PT Cruiser

You should consider the Caliber. My wife and I had a PT Sedan(2003) and a convertible(2005). We sold both and got a Caliber that has chair high seats and is getting 30-31 mpg around town. We were only getting MAX 22 with both PT's and sometimes as low as 17-19 around town. The sedan had the base engine and the convertible had the 180HP Turbo version. My 1940 Chrysler gets better mileage with a flathead 6!

I've heard a few similar stories about low PT mileage, but our (new to us) 2005 2.4 normally-aspirated version is getting between 22 and 24 in town, and about 25-27 on the highway so far.

You're lucky! To be fair, we rented a 2008 PT sedan at the Pensacola airport for the 50 mile drive to Mobile, and it got around 26mpg, but that was driving

55/60. Some people say it is the weight of the body, the "bad" styling, etc. I also wondered what would happen if they put the CVT transmission in instead of the 4 speed automatic. I think it would increase the mileage.

So does my Lincoln Town Car.

You must have the 1.8L 5 speed manual Caliber. I had a 2007 Caliber with the 2.0 Auto. I loved it but I only got about 20-22mpg around town. Same as my 2008 PT. The PT handles a little better but overall the two cars are quite similar. Last year with rebates and other incentives the PT's were far cheaper than a Caliber. So far this year the incentives are not nearly as good. Probably better at model year end this summer.

This is the last year for the PT, so for that alone, you might look at others (resale values often drop for discontinued models). Some others: Toyota Matrix (and its twin Pontiac Vibe), Suzuki SX4, Kia Rondo, Mazda 5 (like a mini-minivan with sliding doors and 3 rows of seats). Or any of the small SUVs -- if you avoid awd you'll get better mileage. The ones most lauded in road tests are Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, and Subaru Forester (awd only). For top mileage, Ford Escape Hybrid.

We have the 2.0 CVT combination, and with very careful driving, we don't push the engine or the car, we are getting the above mentioned mpg. We have the SXT model, very nicely equipped with the standard equipment, and got it for just around 17K. I have heard that they have changed the model somewhat and that it is a little different from our 2007 model. I thought that the PT Cruiser was going to continue, it still sells very well.

For all PTs or just the convertible?

All the more reason to grab one while you can. Deals have never been better. Screw resale value, keep the car until its worn out- better economics all around.

Well, wind drag is certainly a big part of it- that's the price you pay for all the nice headroom inside. We drove ours from Austin To Corpus Christi on saturday morning, and we were driving into a steady 15-20 mph (gusting higher) headwind the whole way. With the cruise set at 70, that made for a "through the air" speed on the order of 85 mph, and it showed- that tank was 20.2 MPG. The return trip that night was about 28 MPG, but the wind had died way down so we didn't have the benefit of a tailwind headed home.

I was pleasantly surprised that the PT didn't get blown all over the road in the wind- it was pretty much immune to the gusts, at least as stable if not moreso than the 93 Vision it replace. I didn't expect that.

As for the transmission- the old 41TE (which the PT has) has always been known as a bit of a power hog since it runs full hydraulic pressure all the time and then lets the electronics regulate the pressure down as needed, rather than having a throttle-position controlled line pressure like older Chrysler automagics did. At least they seem to have it pretty bullet-proof now, unlike its early days. Isn't it true that the Caliber's CVT is configured to "behave" more like a conventional automatic with fake "shift points?" That's one reason that the Caliber doesn't tempt me much- if its got a CVT, it should BE a CVT.

A) I'm not surprised that a Town Car could at least match the highway mileage but I'd be surprised if it gets as good as the PT in the city, and B) how do you wash the old man funk off yourself after driving one of those ;-)

Seriously, the Panther-chassis Fords are very aerodynamic since they're so long compared to any compact car as well as having a very tall final drive ratio and efficient driveline and *should* get outstanding highway mileage. A short vehicle is hard to make as low-drag as a long one (you can't achieve the same fineness ratio), which is why Smart cars get such horrible mileage for the size and weight they are. You'd expect 60 mpg looking at them, but in fact you can do as well or better mileage-wise and carry more with a Yaris or Fit than with a Smart. Lighter weight only comes into play when there's a lot of stop-and-go driving, which is where the Town Car would have more trouble matching the PT.

2008 was the last year for the convertible; it's been reported 2009 is the last year for the hatchback.

As much as I like the car, its probably about time. Its had a remarkable run, and only the most minor of facelifts (2006) during that run.

Wow! Is that hand calculated or the dash display?