NationStates Jolt Archive

My friend and I have been having an argument. His car of choice is the Chevy Cobalt, gas mileage 34 MPG (14 km/l). Mine is the Honda Insight - 66 MPG (28 km/l). I tend to think that in these days of insane fuel costs, fuel efficiency is more important to me than the power of the car, especially considering the incredible savings the mileage of the Insight affords. So, I put it to you: which is more important to YOU personally? I don't want you to vote based on my opinion - that was just for the record. Just vote the way you feel, and feel free to post why in the thread. There is not 'a mixture of both' option, because I'm asking if you HAD to choose, which would it be?

Chevy Cobalt, gas mileage 34 MPG (14 km/l). Mine is the Honda Insight - 80 MPG (45 km/l)
I think something's gone awry with your metric conversions there.

My friend and I have been having an argument. His car of choice is the Chevy Cobalt, gas mileage 34 MPG (14 km/l). Mine is the Honda Insight - 80 MPG (45 km/l). I tend to think that in these days of insane fuel costs, fuel efficiency is more important to me than the power of the car, especially considering the incredible savings the mileage of the Insight affords. So, I put it to you: which is more important to YOU personally? I don't want you to vote based on my opinion - that was just for the record. Just vote the way you feel, and feel free to post why in the thread. There is not 'a mixture of both' option, because I'm asking if you HAD to choose, which would it be?

Power personally. I am not going to be driving across country where getting the much better gas mileage matters. Now that I am in college the only time I drive is just for the sake of driving. So I'd much rather have power in a car over better gas mileage.

NEED I SAY MORE?

5.7 Liter - LS6 V8
405 Horsepower @ 6000 rpm
400 Torque ft lbs @ 4800 rpm


0 - 60 mph 4.0 seconds (the Limited Edition does it it 3.9)
1/4 Mile 12.4 @ 116 mph

http://static.flickr.com/25/58628132_1016673320_o.jpg

I think something's gone awry with your metric conversions there.
Not according to google: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=34+miles+per+gallon+to+kilometers+per+liter&meta=

My friend and I have been having an argument. His car of choice is the Chevy Cobalt, gas mileage 34 MPG (14 km/l). Mine is the Honda Insight - 80 MPG (45 km/l). I tend to think that in these days of insane fuel costs, fuel efficiency is more important to me than the power of the car, especially considering the incredible savings the mileage of the Insight affords. So, I put it to you: which is more important to YOU personally? I don't want you to vote based on my opinion - that was just for the record. Just vote the way you feel, and feel free to post why in the thread. There is not 'a mixture of both' option, because I'm asking if you HAD to choose, which would it be?
Oh really?

Even with the manual on highway the insight is only rated to 60/66 MPG

About 20 mpg lower then you stated

the cvt gets
57 / 56


Just curious
(btw cobalt looks bout right)


Anyways my choice is power for my vehicle ... I need a truck and power is a must

But between two cars probably go with riding comfort over either of them

“My car gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that’s the way I like it!” --Grandpa
Simpson

Oh really?

Even with the manual on highway the insight is only rated to 60/66 MPG

About 20 mpg lower then you stated


Well, I'm going by what some people have said in their user ratings here: http://www.insightcentral.net/owners/opinions/index.html

now when I was in highschool it was all about power. I wanted a big huge muscle car.

Now that I am a grown up and gas prices are really a lot higher, I am looking for better gas miliage (my buick ain't cutting it anymore, nice family car, bad on the family gas budget)

I need a car that has enough get up and go to help me manuver around the idiot drivers in my area, but that is about it.

Well, I'm going by what people have said in their user ratings here: http://www.insightcentral.net/owners/opinions/index.html
So you are comparing an EPA rating to a user submitted one?
To be fair you have to hold each one to the same standard

There is a reason they use a standard to measure and compare things

I voted fuel economy because I'm in college and poor, but my dad's a farmer so I understand that some people need a powerful vehicle. More than just fuel economy and power go into my consideration of which vehicles to buy. Safety, reliability, projected resale value, and looks, just to name a few, also factor in.

now when I was in highschool it was all about power. I wanted a big huge muscle car.

Well, I am in high school. I just would rather save as much money on the ground as possible, so I can spend more money to stay in the air, for flying hours. That's why it's so important to me - the ground is sort of a necessary evil.

So you are comparing an EPA rating to a user submitted one?
To be fair you have to hold each one to the same standard

There is a reason they use a standard to measure and compare things
the epa ratings are not all they are cracked up to be, they run the car without accesories on (no a/c, ect.) not real driving conditions either, so a lot of times the epa ratings are actually better than what you would actually get.

ex> my car has an epa rating of 30mpg but we really only get about 25mpg (partly because of added weight and a/c or heater running)

So you are comparing an EPA rating to a user submitted one?
To be fair you have to hold each one to the same standard

There is a reason they use a standard to measure and compare things
All right, fair enough. It's edited.

Well, I am in high school. I just would rather save as much money on the ground as possible, so I can spend more money to stay in the air, for flying hours. That's why it's so important to me - the ground is sort of a necessary evil.
I said I wanted there is no way I could actually get one. Most of my wanting probably had to do with the crappy car I did drive, it would only go in first gear any higher speeds than that and it would die, but hey what do you expect for a $75.00 car?!

Not according to google: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=34+miles+per+gallon+to+kilometers+per+liter&meta=
Right, and now check the other one. :-)

“My car gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that’s the way I like it!” --Grandpa
Simpson
Cant forget the first part "The metric system is the tool of the devil"

And just for giggles my truck gets 362880 rods to the hogshead

Right, and now check the other one. :-)
The km/l for the insight? I changed the MPG number for it. Is the km/l right now? :confused:

the epa ratings are not all they are cracked up to be, they run the car without accesories on (no a/c, ect.) not real driving conditions either, so a lot of times the epa ratings are actually better than what you would actually get.

ex> my car has an epa rating of 30mpg but we really only get about 25mpg (partly because of added weight and a/c or heater running)
I know but at least they are simmilar standards

Before he was using the EPA from one and user claims from the other

I know but at least they are simmilar standards

Before he was using the EPA from one and user claims from the other
yeah. it annoys me when people do that

Well, being as I live in The Land Of Zero Opportunity (Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania) where you have to drive about a light year away to find any job worth having, I'll take the fuel efficiency, thank you very much. Next car I get is definitely gonna be a hybrid. Fuck the oil companies! Fuck the A-rabs, and the Middle East and all of it. If I could manage an all-electric car, I'd do it, too.

What about that car that is apparently fueled by water? Anyone know anything about that, and if it will ever become available?

I just took a job interview last week, in North Brunswick, New Jersey, which is about 80 miles from where I live...and that is how far you have to go from here, which is basically the asshole of America...to get decent employment. The job in question pays $15.75 an hour, making it worth the travel. Since I live with my mom, virtually rent-free, this isn't too bad a deal.

Moving closer to the job would not, in the end, be cost-efficient in my case, as the rent added on would far outstrip the price of gas involved in commuting. Just wish there was a bus or a train I could use, but no such!

I'll hear tomorrow about whether or not I get the job...apparently five people were interviewing for two open positions.

I mean, if you want to earn 8 bucks an hour, you could work in Allentown, 35 miles from here...but I don't get outta bed for 8 bucks an hour, and by the time you factor in gas, it ain't worth it to go 35 miles for 8 bucks.

On the other hand, if you wanna work around here, you can work on any number of rotten assembly lines, in sweatshops, for perhaps 6 bucks an hour, or you can pluck chickens for about the same money.

I didn't build up 15 years of professional office skills to end up plucking goddam chickens or flippin' fuckin' burgers!

I swear, the place I live is, without a doubt, the absolute asshole of America. If it weren't for the free rent, I would be so gone, so fast, it's unreal.

nice country out here, but no freaking opportunity. Great place to be if you are retired, but, if you gotta work for a living, it really sucks. Unless of course, you are an unskilled laborer.

In my case, even if I were WILLING to go pluck chickens (and I'm not) they would not hire me, because I am far too overqualified. And that is what I have been told a number of times.

NEED I SAY MORE?

5.7 Liter - LS6 V8
405 Horsepower @ 6000 rpm
400 Torque ft lbs @ 4800 rpm


0 - 60 mph 4.0 seconds
1/4 Mile 12.4 @ 116 mph

http://static.flickr.com/25/58628132_1016673320_o.jpg

Yes

:p

Pagani Zonda C12 S
7.3l AMG V12

555bhp @ 5900 rpm
553 ft lbs @ 4050 rpm

0 - 60 mph 3.6s

http://www.italiancar.com.au/images/zg%207%20DEF_lg.jpg


Or, you know, you could just go with a Caterham.

The km/l for the insight? I changed the MPG number for it. Is the km/l right now? :confused:
It looks okay now.

The Cobalt's fuel efficiency (34 mpg) isn't anything to sneeze at in its own right, which is why I chose that option instead of the Insight.

Well, being as I live in The Land Of Zero Opportunity (Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania) where you have to drive about a light year away to find any job worth having, I'll take the fuel efficiency, thank you very much. Next car I get is definitely gonna be a hybrid. Fuck the oil companies! Fuck the A-rabs, and the Middle East and all of it. If I could manage an all-electric car, I'd do it, too.

What about that car that is apparently fueled by water? Anyone know anything about that, and if it will ever become available?

I just took a job interview last week, in North Brunswick, New Jersey, which is about 80 miles from where I live...and that is how far you have to go from here, which is basically the asshole of America...to get decent employment. The job in question pays $15.75 an hour, making it worth the travel. Since I live with my mom, virtually rent-free, this isn't too bad a deal.

Moving closer to the job would not, in the end, be cost-efficient in my case, as the rent added on would far outstrip the price of gas involved in commuting. Just wish there was a bus or a train I could use, but no such!

I'll hear tomorrow about whether or not I get the job...apparently five people were interviewing for two open positions.

I mean, if you want to earn 8 bucks an hour, you could work in Allentown, 35 miles from here...but I don't get outta bed for 8 bucks an hour, and by the time you factor in gas, it ain't worth it to go 35 miles for 8 bucks.

On the other hand, if you wanna work around here, you can work on any number of rotten assembly lines, in sweatshops, for perhaps 6 bucks an hour, or you can pluck chickens for about the same money.

I didn't build up 15 years of professional office skills to end up plucking goddam chickens or flippin' fuckin' burgers!

I swear, the place I live is, without a doubt, the absolute asshole of America. If it weren't for the free rent, I would be so gone, so fast, it's unreal.

nice country out here, but no freaking opportunity. Great place to be if you are retired, but, if you gotta work for a living, it really sucks. Unless of course, you are an unskilled laborer.

In my case, even if I were WILLING to go pluck chickens (and I'm not) they would not hire me, because I am far too overqualified. And that is what I have been told a number of times.
I am waiting for them to work up distrobution for hydrogen powered vehicles
Dhimler test drove one from california to washington

snip.
UHM, no offense, but you've been building office skills for 15 years and you still live at home?:eek:

UHM, no offense, but you've been building office skills for 15 years and you still live at home?:eek:

Uhm...no, and I do NOT appreciate the insult!

I lived on my own for ten fucking years, until this rotten George Bush economy FORCED me into moving back home. It was there or the street.

I lost all my fucking pride, having to move back home, and I do not appreciate snarky comments rubbing my nose in the fact that I'm an obvious loser and a failure at life, thank you, George W Fucking Bush!!!

P.S. You can say "no offense" all you want, the fact is I DAMN WELL DO TAKE OFFENSE AT YOUR COMMENTS!!

Do you really think I WANT to live with my mom? Do you think I would have it this way?

I am the unfortunate victim of circumstances far beyond my control. And I do not appreciate the insinuations that go along with your snarky comments. I do not appreciate them one little bit! My pride has already been ground into dust under the heel of the George Bush economy, so why don't you go and rub salt into my wounds?? You have major-league pissed me off.

snip
OK then, lets compare prices on those!
Mines $65,800 (54,193.50 EUR)

How much for that ugly thing? $350,000?!?!:eek: (ugly to me, anyways. Of course, some probably think the corvette is ugly, so to each their own, I guess;) )

snip
Sorry I asked.
And BTW, thats just sad to blame your problems on Bush. Just sad.

thank you, George W Fucking Bush!!!
Yep, I watched Bush personally fire this guy. Nasty episode, that.:rolleyes:

Olara']Yep, I watched Bush personally fire this guy. Nasty episode, that.:rolleyes:
Thats ok, Bush gave me a dibilitaing spinal condition.

Sorry I asked.
And BTW, thats just sad to blame your problems on Bush. Just sad.
For the love of God, please don't let this degenerate into another bush argument. Please!

For the love of God, please don't let this degenerate into another bush argument. Please!
Agreed ... but I see it as a futal effort lol

For the love of God, please don't let this degenerate into another bush argument. Please!
I most certainly didn't bring it up. And I won't mention it again. Just setting the record straight.

For the love of God, please don't let this degenerate into another bush argument. Please!
Sorry.:(
*goes off to spend prescribed sentence in corner*

OK then, lets compare prices on those!
Mines $65,800 (54,193.50 EUR)

How much for that ugly thing?
A Corvette in the UK costs the equivalent of $85,000.

Zonda is about £350,000 in the UK, and about $500,000 in the US.

I would have one over a Corvette any day. Different league in every area of performence. They aren't just cars...

Oh, and if either of them is ugly then it's definitely the Corvette. Boring...unimaginative...just plain ugly.

Put them both on the same road and the 'Vette won't even see the Zondas dust it would be so far ahead.


Or, like I said, go with a Caterham Superlight R500.

For half the price of the Corvette you would beat both of them on a twisty road, all while sitting a couple of inches off the road with no roof and hardly any walls. Wins every time.

http://vnexpress.net/Vietnam/Oto-Xe-may/2002/05/3B9BC6AF/caterham-superlight-r300-to.jpg

Or, like I said, go with a Caterham Superlight R500.


http://vnexpress.net/Vietnam/Oto-Xe-may/2002/05/3B9BC6AF/caterham-superlight-r300-to.jpgPrice wise and performance wise, I agree with you.($77,000, lots of horsepower) but MAN, that thing is ugly! That other car you showed is way better looking. Besides, what do you do when it rains? lol

Price wise and performance wise, I agree with you.($77,000, lots of horsepower) but MAN, that thing is ugly! That other car you showed is way better looking. Besides, what do you do when it rains? lol
You arse about in the rain for 5 minutes trying to get the canvas roof up.

You really need to see a Caterham in the flesh...stupidly low. It just looks awesome.

I still maintain that the Zonda is great looking:
http://www.wallpaper.net.au/wallpaper/automotive/Pagini%20Zonda%20S%207.3%20-%20800x600.jpg

I still maintain that the Zonda is great looking:
Ok, thats a better pic. I'll give ya that one (although I would have to sleep with Paris Hilton to ever afford one:eek: ) But the "dune buggy" is awful! lol (of course I'm not gonna lie, I'd drive the hell out of it! It does look fun)

“My car gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that’s the way I like it!” --Grandpa
Simpson

I had to work it out.

40 rods/hogshead = 0.0025 miles/gallon

By comparison, the QE II gets about 0.0095 miles/ gallon

Ok, thats a better pic. I'll give ya that one (although I would have to sleep with Paris Hilton to ever afford one:eek: ) But the "dune buggy" is awful! lol (of course I'm not gonna lie, I'd drive the hell out of it! It does look fun)
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.cobbe/r500.jpg

Still awful?

Fuel efficiency. As long as my car can hit 65, I don't care about power.

Sorry I asked.
And BTW, thats just sad to blame your problems on Bush. Just sad.

If Bush hadn't so FUCKED UP the economy, there is no way in HELL that company could have gotten away with that bullshit. They never woulda gotten away with it under clinton, because job were so plentiful then that people woulda walked out en masse!

Now that jobs are scarce, companies can get away with shitting on their workers.

So, at least indirectly, it damn well IS Bush's fault.

Fuel efficiency. As long as my car can hit 65, I don't care about power.
Yeah, here are the specs for the two - the Insight is obviously less, but impressive for 66 horses as compared to the Cobalt's 205!

Chevy Cobalt:
0-60mph=6.4 seconds
Top speed: 143 mph

Honda Insight:
0-60mph=10.9 seconds
Top speed: 112 mph

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.cobbe/r500.jpg

Still awful?
Yeah, sorry. lol Reminds me of a mini Rolls Royce. (don't like them either)
~EDIT~ Although markably better thanthe last one. I can kinda see why you like it. Me? I like it because its got BALLS! :D

If Bush hadn't so FUCKED UP the economy, there is no way in HELL that company could have gotten away with that bullshit. They never woulda gotten away with it under clinton, because job were so plentiful then that people woulda walked out en masse!

Now that jobs are scarce, companies can get away with shitting on their workers.

So, at least indirectly, it damn well IS Bush's fault.
Unemployment rate in America over ten years
1995 5.6%
2005 5.2%
HHMMM..... Yeah, I see your point. :rolleyes:

Yeah, sorry. lol Reminds me of a mini Rolls Royce. (don't like them either)
~EDIT~ Although markably better thanthe last one. I can kinda see why you like it. Me? I like it because its got BALLS! :D
I like it because it looks awesome (my neighbour had one and I spent many a while drooling over it...he took me round a race track in it...wow. Mind blowing), handles better than any other street legal car you can buy, and goes like stink.

It's the best value car out there. Challenges, and easily keeps up with, supercars on a twisty road (loses out on straights), and 'only' costs £40,000.

Yea...I'm a girl who loves cars.

http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-2005-Volkswagen-VW-EcoRacer-Concept.htm

The future will be in combining both - and making cars lighter.

http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-2005-Volkswagen-VW-EcoRacer-Concept.htm

The future will be in combining both - and making cars lighter.
You're right.

Look at cars like the BMW 7 Series Hydrogen, or the Mazda RX-8 Hyrdogen, and anybody can see that car manufacturers are getting better and better at combining a very fuel efficient engine with top performence.

Well, being as I live in The Land Of Zero Opportunity (Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania) where you have to drive about a light year away to find any job worth having, I'll take the fuel efficiency, thank you very much. Next car I get is definitely gonna be a hybrid. Fuck the oil companies! Fuck the A-rabs, and the Middle East and all of it. If I could manage an all-electric car, I'd do it, too.

What about that car that is apparently fueled by water? Anyone know anything about that, and if it will ever become available?
Hydrogen cars still got a couple thing holding them back:

a)they are uberexpensive
b)range is ubershort (a hydrogen tank that is the same volume as a gas tank cannot hold as much hydrogen)
c)they are uberexpensive

http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-2005-Volkswagen-VW-EcoRacer-Concept.htm

The future will be in combining both - and making cars lighter.
Eww, a yellow car.

That Zonda is hot (I like the split-spoiler). I, however, do prefer this:
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/images/large/967-1.jpg
Saleen S7
750 Horsepower
700 lb-ft of torque

Anyways I chose fuel efficency.

To be honest, the Saleen looks like something a 10 year old could draw. Hugely fast, but just doesn't hae the looks to match it.

For me...a supercar needs to look very exotic, it needs to look special. The Zonda does. The Saleen? Looks almost 'run of the mill'.

To be honest, the Saleen looks like something a 10 year old could draw. Hugely fast, but just doesn't hae the looks to match it.

For me...a supercar needs to look very exotic, it needs to look special. The Zonda does. The Saleen? Looks almost 'run of the mill'.
Pft, it could only be drawn by a 11 year old; everyone knows that. I think the back end of the Saleen is as ugly as Paris Hilton, but I think overall the car looks good. Also, don't Saleens handle extremely well due to their aerodynamics?

Pft, it could only be drawn by a 11 year old; everyone knows that. I think the back end of the Saleen is as ugly as Paris Hilton, but I think overall the car looks good. Also, don't Saleens handle extremely well due to their aerodynamics?
Aye, they probably did the aero, and then tried to design a car to fit the aero profile. Quite a few sports cars are done like that...it isn't always successuful.

Aye, they probably did the aero, and then tried to design a car to fit the aero profile. Quite a few sports cars are done like that...it isn't always successuful.
That is how they designed it. The owner of the company has a performance at all cost kinda attitude.

Unemployment rate in America over ten years
1995 5.6%
2005 5.2%
HHMMM..... Yeah, I see your point. :rolleyes:

Misleading.

I am unemployed...yet I am no longer COUNTED as being unemployed, because my benefits have run out. Therefore, that 5.2 percent doesn't count ME. And how many more like me does it not count?

In 1995, you didn't have a whole lot of people exhausting their benefits, and thus dropping off the unemployment rolls. BECAUSE...in 1995, we had a President who CARED ABOUT PEOPLE...and we had extended unemployment benefits because of a rotten economy, which was on the brink of turnaround. The late 90's were very good, economically...you had to not want to work to be out of a job long.

I never spent very long, in the late 90's, unemployed.

The real question ought to be...how many Americans are out there now...either unemployed but not counted as such...or who are under-employed because they have to do something now that their benefits are exhausted...and who are not earning NEAR what they had been...or what they deserve to be earning?

You tell ME why consumer confidence is down so badly. Couldn't be because people are all confident in what the future holds, could it? I think consumer confidence is a better indicator of the economic situation than unemployment numbers...which fail to count for people like me...the long-term unemployed, and the underemployed.

And I believe the consumer confidence was a hell of a lot higher ten years ago than it is today.

I don't have the figures, but I am guessing...based upon what I witnessed then, as opposed to what I am witnessing now.

Somehow, I think consumer confidence today is far lower than it was ten years ago. And THAT, I think, paints a far more accurate picture.

There's a REASON Bush's approval rating is down to 39%, the lowest of any modern sitting President...the only sitting President to have a lower approval rating was Nixon just before his resignation, when impeachment was in the air, and his approval rating was at 36%.

Bush has been an absolute disater for our country, economically.

Misleading.
"I guess" "I think" "It seems to me" "I believe"

Yep, with facts like that its hard to argue with ya! You win. I'm going to bed.

I'd have to say fuel efficiency, I'd find it hard to justify a petrol sucking V8 or turbo motor.

You can get some pretty good, gutsy little cars. Lotus is a good example, or more affordably, an MX5 or 2.0 litre type hot hatch. Sweet handling, zippy acceleration, not too thirsty.

I'd have to say fuel efficiency, I'd find it hard to justify a petrol sucking V8 or turbo motor.

You can get some pretty good, gutsy little cars. Lotus is a good example, or more affordably, an MX5 or 2.0 litre type hot hatch. Sweet handling, zippy acceleration, not too thirsty.
Yes Lotus' are good cars. 23/27 MPG and a 4.9 0-60. Thats pretty impressive.