Great Astra Review

[The O.C.]

There isn't enough C-segment choice over there to make accurate comparisons. Sure, you might have a 1.8 Astra, a 2.0 Focus, a 2.3 Mazda 3 and a 2.5 Golf, but you can't make any kind of accurate performance-related comparisons because despite being the same size, they're not really direct rivals.

Why do you keep MISSING THE POINT?

HOW can you say they are not "direct rivals" and that you can't make any sort of accurate comparisons? That's ingorant......

Those cars listed above ALL compete for the SAME consumers in the same market segment. They ARE DIRECT RIVALS.....regardless of engine configuration.

Once again......for the purposes of THIS discussion, Europe is irrelevant. We are talking about the U.S. market and the Astra's competitiveness in the U.S. market.

[The O.C.]

That's true, I did list that one earlier and it didn't come to mind in my comments. It has a worse 0-60 time than the Astra though, so it's a case of pick your poison if people think it makes much of a difference in real world driving conditions.

Just for comparison:

(Caliber numbers from 5-06 comparo)

Dodge Caliber SE

3,000lbs curb weight

0-60 9.7secs, 0-100 30.6secs

C/D test mpg - 28mpg

Saturn Astra XR

2,880 curb weight

0-60 9.3secs, 0-100 28.7secs

C/D test mpg - 24mpg

[regfootball]

carbiz, the cobalt/ion with either the 2.2 and 2.4 with a manual, now that is a satisfying small car engine combo. i have always found those cars quite gutsy and torquey in addition to being able to rev and pull up high. that is why the wimpy 1.8 in the astra is disappointing, had it been the 2.2 there would have been no mpg penalty and the extra power would have been welcome.

[The O.C.]

carbiz, the cobalt/ion with either the 2.2 and 2.4 with a manual, now that is a satisfying small car engine combo. i have always found those cars quite gutsy and torquey in addition to being able to rev and pull up high. that is why the wimpy 1.8 in the astra is disappointing, had it been the 2.2 there would have been no mpg penalty and the extra power would have been welcome.

Hence the Cobalt SS (non-super- or-turbo'd) with the 2.4L and 5-speed manual went 0-60 in 7.1secs in C&D's test.........I'm not sure what a 5-speed 2.2L does, but C&D got an automatic (power-sapping 4-speed at THAT) from 0-60 in only 8.4secs.....still significantly quicker that the Astra 5-speed.

[siegen]

1.8 I 4s

Lada 1.774 8V SOHC 80.5 hp 102 lb-ft

Chery 1.845 16V DOHC 130 hp 125 lb-ft

BYD 1.839 16V DOHC 120 hp 118 lb-ft (Mazda design)

Chrysler 1.798 16V DOHC D-VVT 148 hp 125 lb-ft (GEMA)

Mercedes 1.796 16V DOHC D-VVT 122 hp 140 lb-ft

FAW 1.765 16V DOHC 118 hp 118 lb-ft (in development)

FAW 1.796 16V DOHC VVT 134 hp 125 lb-ft

Haima 1.839 16V DOHC 121 hp 118 lb-ft (Mazda design)

Haima 1.839 16V DOHC VVT 134 hp 133 lb-ft (in development, different bore x stroke)

Fiat 1.747 16V DOHC VVT 130 hp 121 lb-ft

Ford 1.796 16V DOHC 113 hp 118 lb-ft

Mazda 1.798 16V DOHC VVT 124 hp 123 lb-ft

Mazda 1.789 8V SOHC 94 hp 100 lb-ft (archaic, but still in use)

Geely 1.762 16V DOHC 111 hp 116 lb-ft (ancient Toyota engine)

Geely 1.792 16V DOHC VVT 137 hp 127 lb-ft

GM Daewoo 1.796 16V DOHC 119 hp 125 lb-ft (GM Europe design)

GM Brasil 1.796 8V SOHC 107 hp 119 lb-ft

GM Brasil 1.796 8V SOHC 110 hp 128 lb-ft FlexFuel

GME 1.796 16V DOHC 123 hp 122 lb-ft

GME 1.796 16V DOHC D-VVT 138 hp 129 lb-ft

GMH 1.799 16V DOHC 120 hp 122 lb-ft (big block)

Honda 1.799 16V DOHC VVT 136 hp 127 lb-ft

Hyundai 1.795 16V DOHC 128 hp 120 lb-ft

Mitsubishi 1.834 16V DOHC 138 hp 123 lb-ft

Peugeot 1.749 16V DOHC 123 hp 125 lb-ft

Nissan 1.797 16V DOHC 126 hp 130 lb-ft

Renault 1.784 16V DOHC 118 hp 122 lb-ft (for Proton)

SAIC (MG) 1.795 16V DOHC 133 hp 122 lb-ft

Suzuki 1.796 16V DOHC 123 hp 125 lb-ft

Toyota 1.797 16V DOHC D-VVT 132 hp 128 lb-ft

VW 1.781 8V SOHC 102 hp 112 lb-ft

The only NA 1.8 producing more power, currently in production, is the World Engine 1.8 in the Caliber. The latest GM engine is a smaller, cast-iron block. Both are DOHC Dual-VVT engines, still rare (the Mercedes and new Toyota are the only other 1.8s). High-output or turbocharged 1.6s and 1.4s are the preferred option in new vehicles (BMW/Peugeot, GM, VW, Ford etc.)

The Civic engine produces 140hp/128tq, at least here.

I did miss the Caliber 1.8L engine, for some reason I thought it only came with a 2.0L. That is another example of a too-small displacement engine in a very heavy car.

Then there's the Versa 1.8L, but it is a sub-compact here and does not directly compete with the compacts.

[Guest aatbloke]

Why do you keep MISSING THE POINT?

HOW can you say they are not "direct rivals" and that you can't make any sort of accurate comparisons? That's ingorant......

Those cars listed above ALL compete for the SAME consumers in the same market segment. They ARE DIRECT RIVALS.....regardless of engine configuration.

Once again......for the purposes of THIS discussion, Europe is irrelevant. We are talking about the U.S. market and the Astra's competitiveness in the U.S. market.

It's you that's missing the point. A 1.8 litre car and a 2.5 litre car are NOT direct rivals anywhere. You CANNOT accurately compare ANY normally aspirated 1.8 litre engine with ANY 2.5 on paper. In America, the amount of C-segment cars available is microscopic - with barely any engine choices - so the comparisons are vastly skewed. If you're going to lump a 5-cylinder 2.5 litre C-segment hatch with a 1.8, and run them down a test track back-to-back, you HAVE to take the difference in engine size into account.

How many Astras have you driven? How many Golfs have you driven? Let me tell you that even a 1.4 litre Golf would adequately deal with any American road I've ever travelled on, although there'd be the need for more gear-changing on the mountain roads through the Appalachians. But a 1.8 or a 2.0? No problem.

The purpose of this discussion is determining whether 138bhp is sufficient in a 1.8 litre C-segment car. Well, it is, given that it's one of the most powerful ever built. Is 138bhp sufficient for driving in the States? Having spent seven years over there driving a 130bhp Focus and a 140bhp Galant and having plenty of power to handle your motorways given the driving conditions there, then I would say yes - especially since the driving style is generally slower-paced than it is here. While I was there, fuel went from a miserly $1.10 to $3.00 per gallon, but I drove my cars in the same way as I would here with fuel far more expensive. Trust me, when you're paying $6 or $7 a gallon - and it's only a case of when, not if - then most ordinary people will find a 1.8 litre 138bhp C-segment car plenty sufficient.

Please do not label me as "ignorant" when I've dealt with this class of vehicle for practically all of my driving life. I've driven more of these types of car than you've had hot dinners, mate.

[Guest aatbloke]

Just for comparison:

(Caliber numbers from 5-06 comparo)

Dodge Caliber SE

3,000lbs curb weight

0-60 9.7secs, 0-100 30.6secs

C/D test mpg - 28mpg

Saturn Astra XR

2,880 curb weight

0-60 9.3secs, 0-100 28.7secs

C/D test mpg - 24mpg

I'm not comparing a 2 litre Astra with a 2 litre Caliber, or a 1.8 litre Astra with a 2 litre Caliber. I'm comparing direct 1.8 litre C-segment rivals.

Alfa Romeo 147 1.6 44.1 10.6 120

Audi A3 1.6 50.4 11.9 101

Audi A3 1.8 48.7 8.0 158

BMW 116i 1.6 58.9 10.1 122

Chevrolet Lacetti 1.6 47.8 10.7 108

Chevrolet Lacetti 1.8 no data 9.8 141

Citroen C4 1.6 49.6 10.6 110

Dodge Caliber 1.8 47.1 12.2 148

Ford Focus 1.6 51.4 11.9 98

Ford Focus 1.8 50.4 10.3 123

Honda Civic 1.8 52.3 8.6 138

Hyundai i30 1.6 54.3 11.1 120

Kia c'eed 1.6 52.3 10.9 124

Mazda 3 1.6 49.6 11.2 104

Mercedes B170 1.7 48.7 11.3 116

Mitsubishi Lancer 1.8 46.3 9.8 142

Peugeot 308 1.6 47.1 9.3 140

Proton Gen-2 1.6 50.5 12.6 110

Renault Megane 1.6 50.4 10.9 108

Seat Leon 1.6 47.1 11.7 101

Skoda Octavia 1.6 52.3 11.2 115

Skoda Octavia 1.8 47.9 8.1 160

Subaru Impreza 1.5 44.8 13.7 106

Toyota Auris 1.6 47.9 10.4 122

Vauxhall Astra 1.6 54.3 11.5 105

Vauxhall Astra 1.8 48.7 9.5 138

Volkswagen Golf 1.6 51.4 10.8 113

Volvo C30 1.6 49.6 11.2 99

Volvo C30 1.8 48.7 10.2 123

Source: SMMT

Edited May 13, 2008 by aatbloke

[The O.C.]

It's you that's missing the point. A 1.8 litre car and a 2.5 litre car are NOT direct rivals anywhere. You CANNOT accurately compare ANY normally aspirated 1.8 litre engine with ANY 2.5 on paper. In America, the amount of C-segment cars available is microscopic - with barely any engine choices - so the comparisons are vastly skewed. If you're going to lump a 5-cylinder 2.5 litre C-segment hatch with a 1.8, and run them down a test track back-to-back, you HAVE to take the difference in engine size into account.

How many Astras have you driven? How many Golfs have you driven? Let me tell you that even a 1.4 litre Golf would adequately deal with any American road I've ever travelled on, although there'd be the need for more gear-changing on the mountain roads through the Appalachians. But a 1.8 or a 2.0? No problem.

The purpose of this discussion is determining whether 138bhp is sufficient in a 1.8 litre C-segment car. Well, it is, given that it's one of the most powerful ever built. Is 138bhp sufficient for driving in the States? Having spent seven years over there driving a 130bhp Focus and a 140bhp Galant and having plenty of power to handle your motorways given the driving conditions there, then I would say yes - especially since the driving style is generally slower-paced than it is here. While I was there, fuel went from a miserly $1.10 to $3.00 per gallon, but I drove my cars in the same way as I would here with fuel far more expensive. Trust me, when you're paying $6 or $7 a gallon - and it's only a case of when, not if - then most ordinary people will find a 1.8 litre 138bhp C-segment car plenty sufficient.

Please do not label me as "ignorant" when I've dealt with this class of vehicle for practically all of my driving life. I've driven more of these types of car than you've had hot dinners, mate.

I've driven more cars than you could ever imagine (in the U.S.), so don't even think of going there.

You KEEP IGNORING MY WHOLE POINT THAT THESE CARS ARE ALL FIGHTING FOR CONSUMERS IN THIS MARKET REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ONE HAS A 1.8L, A 2.0L, OR A 2.5L.....people over here don't buy cars simply based upon what the litre-size of the engine is. They don't buy them that way, and they don't necessarily compare them that way.

And YES, I put that all in caps for emphasis.

And NO, the discussion was not a 1.8L in a C-segment car.......the discussion WAS is the 1.8L in the Astra, IN THE U.S., underpowered or not relative to it's competition in the market (which comprises of cars with 1.8L, 2.0L, 2.2L, and yes, 2.5L.) The answer is, seemingly, YES....it is underpowered. That doesn't make it unacceptable, necessarily, but it is down on power and performance compared to the VERY cars (and their bigger engines) that consumers in this market are test-driving against it.

Of course you most certainly aren't "ignorant", but you're acting like it in regards to the realities of the market here, because you can't even bring yourself to acknowledge (whether you do agree or not) the point I've been trying to make.

People over here usually shop either price, or market segment (subcompact, compact, midsize, fullsize.) They don't shop "1.8Litre cars" or "2.0Litre cars" or whatever. Do you GET that...?

The answer could be something like this......"Yes, O.C., I understand that consumers in your market compare vehicles of like price and size and it is common for those vehicles to potentially have different sized engines with different combinations of power and fuel economy. But over here in Europe, because of the much larger availability of engine sizes, comparison shopping tends to gravitate towards models with similar engine sizes and here, the Astra 1.8L is very comparable to other 1.8L cars that consumers may be shopping"

(I feel like I'm speaking into a bottomless pit......)

Edited May 13, 2008 by The O.C.

[The O.C.]

I'm not comparing a 2 litre Astra with a 2 litre Caliber, or a 1.8 litre Astra with a 2 litre Caliber. I'm comparing direct 1.8 litre C-segment rivals.

The Dodge Caliber SE in the comparo, and that I mentioned above, was a 1.8L L4 with 148hp.

[siegen]

It isn't too many: it's providing yourself with the necessary investment in a vehicle to accommodate the dictates of the market. When ordinary people are exposed to paying high fuel prices, then there's a need when you're dealing with the largest vehicle segment in the market.

It does make a difference if you have a 1.8 litre and a 2.2 litre regardless of where you are - for a kick-off, there's going to be a power advantage offset by a marked decrease in urban fuel economy. Americans are simply not used to having an expansive small car market, so they just don't see the difference between the likes of a 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0 and a 2.2 - and that's evidenced quite clearly in this thread. Like I said, if a 1.8 and a 2.5 are similarly priced and sized, people will likely go for the 2.5 if fuel economy isn't an issue - but in performance terms that does not make them direct rivals.

Vehicle size, weight, and aerodynamics play a much larger role in fuel economy than engine displacement. Comparing a 1.8L to a 2.0L or 2.2L is not so cut and dry as you have stated. The larger does not always have the performance advantage while the smaller does not always have the FE advantage, as the Astra demonstrates. In my opinion, a vehicle should be designed around a single engine, and the engine should be designed with the entire vehicle in mind. They should complement each other. Simply putting a smaller displacement engine in to get better fuel economy is the "jerry-rigged" way of doing it -- in the same capacity as putting a giant engine into a car not designed specifically for it (*caugh*IS-F*caugh*lol). The FE benefits should be outweighed by the performance losses. Put a 1.5L (Fit engine) into the Civic, and it might return a point or two better MPG in the city, but will be a complete dog.

US and EU buyers are different. We don't compare vehicles based on engine size. If a 1.8L and 2.0L powered car are roughly the same in performance, size, and FE, then they are indeed direct competitors.

Edited May 13, 2008 by siegen

[PurdueGuy]

I'll say it once again. 138hp in the Astra is sufficient... but not that much fun. Last time I made that statement, your (aatbloke) reply was that it would be plenty fun on a twisty road. You turned a power argument into a handling one, a pretty lame tactic, IMO. What you seem to fail to realize is that, while you may feel that there is no need for more power than that, there are PLENTY of American consumers that disagree with you, and as long as they are speaking their American opinions with their American money at American dealerships, their opinions will matter much more than yours. 138hp is a good base engine, but people want options, including more power.

Edited May 13, 2008 by PurdueGuy

[The O.C.]

'Bloke....here...take a look at Saturn's U.S. website for Astra.....if you don't believe me, see GM's take on the issue......

http://www.saturn.com/saturn/vehicles/astr...yside/index.jsp

Hmmm.....gee, even General Motors themselves are comparing the Astra to a Rabbit with a 2.5L and a Mazda3 with a 2.3L.

Why? Price, size, market segment. Those are two of the cars that Saturn sees as DIRECT competitors. End.....of......STORY.

[Guest aatbloke]

I've driven more cars than you could ever imagine (in the U.S.), so don't even think of going there.

You KEEP IGNORING MY WHOLE POINT THAT THESE CARS ARE ALL FIGHTING FOR CONSUMERS IN THIS MARKET REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ONE HAS A 1.8L, A 2.0L, OR A 2.5L.....people over here don't buy cars simply based upon what the litre-size of the engine is. They don't buy them that way, and they don't necessarily compare them that way.

And YES, I put that all in caps for emphasis.

And NO, the discussion was not a 1.8L in a C-segment car.......the discussion WAS is the 1.8L in the Astra, IN THE U.S., underpowered or not relative to it's competition in the market (which comprises of cars with 1.8L, 2.0L, 2.2L, and yes, 2.5L.) The answer is, seemingly, YES....it is underpowered. That doesn't make it unacceptable, necessarily, but it is down on power and performance compared to the VERY cars (and their bigger engines) that consumers in this market are test-driving against it.

Yes you ARE acting ignorant about the realities of the market here, because you can't even bring yourself to acknowledge (whether you do agree or not) the point I've been trying to make.

People over here usually shop either price, or market segment (subcompact, compact, midsize, fullsize.) They don't shop "1.8Litre cars" or "2.0Litre cars" or whatever. Do you GET that...?

The answer could be something like this......"Yes, O.C., I understand that consumers in your market compare vehicles of like price and size and it is common for those vehicles to potentially have different sized engines with different combinations of power and fuel economy. But over here in Europe, because of the much larger availability of engine sizes, comparison shopping tends to gravitate towards models with similar engine sizes and here, the Astra 1.8L is very comparable to other 1.8L cars that consumers may be shopping"

(I feel like I'm speaking into a bottomless pit......)

I've told you umpteen times before - if people can buy a 1.8 for the same price as a 2.5, so be it. I understand that and have done all along. But that does NOT make the performance or real-world fuel economy an accurate comparison between them on paper. Not only is that how the industry views it, it's also bloody obvious. Your market (as of May 2008) DOES NOT GET OFFERED ENOUGH MODELS AND CHOICES OF THIS TYPE OF CAR to make many meaningful comparable results.

However, get up the E-segment, and your market DOES have more availability to offer more comparable results. Even then, the marginal difference in performance and fuel economy between a 3.0 litre V6 and 3.3 litre V6 on paper is likely to be minute, however the differences between a 1.6 and a 2.0 can be huge - and they certainly are when you're comparing a 1.8 litre 4 with a 2.5 litre 5.

