By on March 12, 2012

Some automakers have cars that get a stupendous mileage, but they are priced or built so that nobody wants them. We won’t name names, draw your own conclusions. A much better metric than the mileage of a car is the mileage of all cars you sell. The combined mileage of all cars sold by a manufacturer or brand used to be a top secret document. Manufacturers with stellar averages sometimes leaked theirs. But what good are these statistics if manufacturers with mediocre averages hide their data? Thankfully, last year TrueCar started tracking the MPG averages of cars sold in the U.S. And it is coming to surprising results.

Not surprisingly, the most fuel efficient cars are sold by smart and MINI. Duh, all they have are small cars.

Once the offerings get a bit more diverse, Hyundai emerges as a clear winner with an average MPG of 27.8 in February 2012. Hyundai is closely followed by Volkswagen with 27.4 MPG. JLR can boast that it affords the luxury of absolutely atrocious mileage, a label Jaguar and Land Rover share with truck-heavy Ram.

With one narrow exception, Detroit cars are below average when it comes to combined mileage. A Volt doesn’t do anything to the environment if people don’t buy it. The only Detroit brand above average is Buick. The German and Chinese influenced brand is a tenth of a mile better than run-of-the-mill.

TrueCar TrueMPG By Brand, February 2011

Brand Feb-12 Feb-11 YoY
smart 36.2 36.2 0.0
MINI 30.3 30.0 0.3
Hyundai 27.8 26.1 1.7
Volkswagen 27.4 25.5 1.9
Kia 26.1 25.8 0.3
Scion 26.0 25.6 0.4
Honda 24.7 24.6 0.1
Mazda 24.6 24.3 0.3
Toyota 24.5 25.0 -0.5
Mitsubishi 24.5 25.1 -0.6
Subaru 23.5 23.2 0.3
Nissan 23.4 22.8 0.6
Suzuki 23.4 23.2 0.2
Buick 22.4 20.3 2.1
Industry 22.3 21.4 0.9
Audi 22.2 22.0 0.2
Chevrolet 21.7 21.3 0.4
Ford 21.3 17.3 4.0
Lexus 21.2 21.2 0.0
Acura 21.1 19.9 1.2
Saab 20.9 22.4 -1.5
Chrysler 20.9 19.5 1.4
Volvo 20.9 21.2 -0.3
BMW 20.5 20.2 0.3
Mercedes 20.5 19.1 1.4
Dodge 20.3 19.8 0.5
Lincoln 19.7 18.8 0.9
Infiniti 19.6 19.7 -0.1
Porsche 19.4 21.0 -1.6
GMC 18.9 18.9 0.0
Jeep 18.6 17.6 1.0
Cadillac 18.4 18.8 -0.4
Jaguar 18.0 18.0 0.0
Ram 15.6 15.6 0.0
Land Rover 15.0 14.0 1.0

The YoY column says what manufacturers actually do about mileage. It compares the combined MPG of cars sold in February 2012 with that of cars sold in February 2012.

The star of the MPG improvement category clearly is Ford. Within one year, Ford delivered 4 miles per gallon more across all Fords sold. If Ford keeps up this performance, it will soon be found in the hero category. The company not rescued by the government has the best improvement and the best overall MPG ranking of all Detroit makers.

Top ranking Hyundai and Volkswagen improved their MPG by 1.9 and 1.7 miles respectively. Buick surprisingly improved a below-average 20.3 MPG last year by a class-leading 2.1 miles. Ford and Buick protected Detroit’s virtue: The mileage may still be sub-par. But at least, something is being done to improve it.


Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

123 Comments on “Want To Save Gas? Don’t Buy American – Announcing The True Heroes And True Villains At The Pump...”

  • avatar

    I wouldn’t consider any of the makes to be “full line” manufacturers until you get to Toyota. Full- size V-8 pickup and SUV sales are going to hurt your numbers, as well high performance cars, even if they sell in relatively small numbers like the Corvette. The only V-8s in Hyundai’s portfolio are in the Genesis and Equus sedans, which are still selling in fairly low numbers and will still get better mpg than a truck regardless. Toyota is the first manufacturer on the list that offers any seriously thirsty vehicles and their share of the pickup and fullsize SUV market compared to GM, Ford, and Chrysler is miniscule. Same with Nissan.

    Given the huge numbers of full size trucks that they sell I am actually more impressed with Chevrolet and Ford being only slightly below average than I am with Hyundai and VW being near the top.

    • 0 avatar

      Disagree. The Honda Ridgeline may only offer a V6, but it gets V8 fuel economy. ;-)


      • 0 avatar

        yeah but when you only sell 3 Ridgelines a year, it doesn’t really affect your corporate mileage. :)

      • 0 avatar

        Mercedes-Benz gets the grand award for cars sucking more than they should based on sized and displacement.

      • 0 avatar

        Good one. I thought about the Ridgeline and the Pilot as I was writing my comment, but as others said, their market share compared to the Detroit trucks is miniscule, even smaller than Toyota and Nissan.

        Honda’s best selling models are the Civic and the Accord. Ford sells as many F-150s every year as both Honda model lines do combined. If you combine the Silverado and the Sierra figures, GM does the same.

        This list is just not an apples to apples comparision, IMO.

      • 0 avatar

        The Honda Ridgeline and Pilot are not only selling in small numbers, they are also not what one would consider Full-sized. The Ridgeline being a uni-body is not really even a truck; more like a Japanese El Camino.

        • 0 avatar

          Uh, the Pilot is as wide as a Tahoe, you can fit 3 car seats in the 2nd row, weighs 4400 lbs dry and seats 8, and oh yeah here is the frame structure

    • 0 avatar

      Agreed, Dukeboy01.

    • 0 avatar

      Well in addition to Toyota’s full line of V8 guzzlers, let’s look at Scion’s line of all I4’s: it’s still below Hyundai even with Hyundai’s having V8’s as well many other cars and SUV’s much larger than anything Scion offers, some still with V6’s.. Truth is much of Toyota’s advantage in the car field comes from Hybrids. Hyundai may be the second biggest seller of Hybrids, but still its percentage of hybrids sold is a mere small fraction of Toyota’s. So if you’re looking for a hybrid and are willing to pay, other than maybe the upcoming Fusion, there’s really no reason to start anywhere other than your Toyota dealer. If you’re not really interested in a hybrid, Toyota is far from a fuel economy leader these days.

      • 0 avatar

        Scion iQ has the best mpg out of any other car on sale in USA :-).
        Camry 4cly 2.5l engine had the best mpg of 4cly engines in class until new Altima came out month ago. Old V6 in new Avalon is also best performer.

        In Europe, where trucks dont play into hand, and there is variety of engine choices, Toyota is #1 full lineup manufacturer, 20% better than VW for instance.

