answers on consumption?

Because we got used to having very cheap gas. It has only been the last couple years that the price got high to the point that our large cars have become a cost problem. We like our large cars, but at $4.00 a gallon gas, US consumers are moving to small cars in droves...

Why the heck are you soliciting observations from outside the USA when you can go to the source?

Why am i soliciting comments from outside USA? Mostly to guage how much we're viewed as "ugly-americans" on account of our fixation on "big cars" & the offshoot, SUVs.

Please don't get me wrong, i love motorsport, & desire a spirited street drive!

Soccer Moms, using MY fuel, now THAT i question!!

In my perfect world all the mundane driving would be automated or mass transit. The only time you'd climb in your personal vechicle would be for pleasure!

For the same reason that people will pay through the nose (sounds like dirty slimy money to me) for anything. STATUS. I have had more than one business that got beaten out by the guy down the street with the flashy signage and hype even though he charged twice as much to get the job done. It's not just that bigger is better but more expensive is definately better. If ever you're on a street corner with a group of people and a big flashy car, truck or SUV goes by, invariably someone will mutter "I wish I could afford to drive one of those". You can't dictate style any more than people could make prohibition work.

We're Americans and we deserve anything we want.

duh

The outside world considers us (US that is) "dumb Americans!". Unfortunately, as a group, we do little to dispel that impression.

What the rest of the world does not realize is that they also put on there pants one leg at a time.

However, since Americans talk louder and more often, we get stuck first with the "dumb" label.

That's my 2 cents worth.

What the rest of the world does not realize is that they also put on there pants one leg at a time.

Hell no! the scots wrap their kilt around the waist. Pants! whazzat? dem's fer sissies and dandified city folks. <VBG>

And what about that part of the population that considers wearing pants as being unlady like?

In the past American cars all were big but recently they also did reduce in size.

I am 6'3" with size 15 shoes and I deserve something with a bit of space. I don't want the joint in the steering column hitting my foot when I go around a corner or sit in a car like a grasshopper (with my knees past my ears). Fortunately a lot of countries produces bigger cars.

If you are from a small (in size) country where you can cross it in a hour a small cramped up car may do but traveling longer distances a more spacious car is needed.

A second (or 3rd) smaller car is however a must.

In SA there is this epidemic of driving double cab or 4x4's for town traffic at the consumption they get it is murder and I don't think we can blame the Americans for that. What is happening in your country?

The same deal with SUVs here; most have 4WD, but will never leave the pavement.

I'm wondering about the logic of purchasing a vehicle that costs $35-$50K US, then complaining about the cost of feeding the beast.

BTW, a chum is your size, his favorite is a 1200S Cooper Mini (the original!) Just goes to show that space available is as much a function of arrangement as total volume.

Are you from outside the U.S.? The All Wheel Drive cars (not 4wd but AWD), or the first time that I heard of them, were all european in nature. Why? Better handling in poor, bad conditions. Enough said? Status? Maybe. We are indeed Americans and if "we" can afford it then "we" should be able to buy whatever it is that we want. Granted the rest of the world might think that we are arrogant in our views (which is fine with me, don't look down on me until you have lived in my shoes) but what we drive is the least of anybodies problems. What about the big BMW's and the Merc's and the beautiful Italian sports cars Ferraris & Lamborghinni's why not complain about these as well -does anybody really need to have a 12 cylinder motor that will propel them down the road at 200 mph? Volkswsagen has a big motor coming out soon (if not already) something like a 10 or 12 cylinder.

While the price of gas IS increasing I think people need to start pushing for alternative fuels (not necessarily corn fuels which have been found to be MORE harmful to the environment than regular fossil fuels). In the early 80's Pres. Reagan told OPEC that if they did not lower the cost of oil, then we (as a country) would start making diesel fuel out of coal. What happened? Instant drop in cost of oil . Now instead of just talking about it, debating it or whatever, it shoud just BE DONE. No more discussion needed. We, as a nation need to get off of the proverbial tit of the middle east, away from their oil and the problems that have insued from our dependency(s). Let them enjoy the lack of income from the United States , they will be getting enough from China and India seeing as they are right up there with the Qty of cars that are being driven on their roads (nowadays). Hell, as much as I love the California coastline, if it means getting off of our OPEC addiction then by ALL means open it up to our HOME GROWN OIL COMPANIES (notice I said homegrown there was no mention of ANY OTHER ENTITY there. Read it as American oil companies) .

I won't even think of buying a car if the vin # doesn't start with a 1 or a 4... Why? These numbers signify that the vehicle was made (or more like built) in America. Let gas be the same way...

Cheerio

Why do most Americans want large cars? Well, to begin with, somewhere along the line our self esteem became all identified with cars. A thousand years ago it was all in the clothes.

Oddly enough the most cofortable car I have ever driven for long distance was the Volkswagen beetle. There seemed to be a place to rest every part of my body and you could steer it with two fingers and your hand in your lap.

We are a "possessions driven" culture. The most car crazy people I have ever known were in Dayton, Ohio. I worked in the tool business and nearly everyone I knew seemed to live for the next biggest and more expensive car. I heard one guy even say "what else does a man live for". One mold maker I knew even traded in his riding lawn mower every two years just to have the latest and greatest.

The rock group Queen had a song that put it rather well. "I Want It All and I Want It Now".

I think S Freud might have something to add on this matter?

bigger cars = more profits for the manufacturers

if they can persuade you to buy they win, it seems like a lot of people on this forum can see reason and are less persuaded. People who are really rich don't need to shout about it. I can have a lot more fun with my money than wasting it on a flash car - I'm not rich. I blame TV and indirect aspirational advertising. If you buy a big car don't complain about fuel consumption.

What about suing the manufacturers, it worked for cigarettes and fast food. "Your honour, when I bought this six-litre truck I didn't know it would cost this much to run".

Or what about big car sculptures? It looks like a car but doesn't go. Put one on your drive to impress the neighbours, wash it on the weekend and drive something sensible

"Or what about big car sculptures? It looks like a car but doesn't go."

They already have those in Kentucky and they sit on cinderblocks.

Americans buy and drive large cars for the same reason rocky mountain sheep bang their heads together. Yes, increased mating success, much like peacocks were supposed to have their tails for(not not any more).

Guys without cars have been dying out in America for many years now, and the carless male has no hope of adding his genes to the pool...

And how are Canadians any different, eh? (Unless, of course, you consider Canada as American; as in North American, in which case, I apologize).

Spent a few days in your fair city recently and, if anything the vehicles sporting Ontario plates are at least as large and expensive to own and operate as those across the border (and probably more considering the GST).

yes, foolish males are the same in both countries. Gas is about 20% more here, it sells for $1.08/liter. A US gallon = 3.79 liters = $4.09 a gallon. The US$ and C$ are almost the same now. Gas in Buffalo is $3.25/US Gallon = 86 cents/liter

California is about $3.50

This will drive the manufacture of diesels and hybrids, so the next 20 years will see quite a change in the operating fleet.

I expect more trains and more battery power local delivery vehicles, and possibly some long haul hybrid trucks, but they are efficient diesels now, so hte battery will allow smaller engines and give hill climb power from the battery?

The problem with this is that the price of diesel and diesel driven vehicles are higher than "normal" gas. Diesel here in San Diego has been well over 4.oo a gallon while regular unleaded is approx 3.59. The gas stations started to boost the price on diesel 2-3 years ago when all of th e diesels started to disappear off of the lots and K&N air filter systems (and the like) started making it plain that these motors were capable of getting better mpg.

Another reason diesels disappeared is the more stringent emission rules, from CARB.

Common rail injection, particulate traps, catalytic converters & urea injection will reopen the california market to diesels.

Low sulfur diesel, supposedly costs more to produce. The price of crude went from $25-110, but this doesn't mean the cost of production went up 4 times, does it ? Shouldn't diesel take less heat to remove from crude?