I've dealt with a massive array of B-segment and C-segment cars all my life. I know what a 1.8 litre engine in this class could do twenty years ago, let alone what one can do with today's engine technology. In America, the market is so tiny you can't draw accurate comparisons between them, except on price for those that are offered.

[Guest aatbloke]

US and EU buyers are different. We don't compare vehicles based on engine size. If a 1.8L and 2.0L powered car are roughly the same in performance, size, and FE, then they are indeed direct competitors.

US buyers also get very little choice in this segment, whereas European buyers do - 171 variations of the Focus alone. In Europe, there's a wealth of difference usually (on paper) between a 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0 and 2.3 litre engines. But then again, to us this is bread-and-butter stuff. To you people, anything less than a 2.5 litre is so insignificant you're going to simply lump them all together.

It's a cultural difference - end of story.

[The O.C.]

Your market (as of May 2008) DOES NOT GET OFFERED ENOUGH MODELS AND CHOICES OF THIS TYPE OF CAR to make many meaningful comparable results.

But my friend.....IN OUR MARKET.....that's all we have to compare. So we compare what we have to compare. That and that alone makes it meaningful.

For the purposes of this discussion, I could care less about Europe. I'm interested 100% in what our market has to offer (regardless of the availability of choice in engine size.)

[Guest aatbloke]

'Bloke....here...take a look at Saturn's U.S. website for Astra.....if you don't believe me, see GM's take on the issue......

http://www.saturn.com/saturn/vehicles/astr...yside/index.jsp

Hmmm.....gee, even General Motors themselves are comparing the Astra to a Rabbit with a 2.5L and a Mazda3 with a 2.3L.

Why? Price, size, market segment. Those are two of the cars that Saturn sees as DIRECT competitors. End.....of......STORY.

That's only because you simply barely get any choices!

[The O.C.]

US buyers also get very little choice in this segment, whereas European buyers do - 171 variations of the Focus alone. In Europe, there's a wealth of difference usually (on paper) between a 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0 and 2.3 litre engines. But then again, to us this is bread-and-butter stuff. To you people, anything less than a 2.5 litre is so insignificant you're going to simply lump them all together.

It's a cultural difference - end of story.

Culture really has nothing to do with this particular discussion.

If we are going to discuss the Astra's powertrain, for the U.S. market, then we need to discuss it RELATIVE to the U.S. market. Your points about European C-Segment powertrain options mean NOTHING to this discussion.

....because we aren't remotely discussing the Astra in Europe, or the European market in general.

[The O.C.]

That's only because you simply barely get any choices!

And what does that have to do with the Astra's competitiveness in the U.S. market?

The choices we have......are....what they are.....we can't change that, and the consumers can't change that.

And it's very unlikely we'll EVER have the number of choices you guys do....even if our powertrain options expand somewhat due to our rising gas prices. So what is relevant over there will remain irrelevant over here.

[Intrepidation]

The Civic engine produces 140hp/128tq, at least here.

I did miss the Caliber 1.8L engine, for some reason I thought it only came with a 2.0L. That is another example of a too-small displacement engine in a very heavy car.

Then there's the Versa 1.8L, but it is a sub-compact here and does not directly compete with the compacts.

The caliber has the 1.8L, 2.0L 2.4L and 2.4L Turbo. Performance and fuel economy do indeed take a hit because of the car's weight. Off-topic....I have long wondered why Chrysler, in search of more small cars, doesn't make a sedan off of the Caliber. Mitsubishi has done it to great success. Considering that sedans historically sell better than hatchbacks in America, and considering that the Caliber sells pretty well, a sedan variant should theoretically sell very well.

On the note of more engine choices...I wish we would get more diesels, especially in smlal cars. I read somewhere the diesel Fortwo gets somewhere in the neighborhood of 70mpg. That would make the car very appealing. I would think small cars in the C-segment would get a good fuel economy boost in addition to the inherit bonus of a road, flat torque curve with diesel options.

[The O.C.]

On the note of more engine choices...I wish we would get more diesels, especially in smlal cars. I read somewhere the diesel Fortwo gets somewhere in the neighborhood of 70mpg. That would make the car very appealing. I would think small cars in the C-segment would get a good fuel economy boost in addition to the inherit bonus of a road, flat torque curve with diesel options.

Agreed about the diesels.

However, my understanding of the European market is that as you migrate down towards the B-Segment cars and then minicars/city cars, diesels become less important due to the inherent fuel economy versus performance advantages of small 1.0L-1.4L petrol engines over there.

But agreed I think diesel Astras, Focus', Rabbits, Mazda3s, and Cobalts would be very appealing. (It has been for VW.....my aunt/uncle own a VW store in Oklahoma City....and the few diesel Jettas they were getting were going for gold......people were fighting over each other to snap up the limited inventory. Should be a GREAT sign for when VW brings the TDi back....)

Edited May 13, 2008 by The O.C.

[Guest aatbloke]

Culture really has nothing to do with this particular discussion.

If we are going to discuss the Astra's powertrain, for the U.S. market, then we need to discuss it RELATIVE to the U.S. market. Your points about European C-Segment powertrain options mean NOTHING to this discussion.

....because we aren't remotely discussing the Astra in Europe, or the European market in general.

Culture has a lot to do with it. The American mentality is "bigger is better." If you're used to larger engines the chances are you won't appreciate the differences between a 1.6 and a 1.8 litre engine, and if you do you'll likely think they're irrelevant - and many here have stated words to that effect. However, when you're from a market whereby a 1.6 and 1.8 represent the bulk of what people buy, you're inherently in tune to their respective differences.

You're paying an average of what - $4.00 or so a gallon these days? When we were at that price level, the average motorist was driving a 1.3 to 2.0 motor, and still bitched about the price. Average incomes and expenses are broadly similar there, yet the average motorist is far from driving a humble 1600cc repmobile. It's the culture that determines the demand and therefore the supply.

The points made here were to determine whether 138bhp is sufficient for the US market. Well knowing what these engines are capable of in a C-segment car, and being au fait with American driving conditions, then I can say that it is, as would anyone with the same experience.

[The O.C.]

The points made here were to determine whether 138bhp is sufficient for the US market. Well knowing what these engines are capable of in a C-segment car, and being au fait with American driving conditions, then I can say that it is, as would anyone with the same experience.

I happen to believe it IS sufficient for the U.S. market, taken in isolation.

But it suffers in performance and (relative) fuel economy in comparison to it's (larger-engined) U.S. competition.