      • 0 avatar

        Toyota Hybrids are old hat. (Prius literally means “That which came before, so there is a little poetic justice in it being dethroned.)

        The most fuel efficient car sold in the US with a gas engine in it is a Chevy Volt. Take my example, how far would you say a Prius can go on 15 gallons? It sure can’t go 15,650 miles like my Volt has on less than that. (14.4 gallons)I don’t expect to have to put any gas in until the 3 gallons I put in it last month is a year old and declared stale. (Electricity costs would have been $450 for those miles if I was paying for it, my roof makes enough to charge twice every day which I sell. I charge at night on the lower night rate…)

        The Volt beat every car besides a Leaf on Edmunds Total Cost of Ownership calculator, and that was before the $5K price drop.

        So, if you are serious about saving gas, buy a Volt.

        • 0 avatar

          Edmonds total cost calculator does not extrapolate the Leaf’s battery degredation costs and Nissan’s false warranty promises on it’s battery pack (even after the lawsuits have concluded and pused them to improve on their warranty). Keep your Volt… you have chosen well. I do look forward to the Tesla Model E coming out in a few years… may not be for everyone, but it should be interesting

      • 0 avatar

        Prius is far from the leader… ppxhbqt, I believe that you are being unfair. The new Chevy appears better. But what are your references?

        That aside, when you read the bottom line in costs, gasoline hybrids make no sense whatsoever. They all stink, and they are dogs to drive, but I had a second gen Prius (before my wife rolled it)and was in love with the packaging. To me, from that standpoint, the car is brilliant. But when you actually drive it, where is the satisfaction? I am surprised that they sell as well as they do.

        So now we see just how far off base these gasoline hybrids are with the Mazda Methane Hybrid Diesel written about since here… and that is pretty far. Gasoline is just not a great fuel from a lot of standpoints. Time is going to teach us even more as to how far.

        Far beyond fuel costs are operating costs per mile and that is why most people don’t get all that excited about mileage. A diesel in conventional dress will easily outlast a gasoline engine by double. But that is just the beginning of the story. Auto trannys die quicker that diesel engines and they are always expensive to even touch.

        Conventional wisdom is that it costs fifty cents a mile to drive a car and everyone seems to accept that number. You can buy a lot of fuel for most any car for anything like that cost per mile. This is why I have decided that actual fuel economy is mostly a political concern. That is, people mostly buy cars for other reasons than mpg even if they talk up mileage in the process.

        My own thought is that the best answer comes when you do the Mazda Hybrid idea times about three and integrate the systems to power up your home. I think that this would be an absolute deal breaker from every viewpoint and you know that this car with 300+ ft/lbs of torque is going to break your neck on acceleration. But that’s just not even close to what it could be.

        Click on my name to see what I mean.

    • 0 avatar

      Strange that you would mention the Corvette, since it is probably the one of the most fuel efficient gasoline cars out there pound for pound when driven gently.

      Next you mention V-8’s. I am amazed, at this point, that anyone even still makes an 8, simply because they must always fire out of sequence. With the adaptation (again) of multi-valved engines, it would seem to me that no one would even consider making one. V-8’s are packaging, not performance solutions, since it is the number of valves that make an engine breath, not the number of cylinders. 153624 is the way to go performance wise, IMHO. BMW has figured this out and shown us why an in-line six is the sweetest engine out there today even though GM continues to work magic on its ancient 1955 V-8.

      My more general question is: Why does everyone stop at gasoline when discussing fuel efficiency? There are turbo diesels that will beat any gasoline car, are cleaner burning, and still deliver adequate performance. So why does everyone stop at gasoline when discussing fuel efficiency? There are turbo diesels that will beat any gasoline car and still deliver adequate performance.

      Finally, on an overall basis LPG and LNG will really be king when it comes to fuel efficiency, especially when you consider their cleanliness. We here at CoilPack4U believe that, when all aspects are included, such as particle size, fuel atomization & control, and more esoteric characteristics, these gaseous fuels will blow the socks off of all other fuels on any basis when they finally catch on.

      Furthermore, when everyone finally gets it, cars with LNG combined with our product will score unheard of average mileage numbers down the road. Think 100 mpg compared to gasoline along with gobs of power. When we get there it will not be a contest.

  • avatar

    It would be interesting to see a volume-weighted industry average. Although smart and MINI are low-volume at the top of the charts, the set {Hyundai, Volkswagen, Honda, Toyota} is a significant chunk of market share above the numeric average. One could have believed before looking at the relative positions that boutique brands would occupy the top and the bulk of cars would be below the by-brand average; it might be with that bunch above the average that we could have an even worse depiction of GM, Chrysler, and JLR — shrinking market share and poor MPG.

  • avatar

    Just goes to show… to save the planet, it’s not about making every car a hyper-miler, it’s about changing the mix of the cars sold. VW near the top even though individually, their cars aren’t milage class leaders. They don’t have the volume of larger cars and SUV’s to bring down their corporate average.

    Also shows where Honda and Toyata have really strayed… they used to have industry leading average fuel efficiency numbers, but got increasingly dependent on larger cars. Also shows how much more growth potential Hyundai has…as they penetrate the market and start relying on higher margin larger cars, their average will go down as well.

  • avatar

    How come the YoY is not the difference between the first 2 columns?
    You explanation: “It compares the combined MPG of cars sold in February 2012 with that of cars sold in February 2012” doesn’t help much neither.

  • avatar
    Twitter: phauser

    Honestly, this table doesn’t tell me anything new. Companies that sell mostly cars? At the top. Companies that sell a range of vehicles? In the middle. Companies that sell luxury cars/trucks? At the bottom. Detroit sells vehicles that are competitively efficient with the competition, but when demand is high for F-150’s they are still going to sell them.

  • avatar

    What, exactly, do those YOY numbers represent? They certainly don’t represent the difference between the supplied ’11 and ’12 numbers.

    • 0 avatar

      They certainly DO represent the difference between the supplied ’11 and ’12 numbers. Just subtract the number in 2011 in the middle column from the number in 2012 in the left column.
      Start with the Smart: 36.2-36.2 = 0.0
      Mini: 30.3-30.0 = 0.3
      Porsche:19.4-21.0 = -1.6

  • avatar

    This article made my head hurt. Bertel is my vying to be my spin class instructor. (He probably isn’t as attractive. And teaches a different kind of ‘spin.’) This chart is the trend of the customer. Bertel’s jump to conclusions mat should also have a price/fuel efficiency/make/model analysis to back his claims up if he wants to push his opinion.

  • avatar

    Try moving 8 people in a SMART, or plowing a parking lot with a Mini. How about a roofing job with a Hyundai? Going to tow your RV or a boat with Scion or Kia?

    What is the point of this story? Consider capability. Houses wouldn’t get built, Camry’s wouldn’t get towed, and people couldn’t drive up piles of cinderblocks without a truck.

    This “news article” is a pile of steamy left wing Bull Doo-doo!!! Shame on you TTAC!!!

    • 0 avatar

      TTAC left wing?…That has to be a first.

    • 0 avatar

      “Try moving 8 people in a SMART, or plowing a parking lot with a Mini. How about a roofing job with a Hyundai? Going to tow your RV or a boat with Scion or Kia?”

      Card carrying Prius driver here.

      Nobody’s arguing that you should plow a parking lot with a Mini Cooper or a Prius.

      If you actually plow parking lots with your truck, or build houses for a living, or haul heavy loads regularly, or travel regularly over unimproved roads in the 3rd world parts of the USA, then you really do need a truck.

      It’s the poseurs that drive pristine clean undented F-150s with no wear on the trailer hitch to white collar jobs in the city that annoy people like me. I believe in their freedom to annoy me, but I also believe in my freedom to publicly admonish them on the Internet for using the wrong tool for the job.

      P.S. Those people do occasionally do favors for the rest of us. For instance, I co-bought an F-150 from a pharmacist who used it to commute to his job in the city. The driver of the truck (a family member who is co-owner) has used the truck to travel thousands of miles over unimproved roads in the 3rd world parts of the USA for her job. She uses the 4WD regularly, and also travels with the bed packed full of work-tools and survival supplies. I’d like to thank the guy who owned the truck before us, for keeping it in such good shape for us while it depreciated, without receiving any real wear. He saved us a ton of money! And now the truck works for a living.

      • 0 avatar


        If the job is posing, then it’s the “right tool” for the job.

        Fairly pristine newer F-150 owner here.

        Most of its noticeable wear & tear, inside & out, were done by mine and friend’s dogs I look after despite hundreds of Home Depot runs (often for cinder blocks & concrete mix) and taking it deep into the woods. So I like to keep my trucks as dent and blemmish free as possible and so what? Don’t you do the same for your Prius? They both sell for more that way, don’t they? Of course no one would ever accuse a Prius owner of posing but should you drive your’s into the ground otherwise you’re just a poser?

      • 0 avatar


        We’re working hard on driving the Prius into the ground, but at 140k miles it just refuses to wear out!

        But, yeah, if you’re commuting to a white-collar job in the city in an F-150, you really aren’t using the F-150 for what it’s good for. You’re wasting a perfectly good work truck on an easy commute.

        Carrying a half ton of gear across the high desert on a dirt trail? My Prius is absolutely the wrong tool for that job, but the F-150 one of several right tools for that job. Very nice truck for the purpose, though.

        Use the tight tool for the right job.

      • 0 avatar


        My commute is short, I’ll admit, but it’d have to be really long to justify having a second commuter car even though I’m in ‘danger’ of getting accused of being a poser or ‘all hat’ because my 5 year truck looks showroom at least at a distance. Actually some random guy laughed in my face about my truck at the Home Depot. I doesn’t bother one bit and it should last me and look good for 40 years the way it’s going and what of it?

        So I’m a poser for buying more truck than I ever hardly need but it’s somehow OK to buy a BMW when a Camry will get me there just fine?

        I worked at a Ford dealer as a kid and remember some old dude would bring in his couple years old, two tone brown ’87 F-150 XLT for service and it sparkled, it looked so new. Thirty years later I’d spot him around town in it and it was the cleanest, nicest older truck around. Then I saw some landscaper with it and it went down hill fast. The first thing he did was put stake-bed wooden sides on it and overloaded it to the point of spreading the bed wide open. Thought it was kind of a shame.

        F-150s can be classic collectables if spec’d out right, right? Maybe not like Corvettes, M3s or something but seeing a well preserved example makes it all the more interesting because most do get driven into the ground while Corvettes and M3s not so much.

      • 0 avatar

        “Luke42: F-150s can be classic collectables if spec’d out right, right?”

        Of course they can. And if the figures at auctions are any indication, classic trucks will be the 69 Camaro of the 20-teens.

        Here’s an article on this for edification:

        Outside TTAC’s B&B parallel universe, trucks are steeped in the culture and the classic market is beginning to recognize that in a big way.

      • 0 avatar


        No moral judgement here, but I do think it makes you look like a tool.

        But perhaps something like an Escape with a small trailer would be a better fit for your needs? It’s still one vehicle, it costs much less than an F-150, and gets much better gas mileage — especially with the newer variants. The 3500lb towing capacity allows you to haul much more than you can fit in the bed of your F-150. It’s a high-volume car, so parts and service are readily available. AWD is available for weekending and cases when snow removal isn’t up to snuff. The Escape is also just as easy to park as the Prius.

        Our Prius is our daily driver, but it can’t do everything. Our backup-car is an Escape with a towing package and a trailer. My 3rd vehicle (which is only in my driveway a couple of times a year, but I’m first owner on the paperwork) is an F-150. It’s a wonderful truck,.

        If you want the truck for some non-practical reason, though, that’s your call. If your truck is really about image (just like those BMWs that I decline to own), then you’ve got to realize that the image isn’t universally perceived the way you wish it would be. I’m strongly biased toward just-what-you-need practicality, so I tend to think “who does that guy think he is?!?” when I see a BMW, rather than “wow, who is that guy!”

      • 0 avatar

        “Luke42: F-150s can be classic collectables if spec’d out right, right?”

        Of course they can. And if the figures at auctions are any indication, classic trucks will be the 69 Camaro of the 20-teens.

        Outside TTAC’s B&B parallel universe, trucks are steeped in the culture and the classic market is beginning to recognize that in a big way.

        I didn’t say that, but I’ll engage anyway.

        Don’t most people who spend their time with classic cars spend more time working on it than driving it? Seems like a fine hobby to me.

        My issue is using a giant and massively work-truck as a commuter vehicle. It’s like you’re driving a smart car — but with an extra 10 feet of stuff bolted on to the back and the front. Why bother?

        If you need a truck for work, you’re probably spending too much time towing trailers, hauling lumber, and driving through the mud to keep it clean and/or fix every little dent. I see these trucks in my town. They’re very obviously being used to transport livestock and agricultural products. That’s an excellent use for a big truck, and it’s the right tool for the job. But when you park an actual farm truck (often dented muddy Duallies) or an actual contractor’s truck next to a pristine F-150 Office Worker Edition, the contrast is pretty astounding.

        • 0 avatar

          Careful taking the moral high ground on this topic and calling out the truck drivers; who’s to say that the people driving those pristine F150s aren’t driving far shorter distances than the Prius drivers? I mean, isn’t it worse for a Prius driver to drive his car 75 miles per day than an F150 driver that works a few miles from home?

      • 0 avatar

        @Luke42, sorry about the misattribution. Getting cross-eyed from reading too much TTAC.

      • 0 avatar


        There are times where I would love to have a full-sized truck… picking up drywall or lumber in large quantities for a project, or a mountain of mulch or topsoil. The people who actually use their trucks for work, though, may not be that high a percentage of the number of full-sized pickups in full zoot that get bought. If you had to prove your hard-working bonafides before buying an F-150, Ford probably wouldn’t sell as many of them.

        However, the stats above reveal the known truth that size and weight are the easiest routes to fuel economy. Not surprisingly.

      • 0 avatar

        Hey now, don’t be trashing no Mini’s now! Well, the new one’s are fine, bash away. However the original Mini had so many models it was amazing. The Safari version with the wicker seats and surrey top (with fringe!) was my fave, although the little truck was cool too. Let’s not forget the Mini Moke!

        Even got to drive a BMC tractor once, it had a diesel version of the 948cc Mowog with the same 4-speed syncro box, as well as a 2-speed for the granny low. Coming from a Ford tractor it took a while to get used to being able to downshift on the fly.

      • 0 avatar

        I suppose I am a poseur as a childless guy with no kids driving a wagon? Maybe I was a poseur fo drive a Landcruuser when I had a paved driveway?

        My favorite poseur is the guy with the hybrid who lives miles from work. I mean, if you really care about not burning fuel, can’t you move close to work and walk or ride a bike or bus?

        Seriously, I save no money and little fuel having moved to a wagon with double the mileage. I just drive more highway trips than I used to. I still use less gas than anyone I know. I do regret the trade every month at the lumber yard or Lowes. I have done the math here several times. You can now do it yourself or pay me a consulting fee.

        It’s been proven, a SINGLE truck rental a month costs MORE than can be recovered by economy car use at under 15k per year.

        If you want to change that, it ain’t gonna change by calling people names. It will only change with excessive regulation/taxation or by removal of the existing regulatory and tax schemes we already have. Deal with it, and stop calling people names just because they disagree with you.

    • 0 avatar
      Dave W

      How about a roofing job with a Hyundai?

      Not roofing, but I ran a gardening company out of an Elantra hatchback. More secure tool storage, and better mileage then a truck, even when pulling a trailer with 1.5 yards of mulch or a yard of compost or top soil. Unlike any truck that gets better then 16mpg I didn’t have to reload, or leave behind, tools when hauling bulk stuff.

      Since roofing tools and scaffolding are lighter and somewhat less bulky then gardening stuff, And bulk roofing materials gets delivered by boom truck right to the roof whenever possible, I think I could do it, if I didn’t hate roofing.

    • 0 avatar

      The point of this story, as the article headline suggests, is to bait people into flaming.

      “Want To Save Gas? Don’t Buy American”


      • 0 avatar

        Exactly, if you truly want to save gas you pretty much HAVE to buy American. My Volt uses less gas and costs less to operate than any other car sold in the US today. YMMV, but I go over a thousand miles on a gallon, and don’t spend any on the electricity either. Last year I went 7500 miles and only used 1 gallon before the stuff went stale and my car made me use it and put fresh fuel in. The 3 gallons in it now should last till next August, I may have used 1 gallon by then, or maybe more if some emergency comes up, that’s the beauty of having a choice to use gas or not…

    • 0 avatar
      Phil Ossifer

      thats what TTAC puts out……….. Anti-American B.S.

  • avatar

    Absolutely useless info. As has been previously mentioned, Ford and Chevy numbers are remarkable when considering the huge amount of F series and Silverado/Suburban/Tahoe sales.

    • 0 avatar

      I agree that this ‘story’ is a complete red herring. Each model in a manf’s range needs to stand on its own merits (which are different for different customers) against its competition. Why does it matter what the company’s fleet average MPG is?

      • 0 avatar

        “Why does it matter what the company’s fleet average MPG is?”

        Fuel economy in the USA is regulated by Corporate Average Fuel Economy:

        Those liberals in congress and the presidency have, with my full support( ;-) ), decided to increase the CAFE standard fuel economy over the next few years. So, this list shows us who’s going to have an easy time dealing with the new regulatory environment that car makers will face in the next 5-10 years.

        There are some problems with the new CAFE regulation (the tests that they’re using for legal compliance are older tests that are less realistic).

        These numbers are still very meaningful even though you rightfully point out that they don’t mean what everybody wants to think they mean.

  • avatar

    agreed, this info is fairly useless, it does not take into account # of cars sold and THEN average their usage. garbage.

  • avatar

    Even down to the lower middle range, most of the brands can rightly say that they offer high mileage vehicles for those that want them. But what they can’t do is repeal the laws of physics. High gas mileage is not free – there are trade offs and even with gas headed toward $5.00 a lot of drivers don’t want to make those trade offs.

    • 0 avatar

      What, like not having an overpowered car?

      My last several vehicles have been close to 3000lbs and close to 100hp. That’s honestly enough power for my everyday needs, even for my old Ford Ranger pickup.

      I bought a V6 Escape (mostly because the engine has a timing chain, but also because the I4 Escape is harder to find), and it has way more power than I use on a regular basis. I like the smoothness of the V6, but after the fun-factor of having power that I don’t need wore off, I’d happily trade it for an I4 Escape with a fresh timing belt.

      I wouldn’t make this tradeoff in a weekend fun-car, but I didn’t buy this car for weekend fun. It’s a family truckster that I bought for purely practical reasons, and it doesn’t agree with my taste. In a weekend fun-car, I’d keep the power. But in this stealth-gray ugly-duckling family-truckster, I want low operating costs (which is why I specified the fresh timing belt on the I4 engine).

  • avatar

    “A much better metric than the mileage of a car is the mileage of all cars you sell.”

    That’s a big assumption. If I reject it, then the entire article is hogwash.

    Wouldn’t a better metric be the overall comparison of the vehicles you sell v. competitors in each market segment? If a car-centric company’s cars have worse mpg than Ford’s or Chevy’s (whose overall numbers are dragged down by their trucks), do they really get better mileage?

    We could try grouping class by weight, and if we assume weight is a decent predictor of mileage, we could use that as a metric. First, define the relationship between weight & mpg based on a survey of all products on the market. (E.g., it might look something like mpg = 45 – weight/200 lb.) Then, average each make’s deviation from that curve across all their sales.

    The result will be an indication of which automakers do better/worse than others based on the type of car they sell. Of course, this won’t help companies that get excellent mileage through weight savings. For that, both the above results and the ‘weighted’ results can be compared.

    • 0 avatar
      Twitter: phauser

      I like this idea. Weight/mpg would be a good measure of the overall efficiency of the vehicle’s drivetrain, aerodynamics, etc; but I’d also like to see a stat for interior volume/mpg to show the “utility” of the vehicle (lower number is better). No statistic will be a perfect measure, but it’s always interesting to look at trends.

