100mpg(Imp) family hatch diesels within three years

[50 mpg by 2012]

Ford Focus-sized family hatchbacks returning 97.5mpg[Imp] will be commonplace within three years, predicts Bosch board member Peter Tyroller – fuel economy 40 per cent better than today’s [EU] cars.

Next generation powertrains, such as Ford’s 1.0-litre three-cylinder Ecoboost engine will reduce fuel consumption by 30 per cent compared to today’s [EU] units

This will be achieved through a combination of powertrain improvements and other measures such as low rolling resistance tyres and engine stop-start – but unlike today, such ‘other measures’ will be a far smaller part of the improvements.

Petrol will not be left behind either: Tyroller, speaking at the SMMT International Automotive Summit at Canary Wharf, predicts a family-sized car averaging 64.2mpg(Imperial) on the official cycle will become common.

For the full 6/12/12 article
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/100mpg-family-hatch-diesels-within-three-years

 

[desy]

I can't tow my boat with a Focus, European 'family sized' is very different than what we do.
I just bought a Flex cause my Altima is too small for family stuff
BTW I said maybe in the poll, how much? on going maint costs, 0-60 times? I'll buy a car that gets 200mpg or 1000mpg what are the trade offs

 

[waggy]

GReat! that would be awesome to have.

 

[Howard]

What would be really nice is a power surge function where the engine can work overtime when not needed for acceleration, to build power in a surge unit or supercapacitor, so that you can get faster acceleration for a short burst when necessary. As it stands, I don't think they can get even 100HP from a 1L turbodiesel.

 

[Bartman39]

What would be really nice is a power surge function where the engine can work overtime when not needed for acceleration, to build power in a surge unit or supercapacitor, so that you can get faster acceleration for a short burst when necessary. As it stands, I don't think they can get even 100HP from a 1L turbodiesel.

They can make the 100hp mark but the emissions standards of even today will kill the the whole deal... It still takes a certain amount of fuel to make HP no matter how you inject it... Also the emission standard in 3 years will hurt it even more here in the US...

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_...s-cancer-same-magnitude-as-second-hand-smoke/

 

[Zap]

I can't tow my boat with a Focus, European 'family sized' is very different than what we do.
I just bought a Flex cause my Altima is too small for family stuff

Really? My family had (okay start laughing now) a 1977 Ford Pinto for a family of 4, BITD.

My mom recently offered to give her 2010 Volvo V70 mid-sized station wagon to my sister, who also represents a family of 4 (which is extremely UNLIKELY to get any larger). My sister declined, giving as a reason, "we need a larger vehicle that can seat at least 7."

Uh huh. This is from the same person who argued at length with me over global warming (she believes in anthropogenic global warming as unassailable fact, my jury is still out).

 

[Doppel]

Ford Focus-sized family hatchbacks returning 97.5mpg[Imp] will be commonplace within three years, predicts Bosch board member Peter Tyroller – fuel economy 40 per cent better than today’s [EU] cars.

Complete rubbish.

 

[Arkaign]

Really? My family had (okay start laughing now) a 1977 Ford Pinto for a family of 4, BITD.

My mom recently offered to give her 2010 Volvo V70 mid-sized station wagon to my sister, who also represents a family of 4 (which is extremely UNLIKELY to get any larger). My sister declined, giving as a reason, "we need a larger vehicle that can seat at least 7."

Uh huh. This is from the same person who argued at length with me over global warming (she believes in anthropogenic global warming as unassailable fact, my jury is still out).

Heheh. Yeah my family had some small cars when me and my brother were growing up in the 80s as well. Today it's a little tougher with all of the safety requirements. Have you seen the size of car seats and infant carrier attachments now? They're freaking gigantic. When my oldest son was younger we had a Buick LeSabre and later a BMW 5-series, and the seat barely fit in the backseat of either.

Don't get me started on the freaking strollers, lol.

 

[Arkaign]

Complete rubbish.

Yeah, not to mention that the current very high MPG cars over there do it by putting in like 75hp diesel motors, 0-60 in 12-18 seconds depending on model. That's about enough to get you killed over here.

 

[_Rick_]

God bless America, the Land of the Free, and the only country where driving an economical car is perceived as dangerous.

In Europe, we have trucks on the road which accelerate to 50 mph much longer than 18 seconds, when loaded. They share the same Autobahn as Audis blasting past at 150 mph.
While it's a stressful environment, nobody is scared of using a slow car.
I don't know whether this is just some collective fear, or whether America is in the crushing grip of vehicular homicide...

Just this: Going fast is more likely to get you killed than going slow.

 

[Zenmervolt]

God bless America, the Land of the Free, and the only country where driving an economical car is perceived as dangerous.

As opposed to Europe, where the schools apparently don't teach children what hyperbole is.

ZV

 

[Doppel]

Really? My family had (okay start laughing now) a 1977 Ford Pinto for a family of 4, BITD.

My mom recently offered to give her 2010 Volvo V70 mid-sized station wagon to my sister, who also represents a family of 4 (which is extremely UNLIKELY to get any larger). My sister declined, giving as a reason, "we need a larger vehicle that can seat at least 7."

Uh huh. This is from the same person who argued at length with me over global warming (she believes in anthropogenic global warming as unassailable fact, my jury is still out).

Most families see their cars the same way campers see their tents. A tent rated to "sleep 8" is really fit for 4-6. Sleep 4? Good luck, you probably want to go to 2. So a family with 2 kids can BARELY fit into a 5 seat sedan. And if they have three kids holy heck forget it, just have to have that minivan STAT!

I know Europeans do tolerate smaller cars, but I imagine this is mainly a north american phenomenon--the idea that you generally always want extra seats in the car not serving a purpose. Think of all the families you know with three kids. I bet you're hard pressed to think of one that doesn't have at least one minivan or 3 row suv.

God bless America, the Land of the Free, and the only country where driving an economical car is perceived as dangerous.[/quite]It's not really more dangerous, though we can all think of examples on which it potentially could be. It's just that if in the US a new car is slow if its 0-60 is 10 seconds (and that would be considered on the slow side), a sub 100-horsepower diesel that is taking way longer than that to hit 60 is a hard sell.

 

[_Rick_]

Why do you need a family hatchback that accelerates fast?
Merging onto a highway is not going to be a problem with a 15-second 0-60.
There's plenty of power to keep going up hill under maximum load.

Yes, there are faster cars - I just don't see the need, if all you do is utilitary driving or commuting. If you're in the car for fun, sure, go ahead, spec a big engine. I did that myself. But plenty of people just need to get from A to B, and don't want to pay excessively for the privilege - why do they still feel the need to pack at least 100 BHP/t?
This is a serious question btw - I would love to understand the motivation behind what appears to the outsider to be just another american excess.

 

[LTC8K6]

I really would not want to merge on I-95 or I-40 here in NC in a car that takes 15 seconds to get to 60mph.

Everyone is doing 70 on 95 and 75 on 40, at least. The on ramps are often not very long.

If it takes 12 or 15 seconds to get to 60, how long to get to 75?

IMO, it's just way too slow to merge safely.

Perhaps if driving conditions and roads, and drivers, were different.

 

[LTC8K6]

The big rigs are already perceived as slow. People are already adjusted to the big rigs on the highways. We know what to expect with a big rig.

People are not adjusted to a car taking 20 seconds to reach parity with the traffic flow.

 

[LTC8K6]

Smart Fortwo takes 21 seconds to reach 70mph, for example.

 

[_Rick_]

Well, usually you don't merge from a stop, but off a 30mph zone. there's also usually more than just the merging lane to accelerate, if you accelerate on-ramp you can easily be doing 50 when reaching the beginning of the merging zone. Slipping in between trucks and taking it from there shouldn't be an issue. Neither should accelerating another 20-30 mph. You can readily take advantage of the lower weight of the car when cornering on the ramp. Also, Fords are usually decently sprung, so that you won't feel like you're on a boat.
Also, in civilised countries, people leave - and even actively create - spaces for merging vehicles. Here in France people do 130 km/h on the Autoroute. Yet trucks and decrepit 20 year old diesel renault 5s can still safely merge, as people obsessively free the right hand lane for merging traffic.
If there's only a single lane you're merging onto, and people are doing 75mph ...there's a problem in the system. Single lane merging usually happens around a maximum 50 mph allowed.

Currently the image I get, is that you are afraid because the rule of the road is the same as that of the economy: the strong eat the weak. Can't afford to be weak, or somebody will crash into you out of spite. This distrust of others is something that does seem to characterize the American Dream. In Germany, it's probably not that dissimilar, with the rule of the Audi and BMW on the left lane, expecting you to hop out of the way, when they come at you on the speed limiter at 150 mph.
In Southern Europe though, while rules aren't being respected, there is more of a respect of other traffic participants. It looks more chaotic from the outside, but usually people leave you the space you need, and are somewhat less aggressive than some German drivers. Driving the French Autoroute is Zen. Driving the German Autobahn (during anything but lowest traffic, going faster than 50mph) is a nightmare. Driving the Swiss highway system is hell (mostly because you have to maniacally stare at your speedometer, while in often dense traffic, that refuses to go below the speed limit, even if security distances are around one twentieth of what they should be).

Aaaanyway, to get back on topic: It seems to be a cultural insecurity issue, that's preventing America from downscaling their vehicular demands.
Maybe a gradual change can happen, but it's unlikely, as especially in crowded areas, more people will feel that insecurity, and cling to their ridiculous vehicles.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Why do you need a family hatchback that accelerates fast?

Because we've grown accustomed to them. It's that simple. A "slow" car here has an 8 to 9 second 0-60 time. Yes, this is simply because we've had very inexpensive gasoline compared to most places and have been able to afford it, but the fact remains that this is what people here are accustomed to.

Merging onto a highway is not going to be a problem with a 15-second 0-60.

I completely agree. And in practice most people actually take 20 or 30 seconds to get up to speed; they don't go balls to the wall every time they want to accelerate. However...

There's plenty of power to keep going up hill under maximum load.

This is only sort of true. Do remember that the US, at least the western portions, has geological features that rather dwarf anything in the UK. There are inclines around where I live that require downshifts to comfortably maintain speed even in my 951. And a friend of mine had a Geo Metro (~14 seconds 0-60, ~50 mpg, US) that seemed fine until she went into the mountains where it struggled to maintain 45 mph with only a driver.

This is a serious question btw - I would love to understand the motivation behind what appears to the outsider to be just another american excess.

People don't like to downgrade. Anywhere. It's not an "American" thing, it's an everywhere thing. If the conditions here had been such that our streets required small cars to navigate them and that gasoline was heavily taxed and that we weren't so geographically spread out that we tend to drive greater distances over freeways, then we'd be driving cars similar to the smaller cars driven in the UK and the rest of Europe or Japan.

But we didn't have those conditions. We had big, wide roads, cheap gasoline, and drove 12,000 to 15,000 miles each year. This led to big cars, with big engines. We got used to cars with huge amounts of room and simply found them more comfortable. This is why the Prius sells very well in the US but 1.0 litre hatchbacks with the same mileage don't. The Prius is big enough and, while it's not "fast" by any stretch, it's faster than a lot of the tiny "conventional" good mileage cars.

Aaaanyway, to get back on topic: It seems to be a cultural insecurity issue, that's preventing America from downscaling their vehicular demands.
Maybe a gradual change can happen, but it's unlikely, as especially in crowded areas, more people will feel that insecurity, and cling to their ridiculous vehicles.

Just curious, how often does calling the opposing side of a discussion "insecure" actually help change their minds? I'm legitimately wondering here since on the surface a comment like that seems more like a way to stroke one's own sense of superiority rather than something aimed at productive discussion.

ZV

 

[desy]

Its always been in NA size is the ultimate luxury, even if the car is a minivan the xtra space is more appreciated than the bells or high quality interior materials, those just add.
I grew up in the 60/70's where cars were huge, unsafe, inefficient and 30 yrs later worlds better.

The safest vehicles are about 4000 lb properly equiped, heavier you have physics on your side in a accident however accident avoidance suffers due to driving dynamics.
Its a tradeoff. Smaller can also be safe as accident avoidance goes up but lose the battles with heavier vehicles

When I was in Europe my uncle upgraded his car from a 1L engine to a 1.2l cause he felt it was gutless. . I imagine that came from hauling around 4 people tripping everyday 🙂 .. I don't think you can get anything smaller than what a 1.5 or 1.6 here?

I didn't say I couldn't live with the vehicle I just got rid of 'a Versa' just WANTED the versatility of the Flex and can afford to do so. We fill the Altima now 'fam of 4' maybe the kids want to drag a friend or two some where, each, or Its our turn to carpool 3 kids + football gear to practice, no compromises required

 

[_Rick_]

Just curious, how often does calling the opposing side of a discussion "insecure" actually help change their minds? I'm legitimately wondering here since on the surface a comment like that seems more like a way to stroke one's own sense of superiority rather than something aimed at productive discussion.

ZV

I wouldn't call it an opposing side.
As for the insecurity: This was the predominant emotional vibe I got from most of the responses so far.
The image of dying because the car is too small, too light, too slow has been perpetuated whenever this kind of topic arises.
It's not about superiority - we are all equally susceptible to FUD-marketing. This is just one specific instance where 'security/safety' gets used as an argument, when the actual impact is quite negligible.

Also, regarding geographical features. I just drove across three alpine passes for fun on my way home from work - I found more of a safety feeling in having huge frickin' brakes on my car, than the fun revvy 135 HP engine, which gave me enjoyment, but anywhere out of second gear I was just breaking the law...So a family diesel car with 4 passengers and holiday gear would be heavier, and slightly less powerful...but the turbo should help at altitude...Also, most of the time when people are too slow going uphill around here - that's because they just drive really slowly.

Also, at this point, I'd rather die in an accident, because my car was too light, than end up killing some family-parents, because my heavy car crushed them....But I guess that's not compatible with American values of self preservation and advancement before all.

 

[LTC8K6]

Well, usually you don't merge from a stop, but off a 30mph zone. there's also usually more than just the merging lane to accelerate, if you accelerate on-ramp you can easily be doing 50 when reaching the beginning of the merging zone. Slipping in between trucks and taking it from there shouldn't be an issue. Neither should accelerating another 20-30 mph. You can readily take advantage of the lower weight of the car when cornering on the ramp. Also, Fords are usually decently sprung, so that you won't feel like you're on a boat.
Also, in civilised countries, people leave - and even actively create - spaces for merging vehicles. Here in France people do 130 km/h on the Autoroute. Yet trucks and decrepit 20 year old diesel renault 5s can still safely merge, as people obsessively free the right hand lane for merging traffic.
If there's only a single lane you're merging onto, and people are doing 75mph ...there's a problem in the system. Single lane merging usually happens around a maximum 50 mph allowed.

Currently the image I get, is that you are afraid because the rule of the road is the same as that of the economy: the strong eat the weak. Can't afford to be weak, or somebody will crash into you out of spite. This distrust of others is something that does seem to characterize the American Dream. In Germany, it's probably not that dissimilar, with the rule of the Audi and BMW on the left lane, expecting you to hop out of the way, when they come at you on the speed limiter at 150 mph.
In Southern Europe though, while rules aren't being respected, there is more of a respect of other traffic participants. It looks more chaotic from the outside, but usually people leave you the space you need, and are somewhat less aggressive than some German drivers. Driving the French Autoroute is Zen. Driving the German Autobahn (during anything but lowest traffic, going faster than 50mph) is a nightmare. Driving the Swiss highway system is hell (mostly because you have to maniacally stare at your speedometer, while in often dense traffic, that refuses to go below the speed limit, even if security distances are around one twentieth of what they should be).

Aaaanyway, to get back on topic: It seems to be a cultural insecurity issue, that's preventing America from downscaling their vehicular demands.
Maybe a gradual change can happen, but it's unlikely, as especially in crowded areas, more people will feel that insecurity, and cling to their ridiculous vehicles.

IMO, it's dangerous to be unable to accelerate reasonably quickly. I will not buy a car that does not move out smartly when I step on the gas.

 

[skyking]

I'd be all over that if we could get it.

 

[LTC8K6]

Our newest small car, I believe, is the Chevy Sonic(Aveo). The 1.4L Turbo hits 60 in under 8 seconds and gets 29mpg city and 40mpg highway.

So, you don't necessarily need to be slow.

 

[LTC8K6]

I can't even count the number of times some idiot has stopped on the on-ramp, trapping me behind them and forcing me to merge from a stop...

Or held me up on the on ramp by accelerating like a glacier...