Unless the cost of more gears in the Powerglide is lower than the cost of an extra 10 % or
so increase in fuel economy, is there no point, other than performance cars maybe?
Not exact matches
Those modifications include stop — start (idle - off) systems
in which the engine shuts down when the car is stopped during driving; low rolling - resistance tires (which are harder and thus less flat, reducing friction); variable valve timing for engines, which
increases gas consumption efficiency; and
fuel economy computers or displays to encourage eco-driving, such as such as those
in the Toyota Prius, which show miles per gallon averages for that moment, hour, week or month, or when riding downhill,
so that drivers are more aware of how their driving impacts
fuel efficiency.
It produced 145 hp (108 kW) and 140 lb ⋅ ft (190 N ⋅ m) and accelerated the small car from 0 to 100 km / h (0 to 62 mph)
in 6.5 to 7.0 s. [14][15] The supercharger was belt - driven but actuated by an electromagnetic clutch,
so that it would not be driven except when needed,
increasing fuel economy.
Next year's model is lighter, but 2017 also brings revised adjustments to stated
fuel economy figures —
so expect some
increase in real - world mpg, even if the window sticker number is different.
Most importantly, when comparing models with the same features, the Toyota was about $ 7,000 cheaper,
so even with the slightly better
fuel economy of the Ford, the gas savings would never make up for the premium
in price (not to mention the
increased insurance costs of Fords aluminum body).
But because tons and power
increased so much, the average new car sold
in 2009 used only 10 to 15 percent less
fuel per kilometer than one sold
in 1990, when the present
fuel economy standards maxed out.