Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:

Gas Mileage: Overrated

by: Felix Salmon August 19, 2008    
Felix Salmon

Felix Salmon

About this author:
Become a Contributor Submit an Article
  • Font Size:
  • Print

I never thought I'd say this, but America has become too obsessed with gas mileage. Prius owners use their real-time mileage readout to try and get the absolute maximum number of miles out of every tank; politicians talk dreamily of cars getting 100 miles to the gallon; and even seasoned Detroit auto journalists have started going mileage crazy. Here's David Kiley, reviewing the Smart Fortwo:

The Fortwo has the best fuel economy of any gasoline-powered car that's not a hybrid, but its EPA ratings of 33 miles per gallon in the city and 41 mpg on the highway are far worse than I would expect for such a small package...

Call me a dreamer, but for a car as small and expensive as the Fortwo, I'm looking for 45 mpg/city and 52 mpg/highway, at least.

The Smart car, remember, is an urban runabout. It's not designed to commute hundreds of miles a week on highways, it's designed to get you around town efficiently. So let's do some basic sums here.

 Assume that the Fortwo is driven 100 miles a week, entirely in stop-and-go city traffic. At 33 miles per gallon, that's 3 gallons of gas. As 45mpg, it's 2.2 gallons of gas. The difference, of 0.8 gallons of gas, will cost you about $3.

Now, all things being equal, would it be nice to save $3 a week on gas? Yes -- but of course all things are not equal. In order to get the Fortwo up to 45mpg in the city, Daimler would have to charge more for the car -- much more than I'd be saving in gasoline costs. Alternatively, they might have to make the engine less powerful. But given the number of highways which snake through US cities, there will always be some highway driving in the Fortwo, and Americans are going to want to keep up easily and not feel underpowered in those situations. Even in its present incarnation Kiley describes the Fortwo's power as merely "OK".

All of which is to present yet another example of why gas mileage should be inverted. Instead of expressing a preference for 45mpg over 33mpg, Kiley would instead be preferring 2.2 gallons per 100 miles over 3 gallons per 100 miles. To Americans currently using 5 or 6 or 7 gallons per 100 miles, that last 0.8 gallons might not seem like as big of a deal. Only once we've got the average car up into the 30s does it make sense to start worrying much about going even further, into the 40s or 50s or even 100s.

Related Articles

This article has 5 comments:

  •  
    Aug 19 11:22 AM
    Has anyone considered other items such as, ethonol recudes overall average mileage.

    I drive a Chevy Silverado today, upgraded from a smaller Chevy S10. The S10 averaged 20 mpg while the Silverado averages 17. Furthermore, the S10 ran poorly and got worse gas mileage on 87 octane, or even 89 octane. I had to run 93 or Premium gas for the small 4 cyl to run decent and get any significant mileage.

    The Chevy Silverado with 5.7L Vortec engine's overall for fuel costs almost equal the fuel causes of the Smaller 4 cyl S10 because even though I get less mileage per gallon, I am obtaining the mileage with low grade fuel, which where I live is about 40 per gallon difference.

    Overall, while the larger full size truck may cost me 2.00 per 100 miles to drive more than the smaller pickup. This results in an overall expendeture of about 108 dollars per year. or maybe 1000 dollars over the life of the vehicle; HARDLY enough to warrent going out and buying a more fuel efficient car.
    Reply
  •  
    Aug 19 05:10 PM
    "America has become too obsessed with gas mileage." is nonsense. The vehicles Europeans are buying average about twice as good the gas mileage as those Americans are buying. Why are you talking about 33 mpg cars vs 45 mpg cars? These are not the vehicles Americans are buying. It is more appropriate to talk about vehicles with much smaller numbers if you want to talk about typical American cars.
    Reply
  •  
    Aug 19 06:01 PM
    In another two years people will be back in their SUVs. No one wants to ride in a tin can. (except for the green people).
    Reply
  •  
    Aug 20 11:02 AM
    dollars per mile is a better counter as you evaluate the whole picture. dont forget insurance costs for the little tin puddle jumpers. of course personal safety has no dollar value but is most important.
    Reply
  •  
    Aug 20 02:32 PM
    When Heavy Equipment manufacturers like DE and CAT are beginning to produce hybrids, I think that says a lot.

    And, we drove a great Fiat 5 seat diesel in Italy. Great mileage, lots of pep, lots of passenger and luggage room... Didn't puff out clouds of black smoke like US diesels seem to.... I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Compare that to the GM whatever-it-was that seats 5, etc...That we rented in Hawaii ... What a dog! Lousy gas mileage, cheaply made.... No comparison.

    jegan ;-)
    Reply
More by Felix Salmon

Investment Resources
Money Management 

Research 

Seeking Alpha provides these ads as a service to its leading contributors
Articles on related themes
Autos 

Aircraft & Parts 

Airlines 

Rail Transport