I loved that car, 63mpg on highway @ 62mph…

Now the gear ratio was too high in the reverse, that you couldn’t back up a hill w/ the AC on. But other than that it was great.

The ’87 model did not have EFI, but a complex “electronic carb”… a pain to rebuild and re-calibrate. But wow on the mileage!

Why can’t we get past 35mpg today? … it seems we’ve done it before? Loss of memory? Suzuki is still in existence. What’s the problem?

IMHO

I loved that car, 63mpg on highway @ 62mph…

Now the gear ratio was too high in the reverse, that you couldn’t back up a hill w/ the AC on. But other than that it was great.

The ’87 model did not have EFI, but a complex “electronic carb”… a pain to rebuild and re-calibrate. But wow on the mileage!

Why can’t we get past 35mpg today? … it seems we’ve done it before? Loss of memory? Suzuki is still in existence. What’s the problem?

IMHO

I was feeling that way too upon first reading this article, but after I read the EcoModder article and watched the video, I realized that it was just a test of concept thing. My first reaction to it was a viceral one based a lot on his use of duct tape.

It would probably look pretty cool if it were nicely

finished with a permanent surface.

I have to wonder if the DOT would have anything to say about the safety of the duck tail.

I was feeling that way too upon first reading this article, but after I read the EcoModder article and watched the video, I realized that it was just a test of concept thing. My first reaction to it was a viceral one based a lot on his use of duct tape.

It would probably look pretty cool if it were nicely

finished with a permanent surface.

I have to wonder if the DOT would have anything to say about the safety of the duck tail.

If you think it is ugly; while I can understand this, I think you may be basing your judgments on “normal” cars that have quite poor performance, and that generate all sorts of aerodynamic problems because they are “designed” by stylists, or as a result of a string of design choices that have nothing to do with how they actually function. So, we have many bad habits — both in how cars are designed, and how we judge them.

Sincerely, Neil

If you think it is ugly; while I can understand this, I think you may be basing your judgments on “normal” cars that have quite poor performance, and that generate all sorts of aerodynamic problems because they are “designed” by stylists, or as a result of a string of design choices that have nothing to do with how they actually function. So, we have many bad habits — both in how cars are designed, and how we judge them.

Sincerely, Neil

I’d say exactly the same about 90% of the guzzlers on the road.

I think efficiency is beautiful. Most people like the looks of aircraft and think they look sexy but put a car on the road that looks like an aeroplane and people think it’s ugly. This is just because people are used to seeing a certain look of car. I think the boattail looks great.

Hats off to someone who cares more about reducing consumption that about how he looks to other drivers.

Nice work, Darin.

I’d say exactly the same about 90% of the guzzlers on the road.

I think efficiency is beautiful. Most people like the looks of aircraft and think they look sexy but put a car on the road that looks like an aeroplane and people think it’s ugly. This is just because people are used to seeing a certain look of car. I think the boattail looks great.

Hats off to someone who cares more about reducing consumption that about how he looks to other drivers.

Nice work, Darin.

I’ve always wanted to make a Chevy Caprice wagon (big roomy 8-passenger vehicle that has almost as much cargo room as a Chevy Suburban) hypermiler and see if I could get it up to 30-35 mpg.

I’ve always wanted to make a Chevy Caprice wagon (big roomy 8-passenger vehicle that has almost as much cargo room as a Chevy Suburban) hypermiler and see if I could get it up to 30-35 mpg.