NJ5 said:
I think you're overestimating the fuel consumption of new cars... A few years ago my father sold our Alfa Romeo 155 which was using way too much fuel, and that was like 10-11 liters per 100 km at most (not a diesel car). Right now he has a diesel car (Nissa Primera full-sized) which uses 5-7 liters per 100 km, I bet a gasoline one doesn't use more than 9 liters even in city driving.
|
The V6 Honda Accord is rated at 11L/100km, and (being that my driving habits are worse than the worst case for most city driving estimates) my 2006 Ford Fusion averages around 12L/100km in the city. Now the question I would have about your father's Alfa Romeo is whether he was driving mostly in the city or the highway, if he is driving mostly on the highway 10 to 11 L/100km is fairly bad, if he is driving in the city it is fairly decent.
Certainly, when you move to a car like the Honda Fit from the V6 Accord you get a major boost in fuel economy but the Accord is 46% heavier than the fit because it is a dramatically larger car. Even your Primera is a much smaller and lighter car than the Accord, and you have a major boost in fuel ecconomy because it is a diesel.
Basically, I'm not saying 13L/100km is good fuel economy but it is very good fuel economy for a full sized sedan (or larger car) and most compact and mid-sized sedans don't do much better today. Certainly there are cars that have dramatically better fuel economy but there are massive trade-offs when it comes to the size, performance and safety of the vehicle when you go in that direction ... I know people will debate safety given crash test results, but crash-tests are testing accidents into stationary objects or cars of similar size; and (in reality) there is a massive difference in safety between an Accord hitting a F150 and a Honda Fit hitting the same F150 under the same conditions.







