Reasonably fun, cheap 90's-00's cars with shockingly good gas mileage

SlickDizzy wrote: In reply to alfadriver: (I used the $4/gal gas because this current low pricing ain't gonna last forever, and I hate the short-sighted "GAS IS CHEAP RIGHT NOW WHO CARES" discussion this inevitably will devolve into)

The low prices may not last forever, but they certainly will for your 1 year time horizon. Rework your numbers at $2.50 gallon. Also you may have a tough time getting $4500 net for your current car and any car you buy is going to need some work. People sell old econoboxes when they are dissatified with them and have neglected them for a while prior to dumping them. There is a saying "the cheapest car you will ever buy is the one you already have"

In reply to HiTempguy:

I'm currently driving a car that gets 19MPG combined on premium...30MPG on regular might seem like an arbitrary goal, but I don't think it's unreasonable. Honestly the lower cost of maintenance and insurance is just as much of a draw as the MPG, but I feel like if I'm making the jump, I might as well go all-in. And then there's the "being able to park in my garage" thing

SlickDizzy wrote: In reply to HiTempguy: I'm currently driving a car that gets 19MPG combined on premium...30MPG on regular might seem like an arbitrary goal, but I don't think it's unreasonable. Honestly the lower cost of maintenance and insurance is just as much of a draw as the MPG, but I feel like if I'm making the jump, I might as well go all-in. And then there's the "being able to park in my garage" thing

Oh for sure, I completely understand. My point was simply by making the goal an honest, real world 30usmpg, you are significantly limiting cars that are IMO "worth owning" in this age/price range.

Toyota Paseo?

It looks good, is reliable, gets awesome MPG and is a fun little car to drive.

I drove one of these through probably the three hardest years on a car of my life (16-19 y.o). Mine was a 2-door. They also come in wagon form. I only ever had one or two minor issues with it - replace thermostat, ball joint, rear brakes, and a set of tires in those three years.

all of 88 HP, but it regularly knocked back 35 mpg for me, the handling was incredibly balanced, and the shifter was lightning fast.

Also, best heat and AC I have ever had in a car.

might be getting a bit old to have the same reliability as I had though.

hyundai Accent?

http://austin.craigslist.org/cto/5119336835.html

Newer than most everything on the list. Handles decent. low 30's for fuel economy.

SlickDizzy wrote: In reply to OldGray320i: I actually just had a Focus ZX3 with the 2.3 Duratec earlier this year. I was really, really disappointed in the mileage (23-25MPG on a daily 150 mile all-highway commute). I gave it to SWMBO, she likes it but it still doesn't crack 30MPG. Do I have to sign up for the 1.9 to get decent numbers?

23-25 is terrible for a 4-cyl "economy" car. I didn't realize the 2.3's were so bad. Was it an autotragic? I know with the newer modern autos, they usually do a little better on mileage now than a manual, but I think a first gen focus is not in that category.

My boy has a 2000, so he's got the 2.0 Zetec in it (maybe they're really 1.9's?). I think it's 130hp stock, so it's not going to win any drag races, but he doesn't hurt on mileage at all. He's recently added a tune and SVT header, I'll ask him about mileage now, too.

This was in my manual DOHC fifth gear swapped '99 Saturn wagon after my commute one day:

Great car.

In reply to OldGray320i:

It's a 2.3 with a 5-speed manual. The 2.0 Zetec is not the same as the ancient 1.9 CVH, which was the "base" engine. I was surprised because the 2.3s even have a transmission with a longer final drive than all other Focii, yet we still do not see particularly great highway fuel economy out of it. To its credit, SWMBO sees 25MPG all day long in her all-city commute, so maybe they are just not cut out for doing 75MPH for an entire tank of gas like I was doing at the time.

I don't hate the Saturn idea but the "you need to swap 5th gear to get great mileage" bit is a huge turnoff, and more work than I want to do at this juncture.

IRT Powar - I had a 97 SOHC wagon, those hwy miles were all day long. Nice to see no change for DOHC car. That thing was bulletproof reliable, too.

IRT SlickDizzy - I went to check mileage for the 2.3 cars, looks like that might be a little low for hwy miles. http://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/4619/ford/focus/ford-focus-mpg-real-world-numbers/p2

Civic hx

SlickDizzy wrote: I don't hate the Saturn idea but the "you need to swap 5th gear to get great mileage" bit is a huge turnoff, and more work than I want to do at this juncture.

A) You'll still see 36 or 37+ with the standard DOHC trans. The RPM drop at 80mph is only ~500rpm. Its a "squeeze some more mileage out" mod, not one that changes the car from a gas hog to a sipper.

B) In case you are unaware, its a simple swap that can be done from the wheel-well - no removing the trans or any major surgery.

Our 318ti regularly does better than 30mpg locally and 36ish on the highway.

I vote Saturn DOHC for reliability and fuel economy, the coupe is a pretty fun little eco box to boot! for some reason I really liked driving my step moms back in highschool. and yes 5 speed and bright purple/pink

Just watch out for subframe rot

Just a side note - if/when you do find the gas miser of your dreams, swapping on some wide sticky rubber is a great way to increase the fun and decrease the mileage. Better off to go with narrow hard tires and just have fun sliding around.

I've got a 2005 Focus ZX3 winter car that fits the bill. It gets 30+ MPG, handles pretty well, has been very reliable, it's very practical and they're cheap. The 2.3's have a pretty big mileage penalty versus the 2.0's. I got 36 mpg on the 6 hour drive home in mine after buying it, which was over mountain passes, through towns and generally going over the limit. A couple years back I bought the SVT suspension setup for about $300 from Ford Racing, which gives stiffer springs and dampers which cured some noises and makes it handle a little better. I've had it on the track and it handled the abuse without issue. I'd recommend it. Fancy and exciting, not so much, but it's a good car.

Your BMW isn't an M5, right?

So you have a 45 mile commute, mostly highway, and A) you can't get over 20mpg in your car, and b) you got 25mpg in a Focus with a 2.3l?

maybe you need to slow down.

My parents easily got mid 30's in their Focus with the 2.3.

I was getting 21mpg in a EcoBoost F150 and my 35 mile commute. That's better than your BMW.

Something seems missing in this.

Right now, I'd tell you to get a 1.9 Escort, and slow freaking down. If money REALLY matters.

My 2012 Mazda 3 with the 2.5L MZR and a 6-speed manual gets around 26-27mpg on average. Not great. It sorta makes up for the poor mileage with a easy maintenance schedule and cheap parts, though. I have squeezed 30mpg out of it a few times. If you have an easy commute on country roads, it will get just over 30.

I regularly got 30+ MPG from my '97 Celica ST with 50/50 driving.

http://www.fuelly.com/car/toyota/celica/1997/aarivers/129208

Car was very reliable and being only 2200lbs was very fun to drive fast.

I'd take a look at the Saturns like people have suggested. Plastic panels also means that most examples will still be in good condition body wise.

t25torx wrote: I'd take a look at the Saturns like people have suggested. Plastic panels also means that most examples will still be in good condition body wise.

Absolutely true, however in salt land those panels may be hiding some structural rust.

Check the rear door sills and front subframe.

I'm pretty surprised theere is only one Civic vote in 3 pages. The EK Civic EX with slushbox I've been driving gets 32-35 in mixed driving, on snow tires. Not a bad car to drive, either. I'm sure a combination of 5spd and lower rolling resistance tires would get you close to 40mpg.

Scion Xa should be on this list as well.

In reply to alfadriver:

My commute has changed since I got the Focus. I used to do 150 miles a day going to Madison and back from Dec-Feb, all freeway. Now I do 45 miles a day about 3/4 of which is stop 'n' go. I think part of the crappy Focus mileage was that it was never warmer than 10 degrees outside during the months I was making that commute.

The BMW on the other hand just has 202k, the wagons have shorter rear end gearing than any other 5-series for reasons nobody knows, and 245-series rubber probably isn't great for economy either.

Giving up the Focus and getting into the BMW was a misstep in hindsight, but it was born out of SWMBO's Saab taking a E36 M3 and the need to get her into something else immediately. The BMW was the car that pushed all the buttons at the time and it SEEMED like a deal, with a great service history. I just didn't expect it to be as thirsty and troublesome as it ended up being.

XLR99 wrote: I'm pretty surprised theere is only one Civic vote in 3 pages. The EK Civic EX with slushbox I've been driving gets 32-35 in mixed driving, on snow tires. Not a bad car to drive, either. I'm sure a combination of 5spd and lower rolling resistance tires would get you close to 40mpg.

In a big city like Milwaukee, any pre-immobilizer Honda or Acura is not a car. It's a liability.