Cash for clunkers: The best gas guzzlers to junk

As Congress debates cash-for-clunkers legislation, we reviewed our data to determine what worn out old cars make the most sense to junk and what qualifying cars we think would make better replacements—featured in another post.

The used cars we’ve listed are the newest vehicles likely to be available for less than $3,500, the minimum voucher value. For this to be worthwhile to the consumer, the vehicle’s trade-in value would need to be less than the voucher. Older versions of these vehicles are likely to be worth less, making the vouchers even more appealing. Many of the models have mechanical twins sold by another brand that may qualify, but we have not listed them here.

Make	Model	Older than model year	EPA combined mpg	Category
Cadillac	DeVille	1994	17	Car
Cadillac	Eldorado	1994	17	Car
Cadillac	Seville	1993	17	Car
Jaguar	XJ6	1996	18	Car
Lincoln	Continental	1999	18	Car
Lincoln	LS V8	2001	17	Car
Lincoln	Town Car	1996	18	Car
Mercury	Grand Marquis	1998	18	Car
Oldsmobile	Aurora	1998	18	Car
Pontiac	Firebird	1992	18	Car
Chevrolet	Astro	2000	16	Truck
Chevrolet	Blazer 2dr 4WD	1995	16	Truck
Chevrolet	Blazer 4dr 4WD	1999	16	Truck
Chevrolet	S10 4WD	1997	16	Truck
Chevrolet	Silverado 4WD	1998	16	Truck
Dodge	Dakota	2001	14	Truck
Dodge	Durango	1998	13	Truck
Dodge	Ram 4WD	1994	12	Truck
Dodge	Grand Caravan	2000	18	Truck
Ford	Aerostar	1996	17	Truck
Ford	F150 V8 4WD	1995	14	Truck
Ford	Expedition 4WD	2000	17	Truck
Ford	Explorer 4WD	1999	15	Truck
Ford	Windstar	2001	18	Truck
Isuzu	Rodeo 4WD	1996	15	Truck
Jeep	Grand Cherokee V8	1997	14	Truck
Jeep	Wrangler	1995	16	Truck
Kia	Sedona	2002	16	Truck
Mitsubishi	Montero Sport 4WD	2001	17	Truck
Nissan	Pathfinder	1998	15	Truck
Nissan	Quest	1999	18	Truck
Toyota	4Runner 4WD	1992	13	Truck

Keep in mind that spending money on a new car can buy you more than just improved fuel economy. A new car will have a warranty to cover repairs. And a decade (or more) of improvement in safety and reliability.

The past 10 years have brought big gains in safety engineering and technology, including better structure to cushion the impact while maintaining the integrity of the occupant space and safety features such as front-side and curtain air bags and electronic stability control (ESC). In particular, many older SUVs have a higher inherent risk of rollover than newer car-based designs with ESC.

In addition to casting the spotlight on eligible clunkers, we will soon present a list of Consumer Reports recommended vehicles that could serve as a replacement.  To see a complete list of Consumer Reports recommended models check out our ratings, available to online subscribers.

—Eric Evarts

Update: President Obama signs Cash for Clunkers bill.
For more information on the Cash for clunkers program, see our guide.

Comments

[Karl]

In this report..No were does it tell the truth that in the way this bill is written currently...It does not save one drop of oil!
Even the writers of the bill admit it was written wrong or incomplete!

You can turn a car in...and buy one that gets WORSE gas millage in return!

Plus, this bill does not take into account the pollution made building the new gas guzzler we are paying a minimum of 35 hundred bucks to create.

Its' just ANOTHER ill written RUSH to solve a difficult problem!

Thanks to the House and Congress for this new spending measure in a time where we can't print or borrow money fast enough! Quick, shovel it out the door before it's not worth anything!

[Justin]

I trade in my $3000 1991 MB SEL 420 which gets 15 mpg on 91 and if I get one that get 25 mpg or better I'll get $4500. Cool might as well take the money now and get a new car when the getting is good.
and for my 99% 6 foot 6 self i guess I'll have fun shopping, i fit in a xb and mini cooper thou.

[Andy]

This bill is only going to hurt U.S. citizens. If it does indeed boost new car sales by one million units, one million affordable used cars will be off the market while one million people will be in even more debt than they were. Also, our government will be in that much more debt and the dollar will be worth even less. What about this bill makes sense?

Who benefits from the bill if it becomes law? The American car makers get more revenue from interest on financing than from the cars they sell. Our government recently became large stakeholders in the U.S. auto industry by loaning them billions of dollars. Now the government is about to pass a bill that is supposed to generate one million new car sales, most of which will require financing. I believe there is a conflict of interest and we need to wake up and see what our government is doing.