    • 0 avatar

      I would love to see that chart.

      A scatter-plot with vehicle mass on the X axis, and Gallons/100miles combined EPA rating on the Y axis. Each auto-maker’s points distinguished with a color.

      I bet The Best And Brightest would have a field day with this one. I can make some guesses about the outliers on the small-car end of the spectrum, but I’d be really curious to see what the big-vehicle part of the graph has to say.

  • avatar


    Now – I want to see this same information broken down by the first letter of each model name.

    I bet there is as much to discover doing that, as there is with this list right now.

    I betting on the letter, “J”! I just have a hunch that the greenest, most bestest vehicles are the ones that have model names that begin with the letter “J”!

  • avatar

    I’ll chime in and agree with most other commenters – what’s the point of this? Doing a ranking by class makes sense – ranking a company by fleet average simply reflects the vehicles they offer and who buys them, not necessarily how efficient the vehicles they produce are for their relative utility. You might as well rank companies by how much gas X brand cars consume every year in the USA. Isuzu would probably win!

    • 0 avatar

      Because environment. If you want to regulate emissions while letting manufacturers have free market control over what they produce, you cap their average emissions per vehicle. This type of regulation has a powerful effect if it’s done properly. I’m more familiar with medical/pharmaceutical, but in countries where the total cost of treatment is capped versus regulating the cost of each individual medical device, the regulatory effect can be quite profound. In Germany, prices for surgical devices fell substantially the year their capitated system was introduced.

      • 0 avatar

        This doesn’t have anything to do with emissions because miles are not a constant.

        Framing the discussion as if they were shifts the blame from the end user burning the gas to the faceless scapegoats of “big oil” and “big auto”.

  • avatar

    Worst. Headline. Ever.

    OK, maybe not, but it’s up there. True, if a buyer were to choose a car by blindly picking a vehicle at random from the dealer’s lot, he’d have a better chance at getting decent mpg by eliminating American manufacturers. I’m pretty confident that the number of people who shop like that is exactly zero.

    Also, TrueCar’s number for industry average is somewhat misleading as it is unweighted, so it’s not really representative of the industry as a whole, it’s the average per manufacturer. For instance, if the industry consisted solely of Ford and Smart, and Ford sells a million vehicles that average 20 mpg, and Smart sells ten thousand that get 40 mpg, the industry average would be 20.2 mpg.
    [1,000,000 Fords*20mpg + 10,000 Smarts*40mpg]/1,010,000 vehicles.
    But using TrueCar’s math, it’s 30mpg ([40mpg+20mpg]/2 Brands).
    Both numbers are significant, as long as you understand how they were determined.

    Bashing aside, that’s some interesting data and I’m glad Bertel brought it to our attention.

  • avatar

    People don’t buy the whole manufacturing line-up of any auto company, do they? Highdesercat, CJinSD, or Volt 230 maybe?

    Bertel Schmidt is starting to stand for “BS” with your anti-American auto industry sentiment.

    I’d bet that Torque/MPG GM beats them all!

    • 0 avatar

      I’d give Bertel far more credit than that. From reading his posts, he does work (or has worked?) for Volkswagen, is German, currently lives in Japan, and apparently reads a lot of Chinese car blogs, and writes for an English-language car blog — so there’s no really reason he should favor American cars just because they’re American.

      I do wonder sometimes, though, if Bertel Schmitt is a penname chosen specifically for the initials — it seems like it would mesh with his sense of humor.

      I’m a fan of his posts, even if I do take them with a grain of salt most of the time.

      But you do make a point about people buying individual vehicles, rather than the corporate average fuel consuming vehicle!

  • avatar

    On the bright side Bertel has put more effort in than simply regurgitating a random and typically inconsequential blog post from some Chinese web blog.

    On the down side he did what many journalists do, present the data in such a way as to permit him to generate an attention grabbing headline. No matter that he is required to give praise to Ford and Buick (in direct contradiction to his title) or that the context of the statistics drastically favors low volume producers of small vehicles while penalizing full line producers and ostracizing niche luxury markets. I would expect that many more SMART buyers are concerned with the “Want to save gas?” theme of the title than your average JLR buyer. The data can be significant but in this context it isn’t particularly useful or surprising as others have explained.

    I’m desperately waiting for a Greasemonkey script that auto-hides Bertel’s submissions.

    As for the member who suggested a political slant, I think that’s going a bit far. But if you were to infer that this particular contributor has an affinity for certain Asian producers and prefers to prop them up at the expense of US based firms then you would be correct. It’s an opinion that he is of course entitled to but after a while becomes a bit tedious.

  • avatar

    This is a pretty lame article. Overall MPG has to do with the cars that you sell, or in this case, the trucks that you sell. Go figure that the American brands that sell big SUVs and trucks in large numbers have a worse overall MPG rating. A+ reporting right there.

  • avatar

    All Ford Escape(and Mazda Tribute) 4-cylinder engines from ’05 on had timing chains, not belts. The same 2.3 found in the Fusion, Mazda3, Mazda5, and Mazda6. The last 4-cyl w/timing belt in the Escape was the 2.0 in ’04.

    • 0 avatar

      I was looking in the 2001-2004 category of Escape, because I’m a cheap bastard and don’t mind doing some maintenance.

      Since I couldn’t find anything close to my ideal car, I just went for the cheapest family vehicle that had LATCH and a trailer hitch. A 2002 Ford Escape V6 fit the bill, and there was one for a no-payments price within a 2-hour drive of my house when my wife finally agreed to it.

      I would have pursued a different course of action if my ideal vehicle were on the market.

      • 0 avatar

        Add a ton of efficiency features, though, and suddenly I’m willing to pay more for the vehicle.

        This thing is the “everything the Prius can’t do” vehicle. Prius is a near-perfect daily driver for us, but it doesn’t do everything. Like tow a trailer to the hardware store, for instance.

  • avatar

    “The combined mileage of all cars sold by a manufacturer or brand used to be a top secret document.”

    The EPA reports this information to NHTSA every year. It’s public record.

    It isn’t quite apples to oranges, since CAFE fuel economy measures involve some, er, interesting math that generally overstates the results. But it’s all available for those who are interested.

    And if you want to see who the violators are, then you can also see which companies get fined. Most of them speak with a foreign accent:

  • avatar

    Hyundai only wins by not making trucks, if you look at the segment averages it loses in every segment versus Toyota except the one for which it makes no vehicles.

    • 0 avatar

      You’ve got that wrong. Toyota wins only by making Hybrids. And you didn’t read the full report. In mid-sized SUV’s, where Toyota sells few hybrids, H/K wins. Minivans, where Toyota sells NO hybrids (though H/K sells no I4’s), is also a lose for Toyota. And lastly there’s small car, where Toyota also has no hybrid. Another lose for Toyota.

