Amusing
 

If you're really wanting something fuel efficient, maybe reconsider a VW diesel:
86 Diesel Jetta Manual

After all, they "have been known to go over 650k miles on one tank"

I used to buy them at about 150k and dump them well before 300k. They may have lasted a lot longer time but I always needed dependability.

Actually all kidding aside the 86 was the first year with hydralic lifters and given a chance was perhaps the best diesel volkswagon of that era.

There is nothing simular available on the new market in north america. Parts where relatively cheap and it was very simple to fix.

I flogged enough of them all over north america to develop a decent respect for what they where. Today their their vintage styling looks out of place to me.

My workmates went crazy for the "diesel bunny" during the gas shortage of the 1980s. They'd drive all over California, pay any price, just to get one. Once fuel became more easily available they went back to their gas-guzzlers.

All of the fuel-efficient car noise we're hearing nowadays is amusing and saddening at the same time, considering that 50 MPG cars were available 25 years ago.

Jeremy

cool!

I sold my 2000 VW Golf TDI to my brother - why did I do that?

He's got over 300K on it now - check my signature line on how it did for me.

Max was something like 64 mpg, but you know how that can be off. But I coasted down hills, no A/C etc.

700 + miles on a tank was very easy

I'm still working on my 85... 37hp 5 speed... gotta fix a broken bolt on the a/c bracket...

I love the new timing belt that (may need tightening)...

Never before have I seen so many "million mile" diesels that all get 40mpg+ (most often 300D and 300SD Mercedes) as I have on the Seattle craigslist. It seems to be the hotbed of that kind of nonsense, more often then ebay even.

I had an '89 Jetta diesel that I bought at their re-introduction. It consistently got 43 MPG in local driving, and could do 55 on the road. Very good car except for its 52HP. Using the AC was like turning on a Jake brake. That car with a modern TDI powerplant would be the best of both worlds today.

well, on the Jetta at least it is indeed a true 45 to 55mpg vehicle... no BS about it.
of course you can walk faster through the lights... especially if the A/C is on...

Doesn`t make anydifference how vintage they look, if it gets 650K to a tank.;)

Charlie

no kidding...
I think it could look and smell like putrified vomit, and it'd sell...:eek:

of course, the ad states the car gets 50mpg, so I figure it must have a 13,000 gallon fuel tank!

Indeed....we bought a Nissan Sentra brand new in 1983....we could get 55 miles per gallon on the highway.

That's just a slip of the brain, he meant 650 miles on a tank. No lie there- I do that on mine.

Also, to be honest, compared to my 240D, the '91 Jetta IDI I now daily drive is a rocketship.

It feels much more at home at 60 or even 65 than the 240D, which feels really out of breath. If I could only find a 1.6 TD, but those were rare in the US

Volkswagon went slowly but progressivly downhill in my opinion after 1986. I had an example like yours. With the natural aspired engine they threw it together with another standard transmiision. I did not like the internal gear ratios. Fortunatly they left well enough alone with the turbo engines transmissions.

There was in my opinion no comparison with the earlier manual transmission. Also they slapped on so many plastic add on body stuff I figured they had purchased the reliable toy company by then. For a company that knew what they were doing something was going very wrong during that period in my opinion.

It accellerated somewhat better but lost a lot at the same time. The current company wants to be the largest auto producer in the world. Introduce the right products into north america might go a long way to achieving this. I am not holding my breath though.

Top end I never took one of those earlier turbo models to myself. A friend claimed 180km per hour or about 110 smiles per hour. All I remember is above about 80 miles an hour acceleration became almost non existant. You knew it was there but that was about all. The indirect diesels seemed to drop efficiency and as a result the bottom plunged out of the fuel milage at speeds much above the legal limit. Legal limit was still 110 kilometers an hour back then. I am not going to do the conversion math accuratly. but about 66 miles per hour I think.

The 240d knows it needs the five speed. It actually screams for it.:rolleyes: Or at least sounds like it does to me. If it was my daily driver on the highway today I would really have to install one. I know I am not but to me it feels like I am abusing the engine.

Agreed. I forgot to mention that I changed my transmission for an '85 (code ACN) that has much better ratios. The one the '91 shipped with (AWY) was crap, unless you want to drag race ( and lose anyway)

Also agreed. I hate all that meaningless plastic. I cant even get under the front end to change the oil ( and I am not that fat for an American) I have almost a full '86 parts car and sometime may swap to the small bumpers etc. I suppose they felt they had to do something to freshen the 5 year old look, but didn't have the coin to retool. So they just did some "plastic surgery". Wankers.