With a gasoline powered 335, one (or the transmission itself) would have to select a lower gear.

Experience counts - we had diesel vehicles in Europe over the summer, and they were hands-down the cleanest, most economical and powerful cars, within their class, that I've driven. And if that isn't saying enough, just check out how well Audi has done with their diesels during Le Mans.

Honestly, the U.S. consumer is being sold a bill of goods with hybrid tech, when with diesels, the consumer could have a much more formidable engine/vehicle for much less money and overall operating costs.

[Ralph]

While diesel engines do make their TQ different than gasoline engines, I wonder how much of that feel from diesel engines is from their turbo chargers, and not from the engine itself.

Ford seems to think....considering the regulations re diesel in US for passenger cars, and considering the extra cost of the engine itself and it's fuel.....a combination of the best from both diesel and gasoline engine makes more sense in US at this time.

That's why we are seeing Ford introduce direct injected turbo charged small (or smaller at least) displacement engines in their whole car line in US. Low end TQ plus fuel economy.

The new Ford Explorer will be introduced with a 3.5 DOHC engine as standard....but the most economical version will be a small (for an Explorer) 2.0 L 4 with turbo charging making adequate TQ they say.

[97CSI]

Hopefully, you are not so naive as to think that Ford actually thinks this is 'best' for us or the country. This is what Ford thinks is best for Ford. They are in business for one reason..........to make money. Their corporate decisions are based on that. Any other choice would border on malfisance (did I spell that correctly?).

The lobbyists (big oil, car companies, etc.) have had the diesel legislated out of this country for smaller vehicles. Look at the skewed price at the pump for the easier to make diesel compared to gasoline.

[RPS]

There is, however, more to diesel than fuel economy. The incomparable torque of diesel engines compared to gasoline engines, is perfect for city and highway driving in regard to inherent large amounts of low-end torque. If you've read any reviews of the BMW 335d, you will understand how diesels in a six-speed manual sedan make the necessity to downshift to pass nonexistent. With a gasoline powered 335, one (or the transmission itself) would have to select a lower gear.

Experience counts - we had diesel vehicles in Europe over the summer, and they were hands-down the cleanest, most economical and powerful cars, within their class, that I've driven. And if that isn't saying enough, just check out how well Audi has done with their diesels during Le Mans.

Honestly, the U.S. consumer is being sold a bill of goods with hybrid tech, when with diesels, the consumer could have a much more formidable engine/vehicle for much less money and overall operating costs.
I was not questioning or criticizing diesels -- my post was strictly to show that with turbo and direct injection modern equal-size gasoline cars can do almost as well as diesel in fuel economy, particularly when adjusted for the energy content in a gallon of fuel. Your comments validating diesel advantages – if directed at me – seem out of place.

I have actually read the reviews on the BMW 335d, but more importantly as a mechanical engineer I studied internal combustion engines – and FWIW passed it with an “A”. In my career I’ve also bought and installed many diesels, so my experience and knowledge goes a little beyond what a person can read in a car magazine. Granted I’m not an automotive engineer but I know when I’m reading ideology vs. spin vs. valuable information, etc….

For what it’s worth, the only real torque that should matter is what is delivered to the driven wheels at a given car speed. Engine torque is one of the biggest smokescreens ever used to sell cars. Without defining speed it is useless, and when speed is addressed then by definition it becomes HORSEPOWER. And yes, to get horsepower to work the transmission has to shift, but so what? That’s what it’s designed to do. If a driver doesn’t like shifting they can buy an automatic and it will do it for them.

I don’t recall stating anything about hybrids in this thread but in the past I’ve stated repeatedly that if compared on equal basis that a conventional and comparable car can do quite well if mostly driven on longer highway trips. Hybrids shine in stop-and-go traffic but I personally avoid heavy traffic like the plague, so they are not for me at this point.

A prime example of this is comparing the new Volt to its cousin the Chevy Cruze. The Cruze seats more, has larger trunk, weighs less, is cleaner to manufacture, costs over $20,000 less, and gets up to 42 MPG on the highway (probably as much or more than the Volt). With fuel savings of less than $500 per year it would take a life time to pay for the Volt’s incremental cost (unless Uncle Sam buys them for us).

[54ny77]

why aren't there more diesel's here in u.s.? can't be a supply issue--commercial vehicles everywhere use it. maybe follow the $: is there more profit margin in regular passenger car & truck gas engines?

i drove some random euro something diesel wagon overseas a few years ago (can't remember the model, maybe an alfa romeo) and it was terrific. mileage was uncanny. power not great, but for 90% of the time it was just fine. lack of top end power only meant things got entertaining when attempting to pass while doing 80mph or so. :banana:

when gas hits $7-10 a gallon i bet we'll see more diesels here stateside.

[fourflys]

why aren't there more diesel's here in u.s.? can't be a supply issue--commercial vehicles everywhere use it. maybe follow the $: is there more profit margin in regular passenger car & truck gas engines?

i drove some random euro something diesel wagon overseas a few years ago (can't remember the model, maybe an alfa romeo) and it was terrific. mileage was uncanny. power not great, but for 90% of the time it was just fine. lack of top end power only meant things got entertaining when attempting to pass while doing 80mph or so. :banana:

when gas hits $7-10 a gallon i bet we'll see more diesels here stateside.

because Americans think they have to have 300hp to go around the block to the store... look around and see how many BIG trucks people are driving that have NEVER pulled a trailer... Americans like BIG things, whether it be trucks or engines or houses... automakers know they can sell us a $50,000 full size Dodge Ram, so why in the world would they tempt us with a $20,000 diesel that isn't as big or fancy?

