Upping the CAFE to 35MPG

[Demon-Xanth]

Now that the House has passed a bill upping the CAFE to 35MPG (it's not law yet). I'm kinda split. On one hand, I like the market to drive what's good and like big powerful engines, but on the other hand if this is what it takes to get cars back to being a reasonable weight, it's a good thing. (I'm sorry, the Eclipse should NOT weigh more than a Chevelle). Are we likely in for another 20 years of shitboxes like we had in the '70s and '80s or can auto makers shift gears faster and bring in good cars that have less weight to get better MPGs quicker?

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Now that the House has passed a bill upping the CAFE to 35MPG (it's not law yet). I'm kinda split. On one hand, I like the market to drive what's good and like big powerful engines, but on the other hand if this is what it takes to get cars back to being a reasonable weight, it's a good thing. (I'm sorry, the Eclipse should NOT weigh more than a Chevelle). Are we likely in for another 20 years of shitboxes like we had in the '70s and '80s or can auto makers shift gears faster and bring in good cars that have less weight to get better MPGs quicker?

It's all political BS, nothing will change.

Under current CAFE standards, E85 screws all of it up because it allows the automakers to screw with the stats by producing E85 vehicles(to support the corn lobby). For example, a Tahoe(15/21), CAFE 20.1mpg(no idea how it's calculated so high, (15+21)/2=18) with a E85 engine(11/15) gets a CAFE rating of 33.3mpg to incentivize automakers to make flex fuel E85.

35mpg isnt hard when you can basically cheat your way there anyway, I'm sure a Flex Fuel Impala gets the order of 60+mpg according to CAFE standards...

 

[Uhtrinity]

Not enough by a long shot

 

[Aikouka]

Make a diesel with fancy features... stuff like my Altima has and I think you'd have a winner. I think some of the problems you get with the higher mileage cars is that they're low in features. If someone wants a nice car, they'll have to pay for it and those nice cars come with nice, big engines.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Well, personally, I don't want all the features. I want a good solid car that is car first, living room last. Though I know I'm a very small minority.

<-- doesn't have power windows, power door locks, cruise control, fog lights, nav system, front ABS, automatic transmission, DVD player (well, sort of, I play MP3-DVDs but don't have a video screen), 2.4 metric tons of sound deadening, seating for eight...

 

[GoatMonkey]

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Now that the House has passed a bill upping the CAFE to 35MPG (it's not law yet). I'm kinda split. On one hand, I like the market to drive what's good and like big powerful engines, but on the other hand if this is what it takes to get cars back to being a reasonable weight, it's a good thing. (I'm sorry, the Eclipse should NOT weigh more than a Chevelle). Are we likely in for another 20 years of shitboxes like we had in the '70s and '80s or can auto makers shift gears faster and bring in good cars that have less weight to get better MPGs quicker?

It's all political BS, nothing will change.

Under current CAFE standards, E85 screws all of it up because it allows the automakers to screw with the stats by producing E85 vehicles(to support the corn lobby). For example, a Tahoe(15/21), CAFE 20.1mpg(no idea how it's calculated so high, (15+21)/2=18) with a E85 engine(11/15) gets a CAFE rating of 33.3mpg to incentivize automakers to make flex fuel E85.

35mpg isnt hard when you can basically cheat your way there anyway, I'm sure a Flex Fuel Impala gets the order of 60+mpg according to CAFE standards...

It sounds like they're calculating based on the amount of gasoline burned. If you fill up your tank and only 15% of the content is actually gasoline, it could make your numbers for miles per gallon (of gasoline) look good.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Now that the House has passed a bill upping the CAFE to 35MPG (it's not law yet). I'm kinda split. On one hand, I like the market to drive what's good and like big powerful engines, but on the other hand if this is what it takes to get cars back to being a reasonable weight, it's a good thing. (I'm sorry, the Eclipse should NOT weigh more than a Chevelle). Are we likely in for another 20 years of shitboxes like we had in the '70s and '80s or can auto makers shift gears faster and bring in good cars that have less weight to get better MPGs quicker?

It's all political BS, nothing will change.

Under current CAFE standards, E85 screws all of it up because it allows the automakers to screw with the stats by producing E85 vehicles(to support the corn lobby). For example, a Tahoe(15/21), CAFE 20.1mpg(no idea how it's calculated so high, (15+21)/2=18) with a E85 engine(11/15) gets a CAFE rating of 33.3mpg to incentivize automakers to make flex fuel E85.

35mpg isnt hard when you can basically cheat your way there anyway, I'm sure a Flex Fuel Impala gets the order of 60+mpg according to CAFE standards...

It sounds like they're calculating based on the amount of gasoline burned. If you fill up your tank and only 15% of the content is actually gasoline, it could make your numbers for miles per gallon (of gasoline) look good.

Actually, I believe it's the base gas combined mpg + ethanol combined mpg. Either way, it's a scam. I'd be happy if automakers could just no bs build cars to today's CAFE standards without all the finagaling. The standard for light trucks is 22.5mpg combined, something even a diminutive Ford Ranger cannot achieve(15/20).

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Well, personally, I don't want all the features. I want a good solid car that is car first, living room last. Though I know I'm a very small minority.

<-- doesn't have power windows, power door locks, cruise control, fog lights, nav system, front ABS, automatic transmission, DVD player (well, sort of, I play MP3-DVDs but don't have a video screen), 2.4 metric tons of sound deadening, seating for eight...

I wish mine did MP3-DVDs . But I wanted something comfortable. I don't need high level luxury, but at least having a comfortable ride is nice .

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Well, personally, I don't want all the features. I want a good solid car that is car first, living room last. Though I know I'm a very small minority.

<-- doesn't have power windows, power door locks, cruise control, fog lights, nav system, front ABS, automatic transmission, DVD player (well, sort of, I play MP3-DVDs but don't have a video screen), 2.4 metric tons of sound deadening, seating for eight...

Amen there. Car manufacturers there have been so caught up in their niceties arms-race that they seem to neglect the fact that they are making cars. I'd rather just have a basic vehicle with a run-of-the-mill stereo system and a/c (a MUST in the South). The other stuff I'd pass on. It adds unnecessary weight and expense to a vehicle.

 

[shabby]

Whats going to happen with the top-end cars like ferrari/porsche/lambo and so forth?

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: shabby
Whats going to happen with the top-end cars like ferrari/porsche/lambo and so forth?

What is the penalty for not meeting CAFE requirements for any given model year (MY)?

The penalty for failing to meet CAFE standards recently increased from $5.00 to $5.50 per tenth of a mile per gallon for each tenth under the target value times the total volume of those vehicles manufactured for a given model year.

Since 1983, manufacturers have paid more than $500 million in civil penalties. Most European manufacturers regularly pay CAFE civil penalties ranging from less than $1 million to more than $20 million annually. Asian and domestic manufacturers have never paid a civil penalty.


For MY 2002, five passenger car fleets including BMW, DaimlerChrysler import, Fiat, Lotus, and Porsche are projected to fail to meet 27.5 mpg passenger car CAFE standard. In addition, two light truck fleets including BMW and Volkswagen will likely fail to meet the light truck CAFE standard of 20.7 mpg. Final Reports for MY 2002 provided by the EPA to NHTSA in mid-calendar year of 2003 may adjust these projections favorably.

Eh, Ferrari pays a few hundred more in taxes per vehicle... not a big deal if a car costs hundreds of thousands.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

There's some irony to VW, a brand that only exists in the US because they were known for being cheap and fuel efficient, is being hit with a gas guzzler tax.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: shabby
Whats going to happen with the top-end cars like ferrari/porsche/lambo and so forth?

Come on now...

all this is is a new means to tax the consumer.

they //politicians// know we won't buy the light weight cars, the cheapies that fold up in a wreck, so we all get slapped with gas guzzler taxes... so the polios can turn around and buy more votes

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: mwmorph
Actually, I believe it's the base gas combined mpg + ethanol combined mpg. Either way, it's a scam. I'd be happy if automakers could just no bs build cars to today's CAFE standards without all the finagaling. The standard for light trucks is 22.5mpg combined, something even a diminutive Ford Ranger cannot achieve(15/20).

ethanol gets lower mileage unless the engine is specifically tuned for ethanol (a much higher compression ratio) (and even then maybe not). this is because ethanol has less energy in it than an equivalent volume of gasoline. E85 engines are still tuned to run on gasoline. sure, maybe the computer can change a few things here and there, but it isn't changing the compression ratio. so it isn't based on ethanol mpg.






anyway, to the OP's point of lighter weight cars, not going to happen. the hybrid systems by which a lot of these cafe improvements are going to be made add weight to the car (camry's weighs about 350 lbs). plus cars have added a lot of safety features in the last couple of decades, which you're not going to see removed (a yaris weighs about 250 lbs more than a 15 year old tercel, which is about the same size).

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: mwmorph
Actually, I believe it's the base gas combined mpg + ethanol combined mpg. Either way, it's a scam. I'd be happy if automakers could just no bs build cars to today's CAFE standards without all the finagaling. The standard for light trucks is 22.5mpg combined, something even a diminutive Ford Ranger cannot achieve(15/20).

ethanol gets lower mileage unless the engine is specifically tuned for ethanol (a much higher compression ratio) (and even then maybe not). this is because ethanol has less energy in it than an equivalent volume of gasoline. E85 engines are still tuned to run on gasoline. sure, maybe the computer can change a few things here and there, but it isn't changing the compression ratio. so it isn't based on ethanol mpg.






anyway, to the OP's point of lighter weight cars, not going to happen. the hybrid systems by which a lot of these cafe improvements are going to be made add weight to the car (camry's weighs about 350 lbs). plus cars have added a lot of safety features in the last couple of decades, which you're not going to see removed (a yaris weighs about 250 lbs more than a 15 year old tercel, which is about the same size).

?

The EPA calculates the following for the Surburban.
15/21 Gas=20.1(no idea how they got 20.1 combined)
11/15=13.2
20.1+13.2= 33.3mpg as per CAFE standards for the Surburban, which is ridiculous.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
Come on now...

all this is is a new means to tax the consumer.

they //politicians// know we won't buy the light weight cars, the cheapies that fold up in a wreck, so we all get slapped with gas guzzler taxes... so the polios can turn around and buy more votes

Wrong, it's a way to pander to the corn lobby:

The EPA calculates the following for the Surburban.
15/21 Gas=20.1(no idea how they got 20.1 combined)
11/15=13.2
20.1+13.2= 33.3mpg as per CAFE standards for the Surburban, which is ridiculous.

politicians are going to be the death of this country. I hope someday they pay for the damage they cause.