Toyota Prius: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

com wrote: 


My niece drove that car in school. It sported a 1.2 litre
engine, and its performance with more than one person aboard
made it truly unsafe in western traffic. The gearing was such
that the driver was constantly busy clutching and shifting, and
there was no power brakes or power steering, so operator
functions became a serious distraction. Of course, air
conditioning was a matter of cranking down the windows.

That model was not available in California, and did not have a
catalytic converter. Further, according to the ad, the version
with auto transmission got 30mpg on the highway.

Honda (among the best of all car makers, in my opinion) would
not hold up that 1.2L '78 as an example of its engineering prowess.

It's truly a wonderful example of how far technology has moved
in the last thirty years. The Honda Fit is, I suppose, today's
equivalent...

Henry wrote: 

I would think not. The Fit has 109 HP and air conditioning.

It's mileage is 34/28 though.

Jeff

in article RpHyi.4513$z83.3452@trndny09, Jeff at com
wrote on 8/21/07 3:54 PM:
 

What stock is this relevant to OR does the author cross-post just because
he's lonesome???

I bought one of these used in 1982. It was a fun little death trap to go
back and forth to work in. Had a manual choke too.....only car I ever owned
that had a manual choke.
The milage was around 30 or so. Not bad considering the drive was about 10
miles each way with at least 10 red lights. Before that I was driving a 72
Malibu 350 V8 that got arounf 12 Mph, so after a little accident I decide to
go small. Eventually the cross member under the engine rusted through,
making the front end slop a little squirely, so I gave it to a kid needing a
car who worked in my brother-in-law's body shop. He bought a new cross
member wholesale and drove it good as new after that. At the time, the
body shop prices for dealer parts were 20-30% what the cost for private
parties like me. I once went to the dealer in the 70s for an lower front
end A-frame (only cam with lower ball joint installed). My price was $125.
I declined, and mentioned it to my brother-in-law at a birthday party a
couple of weeks later. He got it for me for abot $30.


<com> wrote in message
news:googlegroups.com... 

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:14:36 -0700, plenty560 wrote:
 


These did too:

http://www.honda.co.jp/news/1971/image/a71lfp10.jpg

http://www.geocities.jp/poohtibitama/ex2lifevan.jpg

http://www.geocities.jp/poohtibitama/ex2step.jpg

Henry wrote: 

I'm not aware of the 1200 having safety issues due to the lack of power.

It was an economy car that measured up to the manufacturer's claims. The
lack of power steering, (It did have power brakes as is with most cars
with disk brakes), on a car so light is also a non issue.

Oh, A/C was indeed an option as well.

 

Wrong again.

The 1200 evolved into the 1300 CVCC of which the '82/83 models got
nearly 60 mpg highway and 43 mpg in town. I know, I have one!

 

Yeah, cars have gotten bigger and get worse mileage and are not user
friendly with regard to maintennace.

Yep, enjoy your trip in fantasy land...

JT

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:54:30 -0700, Henry <com> wrote:
 

I drove a '74 Civic I got new until 1980. It actually outperformed
most economy cars of its time, at least partly due to its sporty
gearing. I once beat a Gremlin V6 in a drag race to 70 mph and I had
two 6 foot friends with me. It did have power brakes and it didn't
need power steering. Understeered like a SOB though if you pushed it.
It had 12" wheels.

I drove it very hard and I only got over 30 mpg on very rare
occasions. OTOH, this was at a time when big cars got 12 mpg.

Put it in perspective. Compared to my '94 GS-R, the '74 Civic weighed
33% less, had less than 30% of the horsepower, had erratic engine
performance due to carburetor and primitive ignition, and went maybe
17% farther on a gallon of gas in the Summer and not at all better in
the Winter. The Integra is a far better car in every way, but the
Civic was great for its time.
 

Someone mentioned the manual choke. In 1974 the automatic was called
a Hondamatic transmission and it had a torque converter and two
manually selected gears. I bet that was still in use in 1978.
 

"Blash" <net> wrote in message
news:C2F0BC1C.78F79%net...
 
He's spammed car groups for a few months now. Never anything useful - just
the National Enquirer beat.

Mike