CAFE costs are mounting...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy


Try again, tastes changed, Americans went to minivans than SUV's.

Lots of manufactures can't give wagons away, most Americans hate them.


Actually America went to minivans and SUVs. Which changes my argument not one iota. Clearly CAFE essentially eliminated one entire category of automobile. You asked for one model, I give you an entire type.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: engineerscott

Say I've got a family of 4 or 5 and I want to buy a minivan. I'm not going to be very happy lugging around the wife and three kids in a Prius after all, certainly not on a long trip. How much is my 56 mpg mini van going to cost?


It's called the new Prius V, which is basically a Prius minivan.
grin.gif
 
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Awww what a cute little personal attack, run out of come backs?

If you bothered to read my posts at all you would see that I am suggesting a market solution, just with a bit of prodding in the right direction.

If you remember the fuel crises of the 70's than you will also remember those long lines, and how the economy didn't really like that. Also how worthless all those gas guzzling muscle cars became.

Markets do correct, in very painful ways.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could ease it a bit since we know its coming? Possible invest in some new technology, maybe become an energy exporter and make a ton of money?

Or we can just keep doing what we are doing, sending all our treasure overseas to buy oil, and hope when the cheap wells dry up it doesn't put us into to bad of a depression.

Anyway I'm out I don't want to get booted off the forum for political discussion. Its been fun.

You have never adequately explained why you can't simply let the consumer decide what type of car he wants to drive. If oil prices continue to rise, you'll get your wonderful hybrid cars. In fact, people will line up round the block to buy them. But for some reason that's not good enough. Could it be you actually enjoy telling people what to do?

And once again, let me remind you that with respect to the economy the "energy problem" pales in comparison to the issue of government borrowing. The economy has hummed along with oil at this price level before, so what's different? A national debt of 100% of GDP perhaps? And how do you get to such stratospheric debt levels? Maybe a government that tries to do far too many things it has no business doing.
 
Originally Posted By: The Critic
Originally Posted By: engineerscott

Say I've got a family of 4 or 5 and I want to buy a minivan. I'm not going to be very happy lugging around the wife and three kids in a Prius after all, certainly not on a long trip. How much is my 56 mpg mini van going to cost?


It's called the new Prius V, which is basically a Prius minivan.
grin.gif



Sorry buddy, no sale. The Prius V mileage stats:

PROJECTED FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST):
EPA city/highway driving: 44/42 mpg

Doesn't meet the new 56 MPG mileage target. And it's more of a mini-minivan.

I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
 
Originally Posted By: engineerscott
Actually America went to minivans and SUVs. Which changes my argument not one iota. Clearly CAFE essentially eliminated one entire category of automobile. You asked for one model, I give you an entire type.


You missed the other part of my previous post on the issue...

How did US CAFE essentially wipe out Wagons in Australia during the same period as it "did" in the US ?
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: engineerscott
Actually America went to minivans and SUVs. Which changes my argument not one iota. Clearly CAFE essentially eliminated one entire category of automobile. You asked for one model, I give you an entire type.

You missed the other part of my previous post on the issue...

How did US CAFE essentially wipe out Wagons in Australia during the same period as it "did" in the US ?

You need to read my post #2302780 on page 18.
 
It's on page 9 (for me) and I read it.

How did CAFE kill wagon sales in Australia, which happened at exactly the same time that you assert CAFE killed the Amerowagen ?

Especially seeing as Aussies can have the powerful spacious wagons that you state America wanted, and was the reason for them failing ?

Why isn't Australia's decline in wagons sales and their desire for SUVs accepted as a reason for US decline...customers just don't want them anymore in the quantities that they did previously.

I personally (and many others) swapped from full sized wagons to a 4 door 4WD sports utility with tray canopy, to keep the luggage/dogs/dog smells out of my passenger space. And lots of Aussies did too...and we chose turbodisels...and CAFE had SFA to do with our decisions.
 
Originally Posted By: engineerscott
You have never adequately explained why you can't simply let the consumer decide what type of car he wants to drive. If oil prices continue to rise, you'll get your wonderful hybrid cars. In fact, people will line up round the block to buy them. But for some reason that's not good enough. Could it be you actually enjoy telling people what to do?

Many are too stupid.
 
Originally Posted By: engineerscott
You have never adequately explained why you can't simply let the consumer decide what type of car he wants to drive. If oil prices continue to rise, you'll get your wonderful hybrid cars. In fact, people will line up round the block to buy them. But for some reason that's not good enough. Could it be you actually enjoy telling people what to do?

You keep insinuating a fleet fuel economy standard is some sort of centralized planning where some nerd from DC is in a Detroit drafting room, dictating elbow and leg room and some gawky shape, a la Trabant. The "F" in caFe is for Fleet... and it doesn't matter to the Feds how it's achieved.
Quote:

And once again, let me remind you that with respect to the economy the "energy problem" pales in comparison to the issue of government borrowing. The economy has hummed along with oil at this price level before, so what's different? A national debt of 100% of GDP perhaps? And how do you get to such stratospheric debt levels? Maybe a government that tries to do far too many things it has no business doing.

If we cut energy use substantially, we cut wealth hemhoragging out our borders, which we're trading for oil. If we print more money and it stays inside the country, we aren't losing wealth. It's getting revalued, but it's still here.
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
You keep insinuating a fleet fuel economy standard is some sort of centralized planning where some nerd from DC is in a Detroit drafting room, dictating elbow and leg room and some gawky shape, a la Trabant. The "F" in caFe is for Fleet... and it doesn't matter to the Feds how it's achieved.

What Article of US Constitution gives the feds a right to set efficiency standards, ie CAFE?

Just wondering.
 
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers buying ad time

"WASHINGTON – Automakers are publicly taking the gloves off in the fight over upcoming fuel economy standards, launching a campaign of radio advertisements accusing the Obama administration of threatening the industry’s fragile recovery.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers will start airing 60-second radio spots in seven key states next week, including Michigan, the Free Press has learned. The Alliance also recently began airing more policy-oriented ads on a Washington, D.C. news radio station.


The ads, to start Tuesday, will feature an ominous voice warning “after tough times, today’s auto industry is on the road to economic recovery,” but that fuel economy rules “threatens that progress” – leading to less choice, higher prices, job losses and an “electric vehicle mandate.”
 
Same bit of news without the liberal Detroit Free Press slant...notice the Detroit News is able to report the news without including non sensical comments from dinosaurs like Ralph Nader....

Auto Industry Launching ads

"The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers — the trade association representing Detroit's Big Three, Toyota Motor Corp and eight others — will launch a two-week radio campaign in 14 states next week to urge the administration to back "attainable" fuel efficiency standards.

The Obama administration has been in talks with automakers for weeks over the 2017-25 fuel efficiency standards and has initially more than doubled current requirements to a fleetwide average of 56.2 mpg, a move that could add at least $2,100 to the price of new vehicles by then.

Auto officials in the talks say the administration has been holding firm in wanting about 56 mpg, but is offering significant flexibility — including pushing some of the heftiest increases off to the end of the period. They are also discussing a variety of credits to make it easier for automakers to comply.

The administration wants to convince automakers to back a framework for a proposal — along with California, which is considering its own standards.

The alliance will launch ads in Michigan, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Illinois, Montana, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Utah and Virginia — auto states or states where residents buy large numbers of light trucks, said Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the alliance.

"We are launching next week in support of attainable (fuel efficiency standards) that won't extend the recession in the auto industry," she said.

Previously, the group has run similar radio ads in the Washington, D.C., market aimed at policy makers.

In Michigan, the radio ad will run statewide over two weeks, starting Tuesday.

"After tough times, today's auto industry is on the road to economic recovery. But an upcoming decision threatens that progress," the ad says. "Soon, the federal government will announce new fuel economy standards.

Some in Washington have suggested as much as a 100 percent increase over current standards.

The ad warns that if so "families would be hit with higher car prices. Small businesses dependent on vans, SUVs or pickups would face limited vehicle choice."

Automakers, the White House and California struck a deal in May 2009 on the 2012-16 standards — hiking them by 40 percent to 34.1 mpg, a deal that will cost the industry $51.5 billion over five years. But California agreed not to adopt its own standards as part of the rules."
 
Looks like they will come up with a split decision....

White House prepares lower mpg targets

"The proposal would reduce the overall fleet target to an average of 54.5 m.p.g. by 2025, down from 56.2 m.p.g. the White House had initially proposed.

The 56 m.p.g. fleet average by 2025 translated to a 5% increase annually from 2017 to 2025.

The new proposal would allow light trucks to increase only by 3.5% annually from 2017 to 2021, then face a 5% after that. Certain other rules for “work trucks” – primarily full-size, open bed pickups – would also provide more leniency for automakers.

Cars would still be set on 5% annual increase under the plan, according to a source familiar with the situation."
 
Originally Posted By: Kestas
Hitting cars and giving trucks a break is what started the SUV craze in the first place back in the 90s. We can kiss the family sedan and all its brethren goodbye. Looks like we'll all be driving open bed crew cab pickups in the future.


Agreed. It is crazy to cave in on the worst offenders. But that's Detroit's money and their lobbyists talking.

These guys will never learn their lesson. You will bail them out and they will still continue their bad behavior.
 
So, just to be clear...in your estimation Detroits "bad behaviour" is what exactly?

Is it a problem that they build and market what the consumers want? Or are you of the belief that the consumers demand is mandated by Detroit by marketing or some other slight of hand?

The simple fact of the matter is that light trucks account for roughly 50% of the vehicles sold in this market. Building a truck that meets the same corporate average as a smaller passenger car is almost impossible with current technology. What do you suggest those in control of the situation do?

The only lesson not being learned here is the fact that simple legislation doesn't make the impossible, possible.
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
So, just to be clear...in your estimation Detroits "bad behaviour" is what exactly?

Is it a problem that they build and market what the consumers want? Or are you of the belief that the consumers demand is mandated by Detroit by marketing or some other slight of hand?

The simple fact of the matter is that light trucks account for roughly 50% of the vehicles sold in this market. Building a truck that meets the same corporate average as a smaller passenger car is almost impossible with current technology. What do you suggest those in control of the situation do?

The only lesson not being learned here is the fact that simple legislation doesn't make the impossible, possible.


You simply don't understand because you don't drive a nippon fuel sipper. If you did.... you would!

But don't worry, I don't either, LOL!
grin.gif
 
Originally Posted By: engineerscott
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Awww what a cute little personal attack, run out of come backs?

If you bothered to read my posts at all you would see that I am suggesting a market solution, just with a bit of prodding in the right direction.

If you remember the fuel crises of the 70's than you will also remember those long lines, and how the economy didn't really like that. Also how worthless all those gas guzzling muscle cars became.

Markets do correct, in very painful ways.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could ease it a bit since we know its coming? Possible invest in some new technology, maybe become an energy exporter and make a ton of money?

Or we can just keep doing what we are doing, sending all our treasure overseas to buy oil, and hope when the cheap wells dry up it doesn't put us into to bad of a depression.

Anyway I'm out I don't want to get booted off the forum for political discussion. Its been fun.

You have never adequately explained why you can't simply let the consumer decide what type of car he wants to drive. If oil prices continue to rise, you'll get your wonderful hybrid cars. In fact, people will line up round the block to buy them. But for some reason that's not good enough. Could it be you actually enjoy telling people what to do?

And once again, let me remind you that with respect to the economy the "energy problem" pales in comparison to the issue of government borrowing. The economy has hummed along with oil at this price level before, so what's different? A national debt of 100% of GDP perhaps? And how do you get to such stratospheric debt levels? Maybe a government that tries to do far too many things it has no business doing.


1/2 of the trade deficit is oil. I would like to drive a gas guzzler that I don't need also, but the country as a whole is more important. But I almost forgot. It's all about you and your wants. The CAFE standards are to help avoid a national crisis and national security concern when no one is able to afford gas and the economy grinds to a standstill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom