MPG mandates?

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by Alaskapsdvan

Is life not grand?We the people let the makers back slide over the years for more stuff and less mpg.We the people should have stood our ground and demanded better and better mpg and they would have done it.Why is it that we the people need the Government to do it for us?

So, do you not recognize the increasing leverage of the EPA in emmissions mandates against those vehicles that reduced that mileage? Or even DOT mandates that increased weight for various safety issues?

If we stood our ground...

Well, if anyone did, people would have bought small cars rather than bigger cars and vehicles for families, car pools to school and soccer, and so on. Or is that part of the real marketplace unreasonable?

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by checkthisout

Honda is known for efficient engines but look at what their Ridgeline pick-up, Odyssey Vans and Pilot get for mileage.

And their size opportunity for those that need something bigger.

Notice also that they have pulled their diesel off the shelf for an opportunity. I believe I read that it was a US emissions issue. Was supposed to have 52MPG. Similarly, the Focus diesel wagon in Europe already for years has been getting 49MPG, oh, again, emissions issues.

Ford scrapped there V6 diesel work for the smaller vehicles because of emissions. And then there's the three engine families that have gone through development on the larger side: 7.3, 6.0, 6.4. All in very short order.

[drcampbell]

Originally Posted by Super_Dave

You can't prove a negative. That's a straw man.

I don't have to prove it. I'm an eyewitness to it.

Originally Posted by Super_Dave

Customers have asked for increased performance. That requires more efficiency of the overall process. Whether that's advanced ECM's ...

Customers never asked for ECMs at all. Some customers don't know and don't care what's under the hood; others (who do their own work) actively opposed the very idea of ECMs and many still do.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by drcampbell

I don't have to prove it. I'm an eyewitness to it.

Then one needs to check one's premise as standards do no work. They do not do research. They don't have the opportunity to innovate, invent, or produce. They stand in the way artificially. Just as a law reduces an individal's right to do something. More and more and more laws do not give opportunities. They stand in the way.

Originally Posted by drcampbell

Customers never asked for ECMs at all. Some customers don't know and don't care what's under the hood; others (who do their own work) actively opposed the very idea of ECMs and many still do.

ECM's came from the opportunity to do more in a smaller package. The opportunity to have different fuel and ignition curves to accomplish a task to make more power more efficiently. To control lights inside a vehicle so that they turn off after 30 seconds, to have a more gentle power curve in first gear to reduce tire spin, to have a different shift strategy in a single transmission when towing. An electronic control module is what it is, and it represents what men have made to offer more comforts, easier driving, safety, and the like. And, yeah, all out of sight of the driver. Amazing what men can produce.

[MarkEkberg]

Wow.. Gets moved to a different forum and look out.

I too drive a 95 IMP SS. Gets same mpg as all the other mid size sedans with way more fun factor.

I just don't understand how/why people can't remember what was in existance 20 years ago. My folks had a 84 Plymouth Horizon. 33-35 mpg, seated 5 poorly, but ran to 100K before it began falling apart. Was cheap, something like 4K for a brand new one with many options.

My other issue I don't understand is how the DOT mandates poor mpg as well. They insist on all sorts of safety stuff that weighs the cars down. They insist on certain 60-0 distances that force the car to weigh more to accomplish this. Hmmmmm

case in Point the Indian NANO. Little car, but supposidly does not pass EPA or DOT mandates. But gets great mpg, and is being sold to other parts of the world.

[drcampbell]

Originally Posted by MarkEkberg

... case in Point the Indian NANO. Little car, but [supposedly] does not pass EPA or DOT mandates. ...

Why should Tata Motors bother to submit paperwork to the EPA or DOT? Why would they even be thinking about exporting cars to the US when they have a year-long waiting list and at least a 10-million-vehicle market in India alone?

They claim to meet Euro 4 (Bharat Stage IV) emissions, which will be the law in 2010 in eleven population centers.
Emission Standards: India: On-Road Vehicles and Engines

[checkthisout]

Originally Posted by MarkEkberg

Wow.. Gets moved to a different forum and look out.

I too drive a 95 IMP SS. Gets same mpg as all the other mid size sedans with way more fun factor.

I just don't understand how/why people can't remember what was in existance 20 years ago. My folks had a 84 Plymouth Horizon. 33-35 mpg, seated 5 poorly, but ran to 100K before it began falling apart. Was cheap, something like 4K for a brand new one with many options.

My other issue I don't understand is how the DOT mandates poor mpg as well. They insist on all sorts of safety stuff that weighs the cars down. They insist on certain 60-0 distances that force the car to weigh more to accomplish this. Hmmmmm

case in Point the Indian NANO. Little car, but supposidly does not pass EPA or DOT mandates. But gets great mpg, and is being sold to other parts of the world.

You can buy a Smart Fortwo. That trend pretty much died.

Are you saying that as cars have gotten safer that they have also gotten heavier?

I don't think a Honda FIT weighs more than an 82 Toyota Cressida and certainly not more than a 73 Cadillac Eldorado. It might be comparable to my 66 Mustang or a Corvair which would crumple up like a Beer Can in an accident with the Fit.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by checkthisout

I don't think a Honda FIT weighs more than an 82 Toyota Cressida and certainly not more than a 73 Cadillac Eldorado. It might be comparable to my 66 Mustang or a Corvair which would crumple up like a Beer Can in an accident with the Fit.

And a Honda Fit won't meet the newer requirements of 38MPG either, so to meet CAFE requirements of 38MPG, Honda must have other cars that get better MPG.

As for crash data, please give us test data to compare.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by checkthisout

You can buy a Smart Fortwo. That trend pretty much died.

Well the Smart is interesting.

The combined economy of the Smart Fortwo is 36MPG. That does not even meet future CAFE standards of 42 MPG that Obama is calling for.

So, throw that out and get a push cart too. They have a diesel, just like a lot of other manufacturers, but the "wisdom" of the EPA is fully recognized in this role of playing their game.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by drcampbell

Why should Tata Motors bother to submit paperwork to the EPA or DOT? Why would they even be thinking about exporting when they have a year-long waiting list and at least a 10-million-vehicle market in India alone?

They claim to meet Euro 4 (Bharat Stage IV) emissions, which will be the law in 2010 in eleven population centers.
Emission Standards: India: On-Road Vehicles and Engines

The whole Indian market is a fraction of the 10 million vehicles that you claim. So, start by getting facts correct. Tata Motors also exports cars to other markets already.

[1991F250]

Originally Posted by MarkEkberg

Wow.. Gets moved to a different forum and look out.

Funny how that works, isn't it?

Originally Posted by MarkEkberg

I too drive a 95 IMP SS. Gets same mpg as all the other mid size sedans with way more fun factor.

I just don't understand how/why people can't remember what was in existance 20 years ago. My folks had a 84 Plymouth Horizon. 33-35 mpg, seated 5 poorly, but ran to 100K before it began falling apart. Was cheap, something like 4K for a brand new one with many options.

My other issue I don't understand is how the DOT mandates poor mpg as well. They insist on all sorts of safety stuff that weighs the cars down. They insist on certain 60-0 distances that force the car to weigh more to accomplish this. Hmmmmm...

I, too, just don't understand why people's memories are so bad... they CAN remember that their "uncle's best friend's brother knew a guy that had an American-made car 20 years ago, and it was a piece of junk," but they can't seem to remember any of the good things?? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense...
But, even just considering the weight of a vehicle... your Impala, my Grand Marquis weigh in very close to sedans produced today, even though they lack almost all the safety features mandated, so can it truly be a weight issue? Or is something more in play?
Certainly in this day and age, with all the technology that's been around for over 100 years, we can't do any better?? Sadly, we probably can't. Same thing with the space program. We first went to the moon almost 40 years ago, but if we want to go again, NASA says it'll take decade to "develop the technology." Some things in life aren't supposed to make sense, I guess.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by 1991F250

Certainly in this day and age, with all the technology that's been around for over 100 years, we can't do any better?? Sadly, we probably can't. Same thing with the space program. We first went to the moon almost 40 years ago, but if we want to go again, NASA says it'll take decade to "develop the technology." Some things in life aren't supposed to make sense, I guess.

At what point does an individual or a group decide not to spend the money investing in technology only to have it ran out of being used because of intrusion from government mandates?

First point. US gasoline refineries are really old. Various land use issues have made it very hard to get zoning for one and then other issues for "latest technology available" have also hit that hard. Then there's the continued threat of punitive taxation against those companies.

Another personal point. We tested a prototype front race tire in 2004. Universally, most of us really, really liked it a whole bunch. That's what we wanted to be on when available. But in 2005, it wasn't available. We're finally seeing a lot of the grip and feel in a new tire for 2009. We're told that the process for making the tire as a production unit wasn't done until this year because of an environmental issue. Again, more being developed in the mix.

Ford had the 7.3 for how long, then they had to move to the 6.0 and quickly into the 6.4 because of regulation, etc.

It's many, many small things that guys like checkthisout and drcampbell like in order to move their agenda forward. Even Pravda is making fun of our economy. At some point, Atlas Shrugs and lets those guys develop their plan into the disaster that it is. Why should they continue to participate?

[checkthisout]

Originally Posted by Super_Dave

At what point does an individual or a group decide not to spend the money investing in technology only to have it ran out of being used because of intrusion from government mandates?

First point. US gasoline refineries are really old. Various land use issues have made it very hard to get zoning for one and then other issues for "latest technology available" have also hit that hard. Then there's the continued threat of punitive taxation against those companies.

Another personal point. We tested a prototype front race tire in 2004. Universally, most of us really, really liked it a whole bunch. That's what we wanted to be on when available. But in 2005, it wasn't available. We're finally seeing a lot of the grip and feel in a new tire for 2009. We're told that the process for making the tire as a production unit wasn't done until this year because of an environmental issue. Again, more being developed in the mix.

Ford had the 7.3 for how long, then they had to move to the 6.0 and quickly into the 6.4 because of regulation, etc.

It's many, many small things that guys like checkthisout and drcampbell like in order to move their agenda forward. Even Pravda is making fun of our economy. At some point, Atlas Shrugs and lets those guys develop their plan into the disaster that it is. Why should they continue to participate?

What is my "Agenda"?

I doubt most people fit into the stereotypical mold that you try and stuff them into.

[AK_Gandy]

Originally Posted by checkthisout

What is my "Agenda"?

As best as I can tell, it is to try to inject a little middle ground around here to the "frothing at the mouth against anyone who is left of Attila the Hun" members.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by checkthisout

What is my "Agenda"?

I doubt most people fit into the stereotypical mold that you try and stuff them into.

Ok, then, what's you idea for the diesel truck that you drive? Does it fit your needs? Should you have the choice to make your own decisions? This is the mold you place us into as owners of those vehicles...individuals that aren't in the right mold.

You say that hybridization, smaller, lighter, etc are the only ways to gain efficiency. If the ridiculous restriction on diesel engines were eliminated, efficiency would be gained. And some things have to be larger and heavier to work. In addition to choice.

Do you believe in choice or do you believe that others should have someone else tell them what to do?