http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/26/news...ce=yahoo_quote

Don't know about you guys but GM, Ford, DCX are the perpetual punching bags whenever CAFE propose new standards... having to defend themselves publicly against what they claim to be are 'unreasonable' targets. It's no wonder perception is rife that Toyota produce clean, fuel efficient vehicles... they can keep quiet while the Big 3 argue the point, also on Toyota's behalf.

Your thoughts?

 

Like it or not, fuel economy needs to improve. IMHO, the Big 3 (or 2) need to get on board with this instead of complaining about it. Gas prices are down around $.25 right now for a lot of areas, but will likely be back up around $3 again this summer.

GM seems to be making good strides with gas mileage on their trucks. They (and Ford and DCX) need to continue this trend and improve upon it.

 

Other than the obvious oil usage and pollution issues, I've always wondered who's interests CAFE serves when you have a buying public who prefers bigger, gas guzzling vehicles than small, economical ones (based on the way they vote w/ their wallets anyway).

 

Of the Big 3, it would seem GM has the least to worry about. Their lineup is the most fuel-efficient of the domestics. DCX, on the other hand, is f*cked.

 

Read the article.

The problem is that Toyota has acrued alot of fuel economy "credits," due to the fact that they did not make big guzzlers for very long.

What this does is create a condition where they would have a very definite competitive edge. With their credits, they can sell their Tundras and Sequoia's, that get worse economy than GM and Ford offerings.............. without having a guzzler tax on them. In other words, the Tahoe may get 20mpg, but the Sequoia................ which only gets 17mpg would not get the tax, because they would have a 5mpg credit.

This would cause GM and Ford to have to limit the amount of these vehicles that they sell, or they would face big fines.

Ford and GM should fight this. The imports already have a very unfair advantage due to the lack of legacy costs. This would tilt things much worse.

 

CAFE is the devil.

 

X2!

 

Surely, our government will step in to avert this. Right?

 

Higher fuel prices are the only thing that will get more fuel efficient cars built.

The big 3 need to be prepared for when $4 gas comes.

 

Yup. Sad, but true. And with those high gas prices and public outcry about them will come an increase in CAFE. Right, wrong, or otherwise.

As for imports having an advantage....perhaps....but their biggest advantage is that more of them are building what people want to buy at a price they want to pay (and that price is sometimes higher....see "what people want to buy").

Bob

 

Oh yeah, you got that right! Left wing ****'s, committed to bringing down the big 3 errr 2.5...........oh hey, I guess it's been workin' eh! There's a huge network of ***holes, committed to putting this country, and our companies out of business, CAFE is just another one of them. And the fools of this country, will continue to blindly **** this country away on foreign junkpiles!

 

So if I own a foreign car, I'm pissing this country away?

Interesting concept.
Bob

 

At $4/gallon, if you drive 15000 miles per year, the difference between 20mpg and 40mpg is only $125/month. Why would a $125/month jump send people driving yukons over to driving a civic? The only people that do that are the same ones that bought 300 cans of pinto beans right before y2k.

You know how many foreign people live here in the US? That's why american car sales are down...

 

First, CAFE credits are not transferrable between an automaker's car & light truck fleets. Second, they expire after three years. So even if the Japanese did make a lot of econoboxes in the past, it's not helping them out with their gas guzzling Sequioas and Titans today.

 

Well, how much extra vehicle (or house, or consumer electronics, or...) could someone buy with that $125/month? (That's a rhetorical question, but the answer is "quite a bit") Tack that extra expense onto the substantial monthly payments that one is already making on a $40K vehicle such as the Tahoe, and it damn well had better be considered as a potential dealbreaker for anyone who's watching their pennies.

I do think that Lutz's position is being mischaracterized by those that say he's trying to duck the issue of fuel economy; he's lobbying for an increased gas tax - the European approach - as a better alternative to CAFE (that quiet popping sound was SCNGENNFTHGEN's head exploding).