|
With all the talk of late model cars and fuel
economy am I the only one amused to note that in 1951 a V8 Studebaker (232
CI if I remember right) with manual trans and overdrive won the Mobilgas
Economy run that year, driving from Los Angeles to the Grand Canyon, with a
TWENTY-EIGHT mpg average????
It's featured in the Buyers Guide in this
month's Hemmings Motor News.
That translates to about 20-24 MPG in one with a
fair amount of miles on it, equipped the same, in more casual driving
conditions. From a V8, rear wheel drive, manual trans car. By one of
the independents, at that.
So to heck with the Hondas and all that foreign
junk, I'll find me a solid Studey. They're not that expensive, I passed on
a solid '48 4dr last fall for $800 (was a six, they get a little worse
MPG).
Or finish off my $200 '50 Chevy with an S10 5-speed
and an open rear - those mods will get you close to 25 MPG too. The
best part of that car is it has so many botched repair jobs and is worth so
little I could run it into the ground and get another one if I wanted. And
with simple tools and a few spare parts I can fix anything short of a crankcase
explosion, on the side of the road -
Prefer a Forward Look? In '61 the Chrysler
Newport with a 361 engine was the winner in the fullsize class.
Around 22 MPG. I don't remember how the Lancers and Valiants faired.
But a '61-'62 4dr Newport is not that expensive either.
FWIW, if I were buying a new car just for utility's
sake, I'd look at that Ford Fusion or it's Mercury clone. I can't
understand why they wouldn't sell just as well as the Taurus, they look snappy
and have good features and economy. Maybe if they just rebadged
them as Volvos... (the Ford 500, err new Taurus, is built on a Volvo
platform).
Bill K.
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options,
please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
| 
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network