5th Oct 2009, 11:37
First of all, moving close to work is not always an option. My wife and I work about 35 miles apart so one of us has to commute. In a perfect world there would be the exact job you qualify for (and get for that matter) right next door. Wake up, the dream is only a dream!
Also, here the housing is so much more expensive as you get closer to the city, where the good jobs are, and mass transit doesn't really cover all areas too well. Plus, if everyone lived right in or near the business districts where most jobs are concentrated, you wouldn't be able to move. That would be a fun life! I drive with an average of around 33 mpg, so it isn't too bad overall.
The argument that gets me is that you are using less fuel because you only drive your gas guzzler short distances. To me that still doesn't make sense. If you told me you use it for trips on weekends, and needed the extra space for travel, that would make more sense to me. Just doing short jaunts around town would make me want a small efficient car more. You admit you don't use the car much so why use a wasteful one at all? You can still get a pretty economical car that has enough room for most weekend projects and such and still gets over twice what you get now for mileage. Truthfully, what 12 mpg SUV is really all that fun to drive anyhow? Okay the SRT8 Jeep maybe... but not around town!
10th Oct 2009, 11:39
This is a very good point. Housing near your job is not always an option. With that said, you also don't have to opt for a silly-looking (and overpriced) Smart car that is unsafe and gets only marginally better mileage than a real car, or a dangerous and expensive hybrid with the highly toxic and environmentally hazardous batteries.
My wife drives about 15 miles one-way to work. She has an SUV that gets decent mileage, but wanted a more sensible car for better mileage and other long-range driving needs. In January she bought a used Ford Fusion I-4 for only $12,000. It is very nice, with leather and most options Ford offers. It had barely 18,000 miles on it. After switching to full synthetic oil and a K&N high-flow air filter the car gets a consistent 29mpg average and on the freeway with the cruise set on 60 it gets a phenomenal 38mpg. This is better than some hybrids at a fraction of the cost. In addition, it is a very comfortable car with more than adequate power for any driving need. It has been an excellent compromise for her.
11th Oct 2009, 20:20
"With that said, you also don't have to opt for a silly-looking (and overpriced) Smart car that is unsafe and gets only marginally better mileage than a real car, or a dangerous and expensive hybrid with the highly toxic and environmentally hazardous batteries."
I never said I did opt for any car like that.
I have a Focus that gets 33 mpg every day, has leather seats, sync, and all the extras I need and I got it for about $3,000 below retail out the door. highway mileage would probably be close to 40 if I went 60... however at 75 it stays around 35.
12th Oct 2009, 12:12
What turbo 4 gives you twice the mileage of any V8? I had a WRX 2.0 and it was averaging maybe 23 or 24 mpg. My last Mustang V-8 got around 18-20 mpg in town and upwards of 27 mpg on the highway. In addition to that... most, if not all, turbos take super unleaded and a Mustang runs perfectly fine on 87 octane so the cost difference will eat up any advantage you have in gas mileage. I personally would rather have the extra 90+ hp and no turbo lag for basically the same operating costs.
Don't get me wrong... I loved the WRX, but it was no Mustang in performance. Took a lot of strain on the engine and transmission to even try to keep up with any Mustang. At its best, beating the heck out of it, you could get maybe a 5.9 second 0-60 run... but that was really beating on it. Even a 5.0 Mustang does 0-60 in about 6.2 seconds without really hammering the car that much comparatively. The WRX was also a pretty lousy handling car with the stock tires they used on them. I never swapped them for better tires so I am not sure how much that would improve the cars abilities. The WRX was great in the snow though, and I loved not having to put it away for the winters like my Mustangs.
25th Nov 2009, 16:57
"What turbo 4 gives you twice the mileage of any V8?" I'd have to say "MOST of them". My last two V-8 Mustangs averaged between 11 and 14 mpg. My Nephew's Dodge turbo 4 averages well over 25.
7th Dec 2009, 11:20
We continue to enjoy our Mustang, but if Ford doesn't offer a softer suspension in 2011, we are opting for something else. The Mustang is reliable, fun and gets lots of approving looks, but we are tired of having to have the fillings replaced in our teeth every time we drive our Mustang. The Fusion we just sold handled great, was fun to drive and rode VERY smoothly. If Ford made a Fusion coupe, I'd have jumped at one of those.
Also, since Ford has stopped offering the Mustang in sporting colors, that will be yet another reason to look at GM or Chrysler's offerings. Both the Camaro and Challenger come in sporty colors, as a sporty car should. If I wanted Granny gray I'd buy a Buick.
7th Dec 2009, 16:54
Don't you buy a sports car for a sporty ride? Why would you want a soft and sloppy handling Mustang? They did that in the old Fox body 4 cylinder models and they were not at all fun to drive. The GT has a nice taught suspension but it hardly shakes the fillings out of your teeth when you drive it. A little overdramatic aren't you? I'm thinking you should just stick to the Fusion and be done with it. You can get the Sport model and have lots more fun in a quicker car than your Mustang that still has a non-filling loosening ride.
Next year's 3.7 litre V-6 at 305 hp should finally give the V-6 Mustang a good entry level offering. It is way past due for them to retire that old Explorer based 4.0 litre! The grating sound of that engine is probably what is shaking your fillings loose.
8th Dec 2009, 11:09
Why can't people get it that MOST people buy cars for the styling, NOT the ride or power. That's why 66% of Mustangs sold are 6's. Some of us prefer a sporty car that has a DECENT ride. I don't race. I drive on city streets with speed limits and laws prohibiting drifting around corners. I hate bone-jarring rides. Going over a railroad crossing in our Mustang is an experience in lower spinal dislocation. I love the car's looks. I HATE the car's ride. If Ford doesn't offer a softer ride in the 2011, I'll be looking at the better riding Camaro or better still Challenger.