Obama, CAFE and the End of Performance Cars

[GTaudiophile]

Nice rant by the folks at Edmunds.

Let's be direct: The future promises to be filled with gruesomely boring and agonizingly tiny cars no one really wants. I'm talking about cars with small engines, two-digit power outputs and rock-hard low-rolling-resistance tires. They'll be slow, they won't handle and they'll all be ugly. Not to mention the simple fact that they'll all look pretty much like each other; think Prius and Insight.

Every morning you'll wake up, look at the 2016 Chevrolet Pelosi out in the driveway and dread the day's commute. Sure, if you're rich, you'll still be able to indulge yourself by paying some sort of massive gas-guzzler tax, but for most of us, the days of accessible, exciting cars are coming to an end. Just buy the skanky little hybrid prescribed for people at your socio-economic level and shut your mouth.

It's simply the end of automotive choice. And without choice, there is no freedom.

 

[sandorski]

BS, they'll find a way.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

what a dogshit article.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
what a dogshit article.

Pretty much. With the ethanol loopholes, many trucks are already able to beat the 26mpg standard because of how its calculated. IIRC the Flexfuel Surburban or something got like 29.9mpg according to cafe calculations.

Cafe will not affect anything. Spend the $250 to make a vehicle like the Vette flexfuel and you've got a 39+mpg vehicle right there.

Cafe is calculated like this.

a gallon of alternative fuel is deemed to contain .15 gallon of fuel (which is approximately the amount of gasoline in a gallon of E85) [19] as an incentive to develop alternative fuel vehicles.[20] Dual-fuel vehicles, such as E85 capable models, are taken as the average of this alternative fuel rating and its gasoline rate. Thus a dual-fuel E85 capable vehicle which gets 15 mpg on E-85 and 25 mpg on gasoline would be rated as 40 mpg for CAFE purposes[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...e_Average_Fuel_Economy

Furthermore, what if a automaker screws up one year and hasn't made their cars flexfuel yet to skirt around it? Oh no problem, credits from years past AND credits from years IN THE FUTURE can be spent on your current problem.

The above quote is for current CAFe standards, the new ones have even more loopholes.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.c...dard-loopholes-appear/

All this complaining and worrying is because

CAFE changes nothing. That Edmund writer is either A) nothing more than a fear mongering uneducated prick going for shock value rather than truth and journalistic integrity or B). even more scary, a someone absolutely ignorant on the issue commenting and trying to sway public opinion.

CAFE: Somehow manages to be lip service to environmentalists while keeping the automakers and energy corporations at heart.

edit: The surburban gets 28mpg CAFE (15 gas, 84 ethanol) so even the hungriest V8 powered massive SUVS easily vault over the 26.6mpg truck standard.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
what a dogshit article.

Pretty much. With the ethanol loopholes, many trucks are already able to beat the 26mpg standard because of how its calculated. IIRC the Flexfuel Surburban or something got like 29.9mpg according to cafe calculations.

Cafe will not affect anything. Spend the $250 to make a vehicle like the Vette flexfuel and you've got a 46mpg vehicle right there.

But but... obama is the devil!!! /Faux news

 

[LTC8K6]

Obama is just going to loan his 2 car companies 25 to 50 billion more of your tax dollars to re-tool to make these new Obama Motor Works cars.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124295367747745591.html

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
Obama is just going to loan his 2 car companies 25 to 50 billion more of your tax dollars to re-tool to make these new Obama Motor Works cars.

when did the garage turn into fox news?

 

[LTC8K6]

The link is the WSJ and it quotes the admin, and OMW is just a funny play on BMW.

You knew all that, of course.

I understand the obsessive need to get in a crack at Fox, but don't reach so far next time. 😀

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
The link is the WSJ and it quotes the admin, and OMW is just a funny play on BMW.

You knew all that, of course.

I understand the obsessive need to get in a crack at Fox, but don't reach so far next time. 😀

WSJ is owned by the same as Fox and has the same style "reporting".

You knew that, of course.

 

[ViviTheMage]

Yeah, flexfuel won't last long...

Doesn't obama have a VERY heavy cadi? That things gotta be a gas hound.

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.caranddriver.com/re...sive_vehicles_car_news

 

[LTC8K6]

You knew that, of course.

Actually I didn't, but what I mentioned was a quote from the Obama admin, so why does it matter who reported it?

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
what a dogshit article.

 

[rh71]

so the US roads are going to look like Europe?

 

[alkemyst]

While this happened before, automakers found a way to get performance back.

The 70's through late 80's were the worst for performance in the US...but they rebounded with cars making more power, turning better times in all categories and at the end of the day doing it with much less gas.

I forsee if this happens we are looking at 5-10 years of piss-poor cars again.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Cafe is calculated like this.

a gallon of alternative fuel is deemed to contain .15 gallon of fuel (which is approximately the amount of gasoline in a gallon of E85) [19] as an incentive to develop alternative fuel vehicles.[20] Dual-fuel vehicles, such as E85 capable models, are taken as the average of this alternative fuel rating and its gasoline rate. Thus a dual-fuel E85 capable vehicle which gets 15 mpg on E-85 and 25 mpg on gasoline would be rated as 40 mpg for CAFE purposes[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...e_Average_Fuel_Economy

i did the numbers for that after i looked up the law in the USC

the prior numbers had the E85 capability punished a lot to 20 MPG

edit: just changed the page again, the USC section numbers were wrong

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
what a dogshit article.

Pretty much. With the ethanol loopholes, many trucks are already able to beat the 26mpg standard because of how its calculated. IIRC the Flexfuel Surburban or something got like 29.9mpg according to cafe calculations.

How much longer do you expect the flex fuel credit to be part of the CAFE calculation? Especially after the recent public lashings over ethanol production in the U.S.

 

[fleabag]

here is another poorly written rant:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/30850102

Obviously these people aren't taking the issue of oil consumption seriously which is why they bitch so much about slow cars. You want a fast car? Get an electric one, then you'll get all the acceleration you could possibly want and be halving the pollution you produce.

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
what a dogshit article.

Pretty much. With the ethanol loopholes, many trucks are already able to beat the 26mpg standard because of how its calculated. IIRC the Flexfuel Surburban or something got like 29.9mpg according to cafe calculations.

How much longer do you expect the flex fuel credit to be part of the CAFE calculation? Especially after the recent public lashings over ethanol production in the U.S.

It's not part of the CAFE calculation due to the backlash, they changed that a few years ago I think.

 

[bruceb]

Yes, the 1970's - 1980's cars were bad. But the improvement in MPG, Horespower, Driveability primarily came from Fuel Injection & good computer chips. Without those, they would still be bad. As for me, I will keep my old car or buy a used one and fix it as opposed to someone telling me what size car I must own and drive.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: fleabag
It's not part of the CAFE calculation due to the backlash, they changed that a few years ago I think.

what's not part of the CAFE calculation?

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: bruceb
Yes, the 1970's - 1980's cars were bad. But the improvement in MPG, Horespower, Driveability primarily came from Fuel Injection & good computer chips. Without those, they would still be bad. As for me, I will keep my old car or buy a used one and fix it as opposed to someone telling me what size car I must own and drive.

Well that's where my idea comes in where people have a fuel efficient daily driver and then a second vehicle that does all their "burly" needs. I couldn't stand having only one or the other, which is why I like having multple cars, however they really need to reduce the registration and insurance fees. If people could afford to own more cars (2 cars per person), then we'd probably see more people commuting in fuel efficient vehicles and then using their "guzzlers" as weekend vehicles, something I'm all for..

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: fleabag
It's not part of the CAFE calculation due to the backlash, they changed that a few years ago I think.

what's not part of the CAFE calculation?

Ethanol, they phased out ethanol in the calculation of the CAFE MPG.

 

[Farang]

I don't think it is policy that causes gas combustion engines to emit greenhouse gases, maybe they should take their complaint up with God.

 

[postmortemIA]

In Europe cars with larger displacement or more horsepower are heavily taxed, this just means more tax $ for gov. The people who still want V6 or V8 will have them, but they will be treated as luxury.

Tax is on buyer, so it is win-win for government.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: fleabag

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: fleabag
It's not part of the CAFE calculation due to the backlash, they changed that a few years ago I think.

what's not part of the CAFE calculation?

Ethanol, they phased out ethanol in the calculation of the CAFE MPG.

uh, then what is 49 USC 32905?

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
In Europe cars with larger displacement or more horsepower are heavily taxed, this just means more tax $ for gov. The people who still want V6 or V8 will have them, but they will be treated as luxury.

Tax is on buyer, so it is win-win for government.

without the US to sell V8s to en masse are the manufacturers still going to make them?