Export thread

Last nite my brother in law was showing off his new Chevy Cruze to the family, they appear to be a very modern looking vehicle, but in the quest for better fuel mileage GM installed an EIGHTY THREE cubic inch engine (although a turbo) in a 3200 pound car. My '04 Lesabre has a 231 cubic inch V-6, weighs only 400 pounds more, and will out accelerate the Cruze easily yet still delivers almost comparable fuel mileage (about 23-24 overall, and has a lot more room inside, rides better, and is much easier to service and repair.

To me, the automakers are trying to improve fuel mileage at the expense of every other factor in their cars. Given a choice between the two, I would opt for my Lesabre every time. I personally don't care for the flash, streamlined stying or electronic gadgetry many newer cars seem to have.

Imagine THAT, an old guy with a Buick....

When I have to go for another car (which will be soon), I am going to try and stay out of the 2000+ cars and trucks. That persnikety EEC in newer cars is just a pain, miraculous as it may be.

I agree ....

When looking for new vehicle in 08, I was looking for:

• PickUp bed - haul our own trash to the "transfer station" and didn't want smelly trash inside the vehicle.
• Independent suspension - gravel road that is washboard surface OFTEN
• V-8 - Trailer towing and general power
• 4WD / AWD - Hills and Winter
• Rear Seat and Doors - Room for Chocolate Lab​

BKBrown said:

I agree ....

When looking for new vehicle in 08, I was looking for:

• PickUp bed - haul our own trash to the "transfer station" and didn't want smelly trash inside the vehicle.
• Independent suspension - gravel road that is washboard surface OFTEN
• V-8 - Trailer towing and general power
• 4WD / AWD - Hills and Winter
• Rear Seat and Doors - Room for Chocolate Lab​

The only truck with those features only offered a 4.6 V-8 (same as Mustang)
298 Hp , BUT revs higher than I would like before shifting. I would prefer larger CID and lower revs. The 1999 5.9 L. 360 CID Dodge got 18 to 26 MPG and this 2008 4.6 L. Ford gets 14 to 18 (maybe 20 if Im lucky).

Lower CID does not always get better fuel economy !

Given the choice, I would have prefered larger CID !​

Click to expand...

Concur about CID vs fuel mileage...a small engine straining will use as much fuel as a large engine loafing, and have a shorter lifespan to boot.

twall said:

Imagine THAT, an old guy with a Buick....

When I have to go for another car (which will be soon), I am going to try and stay out of the 2000+ cars and trucks. That persnikety EEC in newer cars is just a pain, miraculous as it may be.

Click to expand...

Oh no, I go with Buick because Tiger Woods used to shill for them...:laughing:. And for what it is worth, my Y2K GMC has never given us any EEC problems. '04 Lesabre, none either.

JDgreen said:

Last nite my brother in law was showing off his new Chevy Cruze to the family, they appear to be a very modern looking vehicle, but in the quest for better fuel mileage GM installed an EIGHTY THREE cubic inch engine (although a turbo) in a 3200 pound car. My '04 Lesabre has a 231 cubic inch V-6, weighs only 400 pounds more, and will out accelerate the Cruze easily yet still delivers almost comparable fuel mileage (about 23-24 overall, and has a lot more room inside, rides better, and is much easier to service and repair.

To me, the automakers are trying to improve fuel mileage at the expense of every other factor in their cars. Given a choice between the two, I would opt for my Lesabre every time. I personally don't care for the flash, streamlined stying or electronic gadgetry many newer cars seem to have.

Click to expand...

most of todays vehicles are much more reliable and safer and better mpg than before. Routine maintenance in most cases is also better. i'm sure jd, that your full size buick is smoother riding than a compact chevy cruze which replaced the cobalt....as far as gadgets inside the car,i'm not real happy with that issue, as it is not much different than driving with a cell phone in use. but in many cases the gadgets are what sells the cars to certain people who like that sort of distraction and if certain makes of cars don't offer gadgets inside the car they will lose sales to other manufactures models. i'm not a car guy(trucks forever) for me.i dont worry about mpg figures to much since most drivers never see ideal driving conditions anyway. if i get good mpg in the normal driving i do, fine. if not,oh well. most any day that i am on the roads doing the limit there are always people driving like h=ll.....so then, where's the mpg there.......but all in all, the new cars of today beat the cars of yesterday.

LandN said:

most of todays vehicles are much more reliable and safer and better mpg than before. Routine maintenance in most cases is also better. i'm sure jd, that your full size buick is smoother riding than a compact chevy cruze which replaced the cobalt....as far as gadgets inside the car,i'm not real happy with that issue, as it is not much different than driving with a cell phone in use. but in many cases the gadgets are what sells the cars to certain people who like that sort of distraction and if certain makes of cars don't offer gadgets inside the car they will lose sales to other manufactures models. i'm not a car guy(trucks forever) for me.i dont worry about mpg figures to much since most drivers never see ideal driving conditions anyway. if i get good mpg in the normal driving i do, fine. if not,oh well. most any day that i am on the roads doing the limit there are always people driving like h=ll.....so then, where's the mpg there.......but all in all, the new cars of today beat the cars of yesterday.

Click to expand...

Something I do appreciate about newer models is the reliability and safety that is built in, cars used to need engines and transmissions rebuilt at 100,000 miles, tune ups every year, exhaust systems replaced every few years. We have the safety of air bags, stability control, and many others that make driving easier and reduce deaths and injuries. My in laws had a
1999 Saturn, to add anti lock brakes to their new car was a $695 option !!!! Now they all have them standard.

What irks me most about todays new cars are they are so BLAND looking, used to be able to tell a Ford from a Chevy, a Dodge from a Buick, now everything seems to look identical. Little chrome, no two tone paint, you see yourself coming and going all day long. And I miss useful features like roof drip moldings, vent windows, real spare tires, and many others. And get this...the brother in law who was showing off his Cruze, his son in Florida has a Corvette. That has no spare tire, but has run-flat tires, well his kid hit some road junk, tire was ruined, said it was FIFTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR A NEW ONE !!!!! Frickin' inane. For $1500 I can buy a set of four 8 ply 16 inchers for my GMC, and a set of four premium Michelin all seasons for my Buick, and have money left over. What a farce.

When i go shopping for a new(to me) vehicle, it has to be/have,
A GMC
A truck
A 6.5 diesel
At least 12 yrs old
No rust
No more than $ 2000 purchase price.:wink:

Bison said:

When i go shopping for a new(to me) vehicle, it has to be/have,
A GMC
A truck
A 6.5 diesel
At least 12 yrs old
No rust
No more than $ 2000 purchase price.:wink:

Click to expand...

12 years old, no rust, and in Canada.....:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

JDgreen said:

12 years old, no rust, and in Canada.....:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

Click to expand...

What's so funny bout that?
I ain't living in the rust belt like you.:tongue:

Bison said:

What's so funny bout that?
I ain't living in the rust belt like you.:tongue:

Click to expand...

Maybe me bad, but what does Canada use on the roads in the wintertime? I have read it has long, cold winters, which means lots of snow. Are you saying they don't salt the roads?

JDgreen said:

Last nite my brother in law was showing off his new Chevy Cruze to the family, they appear to be a very modern looking vehicle, but in the quest for better fuel mileage GM installed an EIGHTY THREE cubic inch engine (although a turbo) in a 3200 pound car. My '04 Lesabre has a 231 cubic inch V-6, weighs only 400 pounds more, and will out accelerate the Cruze easily yet still delivers almost comparable fuel mileage (about 23-24 overall, and has a lot more room inside, rides better, and is much easier to service and repair.

To me, the automakers are trying to improve fuel mileage at the expense of every other factor in their cars. Given a choice between the two, I would opt for my Lesabre every time. I personally don't care for the flash, streamlined stying or electronic gadgetry many newer cars seem to have.

Click to expand...

I actually went to test drive a Cruze and the salesman talked me out of it. He said the Malibu was far better of a car and he could offer more incentives with rebates to get the cost down.

I am still looking but leaning towards a crossover, Nissan Rogue

michael b said:

I actually went to test drive a Cruze and the salesman talked me out of it. He said the Malibu was far better of a car and he could offer more incentives with rebates to get the cost down.

I am still looking but leaning towards a crossover, Nissan Rogue

Click to expand...

The Malibu IS a much better car, has a better rating in comparison road tests and is more reliable. GM is nainly pushing the Cruze to get it's fuel economy numbers up. If I was going to buy a replacment for our Buick I would choose the Malibu.

The Malibu has a great track record.

