Is automobile technology going backwards...

[kemper]

I was watching a (terrible) car review show this morning, with the host babbling on about how wonderful the Chevy Cruze is on gas so I figured I would look up the specs and see how it compares to my old 2000 Honda Civic.

 

Here it is:

 

2011 Chevy Cruze Base:

1.8L I4

138 hp @ 6300 rpm

125 lb-ft @ 3800 rpm

 

36 mpg Highway

25 mpg City

 

0-60MPH - ~10 seconds

 

2000 Honda Civic EX :

1.6L I4

106 hp @ 6200 RPM

103 lb-ft @ 4600 RPM

 

36 mpg Highway

30 mpg City

 

0-60MPH - ~9.5 seconds

 

Am I missing something here? Did it really take us 11 years to accomplish a nicer paint job and less rust?

 

Oh ya, and my actual fuel consumption on a tank (mostly highway) is 6.2L/100km which is 37.94MPG

 

Just a thought.

Edited October 18, 2011 by kemper

[mercman]

Fuel efficiency aside, I am living (literally) proof that they have made leaps and bounds in terms of vehicle safety.

 

I agree with you.Safety and comfort has ben vastly improved upon, but performance and economy has taken a step backwards.

[Terry]

yeah but in many cases they have upped the HP

 

and with even tighter environmental regs..which in most cases lower fuel economy .......

it's a balancing act

 

 

or

I have now idea what I am talking about and just like to post a lot...LOL

[Headhunter]

We are definately, IMHO, moving backwards when you consider that most if not all parts used to make cars these days are sourced from off-shore.

Also, consider how long our vehicles are expected to "live" today, compared to yester year.

I bet I could buy a 1980 Caddie with little or no trouble...try and find a 80 Toyota or Honda!

HH

[Headhunter]

The same could be said, in the opposite direction, about the year 2000

I'm pretty sure that I could easily source a 2000 Caddie!

HH

[Headhunter]

It's a well know fact that the major north american builders have been the innovators in this industry... and the N/A builder's top of the line vehicles (Caddie, Lincoln) always brought new technology to the market... the off-shore builders simply copied them.

Funny, but it seems that recently, we've seen more and more recalls from the off-shore builders so they to, are being bit by the cheap parts makers as well.

HH

[cuzza]

I agree with you.Safety and comfort has ben vastly improved upon, but performance and economy has taken a step backwards.

 

All that safety stuff is heavy, heavier car = more energy required to move it. Engine technology is much better than it was, to get the same performnace from a 1990s car weighing the same as a 2012 car you'd get much worse fuel economy, there's about a 600lb difference between a 2000 Civic and a 2011 Cruze

 

It's a well know fact that the major north american builders have been the innovators in this industry... and the N/A builder's top of the line vehicles (Caddie, Lincoln) always brought new technology to the market... the off-shore builders simply copied them.

 

Not so much North American companies any more - the European market is probably the most competitive (including the Euro arms of Ford and GM) and is where the bulk of the innovation happens especialy by BMW, Merc, VW. A good proportion of the lineups from the North American manufacturers have been switchjed to use European models that have been softened up e.g. the Ford Fiesta has been around forever in Europe

Edited October 18, 2011 by cuzza

[kemper]

Yep, I figured that it would turn into a domestic vs. the world bashing, believe me that was not my intention I just happened to be comparing my car against another.

 

If we really want to go down that road, my old man's 2006 CTS has been in since new to repair the following:

 

right rear wheel bearing (90,000 km)

left rear wheel bearing (110,000 km)

completely seized steering rack (95,000 km)

Two misfires (both from toasted igniters) (~140, 000km)

Toast catalytic convertor (from the raw fuel that was pouring through the exhaust because of the misfires)

Passenger seat airbag sensor

Blown brake line in the rear

 

 

And the latest gem, and exploded tranny fluid line leading into the rad... which blew with such force that it covered the entire engine bay AND the windshield. This is a $65k car that has not ever managed to make it more than 30,000 without a costly repair. I bought my old Honda for $3 grand, and the last 40,000 km have been completely 100% trouble free, still running strong at 215,000km.