[John Brownlee]

I have a 1981 Chevy pick up that's been taxed, registered and insured since purchased. It's not my primary vehicle and it gets probably 10 miles per gallon, at best. I use it whenever I have something to haul and since I live in a somewhat rural area that can be often. The "Cash for Clunkers" deal interests me because my truck isn't worth the $3,500 - $4,500 paid out and I project having a continued need for this type of transportation. However, my 28 year old truck doesn't qualify. Sad for me as I would take this opportunity to upgrade this vehicle. Without it, I have little incentive to do so.

[Marc]

Actually Karl, the bill, if approved would allow consumers to receive a voucher up to $3,500 if their current vehicle gets less than 18 mpg and they purchase a new car that gets at least 22 mpg. If they purchase a vehicle that has at least 10 mpg more than their old car, they could receive $4,500 credit. Now get back to your homework.

[JTO]

Actually, Karl, this bill, as it is currently proposed, would end-up with a net savings of oil.

You must buy a vehicle that gets at least 2mpg better than your current vehicle. To qualify for the bigger rebate, the mileage must be 4mpg better. Of course, you can buy a car that gets worse mileage, but you will not get the rebate.

While I don't think this bill goes far enough to promote cleaner cars, it's at least a step in the right direction.

Andy, I totally understand your concerns. However, not all Americans are impoverished. Some of us are just cheap. Why should I trade-in my 2000 Ford Explorer POC when it runs okay? The giant bucket of rust's only value is the engine, tires, and stereo. Give my $4500 for it and I'll happily buy a more fuel-efficient car that will keep a dealership open, factory workers employed, and help repay a loan that my tax dollars support.

My Explorer gets 13mpg on average. Let's face it, most of us don't need the cargo capacity of an SUV for over 90% of our travel. A Camry (made in KY), gets 27mpg combined. I will not drive any more per year than I currently do, so that's a savings of about 600 gallons of gas per year. Just for me. That equates to $1800/year in savings on gas alone. The Camry is far more reliable and cheaper to maintain than an Explorer, saving me another $100 or so a year. Add to that the $4500 tax incentive and my 9-year investment (assuming I keep my new car as long as the last) is over $21000 on a $20000 car. From my perspective, I win in the end.

Just my 2 cents.

[Mike]

I do not understand CR's determined efforts to totally destroy American-owned and built autos. I notice in the annual car survey they limit the number of years you can go back to input your auto experience. Too bad. My American cars, a 1998 147,000-mile Saturn that gets 38MPG highway consistently (just a simple 4-cylinder configuration), and 1995 208,000-mile Grand Marquis, and very reliable, cannot be rated. I should buy imported since they apparently need to be replaced frequently. I do know imports rust horribly. And ask any reputable mechanic. American cars win hands down.
Well, we do know CR has been successful destroying two American auto manufacturers. Ford is still hanging tough.
Look at the families destroyed by CR.
What is the energy saved having to build new cars, especially the voodoo hybrids?

[JBowden]

what will happen to the "junked" cars? Will they really be junked>

[Kevin]

Mike,

Consumer Reports destroyed GM and Chrysler because they report the facts? No. GM and Chrysler have been building crappy cars for years and people realized it and many switched over to better cars. I had a 94 Toyota Corolla which had zero problems over the 80,000 miles that I had it. I even accidentally drove it over 200 miles after I drained the tranny fluid for a transmission fluid change and it kept running. Let's see a Chevy Cobalt do that. Right, it can't, because it's under-engineered. Toyotas and hondas are over-engineered to stand abuse. Of course they are not perfect (toyota's quality has been slipping, and CR reported on that too), and not all the Japanese makers and great either (... mitsubishi...), but don't go blaming CR for honest reporting. I have a '95 blazer I got for free from my mom because it had so many problems it wasn't even worth a trade in. I fixed everything on it and I have since fixed tons more problems. Many of those problems GM knew about for years and didn't fix; they just kept making them wrong (lower intake gasket failure, for example), because of what? Greed. Pure and simple, they thought they could keep pulling fast ones and no one would catch on. I don't feel sorry for GM one bit, or Chrysler. Get a grip.

[Jmbo]

Karl (Rove) just wanted a place to drop his angry rant without doing any homework. This isn't a liberal conspiracy, son. It will actually have some beneficial effects and it will keep a lot of Americans working.

[Stephen]

when I look up the '98 nissan pathfinder at http://www.fueleconomy.gov, it's 16 MPG - slightly more than the 15 listed above.

Can anyone explain this? I'd be eligible for a certain 19 MPG car according to this post, but not the .gov site - if the final bill passes with the >= 4 MPG parameter that was on the House bill.

[urtruelove]

What about all 1992 and old Mercedes v8s. They were less then 18mpgs combined and their resale values are not more then $4000.
420sel, 560sel and se models.

[Fred]

As a conservative, I object to the contribution to the deficit this bill will create; but as a realist, the dummycrats will pass it anyway so why not take advantage of it?

It's my tax dollars that are being used, I might as well benefit.

[Bobby]

What the hell is this country turning into?

BTW: GM has made some damn good cars in the last 20 years(so has Chrysler), the fact that they were selling pretty much the same model cars in their 8+ different brands is what hurt them. That's why "back in the day" they killed off Oakland, Viking, Marquette, LaSalle, and many others. Just like they killed off Olds, and Geo before them, and now Saturn, Pontiac, GMC, and Saab, oh and their mid sized truck line too. Nobody wants to buy the same car with a different sticker. They had a few cars that were flops, like the Pontiac Aztec and others but every auto manufacturer has those...But when you get 8 different brands selling the same 3 or 4 cars with different grilles and emblems you tend to have issues.

I never did understand why they had Saturn for so long...and I didn't understand Saab even more.

[somebody]

why is the Jeep Wrangler on this list? no body is going to crush a Wrangler unless it was rusted to hell, and even then it would be picked clean of its drivetrain first and only the empty carcass would be sent to the crusher.

People want Wranglers and pay a premium for them and climb ontop of each other for one cheaply priced, you would be an absolute stupid fool to give the government a Wrangler for $3500 when someone out there will give you double or triple that price for it.

[anoldbikeguy]

Kevin -

You and your ilk really don't have a clue - get with the new century.

Most of the vehicles from the domestic manufacturers have superior fuel economy when compared to foreign based OEM's, as well as superior quality - see Toyota engine sludge, Honda class action lawsuits for transmissions, BMW, Mercedes, VW total quality issues.

It is time to stop the ludicrous vendetta against the domestic OEM's and look at the truth! Look at the vehicles for sale on venues like Craigslist, etc. You will see a tremendous number of domestic vehicles that have well over 200K miles that are still providing superior fuel economy and reliability = where are the foreign cars?

[Dealer_garage_queen - Saturn_Outlook]

Before I replaced the engine in my Saturn due to a broken camshaft I was achieving 14mpg. My car has needed numerous other problems fixed and I am fed up. Does my vehicle qualify? Please, give me a reason get rif of it!

[dezine]

Will the "Cash for Clunkers" program apply to company titled vehicles?

[Lis]

I thought this sounded like a great idea until I found out that only the cars rich people can afford are eligible. When you go look at the official EPA combined mpg ratings they are using for this "incentive" the ONLY cars that qualify are Lamborghinis, Rolls Royces, Mercedes Benzs, etc. The kinds of cars that the middle class owns are all just above the 18 mpg or less mark. I was hoping to be able to replace our '94 Camaro which in real life gets about 16 mpg, but since the EPA has it listed at 20 mpg, we don't qualify. What a crock!

[sharon]

with this cash for clunkers do you have to buy NEW!! or can you trade up to a vehicle that gets better mpg? This will make a huge difference in who buys and who just watchs

[Steve P]

Surely CR understands that a person with a pickup needs a pickup?

Therefore, we would want to trade in a clunker pickup on a new pickup - not a Honda Fit :-)

Where are the recommendations for work vehicles? If I trade in my 1984 F150, what are my best options in a full-size pickup?

[John Cooper]

The Cars For Clunkers legislation is actually very focused and is only available for a limited four month time frame. It offers participants the opportunity to trade in certain older cars for certain other new ones. Unfortunately, many cars do not qualify for the program and therefore are still ideal for the 'traditional' car donor option. Such non-qualifying cars let people give their cars to non-profit organizations who help people with many different kinds of needs, like supporting youth organizations or our older folks or to help promote the arts and health research.

Help yourself with the Cash for Clunkers program if you qualify or if you don't qualify or would like to help others, give your "clunker" to charity and take a tax write-off!

Here are 400 not-for-profit organizations that can always benefit from your 'clunker' or unneeded vehicle. To donate your car, just click on the link to the charity on the web pages below.

http://www.donatecarusa.com/charities/full_list

http://www.donatecarusa.com

[george swarthout]

My wife and I are on social security we couldnt afford the car payments anyway, we will just keep them going as long as we can.

[Garic]

please, please, please tell me I can get at least a $3500 voucher for a 1988 nissan pulsar nx. small and 4 cylinder it might be but I'm only getting an average 18 mpg, with a tune up an oil change. I would love to trade up to a brand new yaris, corolla, civic, focus, mazda3, hell even a colbalt, would be better than my oil smellin, too tight car.

[Barbara L.]

@Lis
I have the same issue with this program. I have a 1997 Nissan Altima with over 180M miles on it that gets no more than 10-15 mpg. I wanted to upgrade to an american car and this looked like a great way to maximize my downpayment. But according to the .gov grid because the car when NEW rated a 21-22 mpg I don't qualify. That is nuts. If the car still got that mileage I wouldn't be trading it in. Can someone explain this to me.