The Cruze is there to make the politicians and tree-huggers happy. The increase in price (including expensive maintainence) over a comparable sized car outweighs any savings you'll see at the pump.

My two cents on that.

JDgreen said:

Maybe me bad, but what does Canada use on the roads in the wintertime? I have read it has long, cold winters, which means lots of snow. Are you saying they don't salt the roads?

Click to expand...

Yes we got cold long winters with lots of snow,and yes they salt the roads.
That's why me and the wife only drive 4x4 trucks.(the older ones are better build and easier to fix for a DIY mechanic like me):wink:
Little sissy coke can cars is only for city slickers:tongue:

Bison said:

Yes we got cold long winters with lots of snow,and yes they salt the roads.
That's why me and the wife only drive 4x4 trucks.(the older ones are better build and easier to fix for a DIY mechanic like me):wink:
Little sissy coke can cars is only for city slickers:tongue:

Click to expand...

Here is my little sissy coke can car:

JDgreen said:

Here is my little sissy coke can car:

Click to expand...

Very nice. Do they make a version for men? BAHAHAHAHA just kidding. That is a sweet ride.

My mini-monster truck is a 3rd generation Toyota 4skinRunner with a locking rear dif. I use moderately aggressive Bridgestone Dueller Revo tires and I mounted front and rear recovery shackles in case the locking differential and/or my skills doesn't cut it. I used to work "on call" and would have to blast down rural roads through snowstorms at 3:00AM, and ol' Bessie Lou never let me down. My girlfriend hates her. Jealousy.

well you know they say your vehicle size is inversely related to your...ummmmm you know... the size of your weed whipper...I get around ok......:laughing:

gtbobcat said:

well you know they say your vehicle size is inversely related to your...ummmmm you know... the size of your weed whipper...I get around ok......:laughing:

Click to expand...

I used to drive a smaller vehicle, but I kept backing it up over my weed whipper.

Jetblast said:

I used to drive a smaller vehicle, but I kept backing it up over my weed whipper.

Click to expand...

GOOD ONE !!! :laughing:

Jetblast said:

Very nice. Do they make a version for men? BAHAHAHAHA just kidding. That is a sweet ride.

My mini-monster truck is a 3rd generation Toyota 4skinRunner with a locking rear dif. I use moderately aggressive Bridgestone Dueller Revo tires and I mounted front and rear recovery shackles in case the locking differential and/or my skills doesn't cut it. I used to work "on call" and would have to blast down rural roads through snowstorms at 3:00AM, and ol' Bessie Lou never let me down. My girlfriend hates her. Jealousy.

View attachment 2663

Click to expand...

"Bessie Lou"....? That is the kinda name I would give to something like a '59 Impala not a truck.

I call everything Bessie Lou. My girlfriend hates that too.

JDgreen said:

Here is my little sissy coke can car:

Click to expand...

All cars are sissy,'cept RR :wink:

RR? well that can only be short for 2 models....Rambler Rouge, or Road Runner, by plymouth:laughing:

Ok I drive the 1st pic.. the wife ride is next... and the one I`m working on is last ...1980 Merucry Bobcat with transplanted `87 Merkur turbo that s where the gtbobcat comes from

Ok I know this is a mower forum..but I`m curious if there`s other project auto`s out there ?

LandN said:

RR? well that can only be short for 2 models....Rambler Rouge, or Road Runner, by plymouth:laughing:

Click to expand...

Rolls Royce? Rambler Rebel? Range Rover? Those actually existed

Now some funny ones:

Rodded Roadmaster (Buick)

Regally Regal (Buick)

Red Rendevous (Buick)

Reality Ranger (Edsel)

Rusted out Reo (Reo)

Rowdy Ranger (Ford)

Jetblast said:

I call everything Bessie Lou. My girlfriend hates that too.

Click to expand...

You call your weed whipper Bessie Lou?

Sorry I couldn't resist that one....:biggrin:

Bison said:

All cars are sissy,'cept RR :wink:

Click to expand...

Here is my big, tough, smog producing, high riding, gas sucking, rides-like-a-dump-truck 4X4 then....

JDgreen said:

Here is my big, tough, smog producing, high riding, gas sucking, rides-like-a-dump-truck 4X4 then....

Click to expand...

I was more thinking of sumtin one can actually use besides getting bread:wink: