You must bake twice the bread...with half the flour...

[legion]

That is essentially what congress has told automakers.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070622/ap_on_go_co/congress_energy

They are required to increase gas mileage while at the same time using a less efficient fuel (ethanol).

[TimothyFarrar]

Just think about the new truck ads, "fuel efficient light truck, with awe-inspiring 100 hp motor!".

If they keep passing laws, soon the only new vehicles we are going to be able to buy are going to be 100 mpg scooters.

In fact scooters will probably help the environment even more because the population will actually start to decline do to blunt head trauma.

[Dottore]

This is just common sense. Europeans and Japanese automakers have long met these targets while US automakers have sat on their collective a__es and done nothing.

This kind of legislation is long overdue.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I can't stand government intervention but in this particular case, I believe the ends might justify the means.

[djmcmath]

It's almost as if the gov't didn't intervene at all, though. Look at the NHTSA loophole -- if they don't feel like it'll work, they can waive the requirement. And it's not like Congress asked them to change with any urgency -- they've got thirteen years!! to get their collective act together.

Worse, they're fighting this like it's the end of the world, instead of recognizing that people would probably be just as happy spending a lot of money on a tiny fuel efficient car. What would happen if Ford made a quality version of the Smart Car? ("They're so small, you can fit two in your garage -- great reason to get a second!") Why is it that GM's European operations have been selling smaller more fuel efficient cars for years, but the N.A. operation can't manage to cope with the reality of modern gas prices?

[TimothyFarrar]

Face it, it's not cool to own a shyty euro trash car that you have to leave the door open to fit into after eating a large meal.

If enough Americans wanted one then it would be produced by someone... oops.

The real tragedy here is that autos are so regulated that no new manufacturers could ever dream of getting into the business. So even if you have a small/medium volume nitche market for tiny 100 mpg euro cars (which could work if autos were not regulated), it will never happen, because you need a tremendous market to justify big auto to produce such a car.

And the justification of fixed mpg limits in the name of energy crisis is just dumb. There simply isn't an energy crisis, there is a population and stupidity crisis.

[the]

On purely the technical side (not the political stuff), it is amazing where we are today with cars. Anyone who was a car junky in the 80s remembers what it was like then.

Anything with over 200 hp was a supercar! The days of the internal combustion gasoline performance car looked like they were over, for sure, because of the increasing fuel mileage and emissions requirements.

No one in 1985 would have believed that 20 years later, economy cars would have 225 hp, and more than a dozen production cars would be for sale in the US with more than 500 hp. And that emissions would be as incredibly low as they are today.

[RallyJon]

Anything with over 200 hp was a supercar!

And anything over 3500 lbs was a luxo-barge. Maybe if "compact" "economy cars" weren't half again as big as they used to be, 200hp would still be a lot. And an efficient 200hp is a piece of cake today with a tiny engine, direct injection and a turbo.

It's not about forcing car companies to make midget Smart cars. Just roll back 10 years of porking up.

[yieldsign2]

Originally posted by RallyJon
And anything over 3500 lbs was a luxo-barge. Maybe if "compact" "economy cars" weren't half again as big as they used to be, 200hp would still be a lot. And an efficient 200hp is a piece of cake today with a tiny engine, direct injection and a turbo.

It's not about forcing car companies to make midget Smart cars. Just roll back 10 years of porking up.

Err... crash standards also weren't what they were. Most of the weight is in structure enhancements. Think about it. Smaller engines, while the car is heavier. All that weight isn't from window motors (which many 80's car's had).

[HardDrive]

Much to do about nothing.....

The auto industry typically writes their own legislation, and this is no exception.

[RallyJon]

The enhanced crash standards are one component, hardly the biggest, of increased weight. For example, Subaru added approx 220 lbs of structure (of which quite a bit was for increased overall size) between the 2500lb c. mid '90s Impreza and the incredibly safe, 5-star crash rated 3200lb current Impreza. Correcting for the size increase, maybe 100lb (4%) more weight due to denser, high strength steels, reinforced cage, etc.

I think it's a sum of many things, which have been allowed to grow unchecked because no one really cares.

[911boost]

I passed a smart car on I25 yesterday going home. No fing way in hell I am getting on the interstate in one of those deathraps. My harley looks safer than them.

Bill

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Nice to see the Democrats cleaning up the Conservative Corporate Socialist Agenda.

or maybe you think the Government should pay American car companies directly to make better cars?

What you fail to see Chris is that this legislation is a big kick in the ass to US Automakers to keep them competitive on the world stage. Or perhaps we, the taxpayers, should just bail them out in a few years for producing cars that suck and can't compete against EU and Japanese technology. That'll give you somethin' to whine about.

[legion]

1) No one has bothered to notice that it may be impossible to increase mileage while simultaneously increasing use of a less energy-dense fuel.

2) Shaun, it is not the responsibility of the government to give U.S. automakers "a big kick in the ass". It should merely keep the playing field as level as possible. They should be allowed to succeed or fail on their own.

[teenerted1]

lets see the US auto industry has sat on the same standards for 18yrs and has 13yrs to step up and make a better more efficient product? what's the down side again?

maybe a kick in the a$$ on MPG standards will get them to find a way to make better cars and stop closing plants in the US?

of course by then Chinese cars will be able to pass the crash tests and we will be buying all our cars from WALMART.

i wish my pcar still got the MPG they say it left the factory with 34yrs ago.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by legion
1) No one has bothered to notice that it may be impossible to increase mileage while simultaneously increasing use of a less energy-dense fuel.

2) Shaun, it is not the responsibility of the government to give U.S. automakers "a big kick in the ass". It should merely keep the playing field as level as possible. They should be allowed to succeed or fail on their own.

Should be allowed to succeed or fail? Chris, in your corporate socialist world, the government bails out failures, with your money.

[legion]

Shaun, you are projecting a bit too much. Any other of my opinions you'd like to tell me about?

Still, no one has addressed how it is possible to increase gas mileage while using a fuel that reduces gas mileage. It's like trying to bake more bread with less flour...

[teenerted1]

Originally posted by legion
1) No one has bothered to notice that it may be impossible to increase mileage while simultaneously increasing use of a less energy-dense fuel.

2) Shaun, it is not the responsibility of the government to give U.S. automakers "a big kick in the ass". It should merely keep the playing field as level as possible. They should be allowed to succeed or fail on their own.

1)how is this impossible? they made more efficient engines with gasoline as the fuel of choice...why cant they make more efficient motor that uses other fuels?

2)looks like the US automakers have got the failure thing down

[teenerted1]

Originally posted by legion


It's like trying to bake more bread with less flour...

who said bread has to use flour?

[TerryH]

As soon as our 25 mpg cars get 50 mpg, a gallon of gas will cost $8 a gallon. We'll use less fuel, but not less cash. We will never catch up with the oil monopolies err companies.

The minute they heard of congress mandating better fuel economy, they stopped expansion considerations. They need to keep supply short to keep costs up and keep our wallets empty.