Interesting Article on MPG!

[CharBaby]

I got me thinking again about one of my topics of interest...MPG! I still don't beleive MPG is where it should be.


http://editorial.autos.msn.com/where-has-all-the-mileage-gone?icid=autos_1847&GT1=22009

 

[chad8]

The article is total [censored]. It never mentions that the way cars fuel efficiency measurements are made was changed a few years to reflect real world conditions.
The old standard measured test conditions in the lab on a dyno.
Real world mileage has improved i guess 30-50% over the last 30 years on a even testing basis. Still not enough but more than this auto dummy is trying to make a case for.
Imo , the biggest change was the shift to efi with computer controlled spark and timing being next and aerodynamics and radial tires helping too.
No real major improvements.
Its still the same 1800's internal combustion engine.

 

[Boomer]

In OHV engines with push rods, the use of roller lifters was a big improvement in reducing friction and increasing mileage. See this mostly now in pickups.

 

[Sayjac]

I thought the article raised some good points about why mpg's hasn't improved on a steady pace, but rather in fits and starts. The manufacturers are going to make what sells. When gas prices went up, increased interest in smaller more efficient vehicles. When gas prices stayed low, body on frame SUV's like the Explorer ruled the day. Right now we're in the former stage. True, increased weight/bloat has seemed to lower the efficiency of many new vehicles. Added safety features may also be a factor in that.

Now as for an increased gas tax, certainly would be an added incentive for even further and faster improvements in mpg, with increased interest by consumers in more efficient vehicles. As pointed out, in the US we have been spoiled with relatively low gas prices in comparison to the rest of the world. That said, for the majority of legislators it's pretty much political suicide to support such a tax.

Perhaps the increased focus on improved mpg will continue this time. It needs to.

 

[Bluestream]

Originally Posted By: sayjac
That said, for the majority it's pretty much political suicide to support such a tax.


This I don't understand. Increased tax on gasoline would encourage conservation therefore help reduce foreign oil imports. It would also help with the government deficit with is getting out of control. You can't keep borrowing money. Why would anyone be opposed to such a move that would obviously benefit the country?

 

[Sayjac]

I wasn't trying and specifically didn't want to turn this into a "p" discussion, as it I didn't want to get the thread locked. It is a difficult topic to cover without some of it though.

Quote:
This I don't understand.
I assume when you say that, you mean don't comprehend the thinking of those that wouldn't support such a tax. OTOH, I'm sure you understand, that if as a legislator one supports such a tax and your constituency doesn't, you won't be long in office. Thus the political suicide comment.

 

[09_GXP]

Originally Posted By: chad8

The old standard measured test conditions in the lab on a dyno.


The new method still is measured on a dyno but has added a couple extra drive cycles.

 

[rshaw125]

Originally Posted By: Bluestream
Originally Posted By: sayjac
That said, for the majority it's pretty much political suicide to support such a tax.


This I don't understand. Increased tax on gasoline would encourage conservation therefore help reduce foreign oil imports. It would also help with the government deficit with is getting out of control. You can't keep borrowing money. Why would anyone be opposed to such a move that would obviously benefit the country?


The deficit is the result of massive over spending not a result of lack of tax revenue. Raise taxes with an economy that is barely growing is not good policy. That's the opposition.

 

[oldmaninsc]

Originally Posted By: chad8
The article is total [censored]. It never mentions that the way cars fuel efficiency measurements are made was changed a few years to reflect real world conditions.
The old standard measured test conditions in the lab on a dyno.

You might want to go back and read the article again - more carefully this time.

"Even if you adjust for today's EPA testing procedures, the old CR-X still got significantly more mileage out of a gallon of fuel than its modern counterpart."

I think the article is actually pretty much right on point. Modern cars are heavier and have far more accessories. It seems to me at least that modern cars also have more horsepower vs. cars from the 80's. How many cars today take 13" tires? In the 80's I had several cars through out the family that did.

 

[660mag]

Originally Posted By: Bluestream
Originally Posted By: sayjac
That said, for the majority it's pretty much political suicide to support such a tax.


This I don't understand. Increased tax on gasoline would encourage conservation therefore help reduce foreign oil imports. It would also help with the government deficit with is getting out of control. You can't keep borrowing money. Why would anyone be opposed to such a move that would obviously benefit the country?


How about you volunteer to pay the higher tax. As a matter of fact you can mail a check to the Treasury Department for how ever much you would like.
This country is in the [censored] due to over spending, not under taxing.