This is in response to an earlier diary, Is GM this freaking stupid?: Lamenting the fall of Saturn.
The diary hits on a misleading but oft-repeated meme - the mileage of new vehicles is being sacrificed for horsepower. To some extent this is true - new cars do tend to have more horsepower - but that's only one side of the story.
New cars are also loaded down with the weight of extra safety features and amenities that consumers dictated through past purchases.
Airbags have weight. Side impact protection bars have weight. Power windows have weight. Power door locks have weight. Cruise control has weight. Good stereo systems with umpteen speakers and a cd changer have weight. Navigation systems have weight. DVD entertainment centers with rear seat monitors have weight. Car alarms have weight. Motorized seat controls have weight. Heated seats and mirrors have weight. Automatic, dual climate control systems have weight. Emission control systems have weight. Sound control insulation has weight. Traction control and electronic stability systems have weight.
Heavy duty suspension and braking components to carry all this extra weight around with the increased performance consumers demand have weight.
Consumers have demanded their cars loaded to the gills with comfort and safety features. But they don't want to pay a performance hit for lugging all these extra features around. There's only one way to make a heavy car perform as well as a light car - add power.
Here is a comparison of the 2007 Saturn Aura XR midsize sedan to the 2000
Saturn L series LS2 midsize sedan:
(Note that both cars are the top-of-the-line model - i.e., there are less powerful models available - and usually the less powerful cars will sell better. But the diarist I am rebutting picked the top of the line, high horsepower Aura model to complain about, so that's what we'll look at)
Saturn L Series (ls2) Saturn Aura (xr)
Weight 3153 lbs. 3647 lbs.
Horsepower 182 hp 252 hp
Torque 184 ft/lbs 251 hp
Tranny 4 speed Auto 6 speed shiftable (emulates
manual for performance drivers)auto
Mileage 20/26 20/28
0-60 7.3 seconds 6.2 seconds
Wheels - 15" 18"
airbags 2 6
Stereo - Lousy AM/FM/Cassette 240 watts, 8 speakers, sep rear
single CD GM unit controls and headsets, 6 cd changer
of the period mp3 capability, speed sensitive
volume
(apologies for the sloppy "table." It's right in the text entry box.)
Is GM freaking stupid? Uh, no . . . The Aura gets better mileage than the L series, while being much faster and hauling around an extra 500 lbs. of safety features and creature comforts. But don't take my word for it, here are my references:
Saturn L Series (ls2) specs.
Saturn L Series (ls2) standard features
Saturn Aura (xr) specs.
Saturn Aura (xr) standard features
Saturn Aura (xr) 0-60
How does the competition stack up? See for yourselves. With only a couple exceptions, most midsize sedans get the same 20 city/28 mpg as the Aura. Give or take a couple miles.
Compacts get a few more mpg, but that's a different class of vehicle. Note however that while the Honda Fit (31 city/37 highway) gets better mileage than the comparable Saturn Ion (an abysmal 24/32), the Ion is due to be quickly replaced by the far superior Opel Astra. Europe is due to get a 59+ mpg hybrid Astra. I haven't yet seen plans to bring the Astra hybrid to the U.S. If you want it, why not drop GM a line (I guarantee they'll unionize before Honda does)? Otherwise America will be stuck with a 27/34 mpg Astra. It should blow the Fit out of the water in every other category though. The Astra is a very well received model in Europe.