Federal government passes new CAFE laws - 54.4 MPG avg by 2025 - Page 2 - TCCoA Forums

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #31 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 02:13 AM
PostWhore
 
CDsDontBurn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Banning, CA
Age: 33
Posts: 1,518
Before the new Beetle, I didn't really see any Porsche looking like any V-Dub.

The Neon was a great Chrysler / Dodge econo-box seller back in the day. Why they killed it and replaced it with that ugly Dodge Caliber is beyond me. You don't see too many of them and they look ugly as crap
CDsDontBurn is offline  
post #32 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 02:20 AM
Slightly Disjointed
Super Moderator
 
XR7-4.6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roselle IL
Posts: 15,515
Garage
Send a message via Yahoo to XR7-4.6
Really? lol





-Matt
XR7-4.6 is offline  
post #33 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 02:28 AM
PostWhore
 
CDsDontBurn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Banning, CA
Age: 33
Posts: 1,518
Yea, really. The first Porsche pictured, sure. I can see the resemblance. The second one, that's stretching it for me. The third one, I no longer see any resemblance to the Beetle.
CDsDontBurn is offline  
post #34 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 03:09 AM
Slightly Disjointed
Super Moderator
 
XR7-4.6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roselle IL
Posts: 15,515
Garage
Send a message via Yahoo to XR7-4.6
Teardrop shape, large round headlamps, slab sides, side window design... (not even mentioning the Driveline layouts) the resemblance isn't clear? The Beetle looks like a drop of water forming on a faucet and each evolution from the 356 to 911 to 964 to 993 to 996 to 997 has been that same drop of water building up and getting stretched before it drips into the sink

-Matt
XR7-4.6 is offline  
post #35 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 03:39 AM
PostWhore
 
CDsDontBurn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Banning, CA
Age: 33
Posts: 1,518
nope. still don't see it.
CDsDontBurn is offline  
post #36 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 04:45 AM
PostWhore
The AFDB is on a lil tight.
 
Splattered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: is hot
Posts: 3,868
It requires imagination. I can see it. Just mirror the cars top lines horizontally and you can see what he means.

Spinning pies like wheels.

DD driving my 20 year old project

Now with new ball joints...again
Splattered is offline  
post #37 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 05:38 AM
Kind of slapped together
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bossier City, LA
Age: 61
Posts: 4,489
Same or not - the Porsche used a 6 cylinder air-cooled flat motor for years.

The 6 in the Volkswagon Microbus? Was a Porsche 6 with the cylinders flat instead of up and down.

The original 4 cylinder Porsche? Was a VW motor.

Back in the 70's, the hot rod tip for VWs was a Porsche motor.

Transaxle bolted right up.

I don't think the Panamerica is the Beetle match, BICBW.

RwP
RalphP is offline  
post #38 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 08:57 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
rbrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston Clear Lake
Posts: 7,060
I am for higher mileage. I am not sure why we do not already have such. Shoot Ford makes a 65mpg Fiesta in Europe. I would buy one.

What disturbs me in all this is as a country we keep 'leading' the charge for a better world all while cutting off our nose despite our face. When everyone has to do as we do I am all for it. I know that isn't progress, that is lazy and would lend itself to just staying in the same ol easy rut, or would it. Now I could go on and be much more political on this but I'll leave it as that.

95 SC 5-speed The Toy in Storage now.
95 SC Auto Newest storage queen.
91 Festiva 1.3L baby 5 speed
03 Crown Vic Sport 4.6... driver
10 Flex Brick Twin Turbos
*Rodney*
rbrown is offline  
post #39 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 12:36 PM Thread Starter
Seasoned PostWhore
 
NetKeym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbrown View Post
I am for higher mileage. I am not sure why we do not already have such. Shoot Ford makes a 65mpg Fiesta in Europe. I would buy one.

What disturbs me in all this is as a country we keep 'leading' the charge for a better world all while cutting off our nose despite our face. When everyone has to do as we do I am all for it. I know that isn't progress, that is lazy and would lend itself to just staying in the same ol easy rut, or would it. Now I could go on and be much more political on this but I'll leave it as that.
You guys were talking about VW's earlier - shoot the TDI turbo used over in Europe also gets in the 60+mpg range. There was an article awhile back where they put it up against a Prius and beat it - the VW TDI was faster and used less fuel.

It just came to this country, but I doubt it will get that high with all the pollution-control crap we require...

~Rick
TCCoA Sig
NetKeym is offline  
post #40 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 01:57 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tinton Falls, NJ
Age: 34
Posts: 6,965
Garage
Send a message via AIM to MadMikeyL
[QUOTE=rbrown;1446402]I am for higher mileage. I am not sure why we do not already have such. Shoot Ford makes a 65mpg Fiesta in Europe. I would buy one.

QUOTE]

Europe uses a different system for calculating the gas mileage of the cars, as well as a different definition of a gallon, so their fuel economy ratings are going to be about 20% higher than ours for the exact same car. The Fiesta there is pretty much the same car as we have here. The 65mpg, which equates to about 54mpg here, comes from a 1.25L engine, which makes a whopping 60hp. That might be fine for putting around european cities, but on american highways, 60hp just isn't going to cut it.

Passing a law doesn't make the impossible possible, and it doesn't make expensive new technology affordable. If you want 54mpg out of the average car, you are going to have to make some sacrifices somewhere. Either it will be much smaller, or much less powerful, or much more expensive, or more realistically, all 3 of those things, and all of those things are going to discourage prospective buyers in the american market, which is going to cost the car companies more money, which will likely send the companies begging for more bailout money from the government, which means this law ultimately costs each and every tax payer more money for something that they don't necessarily want. If you want more fuel efficient vehicles to be sold, the only effective way to do it is to change the demand side of the equation. Not that I am for this either, but a better way to do this would be to raise the gas tax by $1/gal and watch how many people suddenly WANT to buy the more fuel efficient vehicle. Ultimately, that would probably cost most people less money and have less of a negative effect on the economy, but that is a transparent tax, and so it is unpopular and no politician will do it. If they can hide the tax through increased prices, they can look like a hero campaigning for the environment instead of people seeing the truth that they don't care about anything but their own re-election and lining their own pockets.

Personally, the CAFE laws will help me because with new cars becoming more expensive, people will want to keep their older cars longer, which means more work for the auto mechanics. Also with more fuel efficient vehicles on the road, the demand for gas will go down, which means more cheap fuel available for me and my gas guzzling V8s. Unfortunately, this law will hurt almost everyone else in the country. Increased prices will hurt anyone looking to buy a new car. That will drive the price of used cars up as well, which will hurt anyone looking to buy a used car. The demand for new cars will drop, which will hurt anyone who works in the auto manufacturing or sales business. The revenue brought in from gas taxes will drop, which will hurt the maintenance on the roads, which will hurt everyone driving on the roads. No matter how you cut it, this is a bad idea that is hurtful to the american public, and it has been since the 70s when they came out with it. What this shows is that the current administration has absolutely no understanding of basic economics, and unfortunately that lack of understanding on his part will ultimately cost money out of the pockets of the average middle-class people.

OK, rant over.

-91 Cougar LS, coming soon, complete overhaul with a 427" Windsor.
-90SC 5-speed, MP2, coated rotors, double intercooler, 15%OD, ported heads, comp stage 1 cam, 85mm TB, 90MM LMAF, 80# injectors, soon to be transplanted into...
-90 XR7 5-speed black on black w/sunroof
-98 Mark VIII LSC, Procharger P600b, TR3650 swap and 3.73s.
-70 Torino GT Fastback project car. Needs EFI and a manual trans, but I'm not sure what motor to go with yet.
-"Your buddy Mike is INSANE!" -ClintD's dad
MadMikeyL is offline  
post #41 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 02:01 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
rbrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston Clear Lake
Posts: 7,060
MadMikeyL, that was my point, cut off our nose.
rbrown is offline  
post #42 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 02:02 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tinton Falls, NJ
Age: 34
Posts: 6,965
Garage
Send a message via AIM to MadMikeyL
Most of my comment wasn't directed at you, just the part about the european fuel economy numbers.

-91 Cougar LS, coming soon, complete overhaul with a 427" Windsor.
-90SC 5-speed, MP2, coated rotors, double intercooler, 15%OD, ported heads, comp stage 1 cam, 85mm TB, 90MM LMAF, 80# injectors, soon to be transplanted into...
-90 XR7 5-speed black on black w/sunroof
-98 Mark VIII LSC, Procharger P600b, TR3650 swap and 3.73s.
-70 Torino GT Fastback project car. Needs EFI and a manual trans, but I'm not sure what motor to go with yet.
-"Your buddy Mike is INSANE!" -ClintD's dad
MadMikeyL is offline  
post #43 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 02:18 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
rbrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston Clear Lake
Posts: 7,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMikeyL View Post
Most of my comment wasn't directed at you, just the part about the european fuel economy numbers.
Oh I know. But yours was so looooooooong. lol
rbrown is offline  
post #44 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 02:52 PM
Slightly Disjointed
Super Moderator
 
XR7-4.6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roselle IL
Posts: 15,515
Garage
Send a message via Yahoo to XR7-4.6
I agree with much of what you said Mikey but I don't think ANY incentive, CAFE, gas tax or otherwise, will do anything but harm. Europe's Fuel is taxed into oblivion and look at how great their economy is performing these days.

CAFE does(or at least did) at least keep choice in the equation as it's an average of the full model lineup, not an individual performance model. What I have a problem with, particularly with this latest mandate, is this ever moving arbitrary goal. Have the automakers even met the last one yet? Or even have the prospects to? Are the committees coming up these figures engineers who know anything about motors, engines, and physics? Or is this just some group of pencil pushing bureaucrats who just throw a number out, assuming it would be obeyed because they say so? Is oil really even a true issue here or is it our foreign policy?

I don't know. What I do know is, all the technology supposedly driven by CAFE was created, perfected through competition and put into mass production cars before there ever even was a CAFE or any kind of government mandate telling automakers to do so. You know what CAFE DID drive? SUV production and sales. Vehicles that make the land yachts of the 70s look like tinker toys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NetKeym View Post
You guys were talking about VW's earlier - shoot the TDI turbo used over in Europe also gets in the 60+mpg range. There was an article awhile back where they put it up against a Prius and beat it - the VW TDI was faster and used less fuel.

It just came to this country, but I doubt it will get that high with all the pollution-control crap we require...
I've always held the belief that if you want really high fuel efficiency , it's Diesel or nothing. Unfortunately it's not widely sold or at least marketed in cars here besides VW it seems. Hybrids are disposable band aids, I'd rather use a damn sail.

-Matt
XR7-4.6 is offline  
post #45 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 03:17 PM Thread Starter
Seasoned PostWhore
 
NetKeym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,862
Gee Mikey, right off the deep end there, weren't you? That was quite the series of theories/points you made there! lol

I see what you're saying, but that snowball effect may or may not happen. I bet you said the same thing about the current CAFE regulations that went into effect (even with Bush's delays).

I'm sure the new standards will also be delayed, and I hate the govt making decisions for us just as much as the next guy, but also hate big corporations controlling my money!

~Rick
TCCoA Sig
NetKeym is offline  
post #46 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 05:36 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tinton Falls, NJ
Age: 34
Posts: 6,965
Garage
Send a message via AIM to MadMikeyL
XR7, I couldn't agree with you more. I wasn't advocating any artificial incentive imposed by the government, I was just saying that a higher gas tax would be a less harmful way to do it than the CAFE laws. I completely understand how all the laws did was kill off the large family sedan in place of the SUV

NetKeym, yes I did say the same thing when the last round of CAFE laws went into effect, and if you would like to take a look at the current new car market compared to 5 years ago, you will see that I was correct then too. Average base price of a midsize car has gone up about 15% in the last 5 years. As for the rest of it, those aren't theories but basic economics. If the price of one good goes up, that cost gets passed along and drives up the price of every good or service that depends on it. Increased prices mean decreased demand, which means less of the goods being sold, which means less being produced, which means fewer jobs available producing and selling the now smaller quantity of goods. If you want more fuel efficient vehicles sold in this country, you need to convince people of the benefits of more fuel efficient cars, and that those benefits are worth the costs in terms of price, comfort, safety, reliability, aesthetics, or whatever reason it is that drives people to want the biggest most powerful car they can afford. When people WANT the smaller more fuel efficient cars, the manufacturers will produce them to meet the demand. Trying to alter the supply side without accounting for the demand is a recipe for bankruptcy, and we have already seen at least 3 times now that the government will bail out the auto makers to prevent them from going bankrupt, which ultimately means that the people are going to pay for these small econoboxes whether they like them or not.

-91 Cougar LS, coming soon, complete overhaul with a 427" Windsor.
-90SC 5-speed, MP2, coated rotors, double intercooler, 15%OD, ported heads, comp stage 1 cam, 85mm TB, 90MM LMAF, 80# injectors, soon to be transplanted into...
-90 XR7 5-speed black on black w/sunroof
-98 Mark VIII LSC, Procharger P600b, TR3650 swap and 3.73s.
-70 Torino GT Fastback project car. Needs EFI and a manual trans, but I'm not sure what motor to go with yet.
-"Your buddy Mike is INSANE!" -ClintD's dad
MadMikeyL is offline  
post #47 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 05:37 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
bowez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NEAR
Posts: 2,436
Diesel is a very good answer.

As for 60HP not being enough my Tempo was at 83HP, why does the Fusion that fills it market share NEED 170 HP? 600 more lbs doesn't mandate a additional 90 HP.

If all else fails get a bigger hammer!

93 SC Tbird
MPII w/ Plenum,90mm MAF, 85mm TB, 40# Injectors, 255 lph FP, Double IC w/fan, SCT Chip (Tuned by Jerry),3/4" Raised Top, F52-TT TC, SilverFox AOD 550, SPT-R VB
96 1/2 XR7 Sold and Salvaged
93 5.0 Tbird
bowez is offline  
post #48 of 73 (permalink) Old 08-30-2012, 06:53 PM
WOT Junkie and avid corn burner
 
Mgino96tbird46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Age: 27
Posts: 3,723
Maybe because we don't like falling asleep while waiting to finally get up to the speed limit.

Michael M. ASE P2 Automobile Parts Specialist.

1996 Thunderbird LX. Gone, but not forgotten Oct 1995-March 24 2016

1985 Mustang GT. modified stock Holley 4180C, Weiand Street Warrior intake manifold, equal length headers, true dual exhaust, 5 speed, 3.55:1 8.8'' rear end, Ford Racing 10.5" clutch.

1998 Mustang GT premium. Auto, stock, and slow. Daily beater.
Mgino96tbird46 is offline  
post #49 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-26-2012, 06:49 AM
1st Gear Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 51
I test drove one of the new C-max cars recently and was surprised at how quick it was. It really drove very nicely, was relatively peppy, and is supposed to get 47 mpg in the city and hwy.

I don't think I'll buy one as I'm not too high on hybrids in general but as far as these type of cars go this one pretty much acts like a normal car.
Bill Evanoff is offline  
post #50 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 05:32 AM
Road warrior extrodinaire

Super Moderator
 
Trunk Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Home Sweet Home: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 10,938
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakTbird96 View Post
Hybrid-electric cars suck. Might be great on gas mileage but don't get yourself stuck behind one going up a steep hill or mountain. There were 18-wheelers passing hybrids on I-70 in Western, MD. Mind you, those mountains arent even high and shouldn't be considered mountains. I feel sorry for those hybrid owning schmucks west of the great plains. The world's not running out of oil...the government & media want you to believe that though.
Tell that to Nobuhiro 'Monster' Tajima. Who set a new personal record of 9:46.530, winning the Electric class and placing 5th overall at the 91st Pikes Peak International Hill Climb this year.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K6oOVET6fQ

I hesitate to belive that the cars couldn't hang on the hills and, more likely, the "tree huggin'" drivers chose to "Hyperdrive" their Hybrid's up the mountain.

