New 54.5 MPG Fuel Economy Standards, Rd. 2

[spasm3]

Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Many people always prefer to buy portable living rooms, if they can .


And if they can, and want to, they should.

 

[hattaresguy]

I view this kind of as a mute point. As the price of fuel keeps rising people will naturally buy more fuel efficient vehicles. Or go broke making poor purchases of vehicles that burn a lot of fuel.

$4.50-$5 a gallon seems to be the real break point consumers start to unload low MPG trucks and SUV's, but its just the edge. I think $6-$7 is where you will see real changes in consumer behavior.


Its simple math, say the average salary is $40k a year. NFW are they running a 3/4 truck off that for long at $6 a gallon. Say its driven average mileage 15k a year, at 10mpg, your looking at $9k a year in fuel alone. The numbers just don't work, well they can be skewed by a Visa card but not for long.

 

[ltslimjim]

Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
I would love to be able to buy a new 1995 Civic VX with 55 MPG on the highway.



I'm trying to get my '92 VX up to 50 MPG again! Too bad most trips are less than 5 miles and I need to do a head gasket job (fingers cross block and head are fine)!

 

[whip]

It's a shell game.

Car and Driver article.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/the...lations-feature

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: ltslimjim
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
I would love to be able to buy a new 1995 Civic VX with 55 MPG on the highway.



I'm trying to get my '92 VX up to 50 MPG again! Too bad most trips are less than 5 miles and I need to do a head gasket job (fingers cross block and head are fine)!

Just go buy a cheap 2nd hand Insight. That's the quickest, fastest, easiest way to get in the 70mpg club for under $4000.

 

[sciphi]

I view it as another regulation that some folks will complain about, but will get over once they realize they can still get a pickup with a V8 to commute in, if they so desire. It just might get 15 mpg instead of 10 mpg.

And, I think the higher standard is a good thing, since it's giving us vehicles that are more powerful and more efficient than before. The 800 ft/lbs a modern diesel pickup kicks out, a host of 2 liter turbo engines sneaking up on 300 hp and 30+ mpg highway from a variety of makers, and the naturally aspirated 2.5 4 cylinders making just as much power as larger V6's did while offering better urban fuel economy.

It looks like this is the new age of the inline 4 cylinder engine. I for one have zero issues with that.

 

[tommygunn]

Whats funny is the 4 and 6 cylinder Ecoboost engines feel more powerful then any generic V8 I've ever driven, get more fuel economy, and are far lighter.

V8's will always be around for people too dumb to move forward with technology insisting its somehow better. The V8 should have died almost 20 years ago.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Whats funny is the 4 and 6 cylinder Ecoboost engines feel more powerful then any generic V8 I've ever driven, get more fuel economy, and are far lighter.

V8's will always be around for people too dumb to move forward with technology insisting its somehow better. The V8 should have died almost 20 years ago.


Boy, BMW (and Mercedes) must be absolutely retarded to put turbo's on smaller displacement V8's then right?

 

[tommygunn]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Whats funny is the 4 and 6 cylinder Ecoboost engines feel more powerful then any generic V8 I've ever driven, get more fuel economy, and are far lighter.

V8's will always be around for people too dumb to move forward with technology insisting its somehow better. The V8 should have died almost 20 years ago.


Boy, BMW (and Mercedes) must be absolutely retarded to put turbo's on smaller displacement V8's then right?

Generic V8's; I'm not saying there's specific markets for specific engine designs. If you have a sports car, add whatever amount of cylinders you want, boost it, enjoy.

But the "my truck needs a huge engine from a dumptruck in it because I refuse to acknowledge the existance of anything except raw displacement" needs to stop. The "more litres is more better right?" is such a mantra of the 60's muscle car era.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Whats funny is the 4 and 6 cylinder Ecoboost engines feel more powerful then any generic V8 I've ever driven, get more fuel economy, and are far lighter.

V8's will always be around for people too dumb to move forward with technology insisting its somehow better. The V8 should have died almost 20 years ago.


Boy, BMW (and Mercedes) must be absolutely retarded to put turbo's on smaller displacement V8's then right?

Generic V8's; I'm not saying there's specific markets for specific engine designs. If you have a sports car, add whatever amount of cylinders you want, boost it, enjoy.

But the "my truck needs a huge engine from a dumptruck in it because I refuse to acknowledge the existance of anything except raw displacement" needs to stop.


But you specifically stated:

Quote:
V8's will always be around for people too dumb to move forward with technology insisting its somehow better.


I don't see any exception made for smaller displacement V8's with forced induction (like a bigger EcoBoost) in the sentence above, just a broad brushed slam at V8 owners in general.

I think it is quite probable that Ford will come up with a boosted version of the 5.0L, which is of course a small displacement V8 compared to even its own siblings like the 6.2L. There's nothing inherently dumb or technologically lacking about a V8, nor are their owners automatically stupid for buying one. A basic V8 is likely to be far less problematic than its forced induction sibling for example. So while buying a GM truck with the 8.1L and hauling nothing but air with it might be idiotic, buying a new 5.0L Ford, which isn't far off from the Ecoboost, but based on a much more mature architecture and has far less to go wrong with it (no DI for example) is hardly what I'd call a fools errand, or an exercise for dumb people

 

[sciphi]

There always will be folks who NEED a ton of power in a work vehicle. And a V8 is a great way of getting that power, year after year.

It's not stupid to buy enough vehicle for the intended purpose. If one has a work trailer loaded down with lawnmowers and other yard-care equipment or is hauling loads of feed every day, a V8 pickup is a great tool for that job.

What will happen is the folks who don't need such vehicles won't get them. Recall the SUV was a way for the well-heeled gentleman to get to a country tract on weekends. It was Madison Avenue who popularized neutered SUV's as daily drivers because of that "rugged" image.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Whats funny is the 4 and 6 cylinder Ecoboost engines feel more powerful then any generic V8 I've ever driven, get more fuel economy, and are far lighter.


That may certainly be true - I won't dispute it. However, simple fuel economy and HP figures do not a truck make. Having low end torque and engine durability are extremely important.

If it weren't for emissions standards (which are a good thing - I'm not griping about them) and, to a lesser degree, fuel economy expectations, Ford would still be using the 300, the 302, the 351 and the 460 in their trucks, and Chev would still be using the SBC and 454.

Yes, they're old, and in their usual configurations don't put out the horsepower figures that plenty of smaller engines do. They also don't have to rev 7,000 RPM between shifts and they have proven reliability, easy maintenance, and cheap parts.

If a company can create a powerful four cylinder for truck usage that has serious low end torque, doesn't have to rev sky high between shifts and will last 400,000 miles, great.

@OVERK1LL: Perhaps you can work with Ford to bring about 500 lb valve springs for the new 5.0 engine.

 

[tommygunn]

If you want that, buy a diesel.

 

[Garak]

I don't doubt that's why diesels have been selling so well in the past number of years, along with the fact that they're so much better than they were back in the glory days of the big V-8s and straight sixes in trucks. Diesels are still expensive (although up here, the Cummins is "free" and has been for a fairly lengthy time) and a lot of fleets, particularly government fleets, are reluctant to use diesels. Just about every 3/4 ton or 1 ton fleet truck I see for sale up here has a gasser of some sort, and usually too small of one.

As far as outdated thinking goes, these government fleets still seem to use the purchasing rationale as if the Ford 300 were still available - buy the most bare bones truck you can get your hands on.

 

[DrDusty86]

I agree 100%. Bring back the manual trans.
Tommy, I hope you aren't referring to the newest diesel pickups. While powerful, They are not what I would call reliable at all. My buddy has a for 6.7 Powerstroke that the dealer claims had water in the fuel yet had no water in the seperator NOR did the WIF light come on. Ford stuck him with a $15k repair bill. That's more than some cars cost. GM..same issues but I hear they are fixing them under warranty..quietly..

 

[javacontour]

I guess I have to ask what is wrong with reving to 7k or 17k RPMs?

If you can get a relatively flat torque curve, then having a broad RPM range means you can stay in gear, rather than shifting.

Sure, you can make an engine that only revs to 2500, but then you need an 18 speed gear box to get down the highway.

So something that has power from 1k to 7k and beyond can be a good thing.

Originally Posted By: Garak
I don't doubt that's why diesels have been selling so well in the past number of years, along with the fact that they're so much better than they were back in the glory days of the big V-8s and straight sixes in trucks. Diesels are still expensive (although up here, the Cummins is "free" and has been for a fairly lengthy time) and a lot of fleets, particularly government fleets, are reluctant to use diesels. Just about every 3/4 ton or 1 ton fleet truck I see for sale up here has a gasser of some sort, and usually too small of one.

As far as outdated thinking goes, these government fleets still seem to use the purchasing rationale as if the Ford 300 were still available - buy the most bare bones truck you can get your hands on.

 

[hattaresguy]

Boosted engines should last just as long as anything, as Saab, Volvo, and Porsche have long ago proven. But I don't fully trust Ford yet, the ecoboost is kind of new.

If I were buying a new Ford truck I'd probably either get the base V6 or the V8. But I keep my vehicles for 10-15 years. If I traded every 3-5 I wouldn't care.

Really unless your towing a lot the base V6 is fine, its 300hp which is more than most V8's in half tons were putting out just a few years ago.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
I guess I have to ask what is wrong with reving to 7k or 17k RPMs?

If you can get a relatively flat torque curve, then having a broad RPM range means you can stay in gear, rather than shifting.


If it's a nice, flat torque curve, I suppose there's certainly nothing wrong with it. I don't think we've seen a lot of examples, however, that would be ideal in truck operations. Also, I suspect there will be a fear (real or imagined) that a tow vehicle regularly being revved to 17,000 RPMs might not have the long term durability of something that generally shifts at 3 or 4 thousand RPM.

 

[FXjohn]

how many of you guys saying you want mnuals back even own one?

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: FXjohn
how many of you guys saying you want manuals back even own one?


I own one, the Cruze Eco in my signature. No special order, purchased it out of dealer stock. Great car, lots of fun to drive, and fun to set it up for best MPG's with the manual.