In 1969, Subaru Was Getting 66 Miles Per Gallon

The specs of this car put the curb weight at 993 pounds (with a full tank of gas).

Aside from creature comforts, there are plenty of things that add significant weight to cars for safety. Crumple zones, anti-lock brakes, traction control, air bags, seat belt tensioners, etc.

I do not imagine that it would take much of a collision to result in death or injury of someone in a 360. Efficiency would be nice to have, but I would like to be alive to appreciate the world that I am trying to save...

I agree that safety measures are a large part of the weight issue. Stronger roll cages, better braking systems, air bags, crumple zones, and so forth add weight. A vehicle like the Subaru 360 would be fatal to its occupants in a collision with a modern car, yet alone an SUV or pickup truck.

I seeded an AutoWeek article called The Evidence of Weight: What happened to 50MPG? (that's a direct link as not to do a shameless self-promotion). It was published in their Earth Day issue two or three weeks back.

Basically, they compare the 1992 Honda Civic with the 2008 Honda Fit. Even in just over a decade, the vehicle weight climbed almost 400 pounds (17% increase). That is only the past 16 years. By 1992, passive restraint (automatic seatbelts or air bags) were already required. Between 1969 and 1992, there were many mandatory additions to the safety features of cars.

20 years ago we went to Europe.
We rented a car. Actually a station wagon.
Three adults and two teenagers. Plus all luggage for two weeks.
We got incredible mileage from this car. Why? Because it was tuned to be economical.
It had no technical utentials for economy.
The vehical was tuned up to be economical.
In NA we are all supporting technology to save gas.
Not the technition to do this.

So how does the Yaris drive? I might be in the market for a new car by the end of the year. I don't really have any major requirements (although I do like Volvos and Saabs just based on looks), but I'm pretty willing to try anything.

I know, but I've never really been a fan of Japanese styling. European cars usually look more&helliip;muscular (might be the best term). The Japanese seem to really like the sleek look.

In the mid-90s I bought a Geo Metro that got 35mpg. I sold it a few years later when we decided to buy a minivan. Last year I talked with the mother of the woman who bought it and she said her daughter was still driving it and hadn't had any problems with it. I wish now that I had kept it and sold our pickup instead.

The Yaris drives great, considering it's a sub-compact. I like the stick better than the automatic. It's got 105 hp, which seems fine/enough for its weight, and there's plenty of room for four passengers and a lot of storage space in the passenger compartment, although like all cars of its class, there's not a whole lot of trunk space. But I can fit four people and two sets of golf clubs in it at the same time, so that's plenty, as far as I'm concerned.

It's also a breeze to do your own basic maintenance on. I replaced the stock air-filter with a re-useable K&N filter, and the throttle body and mass airflow sensor are easy to get to for cleaning. Oil changes are fast and easy, with the oil filter and drain plug in easy to reach places. I can change my own oil in about half an hour, using high-quality oil and filters for about the same cost as low quality oil and filters at Jiffylube, which is important for me, since I drive the hell out of it-- 40-mile commute, one way, daily. It also has electric-assist power steering, which is pretty cool.

About the only thing I don't like about it is the paint. The front end is pretty upright, and it gets stone-chips pretty easily. I keep a tube of primer and a tube of touch up paint handy, and you'd never know to look at it, but it could really benefit from a bra. From what I understand, the paint issue is pretty common to Toyotas, though.

Personally, I like the styling. You can also get aftermarket body kits if you're into doing mods.

For $12,500, it's kind of hard to beat.

I bought an '07 Camry Hybrid in May '06 (I otherwise would never buy a "first year" car model- let them refine it a bit before I spend my $$), and have never regretted it. I get 36+ mpg without trying, as I routinely drive 75+ mph on the freeway.
I think the styling is a little more vanilla than I like (I do like German and some European flair), but in the leather seats, Nav system and fuel economy make me smile.
Now it's only every other week to the gas station :)

But you can't buy the diesel Yaris in the United States.

Really? Why not? Could one be imported from Canada (or somewhere where the diesels are sold?

You might not be able to register it, in some states at least. I know California is very strict about this, and I imagine some other states are as well.