Mods? Yea, I got mods ...
Air silencer delete, warp drive, dilithium crystals, flux capacitor, Slingshot Rubber band power adder, Moonshine & Gas, Leaf Blower Supercharger, Hamster Wheel & Hamster, Energizer Bunny generating 1.21 gigawatts, Mr. Fusion® Home Energy Reactor, hover conversion and a sextant celestial navigation system (The original GPS)
Best 1/4: 1,320 nanoseconds @ 670,616,629.2 miles per hour

"There isn't that much difference anymore between spacecraft, aircraft and modern automobiles..." - Keith Henry, NASA's Langley Research Center
See a list of my real mods and pictures of my car HERE. The true performance of my car was made possible by the Carolinas Crew Chief, RobertP at Rob's Tire & Auto.
Trunk Monkey is offline  
post #51 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 11:22 AM
PostWhore
 
CDsDontBurn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Banning, CA
Age: 33
Posts: 1,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunk Monkey View Post
Tell that to Nobuhiro 'Monster' Tajima. Who set a new personal record of 9:46.530, winning the Electric class and placing 5th overall at the 91st Pikes Peak International Hill Climb this year.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K6oOVET6fQ

I hesitate to belive that the cars couldn't hang on the hills and, more likely, the "tree huggin'" drivers chose to "Hyperdrive" their Hybrid's up the mountain.
+1

Electric cars are becoming better and more affordable for the average consumer. Tesla Model-S and Nissan Leaf are great examples of this. Tesla S of course would be comparable to a BMW M5 or Porsche 911 or something like that whereas the Nissan Leaf would be comparable to an econobox of its class, but better.


'97 Bird, "Pearl": L/R 2.5in Magnaflow Hi-Flow CATs | PI Intake & PI Cams | Suspension Rebuild

'13 Taurus, "The Bull": 3.5L Goodness

'00 2dr v6 Accord, "Dirty Girl": Magnaflow Hi-Flow CAT | Greddy SP2 CAT-Back | Eibach ProKit springs | Eibach F/R Sway Bars | KYB-GR2 struts
CDsDontBurn is offline  
post #52 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 11:46 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
S4gunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SF, CA
Age: 38
Posts: 2,091
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunk Monkey View Post

I hesitate to belive that the cars couldn't hang on the hills and, more likely, the "tree huggin'" drivers chose to "Hyperdrive" their Hybrid's up the mountain.
Agreed. I was 100% against buying a Prius despite having a long daily commute.

However, I received one as a rental when I was travelling in the northeast with my wife last month (we went to NYC for a wedding and then wanted to see the trees turn in Maine) and was more than pleasantly surprised.

Over 500 mi in our trip, I was averaging ~49mi DESPITE doing my best to NOT to modify my driving style (70-75MPH on the Hwy, mostly Hwy driving). Yes, the engine was running most of the time but it wasn't working very hard. It's also a very, very slippery car that doesn't weigh very much.

My current car gets 30MPG hwy (97 Honda accord). If the Prius had netted only 40MPG, I would probably replace my accord with a much more fun to drive Mazda 3 (claims 40MPG Hwy but it looks like most people driving how i do average 35).

However, a 19MPG improvement is simply too great to ignore. I will buy a Prius for my next car based purely on economics. My only complaint was that the handling was DREADFUL -- it leans in turns like an 80s japanese minivan. While you guys are much more into it (all my modifications are on a track car), I've never modified any of my daily drivers (the audi and the accord are both bone stock). It makes me laugh but I will likely replace the suspension on the Prius (either with aftermarket springs+rear sway) or if that makes me lose too much ground clearance (i live in hilly SF after all), I'll replace the suspension completely with coil overs so I can adjust ride height.


Bottom Line: higher CAFE requirements will benefit all of us by compelling the mfgs to push technologies. While I agree that some of this has caused vehicles to increase in price, the vast majority of car cost increases are due to all the features that Americans want as standard now: Power windows, fancy climate control, fancy infotainment systems.

The march of technology makes the stuff I "want" and had to add to my accord (and even my audi) via the aftermarket standard stuff now.

Back on the comment about "slow Priuses on hills". They really aren't that slow (compared to the avg econobox). The electric motor really helps with off the line acceleration if you floor it. The reason that you see them going slow is that they make it almost like a game to keep the fuel consumption down (even the lowest end one has a nice screen to show you this in realtime). This gamification makes people drive like grannies... because they want to not because the car can't make it up the hill as you perceive. We aren't talking about an 70s Diesel Merc or an early fox body 4cyl non-turbo Mustang w/ aftermarket AC here. Both of those cars couldn't get out of their own way.