  • avatar
    George B

    Bertel, the company fuel economy ratings only start to make sense if you show separate averages for light truck and cars. I don’t buy a weighted fleet of cars. I buy cars or trucks individually and the company separate car and truck average relative to separate CAFE requirements helps determine what they can sell to me.

  • avatar

    For those who want sales-weighted data: You are looking at it. A click on the link above would have shown you that the data are sales-weighted.
    For those who want the data according to trucks, cars, large trucks, small cars, midsize cars etc: A click on the link above would give you the desired (but probably likewise unwelcome) data.
    For those who want it (yeah, sure) broken out according to how many miles each car drives: Sorry, don’t have. The price of your subscription doesn’t cover that expense.

    • 0 avatar

      Following your link does show that Ford and GM are making fuel efficient cars. Of the 11 auto-makers listed Ford’s small cars MPG only trailed Toyota. Its mid-sized cars VW, Toyota and Hyundai. Its trucks are the most fuel efficient. Ford’s buyers skew more toward mid sized cars and trucks. GM is a little worse. Chrysler is pretty bad.

  • avatar

    Obviously, a person buying a car looks at individual car mpg ratings. Thus, this ranking is not relevant to that situation.

    But I was wondering, what does a automaker’s overall average mean? These rankings don’t necessarily mean one is working harder to save the environment than another since it is sales rated. A company could make the best mpg car in every class except for millitary-use tanks, and if the only thing customer buy are the tanks, their corporate average will look awful.

    So, sales weighting incorporates public sentiment. I’m sure something insightful can be gathered from it, but I don’t know what that would be.

  • avatar

    If we were serious about helping the environment and bending the curve on climate change, we should tax the full size gas guzzling truck until it bleeds. If you need it for work, then you should be willing to pay the piper.

    It is only lifestyle changes like this, where people are forced to do things they might not want to do, that will allow the US to do something about climate change. The rest is just feel good window dressing. It might be a regressive move, but you will need to have a good reason to guzzle gas. Australia seems to be doing ok as a massive country without full size trucks and with more expensive gas.

    • 0 avatar

      Wow for a pro-car website I’m quite surprised to see a statement like this. Even if I bought into the global warming fraud, I’m for less regulation and taxes than more on general principle. We have thousands of meaningless laws still on the books and hundreds of taxes already upon us in society, taxing even legitimate ‘working trucks’ will only cause price inflation for the services those trucks perform, all while the gov’t coffer pisses more money away on failed endeavors like Solyndra. If we’re going to tax cars, tax obnoxious ones like the Prius, and put the money toward some green fantasy. Libs don’t usually like money taken out of their pockets for dreamy climate change projects, but they’ll be happy to rob those they disagree with lifestyle wise.

      • 0 avatar

        Global warming is not a fraud. It’s a scientific truth. I hope you get the same kick out of calling people who take climate change seriously “Libs”, as you will when the coastal cities vanish under the rising tides, and last forest in the Rocky Mountains succumb to pine beetles, and the wars start over water. I’m sure you’ll enjoy it too, when the Chinese government-funded corporations monopolize the solar cell industry, since our Solyndra-not getting nearly the back the Chinese gave their own companies–failed.

        I’m sure your hero Rush will give you more to cheer about even as our economy collapses.

  • avatar

    Want to really save gas?

    Buy a Bianchi, Trek, Giant, GT, Specialized…etc.


    a good pair of walking shoes.

  • avatar

    Go Jeep! My lifted Jeep gets 12 to 14 mpg… depending upon which way the wind is blowing. In July I’m driving it out west for a camping/ Jeep trip. Driving it 3,000 miles is going to be expensive. But the rest of the year, my DD is a Civic. (laugh)

    • 0 avatar

      Way to use each vehicle for it’s best purpose!

      My Civic is currently out somewhere being a loaner while we have relatives visiting. (I had to run out and show them how to change the NAV to exclude freeways just now.) I get around 15-19 MPG with my Silverado C1500, but after 15 years, it still has yet to reach 50K on the odo.

  • avatar

    Just happened to think about this. Could Ford doing so well in improvement be down to the new v-6 hair dryer equipped engine in their pickups?

    If I was to guess, that would be a likely reason for their improvement.

    The big trucks are American car companies downfall here, not individual vehicles.

    • 0 avatar


      While Toyota may be doing better, that’s because us truck owners laugh at their “offering”. (The Tundra with questionable frame and engine, and a mid-size pickup that guzzles more than a fullsize – and oh, tops out around 38K.)

      Toyota seems to make money on their cars, because there are lots of “kool-aid drinkers” who still believe the hype about their supposed reliability. Won’t change this guy’s mind, who’s had two ‘yota piles of junk.

      However, it’s almost a sport bashing domestic cars, even though they’ve made remarkable progress. Fine example is TTAC itself: The “new” Yaris does poorly on EVERY mark. Yet it’s still acceptable. The Sonic is “getting up there”, even though it beats the ‘yota in pretty much every department.

      • 0 avatar

        Toyota gets the benefit of the doubt for their 3 decades treating the Big 3 like their personal whipping boys.

        How many times over the years have the domestics come up with some halfway competitive car to let it fester or fail to improve it?

        The Sonic may look good now, but the better bet is on the reliability that Toyota is known to provide.

        • 0 avatar

          You mean this from 2011?
          Recalls – Sales
          Honda / Acura 3,800,000 – 1,147,000
          Toyota 3,500,000 – 1,644,000
          Ford 3,300,000 – 2,143,000
          Chrysler 773,000 – 1,369,114
          Subaru 591,752 – 266,989
          Hyundai 503,418 – 645,691
          General Motors 500,000 – 2,503,000

          Recalls include models back to 2001.

    • 0 avatar

      I have to agree with that. Not many import companies are tackling the task of heavy duty pickups (The Ridgeline doesn’t count as it’s a V6 FWD/AWD model). Toyota definitely has a gem with the Tundra (it’s built much like a Ford, ie real truck). And Ford offering the EcoBoost V6 to their pickups is really helping the mileage factor. I’m pretty sure I see more EcoBoost F150s than old fashioned 5.0 V8. I already know the 5.0 is bulletproof and has stood the test of time, but those V6s sell like hotcakes. I’m still hesitant about buying one though.

  • avatar

    I think people forget America has some crazy weather and driving conditions all across the country , we don’t just have sun all the time , we have 12ft of snow , massive flooding , Twisters , hail , Rain , Mountains . We have more to deal with then any other place on earth . When was the last time you see a Smart car go off road in the backwoods of Ky? A lot of places need a V8 just to get around and Miles Per Gallon takes a back seat .

