SteVTEC

Here is a FACT, Mike. The MY 2025 standards are 60% more stringent than 2012's. How do you think that's going to happen. Not gonna be nearly as simple as slapping tiny little turbodiesel engines in Toyota Camrys along with some basic weight reduction, sorry!


This is meaningless. Car sales have rebounded because the ECONOMY CRASHED and people delayed new car purchases for several years. Why do you think the auto manufacturers had to be bailed out? And then the natural disasters in Japan. Car sales rebounding has absolutely positively nothing to do with what we're talking about here period. And again, the 2025 standards are 60% more stringent than today's. How long do you think those high-powered options are going to survive? There's examples right in Toyota's lineup of higher powered engine offerings being eliminated. It's just the beginning. Yes, TODAY is the golden age of cars, "Muscle Car Era II", but it's coming to an end very quickly with these new standards. You realize that, right?

I said plenty more than that in my posts.

Did you not see the one about it projected to be about $10,000 more expensive on a typical car to actually meet these standards? The $40k Chevy Volt is a great example, fully DOUBLE the cost of a Honda Accord. And the government is broke and can't afford to subsidize one to the tune of $7500 each for everybody. Do you think the hundreds of thousands of people buying relatively base Camrys and Accords every year for around $20k are going to slap down DOUBLE that for something like a Volt without flinching? I think not.

Nothing ironic, Mike. I said right in my posts that I appreciated the fact that the improved standards already rolled in have spurned automakers to offer newer tech with better power and efficiency, and yes I'm enjoying one of those vehicles. But they ARE more expensive, and things are just getting started.

If you're so convinced that this is a piece of cake and that none of this is going to happen, perhaps you could explain to me how exactly a Toyota Camry could be sold with a 60% improvement in mileage while also keeping costs in check? You think everybody is gonna spring for a hybrid or a Volt or EV car, all of which are significantly more expensive and will continue to be so? The government, with these standards, is basically dictating that anybody buying a new car will have to choose something like a Volt, and it's not gonna be anywhere close to $20k. The market will revolt, and these standards as implemented today will backfire. You don't think so?

How did the first muscle car era end? Those who fail to remember history are doomed to repeat it.

geko29

None of this is accurate, because it's based on a false premise. All these things you describe have happened in the ABSENCE of increasing standards. There are ZERO permanent changes in the fuel economy requirements between 1990 and MY2014 (there was a temporary 2mpg increase for MY2011 only). The current plan requires average fuel economy to DOUBLE in just over a decade. This is just a pipe dream, requiring that better than half of all cars sold for 2025 be significantly more economical than the current-generation Prius. Add that factor in, and watch your list go poof, just like it did 40 years ago. Sure we'll probably be doing ok again when 2050 rolls around, but I for one am going to be way too old to enjoy powerful cars again at that point.

The last time economy standards were raised, the goal looked to be challenging but possible. In fact, there were already one or two models on the market (small cars, granted), that met the requirements, and another one or two in the pipeline that came out a few months later. In this case, there are NONE. Even the much-vaunted Prius falls well short of this new bar. If the best we've come up with thus far doesn't even come close to the requirement, what are the chances that the average car 12 years from now can possibly be over it? Zilch, absent some insanely expensive overhauls--in particular, I'd like to see how the luxury flagships are going to hit their proposed level of 46mpg. I can't wait to read reviews of the 2025 Lexus LS190.

mmarshall

That's true to some extent, Mike, but look at what today's cars cost. You don't get a free lunch. Ram-rodding ever-increasing MPG/CAFE and safety-regs down the throats of automakers has indeed pumped up both base and sticker-prices, though, in some cases such as hybrids, tax-credits offset some of that. There are many examples I could site, but two classic ones are the new Kia Rio and Hyundai Accent, whose prices rose an average of $2000 just between the 2012 and 2013 models. While one does not necessarily have to spend a fortune of a new car (I spent 25K, for example, on my Verano and am generally happy with my purchase), the days of truly low-priced econoboxes, for low-income people, seem to be almost gone. Yes, the American-spec Nissan Versa in its base-trim level, can still be had for prices that undercut Kia and Hyundai, but it is so cheaply-built that few people, especially here in America, would really want one as a daily driver.

in a number of cases, they did.....part of which I just explained above.

bagwell

sucks that the 2013 Mustang Shelby GT500 only has 662hp since the MPG requirements LOL......buy your car now if you're so worried about future MPG requirements it and stop whining....

change sucks doesn't it? hahhaha

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

some vehicles available today would not be attractive options (or necessary) if the govt didn't meddle so much with energy and regulations.

disasters:
- blocking pipeline building
- blocking gulf and alaskan drilling
- requiring ethanol in gas

toyota should be thankful for such insane policies - they helped create the hybrid opportunity. thanks govt.

Blackraven

IMHO
Regulations are okay..............but only up to a certain extent.

Unfortunately, there are cases where some politicians enforce claims that go beyond rationality. Btw, I don't have any favoritism regarding a certain political spectrum (in fact I would prefer a constructive as well as equal or equitable balance between left and right sides of any political spectrum)..........however sometimes, the claims by some politicians are just outrageous.

I think some of those 'dems' want to follow Europe (like how the EU government is about to enforce Euro 6 emission requirements by 2014.........and my god, you bet that's not the end of ever increasing fuel economy and emission regulations).

IF in the future, cars like the S-class, 7 series and Lexus LS will ONLY come with 2.0 liter FOUR CYLINDER engines, then you can blame the politicians as well as the eco-terrorists like Greenpeace.

Also, the issue of lighter body versus safety regulations.

They want to force Fuel economy standards by drastically enforcing weight reduction.....which is good indeed. However, the timeline is too abrupt imo. Materials science and technology cannot keep up with nagging regulations atm.

Yet, the politicians also want to enforce safety regulations as well. IIHS implemented that new front crash test whatever.........which will force a lot of automakers to go back to the drawing board.

It's okay to ask but to implement both at exactly the same time within a rushed and strictly enforced timetable??? I think that's just retarded.

Do these politicians even understand the basic laws of physics and materials science............or do they only understand how to ask for votes?

P.S.
In fairness
I would admit though that electric cars would have a greater energy efficiency ratio compared to internal combustion engines (where most aren't even at 30% efficiency atm).

However, I'm still not open atm to the idea that internal combustion should be completed wiped out from the face of the earth (even in year 2050).

Just saying

mmarshall

Good point, Paul. Although alcohol burns cleanly, and using it undoubedly helps emissions and dependence on foreign-oil, it also has a much lower BTU energy-content than gasoline. All else equal, the more it is mixed with gasoline, the lower the mileage is. Mileage with E85, for instance (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline), in engines than can burn it, can be awful. That is also the case of course, with the many 100% alcohol-fueled cars in Brazil.

I've asked our local gas-stations in my neighborhood, several times, if they can order straight 100% gas instead of the E10 90/10 ethanol mix, but each time they've told me the same thing......the EPA forces it for our area (D.C. suburbs)....and station-owners can't do anything about it. I guess I'll just quit asking.

LexFather

Look at how cars have gotten more fuel efficient recently. To me it shows they just DID NOT want to do it. Again its not like anything has really changed outside of cars getting more efficient.

They might have to revise the goals b/c I do agree thats a tough mark!

Why did it crash? Oh yeah, no regulations..they don't want anything lol. Car sales are up, they tell us the economy is crap. Which one is it? People are buying efficient cars and still buying up SUVs and Trucks. So nothing has really changed. Buying habits change with gas prices which are up and holding. But there has been no mass exodus to only by 40 MPG highway econo-boxes.

I have no doubt in the ingenuity of engineers in the auto industry for more and more break-throughs. Glass is half full here Steve.

Projected. The Volt is not a fair comparison at all, its an electric car and one of the first. The Accord is a basic car that has been in development for decades.

Why are you quoting MSRP? People lease their 50-70k BMW for the same payment as a Camry/Accord buyer. The industry finds ways to make people AFFORD things.

Even without this new rule, car prices have skyrocketed. So they go up anyway.

I never said it was a piece of cake and am well aware how tough those goals are to meet. I just refuse to listen to "the party of no" who is once again telling people "NO".

FYI the muscle car ended b/c Nixon's policies were horrific from dropping the gold standard, to dropping the ball on drilling in Alaska to his MIddle Eastern policies. Until Nixon, oil was what 10 cents a barrel or some ridiculous price. They had no idea the gold they sat on until Nixon. You won't hear the party of "No" saying that though, we will hear how Jimmy Carter was the reason the 1960s and 1970s sucked

So again to me yeah its tough but it is influencing the industry to do better. They can, they will and consumers will win.

Cause in 2025 gas won't be the $3.50-$4 people complain about now

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

thanks mmarshall. and all that FOOD being used for ethanol in gas means higher food prices too.

LexBob2

My guess is that after all of the angst and teeth gnashing in the end the engineers will improve the fuel efficiency of cars in a wide variety of ways, the feds will compromise and we'll all be driving better vehicles than in the past just like we are today.

Just won't happen today or tomorrow.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

they are going to do all kinds of strange things to increase the mpg: cylinder shut down, CVT, tall final gear, 9234353 gear transmissions. Its going to be so gimmicky I doubt the real world mpg will be as advertised. This equipment isnt free either.

Funny how they want to put more ethanol in the engines....when it reduces mileage.

rogers2

Despite the fact that I drive a gas guzzler every other day. I truly feel the government should press on with the fuel economy standards. I think this move would really improve the car industries. If some of the car companies fall short I still will applaud them for making an effort.
I refuse to believe that the engineers can't do it. If the government doesn’t push them they're not going to improve. It still amazes me that a truck is the number one selling vehicle in the U.S.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

Thats BS. Engines continued to get better mpg and more power despite the last govt mandate being in the 1990s. Look at the engines now compared to what we had in the 1990s, total night and day difference. All without a govt mandate. The free market demanded better and more efficient cars. Totally naive to believe that the only way we can get better cars is from the govt. Look how much better phones and computers have gotten in the past 10 years. Any govt mandate there? Toyota invented the hybrid vehicle. Did govt mandate that a hybrid vehicle be created?

What does the govt know about building a car in their infinite wisdom? They cant even deliver a piece of mail profitably.

LexFather

What is this free market you speak of? The free market with lobbyists and where big business interests are first? The Free Market with taxes and Tarriffs in other countries on automobiles? Where is "Free" market? The free market with huge government contracts to automakers? The free market where the government has went in bed with auto-brands ALL OVER THE WORLD (its not just us bub)

Guess what before govt mandate there were no seatbelts. I think Tucker was going to put them standard first. Do you know they were FOUGHT to have them added, told they would add untold cost and complexity.

Oh and before we were born, the all evil "government" sent a man on the moon. Surely they can figure out a car if they really wanted to.

Not all government is bad. Without it there would be utter chaos.

If there was no government involvement in the auto industry we all would be driving this.



Let's get intellectual and not emotional. Jeez

LexFather

And lets just relate it to here. Imagine a forum with no rules, no regulations, no oversight. Surely some of you have been on forums like that, it is a hot mess. Contrarily some forums have too much government and are choked to death.

There is a fine balance that should be found.