-g

My TCCOA iTrader Rating: (44 / 100% w/ 50+ transactions)
S4gunn is online now  
post #53 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 11:57 AM Thread Starter
Seasoned PostWhore
 
NetKeym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by S4gunn View Post
Agreed. I was 100% against buying a Prius despite having a long daily commute.

However, I received one as a rental when I was travelling in the northeast with my wife last month (we went to NYC for a wedding and then wanted to see the trees turn in Maine) and was more than pleasantly surprised.

Over 500 mi in our trip, I was averaging ~49mi DESPITE doing my best to NOT to modify my driving style (70-75MPH on the Hwy, mostly Hwy driving). Yes, the engine was running most of the time but it wasn't working very hard. It's also a very, very slippery car that doesn't weigh very much.

My current car gets 30MPG hwy (97 Honda accord). If the Prius had netted only 40MPG, I would probably replace my accord with a much more fun to drive Mazda 3 (claims 40MPG Hwy but it looks like most people driving how i do average 35).

However, a 19MPG improvement is simply too great to ignore. I will buy a Prius for my next car based purely on economics. My only complaint was that the handling was DREADFUL -- it leans in turns like an 80s japanese minivan. While you guys are much more into it (all my modifications are on a track car), I've never modified any of my daily drivers (the audi and the accord are both bone stock). It makes me laugh but I will likely replace the suspension on the Prius (either with aftermarket springs+rear sway) or if that makes me lose too much ground clearance (i live in hilly SF after all), I'll replace the suspension completely with coil overs so I can adjust ride height.


Bottom Line: higher CAFE requirements will benefit all of us by compelling the mfgs to push technologies. While I agree that some of this has caused vehicles to increase in price, the vast majority of car cost increases are due to all the features that Americans want as standard now: Power windows, fancy climate control, fancy infotainment systems.

The march of technology makes the stuff I "want" and had to add to my accord (and even my audi) via the aftermarket standard stuff now.

Back on the comment about "slow Priuses on hills". They really aren't that slow (compared to the avg econobox). The electric motor really helps with off the line acceleration if you floor it. The reason that you see them going slow is that they make it almost like a game to keep the fuel consumption down (even the lowest end one has a nice screen to show you this in realtime). This gamification makes people drive like grannies... because they want to not because the car can't make it up the hill as you perceive. We aren't talking about an 70s Diesel Merc or an early fox body 4cyl non-turbo Mustang w/ aftermarket AC here. Both of those cars couldn't get out of their own way.


-g

I've been looking at one of these pretty hard lately myself, Gunn!

I'm not a tree-hugger by any means, but I am cheap sooooo.............

~Rick
TCCoA Sig
NetKeym is offline  
post #54 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 12:38 PM
PostWhore
 
rushtonracing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,148
Via satellite, in the future when the CEL comes on the owner may be notified to have the system fixed within a prescribed time frame. Similar to a smog check, failure to remedy the alert, the owner my be required to pay fines, and/or registration denial.

Conservatively, tens of thousands of cars/trucks are driven with the CEL on. The concern is that even though the driver may suffer no drive ability, or performance problem, the vehicle is not getting the designed amount of MPG, and/or excess tail pipe emissions. Yet, the vehicle remains in service.

Bills have been authored, co-authored, to address this concern in all 50 States.
rushtonracing is offline  
post #55 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 02:58 PM
Slightly Disjointed
Super Moderator
 
XR7-4.6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roselle IL
Posts: 15,515
Garage
Send a message via Yahoo to XR7-4.6
Quote:
Originally Posted by S4gunn View Post

Bottom Line: higher CAFE requirements will benefit all of us by compelling the mfgs to push technologies. While I agree that some of this has caused vehicles to increase in price, the vast majority of car cost increases are due to all the features that Americans want as standard now: Power windows, fancy climate control, fancy infotainment systems.

The march of technology makes the stuff I "want" and had to add to my accord (and even my audi) via the aftermarket standard stuff now.



