I'll throw my hat in the ring. I absolutely LOVE my 05 Crown Vic. Base model with a 3 speed. 18-20 city, 22.5 -24 highway with 600,000 to damn near a million mile reliability engine wise. And parts are DIRT CHEAP😁
I've had lots and lots of the Lincolns of the age. An 86 and 87, very close to your numbers. 96 98 99(limo) 01(reg&limo) that get the same numbers. As well as 01 F150 with 5.4 that get just shy your numbers. What I truly like is the interchangeability of parts and ease of service.
I knew a guy that had a used up, ragged out one that had been sitting for a couple years. When the gas prices got nuts, he threw a new battery in it, cleaned it up as best as he could, got it running and sold it for 3k. Before that he at best could have got a couple hundred bucks in scrap for it.
I noticed all the Tahoe's and Suburban's parked in driveways during that time are back on the road now too. Now everyone is buying SUV's again too. Of course the mileage isn't as bad as they used to be in SUV's but just wait until gas goes up again.
Imagine how many miles you'd have to drive in a year to make up the difference. People are irrational. But, when you need an excuse to buy a new car and justify it to yourself, that'll do just fine.
@@CouchMan88 I really doubt it because electric cars are coming. Americans will continue to drive Tahoes and Suburbans for years to come no matter if it’s powered by gasoline or electric. Today’s Tahoe and Suburban gets 20 mpg on the highway with the 5.3 EcoTec3 V8. The Silverado with the 4.3 EcoTec3 gets 23 mpg.
I own a 2008 Prius that I ALSO bought from EuroAsian Bob. It’s been one of the best cars I’ve ever owned. Proud to have a car that the Wizard approves of.
I have a 2008 Volvo S40 1.6 Turbodiesel. it's basically the beautiful version of the Ford Focus from back then (same chassis, platform, suspension etc, but SO good lookin). I was sceptical about the "small" motor, and it's not great performance-wise, but I get about 50 MPG combined, so it always puts a smile on my face when I'm fueling up :)
I'd like to hear a Wizard's "Buy/Not Buy" on vehicle safety. May have experience from ones that have come into the shop almost totalled from a 5 mph bump, or things that have been in serious collisions and haven't had a dent on them. Things like land yachts look safe but they fold like paper bags in crash tests.
Drunken Hobo Chevrolet Aveo is a don’t buy. They are not reliable and they are not even safe in a wreck. Datsun 280Z is a don’t buy because of the Car Wizard’s personal experience. Volvos are synonymous for safety so it’s almost always a buy.
@@atx-cvpi_99 I couldn't buy one even if I wanted to. Chevrolet pulled out of the UK market as their sales were so terrible. You know it's a bad car when even the British won't buy it!
Drunken Hobo And the Australians quit buying Holdens as soon as GM slapped the Holden emblem on a Daewoo. There’s a reason why GM left Australia and New Zeleand except for specialty cars like the Corvette. After 2017, sales plummeted even more.
11:00 The Prius Prime has a Li-Ion battery. The Prius (regular 2nd gen, 3rd gen, 4th gen) have NiMH battery packs. They're all 200V packs but the MaH is drastically different (obviously).
I absolutely love my 2000 jetta tdi. 340k miles and still runs like a Swiss watch. Winter with long idle times in the morning I averaged 47 hand calc, in the summer time where I turn the key and go I was getting 51-54 hand calc. Love those cars. I have a 114 mile round trip to work and I fill it up Monday morning and I can go the whole week on $35-40! It’s stellar. And the car is super comfortable
I am so happy to see a new video from CarWizard. With all the negative, doom and gloom, and arguing all over tv and internet its just relaxing and enjoyable to watch your vids. Granted, ya have to have at least a minor interest in cars.
I used to get 38mpg highway in my '99 accord with the 2.4l 4 cylinder and 5 speed. ULTRA reliable. owned it 6 years and only did basic maintenance. Sold it for $200 less than what I Paid for it. Couldn't ask for a better experience with a car.
I once got about 21 mpg in my 1986 AMC Eagle with the 4.2 6 cylinder on the highway. I credit that mostly to being between 55-60 mph due to traffic conditions. 21 mpg's might not sound like much, but for an 80's era American corner-mobile with an engine dating back to the 60's with the added weight of 4WD, I'd say that's pretty darn good.
Used to have a Dodge Ram 1500, think it was a 95, great truck, loads of power, comfy seats, nice long bed, 13 mpg. I understand the pain of Excursion owners lol
Grew up in a 00' Excursion, it was Diesel though. My dad made the right choice there! Great diesels in that era, before Ford stopped using diesels from International.
The best fuel economy I had was with my first car, a 1988 MK2 Jetta - it had a 1.6L carburated gas engine, but a 4+E manual gearbox. I could go 80-90km/h with it on our freeways (here, they're called Autobahn, but you don't *have* to go fast on them, if you don't want to! Just stay in the right lane and let everyone pass you!), and it had gotten 4.9L/100km, which is really good. My current car is 10 years younger, has a 1.4L MPI engine and gets about 8L/100km in the city...
I had a 2004 Dodge Ram 150 with the 3.7 V6 and 5 speed manual transmission. You would think that it would get "decent" fuel mileage, but it consistently averaged 15-16 mpg! The highest I ever saw was almost 21 mpg on a highway trip where kept it at 65mph on purpose, and of course I got passed by everyone else on the road! My Durango R/T with the hemi and automatic gets way better mileage, and is a hell of a lot faster and more comfortable to boot!
My mom had a 1973 Continental. It was like having a living room on wheels. Full size couch in the back. Very smooth and no chance of getting run off the road by another car.
Enjoy your channel, Dave...practical and entertaining. Here's what I tell folks who don't know automobiles yet are programmed to be concerned as regards what to purchase. Don't even think about the term, mpg. Buy the Honda or Toyota which best suits your needs and wallet. Keep it simple and drive safe.
About that Saab 9000, it might be that bad with the N/A 2.3 automatic. However, any of the turbo engines together with a manual transmission will return much better mileage, it will depend heavily on your driving style. 20-22 city and at least 26 highway is to be expected.
My grandma had one of those Lincolns when I was a kid. It was a foot or so longer than our Suburban. The Saab 9000 shocked me. I had two 9-5s that were great and got in the low 30s on the highway.
I don't understand how people got that mpg? Maybe they were badly maintain is the reason. I own a 93 9000 for 2 years, I got 18mpg city, 30mpg highway out of it. It has to be well maintain or else it is not gonna work right. lol I happen to live near a Saab garage,(5 minutes drive), so repair and maintenance isn't a pain for me. Another big reason is might be because mine is NA, it has no problems that the turbo one are getting.
I recommend the first gen Scion XB (or Toyota Echo) with the 1.5L Toyota engine, preferably the automatic. The auto has higher gearing than the manual. My 2006 is very reliable and easy to work on. These are known to go 300,000 miles + on the original engines.
My 2015 Chrysler 200 with the 2.4 ltr engine and 9-speed auto consistently pulls 36.75 MPG @ 60 miles per hour. With 106,000 miles behind it, it has been very reliable too.
@@0HOON0 I traded it last February for a 2022 Subaru Impreza. At that time, it had 133,500 miles behind it and was still getting the same mileage. Over the 7 years I had it there were no repair bills beyond normal maintenance. I had originally planned to drive the doors off of it, but then I realized by then I'd be an old guy who didn't want a car loan. So I traded it early.
5:52 case in point, we had a 2009 Prius get an oil change, tire rotation and balance and a headlight restoration yesterday at the Walmart Auto Care Center I work at, and it had over 304,000 on it! I’m just waiting for the day that Toyota gets notified of a Gen2 Prius with a million miles on it so they can give that owner a brand spanking new one!