Edited May 13, 2008 by The O.C.

[siegen]

US buyers also get very little choice in this segment, whereas European buyers do - 171 variations of the Focus alone. In Europe, there's a wealth of difference usually (on paper) between a 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.0 and 2.3 litre engines. But then again, to us this is bread-and-butter stuff. To you people, anything less than a 2.5 litre is so insignificant you're going to simply lump them all together.

It's a cultural difference - end of story.

You're coming at this discussion with a viewpoint that the way things are done in Europe are correct and any deviation from that way is incorrect. From our viewpoint, Europe offers too many needless choices. It is indeed a culture difference, however you are trying to use your culture's viewpoint on this topic to argue your point in this culture where things are quite different.

Anything less than 2.5L is not insignificant, that is a considerable exaggeration. Sales of compact and sub-compact cars make up a very sizable portion of cars sold. If you consider the sheer number of mid-size sedans and small crossovers sold with 2.4L engines, you will find that the majority of car sales are indeed under 2.5L (I don't have the time to actually verify this assumption, but it isn't a stretch by any means). Note that by car sales I am not including truck/full-size SUV sales, which still make up a ridiculously large percentage of sales here (however that is changing).

On the note of more engine choices...I wish we would get more diesels, especially in smlal cars. I read somewhere the diesel Fortwo gets somewhere in the neighborhood of 70mpg. That would make the car very appealing. I would think small cars in the C-segment would get a good fuel economy boost in addition to the inherit bonus of a road, flat torque curve with diesel options.

On the contrary, I believe we need more diesels in larger cars and crossovers, and more hybrids in smaller cars.

[Guest aatbloke]

You're coming at this discussion with a viewpoint that the way things are done in Europe are correct and any deviation from that way is incorrect. From our viewpoint, Europe offers too many needless choices. It is indeed a culture difference, however you are trying to use your culture's viewpoint on this topic to argue your point in this culture where things are quite different.

I'm coming at it from the perspective of most countries on earth. There are not "too many needless choices" here. Take the power and fuel economy differential of say just half a litre of engine capacity: there's a good difference between a 1.1 litre and 1.6 litre engine, and more than a 1.5 and 2.0 litre, compared to, say, a 3.3 and 3.8 on average, in terms of its usability in real-world driving conditions. On paper, the difference will be quite stark.

The culture there deems it that you cross-shop between a 1.8 litre car and a 2.5 litre, which is fair enough, I'm au fait with that. However, on paper it's pretty bloody obvious that on average, a 2.5 litre lump is going to reach 60mph before the average 4-pot 1.8 in a similar-sized car. That's what makes the comparison unfair if you don't have some sort of disclaimer that you're using two very different sized engines.

But I agree, cultural differences are at work here.

Edited May 13, 2008 by aatbloke

[Guest aatbloke]

I happen to believe it IS sufficient for the U.S. market, taken in isolation.

But it suffers in performance and (relative) fuel economy in comparison to it's (larger-engined) U.S. competition.

Which it's bound to.

[siegen]

I'm coming at it from the perspective of most countries on earth. There are not "too many needless choices" here. Take the power and fuel economy differential of say just half a litre of engine capacity: there's a good difference between a 1.1 litre and 1.6 litre engine, and more than a 1.5 and 2.0 litre, compared to, say, a 3.3 and 3.8 on average, in terms of its usability in real-world driving conditions. On paper, the difference will be quite stark.

The culture there deems it that you cross-shop between a 1.8 litre car and a 2.5 litre, which is fair enough, I'm au fait with that. However, on paper it's pretty bloody obvious that on average, a 2.5 litre lump is going to reach 60mph before the average 4-pot 1.8 in a similar-sized car. That's what makes the comparison unfair if you don't have some sort of disclaimer that you're using two very different sized engines.

But I agree, cultural differences are at work here.

It doesn't matter what the perspective of other countries are, as the car is competing in this market. It wouldn't matter if this market was the world's smallest, to sell successfully here the product should be tailored to this market. We don't want to deal with slow cars, and offering more smaller engine choices here would not be a good opportunity cost decision --at this point in time--, as the "cost" would be considerably increased overhead and the need for more tooling at the factories or more imported engines and cars; while the "opportunity" would be only a marginal increase in sales in a segment where the domestic manufacturers are already running slim profit margins as it is.

But now we are waaaay off-topic. So to restate my point, 138hp is good and average from a n/a 1.8L compact vehicle in this market; however, in the Saturn Astra, which weighs around 2,860 lbs and has a 4-speed auto, it is too weak and results in a slow vehicle that returns poor mileage. Weight and gearing may not be the only factors, however on paper it is all we can assume at this point. From a packaging standpoint, I do not feel that this Astra is a good buy. It is on the expensive side of compacts, yet offers acceleration and fuel economy that are both at the very bottom of the pack. That isn't to say plenty of people will not buy it, but it will not likely become a sales success.

[The O.C.]

However, on paper it's pretty bloody obvious that on average, a 2.5 litre lump is going to reach 60mph before the average 4-pot 1.8 in a similar-sized car. That's what makes the comparison unfair if you don't have some sort of disclaimer that you're using two very different sized engines.

But it is fair from the standpoint that......the car manufacturers have decided what powertrain combos to offer in their C-Segment cars over here. Some have decided on greater displacement at the possible detriment of some fuel economy......(say the VW 2.5L).....while others have decided to go with smaller engines with perhaps less performance, but the hope of greater fuel economy (Nissan, Honda with their smaller 2.0L.)

The manufacturers have hedged their bets on powertrain configuration. NOW, it is up to the consumer to contrast and compare....and make their purchase decision based on what's more important to them.

For some of them, the performance differential will not be that big of a factor. For others, like my friend that traded an X5 for a Rabbit 2.5L, will appreciate the added performance of the larger engine....while still getting what they feel is competitive fuel economy that suits their needs.

[PurdueGuy]

lol @ no meaningful conclusions comparing a 1.8L car to a 2.5L car. It makes the conclusions MORE straightforward and meaningful.

CarA & CarB are the same size

CarA has 2.5L, is faster, doesn't get as much fuel economy

CarB has 1.8L, is slower, gets better fuel economy

That's pretty darn meaningful.

[siegen]

lol @ no meaningful conclusions comparing a 1.8L car to a 2.5L car. It makes the conclusions MORE straightforward and meaningful.

CarA & CarB are the same size

CarA has 2.5L, is faster, doesn't get as much fuel economy

CarB has 1.8L, is slower, gets better fuel economy

That's pretty darn meaningful.

CarA has 2.2L, is faster, gets better fuel economy

CarB has 1.8L, is slower, gets worse fuel economy. But handles better!!! :AH-HA_wink:

[IfICouldWouldYou?]

It'll take more than the $4 a gallon to change Americans' opinions. It took WWII to change Europe's. Before WWII, American cars and European cars were quite similar. After the war, they were completely different.

Maybe that's what it'll take here to get us out of our Impalas, F-150s and Tahoes. Re-launch the Astra with the 2.0 Ecotec turbo - then watch sales fly.

[Guest aatbloke]

lol @ no meaningful conclusions comparing a 1.8L car to a 2.5L car. It makes the conclusions MORE straightforward and meaningful.

CarA & CarB are the same size

CarA has 2.5L, is faster, doesn't get as much fuel economy

CarB has 1.8L, is slower, gets better fuel economy

That's pretty darn meaningful.

You and I are clearly more than oceans apart.

[Guest aatbloke]

But it is fair from the standpoint that......the car manufacturers have decided what powertrain combos to offer in their C-Segment cars over here. Some have decided on greater displacement at the possible detriment of some fuel economy......(say the VW 2.5L).....while others have decided to go with smaller engines with perhaps less performance, but the hope of greater fuel economy (Nissan, Honda with their smaller 2.0L.)

That's a fair comment - and I think i's also fair to say the segment there is rather like a dartboard with half a dozen darts scattered across it, reflecting manufacturers' different interpretations as to what makes an ideal model there in that segment. Those really are the choices facing American consumers. Over here, on the other hand, this segment is far more concentrated with all the darts lumped together for specific engine sizes, all vying for that valuable piece of segment-within-a-segment.

Things will get particularly interesting once small diesels begin making their mark over there, where the performance based on cylinder capacity with 4-cylinder models can range enormously within 0.5 litres, moreso than a petrol model.

[regfootball]

I've driven more cars than you could ever imagine (in the U.S.), so don't even think of going there.

You KEEP IGNORING MY WHOLE POINT THAT THESE CARS ARE ALL FIGHTING FOR CONSUMERS IN THIS MARKET REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ONE HAS A 1.8L, A 2.0L, OR A 2.5L.....people over here don't buy cars simply based upon what the litre-size of the engine is. They don't buy them that way, and they don't necessarily compare them that way.

And YES, I put that all in caps for emphasis.

And NO, the discussion was not a 1.8L in a C-segment car.......the discussion WAS is the 1.8L in the Astra, IN THE U.S., underpowered or not relative to it's competition in the market (which comprises of cars with 1.8L, 2.0L, 2.2L, and yes, 2.5L.) The answer is, seemingly, YES....it is underpowered. That doesn't make it unacceptable, necessarily, but it is down on power and performance compared to the VERY cars (and their bigger engines) that consumers in this market are test-driving against it.

Of course you most certainly aren't "ignorant", but you're acting like it in regards to the realities of the market here, because you can't even bring yourself to acknowledge (whether you do agree or not) the point I've been trying to make.

People over here usually shop either price, or market segment (subcompact, compact, midsize, fullsize.) They don't shop "1.8Litre cars" or "2.0Litre cars" or whatever. Do you GET that...?

The answer could be something like this......"Yes, O.C., I understand that consumers in your market compare vehicles of like price and size and it is common for those vehicles to potentially have different sized engines with different combinations of power and fuel economy. But over here in Europe, because of the much larger availability of engine sizes, comparison shopping tends to gravitate towards models with similar engine sizes and here, the Astra 1.8L is very comparable to other 1.8L cars that consumers may be shopping"

(I feel like I'm speaking into a bottomless pit......)

to underscore OC's point, i have commissioned a screenplay based on this story

ACT 1 SCENE 1

location: typical car buyer's home, surfing internet

"Joe" - wow, this sucks. gas has gone sky high and my -king truck is costing me a bundle! I've just put gas in again today and the pump stopped at 75 bucks! i had to put in another 30 just to top it off! man, pay day ain't till friday and i need to have some cash left to buy some bud light this weekend so we can have your friends over and get hammered! 4sum! yeah!

"Liz" (rolling away from Joe's groin, fixing her jaw) well Joe, did you ever think about getting a smaller car?...by the way, Kristi and Jennie both think you smell, so fat chance"

Joe - oh stop it you old skank! duh! i'm surfing for small cars right now! my buddy at work just got a bitchin car he said he cut his gas bill in half! and he gets excellent mileage too! He let me take it for a spin, he said its got 170 hp.....it really moves out....get me a beer!

Liz - (bringing Joe a beer from the fridge) well dear, aren't you gonna get screwed when you trade your truck? (puts top back on)

Joe - duh! that's why I need something CHEAP! hey, that Focus, you can tell it to play tunes!!!!!! cool fender vents!

Liz - duh, Joe! everyone knows the focus doesn't have rear anti submarining headrests!

Joe - (contemplating) oh. Yeah, you're right. Hey, this mazda 3 looks bitchen, the test dudes say its the best car....by buddy said that was a good car too. what's this one saturn......ass......trah.....hey, do you ever shave down there?

Liz - aren't the saturns made of plastic? and by the way honey, I wax....but i guess you wouldn't know that since you never seem to check down there that close for yourself now, do you?

Joe - ...nah, this saturn is new, bitchen car! wait, they tested this in one of those supercar magazines.......oh crap!

Liz - what? (painting toenails)

Joe - holy crap! dang thing can't even get out of its own way! thing is like 2 seconds slower than fred's car! and i can't even tell the damn thing which tunes to play! it's only got a 1.8 engine! that rabbit thing is like a 2.5, that's the one that won! and it looks like they get the same gas mileage?

Liz - well you wouldn't be very happy with a slow beater like that, would you?

Joe-you know me Lizzie, I like to GO GO GO! Hey Lizzie,!

Liz - yes Joe? (looking quizzically)

Joe - "play artist little Joe goes to town, baby"

Liz - (walks over towards joe)

Edited May 14, 2008 by regfootball

[FAPTurbo]

[Guest aatbloke]

ACT 1 SCENE 1

location: typical car buyer's home, surfing internet

Having read through your prose with some interest, I'm curious as to how many wheels the home itself has.

