When I bought my 1985 Nissan 2wd it was $6k new without air or radio. The
basic Nissan Sentra was in the same price range. The Nissan truck seemed
more substantial than many of the cars in that day, and many of the cars
today. For example, it had a frame and didn't seem that it would be worse
in a crash than my Honda Civic or any other similar small car. I guess I
would prefer to see them the size they made before they became Dakota sized
and lost their economy. A couple of years later I traded in for a Nissan
4X4, I don't remember the exact gas mileage but I think it was close to 25.

My friend bought a Chevy Aveo and gets 35-36mpg, he said he saw where the
Ford Mustang with a 6 cylinder is supposed to get 31mpg highway. I guess
I'm a bit disappointed that a Ranger 4X4 with a 6 cyl doesn't do much better
in gas than some of the full size trucks. I was hoping to be able to find
something as economical to drive as my 85 Nissan was. I guess the 27mpg
Ranger or 26mpg Tacoma wouldn't be bad though. It seems to me that smaller
trucks have a lot of room for improvement, no wonder I see so many full size
trucks on the road these days.

RogerN


Haven't you seen all the stories on TV and all the pictures of obese
Americans? Most Americans are so big and fat that they can't fit in
small vehicles. Besides being fat they want big, fat vehicles that take
up a lot of space on the road and use a lot of gas. They couldn't care
less about anything but being comfortable and in being in big, huge cars
and trucks. So if you want something small and economical you're out of
luck, Dude. This is America. Land of the big, fat, lazy, pigs. But we're
still better than anyone else. Just ask us.

Hawke