Foo - New mpg standards

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/21/congress.energy.ap/index.html

This legislation is a joke

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/21/congress.energy.ap/index.html

Most of the other countries in the world have vehicles that average like 60 mpg, this is a joke.

The real joke is the counter offers from the car companies. They know how to make true fuel efficient vehicles, and they could be in mass production in less than a year. I swear, those ****ing bastards are in bed with big oil in the worst way.

When they talk about mandating things like a Ford Expedition that gets 70 MPG, or a car like that prototype Lotus SUV thats all electric and gets 350 miles on one charge, then I'll be impressed. Until then, its all a ****ing joke.

Fuel economy will not come from the big car companies, nor will it come from the ****** bags in Washington. It will come from companies over seas, and small private businesses in the US.

I have a feeling oil will be so expensive anyone not driving a car that gets 60 mpg will either be rich or broke.

I know my family in France copes with high gas prices. But they all drive diesels, all get 40+mpg, and keep it affordable then. Why is Europe so far ahead?

Our emissions laws frown on diesels. Too much non co2 emissions.

The cars in Europe and Asia (the ones driven there, not imported to US) aren't really different technology-wise, they're just typically smaller.

The main reason our corporate average fuel economy is so low is that's where the demand is. What Congress is doing here is forcing the supply away from the demand. What we'll see is more focus on hybrid vehicles and a lot loss focus on selling larger vehicles, which drive down a manufacturer's average. Vehicles which get poor mileage won't disappear, but they'll become more expensive as production decreases and margins necessarily grow.

While I think it's about time for the CAFE standards to rise, I have to say this is a surprisingly large increase.

You can get a good overview on what CAFE is at wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy)

haha I thought this was legislation defining MPG formattinghahahaha

yeah ive seen some of those so thought to be 60 mpg cars i feel a lot safer riding a crotch rocket at 200mph without a helmet

yeah ive seen some of those so thought to be 60 mpg cars i feel a lot safer riding a crotch rocket at 200mph without a helmet
I get 60 mpg (less than 4l/100km) on the highway in my TDI VW Golf. There is nothing unsafe about my car.

I have a feeling that car makers rather see cars only belong to the really elite (similar to how cars were before Henry Ford and his assembly line) than come up to the table with mpg standards. I don't blame them, as much as I blame the trend that all investors care about is this financial quarter, and nothing else, where if a company does make some R&D investments, shareholders sue them for not having profits be as good as Q1 was.

It gets old seeing high milage cars styled to look like the same old Scamp, Gremlin, Mazda GLC, or other 1970s crappy subcompact clone. Style-wise, Tesla gets it right for a non-traditional vehicle, but not sure if they will make it.

Look at all the improvements to the internal combustion system made by random people, from making a six-stroke engine to reuse the hot gases, to having pistons share a combustion chamber, to many other improvements. Seeing auto makers come out with the same model, maybe with squarer headlights and +5 hp due to a slight mod on the heads is disappointing.

haha I thought this was legislation defining MPG formattinghahahaha
Me too. I was looking for some discussion on audio files, not fuel mileage.

I wanted to get a diesel last time I got a car. Can't get them in NY new, and used is rare.

I know my family in France copes with high gas prices. But they all drive diesels, all get 40+mpg, and keep it affordable then. Why is Europe so far ahead?

because in america mom needs a 36 foot long 11 ton vehicle to drop off little johnny at soccer practice.

in europe you actually need to know how to drive to get a license...here if you can pull off a 3 point turn your in. then we build our cars based on a population of poor drivers.

because in america mom needs a 36 foot long 11 ton vehicle to drop off little johnny at soccer practice.

in europe you actually need to know how to drive to get a license...here if you can pull off a 3 point turn your in. then we build our cars based on a population of poor drivers.
+1

European driving tests are much more difficult than American. In Europe driving is viewed as a privilege, not a right.

+1

European driving tests are much more difficult than American. In Europe driving is viewed as a privilege, not a right.


From the driver's ed manual in high school, "Driving is a privilege, not a right."

From the driver's ed manual in high school, "Driving is a privilege, not a right."
To bad it's not treated that way.

From the Ohio written drivers test.

What do you do when you encounter a railroad crossing?

a) Nothing

b) Stop after the tracks and look

c) Stop on the tracks and look

d) Stop before the tracks and look

I know all about European Driving tests, my father was born and raised in France. He had to go 3 time to get his license, in a stickshift, with no synchromesh. They apparently made him reverse uphill and downhill around a corner. They would tell you to stop the car midway up the hill, and start it back up. We've got close friends from England who report similar experiences.

I know diesel emissions are frowned upon here. BUt the TDI is am amazing machine, they seem to get no less than 50mpg. I have a hard time believing a VW TDI is polluting more than my neighbors Chevy Avalanche, this must be a well outdated law.

I have a feeling that car makers rather see cars only belong to the really elite (similar to how cars were before Henry Ford and his assembly line) than come up to the table with mpg standards. I don't blame them, as much as I blame the trend that all investors care about is this financial quarter, and nothing else, where if a company does make some R&D investments, shareholders sue them for not having profits be as good as Q1 was.

It gets old seeing high milage cars styled to look like the same old Scamp, Gremlin, Mazda GLC, or other 1970s crappy subcompact clone. Style-wise, Tesla gets it right for a non-traditional vehicle, but not sure if they will make it.

Look at all the improvements to the internal combustion system made by random people, from making a six-stroke engine to reuse the hot gases, to having pistons share a combustion chamber, to many other improvements. Seeing auto makers come out with the same model, maybe with squarer headlights and +5 hp due to a slight mod on the heads is disappointing.


I think European cars (particularly older VW's) tended to look a bit boxy. But newer cars, particularly Japanese cars, look quite sleek IMO. I believe the Tesla is going to make it. THe owner of paypal contributed something like 27 million to Tesla. And there is no shortage of customers at Tesla motors.

Must be reached in 13 years....god this is ********.

35mpg is accomplishable as is. For ***'s sake, even the Corvette has many USVs beat out on fuel economy, all while still not being able to reach 30mpg.

That's sad.

Really, I think we need to up the fuel economy ASAP...not over a decade from now....mosre cars need to put out good economy numbers.

+1

European driving tests are much more difficult than American. In Europe driving is viewed as a privilege, not a right.

Not only that, but there are a **** load of things they don't teach here. For instance, if you were hauling a really big trailer with an auto trans pickup, and went up a big hill, but didn't turn off overdrive, nothing would happen right? Wrong, the tranny will probably start on fire. There is so much they don't teach you about maintainance, and how you should drive in general. And of course European driving classes do stunt driving to teach you how to save yourself in a nasty situation, and that would certainly be good here too.

If you ask me, the basic driving course needs to be an intensive month long course, and not some 16 or 20 hour crap or whatever it is these days.

Not only that, but there are a **** load of things they don't teach here. For instance, if you were hauling a really big trailer with an auto trans pickup, and went up a big hill, but didn't turn off overdrive, nothing would happen right? Wrong, the tranny will probably start on fire. There is so much they don't teach you about maintainance, and how you should drive in general. And of course European driving classes do stunt driving to teach you how to save yourself in a nasty situation, and that would certainly be good here too.

If you ask me, the basic driving course needs to be an intensive month long course, and not some 16 or 20 hour crap or whatever it is these days.

My drivers ed was 30 hours of classroom over a 5 week period. 10 hours of instructed driving, and 6 hours of watching some other kid drive

drivers ed here was a joke....best driving skills I learned came from racing classes and stunt driving lessons.

What I mean by a month long is 40 hours a week, for 4 weeks straight.

I don't see how 40 hours a week is at all practical. That's a full time job. Students would have to drop out of school. If you had a job, you'd have to leave your job, and your income.

You see, I think it should be incorporated into high school. I see no reason not to. Just about everyone drives. And those who don't until later often weren't able to afford the classes while in high school.

incorporating it into high school is not a bad idea. I remember talking to a person who said their school offered drivers ed free of charge. Now, it's usually at least 500 dollars.

drivers ed here was a joke....best driving skills I learned came from racing classes and stunt driving lessons.
x2 and state trooper drivers test

x2 and state trooper drivers test

Here in Michigan, the MSP driving classes involve doing a J turn in 6" of water at 100 mph. That would be one funny drivers ed requirement.

yeah ive seen some of those so thought to be 60 mpg cars i feel a lot safer riding a crotch rocket at 200mph without a helmet
Feeling safer and being safer are entirely different things. Cars are designed to be safe (http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/06/study_no_tradeo.html), or not. They are designed to be efficient, or not. I'd drive a Smart car before I'd drive a pickup truck simply because the Smart car is more structurally sound, and we're far more likely to die in a solo accident than a vehicle on vehicle accident iirc. That being said, driving habits make up the vast majority of risk.

The real joke is the counter offers from the car companies. They know how to make true fuel efficient vehicles, and they could be in mass production in less than a year. I swear, those ****ing bastards are in bed with big oil in the worst way.




I'm not sure that they are in bed with the oil companies (although its possible). It could be they are too concerned with short term profits to do the extensive retooling to produce radically different cars from what they are making now.

And if they did, the oil companies could just shut down some refineries to limit supply along with raising prices.

To bad it's not treated that way.

From the Ohio written drivers test.

What do you do when you encounter a railroad crossing?

a) Nothing

b) Stop after the tracks and look

c) Stop on the tracks and look

d) Stop before the tracks and look

Depends. Is it gated?

I'm not sure that they are in bed with the oil companies (although its possible). It could be they are too concerned with short term profits to do the extensive retooling to produce radically different cars from what they are making now.

And if they did, the oil companies could just shut down some refineries to limit supply along with raising prices.The Reckoning by David Halberstam talks about this mindset, as part of the explanation about why American automakers were so far behind the curve when the Japanese first started to dominate the market. It gave me a whole new insight into the motivations of industry leaders.

This legislation is a joke

Blue star, posting opinons on legislation with a link that says "POLITICAL" right in the middle :lol:

Come to the dark room my friend...

Depends. Is it gated?And, how fast am I going? I mean, if I'm really flying, wouldn't attempting to stop be more dangerous? And how will I get air if I stop? For goodness' sake, they don't give enough details here.

I think some of the newer, more fuel efficient cars are actually pretty appealing. Like the Prius -- I sat in one on the lot and thought it was pretty nifty. I would gladly drive one if Houston wasn't riddle with soccer mom's who think driving an SUV and chatting absent-mindedly on the cell phone is the only way to get from points A to B.

Oh, and to the guy with the Golf Diesel -- I am envious. Everyone I know who has a TDI Golf has been a very satisfied. Almost makes me want to go out and buy one, but I have 18 months left on my Audi lease.

I'm not sure that they are in bed with the oil companies (although its possible). It could be they are too concerned with short term profits to do the extensive retooling to produce radically different cars from what they are making now.

And if they did, the oil companies could just shut down some refineries to limit supply along with raising prices.

I don't much think it would be too hard to re-tool for new designs. Granted auto makers like to make essentialy the same car for as much as a decade or more these days, but it shouldn't be too hard to change within a 3 year time frame. Auto makers saying it will take more that 5 years to change things, and still have crap standards is a crock of horse ****. They could have hybridised cars powered by small long stroke diesel engines that pump the exhaust into a compressed air tank, the compressed air spinning the wheels most of the time, and the engine only operating when the air runs low. This would get over 100 miles per gallon, and it could absolutely be in full production in 3 years. There is no real reason to fundamentaly change body designs, only the power plant.

I don't much think it would be too hard to re-tool for new designs. Granted auto makers like to make essentialy the same car for as much as a decade or more these days, but it shouldn't be too hard to change within a 3 year time frame. Auto makers saying it will take more that 5 years to change things, and still have crap standards is a crock of horse ****. They could have hybridised cars powered by small long stroke diesel engines that pump the exhaust into a compressed air tank, the compressed air spinning the wheels most of the time, and the engine only operating when the air runs low. This would get over 100 miles per gallon, and it could absolutely be in full production in 3 years. There is no real reason to fundamentaly change body designs, only the power plant.

Here's the key thing though: it's not just the producers holding back, it's the consumers. What kind of cars do we buy right now? Mostly conventional gas cars, and we're generally more than willing to pay a premium for extra horsepower. Anybody who's done sales has probably had the experience of near certainty that one product is ideal for a customer, but he is convinced that a different product is the one he wants. The customer is always right, so you sell him that, but even if he's wrong, dogging him too hard to buy the other is only going to chase him away without buying either.

New things almost always enter the market slowly because the consumers don't know if it will satisfy their needs or wants as well as the old verions, and producers are unsure if the market risk of investing in the new product will pay off. A few of you here still remember the Sony BetaMax tapes? It was similar to the Blueray vs. HD-DVD battle today. Beta lost out to JVC's VHS, and all the early adopters of Beta eventually had to spend hundreds of dollars on new players and new tapes.

Also, I work in an industry somewhat related to the auto industry, and I can tell you it does take 5 years to make major changes like a completely new engine system. I will bet you Toyota spent well over that amount of time doing R&D on their hybrid engines before the Prius hit the market. We're about a year into a change from one type of diesel to another and not finished yet. We're talking an established technology and known functional engine, but we have to work the bugs out and integrate it properly with our vehicles. Maturing a prototype technology into a serviceable product and then making it work as desired in your application is a lot more work than people give credit for. The biggest thing in applications like ours and the auto industry is it doesn't just have to work, it has to be steadfastly reliable, too.

Depends. Is it gated?

Ah, very good question. And what a poorly worded question from the test. questions questions:o

... BUt the TDI is am amazing machine, they seem to get no less than 50mpg. I have a hard time believing a VW TDI is polluting more than my neighbors Chevy Avalanche, this must be a well outdated law.

Data point: the US emissions standards typically work on a 3 year cycle. The 2007 set got tighter on NOx and soot. TDI didn't pass. No VW TDI's in the US in '07. The '08 TDI's will have either a soot filter or a urea additive, I seem to recall.

Really, which pollutant your regs were optimized for depended on who was downwind of you during the Cold War. The US favored the neighborly Canadians with regs that targeted particulates, while the Europeans said "Bah" to the Warsaw Pact's trees, and did what they could to keep Italy's frescoes from rotting. Ok, that's a little bit of an oversimplification, but worldwide standards will probably approach unity by 2013-2016. Until then, the most difficult to meet, both in terms of what's allowed and the gymnastics of gaining approval, are (drumroll please) California's. Who'd a thunk?

Blue star, posting opinons on legislation with a link that says "POLITICAL" right in the middle :lol:

Come to the dark room my friend...

Let me tell you, after getting up to page 400 of State of Denial, I am well onto my way to the dark room.

The Reckoning by David Halberstam talks about this mindset, as part of the explanation about why American automakers were so far behind the curve when the Japanese first started to dominate the market. It gave me a whole new insight into the motivations of industry leaders.

Interesting choice of reading material! :)


The Japanese do make good cars. But initially, dumping played a role too, IIRC. Right after Reagan left office, he made a couple speeches in Japan, and got paid 2 million bucks. Hrm.