Autobytel: 93% of Saturn Lineup Qualifies for Cash-for-Clunkers Voucher

[Charlie]

A new story entry has been added:

[drupal=3163]Autobytel: 93% of Saturn Lineup Qualifies for Cash-for-Clunkers Voucher[/drupal]

With Cash-for-Clunkers legislation headed for signing by President Obama, the team of experts at Autobytel has compiled an online buying guide that identifies the top brands and best model bets for a new, more efficient automobile that qualifies for the proposed Cash-for-Clunkers voucher. With gas prices surging upwards, the guide also serves as a timely road map of those vehicles best equipped to save money at the pump.

[adventureoflink]

so what, even our 4-cylinder saturns are STILL eligible for cash for clunkers, even though some of us have gotten over 40mpg? and not to mention this was mostly aimed towards gas/diesel guzzlers? How counter productive.

But ok.

[2NDSOUT]

Interesting.

Bah! I'm not going to trade in ANY of my Saturns for a "NEW" vehicle...

I STILL get 36+ mpg on my 94 SL2...and before my 94 SC1's engine went down...there were a few times when I had got 40 and 42 mpg...and THAT car has over 300K miles on it!

Besides...Even though the OUTLOOK may be nice on the outside, it is still a carbon copy clone of the ACADIA...which my wife and I rented once. Can you say "SPACESHIP"?

Geesh...there were so many controls EVERYWHERE...I felt like I was IN a Spaceship! Just felt uncomfortable. Even though the Acadia/Outlook has room...that 3rd row in the very back makes you feel like you are a mile away from someone if they are sitting back there.

No thanks. I'll be keeping my "old School" saturns. Thank you very much.

[luvme2tymes]

Old school all the way!!!!!

[spork]

That didn't read correctly for me. What they are saying, is that 93% of Saturn's current lineup is eligible to use a clunker voucher for purchase. Conversely, that means pretty much anything sold by Saturn in the past would not be eligible as a "clunker" as it got better than 20 mpg combined. Probably the only ones that might qualify would be some of the 6 Cylinder things Saturn sold since 2000.

[s-seriesguy]

Originally Posted by 2NDSOUT

Interesting.

Bah! I'm not going to trade in ANY of my Saturns for a "NEW" vehicle...

I STILL get 36+ mpg on my 94 SL2...and before my 94 SC1's engine went down...there were a few times when I had got 40 and 42 mpg...and THAT car has over 300K miles on it!

Besides...Even though the OUTLOOK may be nice on the outside, it is still a carbon copy clone of the ACADIA...which my wife and I rented once. Can you say "SPACESHIP"?

Geesh...there were so many controls EVERYWHERE...I felt like I was IN a Spaceship! Just felt uncomfortable. Even though the Acadia/Outlook has room...that 3rd row in the very back makes you feel like you are a mile away from someone if they are sitting back there.

No thanks. I'll be keeping my "old School" saturns. Thank you very much.

So many controls? Not really. It's a modern veichle with modern conveinences that people like. First generation Saturns are about as simplistic as cars get

[ARECCE]

Check this website.

http://www.cars.gov/

[s3nfo]

Well, for grins I went to the CARS website and ran my '01 LW300 through the formula and it doesn't qualify for the rebate. If the V6 300's don't qualify, I can't see how 93% of Saturn's lineup would qualify.

[plato]

again, it qualifies to use the voucher when you buy a Saturn, it does not qualify to get you a voucher if you junk a Saturn. Capisce?

[rossao1]

Such as, My '99 Mercury villager minivan it gets 18MPG. I would qualify for $4500 towards an Aura. The problem is the Aura can't tow my 3000 lb pop-up camper.

[unkle bik]

Originally Posted by rossao1

The problem is the Aura can't tow my 3000 lb pop-up camper.

the tree huggers don't want you to own a camper, boat, or a trailer these days. so no vehicle that can actually tow will be built....

[GR898SL2]

My dad has a late 90's Ford Econoline with the V6 thinking it got better fuel economy than the V8. The difference in FE is negligible, both get 15 MPG combined - but the V6 is notorious for throwing rods or blowing valves around 100K; the Triton V8 has higher reliability.

Even though he thinks the cash for clunkers is a joke, he qualifies for $3500 voucher toward a four-cylinder VUE like my mom's and $4500 if he considers the purchase of a Honda Civic or Ford Focus. I doubt he'll do it. My family generally likes to drive cars until the wheels fall off and the engine quits before even looking at another one.

[adventureoflink]

Originally Posted by GR898SL2

My dad has a late 90's Ford Econoline with the V6 thinking it got better fuel economy than the V8. The difference in FE is negligible, both get 15 MPG combined - but the V6 is notorious for throwing rods or blowing valves around 100K; the Triton V8 has higher reliability.

Hilarious.. getting better fuel economy cuz it's a 6 and that van weighs a good 5000 LBS at least I'm sure the V6 option threw its rods and **** after awhile probably because the econoline is a HUGE like xbox () full-sized van and it couldn't take that load over that span of time.

Come to think of it, I never known the Econoline (or any full-sized van) to have a V6 engine..

On another note, didn't the tritons like to spit out their spark plugs, or perhaps the plugs would break inside the head

[cmd146]

Originally Posted by 2NDSOUT

Interesting.

Bah! I'm not going to trade in ANY of my Saturns for a "NEW" vehicle...

I STILL get 36+ mpg on my 94 SL2...and before my 94 SC1's engine went down...there were a few times when I had got 40 and 42 mpg...and THAT car has over 300K miles on it!

Besides...Even though the OUTLOOK may be nice on the outside, it is still a carbon copy clone of the ACADIA...which my wife and I rented once. Can you say "SPACESHIP"?

Geesh...there were so many controls EVERYWHERE...I felt like I was IN a Spaceship! Just felt uncomfortable. Even though the Acadia/Outlook has room...that 3rd row in the very back makes you feel like you are a mile away from someone if they are sitting back there.

No thanks. I'll be keeping my "old School" saturns. Thank you very much.

While I can appreciate the simplicity of the "old school Saturns", (and actually I'm in the market for one to be my commuter car) I wouldn't say that the Outlook is any more complicated than any new car out there. My Outlook XE has less buttons than the wife's Aura XR. It's size is also comparable to that of it's competition and is easier to drive than a full size SUV like a Tahoe or something, in my opinion. I have it because it's comfortable for a big guy like me, fits a 4x8 sheet of drywall in the back, can tow our trailer around and gets better gas mileage than a comparable full size SUV. Plus you get to do business with a Saturn dealer to get one. I personally wouldn't have gone to a GMC dealer, so Saturn got my business instead of Toyota.

[lamont4689]

I'm not trading mine in as a (clunker) i will never concider it as one--

-my old 93 dodge-shadow---definately is a clunker
rich in S.Va.

[Sival]

Originally Posted by unkle bik

the tree huggers don't want you to own a camper, boat, or a trailer these days. so no vehicle that can actually tow will be built....

Towing is more a factor of the chassis of the vehicle than of the engine in it. For example, all versions of the Grand Vitara are rated to be able to tow 3 000 lbs, there is no difference between the 2.4L inline-4 and the 3.2L V6. Of course, towing 3 000 lbs with the 4 cylinder will make your car Slow (note capital S), but the car can still take it. Ideally, you'd use diesels for towing as they get better torque, but they're not available here so, well, tough luck.

Anyway, point is, I know some of you like blaming all the world's problem on "tree huggers" and the like, but this really isn't about them. It's not because of them that cars have lower tow ratings than they used to be able to have. My guess is that it's because of the coming of the minivan and of the SUV craze, people who had to tow bought SUVs or minivans (if the load was not that big), so car companies dropped towing options on their cars because the volume wasn't there to make it profitable and they didn't have to prepare their car platforms for the towing equipment. It's not like all vehicles have zero tow ability nowadays, for instance the Uplander has a tow rating of 3500 lbs, the Traverse, of 5200 lbs and the Suburban, between 8000 and 9600 lbs. I'm pretty sure the "tree huggers" would have preferred cars to have kept the towing option rather than see the Tahoes and Explorers do the job.

[Tiger]

Last night as I was watching SNL, Fusz, the local Saturn dealership network kept advertising that they qualified for cash for clunkers. I think this is good. They are trying to survive and take advantage of what is available. I would like them to stay in business.

[VTHokie00SL2]

Originally Posted by adventureoflink

so what, even our 4-cylinder saturns are STILL eligible for cash for clunkers, even though some of us have gotten over 40mpg? and not to mention this was mostly aimed towards gas/diesel guzzlers? How counter productive.

But ok.

It means the existing new lineup is eligible for the rebate, not that the older ones are eligible to be traded in.

[Kooler King]

it's now a moot point, the cash-for-clunkers deal is over

[Sival]

Originally Posted by Kooler King

it's now a moot point, the cash-for-clunkers deal is over

What source do you have? The latest news I have is that they are trying to pass through a bill to allow 2 more billions for the program, but it's held up a bit in the Senate.