CAFE standard: 26mpg for light trucks

[DirtFarmer]

If I understand it correctly, the goal is for light trucks to average 26mpg by 2016. I've only done a little reading on this, but I did find the following disturbing quote on Wikipedia:

The most recent revision of CAFE that passed in 2007 no longer grants exemptions to light trucks classified as SUVs or passenger vans unless they exceed 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) GVWR (those that exceed 8,500 lb (3,900 kg) GVWR previously did not have to comply with CAFE standards); Pickup trucks and cargo vans are required to comply up to 8,500 lb (3,900 kg). In 1999, over half a million vehicles exceeded the GVWR and the CAFE standard did not apply to them. In 2011, the standard will change to include many larger vehicles.

The first part of that made me think that it might still be possible to purchase a large pickup (over 8,500 or 10,000 GVWR) and be exempt from the standard. But the last sentence looks like bad news.

Certainly the low hanging fruit that would be first to be picked off with any changes would be the 3/4 and 1 ton pickups and similar cab/chassis trucks. Does anybody know if they're going to end up getting averaged in with the mix that has to average 26mpg?

If so, I guess the unintended consequence will be more people buying class 5 or 6 trucks to tow trailers with.

I don't see how we're going to get the light truck average to 26mpg. The 2.3L four banger Ford Ranger gets 21mpg city, 26mpg highway. Would that even meet the target? Does CAFE look at highway mpg or an overall average of city/highway? At any rate, the tiny Ranger, would, at best just meet the 26mpg minimum. The 4.0L V6 Ranger only gets 15mpg city and 19mpg highway, so to offset that big gas hog, they'll need to produce a tiny "smart truck" made of tin foil, and there's no way in heck they'll be able to offset trucks that only get low to mid teens. Certainly not since the EPA standards have loaded up today's best hope for good mileage (light diesels) with restrictions that have reduced mpg.

Maintain your trucks well boys. Trucks like we're driving now will be rare and very pricey in the future.

[AK_Gandy]

Let me see if I have this correct.

You're against trucks getting better mileage?

Let me guess............

You're also against high fuel prices.

[LMJD]

DirtFarmer, I was under the empression that CAFE included all models except pickups but I'm not sure. If they include pickups and the rest of the econoboxes got terrific fuel mileage, then a 1/2 ton or diesel may only have to get maybe 20-21MPG and they'd be OK since the CAFE *average* would be 26 or more.
I bought a new 1/2 ton V8 a couple years ago and it gets 21 MPG with easy highway driving.

[checkthisout]

If I remember correctly, I believe an F250 exceeds the 8500 GVWR enough to put it up in 10K class, if not Ford can get around meeting the standard by simply uprating the GVWR of the truck.

It would be retarded if Trucks were included in this standard since there is no way you are going to get remotely close to that if you put a trailer behind it or god forbid, put something in the bed and actually use the truck for what it was designed for.

[drcampbell]

Originally Posted by checkthisout

... It would be retarded if trucks were included in this standard since there is no way in hell you are going to get remotely close to that if you put a trailer behind it or god forbid, put something in the bed and actually use the truck for what it was designed for.

Perhaps, but that's not how they're tested & certified.

Light-duty trucks (up to 8,499 GWVR) are currently tested on an FTP-75 cycle (for the "city" mi/gal rating) and an HWFET cycle. (for the "highway" mi/gal rating)
Emission Test Cycles
Both tests are conducted on a dynamometer with only the weight of a driver and fuel in the vehicle but with the dyno calibrated to simulate the loaded weight. (which is not necessarily the GVWR) Because it's tested indoors, trucks (and every other boxy vehicle) receive undeserved bonus points because aerodynamic performance is neglected.

So yes, you won't actually achieve the window-sticker mileage performance when towing or hauling heavy. But you also don't need to to comply with the proposed standard.

It remains to be seen what will happen with 3/4-ton trucks, vans & sport-futility vehicles. Until now, they evaded CAFE standards because they're over 8,500 pounds GVWR and evaded a lot of truck standards because they're under 10,000 GVWR. Ever notice that there's no EPA rating on an F-250's window sticker?

It seems clear to me that the intent of Congress is to close the loophole which enables dentists, accountants and jewelers to drive Hummers as personal cars while claiming them as business equipment, but I suspect they haven't thought the matter all the way through.

It's not as simple as penciling in a higher GVWR; if the manufacturer says it's good to 10,001 pounds, they have to back it up with hardware so that it actually is. Once they do that, they've then built a 1-ton truck and there's no longer any reason to call it a 3/4-ton.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by AK_Gandy

Let me see if I have this correct.

You're against trucks getting better mileage?

So, your saying that goverment CAFE can engineer efficiency?

Or would a manufacturer sell more light trucks in a market place if it had a more efficient engine already in a competitive marketplace if it could be produced?

[AK_Gandy]

Originally Posted by Super_Dave

So, your saying that goverment CAFE can engineer efficiency?

What does safety have to do with it?

I'm saying that some people have been decrying CAFE standards as the end of the world for the last couple of decades and it hasn't happened. Without some type of nudge, the manufacturers would have had very little incentive to do anything about increasing mileage.

Or would a manufacturer sell more light trucks in a market place if it had a more efficient engine already in a competitive marketplace if it could be produced?

I don't really understand the question.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by AK_Gandy

What does safety have to do with it?

Good question. You should read what you respond too as safety has not been brought up.

Originally Posted by AK_Gandy

I'm saying that some people have been decrying CAFE standards as the end of the world for the last couple of decades and it hasn't happened. Without some type of nudge, the manufacturers would have had very little incentive to do anything about increasing mileage.

Really? That is the reason why Japanese import cars sold well. Individual consumers made choices in the market place for vehicles that got better MPG to suit there needs and how much they want to spend on fuel and their payments for road taxes.

Even in commercial trucking, businesses make their own decisions to get new vehicles that have better fuel mileage characteristics to increase profits so they have future capital rather than loans.

How will the increase costs of vehicles and the lost sales as a result of incredible CAFE standards affect those that are not so wealthy? Do you expect mass transit to accommodate these people along with taxpayer funds?

[AK_Gandy]

Originally Posted by Super_Dave

Good question. You should read what you respond too as safety has not been brought up.

My bad. I had a work issue on my mind that combines a safety and an efficiency issue and must have been thinking about it.

As far as CAFE being able to "mandate efficiency," it already has.

Really? That is the reason why Japanese import cars sold well. Individual consumers made choices in the market place for vehicles that got better MPG to suit there needs and how much they want to spend on fuel and their payments for road taxes.

Even in commercial trucking, businesses make their own decisions to get new vehicles that have better fuel mileage characteristics to increase profits so they have future capital rather than loans.

How will the increase costs of vehicles and the lost sales as a result of incredible CAFE standards affect those that are not so wealthy? Do you expect mass transit to accommodate these people along with taxpayer funds?

So in essence, you're saying that the governement (through CAFE) actually "bailed out" the auto industry years ago by forcing them to be smart enough to compete with Japaneses carmakers through increased fuel mileage?

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by AK_Gandy

As far as CAFE being able to "mandate efficiency," it already has.

So in essence, you're saying that the governement (through CAFE) actually "bailed out" the auto industry years ago by forcing them to be smart enough to compete with Japaneses carmakers through increased fuel mileage?

Understood on the safety issue. You're on a lot of forums.

If you have any recognition of what happened, the Japanese cars certainly started arriving in the late sixties, early seventies. VW came even earlier. Cafe standards followed.

It's a straw man that CAFE bailed out the auto industry.

And the F150 is still the best selling vehicle in the US followed by a lot of pick ups in the top ten. Those are what kept the US auto economy afloat, and the Japanese have caught on too making their own half ton light trucks.

CAFE is an artificial means of removing choice from individuals by the government. You do believe in liberty for yourself, don't you?

[greenskeeper79]

I don't like CAFE. Let the auto industry built vehicles that the public wants to drive.

We are turning into a socialist country right in front of our eyes.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by greenskeeper79

I don't like CAFE. Let the auto industry built vehicles that the public wants to drive.

We are turning into a socialist country right in front of our eyes.

Oh, exactly.

Diesel cars are a great example. Most US manufacturers have them available outside the US, but because of emmission standards and DOT regulations that are singular for the US if not a particular state.

That's an over regulation issue. And where have those emmissions standards taken everything?

drcampbell or checkthis out will now complain about a unique Ford product that Ford doesn't bring here and how businesses limit his choice. Go back to the DOT and EPA with it. In addition to he's potentially the only one that might want one. Import it on your own and update it if possible to the standards. Produce, man, produce.

[drcampbell]

Originally Posted by Super_Dave

... CAFE is an artificial means of removing choice from individuals by the government. You do believe in liberty for yourself, don't you?

My choice would be a 4-door Ranger with a small turboDiesel engine and a 6-(or more)-speed dry-coupled automatic transmission for my truck,



and a Ford Transit for my family car, likewise with a turboDiesel and an efficient automatic transmission. (I'm 6'4")



But I don't have that choice.

Now explain to me whether CAFE law or Ford Motor Corporation's marketing strategy is responsible for denying me my choice? (I'll give you a clue: CAFE law doesn't dictate which models will and won't be available. Corporate marketing controls that completely.)

If I want a four-door pickup from Ford, I have to step up to the more-profitable F-150 and if I want headroom, I have to go with an E-150, neither of which achieves even 20 mi/gal and both of which are a PITA to drive around town. And a small Diesel engine or an efficient hard-coupled automatic? Fuggettaboudit.

Then explain to me whether a more-effective CAFE law will increase or reduce my chances of being able to buy what I want. It ain't rocket science: A more-effective CAFE law will increase the number and variety of fuel-efficient vehicles marketed in North America.

Photo gallery: "American" cars you can't buy in America


You want to claim that DOT & EPA are at fault, you need to do better than point fingers at DOT & EPA and say, "Nyah, nyah. It's their fault." Start by explaining how the 2-door and SuperCab Ranger comply with FMVSS-208 and a 4-door Ranger doesn't.

[Packard8]

Originally Posted by drcampbell

(I'll give you a clue: CAFE law doesn't dictate which models will and won't be available. Corporate marketing controls that completely.)

If I recall correctly, Ford, GM, MB, BMW, Honda and VW wanted to import existing European spec diesel sedans but the EPA and DOT put the kibosh on it, not Corporate Marketing.

Seems odd that cars that are clean and safe enough for the Swiss, Germans, French and Japanese don't pass muster here...???

Some folks think that the UAW controlled Michigan lobby had something to do with it..... could that be true?

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by Packard8

If I recall correctly, Ford, GM, MB, BMW, Honda and VW wanted to import existing European spec diesel sedans but the EPA and DOT put the kibosh on it, not Corporate Marketing.

Seems odd that cars that are clean and safe enough for the Swiss, Germans, French and Japanese don't pass muster here...???

Some folks think that the UAW controlled Michigan lobby had something to do with it..... could that be true?

Certainly.

Why should the EPA support engines developed by Ford of Europe and made by Ford of Europe employees that aren't part of the UAW?

Ford Focus is a great example. When the second generation Focus was released, the US had a different version. Was retooled, but it didn't follow where Ford's global market went.