Feds: 36 mpg for cars by 2015

[mcturkey]

Originally posted by: Scarpozzi

Originally posted by: Injury
Too little, too late.

Seriously, 9 years to achieve that? Are they planning it for when gas will be $10/gallon?

Exactly. The American auto industry has been out maneuvered by foreign cars for years. They seriously need to stop this, 1 eco friendly model per year B.S. and do an overhaul of their entire lineup.

2-4 years will hopefully come out with some 35-40 mpg vehicles at least from the American auto industry.

On a side note, I hate being 6'4".

You mean like how the 09 Chevy Cobalt and 08 Ford Focus get 35mpg highway?

Cobalt, Focus, Civic, Corolla

These are all compact cars, yet the best any achieve is 28/37. That alone would still fail to meet the 35mpg average stipulated here.

Tundra, F-150, Silverado

In full-size trucks (chose V8 rather than V6, because very few are sold with the V6), the top MPG performance is 14/19. Again, this would be well below the 2015 mandate.

Long story short, these fleet average requirements are almost certainly not possible to meet in six years for any automaker that sells a large volume of trucks. This isn't in any way the fault of the automaker, as GM actually has the highest fuel economy of anyone when it comes to trucks and SUVs (and, with the two-mode hybrid, is actively working to improve it even further). The problem lies with the consumer buying so many of them. If consumers weren't buying them, the automakers wouldn't be building so many of them.

I'm all for raising fuel economy standards, but I don't see 2015 being a reasonable goal for the numbers required here. In an ideal world, we'd already be at these levels, but this is not an ideal world.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
50 mpg should be the benchmark

:thumbsup:

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

America will have to change about driving big Trucks, SUV's, large gas hog cars, etc...

No we wont. Light trucks are in a seperate category, and just because the fleet average needs to be 36 doesnt mean everyone will buy the low MPG cars.

As long as there is something in the fleet getting 54 and another getting 18, everyone can rush out and buy the vehicle that gets 18 and the fleet will still average 36.

That's not how averages work... They would also have to price the 54 MPG car low enough and the 18 MPG car high enough to balance the demand. I raise their average fuel economy, they have to make it more attractive to buy more fuel-efficient cars.

 

[desy]

Auto manufacturers can do it
But its a case of building cars people don't want? strip out some safety equipment, air, power everything, sound deadening materials and plunk in one of your smaller European engines which Ford GM Dodge all have access to, and easily make good gas mileage cars.

To build a car exactly like what we have now, big and heavy loaded and fuel efficient is hard, and thats where car companies make their most money, yes even Toyota.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
It will cost the auto industry 47 billion?


I thought it was impossible for them to do. Are they going to unmothball that secret technology they and the oil companies put in underground vaults?

We have cars that get over 40mpg now so how is it impossible to do it in over 5 years?

Honda Crx's were getting 50 mpg in the 80's. A little cramped... but still. I think it is doable as well. Food prices soaring... Americans will eat less... and maybe in 7 years the average american won't weigh 252 pounds.

 

[theeedude]

This is stupid and typical government cowardice. With gas at $4 and up it's totally redundant, because there is already incentive for automakers to make fuel efficient cars. Also, they should tax gasoline more if $4 is not enough, not mandate that automakers make cars that consumer may not want.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: senseamp
This is stupid and typical government cowardice. With gas at $4 and up it's totally redundant, because there is already incentive for automakers to make fuel efficient cars. Also, they should tax gasoline more if $4 is not enough, not mandate that automakers make cars that consumer may not want.

Government cowardice? The US.Gov has collected nearly 3/4 of a BILLION dollars in CAFE fines.

Sounds like it's a great money making scheme for them for doing absolutely nothing.

 

[mb]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
It will cost the auto industry 47 billion?


I thought it was impossible for them to do. Are they going to unmothball that secret technology they and the oil companies put in underground vaults?

We have cars that get over 40mpg now so how is it impossible to do it in over 5 years?