Have you ever looked at pictures of people caravaning in Europe? they are pulling trailers with Kia's while we have to buy a Ford Excursion or Suburban to the same job...

[RPS]

why aren't there more diesel's here in u.s.?
Environmental regulations applied to lighter vehicles. In larger vehicle sizes like one-ton pickups and vans they are very common because regulations didn’t apply to them equally. Large commercial trucks are almost all diesel. It’s more of a policy issue than technical.

[fourflys]

Environmental regulations applied to lighter vehicles. In larger vehicle sizes like one-ton pickups and vans they are very common because regulations didn’t apply to them equally. Large commercial trucks are almost all diesel. It’s more of a policy issue than technical.

I don't buy it... the EU has some of the strictest environmental standards ( and are actually enforced...) now, I will agree that it could be an outdated (dinosaur) policy that our Govt has that is the issue...

[TMB]

I don't buy it... the EU has some of the strictest environmental standards ( and are actually enforced...) now, I will agree that it could be an outdated (dinosaur) policy that our Govt has that is the issue...


I think the diesel issue is marketing and perception. As said above people think they need a 300 HP screamer to go pick up milk.

We have a diesel Passat and if I could get another one, I would, in a heartbeat.

I asked the dealer here one day why there weren't more diesels and why VW/Audi wasn't supplying more diesels and pushing them in NA.

He told me that NA accounts for less than 3% of total VW/Audi diesel sales worldwide.

With essentially unlimited demand in europe and asia for nice little diesels and an uphill push here, they weren't in a hurry.

They also know that they will sell every diesel they ship to NA, at list. So they are increasing volume, but it's slow. We're at the back of the bus for priority.

[RPS]

I don't buy it... the EU has some of the strictest environmental standards ( and are actually enforced...) now, I will agree that it could be an outdated (dinosaur) policy that our Govt has that is the issue...
If you want to find a conspiracy, don’t look at the evil auto corporations. It is what it is. Pickups ¾-ton and larger can be sold with Power Stroke, Dura Max, or Cummins diesels, but a scaled down of that same engine can’t be put in a compact truck.

Ford has essentially half of a Power Stroke V-8 diesel in a 3-liter inline four which they sell all over the world in Ranger trucks but they can’t do it here. You and I can’t go to Brazil or Mexico and buy one of those trucks and import it to the US.

It’s sad but true. We can’t buy a truck half the weight with an engine half the size because it’s not clean enough but if we double the size of the truck and engine then it’s perfectly OK. Our government at work. :crap:

[97CSI]

If you want to find a conspiracy, don’t look at the evil auto corporations. Our government at work. :crap:Yes, indeed........ but our 'elected government' is bought and paid for by business (big and small) and the rich.

[fourflys]

If you want to find a conspiracy, don’t look at the evil auto corporations.

don't count the automakers out yet... that same Ranger you can buy in Mexico that has a diesel can also be bought with a 4 door version ala the Nissan Frontier used to be... BUT, you can't find it here because then who would buy the overpriced, not available in a 4-cyl Explorer Sport Trac?

[RPS]

don't count the automakers out yet... that same Ranger you can buy in Mexico that has a diesel can also be bought with a 4 door version ala the Nissan Frontier used to be... BUT, you can't find it here because then who would buy the overpriced, not available in a 4-cyl Explorer Sport Trac?
No matter how thin we slice an issue there are always two sides, right? :)

IMO……. In poorer countries like Mexico fewer people can afford a crew cab F-150, so a crew cab compact truck is in higher demand. In the US most buyers that want a crew cab truck will bypass the Ranger size and go straight to the ½ ton F-150 or equivalent. This then leaves a very small potential market for a crew-cab Ranger or equal.

Like with the OP’s Element, auto manufacturers can’t make money on vehicles that sell in very small numbers.


By the way, what happened to the Frontier crew cab?

[fourflys]

This (http://www.ford.com/cars/focus/2012/gallery/photos/) is a really nice looking car... hopefully, it will have good MPG as well... I really do love 5 door vehicles..

http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/focus/2012/gallery/photos/fcs12_pg_008_ext_sm.jpg

http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/focus/2012/gallery/photos/fcs12_pg_101_int_sm.jpg

[norcalbiker]

I still love my Element when it comes to hauling bikes.

[Louis]

This (http://www.ford.com/cars/focus/2012/gallery/photos/) is a really nice looking car... hopefully, it will have good MPG as well... I really do love 5 door vehicles..

3-doors are even better !!!

That is interesting. I see that fuel economy is TBD.

Also, why don't they show a single picture with the hatch open?

[97CSI]

This (http://www.ford.com/cars/focus/2012/gallery/photos/) is a really nice looking car... hopefully, it will have good MPG as well... I really do love 5 door vehicles..

http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/focus/2012/gallery/photos/fcs12_pg_008_ext_sm.jpg

http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/focus/2012/gallery/photos/fcs12_pg_101_int_sm.jpgLooks like my Malibu Maxx after a 10-15% shrinkage. If the Focus is as good as the Maxx, then they have a real winner.