-g
Every single technology that exists on cars today has origins predating the first CAFE requirements, much of which deeply rooted in gas guzzling motorsport. This "march of technology" you like to reference is the convergence and repurposement of established technologies, some that have become more viable due to manufacturing breakthroughs, rather than legislation encouraging it(just look at batteries). Hell even the Prius wasn't a byproduct of CAFE regs, Toyota just did it. They didn't have to, their pre-Prii lineup was well above the then-current standard, but they did it anyway because they saw a market and acted. CAFE is the government's assurance that they'll selflessly prevent the ridiculous notion that manufacturers will take away what they give us. Because, of course, that has happened soooo many times, grrr! Like Toyota would rebadge the Highlander as the next Prius of CAFE was repealed lol


My stance on pure electric still aint rosy. Tesla May have made the most viable electric car of all time but they are also subsidized up the ass and are largely just fashion statements for the wealthy. Big problem is that you can look at how fast you can make one at a track(drag, roadcourse or whatever.) and look at one in as a commuter with decent range but they don't do both. Unless you're trailer queening a Model-S to a track day(which would REALLY defeat the purpose), your chances of it being a one day affair are going to be very slim. And ultimately a gearless and noiseless car really doesn't get my blood pumping. I may as well play Forza ...on automatic ...on mute. Plus I don't trust electric companies to be any less opportunistic than oil companies in the long term, so there goes the cost saving aspect.

I'm fine with hybrids. I wouldn't own one, I'd rather own just one car I, um, like. But I finally rationalized what makes them work: they aren't a revelation in electric propulsion, they're electric propulsion made viable only by way of internal combustion. So really, internal combustion still wins.

-Matt
XR7-4.6 is offline  
post #56 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 04:40 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
bowez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NEAR
Posts: 2,436
I still say hybrids--as they are now--are a waste the Prius is one of the worst(C-max is better than it). If you want MPG get a Corolla and save the $8k yeah you loose 11mpg (advertised) but by the time you make up that difference you will probably need new batteries which is ~$3k.

Now yes if you live in a area where the car will rot before need a new battery get a hybrid. Just remember there are manual SCs getting mid 30's mpg, so take advertised MPG with a grain of salt.

If all else fails get a bigger hammer!

93 SC Tbird
MPII w/ Plenum,90mm MAF, 85mm TB, 40# Injectors, 255 lph FP, Double IC w/fan, SCT Chip (Tuned by Jerry),3/4" Raised Top, F52-TT TC, SilverFox AOD 550, SPT-R VB
96 1/2 XR7 Sold and Salvaged
93 5.0 Tbird
bowez is offline  
post #57 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 06:03 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tinton Falls, NJ
Age: 34
Posts: 6,965
Garage
Send a message via AIM to MadMikeyL
I don't know what manual SC you are driving, but it isn't going to come close to mid 30s for mileage. The best I ever got with any of mine was 31mpg in my 89 XR7, and that was straight highway with no traffic, and that was before they were putting ethanol in the gas. A manual SC will get high 20s on the highway if driven conservatively, and around town will probably be closer to 15mpg. I love my SC for a lot of reasons, but gas mileage simply is not one of them. With regards to the battery, I was curious about that when they came out, and since they were only rated for 100K miles I thought there would be a major problem once they got higher mileage, but they have been out for over 10 years now, and I know many people who have racked up a lot of miles on them, and I have not seen or heard of a single instance of the battery failing due to anything other than a heavy rear-end impact. I also have not seen any prii in the junkyards other than collision losses, so it appears the batteries last much longer than you would expect. I still maintain that if gas mileage and cost of operating are your concerns, you are better off with a TDI jetta, but for a cheap comfortable commuter car, the hybrids do have a lot going for them.

-91 Cougar LS, coming soon, complete overhaul with a 427" Windsor.
-90SC 5-speed, MP2, coated rotors, double intercooler, 15%OD, ported heads, comp stage 1 cam, 85mm TB, 90MM LMAF, 80# injectors, soon to be transplanted into...
-90 XR7 5-speed black on black w/sunroof
-98 Mark VIII LSC, Procharger P600b, TR3650 swap and 3.73s.
-70 Torino GT Fastback project car. Needs EFI and a manual trans, but I'm not sure what motor to go with yet.
-"Your buddy Mike is INSANE!" -ClintD's dad
MadMikeyL is offline  
post #58 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 06:34 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
bowez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NEAR
Posts: 2,436
Drummer on SCCOA gets mid 30s Hwy in Memphis area 100% stock 91 SC, and my SC gets 17/24 (3.73) with the tune on the rich side.

Consider Hybrid, maybe but I agree with you they are not the most economical decision unless you live in HIGHLY urban areas, and there are many hwy vehicles that are better.

If all else fails get a bigger hammer!

93 SC Tbird
MPII w/ Plenum,90mm MAF, 85mm TB, 40# Injectors, 255 lph FP, Double IC w/fan, SCT Chip (Tuned by Jerry),3/4" Raised Top, F52-TT TC, SilverFox AOD 550, SPT-R VB
96 1/2 XR7 Sold and Salvaged
93 5.0 Tbird
bowez is offline  
post #59 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-11-2013, 11:52 PM
50 years of Mercury Cougar 1967/2017
 
r429460's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cooper City, Fla.
Posts: 1,157
There's that magic tank of gas again.

Quickest N/A Modular MN12.
11.97@ 109.35
3880 lbs. w/driver.

Bradenton Spring Brake Shootout 03/04/2017.
r429460 is offline  
post #60 of 73 (permalink) Old 11-12-2013, 01:58 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
S4gunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SF, CA
Age: 38
Posts: 2,091
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by XR7-4.6 View Post
And ultimately a gearless and noiseless car really doesn't get my blood pumping. I may as well play Forza ...on automatic ...on mute.
...
Plus I don't trust electric companies to be any less opportunistic than oil companies in the long term, so there goes the cost saving aspect.
...
But I finally rationalized what makes them work: they aren't a revelation in electric propulsion, they're electric propulsion made viable only by way of internal combustion. So really, internal combustion still wins.
1) Most people don't need/want big V8s. Most people just want transportation from point a to point b with all the electronic do-dads (BT, fancy stereo, etc) of home. I read an article recently in Popular Science/Mechanics or C&D (I'm not sure which) that was a statistical breakdown of US car buying. 4cyls are waay more popular than V6s and V8s and average displacement is dropping. We will need to wean ourselves off of gasoline. Sure, there's plenty of fuel left for our lifetimes but at our current consumption rate (esp with china developing as they are), all the easy to reach oil will be harder to reach which will leave our children with the unenviable choice of oil vs water (another resource that is significantly unevenly distributed -- I predict our first war over water within our lifetimes as well).

You need to face the fact that you are in the minority. I don't support making gasoline cars "illegal" but it's standing as the basis for the fuel that moves around the majority of americans and most other folks in the world will change within our lifetime.

We still need oil for plastics & a whole host of stuff we can't reproduce with plants.
IIRC, only 10% of all oil is used for plastics now so until we develop stupid cheap energy (fusion) + nanotechnology to assemble materials from basic molecules, we really do need to stop wasting our oil... for our kids sake.

2) I agree that a Tesla is too heavily subsidized and doesn't solve the basic needs of our population. If it was up to me, I would have let the cars sell themselves.

3) Do you realize that the electrical generation business is probably the most heavily regulated industry in the US? Their pricing is set by the govt. Where they can sell and how they make their products is regulated by the govt. They are allowed to make a certain amount of profit and any excess profits must be returned to the customers -- not the owners. Pharmaceutical companies don't even have to deal with this much crap (they are regulated on mfg but not on sales). In contrast, the oil business is limited on where they develop but for the most part (ex: in the US), they are unrestricted on the price & location of where they sell their product. You are absolutely wrong on this aspect. the Framework to limit PG&E legally (my local power company) is far stronger than anything locking down ExxonMobile. I don't particularly care for either but given one choice or the other and all other aspects of powering our transportation grid were the same, I'd pick the electrical generation company.


-g

My TCCOA iTrader Rating: (44 / 100% w/ 50+ transactions)
S4gunn is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TCCoA Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome