I meant comparable in fuel economy and weight (or comparable MPG/weight ratio). Of course smaller cars get better MPG than my car, but my point was that they would get even better fuel economy if consumers didn’t demand such high powerful engines.
Uh, you just admitted that you drive a 24 year old diesel. :smack: :smack: :smack:
I’d be willing to bet that your car pollutes as much per mile as all the Formula One cars combined in any race. OK, maybe I was exaggerating a little on that one. But I am 99.99% certain that my 240hp gas engine is cleaner than yours, and I have 3.5 times the power. I get about 26mpg combined driving, but MPG goes out the window when you’re driving a 24 year old diesel. You’d have to get 1000mpg to pollute less than a new car with all the emissions controls on them.
Your diesel and Gore’s light bill are saving the planet!
Look, it’s really not a big deal if you didn’t realize it was a diesel. Most people are not familiar enough with 1980s Mercedes model naming conventions to have realized it either. I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I’m just telling you it’s a diesel. You can stop the spinning now, mmkay? 
Re: Diesels being dirty
They sure seem dirty, don’t they? That’s because you can see the pollution that the vehicle is putting out. Just because you cannot see it does not mean that it is not polluting, and the particulate matter that you see most likely has more of a hand in creating clouds than contributing to greenhouse gases. In fact, my 99 Dodge diesel does not have a catalytic converter installed on it at the factory. The EPA decided that it burned cleanly enough without it (it weighs 6600lbs, and averages 24mpg). Turbochargers (especially the variable-vane type, another motorsports advance) help make diesels much less smoky. The Mercedes could benefit from a more modern injection pump, but its concept is pretty sound. Less fuel burned usually equals less emmissions. If you want a modern equivalent to your Merc, the wife’s TDI averages 44. It gets better fuel mileage than your Merceds largely from getting more power from less displacement, and it is a blast to drive. The next generation is supposed to get even better efficiency and emissions than the current model, developed with Audi and Mercedes, two companies that I am sure have learned from their extensive racing experience.
Oh, and I have to give another racing plug. Cummins never developed another 2 stroke diesel after they melted one down at the Indy 500. The world would be much more filthy if that technology had persisted.
Further plugging: Most performance improvements on a diesel actually increase fuel efficiency. This is due to the diesel operating outisde of its most efficient range for less time. As long as you are adding a proportionate amount of oxygen to increases in fuel delivery, the emissions effects are negligible.
Now, the obligitory auto enthusiast’s counter to hybrids. You are probably not gonna get more fuel mileage than the TDI does in the real world. Plus, when you are done with the car, there are the batteries to dispose of.
And oh, I waited too long to be able to add these:
The Merc (3300lbs) and the Jetta (3100lbs) are comparable.
Opel had two diesel powered speedsters average 140mph for 24 hours, getting 114 mpg along the way. That sure sounds like racing or performance research to me.
As an aside, The Economist had an article recently about the impact of proposed European regulations on CO2 emissions, which would hit the Germans disproportionately hard because they make so many high-powered cars.
The Germans and the Brits had the most powerful cars, averaging 1.8 litres and 120 horsepower. The figure for the US was something like 3.2 litres and 212hp.
I have no idea if those numbers are accurate, but if they are then the US really is full of ridiculously oversized car engines.
No less a person than Soichiro Honda himself has stated that without the company’s participation in racing, and the knowledge (especially regarding engine design) gained in that pursuit, that he doubted very much if Honda could have survived as an independent company.
You asked for technologies that helped Hondas drive fast but also helped fuel economy, that’s what spazattak gave.
Your elderly oil burner is hardly a picture of effciency either. From such a large engine it produces little power and mpg on a par it would seem with petrol engines.
I know one way the F1 engine freeze might reduce CO2 levels. A lot of us just might be turning off our TVs. The best part of F1 is that the rules allow a team quite a bit of freedom to push the limits of technology. If I want spec open wheel, I’ll turn on CART.