Honda Crx's were getting 50 mpg in the 80's. A little cramped... but still. I think it is doable as well. Food prices soaring... Americans will eat less... and maybe in 7 years the average american won't weigh 252 pounds.

That's some messed up logic there. The CRX weighed nothing by todays standards, had no safety features and only had 58hp.
Also, food prices may be "soaring", but fast food is cheap as ever so people will still eat in excess.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: mb

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
It will cost the auto industry 47 billion?


I thought it was impossible for them to do. Are they going to unmothball that secret technology they and the oil companies put in underground vaults?

We have cars that get over 40mpg now so how is it impossible to do it in over 5 years?

Honda Crx's were getting 50 mpg in the 80's. A little cramped... but still. I think it is doable as well. Food prices soaring... Americans will eat less... and maybe in 7 years the average american won't weigh 252 pounds.

That's some messed up logic there. The CRX weighed nothing by todays standards, had no safety features and only had 58hp.
Also, food prices may be "soaring", but fast food is cheap as ever so people will still eat in excess.

doh. my car only has 36hp

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: vi edit

Originally posted by: senseamp
This is stupid and typical government cowardice. With gas at $4 and up it's totally redundant, because there is already incentive for automakers to make fuel efficient cars. Also, they should tax gasoline more if $4 is not enough, not mandate that automakers make cars that consumer may not want.

Government cowardice? The US.Gov has collected nearly 3/4 of a BILLION dollars in CAFE fines.

Sounds like it's a great money making scheme for them for doing absolutely nothing.

That's what, like a couple days of Iraq worth?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: mcturkey

Cobalt, Focus, Civic, Corolla

These are all compact cars, yet the best any achieve is 28/37. That alone would still fail to meet the 35mpg average stipulated here.

Tundra, F-150, Silverado

In full-size trucks (chose V8 rather than V6, because very few are sold with the V6), the top MPG performance is 14/19. Again, this would be well below the 2015 mandate.

those aren't the figures used for CAFE. the CAFE figures are higher. additionally, CAFE gives huge bonuses for flex fuel vehicles (165% of the straight-gasoline mileage despite the lower mpg of flex fuel).

 

[spidey07]

In soviet US, government rules your cars too!

What a bunch of crock this is. The last thing people want is to go back to the 80s where cars only have 130 hp.

 

[ViviTheMage]

hahaha, who cares....2015, it should be 2010.

what about the old cars that get 5-10 mpg?

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
It will cost the auto industry 47 billion?


I thought it was impossible for them to do. Are they going to unmothball that secret technology they and the oil companies put in underground vaults?

No it isn't. Smaller engines in lighter cars would easily achieve that.

I doubt it will pass...even though I support it. And it's not as though that cost will be absorbed by the big 3 alone. All auto manufacturers will have to comply.

The death of the fullsize SUV is at hand! About fucking time!!! 😉

 

[Baked]

The world will end in 2012, so who gives a fuck.

 

[Syrch]

but according to many people our oil supply will be gone in 5 years!

 

[Xavier434]

I believe this was posted some time back but for those who missed it and wish to read a well researched article involving where the world stands with auto technology and design, what is currently in the works for the future, and why we don't have 50 mpg in the US right now then give it a read.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/130439

In short summary, auto companies make what will earn them the most money based on what people want to buy rather than optimizing efficiency.

Individual Desires > Collective Concerns 🙁

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I believe this was posted some time back but for those who missed it and wish to read a well researched article involving where the world stands with auto technology and design, what is currently in the works for the future, and why we don't have 50 mpg in the US right now then give it a read.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/130439

In short summary, auto companies make what will earn them the most money based on what people want to buy rather than optimizing efficiency.