I had a 1999 and 2005 Park Avenue with the 3.8 Series II V6 and they to could get over 30 mpg on the highway in a superbly comfortable and full-size American luxury sedan. It is a shame GM discontinued the 3.8 especially after they changed to the aluminum intake manifold in the Series III which took away the one major flaw these engines had with leaking intake manifolds becasue the plastic and aluminum would cool at different rates and cause warping and cracks in the gaskets. Luckily I never had to experience this. I also had a '97 Lumina in high school with the 3.1 known for the same thing and escaped with that one to. Now I have a 2004 Century as a second car with the 3.1 so hopefuly it will be good to me as well. After all most a year so far so good. None of the V6s GM had replaced the 3.8 with can match the mileage or reliability.
I was also in awe, hearing what he got to say abou that, ehm. For the power and the (dynamic) acceleration, this is quite a good fuel consumption, much more with the Aero on the highway, with a longer gearing on manual.
Also a bit stunned. I had two different saab 9000. First an older 9000i and then a 9000t (smaller turbo). Both cars had the 2,3 liter motor. On the highway, with winter tires, I would normaly get around 27 mpg. The fuel I used was 95 octane. Maby there´s a diffirence if you fuel it up with regular instead of premium?? Hope I got the spelling right. Thanks for an awesome channel!
@@janblom1174 when you use lower octane gas in your saab the computer will retard the timing making your fuel mileage worse. The people wizard is talking to are probably using 87 and have a lead foot.
My 2004 Saab 9-5 Aero also didn’t get that great of gas mileage. It only got about 17 city and 23-24 mpg highway. That’s pretty bad for a 2.3 liter but it was made for performance. It also only took premium which kind of sucked but I loved that car. It was so much fun.
My Saab 9000 2.0T automatic gets about 8 l/100 km on the highway. I think that the low mileage reported here is due to the Saab being made for 95 RON fuel, but it _can_ run on 87 AKI. Also I don't know what that uncle was on about, but 9000s are a breeze to work on, and doesn't require much work either. There are a lot of US cars that are much worse to work on
It sounds to me like the good all car wizard is full of shit and has not worked on a 9000 in his life. These cars are dead easy to work on and quite rather fuel efficient given their size, practicality and general spec. I manage over 40 UK mpg (around 33 US mpg) on the motorway. First and last video I will ever watch from this guy lol
@@gimenofm To be fair, the engine compartment is pretty cramped, especially on the earlier turbo models with vacuum hoses going all over the place. And there is significantly less room in there, than in an american car, but that's more of an "US cars have ridiculous amounts of wasted space"-thing, rather than the 9000 being poorly designed.
Saab 9000s are breeze to work on: heater core repair without even working IN the car: it's behind the firewall, sliding into the dash-area. my 2.0LPT does about 32mpg (uk). and man! are they easy to tune...a stock 2.0LPT has 150hp, but 265 is doable. years ago we (a small group of Saab enthousiasts in The Netherlands) rebuilt a 2.3 FPT: it had 225hp stock, but the engine was built like it had to deliver 300+hp, that sturdy. water pump is built onto the engine, and easy to replace. yes, Saabs are quirky, but not as bad as the Car wizard wants you to believe.
@@gimenofm I mean he did say he’s taking someone else’s word for it. That person is most likely wrong. Never had any issue working on a single one of my Saabs
I own a 2.3 NA 9000, the engine bay looks like a Honda, and it sound like a Honda. lol It has no turbo, so it is very roomy in there. I own it for 2 years now, got 15city-30highway mpg out of it. I suspect the bad rep is due to how people cheap out on maintenance so much they became junk and are useless to repair. Or not gonna work right anymore from all the neglect owners.
1997-2001 Volvo V70 2,5 5 cylinder Turbo diesel manual transmission. 40+mpg on the highway and around 30mpg in the city. Very reliable mine has 261 thousand miles on it an runs well. the highest mileage one that was even featured in our local car magazine has 569 thousand miles on it. the best thing is bodies on these cars hardly ever rust. 1984-1993 Mercedes-Benz 190D(W201 chassy) had it as my first car and that honestly got 50MPG no problem. i drove it a lot and besides normal maintanance it gave me no trobule.
I had an 81 VW Rabbit diesel, 4 speed manual and in town it got about 45mpg and 50 when I was brave enough to get on the highway. It had 48 angry horsepower lol.
My 2013 Elantra 6spd got 50mpg from New Hampshire motor speedway to Boston. I traded it in for a ram 1500 with a 5.7 because owning a home in the suburbs having a truck makes dump runs and home depot runs easier.
On the other hand a Dodge Shadow 2.5 NA with a 3 speed slush box. I get 19 in the city and 15 highway. 100 HP in a 3000 pound car means cruising at 65 is about half throttle and if you hit a hill floor it.
My first car was a 05 Buick LeSabre. I managed 30 mpg out of it on the highway. I'd love to find another one in good condition. I got half a million miles out of mine before the rear subframe broke on a gravel road due to extreme kansas rust -_-
I had a SAAB 9000 2,0 150hp 1997 and i try to convert from litre to gallon and miles to kilometer and it was 30miles per gallon on the highway not so good or not to bad but in city it was bad maybe 18-20miles but here in sweden there is not many left now. It was a good comfortable car
Yep, I've owned 3 Saab 9000's and they all returned approx 30mpg at highway speeds. In town however they were very thirsty cars, I saw as low as 13mpg in stop start traffic. What they did excel at was long distance cruising, I drove 700 miles in a day in mine and got out as fresh as a daisy at the other end, most cars you fall out of all cramps and aches after long drives.
I just stumbled upon this video and ive never got this bad mileage even from the automatic. My 2.3 aero with 430k km on the click gets 7.5l on the highway and around 12ish in city traffic. Combined is always around 9.5. Same as its been with all my 2.3 turbos.
The 3.8 buick is a monster. As long as the intake plentum doesent melt. And replace the little coolant elbow just below the valve covers. U can replace it with a metal one. Good to go
The main difference between the honda insight and toyota prius is you can operate the honda with a dead hybrid battery. That way, when your battery completely degrades, you can still drive, while in the prius, you can't.
Had a Saab 9-3 Turbo and a 9-5 3.0 V6 both were not very economical however they were very straightforward to work on with lots of easy to find GM parts. Pretty reliable too if maintained to Saab exact specification. For example using the Saab specified spar plugs inside of normal plains. Normal plugs could kill the ignite cassette. If I could buy a new Saab today I would.
I had a 2000 VW TDI , I think it was the 1.9. I have to say the drivetrain was bulletproof, but unfortunately the entire car around it was total garbage. Expect everything to fall apart, a lot of electrical issues and also expensive service intervals that must be done or you’ll have major problems.
As a prior Tahoe Hybrid owner, I can tell you they are GREAT! The transmission intelligently switches between 4 physical gears for high load and towing or e-cvt power split mode, just like the very reliable Toyota hybrid designs. This transmission was also licensed to BMW and Mercedes Benz. There are no belts and pulleys like bad cvt designs. They came fully loaded with every option, and the fuel saving in the city is around 25% better, while also being more powerful. Looking only at the MPG number is deceptive, because MPG is a non-linear scale. I averaged 23.9 MPG over the entire ownership. Really good, for a big boned 4x4 body on frame with a 6.0l V8. Just regular maintenance and it breezed past 100k miles, no issues. GM also put this system in a lot of commercial trucks and city busses. There's nothing to be afraid of.
@@atx-cvpi_99 GM explained that they used the 6.0 because the smaller engines did not have enough power or displacement when running in 4-cyl mode, which means they would always have to run in V8 mode. Obviously, the cylinder deactivation was less sophisticated back then, so it could only do 8 or 4 cylinders unlike current GM designs that have dynamic adjustment from 8 to 2.
How V10, V8 cars can be compared in fuel economy concept? It's like comparing apples and oranges for logical perspective. For fuel economy, it would be a better comparison to list cars that positioned themselves as fuel economy category with somewhat similar engine size based on their reliability results in accordance with your experience.