[regfootball]

why, you thinkin you wanna get in on some lizzie?

there might be wheels on that house but its a very good point. people in the US that buy small cars are economically challenged most of the time. saving dough is the main reason they would even consider a small car.

generally in the US, people will upsize their car as much as their pocketbooks can afford. it's deceiving now because after a long boom of buying cars on home equity etc. many people are downsizing, between that and spendy gas. most of the people even considering small cars now would not normally unless their waller wasn't in a world of hurt.

[Guest aatbloke]

why, you thinkin you wanna get in on some lizzie?

there might be wheels on that house but its a very good point. people in the US that buy small cars are economically challenged most of the time. saving dough is the main reason they would even consider a small car.

generally in the US, people will upsize their car as much as their pocketbooks can afford. it's deceiving now because after a long boom of buying cars on home equity etc. many people are downsizing, between that and spendy gas. most of the people even considering small cars now would not normally unless their waller wasn't in a world of hurt.

To be fair, that's because you've never had to pay realistic fuel prices. The culture becomes suited to that and develops ideas what it considers the norm. For example, while I was there many people felt the need to buy a large SUV the moment they had a baby - yet the majority of such vehicles usually had only one occupant at any one time. Things however are changing and you're starting to approach the level most countries around the world have been used to for many years. As far as the credit crunch is concerned, I said that would come when I first moved there and began getting astronomical levels of credit approved, and discovering the sheer number of people who had to resort to bankruptcy. That was a ticking time-bomb.

Edited May 14, 2008 by aatbloke

[enzl]

To get back on point a little: The Astra is a great start--the 1.8 was the default choice because of what's being produced in the EU. I'm sure that GM would have preferred the US Ecotecs...

That being said, apparently Gas Prices and Fuel Economy concerns finally made news at the tubes:

http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A.../805140386/1148

GM's going to emphasize cars and fuel economy! Wow, are these guys a little slow.

[Robert Hall]

To get back on point a little: The Astra is a great start--the 1.8 was the default choice because of what's being produced in the EU. I'm sure that GM would have preferred the US Ecotecs...

That being said, apparently Gas Prices and Fuel Economy concerns finally made news at the tubes:

http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A.../805140386/1148

GM's going to emphasize cars and fuel economy! Wow, are these guys a little slow.

Amazing..have they finally awaken from their overdose on obese trucks and SUVs?

[regfootball]

To be fair, that's because you've never had to pay realistic fuel prices. The culture becomes suited to that and develops ideas what it considers the norm. For example, while I was there many people felt the need to buy a large SUV the moment they had a baby - yet the majority of such vehicles usually had only one occupant at any one time. Things however are changing and you're starting to approach the level most countries around the world have been used to for many years. As far as the credit crunch is concerned, I said that would come when I first moved there and began getting astronomical levels of credit approved, and discovering the sheer number of people who had to resort to bankruptcy. That was a ticking time-bomb.

what just because the US didn't have overtaxed 7 dollar fuel? wow, you're full of yoself.

[cire]

Amazing..have they finally awaken from their overdose on obese trucks and SUVs?

I think the U.S. market has finally suffered a hangover from their addiction to monstrous trucks and SUVs. Isn't it amazing what severe price hikes in fuel can do to a society that has bought into the "bigger is better" illusion for so long?

I think GM and Ford are suffering now because they streamlined their focus on what was at one time an extremely profitable segment while they neglected their car segments and surrendered those segments to foreign competition. Both corporations received a severe wake up call when gas prices spiked and many people started to realize that their SUV vehicular monstrosities weren't as necessary to their lifestyles as they had been previously brainwashed to believe. It's so sad to see them playing catchup with the swift market changes, but I hope they have finally learned that they need to pay attention to all segments of the auto business to ensure long term success instead of focusing solely on the profitable flavor of the moment. I owned car products (both brand new) from each corporation during the height of SUV mania and both products presented me with nightmarish ownership experiences in addition to being glaring examples of the halfhearted development/engineering that both companies were investing in their car lines at the time.

[siegen]

To be fair, that's because you've never had to pay realistic fuel prices.

There's nothing unrealistic about what we pay for gas. Our price fluctuates just like all other commodities do based on supply and demand. You are right to assume that most Americans have never had to pay gas prices that most Europeans pay. You are wrong to assume that our prices are unrealistic while yours are realistic. Our gas is not taxed unlike many nations, and there are plenty of nations that pay considerably less than we do.

The culture becomes suited to that and develops ideas what it considers the norm.

Perhaps you need to think on this sentence for a minute.

[A Horse With No Name]

Don't forget the 1.8L 140HP civic engine.

I drive a 1.8L Integra and 1.9L Escort Wagon often. The Escort is sufficient for normal use, although it is a bit slow accelerating onto freeways and passing, it is adequate but not fun. The Integra is of course quite fast and fun. I believe it also weighs a tad more than the Escort. The gearing and powerband must be superior since it has the displacement and weight disadvantage. These are both 5-speed manuals.

The 2.5 Jetta isn't the best comparison to the Astra, and I haven't tried to make that comparison although I suppose some people will. The 2.2L Cobalt, despite the larger engine, is a direct competitor, as well as the plethora of 2.0L compacts (Kia, Hyundai, Ford, etc). They are the same price range and offer similar mileage. The Astra may have a better chassis, better handling, and European styling.

...off topic but the 1.8 Integra was one of the sweetest cars Honda ever came out with.

Hard to find here in Ohio not beaten to death...but I saw a really nice white 2 door V-tec Integra the other day (not a type R) on a car lot that was clean as a pin.

A type R integra would be on my short list of cool cars.

Also glad to see you don't drive an autotrajic...

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

There's nothing unrealistic about what we pay for gas. Our price fluctuates just like all other commodities do based on supply and demand. You are right to assume that most Americans have never had to pay gas prices that most Europeans pay. You are wrong to assume that our prices are unrealistic while yours are realistic. Our gas is not taxed unlike many nations, and there are plenty of nations that pay considerably less than we do.

Perhaps you need to think on this sentence for a minute.

I'd gladly pay Euro gas prices and Euro gas taxes if I could have a good, subsidzed rail system, better police, better highways, better environmental controls, better schools, and all of the other "betters" that the europeans have.

Government can't give away services...and I'd rather pay $7.80 for gas, drive less in a smaller car, and have the services.

