Public wants 60mpg, but don't listen to them.

[toesuf94]

Free BEER?

I would love 60 MPG...but then again it snows here in Iowa...and we have lots of trucks hauling grain...so I really do not need one of these just to save on gas.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Please, just stop. We're not Europe. If you like it so much, pack your gear and go move there.

First, most of those countries do not have the high standards we do for both crashing and safety. This causes the prices to go higher here than they do over there.
And yet statistically, aren't there fewer deaths per mile driven in most European nations than there are in America, thereby reducing the need to mandate excessive safety systems?

Second, those countries are setup a lot differently then we are here in the US. They have smaller roads, often just 2 lane roads. They have high quality mass transit, which the US doesn't.
Can't argue with the roads, but mass transit can easily be expanded & improved in North America. However, unless it gets more expensive to drive a car, people probably won't take buses or trains very much.

Three, about half the cars in Europe are diesel powered....which provides better fuel economy in most cases.
And most European nations tax gasoline more than diesel to encourage people to buy the more efficient diesel cars. They are also slightly more lax with regard to diesel emissions

Four, and this is the point of Dragon's post - MOST of those "fuel efficient" cars are the size of a freaking go-cart.
I have a completely different take on the article. People in the US do not want small cars. And none of the conventionally powered small cars on the market today can reach the 60 mpg goal. So to reach it, everything will have to become an EV or a hybrid which will make cars far more expensive.


I'm sorry, but I am not riding around in something that's 5 ft. long and 3 ft. wide. I would like to go home after an accident. You talk about how Americans don't mind paying out that money, but then you fail to see why.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that Europeans all drive tiny death traps ... but from what I've seen there are a lot of compacts/subcompacts on the roads over there, usually in a wagon or hatchback style. They hate things like the Smart Fourtwo almost as much as people over here do.

At the same token, I'm not against improving fuel mileage. These companies can already do it with the technology that is already in use today. There are engines overseas that could easily be put in the same cars here, but because of stupidity in regulations, they don't
Be careful when looking at the fuel economy for cars overseas. They don't use the US EPA test cycle, which is the least generous testing regime that I know of. Often there will be a 10-20% difference based solely on how the fuel economy gets measured while not a single thing is changed on the car.

I just find it funny that your sitting here basically calling us stupid for paying to gas the vehicles we choose to drive and yet you do the exact same thing.....
He did nothing of the sort. His point was that regardless of what people said in the poll, when they vote with their wallets they show their real preference, which is trucks & muscle cars.

That said ... I still think that 60 mpg CAFE for 2025 is an absolutely terrible idea & anyone who is advocating probably doesn't understand the difference between 'possible' and 'practical'.

[Epitaph]

The big 3 and foreign automakers wont let it happen, seeing as they have lobbyists to take care of it.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Whether Americans want 60 mpg cars depends on the context. Are they going to get roughly the same car they have today and get 60 mpg, or will they have to trade of between fuel economy and comfort, safety, performance, etc...

When you ask Americans whether they want 60 mpg, accounting for those other factors, the answer is "no". Car sales make that pretty obvious.

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

And yet statistically, aren't there fewer deaths per mile driven in most European nations than there are in America, thereby reducing the need to mandate excessive safety systems?

The roads are smaller, and there are several highway systems (similar to the Autobahn) that allow high speeds, so it's very easy to get your fix without being stupid. Also, most cities have very low speed limits such as 30-40k...and they are very heavy handed usually when it comes to tickets. They also have a MUCH better system of training people to drive. Most countries don't allow you to get a license before 18. Most require a 1 year driving course.

There's also a lot less roads to drive compared to here, as the abundance of good mass transit makes it easier to avoid the roads all together.

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Can't argue with the roads, but mass transit can easily be expanded & improved in North America. However, unless it gets more expensive to drive a car, people probably won't take buses or trains very much.

You actually hit the nail on the head. Mass transit absolutely could be improved, and it should! The difference here is that most of those options for the average person in the US make it impossible to use. It would take me an hour to ride the bus 15 miles....and I'm sorry, but that's just not acceptable in this day and age. I can drive it in 20 minutes...the same exact route.

There's also a big limit for the range. I'm 3 miles away from the city bus line, and I would ride it if I could. I can't....and it would again be an hour ride to go what takes me about 30 minutes to drive, even in rush hour.

Originally Posted by DGthe3

And most European nations tax gasoline more than diesel to encourage people to buy the more efficient diesel cars. They are also slightly more lax with regard to diesel emissions

Again, no disagreement here. I'm all for that if its a worthwhile measure. If you could put diesel engines in cars here, with the same level of performance or better, with better fuel economy...why wouldn't you? I mean you can use VW as a prime example. They have about a 10-14mpg difference between their gas/diesel powered cars just here in the US. Imagine if they would be a bit more lax on the diesel issues here, while stepping up on gas?

Originally Posted by DGthe3

I have a completely different take on the article. People in the US do not want small cars.

Yet your comment basically echoes mine. People don't want to drive something the size of a toy. I'm almost 6'3" with a 15-16 shoe, making me the equivalent of someone 6'5"-6'6" in some cases trying to drive a car. There is hardly any room in some of the "midsize" cars, let alone trying to drive something like a Toyota Yaris or even an old MR2. Some people manage fine, some don't. Now try to carry a family of 4 in something the size of a Yaris.... it doesn't work. They're great for zipping around town but I wouldn't trust it doing anything over 40mph and I certainly wouldn't think of wanting to be in a car accident.

Originally Posted by DGthe3

I'm not sure where you get the idea that Europeans all drive tiny death traps ... but from what I've seen there are a lot of compacts/subcompacts on the roads over there, usually in a wagon or hatchback style. They hate things like the Smart Fourtwo almost as much as people over here do.

I wasn't implying they were, I was referring to myself. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. Still, a compact or subcompact is awfully small. The smallest car I ever drove on a regular basis was a Chevy Beretta. That was with the seat all the way back, and me sitting basically on a portion of the top of the seat to be comfortable. Even then, it wasn't very comfortable.

The roads over there as well don't really provide for a lot of large vehicles. You will rarely ever see any American full size trucks over there, and even then, you will usually see the old SUV's more than an actual pickup.

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Be careful when looking at the fuel economy for cars overseas. They don't use the US EPA test cycle, which is the least generous testing regime that I know of. Often there will be a 10-20% difference based solely on how the fuel economy gets measured while not a single thing is changed on the car.

Still, let's say that they have a vehicle stating it gets 50mpg. Over here, it gets say 43mpg....it's still better than the 32-34mpg its gasoline sister gets here. That's all I'm saying. They have better options, but due to in some cases, stupid/overbearing regulations, companies aren't able to bring them. The midsize/fullsize truck market has been BEGGING for a diesel engine in something under a 3/4 ton - 1 ton pickup. Even SUVs would benefit from these, as they could add an extra 4-8mpg easily. There are easily hundreds of modded Rangers/S10's that have added the favorite TDI out of a Golf or Jetta and are running 30-35mpg...in a pickup.

Originally Posted by DGthe3

He did nothing of the sort. His point was that regardless of what people said in the poll, when they vote with their wallets they show their real preference, which is trucks & muscle cars.

The way I see it, he did. Why do I feel that way? Because he himself owns a muscle car. Granted, he has the luxury of also owning a smaller car, but the point is that he still voted with his wallet too. Maybe not 100%, but I feel that he did.

The other thing is this, and I kind of said this earlier, if there were more choices with slightly larger, fuel efficient cars, perhaps people would be more apt to buy them instead. Why buy a Prius when you really need a truck? You also have to look at the fuel economy on trucks/muscle cars. It's the highest it's ever been in terms of performance vs. efficiency. I've got a 426hp motor that gets relatively the same gas mileage that my previous 4dr Grand Prix GTP with 260hp(factory) got.

[coolman]

I would gladly take 60MPG as long as it's still over 400HP.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by rayhawk

Unfortunately, every generation of Americans becomes less knowledgeable about science and technology,

I disagree...There is just so much more tech out there to understand...the percentage most people DO understand appears to be shrinking...but I can tell you my grandmother thought it darn near divine intervention when I recorded a video on my phone, and sent it to person sitting next to her so she could see it.

Still, your point is taken and agreed with. There are some "experts" that have no business spouting their mouths off to uninformed policymakers. It upsets me a good bit...because believe it or not, they don't pick a number out of a hat. A LOT of money and time is devoted to analyzing a given set of circumstances, in this case fuel economy standards.

One of the reasons it's a justified expenditure for certain groups is because it reveals all the bull$h!t they now know to leave out when pitching the idea...

I'd like to know if CAFE has EVER had a measurable effect on fuel consumption. I don't think it has.

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

These companies can already do it with the technology that is already in use today. There are engines overseas that could easily be put in the same cars here, but because of stupidity in regulations, they don't.

They can certainly do better, that's for sure. But again -- it will come at a cost...

Still...you've touched on a great point. If anyone spends some time looking at all the auto regulations, specifically the ones regarding emissions and fuel economy...you'll find a LOT of contradictions. Our policy makers have steadily been directing the overall movement of the auto industry through regulation...and enough is enough, imo. I don't want them gone (because I do appreciate smog-free air....), but I do think many of them need to be scaled back...WAY back.

One more point...Europe largely regulates by emissions, not mpg. But emissions leads mpg in most cases. Their regulations are, in some ways, stricter than our own. So their cars are more expensive to meet those regs...but there's one player they have that we don't: High fuel prices. Europeans are willing to pay high vehicle prices because they're influenced by high fuel prices...

Originally Posted by coolman

I would gladly take 60MPG as long as it's still over 400HP.

I've saved up for the 300% premium, too!

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I'd like to know if CAFE has EVER had a measurable effect on fuel consumption. I don't think it has.

I think it was found that when CAFE was introduced & ramped up, people simply drove more & consumed the same amount of fuel.

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Still...you've touched on a great point. If anyone spends some time looking at all the auto regulations, specifically the ones regarding emissions and fuel economy...you'll find a LOT of contradictions. Our policy makers have steadily been directing the overall movement of the auto industry through regulation...and enough is enough, imo. I don't want them gone (because I do appreciate smog-free air....), but I do think many of them need to be scaled back...WAY back.

Yeah, they do contradict each other. There was a law in Michigan I think, that prevented aftermarket exhausts from being put on, despite it being better for the enviroment/being more efficient/increasing performance. I don't know if it got shot down or changed, I think it did, but it's just crazy nonsense like that that makes it harder for companies to bring their cars here.