    • 0 avatar

      I disagree that a V8 is anything more than an expensive paperweight when it comes to off-roading. Steep roads that were smooth as glass for decades have been destroyed, turned into washboards full of ruts by over-powered 4X4’s. A ’44 4 cylinder Jeep can easily negotiate the washboards without spinning any wheels, something the over powered versions have trouble with, in fact they are the reason for the washboards in the first place. Being unable to control the power is what causes wheel spin.

      Sometimes getting up a hill is all about NOT using too much power, just letting the low gear do it’s job. Less is often more…

  • avatar

    I wonder how much of the average improvement is due to direct injection?

  • avatar

    A couple of things to point out;

    I don’t think, firstly, anyone is disappointed or surprised at the Land Rover performance. When your core product is available only with a 5.0 litre V8 with or without a supercharger, you’re not really trying to challenge Smart.

    Secondly, your posts always interest me, Bertel. I’m not American so I don’t take offence, but it is highly noticeable that they always seem to have some anti American(or, more usually anti GM) bias.

  • avatar

    LOL @the guy who thinks 140k is a lot of miles on a car.

  • avatar

    As I see it, this is a very basic informational chart that depicts something we already know. Americans, because we’re individually based over society based, believe that gas mileage is not that big a factor in buying a car. We all know that there are plenty of ‘Muricans with Napoleon complexes that just cant be seen in a small car and that bigger is always better and why buy the base engine when you can get a Hemi?

    Not picking on Dodge, they are only selling what they believe, through focus groups and real-world consumer base, the American customer will buy. Sometimes they get it wrong as with the GMC Enovy XUV or Pontiac Axtek or Mercury Cougar (post millenial). I myself cannot shame the fat-a** in the Suburban to get out of his truck that’s burbling in line at the DQ getting horrific mileage and polluting the air around him. I do relish watching his expression at the gas pump when my Saturn Astra burps it’s full at 10 gallons and his ‘Burban is still sucking down another week’s pay.

  • avatar

    TTAC this has to be one of the most ridiculous articles you’ve ever posted, seriously, you just hurt your reputation for posting it. (insert face-palm image)

  • avatar

    That Jeep mpg is too high.

  • avatar

    The logic of this article is stunning. Might as well say “Want to save money? Don’t hire a man” and then show all the attendant statistics that demonstrate gender pay inequity.

    Logic. Not your forté.

  • avatar

    Funny now that the Korean gas mileage champs are now Korean fraud champs! ROFL!

  • avatar

    So the Chevy Cruze Eco 42 highway MPG is worse on gas than the Toyota Corolla 34 highway. The 4WD 5.3 V8 Silverado/Siera 21 highway are worse than the Tundra 5.7 17 highway? Even the Sonic turbo at 40 highway is better than any Yaris or Fit. Even the much maligned Colorado 4 door pickup with the optional 5 cylinder at 21 highway is better than the Tacoma’s 19 rating with the V6 engine. Ford posts similar high numbers with there Fiesta/Focus of up to 40 highway. The hybrid is what is totally carrying Toyota’s fleet average and that isn’t representative of the whole. And lets see what happens when the lies over at Hyundai result in re-adjusted/lowered MPG ratings on several of there main stream vehicles.

    • 0 avatar

      Our Cruze got about 48 mpg out on our the last 1000 mi trip although on the way back it got 40… slightly down hill vs. up hill. You cannot get that turbo going much to get that mileage, but that’s a lot of fun. It matches our friend’s old Civic hybrid with the infamous manual combo. That Civic is on its third HV batt btw. Yike$.

  • avatar

    As I type this, I am LEGALLY DRUNK which entitles me to ask a stupid question. I’m drunk on a Sunday Night, you ask? Hey, I used to crack the books EARLY when I was a youngun’, so naturally, when it comes to my drinkin…

    Anyways, During WWII (You know, the big one? The one President Nixon freed the slaves?!!!), America used to force American air craft and auto companies to Collaberate. [No, you ain’t putting that Allison in the P-51, you’re putting in a Limie Rolls Royce Merlin and kicking Heine Heine!!!] Why can’t we do that with Automobile ENGINES today? Does anyone REALLY CARE if their Jimmy is really a GMC under the hood? I don’t and I guess 99% of Americans don’t.

    So why doesn’t the government hold a contest that whoever submitts the winning engine for the class (SUV, TRUCK, SubCompact) gets 4 years TAX FREE plus royality cheques every year from those American Car Companies FORCED to build their engines? Why does EACH car have to have its own kind of battery or its own kind of wiper or its own kind of XYZ? Why can’t everything be standardized? Why can’t the Government use its rocket scientist to build a Modern, Fossel Fueled Internal Combustion Engine that get 100 miles a gallon regular or that gets 100 mpg Diesel (no soot)? You know, where we all hold hands and sing Kum Bah Ya, My Lord?

    I drove (rental) the Dodge 1500 Ram from Ft Benning to ATL & back at a sipping 11mpg!!! I l-o-v-e-d the cushy feel of that truck (almost car like) but 11mpg, my God?!!! Why isn’t there a gas guzzling tax of wasteful designs like that. OK, call me a Tree Hugger but why should I support the stupidity of people who’ll put a four tyre split axel on a Ram 1500 Crew Cab so that they ‘can look cool/coolio?!!

  • avatar

    There is a greater problem though that is more to do with changing a consumer mindset, which is hindered by the manufacturers not offering suitable alternatives to their consumers and also the price paid for fuel.

    In Europe as of now (09/04/2013) the price for a US gallon of leaded fuel is $7.97 and diesel $8.40, if the US was affected by these prices, manufacturers would have no choice but to offer more fuel efficient cars.

    My comparison is this, let’s take the Ford Focus available pretty much worldwide, but lets compare European Ford Focus engine availability to US engine availability.

    European Available Ford Focus Engines

    Petrol Engines———BHP-CO2/KM-MPG–MAX-0>62MPH
    1.0 EcoBoost———-100—109–58.9—115—-12.5
    1.0 EcoBoost———-125—114–56.5—120—-11.3
    1.6 Duractec Ti-VCT—-105—136–47.9—116—-12.3
    1.6 Duractec Ti-VCT—-125—149–44.1—120—-11.7
    1.6 EcoBoost———-150—137–47.9—130—-8.6
    1.6 EcoBoost———-182—137–47.9—139—-7.9

    Diesel Engines
    1.6 Duratorq TDCi——095—109–67.3—112—-12.5
    1.6 Duratorq TDCi——105—088–83.1—116—-11.8
    1.6 Duratorq TDCi——105—099–76.4—116—-11.8
    1.6 Duratorq TDCi——115—109–67.3—120—-10.9
    2.0 Duratorq TDCi——140—124–57.7—129—-8.9
    2.0 Duratorq TDCi——140—134–54.3—127—-9.5
    2.0 Duratorq TDCi——163—124–57.7—135—-8.6
    2.0 Duratorq TDCi——163—134–54.3—134—-8.9

    US Available Ford Focus Engines

    Petrol Engines
    2.0L Ti-VCT GDI I-4—–160——–33
    2.0L Ti-VCT GDI I-4 PZEV-160——–33
    2.0L GTDI EcoBoost I-4—252——–26

    Diesel Engines

    Now the Europeans have vastly more options to choose from, and if we compare fuel economy between European and US available engines it’s day and night. The worst European engine gives 44.1 MPG whereas the worst US engine gives 26 MPG; the best European engine gives 83.1 and the best US (excluding electric) gives 33 MPG.

    I appreciate that the US has yet to adopt the diesel engine in their cars as they see it as the preserve of “big rigs” and not family cars, also there is the infrastructure to take into account, in that filling stations are more set up to serve petrol rather than diesel.

    US cars are getting better in terms of economy, but they are still miles behind what is actually available, I would hope that the average American would jump at these engines if they were available in the US, please correct me if I’m mistaken.

    • 0 avatar

      Ahh, bit by the UK Gallon were you?
      UK pints were 20 Oz, vs. US 16 Oz., so US gallon (8 pints) is 128 Oz vs UK 160 Oz. Multiply those MPG’s by 0.8 to get US MPG. Still, smaller engines do get better mileage.

      Odd that they are still using MPG while using metric measurements everywhere else, except the odd sign in little backwater villages that says something like “Prepare to Stop in 300 Yards”.

  • avatar

    What I find most interesting and unmentioned is that among luxury brands, just below industry average, is Audi at 22 mpg. Why you ask? Probably 98% of the Audi cars sold in the US are full time four wheel drive. Land Rover and Jeep are toward or at the bottom of this list. Only Subaru, a non-luxury brand exceeds Audi. So, maybe the sales pitch, “Truth in Engineering”, actually means something here.

  • avatar

    According to the EPA, Ford’s Ecoboost line has shown noticeable improvements – but in the real world (with hills, stop-and-go driving, etc.) “small engines pulling heavy vehicles” isn’t working out as well as Ford touts; the Ecoboost I4’s are less fuel efficient than DI engines of larger displacement. And (as mentioned by one of the B&B) their hybrids were *dramatically* overrated for MPG.
    So, was the DOE loan money well spent? Well, if it was for EPA ratings for Ford, then yes; but for actual fuel consumption?

  • avatar

    Porsche has some polar opposites in fuel economy. The Boxster, Cayman and 911 get good economy. The GT3, turbo models and fugly Cayenne are what puts it down the bottom end.

  • avatar

    Opel in Germany has a very cool sliding-into-the-bumper bicycle rack on many of its models. This brilliant idea saves getting a trailer hitch installed and getting a rack, in addition to improved security and appearance.

    See how it works here:

  • avatar

    Very poor title for this story. I thought some camel jockey was telling us to buy our gas and oil from Arab infidels rather than using petroleum products from our own country. We have made our worst enemies rich, and become dependent upon them by our dependence on foreign oil. A century ago, electric and steam-powered cars ran rings around gasoline cars. Today, we can’t build them half as well as our ancestors did. We’ve put our priorities in the wrong place, and we argue about the wrong things.

    But back to the matter at hand: I try to buy all my gasoline from Hess, because they are one of the few gas stations using domestic petroleum (their gas comes from their own oilfields in Louisiana). I won’t use one drop of Muslim oil if I can help it. Not one cotton-pickin’ drop.

    • 0 avatar

      Thanks for the info about Hess. I never realized that they use domestic oil. I think everyone should pay more attention to what they’re buying and the global impact it has. I’ve been trying to use top tier gasoline that has excellent detergents and is quality gas. You wouldn’t believe all the crap that is added to gasoline, and I’m not just talking about ethanol. Pay a little extra and help your neighbor down the street. I’m trying to do that more than ever now. I hope everyone tries to do the same.

  • avatar

    I’m sorry, but I don’t let gas mileage determine what kind of vehicle I get. If you haven’t noticed, gas mileage doesn’t make that much of a difference if you consider the entire picture of actual vehicle costs of ownership. Insurance, repairs, maintenance, and fuel mileage make up all the pieces of the puzzle. I’d rather have an older gas guzzler that costs a few hundred dollars to repair every year than a new car with hundreds of computer systems and pay thousands to repair those systems (the more sensors you have, the more likely they are to break and they are expensive). America has lost our sense of dignity since we let gas mileage rule our opinions of cars. And let me remind you, America was the country that had a business man make the ownership of automobiles affordable and possible at the turn of the 20th century.

  • avatar

    What a completely flawed piece of “research”. How is this drivel even permitted on TTAC, anyways?

    Of course Toyota and Hyundai will be at the top. Toyota only sells a few thousand Tundra’s a year, versus how many F-150’s and Silverado’s?

    Either compare segment-to-segment, adjusted for volume of sale, or stop posting rubbish, inflammatory articles like this one…

  • avatar

    “You, Sir, are a usefully idiotic pawn of the Chinese government and a despicable fetishist of rubber pleasure devices.”

    That is a disturbing enough statement but should it should read “You, Sir, are a usefully idiotic pawn of the Chinese government and a despicable fetishist of rubber pleasure devices and life-sized cardboard cutouts of Lee Iacocca in the nude.”

    These new binoculars are awesome.

  • avatar

    Ford was rescued. They wouldn’t have survived GM or possibly even Chrysler dying. They would have had poorer terms on credit if they hadn’t had the implicit guarantee that the feds would bail them out.

    They didn’t have to actually take direct payments from the government to make money on it. Every company that manufactures cars in the US or used the same suppliers as GM and Chrysler benefited.

  • avatar

    So TTAC is now hiding behind those experts at Consumer Reports. ROFL.

    The Cherokee is a world car where that 9th gear will get used on the Autobahn, Autostrada, the wilds of Texas, that lonely stretch of I20 between Atlanta and Augusta, the Australian outback, Saudi Arabia and the rest of the world.

    TTAC continues to tell everyone that American vehicles get bad gas mileage when a Pentastar Ram gets 100 more miles per tank of gas than a V6 Tundra!

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • 96redse5sp: Lol at “re-education program”. Matt Posky can’t help himself. He has to bring politics into all his...
  • DrivenToMadness: I’m in the automotive semiconductor business and I can assure you the supply problem is NOT...
  • Al: I need to grab those doors for my Sbarro Windhound!
  • SnarkIsMyDefault: Norm, Naked or S model? And what’s your old SVRider name? (Not to go off topic or...
  • Lightspeed: I fell in love with these when I visited Ankara and Istanbul and went for a lot of harrowing cab rides in...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber