Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Garage' started by Ktulu, Oct 11, 2007.
I'm not a Toyota fan, but that site takes liberties with the facts & figures.
I suspect Toyota is not supporting the higher CAFE standards for several reasons and one of them is that while they could meet the suggested standards, it would kill other automakers and everyone would point at Toyota & scream monopoly.
They (the website) also confuses the fact that while Toyota does make relatively environmentally friendly cars, they make a lot of them, so they claim the total of pollution created by ALL of the Toyotas manufactured makes Toyota a bad corporation. They're also comparing the small cars Toyota used to make with the full range of vehicles they make today (CAFE scores going down)
So their only beef (in many guises) is that Toyota's opposing legislation to increase fuel economy standards.
Like, you know, every other auto maker.
I don't want this forcing all cars to be averaging 35mpg. If someone wants a car that gets that fine, up to them (and I'll agree that it is nicer on the pocketbook). But I prefer a car that actually has a real engine with some power behind it. The side effect is lower mpg but that is a choice the owner of the car makes when he buys it.
their facts page is curiously devoid of numbers.
they like the whole fleetwide term a lot. so yeah moose is right about them lumping in the new classes of trucks and other heavy load vehicles TM has been introducing over the last few years.
the beef with hybrids not getting better mileage is kind of a red herring. hybrid technology isn't some magically MPG increase over ICE. It isn't automatically higher than ICE. Anyone can improve mpg by lowering weight and improving aerodynamics at top speed. The problem is a lot of people dont ever reach top speed to get the miles that go with the gallons. Urban traffic allows hybrid cars to waste less gas than ICE. So even if both only get 35mpg at freeway speeds, the hybrid will do better at total distance traveled per tank than ICE.
Et Tu, Toyota...
It's unfortunate too see Toyota going this route but lets hope that this group and others will change that
Well, that's the funny thing about it...there are already rules on the books "forcing" the average mileage to be above a certain number. Yet you are still free to go to any dealership in the country and buy the most gas-guzzling car you like.
People are sheep. They don't know what they want. The only reason why they're trying to stall this issue (and the only reason that the avg economy isn't already 35) is that they make more money when the salespeople try to push a $60k 400hp luxury SUV on someone who just needs a small econobox to get to and from work. The enthusiast who knows what they want isn't going to listen to the salesman anyway.
I'd love it if the average car was small, light, and got good mileage. It would make having a sports car that much more prestigious, it would vastly improve visibility on the road, it would make the streets safer for pedestrians, small cars, and motorcycles, it would help the parking situation in big cities, and it would help gas prices, oil supplies, and pollution. Why does the horsepower rating of a base-model economy car seem to go up every year, but the mileage stay the same? Sure, they're getting a little heavier, but they're also getting bigger for no good reason, and they're trying to one-up the power of the competitors. Your average person probably wouldn't know the difference between 130 and 140hp, but they'll see the bigger number and want THAT one. They certainly don't need it.
With higher CAFE standards, the people who know what they want can get what they want, and the people who don't know what they want will get what they need. Not hundreds of hp and thousands of pounds MORE than they need.
You sound like a Democrat.
The last thing we need is more government regulations.
This government regulation is already in place.
Not to mention that the people, the government, and businesses all manipulate themselves and each other in thousands of different ways, whether it be taxes, benefits, shopping patterns/boycotts, advertising, governmental programs of all types, the media, voting, industrial regulations, grants, and tons of other examples. CAFE is very very minor by comparison.
And what exactly is wrong with what I posted?
The new standards aren't in place yet.
The cars we have now with any kind of power will be neutered.
Oh come on.
You are a major car company. You sell 2 million econoboxes that get 29 mpg, 200,000 pickup trucks that get 20 mpg, and 10,000 sports cars that get 15 mpg.
Now the government tells you that you need to average 30 mpg across the fleet.
Are you more likely to (a)knock 5 hp and 20 lbs off of the econoboxes to net a couple extra MPG, possibly winning MORE customers and complying with regulations, (b)Make a smaller engine be the stock option in the pickup truck, since most people aren't using them to haul anything anyway, or (c)Piss off some of your highest-profit customers by neutering your low-volume sports cars that are barely affecting your average, and end up having to screw around with the econoboxes anyway to make regs?
So the 140 hp Honda Civic of today becomes the 130 hp Civic of tomorrow, and suddenly Joseph Stalin has risen to power and Viper drivers are being sent to Siberia?
Or you let demand dictact the average MPG of cars. Why make another regulation when consumers will do it on their own?
Don't believe everything you read on the internet.
I'd like to see legislation mandating improved fuel economy in cars and especially in trucks and SUVs.
Because republicans have been so good about giving us smaller government and fewer regulations? :roll:
OMG a Democrat! Stone him to death :roll:
govt. legislation is needed when auto-makers wont change (for the better) by themselves. It's sad that foreign automakers could raise their avg mpg w/o any legislation but US automakers couldnt
Do you have a link to the automakers avg mpg figures for the past 10 years?
Actually I just found a really good link to an EPA study over the past 30 years.
I'd love to have smaller cars with the same sized engines of today's cars. But legislation isn't going to make it happen.
The problem is that the MARKET wants living rooms on wheels to cart around their 2 kids to school. They want the huge ass vehicles because they "feel" safer. Until the market changes to see smaller cars as better cars, nothing will change.
I don't think mandating higher MPG ratings will lessen our use of oil or gasoline. It will just allow people to get more mileage out of their truck or SUV. Raised CAFE standards are not going to "save million of barrels of oil per day."
I don't see why the government should be mandating something like this. It's really not their place, but the nanny state will only get worse. I see it as... rather than helping inform people about choices in cars so maybe they'll make a "smart decision" on their own, they're trying to force better mileage in cars.
Also, from that Et Tu, Toyota? article.
They do have American plants that assist in American automobiles. Although they obviously have more of a market than just in the USA, considering that lowering employment at a GM plant because of less demand and more demand for a Toyota can make one assume that the Toyota plant(s) would have to hire more to make up for it. Sure, it's more money for the Japanese company, but Americans are still being paid either way.
Also, as to why Toyota is against the bill... I think it's to stop the squashing of innovation. Sure, innovation includes "greener" cars, but who's to say that you can't have innovation in power (hp/torque) as well? It's also because there's really (as I mentioned) no need for the government to stick their nose into it.
More and more lately, I seem to be getting more fed up with government regulation on things that don't necessarily need regulation.
20 years ago toyota didn't make a V8 for use in the US. twenty years ago the camry was a tiny boxy little car. it weighed somewhere between 2700 and 3000 lbs, was 182 inches long. it now weighs between 3300 and 3500 lbs, and has grown 7 inches in length, 5 inches in width, and 4 inches in height. the only safety feature 20 years ago were those stupid automatic seat belts. the current 4 cylinder puts out slightly more horsepower and torque with slightly less displacement than the old V6.
anyway, get rid of all the standards and regulation, and just make people internalize the externality through an appropriate fee, earmarked for cleaning up the pollution.
Europe accomplished the same thing by taxing the hell out of gas. Instead of mandated MPG the USA should increase the current tax and let the consumer buy whatever he wants.
Many of the mandatory safety features are killing MPG too. Cars today are much heavier than cars used to be. A 1965 Mustang, with all of the chrome and thick sheet metal, weighed 2,556 pounds. Or, to put that another way, the same weight as a brand new Honda Fit. Yes, the tiny little econobox, smaller than a Civic, Fit.
Fuel economy has stagnated because cars have become absurdly overweight. From both mandatory safety features (airbags, crumple zones, energy-absorbing bumpers) and luxury items (power windows, locks, A/C, etc).
What that site doesn't mention is, what's good for Toyota is also good for Honda, Nissan, Ford, GM, Chrysler, etc. I don't think Toyota is the only one lobbying for the same crap. Stupid slanted bs sites like this make me sick...and I don't even like Toyota.