DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Abaronos** · 08-23-2009, 10:43 AM

[QUOTE=tinomen;1175618Why does my 17 year old AWD turbo'd car get better fuel economy than either of the new AWD Taurus's?

Seriously,cars today going on a HUGE diet would yeild better numbers all around for performance AND economy..I have no idea why every car's turned in to a lumbering dinosaur these days.[/QUOTE]

What do you drive exactly? Fuel Economy numbers haven't really improved for some time actually. They have only been getting more powerful, plus the NEW EPA numbers also really helped to lower economy figures.
It seems that the car industry has a lot more to worry about economy, as they are worrying a lot more about CO2 emissions as well.

But economy wise to say the Dodge Charger, Taurus wins when you compare AWD vs AWD.

Yes, thoes are decent numbers.

But I would have loved to see 20/30 AWD & 24/35 FWD respectivly. I guess I am just to ambitious with my thinking...

24/35 is what small cars get with a 4-cylinder motor weighing 1000lbs lighter, lol.
Not even the V6 Fusion gets those numbers.

The Impala w/ 3.5L gets 21/31 FWD, not AWD, plus lacks 55hp compared to the Taurus 265hp and economy. Plus, the NEW EPA has these 211hp Impalas only rated at 18/28 these days, so the rating is no better than the more powerful Taurus.

08-23-2009, 10:43 AM	#10
Abaronos Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 452 Senior Member	[QUOTE=tinomen;1175618Why does my 17 year old AWD turbo'd car get better fuel economy than either of the new AWD Taurus's? Seriously,cars today going on a HUGE diet would yeild better numbers all around for performance AND economy..I have no idea why every car's turned in to a lumbering dinosaur these days.[/QUOTE] What do you drive exactly? Fuel Economy numbers haven't really improved for some time actually. They have only been getting more powerful, plus the NEW EPA numbers also really helped to lower economy figures. It seems that the car industry has a lot more to worry about economy, as they are worrying a lot more about CO2 emissions as well. But economy wise to say the Dodge Charger, Taurus wins when you compare AWD vs AWD. Yes, thoes are decent numbers. But I would have loved to see 20/30 AWD & 24/35 FWD respectivly. I guess I am just to ambitious with my thinking... 24/35 is what small cars get with a 4-cylinder motor weighing 1000lbs lighter, lol. Not even the V6 Fusion gets those numbers. The Impala w/ 3.5L gets 21/31 FWD, not AWD, plus lacks 55hp compared to the Taurus 265hp and economy. Plus, the NEW EPA has these 211hp Impalas only rated at 18/28 these days, so the rating is no better than the more powerful Taurus.
	Quote