New fuel economy standards for 2016 = +30%

[SubLGT]

Originally Posted By: PT1
These rules will end GM for sure. They won't be able to turn a profit w/o their SUV line up and I want to see a Suburban get 10% better fuel economy.


Not to worry. There will be plenty of loopholes in the regulations to ensure that GM can continue building what they have always built. For instance, their flex fuel vehicles can be rated at higher CAFE mpg than they can actually achieve.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/cafeghg-standard-loopholes-appear/#more-315761

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: tonycarguy
I can see that the new MPG standard will severely hurt federal and state governments because of reduced gas tax revenue. What will likely happen is the government will raise gas taxes proportionately with the new CAFE


They're already complaining about Priuses tearing up the roads more b/c the regenerative braking exerts force on asphalt that isn't recovered in taxes.

I say raise 'em a bunch then rebate the first X number of gallons if your license/insurance is in good standing.

 

[BrianWC]

Remember, this is where some states got the idea of toying with a gps-tracked mileage tax. Therefore, instead (or in addition) to being charged for fuel used, you're charged for miles driven. Essentially a road use tax

 

[keith]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
1950 Holden 5 seat family car seated 5, travelled at the speed limit (was slow to get there), and got 30MPG (Oz).

2009 Holden 5 seat family car seats 5, travels at the speed limit (fast to get there), and gets 10-12km/l




Good luck getting that 1950's Holden to pass safety and emission testing. Did it have AC, ABS, traction control, air bags, power windows and locks and all the other things that are either mandated or expected by customers? I could get 35 to 40mpg highway in my 1984 Dodge Omni GLH, but it's not relevant. May as well compare a car to a horse and buggy.

 

[Tornado Red]

Originally Posted By: BrianWC
WSJ has boards? Wow, I'm a daily Journal subscriber and even I couldn't imagine the hilarity that no doubt takes place there.


If you imagine that WSJ subscribers have more intelligent things to say, you will be disappointed. There are as many if not more morons posting to their forums as anywhere else. I was really surprised that they believe the same conspiracy theories as you might find at gasbuddy.com or washingtonpost.com.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Originally Posted By: StevieC
I just wish that they made decent small cars for tall people. It's a PITA trying to find something that is comfortable when you are tall like me. Even my Neon hurts my back because I have to lean the seat back a bit and there is no room for my legs...

ALlow me to once again hawk my new Fit. Tilt and telecoping steering wheel. And, although I am only 5'10", I'd point out there's a LAGRE amount of room between the top of my head and the roof of the car.

I agree with you and it's one of the choices I will consider in the future when my Santa Fe needs replacement... I was making a statement at the lack of space in most small cars... I can't fit in the Civic, Corolla, Accent, Elantra, Mazda 3's... It's a Biatch trying find something small and good on gas. The fit is not on this list of "not for me".

 

[bcossa2001]

Will diesel engines have any hope of meeting the new mileage and emission standards??

 

[BrianWC]

Don't the VW diesels already meet them? I mean, the Jettas get insane mpg. And the whole reason that they dropped them for a year or two was to bring them up to California's emission spec, right?

 

[PT1]

Originally Posted By: Kestas
EPA figures for flex fuel vehicles are based on miles per gallon of gasoline. It also assumes that the driver will drive 50% of the time with E85. That's why a year ago Toyota was advertising most of their vehicles get over 30 mpg.

I've read many articles in the past few days about the announcement. It's always a hollow read. They talk about all the wonderful things that will happen... how much fuel we'll save... how the air will be cleaner... how we'll be less dependent on foreign fuel. But never does it mention how we're going to achieve it. It's as though one can snap their fingers and it'll happen... gimme a break!

I remember how this went down back in the late 70's. The same type of thing was mandated. I think few people remember how CAFE panned out.


Exactly....hey I am in DC and I want 900mpg....

 

[PT1]

Originally Posted By: bcossa2001
Will diesel engines have any hope of meeting the new mileage and emission standards??


Mileage yes, emissions a definite maybe.

 

[PT1]

Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Don't the VW diesels already meet them? I mean, the Jettas get insane mpg. And the whole reason that they dropped them for a year or two was to bring them up to California's emission spec, right?


Well , now that we all live in the United States of CARB that won't be an issue.

 

[Tornado Red]

CARB is already planning for even lower emission standards. Yes, the announcement a couple days ago is just the new starting point for the environmental wackos. The earth will never be clean enough for them until all the humans are gone.

Somebody really needs to smack those people around a bit.

 

[StevieC]

Why don't the all jump off a cliff so they stop using resources if they really want to make a difference and leave the rest of us "polluters" alone, instead of spewing CO2 from their mouths fighting the rest of us.

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
The key to better mileage is lighter-weight cars—in which people die more often in traffic accidents. Since CAFÉ passed in 1975, smaller cars have killed almost 50,000 more people than otherwise would have died on the roads, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported in 2002. CAFE kills up to 3,900 extra people each year, a study by Harvard and the Brookings Institition states. It finds that for every 100 pounds less that an auto weighs, up to 780 more people die in traffic accidents in a year.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/30850102

 

[Cutehumor]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
The key to better mileage is lighter-weight cars—in which people die more often in traffic accidents. Since CAFÉ passed in 1975, smaller cars have killed almost 50,000 more people than otherwise would have died on the roads, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported in 2002. CAFE kills up to 3,900 extra people each year, a study by Harvard and the Brookings Institition states. It finds that for every 100 pounds less that an auto weighs, up to 780 more people die in traffic accidents in a year.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/30850102


It's a govt conspiracy to thin out the SS and medicare collectors

 

[dwendt44]

THere are some engineering changes that can/could help mileage.
Not sure how the average consumer would think about them though.

Running an engine at 250º is one. That 5 and 6th gear could be redone for mileage.
Some cars and most trucks still look like a brick when viewed from above. A touch more streamlining would help some too.

 

[Drew2000]

I certainly hope "the government" goes after all those "people" that build giant, wasteful homes for only two folks to live in, and the obese who consume way more food which uses energy to produce and...

(where does the Nanny State end?)

As for raising taxes, many are already getting taxed into the poor house---for lousy, incompetent, hypocritical or just downright crooked government on the federal, state and local levels. Where does it end? (other than death for the taxpayer, or putting a few politicians in the cross hairs, like the good old days when We The People actually ran our country.)

I really feel sorry for little kids. They will inherit a bankrupt, broken also-ran country of insufferable bureaucratic control.

 

[Kestas]

Originally Posted By: Tornado Red
CARB is already planning for even lower emission standards... The earth will never be clean enough for them until all the humans are gone...

There are some parts of Los Angeles where the exhaust coming out of the tailpipe from modern vehicles is cleaner than the air coming into the engine (with the exception of CO2).

It's been long known that EPA should back off tailpipe emissions. They've done an aggressive job with vehicles over the decades. Now they should call it good and downsize their office to maintain what has been achieved. They are saddling the auto industry (both buyers and manufacturers) an enormous cost to reduce an insignificant amount of pollution, when other sources (e.g., lawnmowers and weedwackers) are now the significant contributors to pollution. The only reason EPA targets cars is out of habit, and not because it's really needed.

 

[Kestas]

Originally Posted By: dwendt44
There are some engineering changes that can/could help mileage... Running an engine at 250º is one...

The auto industry is trying. The limiting factor is a materials issue (e.g., seals).

 

[hone eagle]

I posted this somewhere else here but incase you missed it .The cars makers should have no problem reaching these standards in fact the F150 is less than 2 mpg off. loopholes