Individual Desires > Collective Concerns 🙁

Another important thing that this article doesn't cover is emissions. Many high MPG engines in use in Europe/Asia can not pass federal or individual state emission laws.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Individual Desires > Collective Concerns :thumbsup:

*FIXED*

That's exactly what is so great. When you start pushing collective concerns that's when you have crossed the line in my book which is why legislation such as this should be discouraged in a free country.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Individual Desires > Collective Concerns :thumbsup:

That's exactly what is so great. When you start pushing collective concerns that's when you have crossed the line in my book which is why legislation such as this should be discouraged in a free country.

If you are going to quote me and change the quote, please let everyone know.

On that note, I'm not supporting that legislation should get involved and micromanage everything, but these concerns shouldn't be ignored by them either. Mostly, I wish more people would choose to be more conservative during times like these. I don't expect that to happen because most people are far too greedy for their own good, but I will do my part anyways.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Individual Desires > Collective Concerns :thumbsup:

That's exactly what is so great. When you start pushing collective concerns that's when you have crossed the line in my book which is why legislation such as this should be discouraged in a free country.

The trouble with that is that we are reactionary instead of proactive. We should have been proactive about this and started to develop different technologies and more efficient cars a decade ago. Now we have gas prices over $4/gallon and half of the population is driving around in the least efficient vehicles developed since the early 1970s. Yep, free market is the way it should be...:roll:

 

[CrazyShiz]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Individual Desires > Collective Concerns :thumbsup:

That's exactly what is so great. When you start pushing collective concerns that's when you have crossed the line in my book which is why legislation such as this should be discouraged in a free country.

The trouble with that is that we are reactionary instead of proactive. We should have been proactive about this and started to develop different technologies and more efficient cars a decade ago. Now we have gas prices over $4/gallon and half of the population is driving around in the least efficient vehicles developed since the early 1970s. Yep, free market is the way it should be...:roll:

I don't agree with it, but the free market has always been reactionary. The only time the free market will change course is when they've hit bottom and can't make any more money off of it, or they can make more money off of something else.

When profit is the major objective, everything else goes by the wayside.

 

[moparacer]

In short summary, auto companies make what will earn them the most money based on what people want to buy

Exactly the cheap oil through the 90s and even up as recent as 2003 really gave the auto industry no incentive to increase fuel milage beause customers didnt care...My how things have changed lol. You cant give older vehicles that get 15-20 mpg away around my area right now...

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: CrazyShiz

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Individual Desires > Collective Concerns :thumbsup:

That's exactly what is so great. When you start pushing collective concerns that's when you have crossed the line in my book which is why legislation such as this should be discouraged in a free country.

The trouble with that is that we are reactionary instead of proactive. We should have been proactive about this and started to develop different technologies and more efficient cars a decade ago. Now we have gas prices over $4/gallon and half of the population is driving around in the least efficient vehicles developed since the early 1970s. Yep, free market is the way it should be...:roll:

I don't agree with it, but the free market has always been reactionary. The only time the free market will change course is when they've hit bottom and can't make any more money off of it, or they can make more money off of something else.

When profit is the major objective, everything else goes by the wayside.

Which is why we need legislation, because by the time we hit bottom, it will be too late.

 

[CrazyShiz]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: CrazyShiz

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Individual Desires > Collective Concerns :thumbsup:

That's exactly what is so great. When you start pushing collective concerns that's when you have crossed the line in my book which is why legislation such as this should be discouraged in a free country.

The trouble with that is that we are reactionary instead of proactive. We should have been proactive about this and started to develop different technologies and more efficient cars a decade ago. Now we have gas prices over $4/gallon and half of the population is driving around in the least efficient vehicles developed since the early 1970s. Yep, free market is the way it should be...:roll:

I don't agree with it, but the free market has always been reactionary. The only time the free market will change course is when they've hit bottom and can't make any more money off of it, or they can make more money off of something else.

When profit is the major objective, everything else goes by the wayside.

Which is why we need legislation, because by the time we hit bottom, it will be too late.

Exactly, which is why I don't understand the hate against having a hybrid system with free market and regulation. We have that now, but is the only way to sustain that is having one side want to over-regulate and another under-regulate? Can we please agree there needs to be a balance?