The S Series would be a great car for the lineup today

[VTHokie00SL2]

I knew we'd hit $4 per gallon gas sooner or later. Figures that GM and Ford are still concentrating on trucks, SUV's, and muscle cars. Anyone else think that a modern day S Series would sell well? Of course, there's always the Honda Civic - an excellent small car with great fuel economy for sure! But I still miss my dent resistant plastic Saturn!

[MiSaturn]

The bigger question would be if the General could build the S series today and make any $$$ on it... . They'd probably have to ditch the 1.9L mil for something more modern, but with the exception of adding more airbags, it might sell.

Styling is somewhat passe', would have to come up with something with a little more fllair to make it saleable.

It would beat the snot out of most current econoboxes, IMO, that are available today.

[eRic 02sc2]

my SC2 is getting 27-29 mpg so I'm keeping it. a 1.8L from the Astra would be awesome in a S-Series. more power in a lighter car.

[Yenko]

Some of these new cars are getting worse gas milage than cars in the early 90's..

If these S-series would have come with even 140 hp 2.0L they would do pretty well against most imports in its day.

But then again, power is gas milage

[Tiger]

Originally Posted by Yenko

Some of these new cars are getting worse gas milage than cars in the early 90's..

That is what I was thinking. The new Civic decreased its fuel economy, along with the new Corolla. Now there is little difference in their fuel economy compared to my car. So, if you re-do an S-Car, would it compete with Civic and Corolla, or make something to compete with the Fit and Yaris? The Civic and Corolla seem to be more the size of the Camry and Accord of days gone by...

[SL2_Gold]

Ya this girl at school kept going on and on about how she is getting a 2007 honda civic for her 17th birthday and she said her dad was going to buy it because of the gas mileage and one day I was talking to her dad at home depot and he asked me what I thought about Honda Civics and I was like there okay but I mean my saturn gets 29/32 for gas mileages and its 13 years old. He said thanks and walked off and when I came back to school monday that girl pulled up in a green 1996 sc2. lol

[Tiger]

That is really funny! But, you may be on someones S-list if someone finds out about that conversation.

I was upset when the ION was rated for less MPG then my older S-Car. Seemed like Civic and Corolla were getting better gas mileage each generation until now. Looks like I will be keeping my S-Car for a long time. It is cheaper to repair then get something with marginal mileage gains.

[MikeNW]

A bigger motor (2.0 or 2.4 L) wouldn't necessarily get worse MPG.
It would have more power, so you could use a higher final drive, so the engine would turn slower on the highway. Modern technology would make the engine lighter.
Lots of people in the 70's got better mileage with small V-8 than 6 cyl because the V-8 loafed on the highway.
Plus, it's how the mfr. tunes it, camshafts and manifolds and timing etc.

You have to do some math to see if a new $$$$ econobox is cheaper to run than an older Saturn. The MPG would have to be a lot more to justify that much more expense.

EXAMPLE/
How many miles do you drive in a year (say 18,000)
What is MPG of new car (say 42)
What is MPG of old car (say 35)
What is $$$ per gallon (say $5)

Take $$$ per gallon x miles per year / MPG of old car = $2571
Take $$$ per gallon x miles per year / MPG of new car = $2143
Take the difference to see what the new car saves in gas only in a year = $428.

Is it worth it? You do the math.

[Tiger]

Originally Posted by MikeNW

Take the difference to see what the new car saves in gas only in a year = $428.

Is it worth it? You do the math.

Thanks, math is not my best subject. The difference would be offset by the yearly Personal Property Tax and higher insurance rates. My insurance rate is amazingly low even with commercial insurance needed for work. When I looked at a used Civic insurance was $20 per month higher. Deprecation of the S-Car reaps its rewards come tax time.

My parents have a 94 Corsica with the 3.1 six cylinder motor with an automatic. On long highway trips they were getting from 35 to 37 mpg. So I can see were more power does not mean lower economy as long as other things are balanced out. My concern for a new car is not how fast I can get from A to B. As long as I can safely merge into traffic or get out of the way when needed I am fine. Most of the time I drive like a granny, but most speed limits are between 20 mph to 35 mph while they rebuild the interstate. It just seems car companies are putting power before fuel economy.

[MikeNW]

Well, there are a lot of other factors that I didn't include, tax, license fees, budgeting for repairs, etc.

I just did that as an illustration. In the 70's gas crises, people were buying new things that got a little better mileage than their older, paid off things. Sometimes it didn't make sense mathematically. "Well, this car gets 30 mpg and my old one got 24!" Maybe they were better off keeping their old one. Maybe they didn't drive enough to worry about it.

My SL has been paid off for almost 11 years, repair cost is nil, taxes are low, it gets almost 50 on the highway. YUP I'll keep it. Hell, I just put a cd player in it!
Even if I blow the diff pin, a new tranny is in the $2K range. Engine rebuild is not that much. I can fix almost anything on it.
My future Suzook GS500 will help reduce miles on the Sat.

[Tiger]

Very nice Mike. If GM would have a reliable car that could get 50 mpg now with the current/future price of gas that would be a great selling point. As it is the Aveo has unimpressive fuel economy for a small car. Now I know if I need a commuter car I will look into an SL1.

[eRic 02sc2]

Originally Posted by Tiger

That is really funny! But, you may be on someones S-list if someone finds out about that conversation.

I was upset when the ION was rated for less MPG then my older S-Car. Seemed like Civic and Corolla were getting better gas mileage each generation until now. Looks like I will be keeping my S-Car for a long time. It is cheaper to repair then get something with marginal mileage gains.

the ION was over 300 lbs heavier and came with bigger engines than S-Series so worse gas mileage was to be expected.

[higleyjp]

Originally Posted by eRic 02sc2

the ION was over 300 lbs heavier and came with bigger engines than S-Series so worse gas mileage was to be expected.

Still, you'd think that with all the advances in technology in the almost 20 years since the S-series engine was designed GM could come up with a car that at least equals the S-series, if not exceeds it in fuel efficiency even with the differences in displacement and weight you pointed out.

[bad mikey]

My 02 SL2 recently got 46.40MPG, I went 129.6 Mi on 2.793 gal of fuel. Not only was I driving but the wife my son and daughter where along as well as an overstuffed trunk. We travelled from Oshkosh, WI to Spring Green, WI no winds, air temp in mid 50's. We started in flat runs to the very hilly areas of southwest WI. Even on the way back with even more junk in the trunk, air on this time and storms I managed to get 36 MPG. This car is very well maintained I have 101560mi on it and it runs most excellent!!

[Citation84]

Originally Posted by Yenko

Some of these new cars are getting worse gas milage than cars in the early 90's..

If these S-series would have come with even 140 hp 2.0L they would do pretty well against most imports in its day.

But then again, power is gas milage

The EPA rating procedure is different as of 2008, so, yes it will appear that the new cars get worse mileage than the ratings achieved with the old.

Additionally every generation of car seems to be larger and heavier than the last and it can't all be attributable to "safety" concerns. Look at a Camry from 1988 and today. Or a Civic from 1984 and today. A "mini" van from 1988 and today.

[Citation84]

Originally Posted by VTHokie00SL2

I knew we'd hit $4 per gallon gas sooner or later. Figures that GM and Ford are still concentrating on trucks, SUV's, and muscle cars. Anyone else think that a modern day S Series would sell well? Of course, there's always the Honda Civic - an excellent small car with great fuel economy for sure! But I still miss my dent resistant plastic Saturn!

It was only a matter of time. History does tend to repeat itself, but..

Not only is it GM and Ford lost in the wilderness with their heads up their SUVs but Chrysler is claiming just today that they expect to "turn things around" with their all new Dodge Ram truck. They're just hopeless. And only now is GM giving us the Cobalt XFE ????

That Caliber pig only gets 30 on the highway and the PT no better. Avenger and Sebring get 32 with the base engine but they aren't in the same class or price range as the Civic/S Series/etc.

Supposedly the Astra gets 32 HWY. I have always gotten 32-37 on my ION on the freeway and 24-27 in mixed city driving and that's with an automatic.And always better than EPA estimates over the past 3 years.

You are sooooo right VT, there is a glaring omission in the Saturn/GM/Ford/Chrysler line ups. Sadly if we do get a high mpg, reasonably priced [and the Astra isn't either, yet] small car from any of them they will be sourced from Korea or China in the future.

Let's see what happens when the next Gen. Cobalt/Astra offering comes out. Hopefully GM will go for CLASS LEADING fuel economy rather than "competitive" figures and keep the size and weight under control.And maybe a REAL base model without all that electronic garbage on it, so that one can at least CHOOSE whether or not it's necessary. Just more things to go wrong.........

KISS [ keep it simple stupid ] principles abound in the S Series and I doubt we will ever see the likes of that again, not between the nanny state wanting to idiot proof and turn every car into a padded cell and the ever progressing demand that even base models be loaded with heated seats and power cup holders and electronic fuel door openers as well as power this that and the other, leather, AC and on and on. It would be a a relief to find a car without all the junk added to it, but there are only a handful of buyers out there for the type of car the S Series represented as far as design philosophy.

What people say they want and what they actually buy are two different things, it seems.

[Low Saturn]

Originally Posted by higleyjp

Still, you'd think that with all the advances in technology in the almost 20 years since the S-series engine was designed GM could come up with a car that at least equals the S-series

They're capable of it, they're just not programmed to. We're just more than happy to fill our tanks with $4.00+ a gallon gas in wastefull cars and keeping oil companies in record profits and auto executives rich.

[Ashkicker]

GM obviously knows how to build an American made car that can deliver mid-40's mpg on the highway. The folks at Springhill figured that out 20 years ago when they designed the S-series Saturn.

Might just be a matter of corporate greed. If GM re-introduced the S-series in the $15 to $17K range, they would find it much harder to to convince us that we need to fork out $30 to $35K for their 2010 Chevrolet Volt.

On the other hand perhaps the demise of the economical, reliable S-Saturn is merely indicative that GM management wants to downsize.

[sl_don]

Originally Posted by Yenko

Some of these new cars are getting worse gas milage than cars in the early 90's..

If these S-series would have come with even 140 hp 2.0L they would do pretty well against most imports in its day.

But then again, power is gas milage

So you would be first in line for a 90 HP civic, 65 HP excel, 63 HP swift/Firefly/Metro. i could name more.

We want power power means more gas. it would be suicide fro a car maker to enter the market with a cheap sub 100 horse power car. nobody would buy it. the smart pulls it of purly on novelty factor (trendy) and when you consider it it really isn't that cheap.

in the Astra's segment all of the cars have at least 135 HP. the 1.8 was used in the Astra as a compromise between power and economy. When you compare it to the Mazda 3 sport and VW Rabbit yes it has less power but it is significantly better in terms of fuel economy.

The S-Series was a great car but its time has come and gone it would not be able to compete the market for those cars is flooded and there really is not enough profit if any in that segment.

[2003MercMaraude]

Agreed, that more hp does not equal less mpg, necessarily. I had a low mileage (as in 17k miles) 2003 Acura TL type S a year and a half ago. It was 260 hp 3.2 vtec, did 0-60 in under 7 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 14.8 (which for a stock FWD 4 door in 2003 was blazing fast). The car got 26-28 mpg highway driving 80 mph and passing everyone. The automatic SL2 I just bought will barely get that for highway MPG because it's an auto. And it does 0-60 several seconds slower.


But I had to trade "up" the TL-S for the V8 302 horsepower Marauder in my sig... yeah that was a "smart" move (downgraded gas mileage by about 8 mpg highway, woops! just in time for gas prices to go up)