Thanks for the tip about the Ultimate Subaru Message Board, Robert - looks like a good site. I have a 2001 Subaru Forster, and have never had any problems with it - great car. I'm in the market for a new car now, and I'd like to buy a hybrid of some type. I wish Subaru would offer one, but I guess I'll have to go with Honda, Toyota or Nissan if I decide to go that route. If I don't get a hybrid, I'll probably end up with another Subaru - Outback or Forester.

I'm getting about 23mpg in the Forester, but that's almost all city driving since I retired, so I've been pretty happy with it. That's why a hybrid would be ideal for me. I would probably get 35-50mpg in the city, depending on which car I decided on. Safety is also a concern of course. so the Toyota Camry hybrid like Nycam has might be a better choice for us than a smaller Prius.

Thank you for sharing all your information. Have a Toyota Tacoma now and very happy with it especially living in Maine. Hope we can pool our thoughts in future to help each other.

gets 50 MPG on the highway

It is also worth noting that the EPA mileage ratings have changed recently. That 50 MPG would probably have been a 55-60 MPG rating using the old system.

The 360 also came as a "van" and a van-front pickup - they were used mostly in industrial settings, large plants (like Universities, large office complexes, etc.) as a closed version of a "Cushman" - to go around the plant. There are such vehicles today doing just that, being used in large plants - they aren't street legal. The 360 was a product of Japan's tax codes which increase the tax based on engine size, wheelbase, width, length, etc. Honda's original cars in the US were 2 different 600's (600 cc).

Europe for years produced similar small vehicles; Fiat 500's and 600's, Citroen 2CV, Renault 4's; etc. Very few today would drive anything that underpowered / equipped. Fuel economy is very much a figure of weight - it takes energy to move a weight.

European countries have different emissions standards for gasoline and diesel engines. Gasoline engines produce more carbon emissions and fewer nitrogen. Diesel are the opposite. So, the regulations allow diesels more nitrogen, but fewer carbon emissions. Here, we had a single emissions standard that was not diesel friendly. There are some transitional standards in place now to help the transition to clean diesel (ultra-low sulfur).

a little whiz of a car that got about 65 miles a gallon on the freeway. Top speed was about 80 miles an hour.

'You can already buy an 80 MPG diesel in Europe - but it can't meet US emissions standards.'
That's too bad. I wonder if that car could pass if it could burn the so-called 'cleaner' diesel fuel.

The irony of Environmentalism has come quote "360". Under California Emission standards, an SUV that gets 12 miles per gallon emits over 3X more carbon than this car does at 65 mpg. When you also consider that over a 5 year period (10K miles per year/50K) the SUV will use 3,397 more gallons of gas to operate. Thats 6X more fuel than for one of these subaru's. If MPG standards were 65 mpg that would represent an 80% reduction in oil consumption in the U.S.. Environmentalist in their "infinite wisdom" are killing our environment faster by enforcing emission standards when they should have been forcing MPG standards all along. How stupid is that??

Evironmentalism is a large group of diverse topics. It is obvious that emmision standards were promoted becaause it does not curb fuel consumption.

It is obvious that emmision standards were promoted becaause it does not curb fuel consumption.

I have to disagree. Because that assumes Big Oil has finger prints on it since they are the only ones that would profit from it. Big Oil in cahoots with the California Democratic State Legislator? Hardly. California Democratic State Legislator in cahoots with misguided environmentalist? Most definitely!

It only takes a few politicians with the right amount of power who have friends in big oil for such a thing to happen.

I agree with the whole political corruption theme where anything is possible. But that would be a HUGE story >>>> Democrat connections to Big Oil.

I worked for a dealership when a teenager and our place had one of the very first Bricklin's made. Nice car especially the doors opening vertically.

Thank you for that link. I learn something new and forget 2 things every day.

Yes, Eddie, we have a similar thing here. Not sure if different states handle it differently -- BUT you can register an older car as a collectible rather than as your main category vehicle. It will have a different fee for the license, the emission standards are waived, different insurance rate. Your license plate will have the word 'Collector' or something like that, in addition to the license number.