Chris

[Robert Hall]

I'd gladly pay Euro gas prices and Euro gas taxes if I could have a good, subsidzed rail system, better police, better highways, better environmental controls, better schools, and all of the other "betters" that the europeans have.

Government can't give away services...and I'd rather pay $7.80 for gas, drive less in a smaller car, and have the services.

Chris

Yes, assuming that's what the Euro gas taxes go towards... the extensive and on-time rail system is one of the things I've really enjoyed on my vacations in Europe.. I'd support higher gas taxes to invest more in our crumbling infrastructure as well.

[A Horse With No Name]

Agreed...better to use the $ for jobs here than a war for oil "over there...

Chris

[Guest aatbloke]

There's nothing unrealistic about what we pay for gas. Our price fluctuates just like all other commodities do based on supply and demand. You are right to assume that most Americans have never had to pay gas prices that most Europeans pay. You are wrong to assume that our prices are unrealistic while yours are realistic. Our gas is not taxed unlike many nations, and there are plenty of nations that pay considerably less than we do.

Supply and demand affects prices everywhere, naturally. But I think the majority of countries in the world would agree that you've always paid what they consider to be unrealistic prices compared to their respective nations, because it's so heavily subsidised by your government. Not just those in Western Europe - which have long been notably highly taxed - but also Japan, several South American countries, Australasia, the Indian subcontinent, the Far East (except China) and many African countries. I discovered this list of retail prices on the subject getting on for a month ago in a trade magazine, which I converted into US gallons and US dollars:

Turkey $10.03

Norway $9.55

Denmark $8.47

United Kingdom $8.39

Germany $8.23

Portugal $8.23

Iceland $8.06

Netherlands $8.02

Finland $7.98

France $7.93

Belgium $7.64

Hong Kong $7.56

Sweden $7.42

Italy $7.30

Hungary $7.21

Slovakia $7.09

Austria $7.03

Ireland $7.03

Poland $7.03

Czech Republic $6.85

Croatia $6.57

Spain $6.49

Greece $6.49

Romania $6.32

Switzerland $6.24

Lithuania $6.13

Slovenia $6.13

Israel $6.10

Uruguay $6.04

Greece $5.93

Latvia $5.88

Estonia $5.83

New Zealand $5.42

Kenya $5.28

Singapore $5.19

Australia $5.18

Chile $5.13

Mozambique $4.71

Brazil $4.66

Canada $4.62

India $4.61

Ukraine $4.43

South Africa $4.26

Cuba $3.91

Japan $3.84

Philippines $3.54

United States $3.49

Russia $3.46

Nicaragua $3.45

Argentina $3.09

Panama $3.02

Thailand $2.61

Mexico $2.55

China $2.44

Malaysia $2.01

Egypt $0.93

Kuwait $0.78

Saudi Arabia $0.45

Nigeria $0.38

Iran $0.33

Turkmenistan $0.29

Venezuela $0.17

Edited May 14, 2008 by aatbloke

[Guest aatbloke]

I'd gladly pay Euro gas prices and Euro gas taxes if I could have a good, subsidzed rail system, better police, better highways, better environmental controls, better schools, and all of the other "betters" that the europeans have.

Government can't give away services...and I'd rather pay $7.80 for gas, drive less in a smaller car, and have the services.

Chris

I wouldn't say that generally speaking, European policing or schooling are better than it is in the States. In this country at least, policing in many counties is woefully underfunded. The quality of state schools here can be hit and miss, as in the States, but things are improving now that schools across the country are graded based on exam results, teaching talent, etc. I'd say the standard of University education in the United States was second-to-none though, and probably the finest in the world.

I would say that in my own experience though that public transportation and highway maintenance is better in Western Europe.

[The O.C.]

to underscore OC's point, i have commissioned a screenplay based on this story

ACT 1 SCENE 1

location: typical car buyer's home, surfing internet

"Joe" - wow, this sucks. gas has gone sky high and my -king truck is costing me a bundle! I've just put gas in again today and the pump stopped at 75 bucks! i had to put in another 30 just to top it off! man, pay day ain't till friday and i need to have some cash left to buy some bud light this weekend so we can have your friends over and get hammered! 4sum! yeah!

"Liz" (rolling away from Joe's groin, fixing her jaw) well Joe, did you ever think about getting a smaller car?...by the way, Kristi and Jennie both think you smell, so fat chance"

Joe - oh stop it you old skank! duh! i'm surfing for small cars right now! my buddy at work just got a bitchin car he said he cut his gas bill in half! and he gets excellent mileage too! He let me take it for a spin, he said its got 170 hp.....it really moves out....get me a beer!

Liz - (bringing Joe a beer from the fridge) well dear, aren't you gonna get screwed when you trade your truck? (puts top back on)

Joe - duh! that's why I need something CHEAP! hey, that Focus, you can tell it to play tunes!!!!!! cool fender vents!

Liz - duh, Joe! everyone knows the focus doesn't have rear anti submarining headrests!

Joe - (contemplating) oh. Yeah, you're right. Hey, this mazda 3 looks bitchen, the test dudes say its the best car....by buddy said that was a good car too. what's this one saturn......ass......trah.....hey, do you ever shave down there?

Liz - aren't the saturns made of plastic? and by the way honey, I wax....but i guess you wouldn't know that since you never seem to check down there that close for yourself now, do you?

Joe - ...nah, this saturn is new, bitchen car! wait, they tested this in one of those supercar magazines.......oh crap!

Liz - what? (painting toenails)

Joe - holy crap! dang thing can't even get out of its own way! thing is like 2 seconds slower than fred's car! and i can't even tell the damn thing which tunes to play! it's only got a 1.8 engine! that rabbit thing is like a 2.5, that's the one that won! and it looks like they get the same gas mileage?

Liz - well you wouldn't be very happy with a slow beater like that, would you?

Joe-you know me Lizzie, I like to GO GO GO! Hey Lizzie,!

Liz - yes Joe? (looking quizzically)

Joe - "play artist little Joe goes to town, baby"

Liz - (walks over towards joe)

ROTFLMAO.....

That is the funniest damn thing I've read in a LONG time......

[The O.C.]

To be fair, that's because you've never had to pay realistic fuel prices.

Well it's all relative. Our gas prices have always been way lower than Europe's......but I do agree with the fact that it seems the average full-size truck/SUV seems to usually have your single housewife in the driver seat with nuthin' else in the blasted thing.