Gas to hit all time high this summer

Status
Not open for further replies.
"No....CAFE stopped production of large cars with V8's... so to get a large vehicle with V8 you had to get a truck, which are not subject to same mpg standards."

Actually, increased efficiency caused most V-8s to go away. To get "power" in 1975 you needed a V-8. Who needs a V-8 today when DOHC V-6 engines routinely put out 225+ horsepower? When I raced a Porsche 944 with a relatively anemic 143 HP, I never had any trouble embarassing Mustang GTs on the track, even though my 944 had exactly HALF the displacement of the 5.0 'stangs. It's all about efficiency. Just look at the new VWs with the turbo 1.8L thimble-sized engine -- those Jettas could likely outrun a Crown Victoria V-8 police cruiser if desired. With engineering and efficiency like this, who needs 10,000 cubic inches? CAFE ain't the V-8 killer here -- advanced engine design is.

[ March 01, 2004, 06:07 PM: Message edited by: TC ]
 
But people do not want those...that is why they buy trucks/SUVs. That is the point.
Also the car you mentioned are very small. A VW is also a lot lighter than Crown Vic, a big factor in that performance. What was motivation for small cars and small engines? CAFE and the like. Trucks are not subject to same regulations.

[ March 01, 2004, 06:21 PM: Message edited by: Jason Troxell ]
 
People don't want advanced engine designs? Most SUV buyers (and car buyers) know about as much on engine type as they know about nanoparticle physics. People have been buying transverse-mounted 4 and 6 cyl Ford Tauruses, Honda Accords and the like for years, a few decades actually. Those that have later opted for SUVs have done so because they believed they need more space, and more often (after all, look at all the solo SUV commuters), BECAUSE THEY'RE "COOL." They could care less about V-8s since the Tauruses/Accords/Camrys/Caravans they owned before didn't have V-8s either. Toyota, Nissan, and many other SUVs -- not to mention a billion minivans -- have all proven popular IN SPITE of no V-8 engines available for most of them.

I'm sure some people buy SUVs/pick-ups specifically in order to get a V-8. Maybe all of 10% of the light truck-buying public. The other 90% only care what the HP rating is compared to the competition.
 
quote:

Originally posted by Bob Woods:
We here in the USA are lucky, we have the lowest pump prices of all the industrialized nations and most of the third world. We b**** about the oil companies and the Government being in bed together, but we do have cheap gas.

That's a funny thing about crude. We all pay about the same price for it. The big difference is the taxes. Those folks in most of Europe put a lot of money into the coffers when they buy fuel...
shocked.gif



Tim
 
Drew99GT US has cheapest fuel in the World. Ours is cheaper than Europe etc but at say A$1 per litre it's way beyond what you pay. Oil is say US$35 per barrel doesn't matter who's buying it.
 
As Sprintman said, gas is cheap in the USA. Unleaded is $1 Australian doller per litre. After converting your fuel prices from Gallons into litres, and adjusting for the exchange rate, you guys pay around 60 cents per litre.
 
Sprintman, you made it sound like the US subsidizes gasoline production here in the US or something, by saying gasoline is cheaper to buy at the pump than it costs here in the US to produce.

I guess the realignment of the US dollar is "realigning" gas prices throughout the world as well. We pay more, ya'll are probably going to be paying less, at least for currencies that are appreciating against the dollar.
 
I left out the Middle East purposely as it known they give it away almost. I should have said Western country, my apologies. Indonesia price a surprise particularly when they are on our doorstep.
 
Drew,
I think that we end up subsidising you guys somehow.

The Aussie Dollar has gone from 47c U.S. to 87c, but our petrol price has only dropped from just under $1 per litre to just under $1 per litre.

Needless to say, most of the new improved profits are exiting our country at a great rate of knots.
 
quote:

Originally posted by Drew99GT:

quote:

Originally posted by sprintman:
You have cheap fuel, even less than the production cost. Don't complain.

Could you explain please, Sprintman?


try the actual cost to society http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17660

quote:

How much did you pay per gallon of gas the last time you filled up your car's tank?


It was probably about $1.75 per gallon, give or take a quarter depending on where you live. In the grand scheme of things, this isn't much – less, in fact, than you would pay for a gallon of milk.


But the price at the pump is nowhere near the real cost of that oil you put in your car. After you figure in the military expenditures of securing and protecting the petroleum, the cost of lost jobs and misplaced investment capital, and the burden of periodic "oil shocks," the price is much, much higher. According to a recent study by National Defense Council Foundation, the real price of gasoline is somewhere between $5.01 and $5.19 per gallon. That's as much as $93 to fill up a typical gas tank. Our oil addiction is burning a hole in our pockets, and most Americans don't even know it.


One of the most obvious costs of our oil dependence is the price of maintaining a vast military machine capable of keeping the oil flowing cheaply. Defending the oil that comes out of the Persian Gulf alone costs some $42.8 billion a year. This doesn't include military expenditures in oil-rich Colombia, nor the $87 billion in additional costs for the occupation of Iraq.


Then there's the damage to the economy. According to the study, the economy loses some $160 billion every year due, indirectly, to our addiction – money wasted on unproductive industries and related health care expenses. Periodic oil shocks – 1973-74, 1978-80, 1991 – have cost American businesses and consumers another $2.5 trillion. It's almost as if we're paying for the dubious privilege of being ripped off.


The National Defense Council Foundation is a right-of-center think tank, its advisory board packed with people such as Senators Trent Lott and Orrin Hatch. That a proudly conservative group would go through the trouble of calculating the true cost of oil shows that concerns about the United States' oil dependence transcend party lines. It's just common sense: Oil addiction, like any addiction, is dangerous.


 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom