Ebony's Pearls

Car From Front
Originally uploaded by nodigio

I went to Fuel Economy to see if my car qualified as a "clunker" under the new trade in rebate.

It is with a mixed heart that I must tell you that regardless of appearances, my car is soooo not a clunker.

In fact, it rates better than the newest equivalent model car (ie - same engine size, passenger and cargo space, weight, fuel type, etc) by a considerable margin.

My poor, battered clunker of a car is 14 years old, gets a combined mpg of 38, emits the least CO2 of all similar models of cars, and has the best emissions impact. A brand new car - a 2010 - of an equivalent make and model - gets a combined mpg of a laughable 24, emits CO2 in the mid-range, and does equal my car for emissions impact.

My car gets fantastic mileage - costing me only $700 a year in gasoline (assuming gas averages out to $2.50 a gallon) compared to a brand new car's estimated $1493. I've kept records of how much gasoline I put in my car and how many miles it's gone since the last tank-full so I know exactly what real life mileage my car gets.

What I'd like to know is why and how did new cars fall below the standard my old car has?

Aren't new cars supposed to be better, more fuel efficient, less polluting, and less expensive to operate than older cars?

When did they reverse and become less fuel efficient, more polluting, more expensive?

I'm going to invest in repairs for my car rather than buy a new one because my car, old, battered, and weary as it is, is a better car than any brand new one on the market.

I'd considered buying a new car after that man hit mine and damaged it, but I couldn't find a car that was as nice as mine. Now, I know for a fact that my car truly is much better (looks aside) than any new car on the market of comparable size, capacity, and engine.

So, I will wait to buy a ew car until the auto-manufacturers remember how to do it right and make a car better than mine.

Where did they go so horribly wrong?