beefers1

Notice how the compact and subcompact cars from the 80's and 90's were a lot smaller than they are today? A Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic compact nowadays is as big as a mid-size car from the early 90's. Sure, engines have become more fuel-efficient, but the increased size and power of the new compacts have all but erased the gains in economy!

In the late 1980's, GM created the budget Geo brand, and one of the first models was the Metro compact. It featured a 1.0L straight-3 rated at 55hp, and got around 50MPG. A 49hp model was also available, which got almost 60MPG.

So why is it that, despite better, more efficient engines, modern cars cannot reach that level of fuel economy? As I said before, compacts have grown in size, but nowadays, even the smallest cars have over 100hp (8th gen. Honda Civic has a 1.6L straight-4 rated at 123hp, up to a 2.0 with 198hp. A new Mini has a 1.6L straight-4 with 120hp.)

So why can't we build compacts like they did 15 years ago? With today's improved efficiency, combined with yesterday's design, I'm sure we can easily pass the Metro's 50MPG. Why not tune down the engine to 50-60hp, and make them smaller to early 1990's levels? It was perfectly adequate back then, and I'm sure speed limits haven't increased now to render the 100+hp necessary. For the everyday commuters that most of us are, why not?