 

My Honda gets an oil change once every three months... I bet my dad's mechanic LOVES to see the Cadillac rolling in to the shop.\

 

 

Edit - I should add that in the new car sector, there is limited quality across the board

Edited October 18, 2011 by kemper

[hammercarp]

I agree with you.Safety and comfort has ben vastly improved upon, but performance and economy has taken a step backwards.

Comfort? I drove a rented Chevy Cruz or should I say tried to drive it. I took it back. Simply horrendous. No matter how I adjusted the seat and the steering wheel. You had to stop 75m from a light in order to see it. This stupid idea of slanting the angle of the bottom of the side window frame. Try and parallel park and it will drive you batty. You always end up crooked because it screws up your perspective.

I drove the Chev Impala as well and it was almost as bad. No view at all in the rear view mirror because of the gigantic ass end sticking up in the air. You step on the gas and all it does is make noise and does not accelerate until the pedal is 3/4s of the way to the floor. These guys forgot how to build cars.

[blaque]

This is a $65k car

 

CTS-V i take it?

[mercman]

yeah but in many cases they have upped the HP

 

and with even tighter environmental regs..which in most cases lower fuel economy .......

it's a balancing act

 

 

or

I have now idea what I am talking about and just like to post a lot...LOL

 

 

Post on big guy, you make me smile

[craigdritchie]

You have to look at the bigger picture.

 

That 2011 Chevy most likely has a lot more bells and whistles in it than the 2000 Honda does. Pretty much everyone expects air conditioning as a standard feature today, and that was not the case with a 2000 Honda Civic (it was a $1,300 option). We all expect bells and whistles like power windows and locks, remote keyless entry, a nice stereo, etc etc etc. We all want the new safety features, like multiple air bags and I-beams in the doors and ABS brakes and all kinds of other stuff that helps keep us alive in a collision - none of that stuff was found in the 2000 Honda Civic. I know because my ex drove one.

 

End result - I would bet the 2011 Chevy probably weighs a bit more than the 2000 Honda, which is why even with more engine power, it's still delivering about the same fuel economy.

 

Oh - and let's not forget, here we are 11 years later and in spite of continually rising costs, the retail price of a car hasn't changed all that much. In 2000 a decent economy car cost about $20k, and it still does today - in spite of having all that extra stuff in it.

 

Look at the big picture and I think auto technology is moving forward quite nicely.

[Skipper D]

The worlds mad , KNOW WHY ? To many people in it . Every bodys right and your wrong . I can't wait to get off .

[kemper]

You have to look at the bigger picture.

 

That 2011 Chevy most likely has a lot more bells and whistles in it than the 2000 Honda does. Pretty much everyone expects air conditioning as a standard feature today, and that was not the case with a 2000 Honda Civic (it was a $1,300 option). We all expect bells and whistles like power windows and locks, remote keyless entry, a nice stereo, etc etc etc. We all want the new safety features, like multiple air bags and I-beams in the doors and ABS brakes and all kinds of other stuff that helps keep us alive in a collision - none of that stuff was found in the 2000 Honda Civic. I know because my ex drove one.

 

End result - I would bet the 2011 Chevy probably weighs a bit more than the 2000 Honda, which is why even with more engine power, it's still delivering about the same fuel economy.

 

Oh - and let's not forget, here we are 11 years later and in spite of continually rising costs, the retail price of a car hasn't changed all that much. In 2000 a decent economy car cost about $20k, and it still does today - in spite of having all that extra stuff in it.

 

Look at the big picture and I think auto technology is moving forward quite nicely.

 

I see what you are saying, I guess my point was given the technological advances we have made in other areas it is surprising that I can't expect bells and whistles PLUS better economy.

 

Also, my civic has air conditioning, power windows and locks, a surprisingly decent stereo, multiple air bags and ABS. Again...just thinking out loud

[Jer]

I see what you are saying, I guess my point was given the technological advances we have made in other areas it is surprising that I can't expect bells and whistles PLUS better economy.

 

 

 

 

In the last eleven years, besides mostly silly communication devices and TVs, I don't think we've had that many extraordinary technological advances.

[Raf]

Cars are getting heavier and heavier. They do more of the driving for you, systems like Traction Control, Active Steering, christ they can park themselves now. I personally don't like it all, I want a driver's car - Lighter, raw, manual transmission and RWD.

Edited October 18, 2011 by Raf

[kemper]

Cars are getting heavier and heavier. They do more of the driving for you, systems like Traction Control, Active Steering, christ they can park themselves now. I personally don't like it all, I want a driver's car - Lighter, raw, manual transmission and RWD.

 

 

Agreed Raf, although my civic has about the same horsepower as a common housefly if you really wind it up you can have a bit of fun. I can't see myself in a tech-loaded automatic unless my knees give out and I'm 22 so I have lots of time to enjoy the drive. Only problem is I'm going to have to keep buying older cars, because true drivers cars are quickly going the way of the Dodo. That said, the new 911 Turbo looks pretty raw...

[Kingsalmon]

All of us in North American are brainwashed that what we have here are "fuel efficient" cars. Fifteen years ago, my uncle in europe had an Opel corsa diesel that was similar to a Honda Civic. THis thing would average 3-4 litres per 100/km and he still has this car today. That is fuel efficient. I went to Austria four years ago and rented a van for seven people and lots of luggage. When I got there they had a brand new Opel Vivaro that had nine seats and loads of luggage room. It looked like a box, but heck, it drove like a sedan. It had a turbo diesel engine and had plenty of guts. I put 3500 km on the thing over three weeks and filled it up three times. Our last day before the vehicle return I was fooling around with the guages and stumbled upon the trip computer. Over the three weeks I burned an average of 8.8 litres per 100 km and this is autobahn driving upto 180 km/h, mountain driving, city driving, basically everything. I was amazed. This thing is bigger than the Chevy Express/GMC Savana and burns less than half the fuel! Where can I get one in Canada? The answer is: I can't. And probably never will, because we are forced to believe that fuel efficient vehicles are years away. That is Bull!. THe fact is that there are fuel efficient vehicles all over the world but in North America. Why I don't know, but it probably has something to do with government/oil companies/ auto companies conspiracies.

[kickingfrog]

Remember how much better we think we were the older we get?

 

Today's cars in general are better, in just about every way that matters, then yesterdays cars. Sure you can pick one aspect of a current veihicle that you don't like compared to an old favourite but there is a reason a car's value plummets as it gets older. My dad drove a lot of great cars in the 50's and 60's. All of them were fast, none of them could stop for poop and most didn't handle curves all that well. He loved talkin' about them, but he said his current car was lightyears better then those cars he grew up with.

[Rod Caster]

 

 

Edit - I should add that in the new car sector, there is limited quality across the board

 

2009 corolla xrs. 110 000kms. 3 sets of melted tires (love the ebrake) and not a single problem other than trucks backing into it. This is also the first year of a new model too. Here is your winner.

 

Like others said, the safety features. Have added a lot of weight. And have you noticed that cars get bigger with every model change... Hence the honda fit replaces the civic

[Moosebunk]

My dad's Terrain emails him once a month to let him know where he's going in life. Cause, it knows when he doesn't.

 

Backwards Technology... sadly, only when it comes time to take the car to the shop for a two day lobotomy at $90/hr.

 

The robots are winning and I'm not sure when it'll happen or if it already has, but I think... I could be... in the Matrix!

[mbosh1980]

I'm in a Matrix XR and like it fine...looking at an FJ though.

[Tybo]

Over the last ten years they have made leaps and bounds.You can't compare a 2000 to a 2010.

the electrical system the engine and tranny's are all different.For the most part they don't even use the same fluids.

[BillM]

Agreed Raf, although my civic has about the same horsepower as a common housefly if you really wind it up you can have a bit of fun. I can't see myself in a tech-loaded automatic unless my knees give out and I'm 22 so I have lots of time to enjoy the drive. Only problem is I'm going to have to keep buying older cars, because true drivers cars are quickly going the way of the Dodo. That said, the new 911 Turbo looks pretty raw...

 

MKVI Golf TDI. More hp and trq then your Civic, much safer, way better interior (ie it doesn't sound like a tin can when you shut the door) and get's better mileage.

 

Lot's of fun to drive as well

 

There are options out there, you just need to look.

[danc]

2009 corolla xrs. 110 000kms. 3 sets of melted tires (love the ebrake) and not a single problem other than trucks backing into it. This is also the first year of a new model too. Here is your winner.

 

 

A one year old vehicle without a problem and you're calling it a winner? My '96 F150 has had a new starter, tie rod end, and brakes since new. Now that's a winner.