2008 Saturn Astra

[geese]

It has a German feel to it because it is German. Opel engineered the vehicle and Vauxhall rebadged it for the UK. What do you mean by cluttered up the Saturn version? It is exactly the same as the Opel/Vauxhall version. It has the same interior and the same 1.8 Ecotec. Too bad the US Diesel regulations are so strict now that the diesel engine couldn't come over. Hopefully Opel is engineering a diesel engine that can meet US diesel regulations.

The exterior styling seemed a bit fussier then i remembered it to be. I did like the interior though- better then the current gen VW Golf i had a spin on a week back.

I do wish GM would do more with its Saab brand though - i relly like them- stop rebadging Subarus and do what Ford is doing with Jaguar and invest invest invest!

 

[mfacey]

My mom bought the 3 door hatch a few weeks ago here in Holland. Also with the 1.8 140hp engine. Great car. Nice finish, rides well and looks the part! She also got it with this cool panorama windshield. Here's one the press-photos.

 

[crazytom]

A 1.8L engine...is that the smallest they can go? I'm not looking to win any races in a car, even though most people are determined to beat me to that next red light. I just don't get it...it's a small car, I don't need to race it, and I'm sure not going to tow anything with it. Last time I checked, the fastest you could go in the U.S. was around 75 mph...so 85 mph would be a good top end for any consumer car. Is a little fuel economy too much to ask for in this day of high gas prices and global warming? My bicycle is looking like a much better option.

I've been spoiled: My little '91 Metro is still churning out 43 mpg, but showing it's age at 165K miles. Sure it's a deathtrap, especially with all the American idiots driving tanks around like they own the road; but I count on people being idiots and drive accordingly.

Saturn was my last hope for a fuel efficient, cost efficient car this year. Looks like I'll have to wait for the Automotive X Prize winner. *holds breath*

 

[blitzkrieg79]

A 1.8L engine...is that the smallest they can go? I'm not looking to win any races in a car, even though most people are determined to beat me to that next red light. I just don't get it...it's a small car, I don't need to race it, and I'm sure not going to tow anything with it. Last time I checked, the fastest you could go in the U.S. was around 75 mph...so 85 mph would be a good top end for any consumer car. Is a little fuel economy too much to ask for in this day of high gas prices and global warming? My bicycle is looking like a much better option.

I've been spoiled: My little '91 Metro is still churning out 43 mpg, but showing it's age at 165K miles. Sure it's a deathtrap, especially with all the American idiots driving tanks around like they own the road; but I count on people being idiots and drive accordingly.

Saturn was my last hope for a fuel efficient, cost efficient car this year. Looks like I'll have to wait for the Automotive X Prize winner. *holds breath*

In Europe things look a bit better, they have a bunch of efficient diesels there, here in US the oil lobby has too much influence on the government but around 2010 it seems it will change a bit as few car companies will bring more diesel options to the US market. But what is mind boggling is that here in NJ the price of diesel fuel is more expensive than the highest grade gasoline where diesel fuel doesn't require as much refinement nor technology to be produced. Current diesel engines are highly efficient, they don't pollute any more than gasoline engines and all of the world has embraced the diesels yet due to "strict US gov't regulations" you don't see a whole lot of them in passenger cars, same government that cares about the environment so much hat they haven't signed the Kyoto protocol which just proves that US govt is full of it as Europeans are even more restrictive when it comes to the environment but yet diesels account for a huge chunk of automotive market there.

Another thing is the Hybrids (which in my mind are overrated big time), people think they are saving the environment by going hybrid and it's definately not the case. On the Toyota Prius sticker you can read that the car supposedly gets 60MPG when in real life it's closer to 40-45MPG, EPA will introduce new ratings for 2008 models and people will see that Hybrids are not what they are cracked up to be, add to that that eventually the giant batteries will have to be replaced/disposed (which will not only be expensive to do but also environmentaly unfriendly). Hybrids are just a marketing ploy, the technology is too expensive and doesn't return significant savings in fuel efficiency nor pollution. Funny thing is that the 6 cylinder 3.0l PZEV engine found in the 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander generates less pollution than a Prius.

Diesels are not only more efficient than hybrids but also the technology is a lot cheaper, in Europe you can get diesles that will get you 60-70MPG and not skimp on acceleration (hybrids stink when it comes to performance oriented driving). Prius is just an econobox sedan that when you take out the hybrid system will leave you with a $15,000 car. One thing that we have to remember though is that there are also more strict safety regulations imposed on car manufacturers on yearly basis which unfortunatelly means adding additional weight to the vehicles which translates into burning more fuel and demand for higher displacement engines as you can't really put a 1.5l v4 engine inside an over 3,000 pound car because first of all the engine wouldnt be reliable as it would have to be constantly working at high RPM to move the car anywhere which would result in less than desirable MPG.

 

[Counterfit]

Prius is just an econobox sedan that when you take out the hybrid system will leave you with a $15,000 car.

With crappy handling too. The first Prius(es?) had low rolling resistance tires. Good for economy, crappy for ride quality and handling (the only time those two don't trade off against each other).

There are rumors of Subaru bringing diesel to the U.S. If they do, it's swap time for me.

he Ford Model T got 25-30 miles per gallon. Today's cars don't get much better. WTF?

And the Model T only made 20HP, while todays 25-30MPG cars make more than 10 times that. For example, the new Camry. Road & Track averaged 26.3MPG with it during a comparison test (read: not exactly efficient driving styles. They flog these cars) That's from a 268HP V6. 13.4 times the power with the same fuel efficiency, at higher speeds. Current cars are nearing the theoretical maximum efficiency of the internal combustion design (a least with current technology). 99.9% of the fuel is burned, but only 60% of that energy at most goes into producing power. The rest is lost as heat to the engine itself and the coolant.

 

[hopejr]

I've been spoiled: My little '91 Metro is still churning out 43 mpg, but showing it's age at 165K miles.

I have a 1992 Suzuki Swift sedan (sedan version Geo Metro, and looks nicer ). That's really fuel efficient (7.2L/100km), especially compared to my 1996 Camry (9.4L/100km). I hardly drive the Swift now, but when I did, I paid half as much for petrol weekly as I do now.

But what is mind boggling is that here in NJ the price of diesel fuel is more expensive than the highest grade gasoline where diesel fuel doesn't require as much refinement nor technology to be produced.

It's the same here in Western Australia (and I'm guessing probably other states here too). Very strange, but doesn't matter so much because diesels are so efficient.

 

[mkjj]

The Vauxhall Astra is not a bad car, friend has one, just seem a bit bland. The coupe is a good looking car though. The Vectra is seen as a reps car and gets severley hammered in the motoring press. Mind you this wave of adapted Euro cars must be better than the American cars I hav driven when on holiday, now they are poor, bits fall off them all the time!

Then again look what they have done to the great Chevy brand in the UK, re-badged Daewoos, oh the shame.

 

[Chundles]

The Vauxhall Astra is not a bad car, friend has one, just seem a bit bland. The coupe is a good looking car though. The Vectra is seen as a reps car and gets severley hammered in the motoring press. Mind you this wave of adapted Euro cars must be better than the American cars I hav driven when on holiday, now they are poor, bits fall off them all the time!

Then again look what they have done to the great Chevy brand in the UK, re-badged Daewoos, oh the shame.

Holden (the Australian arm of GM) is doing the exact same thing, instead of the cool euro designed small cars they used to have they're now rebadging Daewoos - and getting slammed in the media for the drop in quality/design.

 

[Abstract]

I have a 1992 Suzuki Swift sedan (sedan version Geo Metro, and looks nicer ).

Geo Metro.......I think Ned Flanders owns that car.

 

[joepunk]

I have a 1992 Suzuki Swift sedan (sedan version Geo Metro, and looks nicer ). That's really fuel efficient (7.2L/100km), especially compared to my 1996 Camry (9.4L/100km).

Please correct me if I am wrong. The lower number 7.2L/100km is better than the higher 9.4L/100km?

 

[mfacey]

Please correct me if I am wrong. The lower number 7.2L/100km is better than the higher 9.4L/100km?

eh.... yeah...

 

[hopejr]

Please correct me if I am wrong. The lower number 7.2L/100km is better than the higher 9.4L/100km?

This is the inverse of the km/L (i.e. mpg) measure. Most people I know measure it as less fuel used for the same distance, i.e. L/100km. Less litres per 100km being better. It's generally regarded that 10L/100km (or 10km per litre) is the threshold, any higher consumption than that is inefficient.