This brings up an interesting point on safety. Things like a Toyota Yaris, Chevy Aveo, Honda Fit all may be good on mileage . . . but what about stats on deaths in car accidents vs deaths on larger vehicle.

The NHTSA does frontal ratings by ramming the car in to a wall at 56KM/h. They use the same speed but a 3,015lb weight hits the side of the car at the same 56KM/h.

So sure, the Yaris gets a 4 star (of 5) on it’s front impact, if you hit a wall dead on at 56KM/h you’ll probably be OK. What happens when you swerve to miss a deer and smack dead on with a 5527lb GMC Yukon and you’re both going 80KM/h. Which do you want your baby seat in?

This is why I drive a full sized car. Though I purchased the performance engine since it got 200HP instead of 155HP, and got the same mileage which I found strange. Why would you not purchase the big one

I don’t need a truck, don’t like mini vans very much, SUVs are for soccer moms, but I like being in comfy vehicles and feeling like if I hit something I’m not going to turn in to a pinball.

If you think it’s annoying/frightening to have your Honda get lost in someone’s blind spot, try bicycling around these idiots with their smog-belching behemoths. I’ve thought about getting one of those 115dB airhorns for my bike to make damn sure I get their full attention when necessary. Fortunately, most Portlanders are used to bikes on the road, and 99.9% are very aware, cautious, and considerate.

Still, it only takes one idiot who can’t or won’t handle his/her vehicle properly to flatten you like an opossum.

Maybe I need airbags for my bike?

It took a couple of weeks for me to learn to get it to accelerate acceptably and for the first few days a lot of people flashed their brights at me as I struggled to reach 60 coming onto the highway. If they offered an even smaller engine, I don’t think many people would buy it. It’s sad.

Given that I burn $40 worth of gas a week now in an economy car, the thought of picking up a 20-year-old CRX to use as a commuter car has crossed my mind. But given the number of times people in large vehicles lose my Civic in their blind spots, I’m afraid to drive anything smaller.

I think the biggest reason small cars haven’t caught on in the United States the way they did in Europe is because there are so many large vehicles on the road, driven by people who are unable (or unwilling) to watch for smaller cars. Then again, I may be jaded because someone in a Suburban nearly ran me off the road during my morning commute today when he decided to change lanes. That doesn’t happen to me every day or even every week, but it happens often enough to really irritate me.

Profit less maintenance, gas, insurance…more maintenance…you’d probably be driving a totally different car given all the parts you’d have to replace…Sticker price does not reflect the true “price” of a car.

Nicstarling, are you taking into consideration the new vs. old EPA mileage ratings?

My first new car was a 1992 Civic VX hatchback: EPA 55 hwy, 48 city. 102 horsepower. $10,000.00. (@$15045 in today’s dollars). I never got above 50 mpg, but was still very pleased with the average 46-48 mpg I got. The 102 horsepower was good for just about everything, except getting over the Rocky Mtns. For that, downshifting was definitely required. http://www.edmunds.com/used/1992/honda/civic/3912/specs.html

When I was living in England about 30+ years ago, the little minis were quite the rage for midnight illegal road-rallys… They’d pump them up and scream through the English countryside at speeds in excess of 100 MPH ( Referred to as ‘the Ton’ in those days.. ).. I’d drive 3 or 4 hours a night after work to go to college (University of Maryland night classes ) and get home in the wee hours. I got run off the road twice by a bunch of these guys … You’d be barely making the turns at 60and these guys would be screaming towards you at incredible speeds…. Not much else to do in those days in England. Pubs closed at 10:30 PM and only two channels on TV and the last one BBC would turn off at 11PM… Soooo, idle hands and all that .. Ahhh memories….

Thx jegan

Don’t worry though, the guys at MIT have your back and are working on an EVEN BETTER system to accomplish the same thing. They call it a Stackable car.

I wrote a mini-blip about it here so check it out… http://randyandrachel.com/2007/11/25/carbon-free-stackable-cars/

The record companies broke even with the deals. You were required to buy more tapes at full price, which countered the gazillion you got for 1 cent. The real money was for all the people who forgot to return the monthly card saying they didn’t want the “tape of the month.”

I personally made them a fortune several times. I have an uncle who bought over 1000 CD’s through these clubs.

@Traciatim-Great comparison of then vs. now. People forget this when they complain about how much stuff costs now. In most cases they cost a less. We just buy a lot more!

So lets look, the Datsun 510 Sedan final price says $2340. Adjusted for inflation that’s $12,412.00 according to the BLS inflation calculator.

The Kia Rio5 base price is $12,915. Pretty darn close. The Rio gets around 30MPG combined, so around the same as the Datsun too.

Has anything really changed?

The Kia Weighs 2438lbs, the Datsun as 2041lbs.

The Kia puts out 110HP, the Datsun about 96HP. Considering the weight to power ratio they are near equal.

The Kia is 158in x 66in, the Datsun 160 x 61 . . .

Though the Kia comes with air and a CD player, it has sensors up the yin-yang for finding out what’s wrong with it. It’s much safer thanks to it’s air bags all over the place. It’s probably a pile more comfortable too.

I think we’re pretty much exactly where we were except we have mandatory catalytic converters now so emissions are lower.

Oh, and 1 tape back then was 20 bucks, so a CD now should probably be 106.09 . . . but they are still around 15-20 bucks. Who’s complaining about expensive music?

Plus one more thing, in 2006 dollars the median income for 1971 was 39,196, and in 2006 was 48,201. So the Datsun was (12412 / 39196 ) 31.7% of median income and the Kia is now (12915 / 48201) 26.8% of median income.

Looks like I like where things are going. It looks dramatic because all those cars are under 2500 bucks, but when you really dig deeper things are pretty much getting better.