You see what’s interesting about this old Citroën 2CV brochure? Well, I mean all 2CV brochures are interesting, at least to me, but this 1963 British-market Citroën brochure does something pretty novel and useful: every car it shows, it lists its top speed and fuel economy, two pretty important numbers when you’re car shopping. Nowadays, top speed may be less of a big deal, since that number is almost assuredly enough to get your ass thrown in jail in any state in the Union, but back in 1963, that wasn’t always the case. Like for this 2CV, which could hit a blistering 56 mph, flat out. It could also get 56 mpg. That’s nice, that 56 mph/mpg symmetry, right? I wonder if there’s other cars that can claim a similar symmetry?
Here’s that full brochure page, by the way, which includes the DS (100 mph, 25-30 mpg)/ID (90 mph, 25-30 mpg), and the Ami 6 (65 mph, 43-52 mpg) along with the venerable 2CV:
So, only the 2CV has that speed/economy balance. The only other car I can think of that advertised a similarly symmetrical set of speed and fuel-sipping numbers is the tiny Berkeley sports car, which had made claims of being a “double 70” car: 70 mph and 70 mpg. It’s mentioned in media of the era:
Of course, when I drove a Berkeley, I had a blast but I do not think it would have hit 70 mph:
Maybe with some gale-force tailwinds and a nice steep, roller-coaster-like incline it could but I’m a bit skeptical. And Berkeley’s own ads seemed to back off those claims when it came to economy:
See? They’re just claiming 60 mpg and 70 mph. They’re really sticking with that 70 mph, so maybe it is possible?
But 60 mpg/70 mph isn’t a nice neat 70/70 so I’m not sure this counts. 60/60 I bet it could do! Does that count, even if it was never advertised that way?
Are there other symmetrical cars I’m forgetting about? A 50/50 should be possible. An original Fiat 500 could do 50/50, but, again, I’m not sure I’ve seen it advertised that way. Still, maybe that could count? The VW XL1 could do about 100 mph, but VW claimed much better fuel economy: 261 mpg.
I feel like there could be a 100/100 car. Maybe an 80/80? Now I want to know.
In metric? None.
I once owned a 1953 Austin A40 Somerset Saloon that claimed 0-60mph in 35 seconds, but by the time I got it was well over that, likely 40-45 seconds. I say likely because I would never take in on any highway as the front wheels would begin to flutter above 40mph. 40 was the limit. It also netted 40mpg from its 1.2L engine. (By sheer luck I found out that while few girls at school would get into some guys glamorous muscle car, they all gladly piled into mine for a ride home in my “cute bouncy little bubble”. Slow car, no shocks, lots of laughs, good times.)
My SL goes 120mph easily and gets 120 miles per tank.
It’s a 22-gal tank, kill me now
Going 56 mph in a 2CV is not something I would recommend, at all.
It’s really not a problem to do 56 or 75 mph for a short while with the 602 engine, but it’s nicer 45-50 on longer trips. They are rev happy little engines.
2cv owner for 13 years.
edit. remeberd this post I made
https://www.reddit.com/r/2cv/comments/n88jj5/i_am_speed/
It’s noisy but perfectly doable. I would even say mandatory if driving in a hilly région . If you don’t get momentum while you can, you would be shifting into second at the top of the hill.
Why limit ourselves to American FreedomUnits? L/100km opens up a lot of possibilties.
Half the fleet currently is capable of 0 mph and 0 mpg