Updated CAFE Standards

[cab2g]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

Adjusted for inflation, gas was the cheapest it has ever been just 12 years ago.

You're using the same logic that 10 years ago says the average house would cost over $500,000 by today. Don't you recognize a speculative investment bubble when you see one?

The Malthusians have been wrong for all of human history. What makes you think that will change now?

well there was a bubble in 07/08. But with that being said the supply isn't increasing as much as demand internationally. And wait until we get out of this global recession. Think gas prices are high now, well I guarantee that average income will increase at a disproportionately low amount compared to gasoline costs.

[lcrngrs]

Originally Posted by Soloshawn

With the new Government standards starting in 2017 will this kill the supposed new 6th Gen Camaro? At 54 mpg even with some really high mpg cars to balance out the lower mpg cars the end of the big V8 is very near. I will be keeping my 5th Gen car forever now. Chevrolet would keep the Corvette as it's low mpg car for performance and drop the Camaro.

How about this for a concept! Lower the price of gas and stop worrying about how many MPG's we get.

[fielderLS3]

Originally Posted by cab2g

well there was a bubble in 07/08. But with that being said the supply isn't increasing as much as demand internationally. And wait until we get out of this global recession. Think gas prices are high now, well I guarantee that average income will increase at a disproportionately low amount compared to gasoline costs.

The globe really isn't in a recession right now, though. The US and parts of Europe are, but on the whole the world is doing rather well.

Try not to forget that much of the recent "demand" has been inflated by investors keeping oil in storage offshore. Yes, it is being bought up, but it is not being burned. Once the price hits a point where the investors deem it to have topped, or we hit market conditions that force them to sell (like an increase in interest rates making margin buying unprofitable), all that oil we think isn't there, which is making the markets appear to be tight will suddenly and "magically" reappear. Similar events have happened with other commodity bubbles, as wll as with the housing bubble. Oil fell from $147 to $33 in 6 months in 2008. There is no reason such a fall cannot happen again.

Longer term, shale oil, and obtaining oil through "fracking" as we are with natural gas (which, by the way has sinlge handedly caused nat gas to drop from $15 per MBTU a few years ago to around $4 today) will result in more supply 10-20 years down the road than anyone is anticipating. These unconventional production means are quite profitable at today's, and even at somewhat less than today's prices, and will be quickly coming on line in the coming decade. Natural gas will displace some of the oil demand, as will other alternatives to a lesser extent.

Long term, I don't think all the pessimism out there is warranted. People have been freaking out about running out of resources since history began. This is about the 6th or 7th time we were supposed to have "run out of oil." I just don't see a reason why millenium long norms in resource availability will suddenly change to a new chronic shortage paradigm now.

[The_Blur]

This is not the end of the Camaro. Let's take a look at how CAFE works.

CAFE takes the average fuel economy of a manufacturer with a weight on production. For example, if a manufacturer makes 3 cars with 20 mpg and 10 cars with 40 mpg, the fuel economy average for CAFE is approximately 35 mpg because there are so many more cars with 40 mpg than 20 mpg. That is very important to GM because GM's heritage of making high-performance vehicles and trucks.

There is also a loophole for certain special vehicles, which include hybrids and other fuel efficient vehicles that bump the average. By producing these vehicles, a company can surpass the standards even if the math doesn't work out.

GM has several high-tech, fuel efficient platforms that will give these aforementioned bonus credits in addition to raising the average with their numbers. Moreover, the high-performance vehicles we worry about losing are not produced in the same numbers as compacts, like the Cruze, that raise the average.

We are looking at a lot of changes in our future. Manufacturers will increasingly emphasize new technology to reach these targets, including direct injection, smaller engines, diesel, forced induction, aerodynamics, and lightweight materials. As a result, we can expect cars to get more expensive.

GM has a lot of things going its way. As a leader in fuel efficiency technology, GM has a head start when it comes to developing products that satisfy federal requirements. As a result, GM may not have to give up on performance. That being said, we may see lower horsepower numbers counterbalanced by lighter vehicles. We can't expect to see a new, high-horsepower motor every couple of years, but we can expect engines with potential. Think back to those detuned 350s that still had good power and could be more aggressively tuned to kick some behind at the track. The good news here is that GM is continuing to engineer great performance while maintaining federal standards.

With all the costs affecting GM, I'm sure GM will do everything it can to avoid fines. More R&D cost contributes to future engineering, while doing nothing could result in those same costs going to the government without any new technology as a result. Basically, GM has no choice but to continue investing heavily in advanced technology and make a few gambles that American buyers will purchase fuel efficient alternatives to what we drive today, including diesel cars and force-fed performance vehicles.

[Soloshawn]

As you all state that it is on the average of production cars built. So if you build a bunch of 70 mpg cars that leaves way for a smaller amount of cars that do 30 mpg. Rapidly increasing population in the world with other markets increasing in production such as China, India and 3rd world countries the demand for oil will increase past the production of drill, drill. There will be an end to the oil at one point. GM also has a world wide promotional face to put on and performance isn't there future face. Economy and preservation will be. The Camaro has always been the secondary child behind the Corvette. They will use the Corvette to show off new technology and performance. They don't need to have a poor secondary choice to show off. I will be paying $20 for gas in the future and be happy about it as people look at me with a sneer on their face as I gobble up the gas. I will look back and flip them off as I have one of the last big V 8's.

[Berean]

I have a novel idea.

Let manufactures build what people want to buy and get the government out of the picture.

[johndawg]

Originally Posted by Berean

I have a novel idea.

Let manufactures build what people want to buy and get the government out of the picture.

AMEN!

[speedster]

Originally Posted by Berean

I have a novel idea.

Let manufactures build what people want to buy and get the government out of the picture.

Absolutely.

[Juiced1]

Originally Posted by Apex Chase

CAFE stands for Corporate Average Fuel Economy. That doesn't mean ever car has to meet it, they just have to average out. With all the technology coming down the pipe it will be no problem.

+1

Also, I'd like to add that they test vehicles on a dyno under easier condititions then you would think. So usually the cars they test record higher numbers then the claimed highway numbers. So they aren't as far off as you would think.
The new 6th gen Camaro should be lighter and sporting the new direct injection gen V small block! I'm sure it will be pushing close to 30MPG of the showroom floor. I'd hate to see the muscle car die again but I think we have enough technology to fight it this time around!

[FL1CK]

This thread =

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by Berean

I have a novel idea.

Let manufactures build what people want to buy and get the government out of the picture.

I agree with you, but I can see 2 reasons why the US would like to force domestic manufacturers—don't kid yourself by thinking they are targeting anyone else—to build more efficient vehicles.

Reason 1—hippies like efficient cars. Without getting political, at least one major US political party supports this; therefore, it must be. Since we do not allow political discussion, I'm stopping here.

Reason 2—it forces American companies to invest in research and development that otherwise would not have happened without the original CAFE legislation. This is the reason that counts because it allows Detroit to keep making cars.

Let's explore for a moment a world without CAFE. In the 1980s, car quality improves instead of diminishing, but the engineering is no different than it was in the 1960s. American cars are really fast and stylish, and classic nameplates like the Chevelle and Roadrunner continue to make their way into garages. At the same time, vehicles built with half the cylinders and more than double the fuel economy begin hitting the shores by ship, and people love that they can go twice as far in a Honda than they could go in a Chevrolet. As a consequence, buyers motivated by the fuel economy numbers, not the performance, buy imports. A half-hearted attempt to make similar cars by GM, Ford, and Chrysler fails, but they have trucks and muscle cars, and that's all they think they need. As time progresses, domestic manufacturers have to move more upscale to justify the cost of their product lines when compared to cheaper, more efficient cars with similar build quality. Chevrolet goes back to its roots of being considered upscale. Cadillac goes way upscale. Pontiac builds performance cars, and the Aztek never comes into existence. This all sounds good, but let's talk sticker price for a moment. GM, with its more expensive labor and incredible build quality that includes premium materials, averages a price similar to that of an imported luxury car. Without a lower nameplate, GM simply can't produce the volume to compete with these economy brands. GM then decides to initiate the Saturn or Geo brand. Either way you name it, the quality doesn't fit GM, and pressure from above forces GM to make this brand compete more with imported Asian luxury than what it was designed to fight.

Let's take our fantasy future of muscle cars without CAFE to circa 1990. Around this time, GM—comprised of Chevrolet, Cadillac, Pontiac, GMC, Buick, Oldsmobile, Daewoo, Opel, Hummer, Vauxhall, Saturn or Geo, and other investments—is struggling under incredible financial stress. The UAW has strongly demanded job security in contracts after almost constant plant closures and flatlining wages. Since GM has limited production in most of its brands aside from Chevrolet, Saturn or Geo, and GMC, a strike would shut down the entire, not-so-big company. GM is also no longer the world's largest automaker and cannot afford to expand into overseas markets or even invest in R&D to compete with more efficient vehicles. Ultimately, the EV1 is built by Toyota instead of GM and called a Prius. It sells without worthwhile competition until the Leaf hits production. GM is forced to either sell individual brands or go into bankruptcy. It tries selling, but the deals are bad. GM goes into a bad bankruptcy. It never emerges.

Today, things are different. GM prides itself on being a global leader. I am not happy about the new CAFE laws. They suck; however, I recognize that a reluctant GM of the 1970s would not have made good competition with Asian rivals without said regulations. In a sense, I'm grateful that left wing politicians of the era had either the genius foresight or stubborn ideology to force automakers to modernize. It may have put down a great line of cars, but it ultimately made sure that American innovation stayed among the best by pushing that Yankee ingenuity.

Flame away.

[evan]

oh man this topic has been beat into the dirt like 3 times today already. lol

[LimaCharlie]

I've always believed the 5th gen will be the last V8 powered Camaro. I really think the big engine in the 6th gen will be a twin turbo V6.....with better gas mileage and similar or more horsepower than the LS3. A V8 will only be available in the Corvette and trucks. I fear this might be reality in all the V8 powered cars today, including the Mustang and Challenger. Enjoy these last years of V8 powered cars.....

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by AZCamaroFan

Exactly. People can say it's an average all they want, but that is a huge number. There aren't any cars today that are even getting that number on the highway, other than hybrid's.

A number of cars exceed it right now actually. CAFE is not the same as the fuel economy numbers you see on the window sticker from the EPA. Its actually similar to, if not the same procedure, as whats used to calculate the gas guzzler tax. Generally speaking, its about 20% higher than what we normally think of. So a car listed as getting 23 city/32 highway for example would probably have a CAFE score of about 32 mpg. If its a large sedan that can run on E85, it could easily be rated at 54 mpg, unless they've closed those loopholes (which I doubt)

That said, the real problem with this new standard isn't performance cars, they'll account for something like 5% of GMs sales. Their overall impact will be fairly small. A lot of performance cars aren't that much less efficient than V6 sedans, except for the big dogs like the CTS-V or ZR1 whose numbers barely register. The problem is trucks. Pickups account for something like 25% of GM sales volume, they're not going to be able to afford to have them too far below their CAFE target. Similar story at Ford & Chrysler.