New PT cruiser

Just bought a new PT under the cash for clunkers program. Great deal for such a versatile vehicle. Only thing I don't like is the lousy gas mileage for it's power/size. Great ride, very quiet, comfortable, AC works good and it has a LIGHT color interior instead of the SO boring medium and dark charcoal that seems to be just about the only thing available in most vehicles these days. I really didn't think I was going to like it very much but I've been very pleasantly surprised.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher
Loading thread data ...

and your mileage?

Reply to
rob

Well I and all the other tax payers must certainly apologize for that. We were told that the purpose of taking my money to help pay for your car was to put fuel efficient vehicles out there. If we had know it wasn't going to get better mileage, we wouldn't have allowed them to take our money for that.

Oh wait! They never asked our permission in the first place, so our bad. You're welcome.

The whole thing was a fraud. Guess what the "official" mileage for my '85 Ford 150 was stated as by the program's sponsored web site. Try 21 mpg (or was it 22? - I forget but doesn't matter). Anyone who ever owned one will tell you that it wouldn't even get 13 on a good day.

Again - you're welcome.

Reply to
Bill Putney

It does get better, just not a whole lot better.

Thanks. If it wasn't me it would have been someone else. Might as well be me!!! I don't write the laws.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

Looks like I can figure on 22 mpg for my mostly commuting use. If it was all city it looks like it would be closer to 19. All highway perhaps 25 on a long trip. Pretty close to what the EPA estimates are.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

That's what a looter says to himself. :)

Might as

I know - my comments weren't aimed at you personally.

Reply to
Bill Putney

Same here Bill. I was thinking of getting rid of my 2001 Cruiser in the Cash for Clunkers program. New plugs, wires, KN air filter, still terrible mileage. Feds said city/highway average mpg is 19. I filled the Cruiser, took a 90 mile trip on an Interstate, filled the tank and got 16.9 mpg. So I'm stuck with my clunker.

Reply to
Pete E. Kruzer

The looter is doing something illegal, I am not.

understood

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

Agreed. I did not say you were doing anything technically illegal - I only said that that is what the looter says to himself - period.

On a philosophical basis, making something legal does not necessarily make it moral or ethical - I'm sure we both could come up with our own examples of that. I would argue those points in a discussion as well as the Constitutionality. Again - I don't blame you.

Reply to
Bill Putney

ok i wondered, since i have heard the mileage on these could be better. best mileage ratings from the guv-ment seems to be on the stick cars.....

Reply to
rob

hell they rated my 96 LHS (with 167,000 miles but they didnt care about mileage) at 19, thereby making it not a clunker. then re rating it at 18 (one MPG less) then it was eligible.

i think i read somewhere that even though the PT didnt get that much better MPG than mine, it was still going to be allowed if i wanted it, since the government web site had the PT designated as a TRUCK and trucks had lower requirements. maybe that's how so may F150s got bought this summer!

Regardless there is still a 96 LHS in the garage and nothing else.

Same here Bill. I was thinking of getting rid of my 2001 Cruiser in the Cash for Clunkers program. New plugs, wires, KN air filter, still terrible mileage. Feds said city/highway average mpg is 19. I filled the Cruiser, took a 90 mile trip on an Interstate, filled the tank and got 16.9 mpg. So I'm stuck with my clunker.

Reply to
rob

My daughter can get a solid 25.5 mpg highway out of our 2006 PT Cruiser

Reply to
Steve Stone

What engine size do you (and Ashton Crusher) have?

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

The base, no frills, non turbo model for that year.

Reply to
Steve Stone

It's teh base 2.4 liter.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

Yeah, the stick shifts are rated for about 2 mpg more.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

I have mixed feelings about the program. Honestly, before I felt it would benefit me it bothered me a bit. It's part of a long list of things like the tax breaks for hybrid cars. A friend of mine whose wife and him both make good money just spent $50K having solar electric system installed on his house. He said he will get back $24K from Tax breaks making the thing a break even proposition in around 6 years or so. Many of these things really only are workable if you have lots of money of your own to put in up front.

The only reason I went for the Clunker thing was that my 89 S-10 was running progressively worse and losing power. Plus it needed the transmission rebuilt. Hard to justify putting $2000 plus into it when that would still make it only worth $2000 and it would still have 190k miles on it. So it really was like getting the full $4500.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

One thing that people almost always fail to factor in on these "break-even" calculations is the "cost of money over time" ("interest"). By literal accounting formulas, the pay back periods are extended significantly - often beyond the replacement period. So, even ignoring the government subsidy aspect in the real costs, there usually *is* no payback. Factor the subsidy in, and there is no payback - just good feelings.

Makes sense. I was curious what you turned in as the clunker. Now I know.

Reply to
Bill Putney

You should have seen the red face on the finance guy when I turned down the $500 alarm system they had installed and declined adding the tinted glass. I pulled all the pullable parts off the s-10 and sold them and made another couple hundred off that. It killed me that I had to leave a one week old alternator on it. But I did keep the battery and put in one from a co-worker who otherwise was going to turn it in for a new one on his car. My custom cable adaptors are shown here

formatting link
the charger clamps) They told me one guy traded in his Dodgevan and he had pulled most of the glass, the headlights, variousbulbs, and even took off one lug nut from each wheel. He had anothervan at home just like it.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

Damn! I am getting about the same with my 1941 Windsor/Fluid Drive/241.5ci flathead 6!

Reply to
CF

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.