CAFE mpg is one thing, but it doesn't say anything about rolling back emissions requirements.
CAFE mpg is one thing, but it doesn't say anything about rolling back emissions requirements.
I agree. Some common sense regulations would be nice.Frankly, I think on a lot of this regulation, there is a fine line between reasonable and excessive. I you can get 97% of the benefit at, say, 25% of the cost and regulation, is thr last 3% really worth it, or should they look at other sources of pollutants that are far larger? At some point, the result is so minimal that pursuing it becomes insane, and I think in a lot of cases (diesels being one) that that point has been crossed and things need to roll back a bit.
And I don't want to hear the 'but then we will have air like China' crowd, because that's *NOT* what I said! Rolling back to reasonable regulation is not, in any way, the same as eliminating it . . .
Exactly - any engineer will tell you that the first 80% of the job takes 20% of the money/time, but that last 20% will take the other 80%.Frankly, I think on a lot of this regulation, there is a fine line between reasonable and excessive. If you can get 97% of the benefit at, say, 25% of the cost and regulation, is the last 3% really worth it, or should they look at other sources of pollutants that are far larger? At some point, the result is so minimal that pursuing it becomes insane, and I think in a lot of cases (diesels being one) that that point has been crossed and things need to roll back a bit.
The 'at reasonable cost' seems funny in this age of $60,000 pickups that sell like hotcakes.There is 'better', and there is 'at reasonable cost' and the latter appears to be a failure. Just because something is possible does not necessarily make it good overall . . . .
The 'at reasonable cost' seems funny in this age of $60,000 pickups that sell like hotcakes.
That's one way to look at it. On the other hand the potentially 50 MPG Chevrolet Cruze diesel is legal and it has been so for some time now.I agree. Some common sense regulations would be nice.
Just like a new F150 Raptor is legal that gets 15MPG but a 50MPG TDI is illegal. Someone is stuck on stupid.
Ok, maybe there's some of this 'consumer fickleness' but as OH and others have pointed out repeatedly is that Americans want mostly large to medium SUVs and if they get a raise an even better choice would be a truck. This combined with relatively lower fuel prices and you have the 'perfect storm' to keep the national non-commercial fleet average fuel economy as close to 20 MPG as possible for decades. You cannot fool the laws of physics. You prefer an SUV to a mid-size wagon and there is going to be a substantial fuel economy penalty, no matter what engine you put in it.Consumers are a fickle bunch. They changed with the time
. Auto makers have been very consistent over the years by insisting the car engine can not be improved since 1965. They patched together crappy solutions, claiming it was the fault of regulations and the 1975 emissions we're impossibly difficult. Then in 1973 Honda found a solution at a reasonable price. Other automakers followed, with Detroit bringing up the tail end. Same story for decades, it just is impossible to do anything better.
Detroit did lots of advanced things, people just didn't buy them, or didn't appreciate them, or they never got past the teething phase.
Chrysler had fuel injection in 1950.
Chevrolet had it in 1957.
Oldsmobile and Buick both had all aluminum alloy V8 engines in the early 1960s.
Ford had overhead cam V8s in the 1960s.
Pontiac had a belt driven OHC I6 in the 1960s.
Pontiac also had a rear mounted transaxle with IRS in the '60s.
The Corvair, despite its issues, was a really advanced car compared to others in its day, and even had an optional turbocharger.
NONE of the above sold well, because the consumers instead bought giant iron pushrod V8s instead. They were cheaper, less fragile, more powerful.
If all the current vehicles sold trended towards the higher end of MPG, while the gas hogs sat and gathered dust, they would change what they build. But that is not happening. Consumers are not buying the little Fiesta, so Ford is removing it from our lineup. Consumers are not buying the C-max, so Ford is removing it from our lineup. The Focus sales have been in decline since 2012... last year, down to 158k units. The Explorer in the same period has seen increasing sales, with a final tally of 271k units last year. By the end of the 2018 model year, it is predicted that Ford will be selling twice as many Explorers as Focuses. If the trend continues, which one do you think Ford will want to continue building?
Chevrolet Cruze: sales slipping since 2014, now down to 184k last year. Traverse? Climbing steadily, up to 123k last year, and the Equinox also climbing hit 290k last year, and is expected to top 300k by end of 2018. Of course, this is eclipsed by the Silverado, which sold a whopping 585k units in 2017. That is more than the total sales of the Spark (22k), Sonic (30k), Cruze (184k), and Malibu (185k) COMBINED.
Dumb Americans are victims of their own greed - more power - I need MOAR POWR lol. I imagine if they used that tech they could've had 250 hp and perhaps doubled mileage.The problem is, most of the better technology, of both gasoline and diesel, has been eaten up by bigger, bloated, heavier, and more [needless] power.
If we were content to drive an A1 Golf, we'd be able to buy a new 70 MPG car for probably $12k. But we've legislated our way right out of even having that be an option.
BTW, a Fox body Mustang, in the late '80s, with the standard 2.3L and 5sp manual gearbox, could tag 30 on the highway. I know, I had one. And it was pretty peppy, too. So again, the "new" Mustang, with what is probably an engine with thrice the HP, does not go thrice the distance on the same amount of fuel.
My close friends - all for the better (VW TDI until the emissions issue, a Toyota hybrid, etc), but then I hang around with practical types.Just a case study, for fun, poll a few of your friends and family members to see what if any changes to their primary vehicles have resulted in a change for the positive in fuel economy in recent years.
I can tell you that ALL four of my remaining siblings, and their spouses, are currently driving vehicles that consume more fuel (in a couple cases, a LOT more) than they once did. And nothing else changed that would have been cause to suddenly decide being wasteful is OK. I certainly don't like getting into discussions about it with family, but I quietly just sit and shake my head. And they ALL complain about money.
I have a lot of friends and friends of friends that are the same way. It is just a wasteful American attitude, and if it is cheap or convenient to be wasteful, then all the better!
And for those who live in the city, who could actually benefit from an EV, they look at me like I am nuts for even mentioning it. My brother just bought V8 #2, a giant Tundra, that he doesn't need, parked next to the Sequoia that his wife drives, in the driveway of a house they cannot afford. THAT is the "typical" American consumer, and THAT is who the manufacturers are building for. Given the profitability of giant trucks, it is easy to see why.
Myself: Passat TDIJust a case study, for fun, poll a few of your friends and family members to see what if any changes to their primary vehicles have resulted in a change for the positive in fuel economy in recent years.
I can tell you that ALL four of my remaining siblings, and their spouses, are currently driving vehicles that consume more fuel (in a couple cases, a LOT more) than they once did. And nothing else changed that would have been cause to suddenly decide being wasteful is OK. I certainly don't like getting into discussions about it with family, but I quietly just sit and shake my head. And they ALL complain about money.
I have a lot of friends and friends of friends that are the same way. It is just a wasteful American attitude, and if it is cheap or convenient to be wasteful, then all the better!
And for those who live in the city, who could actually benefit from an EV, they look at me like I am nuts for even mentioning it. My brother just bought V8 #2, a giant Tundra, that he doesn't need, parked next to the Sequoia that his wife drives, in the driveway of a house they cannot afford. THAT is the "typical" American consumer, and THAT is who the manufacturers are building for. Given the profitability of giant trucks, it is easy to see why.
This. And nowadays car manufacturers are like look at us we broke the 30mpg mile mark. Please thats 30 years ago with less BS on the car and way more practical, easier to work on and maintain. More mpgs in every car means less emissions. People sadly are just as ignorant as ever and continue in that trend. The movie Idiocracy isnt a fiction comedy its a glimpse into the future.The problem is, most of the better technology, of both gasoline and diesel, has been eaten up by bigger, bloated, heavier, and more [needless] power.
If we were content to drive an A1 Golf, we'd be able to buy a new 70 MPG car for probably $12k. But we've legislated our way right out of even having that be an option.
BTW, a Fox body Mustang, in the late '80s, with the standard 2.3L and 5sp manual gearbox, could tag 30 on the highway. I know, I had one. And it was pretty peppy, too. So again, the "new" Mustang, with what is probably an engine with thrice the HP, does not go thrice the distance on the same amount of fuel.
Welcome to life. You don't smoke, drink, and you exercise. You get to live longer and pay taxes on the idiots who end up on disability dying from lung and liver disease.I don't think that will happen here. Every time it even gets mentioned, people start to go bananas. (I don't, I laugh... but I'm not driving a pig either).
In this country, we instead reward people for bad choices: case in point, Cash for Clunkers. People who bought a pig, that lost value quickly, and didn't take care of it, got a nice cash payout. People like me, who bought an efficient car that held its value and took care of it... got nothing beyond what I granted myself for making a wise choice in the first place. And my tax dollars went to pay for the idiots who made poor decisions.