death of the automotive V8?

[Flieger]

Originally Posted by Por_sha911

OK, maybe they will attempt to create a maximum allowed CAES (Corporate Average Engine Size) mandate?

BTW, has anyone thought about the added cost of maintenance when no one (and possibly even no indy shops) can work on their own cars due to the advanced technology. Then there's the cost of the high tech parts...

I don't think they will have maximum engine size (though in other countries they tax larger engines more). I think that the fuel economy regulations are more in keeping with the goal of reducing the usage of foreign oil (sorry if that is too parfy) and will accomplish the smaller engines as the automakers look to meet those regs. Plus, the special interest lobbiers will like it better, because they can still make a few supercars every year.

Cars are now becoming disposable appliances. The new ones are more efficient as an incentive to scrap the old and buy new. Sad in some ways. But the classics will hopefully live on a bit longer (all those old 911s out there maintained by their owners).

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by Por_sha911

OK, maybe they will attempt to create a maximum allowed CAES (Corporate Average Engine Size) mandate?

Don't laugh too soon.

They've been pushing that agenda in European countries and Japan for years by taxing displacement. Big engines = big taxes.

I could see it happening here

[Flieger]

Originally Posted by kaisen

Don't laugh too soon.

They've been pushing that agenda in European countries and Japan for years by taxing displacement. Big engines = big taxes.

I could see it happening here

I don't think GM will go for that. They like to use mega overdrives with their big V8s and would likely cite their good highway fuel economy with the Corvette even with the big engine.

[Por_sha911]

Originally Posted by Flieger

Cars are now becoming disposable appliances..

Unfortunately, you are correct. Replacing a car every few years is far worse for the ecology than a well maintained older vehicle even if it is less efficient. A new car is a huge package of wasted raw materials and energy to produce it.

[RWebb]

V-8s are not going away - CAFE is corporate average fuel economy - the more Volts they sell, the more V-8 Vettes they can sell.

Moreover, direct fuel injection and other technologies improve all aspects of engine performance, including efficiency.

And... improved materials science means lower friction bearings, so the displacement at which it makes sense to make a V-8 (and not a 6) goes down. Take a look at the bearings in an old Jag sometime - they are monstrous.

[javadog]

The demise of the V8 isn't the point here. It's the fact that, to meet these standards, all they'll be able to build is a bunch of little ****boxes. Appliances, with four wheels. They will be eliminating the fun from driving and relegating the automobile to simply getting people from point A to point B. Just as much fun as a city bus, or a bicycle.

I'm all for giving buyers a choice of what they buy and drive, so those weirdos that hate cars and hate driving can buy their efficient little ****boxes and those of us that enjoy driving can drive something a little more fun.

I do my part for energy consumption by not driving as often as I used to. When I do get out, I want the option of driving something interesting.

I don't tell the eco freaks they can't participate in the recreational activities they choose to enjoy. They should butt out of my life, too.

JR

[Flieger]

Hey, bicycles are fun.

[McLovin]

Glad you like them. There are those who wouldn't mind seeing those being our main form of transportation.

[javadog]

Originally Posted by Flieger

Hey, bicycles are fun.

Not where I live...

Still, everyone is free to make that their method of transport, if they wish.

JR

[Flieger]

San Luis Obispo is very bike friendly so I guess I see them as a good alternative.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by kaisen

Don't laugh too soon.

They've been pushing that agenda in European countries and Japan for years by taxing displacement. Big engines = big taxes.

I could see it happening here

Agreed. That, along with a lot of the other Euro style austerity, since that seems to be the the unchangeable path we are on.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by Flieger

San Luis Obispo is very bike friendly so I guess I see them as a good alternative.

Like in SLO, bikes are a good alternative to billions of people on this Earth.

Why should the US be any different?

[Flieger]

Originally Posted by McLovin

Like in SLO, bikes are a good alternative to billions of people on this Earth.

Why should the US be any different?

You think it is bad with bikes? Imagine if each one of those people was driving an SUV.

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by McLovin

Glad you like them. There are those who wouldn't mind seeing those being our main form of transportation.

I think they make excellent hood ornaments.

[Flieger]

There are quite a few Nissan Leaves out here, too...

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by Flieger

You think it is bad with bikes? Imagine if each one of those people was driving an SUV.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by javadog

The demise of the V8 isn't the point here. It's the fact that, to meet these standards, all they'll be able to build is a bunch of little ****boxes. Appliances, with four wheels. They will be eliminating the fun from driving and relegating the automobile to simply getting people from point A to point B. Just as much fun as a city bus, or a bicycle.

I'm all for giving buyers a choice of what they buy and drive, so those weirdos that hate cars and hate driving can buy their efficient little ****boxes and those of us that enjoy driving can drive something a little more fun.

I do my part for energy consumption by not driving as often as I used to. When I do get out, I want the option of driving something interesting.

I don't tell the eco freaks they can't participate in the recreational activities they choose to enjoy. They should butt out of my life, too.

JR

Ten years ago:

2003 Porsche 911 Turbo
0-60 mph in 4.1 secs
1/4 mile in 12.7 secs @ 114 mph
60-0 in 117 feet
EPA 13 mpg city / 21 mpg highway / 16 mpg combined

Today:

2013 Tesla S sedan
0-60 mph in 3.9 secs
1/4 mile in 12.5 secs @ 111 mph
60-0 in 105 feet
EPA 88 mpge city / 90 mpge highway / 89 mpge combined

Ya think the Tesla, which currently meets proposed 2025 CAFE regulations, is "just as much fun as the city bus"??

Zero to sixty in 3.9 seconds, 1/4 mile in 12.5 seconds, and 100 eMPG.....

World Exclusive! 2012 Tesla Model S Test and Range Verification - Motor Trend

[Neilk]

Originally Posted by kaisen

Ten years ago:

2003 Porsche 911 Turbo
0-60 mph in 4.1 secs
1/4 mile in 12.7 secs @ 114 mph
60-0 in 117 feet
EPA 13 mpg city / 21 mpg highway / 16 mpg combined

Today:

2013 Tesla S sedan
0-60 mph in 3.9 secs
1/4 mile in 12.5 secs @ 111 mph
60-0 in 105 feet
EPA 88 mpge city / 90 mpge highway / 89 mpge combined

Ya think the Tesla, which currently meets proposed 2025 CAFE regulations, is "just as much fun as the city bus"??

Zero to sixty in 3.9 seconds, 1/4 mile in 12.5 seconds, and 100 eMPG.....

World Exclusive! 2012 Tesla Model S Test and Range Verification - Motor Trend

+ 1

In another 10 years, the Tesla equivalent will hopefully get 400-500 miles per charge too. A long time ago, people were mourning the end of muscle cars, today we have 4 door sedans that will blow away any car from that era and get 3x the mileage on the highway.

I don't think there is anything to cry about here. I heard that cars are responsible for something like 50% of the oil consumed in the US. Can you imagine the affect that would have if we could reduce our use and subsequent imports by 30+ percent?

[Por_sha911]

Originally Posted by RWebb

V-8s are not going away - CAFE is corporate average fuel economy - the more Volts they sell, the more V-8 Vettes they can sell.

How many people willing to buy a Volt for 40k will it take to bring the CAFE of the Vettes and V8 pickups to the 54.5 average? Not enough. The American public isn't buying EV's now so it has to be forced on them.

[Por_sha911]

Originally Posted by kaisen

Ten years ago:

2003 Porsche 911 Turbo
0-60 mph in 4.1 secs
1/4 mile in 12.7 secs @ 114 mph
60-0 in 117 feet
EPA 13 mpg city / 21 mpg highway / 16 mpg combined

Today:

2013 Tesla S sedan
0-60 mph in 3.9 secs
1/4 mile in 12.5 secs @ 111 mph
60-0 in 105 feet
EPA 88 mpge city / 90 mpge highway / 89 mpge combined

Ya think the Tesla, which currently meets proposed 2025 CAFE regulations, is "just as much fun as the city bus"??

Zero to sixty in 3.9 seconds, 1/4 mile in 12.5 seconds, and 100 eMPG.....

World Exclusive! 2012 Tesla Model S Test and Range Verification - Motor Trend

$105,400 for car that can go a maximum of 265 miles. I'm not impressed.
BTW, my 1987 911 gets 27 mpg highway (at a little more than the posted 70 mph) and holds 22 gallons. That equals 540 miles with two gallons to go.

I wonder what the folks in Louisiana with an EV are going to do when they won't have power for a few weeks?