Steve S could probably shed some light on the relative costs of production.

Yeah, CARB is a beast that is making it harder for diesels; especially, here in construction - everything is run on diesel from the little Bobcats to the Loaders, Cranes to the big earth movers. All of them have been affected one way or another...

Up here, the air board is talking about subsidising the replacement of older diesels, which would then be sold out of the area. Exporting the emissions, not eliminating them. Construction & fleets dwarf the numbers of the intended target "ag".

Because we have had the freedom to choose to waste our own money and drive what we want without some busybody passing laws to force us to live the way they think we should. I like a big, comfortable, heavy, safer car too, but I drive a Hyundai Tucson that gets 28 mpg. It has the cargo space we need and seats 5 in relative comfort. It feels safe and roomy. No one should have the right to dictate how I should live, what I should drive, how I should think, who I should vote for, what I can say or what I believe.

When fuel gets too expensive, then people will choose on their own what they will drive, based on their own needs, desires and abilities. We also have the freedom to bitch about prices when they seem to rise without good reason and in some other countries are kept extremely low. We can also complain that taxes on fuel are too high and vote the SOBs out of office, but somehow Tweedledem and Tweedlerep are not all that different, so it really doesn't matter that much, we're still screwed to the hilt.

EVs have too little range, speed, size and convenience to replace IC cars for some time and those are not excuses, but good and valid reasons for not using them more. When EVs the same sizes as IC cars can go 400 miles on a charge, recharge in 5 minutes and cost the same as regular cars, THEN they will be accepted and used. Until then the majority of people will ignore the tears of frustration, whining and complaining from promoters of EVs, the "greenies". Stop complaining and produce something people will want and can afford to buy. Check the prices at Tesla Motors, Meyers Motors and AC-150 EV Power System and look at the speed, range and size. Expensive toys.

I don't live in America, Thank god! but have driven mostly American vehicles all my life. My buddy flipped his mini cooper on a windy road. Perfect condition but windy. I have crashed and/or rolled half a dozen cars yet none of them were attributable to my driving. Shit happens on twisty and windy mountain roads - especially when icy. My wife is terrified of small cars. She has been forced off the road a few time by big logging trucks or semis on the highway. Bad enough in a full sized Chrysler but deadly in a small car. It would hav ebeen so light it woudl have sunk in the river. the heavier car skidded to a stop on the shoulder. And it had more crush space.

Th eonly time I drove a car you might call small. it was hit broadside by a guy running a stop sign and I was pinned inside the wreckage. a smaller car would have killed me. Neither of us would be alive today if we drove those tiny little tin boxes on wheel. Ask most suburban women why they drive SUV or pickup trucks and the answer seems to be they feel safer than in a small car.

As for the cost of fuel. Well, my 20 year old diesel truck gets as good or better milage than a lot of the newer more expensive models by ford GM or dodge. I get 22 miles per gallon consistently. To reduce expenditure we have rearranged our life so we only go to town one or twice per month. Its a 100 mile round trip. Fuel burn is approximately $20 per trip. We are now paying $5.40 per imperial gallon. ( $1.20 CDN per Liter) No way could I haul fire wood for our stove in a sub compact car. We cut the slabs into 8 foot lenghts at the mill and haul it home.

90% of the local population drive trucks around here. I feel deprived because mine is not 4 wheel drive. Half the year we can't go certain places due to road conditions and the risk of getting a 2 wheel drive stuck. A chain saw is as much a part of the emergency equipment as road flares. More than once I have had to cut my way past downed trees across the road. Where do you put all that in a sub compact car?

Just one non American perspective.

I used to own an older (1966) chevy 1 ton "shorty" - the bed was shorter than the cab - built the engine for high low end torque, and could take that truck places that a 4WD would have problems getting to, no matter what the weather, as long as I kept good tires (tyres for you queens English folks) on it. Of course, it was outfitted with dual wheels on the back and I think that is what made the difference. Fuel milage never varied from 10.5 miles/gal, empty or loaded. Probably could have gotten better if I didn't have a lead foot all the time. Was nothing for me to put 5T of gravel on it, or stack 2 cord of firewood and go make my deliveries.

It's simply because of the US traffic laws.

If two vehicles arrive at a stop sign at the exact same time, the larger vehicle always has the right of way.

In terms of fuel and cost. Most of you are techies like me (Industrial maintenance) only most of you, I gather with engineering degrees.

The beast in the White House a while ago was talking about it being twenty years to hydrogen, no doubt thinking, excuse me he does not think, repeating the mantra about fuel cells.

Truth is virtually any of the reciprocating beasts we run are perfectly capable of running on gaseous fuels available every day. In Europe, during W.W. II, some folks used to do destructive distillation of wood and run on the product gas. Truth be to tell the conversions are really very simple.

Those of you working in warehouses probably ride, or at least walk by, such a vehicle every day; fueled with propane, i.e. forklifts.

I was indeed thinking of converting my old Dodge V8 van to run on LP because if I bought it in bottles I could sure as hell beat the road tax. LP, like gasoline, is available virtually everywhere.

Nonetheless, as evidenced by bus operations, conversion to LNG provides a much cleaner running engine. Conversion ought to cost less than a thousand bucks especially in these modern injected computer controlled machines.

BP (I believe it was) even installed some LNG dispensers here and there, no doubt thinking the change was about to take place. After all, not only are bus fleets converting, but power companies, gas companies, and others are running fleets of LNG cars.

I would bet that fuel injected, computer controlled engines would be capable of being squeezed down on gaseous fuels so that there would be almost no waste. After all that is one reason they don't pollute.

Further, small pumps for home compression of natural gas are now available.

The problem obviously is politics and the refusal of petroleum companies to give up their virtual monopoly.

Still, most of you folks are no doubt capable of making the fuel conversions.The biggest part of the problem, literally, is tanking. The engine changes, especially with fuel injection, simple.

j.

In England we give way to the vehicle on the right (left in your case) be it cycle or juggenaut, and do you know, it avoids accidents! I'm surprised you haven't thought of that. It reduces fuel consumption because one vehicle knows that it has the right of way.

He was kidding. The rule in most of the U.S. (at least in the northeast) is that the vehicle on the right has the right of way when both arrive at an intersection at the same time.

Yeah sure! Just wait till you get 4 way stop signs and five or more cars lined up at each road. Its an accident looking for a chance to happen. The bureaucratic rule is nothing gets done about installing a light until 10 fatalities have taken place. Lights are expensive you know. They cost $750,000 per intersection and life only cost . . . well its cheaper.

So we continue to waste fuel with stop signs at every intersection. The residents Association feel it slows cars down ( true) and makes life safer. Not true since the additional smog from cars stopping idling and starting again. Oh yeah and the latest enviro dictate. NO IDLING!

So now you have to shut of the car if it is idling more than one minute. I have timed it. Many lights take longer than one minute to run through one cycle. Especially when lane control involve seperate left turn signals then anothe rsequenc for straight through. One particualrly busy intersection takes 3 minutes by my watch to run through a complete cycle. And yes its inside a no idling zone.

California vehicle law (or however you want to put it) says that if 2 cars arrive at a sop sign at the same time then the vehicle on the right is the first to go through the stop, like yours... Not to far off from the old world now are we?

I remember clearly it was stated that by YYYY, everyone WOULD be driving electric cars. This was stated in the year XXXX.

Well, seems they were off by a year or two. Not that many electric or even hybrid cars on the road TODAY. I guess their crystal ball didn't work very well then.

The year XXXX was 1957 (51 years ago) and YYYY was 1970. Looks like we are already 38 years late of getting it done here in the USA.

Probably going to be another 30+ years before electric cars start showing up in any great numbers. Things like that just don't seem to happen very fast.

Same with making electricity, lots more is being generated by wind farms than solar farms, but neither one is efficient (yet). But the day is coming... if we are "lucky"!! and live that long, when we will be using something besides crude oil products as a fuel.

Seems the world is just about stupid enough to burn it ALL up FIRST, without having a replacement fuel. Going to be LOTS of crying and whining when that happens! All those vehicles, and nothing to make them go. :) And that time IS coming upon us really fast.

I went from a full size 1970 Chevy pickup with a 350/5.7L, about 12MPG, to a new Chevy S-10 in 2002. 262/4.3L, 2 less cylinders, 90 less cubic inches, was brand new (still about is, only 26,000 miles on it now, in 6 years) and it too, gets about 12MPG.

What is up with that? On the scales it weighs about the same (4,000lbs), even though it is much smaller. 32 years, and never improved the mileage. You think the engineers are slooooooooooow learners in making a vehicle go more MPG, or is there something going on we don't know about?

If I were to buy a 2008 S-10, maybe I would get 12.5MPG huh? LOL How sad.

That is the cause of a lot of the bigger vehicles on the road too. Why drive a smaller one, when they both get the same mileage?

Ken

They can make synthetic gasoline from coal. It was done over 50 years ago when Germany was running out of oil because we bombed their [captured] oil fields and tanker trains and pipelines. If we run out of oil and there are not enough alternative fuels, then we too will use synthetic gasoline and run the "greenies" out of town when they protest.

We are short on electricity now, if all autos were converted to electricity, we would have to double the number of generating plants. Not In My Back Yard, would be the first protest, the second would be that almost every practical or almost practical method of supplying large amounts of power will affect the environment. With all the lawsuits they could tie up new electric plants for 25 yrs or more and add millions to their cost. That cost will be paid by us in the form of higher electric prices.

Since EVs cost a lot more for a car that has the range, size, speed and convenience of regular cars, then fewer people will be able to afford cars. Fits into the elitist "Greenie" worldview that says people shouldn't have cars and should use public transportation.

Since Big Auto is locked into the inherently polluting IC engine average mpg has not increased since the 25 mpg of the Model T Ford, mostly due to pollution controls. For another solution e-mail - beesidemeusa@yahoo.co.uk - and ask about alternative autos.

I had a 72 Blazer 4x4 with 350, which I replaced with a 396. My mileage went from 15 up to 17.5 with the big block, at least when I kept my foot out of it! The larger engine was built for better performance than the small-block, higher compression,better cam,headers, etc,but what probably made the most difference was the 396 had more torque at 55 mph,so it was able to use less throttle opening. The truck had very high axle gear ratio , 3.07/1 ,so the large engine just loafed along. I think you answered your own question,"on the scales it weighs about the same". We must remember that todays engine operating parameters, are dictated by the EPA not MPG.

There is a slightly different view.

When studying, I took economics as my "non engineering" topics.

The answer to the initial quaestion is very simple.

If the car companies make a "small" car that sells for say $20k and makes 10% profit, then they make $2k per car sold.

If the car companies make a larger car that sells for $40k and makes 10% profit, then they make $4k per car sold.

The total number of cars that will be bought across any population is basically stable.

The directors of the car companies are required under company law to "maximize profit for their shareholders" and so will produce big cars as long as they can convince the public that they need them.

Would a government required to keep the 'best interest' of all citizens be justified in taxing the profit out of disproportionate useage?

Our government is not here to keep the "best interests of all citizens", it is here to defend our constitution, our shores, and give a level playing field for the people to do business and live their lives as they choose, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. The government is never justified in taxing the profit out of anything, the people always pay the taxes, and we are taxed enough thank you. If someone wants to work half their life, just to feed the government, so it can turn around and give the money to the latest fad program, they can move to another country. Please leave this one to "WE THE PEOPLE". The USA is based on Freedom . The freedom to drive what we want,to go where we want, and do what we want. If you don't like big cars, don't buy one. If gas costs too much, buy or build something that gets better mileage. If you don't like what someone else is driving,GET OVER IT !

I think this discussion has degenerated to where there is no point in staying subscricbed. BYE!

Unfortunately, when left entirely on their own, people will almost always optimize for the short term and society often has to pick up the pieces in the long term. That's why the government heavily taxes tobacco. In the short term, "you're only hurting yourself," but in the long term we all pay your medicare/medicaid bills.

Fuel efficient and low emission vehicles fall into the same category. Instead of leaving your kids or grandkids a gigantic mess to clean up, the government may (and I think should) choose to incentivize us all to make more sensible vehicle choices. Probably the best way to do that is by gradually ratcheting up the gasoline tax. In response, automakers will work harder on making more efficient vehicles cost effective (big ones if possible, smaller ones if necessary).

By your thinking, having the government increase gas taxes to get people to drive more efficient cars, you will actually cause low income people to suffer. Increasing fuel costs affect everyone and everything they buy. Food prices for example ,are heavily influenced by the cost of fuel, raise the fuel price, the poor pay more for food. The well to do will fly their jets and drive their Hummers anyway, how is that fair. You may then want to put a large tax on the lavish vehicles the rich buy, Clinton did that, and it only hurt the workers and their family's who built the yachts. And since taxes came up, how much of my "hard" earned money do you want the government to TAKE ? The highway fuel use tax is supposed to be there to maintain our roads, why then does 40% of it go into the general fund, and never make it to the roads?

What do you think will happen to poor people when oil starts to get scarce and gas prices escalate VERY quickly as more expensive oil sources come on line?

At least using my suggestion we can escalate prices SLOWLY and give people (and the auto industry) time to improve fuel efficiency.

It's not a question of if, just a question of when.

so, who really cares about 'poor people'?

Get a better job.

I seem to recall reading that Marie Antoinette said something similar to that not too long before she lost her head. "Let them eat cake", was, I believe, the phrase. There is another saying I like. "Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it".

I notice you posted annonamously.

Let them eat cake was good advice, since bread was scarce, because the economically ignorant revolutionaries had put price controls on bread. Cake, not price controlled, was readily available. And still people do not learn from history.

I beg to differ; my understanding on the translation of the Gallic: "no coarse peasant bread? why not then the fine white bread? (we, the wealthy have plenty of that)"

Yes, it was a test, when i started this from a point of view that we were consuming too much for the general good i was met with the view that "it's my right to conume as much as i can afford to!"

When i posed the thought that disproportionate use was driving climate change & petro-scarcity; if regulation were to curb this, we'd all be better off - i was called 'communist'.

& when i posted 'i don't care', i'm heartless; go figure.

For sure: petro supply is finite, the less you use the less it costs @ whatever price, + the less you NEED it the less extortive pricing is possible.

I like to consume, also. & resent being held over a bbl. This is not easy!

"That's why the government heavily taxes tobacco. In the short term, "you're only hurting yourself," but in the long term we all pay your medicare/medicaid bills."

Ah, but if the smokers die sooner, there are net gains to the government in reduced social security payments and shorter hospitalizations. Cancer kills quicker than
Alzheimers.

You didn't study very hard in economice unless it was at the local communist college. Economics isn't about the big bad businessman. Economics has a law called supply & demand. The rise in the purchase of Japanese cars in the US in preference to the american car companies is a result of supply & demand. The US has large cars because we want large cars not because some CEO decided he could make more money making them. Us companies are suffering because they don't respond to market demands.

Sorry, it is the car buyer, not the car decider, who does the deciding...and the convincing.

Those who whine are either poor or stupid. Get over it. Get a life.

There are only two solutions:

1. Get a high paying job, become rich - this is an advise for the poor.
2. Lessen your wants/needs - for the rich who can't get any richer.

I don't know where you live but you're an example of a busybody. You probably live in one of the many socialist countries where everyone sits on their behinds, work 25 hours a week and have the time to stick their noses into everyone else's business.

Take a close look at your own country and concentrate on "correcting" your own problems.

We work hard, we are generous people giving of ourselves and our wealth to many charities. We did not colonize and exploit Africa, India and China, and then leave it in a mess. We saved Europe & rebuilt it not once but twice and, as it looks now we'll probably have to extracate them from the Muslim hordes that they are allowing to overrun them and destroy their economies.

Mind your own business.

Here's a gent that hasn't (yet) been 'offshored'.

BTW i average ~55hr/wk; much of my time is spent trying to overcome 'the Unfair Advantage' (M Donohue, truly a special individual!!) of offshoring.

Hi, my name is Brad and I'm addicted to oil.

I love the sound of a well tuned big block v8 engine idling, accelerating or pushing red line. To me, it's as sweet as a babies cry. I spend my free time building, tuning and piloting vehicles that are powerful and in many cases loud. It's not about status, it's more about enjoyment. To dream up, engineer, and build a vehicle the way I want, is extremely rewarding to me. In many cases, I enjoy building them so much, that finishing the project is almost a let-down. There is a tremendous feeling of accomplishment, however, when I roll back the throttle on a 100+ cubic inch motorcycle or lift the front wheels of a car by accelerating.

We have an old saying around here, "If I have to explain, you wouldn't understand."

I'm kinda there, too.

Though my fantasy is a DFX powered Caterham7. Insane & loud? You bet! Big (read HUGE!), Never.

Hey Brad, I am addicted to oil too.

But, BOY Howdy is that a killer pic that you have for your avatar... Talk about getting your socks knocked off

Cheers

1. Yes, some Americans buy big cars for status. They buy big Mercedes cars, just as the status conscious Germans do. My wife drives a Prius, as a status symbol, but the fuel savings do not make up for the higher price.

2. If you are French, you can drive a Smart Car or other small vehicle, because all you need to carry is your mistress, and you don't go far. However, Americans often have large families. It doesn't make sense for Mama to drive one car, 35 mpg, with three children, while Daddy follows in another small car with the other three children. One big 20 mpg minivan or SUV makes sense. If you also tow a boat or travel trailer or whatever, a Prius won't do, even for one passenger.

3. In spite of the economy of driving a small car, sometimes a bigger one is cheaper to run. Example, I used to drive from Kansas City, practically the geographical center of North America, to south of Houston, on the Gulf coast. In my Subaru (about 25 mpg), it took two days and cost more for overnight lodging on the way than it did for fuel. When my wife traded it in on a Chrysler Pacifica (only 20 mpg, and with a 3500 lb. capacity trailer hitch), the larger car was comfortable enough that we could drive straight through, perhaps with one of us asleep after switching drivers. I wouldn't have thought that would be the case, but it was.

4. Rents and prices for urban houses or condos in Kansas City are such that we could not afford to live downtown, and even then public tranportation is inadequate. 20 miles from downtown, housing prices are about 1/3, and we have trees and a deck and a lawn to mow, too. The saving in housing cost can buy a lot of gasoline.

From inside the USA market, no comment as per your wishes.

But good luck finding your answer where you're looking.

When I was a boy, gasoline was 25 cents a gallon and coffee was 5 cents a cup. The price of a gallon of gas was the price of 5 cups of coffee. Now gasoline is $3.12 a gallon and coffee is at least $1.10 a cup, much more at Starbuck's. So, in terms of coffee, gasoline prices are lower than they used to be.

Back when gasoline was $.25 a gallon, gold was $35 an ounce. An ounce of gold would buy 140 gallons of gas. Now gold is about $1000 an ounce, and an ounce of gold will buy about 300 gallons of gas. The price of gasoline has dropped a lot!

There was a suggestion that we would consume less if imports were restricted. That is certainly true; we would consume fewer bananas and oranges and fresh flowers imported from South America. Of course, the rich would still be able to buy them, grown in hot houses heated by coal and worked by illegal immigrants.