Your links were either too old, full of fluff, or otherwise stating what we already know.

You tried to call out GunionM and act like you know more than he does. If you've been keeping up with the trend around here and reading the stuff thats keeping up, you'd realize what he's saying has a LOT of validity and doesn't just come from him.

The FACT remains that the MARKET is going to DEMAND 35mpg vehicles in the next 10 years, long before the CAFE deadline has taken effect. Gas prices constantly going up will hit consumers harder and harder in the wallet - but those that are willing to pay for gas and pay for a V8 will still be able to get it. Cars like the Chevy Beat and the Volt will help - and bringing the small gas/diesel engines over from Europe will help as well. Combined with other technology, getting to the 35mpg CAFE limit will be work - but it is certainly possible.

And to your link about Toyota meeting CAFE early - its all BS fluff from their marketing guru's trying to push their green image. There is no hardcore proof in there about how they are going to do it - it is just them saying they can. GM can too. So can Ferrari. Will they? Well, Ferrari wont.

 

Hey Slickster guionM !


I commend you on your replies to this thread. Very well answered regarding the manufacturing of the vehicles.

Higher fuel consumption, cleaner emission, and durability should always be the target. No matter if we like it or not, it's a necessity that all manufactures are bound to in order of competition.

As it is, it's not only the US names that need to meet the criteria. Mazda has a V6 that averages only 15mpg... that's not good.

Have you ever live in the city? I live here in Los Angeles.... moutain ranges can only be seen after it has rain. Despite my interest in the new Camaro and owning two 4th gen Trans Am, I can see the necessity. Owning a Gas Guzzler is an interest and not a necessity.

When you think about it, the only satisfying thing about our vehicles is the RUMBLE from the exaust. Man, if companies designed another vehicle with the same torque and increase gas mileage without the rumble, I see some people here would not be interested. My best per se example is the TESLA..... 120 miles or so equivalent 1 gallon..... total of 200 hunderd something mile per charge. 0 - 60 in 4 seconds I believe, but the vehicle cost $100k and has sold out already.

It could be done already, though it's out of our price range. Moving away from Fossil Fuel in the future is good for consumers when it comes to the pocket book.

Other than that, I have read the makes running the line for only short lengths from now on, about 4 years. Among them that are out is the PT Cruiser and many others.

Moreover, we are not at the peak of our technological vehicle advances, thus, things can always be improved.................. just think, if we stopped at Analog Signals, we would not have Digital Hi Def of today.

Mattttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

 

This is the very reason I sold my Voyager. Get 18 MPG on average or buy something better. Bought a Toyota yaris and now get on average of 33 MPG. Saves me $30 a week in gas. Before I got the Yaris I had 2 mini vans and my Firebird Convert. Guess which of the 3 got the best mileage? Yep the Bird that only get driven about 2K per year.

 

An article from 2005.... well before the new CAFE standards were debated and voted on. Pretty irrelvent now.

A brief article on the 35 mpg standard on an enviromentalist website, with comments from readers.... what types of comments do you expect on an enviromentalist website?

An article on GM cancelling their DOHC engine program. You wisely left out the key quote of that article:
"And that's really what all this is about: looking ahead to the day when a 35 mpg CAFE standard has to be met. Gone will be the days when top-level luxury cars were offered with V8 engines just because they were the most powerful and torquey motors of the time. If the same power can be achieved in a lighter, more efficient V6, expect most automakers to start ditching V8s quickly.

Cadillac STS is currently selling far more V6s than V8s.

An article about the fact the Hemi doesn't have a future...but you ignore the whole story:

"The Hemi engine's downfall is its inability to adapt to features proven to increase efficiency. The large combustion chamber design and dual valve structure leads to blow-by of unburned fuel, thus producing large levels of undesired emissions. The use of dual spark plugs has improved burn in the hemispherical combustion chamber, however, it's a solution that increased cost and complexity. More modern and efficient chamber structures, unlike the Hemi, can fit four valves and utilize dual overhead camshafts."


