FrankReynoldsCPA

Common-rail technology, low-sulfur fuel, EGR, and DPF technology also cause harm to the engines themselves. Follow any current HD truck forum and you'll see this. The DPF absolutely killed MPG on the 07+ trucks. It's finally improving a bit due to the reliance on SCR(urea) based technology over EGR, but that hasn't completely eliminated the issues caused by dumping hot, dirty exhaust fumes back into the engine instead of clean fresh air from the atmosphere. Increased carbon, wear, risk of overheating etc. Because of the EGR, there was an increase in particulate matter, so the EPA required the DPF to patch that hole in the dyke. In addition to costing MPG and power, that filter plugs up regularly and has to be cleaned by a process called regeneration. That's when the computer dumps fuel into some of the cylinders during the exhaust stroke in order to burn the soot in the filter and turn it to ash. This raises temps, wastes fuel, and because there is no compression in the cylinder, it lets fuel get past the rings and into the oil. This causes wear on the cylinder walls and causes premature wear and failure in the rotating assembly.

Low-sulfur fuels have almost ZERO lubricating properties compared to the original fuels used. It's caused issues on older trucks that were designed to run on regular old diesel fuel. Pump wear, leaky hoses, etc. But even the newer trucks designed to run on it are having issues(partly due to Bosch's incompetence). I'm sure truck owners stuck with a $10,000 HPFP replacement can at least take solace in the fact that their clean fuels are saving mother earth.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

more links needed, huh?

Former Electric-car Engineer: Electric Cars Pollute More Than Gas

lesscars.org - old site, but classic delusion


why bad environmentalism is such an easy sell


why buy green cars?
2014 greenest cars
hint - they're all small, ugly, slow, and/or boring.

paris bans half the cars on some days

next up - hope you don't like steaks and burgers...
Cow 'emissions' more damaging to planet than CO2 from cars

LexBob2

The sky is falling!!!

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

environmentalists would have us believe so, and the politicians that use their claims for power over us.

LexFather

Gengar, is this the appropriate way to resound? My position is clearly different than yours and I have stated why, no one is misquoting statements. Unfortunately some of you do not like it when some of us stand up for what we believe in and do it with facts and with supporting data. I have done so and anyone can walk outside to a car dealership and see for themselves the vast array of cars being sold.

The O,P nor anyone supporting his position has evidence pointing that cars are worse and dying. If you do not like forced induction that is a personal preference, the facts are the cars get more power and better MPG. If you don't like manuals dying out that is fine but don't blame enviornmentalists as the main cause for it

I posted a link showing TODAY we have MORE 500 HORSEPOWER CARS ever in HISTORY. So how can this mean that environmentalists have killed the car? There isn't a rebuttal for it at all. The crazy thing is those cars get better MPG than ever before. If anything Environmentalists should be pissed that we have more 500 hp cars in history.

Again if the same group of guys want to blame the, government, environmentalists, Jimmy Carter, Lincoln, Cher, low fat milk, Elton John etc that is one thing. To sit here and completely blame them for the death of the car is not only greatly exaggerated and fear mongering but simply incorrect.

Contrarily if we had it your way, with no regulation, cars wouldn't even have seat belts, they would be all OHV V-8s getting 150hp and 12 MPG . Not to mention people building cars would get paid 50 cents a day, working 18 hour days with no benefits starting at the age of 6. Teddy Roosevelt saw through this.

There is a reason sometimes why the government has to step in.

LexFather

I'm sorry but these do not support your position that environmentalists and politicians are killing the car. What they are showing is your bias towards those cars and those groups. There is no one or nothing that can say that cars today are not
1. Safer
2. More efficient
3. With more Power
4. With prices flat
5. With car companies making record profits
6. With emissions down

If you and others are that upset that the government stepped in to make cars better, that is really sad. The Government is not all bad, sometimes they do good. This is a good case of it.

Lets look at the 2006 Ford Explorer which you own.
2006 model makes around 290hp from a V-8 making about 16 MPG
2014 model makes around 365hp from a turbo V-6 making about 19 MPG

There is no doubt that the 2014 is larger, safer, faster with more tech for around the same price adjusted for inflation. If you are that upset there is no V-8 Explorer offered and you have to have a V-8 well they still sell the V-8 only Expedition.

So how on earth did environmentalists kill here?

Someone just bumped the Civic Type R thread...see what Autoblog says

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

you're really great at stating 'no one can say' when in fact, no one did.

wrong premise - you believe the environmental and other regulations have made vehicles better, but what they've done is REQUIRE them to be more efficient. competition did all the rest of it, not government. and despite all the market-meddling, MARKET COMPETITION, not government will bring about ongoing improvements. to make the point clearer to you, was it government that made toyota and honda successful in the u.s. in the first place? if you say yes, well, don't really know what to say. what made them successful initially was they had more efficient small vehicles during the 70s oil crisis. it wasn't quality initially, but quickly they showed they were making more reliable vehicles with simple option packages and it all took off. had NOTHING to do with government.

again you dismiss all those links and others which make it clear that passionate environmentalists believe cars are EVIL, and they are lobbying politicians to pass legislation that restrict the use and type of vehicles, and drastically tax any viewed as more undesirable than others.

YOU just got a V8 LS sedan. would you have preferred it had a turbo v6? don't think so. what if lexus ends up dropping the v8 because of pressure, cost, regulations, etc. they probably won't because unlike mb/bmw, they can leverage the sales of their other huge mothership brand's CAFE ratings.

agree on the first, vehemently disagree on the latter.

fortunately, car companies, dealers, etc. have lobbyists too, and deep pockets to counteract a lot of the goals of radical environmentalists.

and i'm sure environmentalists wouldn't approve of the fleet of vehicles in your sig.

LexFather

I'm sorry but cars are not ruined, no one has ruined them. Cars are vastly better today. If you are that mad that the government helped improve cars, I'm sorry.

Not sure how on earth you could even bring up the LS comparison when I stated long ago how the current S-class, S8, 7 series offer V-8s that are more powerful and more fuel efficient. I've already hinted that the next generation of Lexus V-6s and V-8s will have forced induction. You completely ignore this to make a hypothetical statement up that simply is not reality.

At this point it is time to agree to disagree. Consumers and myself will sadly have to deal with all these ruined cars.

lol

gengar

You have already twice misquoted me in this thread, and you continue to do so in your latest post. Misquoting and misrepresenting others is a cheap way of avoiding meaningful discussion - it's too bad you feel the need to do so to try to make a point.

DaveGS4

iTrader: (2)

OK guys, think both sides have had enough to say on this topic and don't seem to be finding any middle ground.