Cars are too heavy. You can thank your government a little for this and all the luxury touches.

Cars should be getting lighter. They make them lighter just so they can fill them up with more luxo and saftey items.

We should all be driving Ariel Atoms.

Amazing considering there’s so much possible with things like weight reduction, engine efficiency and CVT / IVT transmissions.
Cars are often used for daily commuting with only one person in the car. So a car specially designed for that would be great. Something like the Volkswagen EcoRacer:
http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_shows/tokyo/0511_volkswagen_ecoracer/

Although the exterior design is a bit freaky, the car has everything you need for commuting, and is fun to drive, and does 82 mpg. I’d take this thing everytime over one of those ugly Smart cars.

“Clearly, automakers have opted to add more safety, performance, and luxury features, which negate the increased efficiency of modern engines.”

Clearly, automakers have added more weight to meet a multitude of government regulations that have driven the average price of a vehicle through the roof as well.

automakers have added everything because of government mandates and laws.

Automakers have added all this things for whatever reason but they still have not made many attempts to reduce fuel consumption and that is just wrong, really this is quite sad.

“Automakers have added all this things for whatever reason but they still have not made many attempts to reduce fuel consumption and that is just wrong, really this is quite sad.”

That responsibility is on the people, not the automakers. Have you ever studied business? do you know that business work in their own self interest? Do you understand supply vs demand?

It is not wrong and sad that the top corporations in the world do not bend to your bias. What is wrong and sad is that you expect the top corporations in the world to adhere to your agenda.

You can’t blame the government for this-! Does the government mandate that half of all American women drive enormouos 8 passenger busses-? Or that half of all American men drive extra-super duty 4 door Tonka trucks-?? Yes, I’m exaggerating somewhat, but once you’ve had small youl never go back lol !… MINI Cooper S

This is a reallly sad statement.
I had a 1987 Honda that got 44 mpg when I flogged the living **** out of it. It would bury the needle at 115 mph in third gear, 78 in second. It was a little shy on horsepower, 58 according to the factory, but it still had a reasonable 0-60 time. (44 mpg, largely highway miles, fifth gear, 80 mph or so. I’d bet you could get 50 if you were a little slower and didn’t run it like a dragster from every stop sign and traffic light.)
It weighed about 2000lbs, it was a standard (the single biggest factor among the same model affecting gas mileage besides displacement).
That was 20 years ago!
They now claim good gas mileage is 28? Yeah right. 35? BS. There is no reason other than lazyness and the “stuff as much crap in this big heavy brick as possible” attitude that the fuel mileage is so poor.
Yeah, I said it, it’s poor.
It’s not the gov’ts fault. Not entirely. Cars should be lighter, there should be fewer marketing campaigns about how an SUV drives like a car (it doesn’t it’s a truck.) And automatic transmissions need to go. They really haven’t changed much since the electroglide two speeds from the 50s.
They make single comuter vehicles that get reasonable gas mileage. I drove mine in for the last week: 1982 Kawasaki GPz. I’m getting 59 mpg. Which isn’t bad since it’s 25 years old. Yes, I drive that just as hard.
Even if you’re currently getting bad gas mileage, you can improve it. Some suggestions at http://articles.mechlogs.com/4/84

Here in Europe you can buy a Diesel car with a mileage of 50 mpg. It’s not as big as a Ford F150 but it will get you everywhere. It will have something like 85 hp.

The strange thing is that in the States you can not even buy the 2000 cc or less versions of cars that you can buy here in Europe (VW Passat, BMW 3 series, Mercedes C en E series ) which have a mileage of +/- 30 MPG.

BartMack, right on!! I can agree with that. I also have a Cooper S and love how fast it is, love how it handles, love how efficient it is, and the list goes on…

BartMack, right on!! I can agree with that. I also have a Cooper S and love how fast it is, love how it handles, love how efficient it is, and the list goes on… Those single drivers cruising around in the “8 passenger busses” don’t know what they are missing!

The CAFE standards have really worked well over the past 25 years so I’m sure the US government will spend a lot of time and effort to “improve” the standards even more over the next 25 years. We are sooo fortunate to have those geniuses in Congress solving all our problems.

Here’s an idea: restore communism in China!! Force the billion Chinese to ride bicycles again and quit sucking up our oil.

This is sad… Heavier and less mileage. WTF. Where’s technology?

the technology has been negated by a 35% increase in average weight.

For once I’m for the idea of government mandated fuel economy standards (CAFE in the U.S.). This might be the only thing that will force vehicle weights down, because consumer demand sure isn’t going to do it.

Everyone is getting bigger and heavier cars in the name of safety, but the end result would be every car being big and heavy, which is no safer than every car being relatively light and compact.

“This might be the only thing that will force vehicle weights down, because consumer demand sure isn’t going to do it.”

It is the government regulations that has forced vehicle weights up in the first place… how are cafe standards going to bring weight down? increased fuel economy standards does not lower vehicle weight… but increasing vehicle weight lowers fuel economy.

You know, everyone’s saying “the weight is too high”, “they need to lower the weight”, but I’d rather be in a heavier car in an accident. I’m not an expert in physics, but the basic laws of physics indicate that the vehicle with more mass will always “push” the lighter vehicle away. Isn’t there anything that can be done to improve fuel economy while keeping the same weight?

“Isn’t there anything that can be done to improve fuel economy while keeping the same weight?”

Diesels. US regs bend us over.
Dual mode hybrid: on the way for BMW, DCX, and GM.
direct injection. More advancements coming.
additional cycles: steam/heat recycling… on the way

etc…

“In 1987, 19 percent of the passenger vehicles on the road were SUVS or pickups. Today, 50 percent are”

This is the single biggest factor as to why we haven’t seen an improvement in overall MPG. Had the SUV boom not taken place, we would have notworthy gains, regardless of additional safety equipment and increased displacement/power.

From the linked repot:

“For model year 2006, cars are estimated to average 24.6 mpg, vans 20.6 mpg, SUVs 18.5 mpg, and pickups 17.0 mpg”

Yeah I suppose if a lighter car would crash with a heavier car, the lighter car would be tossed around more. But if they make the lighter car strong enough to survive the crash without intrusion into the passenger compartment and install a cocoon-like airbag system for every seat that would completely surround the passenger during a crash I think light cars would just as safe / safer.

We live in a capitalist market. And in this market, there hasn’t been a huge demand for more efficient cars until Katrina hit last year and everyone was forced to pay $3-$4 a gallon. Such short memories! If everyone truely felt that driving a smaller car was beneficial to us all, then Honda Fits would be selling off the lots. Trouble is, for the same price as a well equiped Fit, you can get a vehicle that is larger and more powerful. The prices do not match what you get.

If you really want to help the environment and unclog the highways, then go get yourself a motorcycle. Better yet, buy yourself a moped or a skooter. Put your money where your mouth is!

This is why it’s difficult for me to find many manual transmission cars to choose from. I absolutely hate automatics unless I’m driving a big Mercedes SEDAN.

How about this:

Get rid of the SUV trend and move back to lighter cars?

It’s insane how few 3100 or 2800lb non FWD cars are out there right now.

And most of them are only weekend 2-seaters.

Clearly, consumers think that 20mpg in a heavy (and thus safer), luxurious car is more pleasant than 30-40mpg in a Golf.

Automakers do, after all, make a large number of cars that make over 20mpg; there are even a goodly number in the near-40 or 40 range.

But they’re not popular enough to get the average up, and it seems silly to blame the manufacturers for that – they’d love to get their CAFE numbers as good as possible by selling even more of those, I imagine.

Consumers want power, size, and luxury more than they want lower fuel consumption; this is demonstrated by their purchasing patterns, in the presence of choices in both directions.

Rather than a government-mandated fuel-economy regulation, a better start would be to set a maximum weight limit for passenger cars starting at 3500 Lb and dropping by 100 Lb per year with a final target of approximately 2700 – 2800 Lb.

@ #2 – Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but I believe the EcoRacer was never intended for production. I agree it would be near perfect, but I would have prefered the GX3, which has been killed off for “safety concerns”. WTF. It would be safer than a bike…

@ 1c3d0g – Your views on vehicle weight (and size by association) are what is wrong with selfish US “drivers”. The view “if my vehicle is heavier or bigger I’ll be safer” is absurd. The lighter a vehicle is the better it can respond (accelerate, brake, maneuver) i.e. AVOID hitting something. Also, weight has nothing to do with the surviveability of a crash. Strength & design (crumple zones, door beams) have ALOT more to do with it. I gather from your statement that you’d rather be in a 60s or 70s full size sedan than a Lotus Elise because it would weigh more. Guess what would happen if you rolled over. The roof would collapse under the weight. You hit a guard-rail. You would go through it. etc, etc.

Don’t think I’m a lightweight elitest, I drove into a tree @ 40+ mph in a 88 Jaguar XJ6 & walked away without a scratch. Not because the car weighed alot, but because the crumple zones did their job & the frame passed the energy around the cabin. (A tree will always win) So much so that I was only able to get out by climbing out the sunroof because all the doors were jammed shut. I would hate to think what would happen in my current car, a 76 Lancia Scorpion. The thing weighs barely over 2000 lbs & has little structure to it. i.e. the doors are just skins, nothing but an empty trunk in front of me. But it is “safe” in the sense that it handles like a gokart & at the time had one of the shortest stopping distances recorded by the auto press.

(Also, the people that think modern small cars are unsafe, search Google Video for some crash tests, many are safer than the tanks you THINK are safer.)

@ JaggedXJ
Yeah I know the EcoRacer concept won’t be built for a while. However, I think it would be THE car for young people like me who usually can’t afford nice cars because of high taxes, insurances and fuel economy. I think I would buy it if the base price wouldn’t be too high. Because I know I won’t be able to afford nice BMWs for a while .
Completely agree with your response to 1c3d0g . Lighter is always better I’d say. No matter what sort of car.
Too bad about the XJ6 BTW.