An article that Toyota expects to reach the new 35mpg standard well before the 2020 deadline. The reason Toyota gives is because it expects to have vastly increased Prius sales and improved mileage on it's battery pack. Toyota also plans to have diesels optional on Sequoia and Tundra within 2 years.

However, GM is about to bring out the Volt, and plans to expand that technology to other vehicles. GM is also finally getting off their **** and looking at diesels as well. GM is also been pushed to move the Chevy Beat into production, something they weren't going to do before CAFE.

Right now, Chevrolet gets higher fuel economy ratings than Toyota. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but it's a very safe bet that Cadillac gets better overall fuel economy using CAFE's average than Lexus. Toyota's expectation of reaching 35 mpg ahead of schedule is based on things in the pipeline.

Yet, GM has plenty of items not just in their pipeline, but in production all around the world. Yet, you're trying to get us to believe (using articles that don't support CAFE being the death of the auto industry or performance cars if you actually read them) that the US auto industry can't compete and that CAFE means essentially the end of all performance civilization.

Uh.... Not quite.


Yea, and I can suggest long term exposure of astronauts to space radiation will cause them to sprout 4 arms, but that doesn't make me plausable. Just because "some" say it, doesn't make it policy.

What has been suggested is imposing a "Congestion Tax" to some cities central and downtown areas to encourage public transportation and decrease congestion in those central areas. Here in San Francisco (the city most likely where something like this will happen first and hardest) the proposals range from banning cars from certain streets in downtown (making our Muni run on time, which it barely does) to charging a fee to those that commute into the city that don't actually live here.

Since I actually live in the city, and I prefer not to drive in central downtown San Francisco, none of the proposals affect me.

As far as educating the ignorant, I think I don't need to post anything else.


Any change on a platform or chassis (which is used interchangably in automotive writing) that chassis needs to not only undergo that company's validation testing, but also must undergo government crash testing as well.

That qualifies it as an all new chassis (and platform).

The law has been passed. CAFE standards are going to change. It's a done deal. All that's left is decide yearly standards between 2011 and 2020. We can either sit here and fight a law that isn't going to be changed (and in some ways is necessary), or use our pocketbooks and prove that there's still a market for performance cars. Buy them, and manufacturers will find a way to keep making them.

90% of the general public know little about cars. 99.9% of congressional representatives know nothing about cars.

For anyone that doesn't know the story (it also made some news papers) is that this congresswoman (from Michagan I believe) was going to vote "NO" on the bill. One day she was driving her Buick at something like 50 mph and noticed the digital display read 32 mpg. She changed her vote to yes. The problem with this is that she fails to understand that large trucks and SUVs are part of that 35 mpg figure.

Again, knowledge about vehicles is non-existant with the public. There's probally 2-3% of us in the US population that understand the difference.

 

 

no platform deserves to be around for 30 years.

 

I know large luxury cars will take a hit from CAFE....BUT...won't the trucks and large SUV's still be above the GVW standard for CAFE??

Or could the new CAFE laws force SUV's to even grow a little larger to stay out of CAFE's way??

 

Part of the reason why GM is switching to diesel is to improve the average mpg. However California is talking about passing a law to remove the exemption for diesels under 14,000 GVW from their biannual emissions testing program. (Yes, currently diesels are not required to be tested in California. And some people wonder why I'm pushing for a turbo diesel V8 Camaro. )

 

You nailed the REAL problem with the new CAFE standards, and why General Motors perhaps the most vocal regarding the new standards.

Bill Ford has already stated that the old business plan of relying on trucks and SUVs to keep the company solvent is no longer possible. Chrysler is making deals to bring more small cars to market. Toyota (although as much against the new standard as anyone) is pusing more mileage from the Prius and expanding that technology to their entire car line.

General Motors specifically made their new trucks and full sized SUVs to be built better, cost less to build in the process, & have larger profit margins. GM planned to use that to fund their cars. CAFE mucks that up.

On the car side, GM is one of the best as far as CAFE. Chevrolet proudly boasts they have x number of cars that get over 30 mpg. GM can reach 35 mpg car-average in their sleep. GM can probally reach 37 in 13 years. But that means they are going to have to either invest money in raising the mpg of large trucks and SUVs or they are going to have to move more people to car-like vehicles.

The new CAFE standards have had some positive effects at GM already.

It was enough to push the RWD Alpha over the top here in the US, the next Corvette is going is likely to lose weight, Chevy's getting a car smaller than Cobalt, and we're likely to finally get diesels.

 

Global warming is over, folks. 100 years of it reversed in a single year.
See here:
http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature...ticle10866.htm
Al Gore is going to have to make a movie about Global Cooling. And call for increased regulation of the automotive industry to decrease particulates that block sunlight.
You heard it here first.

 

Uh oh, all them danged diesels are smokin up the sky and blocking out the sun.

Better tax'em!..

 

My main objection to CAFE is not the ability to comply with it, nor it's effect on performance cars per se, but the inate wrongheadedness of the approach. We will never conserve our way out of our situation concerning oil consumption. We wouldn't be able to do it if China and India weren't becoming major consumers of the resource, and certainly not now that they are. CAFE is a knee-jerk, antiquated, approach to the issue of oil consumption. The right way is to move as rapidly as possible to alternative fuels and an economy that isn't dependent on oil. Not to mention the national security issues and costs of war associated with our oil dependency.

Fortunately, our society is fast realizing that a move away from oil is essential to the future. This broad realization finally is gaining the genuine momentum it should have had three decades ago. It is this understanding amongst industry leaders and the public at large which will secure the future, not the fumbling laziness of Congress leaning on an old strategy like CAFE. The sad part is that our auto industry will be taking a hit over this before the displacement of oil becomes significant enough in the market to change the game.

 

Couldn't have said it any clearer. Excellent post!!!

 

GM's problem is they got greedy during the late 90's and early 00's, they quit putting resources into cars and shifted everything to trucks and SUV's since the profit margin was so high, I said it then and to this day I believe that is the reason they are hurting so bad now, they thought about today instead of tomorrow. They could make $10k plus profit on SUV's back a few years ago and they let the cars go stagnant, some of the most boring cars of past memory, they let the Camaro die off with no advertisement the final year. All I ever saw on the Tv was ads for Chevy SUV's hardly ever for cars. Chicken came home to roost and now they're paying the price for a short term payday. I hope it was worth it to whomever made those decisions. Look at how long it's gonna take to rebuild the once dominant company, hopefully they are able to and not fall back into the quick money trap and think more longterm.

 

Excellent post.

However, I do differ in that I see reduction of oil dependence on more of a National Security level than a Global Warming issue. Any reduction we post in greenhouse gases is going to be far more than offset by India and China many times over. Both already have very lax enviromental standards, and aren't likely to change that anytime soon.

I do agree, CAFE is perhaps the worse choice. It puts the burden on automakers to control the market. It had unintended consequences when enacted in 1975.

However, this time around, CAFE is almost certainly not going to have the same adverse effect it had when it was enacted. This time around:

1. Cars aren't going into CAFE standards already underpowered. Today normal cars are as quick as some of the top performance cars of the late 60s, let alone the mid 70s.

2. Today's cars have already gotten too heavy. The attitude with car companies (foreign as well as domestic) was as long as it meets fuel & emission standards, weight isn't as much a concern.

3. CAFE is no where near as agressive as it was the last time around. In 1975, CAFE mandated a 100% improvement in fuel economy in just 10 years. Today, that would be like Congress mandating cars get 60 mpg by 2018. Instead, it's an increase from 27 mpg (current average of cars & trucks combined) to 35 mpg, roughly 30%. Instead of 10 years, industry has 13.

4. Fuel prices are likely to drive the market to smaller cars quicker than CAFE will this time. By the time CAFE passed in 1975, fuel prices were already back down. This time around, if anything, the pressue is on to drive fuel prices up higher. $4 average is expected by summer. The dollars plunge (being helped along by the Fed's continued intrest rate cuts) means that the price is going to be even higher even if oil prices don't change. In increase in fuel prices in 2007 gave the US a 1 mpg bump in average fuel economy as measured by CAFE standards. We're in for bigger, faster jumps than that in the very near future.