Honorable mention for gas guzzler, Lexus IS300. Here's a car that is the size of a Toyota Corolla but its rated at 16 city/22 highway, and "requires" premium fuel. Its a fun car to drive, great handling, RWD, the 2JZ inline six makes decent power and sounds AMAZING, but damn its hard on gas for being a tiny car. I used to have a similar SC300, same 2JZ engine/5 speed manual, that did 18 in town, 23 highway. Mainly though its the cost of premium fuel that ate me out of house and home(.50 to $1 a gallon more), I drove that car pretty hard so I never chanced it with regular.
My 2012 Focus 1.6 182hp had lower fuel usage than my buddys prius. Prius are only really efficient if you have a lot of queue driving or slow city driving. Just regular driving on normal roads/highway the added weight of the battery just equals to higher consumption.
Great vid. How about doing cars with performance and gas milage next. My c5 corvette is getting 31mpg on the highway driving moderately. Thanks for sharing.
I towed a ~2000lb trailer in addition to 4 dudes +their gear 800mi @75mph over the Sierra Nevada mountains and averaged 38mpg. Really great car and definitely recommend the manual.
I have a 2005 Mercedes e320 cdi as my first car. It Is one of the best all around cars for the price that I’ve ever seen. Gas mileage is decent, it’s super comfortable and the diesel has never given me a single issue! :)
I have 2014 Dodge Charger /w v6 and 8 speed transmission on highway trip gets 24-26. Record was 29.4 on one tank. For generally drive get about 19-21 per tank. At 75k so far it been solid car.
Car Wizard i see where your coming from but who would consider a 90s turbo saab or well,90s turbocharged car to get acceptable mpg for todays standard. i liked mine for its nice ride quality and turbo fun.
Something to consider for the 9000 is that while 18 for the auto and 21 for the manual wasn’t a great EPA rating (the linked article quotes EPA ratings), EPA also sets automobile size classes. The Rolls/Bentley the Wizard is standing in front of is rated as a midsize classed car. The Saab is EPA rated full-size. So the author is not consistent calling the 9000 a compact on your link. And the Saab gets 7 MPG better than a 1995 Roller that is a size class smaller 🧐
Scotty Kilmer says Prius batteries deteriorate and MUST be tested...The Wizard says they deteriorate A LITTLE but he doesn't seem too worried about it.
I need to disagree with you on the Saab 9000. As a Saab owner and enthusiast for 35 years, the Saab 9000 on highway consistently gets 28-30 mpg easy! As far as working on them, they're no different than any other car. I had an independent Saab garage that employed 2 Saab Master Techs and never had an issue getting them fixed right and economically. They're fairly simple to work on really.
@@brianlego98gaming - If they're not properly maintained yes, as with any car. My four Saab's that I have owned since 1986 each had over 100K carefree miles on them when I upgraded to a newer model. The top mileage one had 186K and the lowest one (currently own) has 118K miles on it. With the exception of maintenance items and Mobil1 0w/40 oil changes every 5K miles or 4 months, which ever came first, never once was I stranded because of a breakdown. Most reliable cars I have ever owned. All of them got 30-34 mpg highway mileage 24-26 mpg around town.
2009 Hyundai i30 1.6lt turbo diesel. Get 53mpg highway and no worse than 37mpg in the city flogging it with the aircon running and on very hot days. I'm guessing they're not for sale in the USA. Great car, in 11 years it's had one $300 repair to power steering and that's it, just servicing. Service interval is 12 months/ 15,000km (9300miles)
Wow, I've owned almost all of those cars from the Metro with the 1.0L to the Lincoln with with the 460. And your numbers are pretty much spot on; though I don't think I ever hit 8mpg with the Linc on the highway usually 6-7 was all I could get.
Father in law had a 2005 Impala with the 3800 V6, I could hardly believe he could get 32 mpg out of that thing. Mean while the 3.5 in my Nissan struggles to get 29.
I've had two 9-5s and I currently have 9-3. Agreed 9000 is not the most fuel economic car out there but hard to work on? I have no idea what he is speaking about. I'm not a mecanic and I get along with them just fine.
@@Latsaab I haven't had 900 so I guess this is a bit of a guess but in case fuel consumption is your main worry I'd forget about it and choose some other brand.
Hi Wizard. To your question, the first car my wife and I bought together was a new 2004 VW Passat GLS 4Motion with the 1.8T motor with 170HP and 5 speed Tiptronic automatic. We bought it when we lived in Northern California. There, my wife drove a lot of highway miles and we liked 4Motion for trips to Tahoe. Once we moved to Houston, my wife did more city driving being the kid shuttle, and that’s when we started seeing 17 or 18 mpg in the city. Given that the car had only 170HP and took 93 octane fuel, this fuel economy was shocking to me. On the highway, it could maybe get to 28mpg. I started calling it Der Schwein.
You can just trade in your 2004 Volkswagen Passat 1.8T 4Motion for a 2019 Kia Sedona EX minivan, because the 2004 Passat is too old already. The 2019 Sedona has the 3.3 L GDI V6 engine, which produces 276 horsepower and it has the eight-speed automatic transmission with manual-shift capability. It has a ton of cargo space, it is a lot more smoother and it is still fuel-efficient. Also, it is excellent on road trips, especially you now reside in Houston. All in all, the 2004 Passat 1.8T is not a bad car, but it is almost 17 years of age. It is time to trade it in for a newer minivan now. Just buy the 2019 Kia Sedona EX.
Actually, that Passat has been gone for 7 years. It was over 110K miles when my wife was in an accident with it. She was fine, the car was totaled. We are much happier with what replaced it: a 2013 Honda Accord EX. On 87 Octane, it does mid to high 20’s in mixed driving and low to mid 30s on the highway, while kicking out 185HP. Plus, the Accord has a great ride and handling balance.
I've really go into tiny hatches and stuff over the last few years moving away from my obsession with only sporty/performance stuff and enjoying both worlds. My latest daily/project is an 88 Mitsubishi Delica van I picked up for 800 bucks no rust running and driving clean title/interior. The 4G64 in it was still running fine but at nearly 200k miles I opted to do a teardown...which lead to dohc swap and turbo charger. It runs pretty solid at nearly twice the power/torque now, definitely peppy for a microbus/true mini van. Not exactly a contender for the highest gas mileage though lol. I average in the mid-ish 20's, better than with the stock 100hp configuration >.>. Not bad for a 7 person van though IMO.
Had the Jetta/Bora 1.9tdi here in the U.K. 50mpg wasn't even a challenge. Then I got the next gen Jetta 2.0tdi and that was even better. One run of about 20 miles and I got 74mpg at about 60mph. 60mpg was easy. Had to be with diesel running about £1.45 a LITRE at the time. Cheaper now though 😎
The Ford 6.8 v10's didn't get vvt. They're nothing special, but the main selling point was to be cheep to buy, and cheep to maintain. They had some issues, but nothing like the 5.4. They mainly went in crew trucks and medium duty trucks. They where for employees that would tear up a diesel, or forget what fuel to use. RV's used them to for the same reasons. They also handle idling better than modern diesels with dpf. The milage is terrible, but many were willing to live with that to cut costs elsewhere. Ford didn't build it all the way up to 2019 for fun.
toyota echo is a great choice. my 2000 echo is still going great at 200k NEVER gets less than 30mpg. no break downs cheap to keep. good power 109hp for 2085 lb car.
At the end of the 70’s my parents purchased a 1973 Mk-IV Continental (4 kids!). What I remember as a kid was the amount of oil it took everywhere we went. But it was such a cool car. Thanks for the video.
On the Lincoln Mark, I had one in High School and drove it 60 miles every day but gas prices were 85 cents in early 90’s. The gas mileage on the Lincoln was 15 highway and don’t goose the throttle. Very good car and reliable.
Any 1.9 tdi that is under 100kw is very good on the economy, and the best thing yet they can run up to 400k miles. With the eco chip the mileage on highway can get over 60miles for a gallon.
My 2014 Caddy ATS 2.0 AWD (which I loved to drive, and I'm still mad at the dealer for talking me out of the RWD manual they had) had the hugest city/hwy disparity in the history of cars. I'm Canadian, so I have to do a bunch of conversions, but here's the tally on 3 years of records converted to US measurement: City: 15 mpg, Hwy: 39 mpg.
I would recommend P2 Volvo's my '01 V70 gets me around 30 on the highway and its not to bad in the city either, if you take a lot of long drives its a definite good choice.
“Two-juar-egg” My first car was a 2002 Volvo S80. That 4,500 lbs tank with 165,000+ miles got 22/30 MPG. I was so impressed by it’s fuel economy and it also had a massive fuel tank. I’d get 500 miles on a full tank...but it also took premium fuel, so there’s that. Recently, I bought a 2019 Toyota Prius. I live at elevation in Colorado and am averaging 54.2 MPG after about 7,800 miles on the odometer. It gets a little over 500 miles on a full tank and only costs about $16-18 to fill up every 1-1/2 week.
I had a single cab short bed 99 Sonoma with the 2.2 4 cylinder. Did a few things to it hotter plugs better plug wires and better coils with cold air intake synthetic fluids and a better flowing exhaust. I used to drive 160 miles one way and 160 back every weekend and got 45 mpg. The dealership I traded in to kept the truck for a year as their run around cause they loved the gas mileage.
I have a 1996 Metro 3 cyl with 256K miles and the only thing I had to replace was the water pump. At about 178K I replaced the timing belt and tensioner but the old ones were in great shape. What amazed me was the size of these parts. Both looked big enough to go on a V6 engine. The car still gets great mileage too.
The Suzuki G10 is a solid motor. Its a non interference design so there is no damage if the t/b belt breaks. Some have repaired the timing belt on the side of the road. Variants of the Metro are still built in Pakistan. A 96 Metro is a fairly comfortable driving highway car.
I had my 1st and last VW in 1986. It was a 1978 Rabbit diesel, but it had a 1982 VW Jetta 74 hp engine instead of the 48 hp original engine. It was very peppy but it was a freaking cracker box on wheels. Never felt safe in that POS. But it always got around 55 MPG. Sometimes high MPG just ain't worth it.
Similar for my FJZ80. Why are land cruisers so terrible on fuel? Even the new ones are EPA 13. B-Series Mazda extended cab was up to 24 city / 29 highway
The saab 9000 is amazing car if you plan on tuning it, sure gas mileage isn't great, but you can get 400 horsepower easy with a new fuel pump, and bigger turbo on the cheap. Also, when it comes to working on them, it's a 4 cylinder, it's honestly not that hard.
1999 camry 2.2 drive from michigan to missouri to see the eclipse a few years back, with the woman two kids and loaded trunk A/C on and running close to 80 mph, got a bit over 30 mpg
I personally drove a 5 speed first gen insight across the country with no ima, aka no hybrid, just the 1L 3cyl. I got 70+mpg AVERAGE the whole trip. From phoenix, to flagstaff, to the middle of New Mexico on 3/4 tank. And 270k miles just chugging along!
I took the dead 455 out of my 72 Oldsmobile custom cruiser wagon and put in a Buick 231 V6 (3.8L) with manual steering and electric fan. Went from 8 mpg to 16 mpg city. also handles and brakes better with 50/50 weight distribution. Won't rip the tires but haven't noticed much power difference.
I actually have a 2001 V10 Excursion - and honestly, I love it. The MPG isn't great but it's a VERY useful vehicle, and very reliable. I like it better than any pickup truck, parts are cheap, and it's easy to work on. However, I would not recommend one as a daily driver or commuter, I use mine as a winter truck.
I get 10 in the city and 15 on the highway in my 2001 excursion. It is a dog when accelerating. Nothing beats it for room though. We've taken trips on it and enjoyed it. It spit a plug one time. I bought a 200 dollar kit and fixed it in 30 mins with the ability to fix more.
Low HP but plenty of torque. It was really easy to "wake up" those toilets with a few bolt-on goodies too. They were just restricted to comply with EPA regulations.
I got a used 2016 Mitsubishi Mirage hatchback with the cvt as a beater car, and get 35 mpg city and 55 mpg highway going 65 mph. going 55 mph I get up to 60 mpg. and now daily driving it. its got 319k miles
I drove an F450 for a few hours and burned 50 gallons of diesel. I guess that's what happens with a heavy ambulance going down the highway between 85-90MPH.
I'll throw my hat in the ring. I absolutely LOVE my 05 Crown Vic. Base model with a 3 speed. 18-20 city, 22.5 -24 highway with 600,000 to damn near a million mile reliability engine wise. And parts are DIRT CHEAP😁
I have a 1996 Lincoln Town Car with 300k miles and it still gets 27 mpg highway. Panther platform FTW!
Next car I get I'm considering one of those or the mercury version. Preferably owned by an old person who took care of it
Those cars are build like tanks, it’s a shame they stopped making them.
Best I got was 26.8 in my 94 town car, and my vic got 390 miles on 7/8 of a tank
I've had lots and lots of the Lincolns of the age. An 86 and 87, very close to your numbers. 96 98 99(limo) 01(reg&limo) that get the same numbers. As well as 01 F150 with 5.4 that get just shy your numbers. What I truly like is the interchangeability of parts and ease of service.
In 2008 during the recession those used Geo/Chevy Metros were popular, selling for like $7k or $8k at the time.
I knew a guy that had a used up, ragged out one that had been sitting for a couple years. When the gas prices got nuts, he threw a new battery in it, cleaned it up as best as he could, got it running and sold it for 3k. Before that he at best could have got a couple hundred bucks in scrap for it.
I noticed all the Tahoe's and Suburban's parked in driveways during that time are back on the road now too. Now everyone is buying SUV's again too. Of course the mileage isn't as bad as they used to be in SUV's but just wait until gas goes up again.
Imagine how many miles you'd have to drive in a year to make up the difference. People are irrational. But, when you need an excuse to buy a new car and justify it to yourself, that'll do just fine.
2003-05 Honda Civic Hybrids were $17k. Now they are $3k. They were really bad about the hybrid batteries.
@@CouchMan88 I really doubt it because electric cars are coming. Americans will continue to drive Tahoes and Suburbans for years to come no matter if it’s powered by gasoline or electric. Today’s Tahoe and Suburban gets 20 mpg on the highway with the 5.3 EcoTec3 V8. The Silverado with the 4.3 EcoTec3 gets 23 mpg.
I own a 2008 Prius that I ALSO bought from EuroAsian Bob. It’s been one of the best cars I’ve ever owned. Proud to have a car that the Wizard approves of.
My Dad looked at a Prius a while ago (quite a while ago actually), and the mpg wasn't any better than a good diesel.
Your Prius is Wizard approved, that should make it worth more 😷
@Clif Bradley 😂😂😂
I'm disappointed there's no H2 Hummer!
i love my 2008 prius but i'm getting a bit bored :/ its also rubbish to haul stuff the hatch is too small
I have a 2008 Volvo S40 1.6 Turbodiesel. it's basically the beautiful version of the Ford Focus from back then (same chassis, platform, suspension etc, but SO good lookin). I was sceptical about the "small" motor, and it's not great performance-wise, but I get about 50 MPG combined, so it always puts a smile on my face when I'm fueling up :)
I love my 08 Gen 2 Prius. It’s only got 75K miles, and the city mileage is down to about 43-44 in the city, but it works great and never a problem.
I'd like to hear a Wizard's "Buy/Not Buy" on vehicle safety. May have experience from ones that have come into the shop almost totalled from a 5 mph bump, or things that have been in serious collisions and haven't had a dent on them.
Things like land yachts look safe but they fold like paper bags in crash tests.
Drunken Hobo Chevrolet Aveo is a don’t buy. They are not reliable and they are not even safe in a wreck. Datsun 280Z is a don’t buy because of the Car Wizard’s personal experience. Volvos are synonymous for safety so it’s almost always a buy.
@@atx-cvpi_99 I couldn't buy one even if I wanted to. Chevrolet pulled out of the UK market as their sales were so terrible. You know it's a bad car when even the British won't buy it!
Drunken Hobo And the Australians quit buying Holdens as soon as GM slapped the Holden emblem on a Daewoo. There’s a reason why GM left Australia and New Zeleand except for specialty cars like the Corvette. After 2017, sales plummeted even more.
BMW I3 total when birds poop on it
@@drunkenhobo8020 pssst! Vauxhall is Chevrolet!
11:00 The Prius Prime has a Li-Ion battery. The Prius (regular 2nd gen, 3rd gen, 4th gen) have NiMH battery packs. They're all 200V packs but the MaH is drastically different (obviously).
I read recently that the AWD version of the 4th gen uses a NIMH battery, but the others use a Li-Ion.
I absolutely love my 2000 jetta tdi. 340k miles and still runs like a Swiss watch. Winter with long idle times in the morning I averaged 47 hand calc, in the summer time where I turn the key and go I was getting 51-54 hand calc. Love those cars. I have a 114 mile round trip to work and I fill it up Monday morning and I can go the whole week on $35-40! It’s stellar. And the car is super comfortable
Junk
I am so happy to see a new video from CarWizard. With all the negative, doom and gloom, and arguing all over tv and internet its just relaxing and enjoyable to watch your vids. Granted, ya have to have at least a minor interest in cars.
I used to get 38mpg highway in my '99 accord with the 2.4l 4 cylinder and 5 speed. ULTRA reliable. owned it 6 years and only did basic maintenance. Sold it for $200 less than what I Paid for it. Couldn't ask for a better experience with a car.
I once got about 21 mpg in my 1986 AMC Eagle with the 4.2 6 cylinder on the highway. I credit that mostly to being between 55-60 mph due to traffic conditions. 21 mpg's might not sound like much, but for an 80's era American corner-mobile with an engine dating back to the 60's with the added weight of 4WD, I'd say that's pretty darn good.
Ford Excursion - will pass anything except a gas station. Eight mpg isn't fuel mileage that's a fuel leak.
Used to have a Dodge Ram 1500, think it was a 95, great truck, loads of power, comfy seats, nice long bed, 13 mpg. I understand the pain of Excursion owners lol
Grew up in a 00' Excursion, it was Diesel though. My dad made the right choice there! Great diesels in that era, before Ford stopped using diesels from International.
I have a 1997 Nissan that was getting 15mpg. There was a hole rusted in the gas tank. Replaced the tank back to 22mpg, its a 4x4.
Charlie Bennett The 6.0 Powerstroke is crap.
Get the 7.3l
The best fuel economy I had was with my first car, a 1988 MK2 Jetta - it had a 1.6L carburated gas engine, but a 4+E manual gearbox. I could go 80-90km/h with it on our freeways (here, they're called Autobahn, but you don't *have* to go fast on them, if you don't want to! Just stay in the right lane and let everyone pass you!), and it had gotten 4.9L/100km, which is really good. My current car is 10 years younger, has a 1.4L MPI engine and gets about 8L/100km in the city...
I had a 2004 Dodge Ram 150 with the 3.7 V6 and 5 speed manual transmission. You would think that it would get "decent" fuel mileage, but it consistently averaged 15-16 mpg! The highest I ever saw was almost 21 mpg on a highway trip where kept it at 65mph on purpose, and of course I got passed by everyone else on the road! My Durango R/T with the hemi and automatic gets way better mileage, and is a hell of a lot faster and more comfortable to boot!
My mom had a 1973 Continental. It was like having a living room on wheels. Full size couch in the back. Very smooth and no chance of getting run off the road by another car.
Enjoy your channel, Dave...practical and entertaining.
Here's what I tell folks who don't know automobiles yet are programmed to be concerned as regards what to purchase. Don't even think about the term, mpg. Buy the Honda or Toyota which best suits your needs and wallet. Keep it simple and drive safe.
About that Saab 9000, it might be that bad with the N/A 2.3 automatic. However, any of the turbo engines together with a manual transmission will return much better mileage, it will depend heavily on your driving style. 20-22 city and at least 26 highway is to be expected.
My grandma had one of those Lincolns when I was a kid. It was a foot or so longer than our Suburban.
The Saab 9000 shocked me. I had two 9-5s that were great and got in the low 30s on the highway.
I don't understand how people got that mpg? Maybe they were badly maintain is the reason. I own a 93 9000 for 2 years, I got 18mpg city, 30mpg highway out of it. It has to be well maintain or else it is not gonna work right. lol I happen to live near a Saab garage,(5 minutes drive), so repair and maintenance isn't a pain for me. Another big reason is might be because mine is NA, it has no problems that the turbo one are getting.
Loved the appearance on Car Trek 2! Have a great day.
I recommend the first gen Scion XB (or Toyota Echo) with the 1.5L Toyota engine, preferably the automatic. The auto has higher gearing than the manual. My 2006 is very reliable and easy to work on. These are known to go 300,000 miles + on the original engines.
My 2015 Chrysler 200 with the 2.4 ltr engine and 9-speed auto consistently pulls 36.75 MPG @ 60 miles per hour. With 106,000 miles behind it, it has been very reliable too.
2 years later. How's it holding up at this point?
@@0HOON0 I traded it last February for a 2022 Subaru Impreza. At that time, it had 133,500 miles behind it and was still getting the same mileage. Over the 7 years I had it there were no repair bills beyond normal maintenance. I had originally planned to drive the doors off of it, but then I realized by then I'd be an old guy who didn't want a car loan. So I traded it early.
5:52 case in point, we had a 2009 Prius get an oil change, tire rotation and balance and a headlight restoration yesterday at the Walmart Auto Care Center I work at, and it had over 304,000 on it! I’m just waiting for the day that Toyota gets notified of a Gen2 Prius with a million miles on it so they can give that owner a brand spanking new one!
I had a 1999 and 2005 Park Avenue with the 3.8 Series II V6 and they to could get over 30 mpg on the highway in a superbly comfortable and full-size American luxury sedan. It is a shame GM discontinued the 3.8 especially after they changed to the aluminum intake manifold in the Series III which took away the one major flaw these engines had with leaking intake manifolds becasue the plastic and aluminum would cool at different rates and cause warping and cracks in the gaskets. Luckily I never had to experience this. I also had a '97 Lumina in high school with the 3.1 known for the same thing and escaped with that one to. Now I have a 2004 Century as a second car with the 3.1 so hopefuly it will be good to me as well. After all most a year so far so good. None of the V6s GM had replaced the 3.8 with can match the mileage or reliability.
Love the wizard, truly, but as a 3 time Saab 9000 owner, including one that was an Aero, they get 26-30 mpg on the highway!
I was also in awe, hearing what he got to say abou that, ehm. For the power and the (dynamic) acceleration, this is quite a good fuel consumption, much more with the Aero on the highway, with a longer gearing on manual.
I owned a 9-5 aero and it got over 30mpg on the highway easily. As does my Viggen
Also a bit stunned. I had two different saab 9000. First an older 9000i and then a 9000t (smaller turbo). Both cars had the 2,3 liter motor. On the highway, with winter tires, I would normaly get around 27 mpg. The fuel I used was 95 octane. Maby there´s a diffirence if you fuel it up with regular instead of premium?? Hope I got the spelling right. Thanks for an awesome channel!
I clicked on this video for the Saab I've never owned a 9000 but I have a 99 9-3 se and I can get 25 on the highway driving like a bat out of hell.
@@janblom1174 when you use lower octane gas in your saab the computer will retard the timing making your fuel mileage worse. The people wizard is talking to are probably using 87 and have a lead foot.
My 2004 Saab 9-5 Aero also didn’t get that great of gas mileage. It only got about 17 city and 23-24 mpg highway. That’s pretty bad for a 2.3 liter but it was made for performance. It also only took premium which kind of sucked but I loved that car. It was so much fun.
My Saab 9000 2.0T automatic gets about 8 l/100 km on the highway. I think that the low mileage reported here is due to the Saab being made for 95 RON fuel, but it _can_ run on 87 AKI. Also I don't know what that uncle was on about, but 9000s are a breeze to work on, and doesn't require much work either. There are a lot of US cars that are much worse to work on
It sounds to me like the good all car wizard is full of shit and has not worked on a 9000 in his life. These cars are dead easy to work on and quite rather fuel efficient given their size, practicality and general spec. I manage over 40 UK mpg (around 33 US mpg) on the motorway. First and last video I will ever watch from this guy lol
@@gimenofm To be fair, the engine compartment is pretty cramped, especially on the earlier turbo models with vacuum hoses going all over the place. And there is significantly less room in there, than in an american car, but that's more of an "US cars have ridiculous amounts of wasted space"-thing, rather than the 9000 being poorly designed.
Saab 9000s are breeze to work on: heater core repair without even working IN the car: it's behind the firewall, sliding into the dash-area. my 2.0LPT does about 32mpg (uk). and man! are they easy to tune...a stock 2.0LPT has 150hp, but 265 is doable. years ago we (a small group of Saab enthousiasts in The Netherlands) rebuilt a 2.3 FPT: it had 225hp stock, but the engine was built like it had to deliver 300+hp, that sturdy. water pump is built onto the engine, and easy to replace. yes, Saabs are quirky, but not as bad as the Car wizard wants you to believe.
@@gimenofm I mean he did say he’s taking someone else’s word for it. That person is most likely wrong. Never had any issue working on a single one of my Saabs
I own a 2.3 NA 9000, the engine bay looks like a Honda, and it sound like a Honda. lol It has no turbo, so it is very roomy in there. I own it for 2 years now, got 15city-30highway mpg out of it. I suspect the bad rep is due to how people cheap out on maintenance so much they became junk and are useless to repair. Or not gonna work right anymore from all the neglect owners.
1997-2001 Volvo V70 2,5 5 cylinder Turbo diesel manual transmission. 40+mpg on the highway and around 30mpg in the city. Very reliable mine has 261 thousand miles on it an runs well. the highest mileage one that was even featured in our local car magazine has 569 thousand miles on it. the best thing is bodies on these cars hardly ever rust.
1984-1993 Mercedes-Benz 190D(W201 chassy) had it as my first car and that honestly got 50MPG no problem. i drove it a lot and besides normal maintanance it gave me no trobule.
I had an 81 VW Rabbit diesel, 4 speed manual and in town it got about 45mpg and 50 when I was brave enough to get on the highway. It had 48 angry horsepower lol.
My 2013 Elantra 6spd got 50mpg from New Hampshire motor speedway to Boston. I traded it in for a ram 1500 with a 5.7 because owning a home in the suburbs having a truck makes dump runs and home depot runs easier.
On the other hand a Dodge Shadow 2.5 NA with a 3 speed slush box. I get 19 in the city and 15 highway. 100 HP in a 3000 pound car means cruising at 65 is about half throttle and if you hit a hill floor it.
My first car was a 05 Buick LeSabre. I managed 30 mpg out of it on the highway. I'd love to find another one in good condition. I got half a million miles out of mine before the rear subframe broke on a gravel road due to extreme kansas rust -_-
I had a SAAB 9000 2,0 150hp 1997 and i try to convert from litre to gallon and miles to kilometer and it was 30miles per gallon on the highway not so good or not to bad but in city it was bad maybe 18-20miles but here in sweden there is not many left now. It was a good comfortable car
Do you prefer Saab or Volvo?
Yep, I've owned 3 Saab 9000's and they all returned approx 30mpg at highway speeds. In town however they were very thirsty cars, I saw as low as 13mpg in stop start traffic. What they did excel at was long distance cruising, I drove 700 miles in a day in mine and got out as fresh as a daisy at the other end, most cars you fall out of all cramps and aches after long drives.
@@andrewlaw I agree. Car wizard doesn't know what he is talking about in this case.
I just stumbled upon this video and ive never got this bad mileage even from the automatic. My 2.3 aero with 430k km on the click gets 7.5l on the highway and around 12ish in city traffic. Combined is always around 9.5. Same as its been with all my 2.3 turbos.
2002 BMW 525i 209k miles 5 speed auto. 20mpg in town 16mph average, 28mpg highway at 75mph, 32mpg at 60mph. One of the best daily drivers ever.
The 3.8 buick is a monster. As long as the intake plentum doesent melt. And replace the little coolant elbow just below the valve covers. U can replace it with a metal one. Good to go
I have a 1972 Plymouth Scamp with a Slant 6 that currently gets around 18-19 in the city and 22-23 highway (on 91 octane non ethanol fuel).
The main difference between the honda insight and toyota prius is you can operate the honda with a dead hybrid battery.
That way, when your battery completely degrades, you can still drive, while in the prius, you can't.
Had a Saab 9-3 Turbo and a 9-5 3.0 V6 both were not very economical however they were very straightforward to work on with lots of easy to find GM parts. Pretty reliable too if maintained to Saab exact specification. For example using the Saab specified spar plugs inside of normal plains. Normal plugs could kill the ignite cassette. If I could buy a new Saab today I would.
Had a 2016 Kia Forte 5 with the 1.6 turbo. It had 200 HP and still got 37 MPG average. Great little car for power, MPG, and reliability!
I had a 2000 VW TDI , I think it was the 1.9. I have to say the drivetrain was bulletproof, but unfortunately the entire car around it was total garbage. Expect everything to fall apart, a lot of electrical issues and also expensive service intervals that must be done or you’ll have major problems.
As a prior Tahoe Hybrid owner, I can tell you they are GREAT!
The transmission intelligently switches between 4 physical gears for high load and towing or e-cvt power split mode, just like the very reliable Toyota hybrid designs. This transmission was also licensed to BMW and Mercedes Benz. There are no belts and pulleys like bad cvt designs.
They came fully loaded with every option, and the fuel saving in the city is around 25% better, while also being more powerful. Looking only at the MPG number is deceptive, because MPG is a non-linear scale. I averaged 23.9 MPG over the entire ownership. Really good, for a big boned 4x4 body on frame with a 6.0l V8.
Just regular maintenance and it breezed past 100k miles, no issues. GM also put this system in a lot of commercial trucks and city busses. There's nothing to be afraid of.
They also did not hold resale value at all. If GM had put a 4.3 V6 or a 4.8 V8, it would have been a success and got better fuel mileage.
@@atx-cvpi_99 GM explained that they used the 6.0 because the smaller engines did not have enough power or displacement when running in 4-cyl mode, which means they would always have to run in V8 mode. Obviously, the cylinder deactivation was less sophisticated back then, so it could only do 8 or 4 cylinders unlike current GM designs that have dynamic adjustment from 8 to 2.
Harsh on the Touareg! My V6 TDI with a remap gets 36mpg on the highway and over 275bhp!
Wizard the Touareg is a great car!
Love the channel 👍
Yeah, I did not realize the V10 TDIs were that bad. I have a 2012 Touareg with the V6 and get the same highway milage.
How V10, V8 cars can be compared in fuel economy concept? It's like comparing apples and oranges for logical perspective. For fuel economy, it would be a better comparison to list cars that positioned themselves as fuel economy category with somewhat similar engine size based on their reliability results in accordance with your experience.
I said in the video that the comparisons are not matched, but rather, how good can it get, vs how bad it can get
I need to disagree with the saab. I get 23.5mpg period and that with a big turbo while having fun. but that's with the B204e.
Honorable mention for gas guzzler, Lexus IS300. Here's a car that is the size of a Toyota Corolla but its rated at 16 city/22 highway, and "requires" premium fuel. Its a fun car to drive, great handling, RWD, the 2JZ inline six makes decent power and sounds AMAZING, but damn its hard on gas for being a tiny car. I used to have a similar SC300, same 2JZ engine/5 speed manual, that did 18 in town, 23 highway. Mainly though its the cost of premium fuel that ate me out of house and home(.50 to $1 a gallon more), I drove that car pretty hard so I never chanced it with regular.
My 2012 Focus 1.6 182hp had lower fuel usage than my buddys prius. Prius are only really efficient if you have a lot of queue driving or slow city driving. Just regular driving on normal roads/highway the added weight of the battery just equals to higher consumption.
Great vid. How about doing cars with performance and gas milage next. My c5 corvette is getting 31mpg on the highway driving moderately. Thanks for sharing.
I towed a ~2000lb trailer in addition to 4 dudes +their gear 800mi @75mph over the Sierra Nevada mountains and averaged 38mpg. Really great car and definitely recommend the manual.
I just love how car wizard impersonates what someone would say about a car then immediately says "no it's not" or "No it isn't"
I have a 2005 Mercedes e320 cdi as my first car. It Is one of the best all around cars for the price that I’ve ever seen. Gas mileage is decent, it’s super comfortable and the diesel has never given me a single issue! :)
I have 2014 Dodge Charger /w v6 and 8 speed transmission on highway trip gets 24-26. Record was 29.4 on one tank. For generally drive get about 19-21 per tank. At 75k so far it been solid car.
I will add I have bit of lead foot. Also the car is AWD. When it goes into awd mode loses 2-5mpg
my '18 Accord Sport (2.0, ten speed auto) just got 38mpg on a 240 mile trip this week. 252 horsepower of FWD fun
my saab 9000 did 30 hwy
www.google.com/amp/s/driving.ca/ford/features/feature-story/worst-gas-guzzlers-of-all-time/amp
Car Wizard i see where your coming from but who would consider a 90s turbo saab or well,90s turbocharged car to get acceptable mpg for todays standard. i liked mine for its nice ride quality and turbo fun.
Something to consider for the 9000 is that while 18 for the auto and 21 for the manual wasn’t a great EPA rating (the linked article quotes EPA ratings), EPA also sets automobile size classes. The Rolls/Bentley the Wizard is standing in front of is rated as a midsize classed car. The Saab is EPA rated full-size. So the author is not consistent calling the 9000 a compact on your link. And the Saab gets 7 MPG better than a 1995 Roller that is a size class smaller 🧐
1996 Ford Escort Coupe manuel w/ 1.8l gets at least 30mpg city and up to 45 Highway
Scotty Kilmer says Prius batteries deteriorate and MUST be tested...The Wizard says they deteriorate A LITTLE but he doesn't seem too worried about it.
This guy gives out good advice & information. Knows what he is talking about.
I need to disagree with you on the Saab 9000. As a Saab owner and enthusiast for 35 years, the Saab 9000 on highway consistently gets 28-30 mpg easy! As far as working on them, they're no different than any other car. I had an independent Saab garage that employed 2 Saab Master Techs and never had an issue getting them fixed right and economically. They're fairly simple to work on really.
Said the exact same thing in the comment above. Wizard is wayyy out of the truth on this one
Saab 9000s with 2.3 4 cylinders are endless moneypits as they age.
@@brianlego98gaming - If they're not properly maintained yes, as with any car. My four Saab's that I have owned since 1986 each had over 100K carefree miles on them when I upgraded to a newer model. The top mileage one had 186K and the lowest one (currently own) has 118K miles on it. With the exception of maintenance items and Mobil1 0w/40 oil changes every 5K miles or 4 months, which ever came first, never once was I stranded because of a breakdown. Most reliable cars I have ever owned. All of them got 30-34 mpg highway mileage 24-26 mpg around town.
@@brianlego98gaming They are not good vehicles anyway, compared to other Saab's.
2009 Hyundai i30 1.6lt turbo diesel. Get 53mpg highway and no worse than 37mpg in the city flogging it with the aircon running and on very hot days. I'm guessing they're not for sale in the USA. Great car, in 11 years it's had one $300 repair to power steering and that's it, just servicing. Service interval is 12 months/ 15,000km (9300miles)
Wow, I've owned almost all of those cars from the Metro with the 1.0L to the Lincoln with with the 460. And your numbers are pretty much spot on; though I don't think I ever hit 8mpg with the Linc on the highway usually 6-7 was all I could get.
1985jimmydean Then you had a MAJOR problem with the Lincoln. 14 mpg on the highway is normal; I have owned three.
@@mikek5298 Sorry Mike, no chance you could get that from a 460 unless you threw it out of a plane.
Those are semi numbers
Father in law had a 2005 Impala with the 3800 V6, I could hardly believe he could get 32 mpg out of that thing. Mean while the 3.5 in my Nissan struggles to get 29.
First car was a 72 Pontiac Catalina with a 455. Got 8 I think. If I could have afforded it, I should have kept it. Gas was too expensive for too long
I had a 1969 Mercury Marquis convertible with a 429 2V. I put a new carburetor and a new distributor with Mallory unilite ignition and I got 16 mpg
I had a saab 9-3 with the b204 engine. It was easy to work on(lots of room). And it was bullet proof. The turbo engines might be another story.
I've had two 9-5s and I currently have 9-3. Agreed 9000 is not the most fuel economic car out there but hard to work on? I have no idea what he is speaking about. I'm not a mecanic and I get along with them just fine.
@@Kyosti5000whats the fuel economy like? Am considering buying a 1995 Saab 900s and fuel prices are crazy in Norway 😅
@@Latsaab I haven't had 900 so I guess this is a bit of a guess but in case fuel consumption is your main worry I'd forget about it and choose some other brand.
Hi Wizard. To your question, the first car my wife and I bought together was a new 2004 VW Passat GLS 4Motion with the 1.8T motor with 170HP and 5 speed Tiptronic automatic. We bought it when we lived in Northern California. There, my wife drove a lot of highway miles and we liked 4Motion for trips to Tahoe.
Once we moved to Houston, my wife did more city driving being the kid shuttle, and that’s when we started seeing 17 or 18 mpg in the city. Given that the car had only 170HP and took 93 octane fuel, this fuel economy was shocking to me. On the highway, it could maybe get to 28mpg. I started calling it Der Schwein.
You can just trade in your 2004 Volkswagen Passat 1.8T 4Motion for a 2019 Kia Sedona EX minivan, because the 2004 Passat is too old already. The 2019 Sedona has the 3.3 L GDI V6 engine, which produces 276 horsepower and it has the eight-speed automatic transmission with manual-shift capability. It has a ton of cargo space, it is a lot more smoother and it is still fuel-efficient. Also, it is excellent on road trips, especially you now reside in Houston. All in all, the 2004 Passat 1.8T is not a bad car, but it is almost 17 years of age. It is time to trade it in for a newer minivan now. Just buy the 2019 Kia Sedona EX.
Actually, that Passat has been gone for 7 years. It was over 110K miles when my wife was in an accident with it. She was fine, the car was totaled. We are much happier with what replaced it: a 2013 Honda Accord EX. On 87 Octane, it does mid to high 20’s in mixed driving and low to mid 30s on the highway, while kicking out 185HP. Plus, the Accord has a great ride and handling balance.
I've really go into tiny hatches and stuff over the last few years moving away from my obsession with only sporty/performance stuff and enjoying both worlds. My latest daily/project is an 88 Mitsubishi Delica van I picked up for 800 bucks no rust running and driving clean title/interior. The 4G64 in it was still running fine but at nearly 200k miles I opted to do a teardown...which lead to dohc swap and turbo charger. It runs pretty solid at nearly twice the power/torque now, definitely peppy for a microbus/true mini van. Not exactly a contender for the highest gas mileage though lol. I average in the mid-ish 20's, better than with the stock 100hp configuration >.>. Not bad for a 7 person van though IMO.
Had the Jetta/Bora 1.9tdi here in the U.K. 50mpg wasn't even a challenge. Then I got the next gen Jetta 2.0tdi and that was even better. One run of about 20 miles and I got 74mpg at about 60mph. 60mpg was easy. Had to be with diesel running about £1.45 a LITRE at the time. Cheaper now though 😎
My 06 Fusion gets between 25 to 30 M.P.G. I have the 4 cylinder.
The Ford 6.8 v10's didn't get vvt.
They're nothing special, but the main selling point was to be cheep to buy, and cheep to maintain. They had some issues, but nothing like the 5.4.
They mainly went in crew trucks and medium duty trucks. They where for employees that would tear up a diesel, or forget what fuel to use. RV's used them to for the same reasons. They also handle idling better than modern diesels with dpf.
The milage is terrible, but many were willing to live with that to cut costs elsewhere. Ford didn't build it all the way up to 2019 for fun.
toyota echo is a great choice. my 2000 echo is still going great at 200k NEVER gets less than 30mpg. no break downs cheap to keep. good power 109hp for 2085 lb car.
At the end of the 70’s my parents purchased a 1973 Mk-IV Continental (4 kids!). What I remember as a kid was the amount of oil it took everywhere we went. But it was such a cool car. Thanks for the video.
On the Lincoln Mark, I had one in High School and drove it 60 miles every day but gas prices were 85 cents in early 90’s.
The gas mileage on the Lincoln was 15 highway and don’t goose the throttle. Very good car and reliable.
The newer Saabs use Ecotec fours. Garbage fours.
Any 1.9 tdi that is under 100kw is very good on the economy, and the best thing yet they can run up to 400k miles. With the eco chip the mileage on highway can get over 60miles for a gallon.
My 2014 Caddy ATS 2.0 AWD (which I loved to drive, and I'm still mad at the dealer for talking me out of the RWD manual they had) had the hugest city/hwy disparity in the history of cars. I'm Canadian, so I have to do a bunch of conversions, but here's the tally on 3 years of records converted to US measurement: City: 15 mpg, Hwy: 39 mpg.
I would recommend P2 Volvo's my '01 V70 gets me around 30 on the highway and its not to bad in the city either, if you take a lot of long drives its a definite good choice.
He's right about driving habits. You don't have to do extreme hypermiling, but winding it out will always get you worse economy.
“Two-juar-egg”
My first car was a 2002 Volvo S80. That 4,500 lbs tank with 165,000+ miles got 22/30 MPG. I was so impressed by it’s fuel economy and it also had a massive fuel tank. I’d get 500 miles on a full tank...but it also took premium fuel, so there’s that. Recently, I bought a 2019 Toyota Prius. I live at elevation in Colorado and am averaging 54.2 MPG after about 7,800 miles on the odometer. It gets a little over 500 miles on a full tank and only costs about $16-18 to fill up every 1-1/2 week.
I had a single cab short bed 99 Sonoma with the 2.2 4 cylinder. Did a few things to it hotter plugs better plug wires and better coils with cold air intake synthetic fluids and a better flowing exhaust. I used to drive 160 miles one way and 160 back every weekend and got 45 mpg. The dealership I traded in to kept the truck for a year as their run around cause they loved the gas mileage.
Aren't those geo metros just old Suzukis?
Aka Suzuki Swifts.
I have a 1996 Metro 3 cyl with 256K miles and the only thing I had to replace was the water pump. At about 178K I replaced the timing belt and tensioner but the old ones were in great shape. What amazed me was the size of these parts. Both looked big enough to go on a V6 engine. The car still gets great mileage too.
The Suzuki G10 is a solid motor. Its a non interference design so there is no damage if the t/b belt breaks. Some have repaired the timing belt on the side of the road. Variants of the Metro are still built in Pakistan. A 96 Metro is a fairly comfortable driving highway car.
I had my 1st and last VW in 1986. It was a 1978 Rabbit diesel, but it had a 1982 VW Jetta 74 hp engine instead of the 48 hp original engine. It was very peppy but it was a freaking cracker box on wheels. Never felt safe in that POS. But it always got around 55 MPG. Sometimes high MPG just ain't worth it.
I would of said a land cruiser 200 series. I daily mine and get 12 hwy 8 city
Similar for my FJZ80. Why are land cruisers so terrible on fuel? Even the new ones are EPA 13. B-Series Mazda extended cab was up to 24 city / 29 highway
Permanent 4wd and 33s do it for me
Late 90's Chevrolet Tahoe is the same
What was it before 33s and fulltime 4wd?
@@TBendez 14 hwy 10 city
The saab 9000 is amazing car if you plan on tuning it, sure gas mileage isn't great, but you can get 400 horsepower easy with a new fuel pump, and bigger turbo on the cheap. Also, when it comes to working on them, it's a 4 cylinder, it's honestly not that hard.
1999 camry 2.2 drive from michigan to missouri to see the eclipse a few years back, with the woman two kids and loaded trunk A/C on and running close to 80 mph, got a bit over 30 mpg
I personally drove a 5 speed first gen insight across the country with no ima, aka no hybrid, just the 1L 3cyl. I got 70+mpg AVERAGE the whole trip. From phoenix, to flagstaff, to the middle of New Mexico on 3/4 tank. And 270k miles just chugging along!
I took the dead 455 out of my 72 Oldsmobile custom cruiser wagon and put in a Buick 231 V6 (3.8L) with manual steering and electric fan. Went from 8 mpg to 16 mpg city. also handles and brakes better with 50/50 weight distribution. Won't rip the tires but haven't noticed much power difference.
I actually have a 2001 V10 Excursion - and honestly, I love it. The MPG isn't great but it's a VERY useful vehicle, and very reliable. I like it better than any pickup truck, parts are cheap, and it's easy to work on. However, I would not recommend one as a daily driver or commuter, I use mine as a winter truck.
I get 10 in the city and 15 on the highway in my 2001 excursion. It is a dog when accelerating. Nothing beats it for room though. We've taken trips on it and enjoyed it. It spit a plug one time. I bought a 200 dollar kit and fixed it in 30 mins with the ability to fix more.
I never understood how we used to have these giant engines that sucked gas like flushing a toilet but only made 120HP. WTF was going on back then?
They made a lot of power until environmental regulations strangled them. Cars in the 60s had way more power than the 70 to the late 80s.
Low HP but plenty of torque. It was really easy to "wake up" those toilets with a few bolt-on goodies too. They were just restricted to comply with EPA regulations.
I used to own a 89 Honda prelude. Got high 30s on the freeway. Miss that car.
Daihatsu Charade...Mazda 121 Demio...Citröen 2cv...Suzuki Swift (3cyl)
My 2016 civic manual gets 32 in town 42 hwy
I think I noticed a blue foxbody in one of your videos recently Mr. Wizard. Can you do a video on that? Would love to see some content about that car!
My first car was a 1973 Plymouth valiant with a 225 slant 6. I averaged 24 mpg in that car and never lacked for power.
2gen prius in unstopable. I seen cars 400k-500k miles still oem engine and trans.
Haha. My first car was a late 90s LeSabre. And yeah, the frame rusted to bits out here in the Rust Belt well before the engine gave any problems.
I got a used 2016 Mitsubishi Mirage hatchback with the cvt as a beater car, and get 35 mpg city and 55 mpg highway going 65 mph. going 55 mph I get up to 60 mpg. and now daily driving it. its got 319k miles
I have a 2015 manual Mirage. 158k, never had a problem, and 40 mpg easy.
I drove an F450 for a few hours and burned 50 gallons of diesel. I guess that's what happens with a heavy ambulance going down the highway between 85-90MPH.
Excellent video Wizard. Thank you
I haven't seen gas below $2 in years. It's $2.99 in my local town in California.
Agree about the Lincoln, but it's the best looking car of the group.