Poor Hybrid sales threaten 2025 CAFE targets

[Danno]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: Danno
I am surprised at how low my 2.4L 2013 Sonata can go in the rev range before calling for a downshift.

Top gear lock up, 1,300 rpm at 45 mph is pretty common cruise mode.


Do you find that to be objectionable?


Not objectionable, more like me changing my habits or preconceptions on how an engine should sound or feel.

 

[hattaresguy]

Originally Posted By: splinter
EPA-420-F-12-068
Quote:
The IRS collects the tax directly from the manufacturer or importer of the vehicles. The following table shows the gas guzzler tax rates which have been in effect since January 1, 1991.
The manufacturer or importer must pay this amount for each vehicle that doesn’t meet the minimum fuel economy level of 22.5 mpg.

CAFE is merely another clever method of revenue enhancement.

Except the consumer, of course, ultimately pays the Gas Guzzler tax and more to state and federal coffers with each mile traveled.

www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/guzzler


Really is the gas guzzler tax really hurting Ferrari sales?

I can honestly say I have never heard anyone saying [censored], wish I could afford the Lamborghini Aventador LP700-4 but that darn gas guzzler tax is so high its holding me back.

The biggest problem with that tax is it whacks low volume, and low mileage high end cars. As bad as a Lambo is driving around at 6mpg it only probably drives 1k miles a year. Compared to the average half ton at 15 that seems to drive 30k a year.

They should whack every 1/2 ton pickup and full size SUV with it, those are the vehicles that really burn fuel.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
They should whack every 1/2 ton pickup and full size SUV with it, those are the vehicles that really burn fuel.


I guess I struggle with why they should be whacking anybody at all.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
They should whack every 1/2 ton pickup and full size SUV with it, those are the vehicles that really burn fuel.


I guess I struggle with why they should be whacking anybody at all.


Wow. It's amazing how one small sentence can signify so much.

 

[spasm3]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
They should whack every 1/2 ton pickup and full size SUV with it, those are the vehicles that really burn fuel.


I guess I struggle with why they should be whacking anybody at all.


The tax should be done away with and let the market bear what sells and not sells.

In fact i could make a case to tax the heck out of the hybrids and small fuel efficient cars as they pay less road tax and incur more injury costs in accidents.
i won't because i don't believe in a tax for either.

 

[Kiwi_ME]

My VW 1.2 4-cyl with turbo is far from peaky with an electronically-flat torque curve from 1400 to 4000 rpm. Under light throttle the 7-speed DSG will silently hit 4th by the time I've crossed the intersection, and without exceeding 2000 rpm.

Originally Posted By: kschachn
I guess I struggle with why they should be whacking anybody at all.

No doubt a majority of people wonder the same thing. But if everyone understood and accepted the long-term reasons there would no need to bias the economics. But I have no doubt things will start to become more clear in the next five years.
You are still well off ... I have to deal with gas at $8.50/gal.

 

[spasm3]

understood and accepted[/S] got sucked into believing the long-term reasons there would no need to bias the economics. But I have no doubt things will start to become more clear in the next five years.
You are still well off ... I have to deal with gas at $8.50/gal.

fixed that for you

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: Kiwi_ME
No doubt a majority of people wonder the same thing. But if everyone understood and accepted the long-term reasons there would no need to bias the economics. But I have no doubt things will start to become more clear in the next five years.
You are still well off ... I have to deal with gas at $8.50/gal.


To be honest that's your problem, not mine. We have no shortage of oil here in NA, the reasons for this tax are purely social engineering by our government.

 

[Jetronic]

Originally Posted By: Danno
I am surprised at how low my 2.4L 2013 Sonata can go in the rev range before calling for a downshift.

Top gear lock up, 1,300 rpm at 45 mph is pretty common cruise mode.


My 2.0 Alfa can go as low as 1050 RPM before downshifting, and will go up slight inclines aswell at those rpms... but 1050 rpm in 6th is only about 35 Mph (38 indicated)

 

[Jetronic]

Originally Posted By: spasm3
The tax should be done away with and let the market bear what sells and not sells.

In fact i could make a case to tax the heck out of the hybrids and small fuel efficient cars as they pay less road tax and incur more injury costs in accidents.
i won't because i don't believe in a tax for either.

The tax should be in the fuel, that way you promote proper usage of hybrids and ecological driving.

 

[Kiwi_ME]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
To be honest that's your problem, not mine. We have no shortage of oil here in NA, the reasons for this tax are purely social engineering by our government.

Well, to be fair, I had clearly indicated that it was my problem. The price here has nothing to do with "a shortage," there is none and the rest is simply Economics 101, the market price + taxes for this remote location. As for social engineering, governments have no need for that, they simply enact laws. What you are thinking of is what Fox News does.

Originally Posted By: spasm3
fixed that for you
No need to, your views are understandable and many people in this country think the same. Like I said, give it 5 years. Not to derail OP's thread with further details, but the same tools that you used to reach this site can be used to learn the science. NASA is a good start, you remember them.

 

[DoubleWasp]

For those who can actually manage with a tiny car with low horsepower, hybrids are a good option.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Many hybrids are neither tiny nor low-horsepower...but you knew that!

 

[DoubleWasp]

The ones that actually turn in significant fuel economy gains compared to a standard gas model are.

Until there's one that will tow a 33' Maxim cruiser, I'll pass.

 

[justalubetech]

I'd rather just have a 3-cylinder Geo Metro, nice simple vehicles. Easy 50+mpg and enough power to cruise down the freeway at 75+mph. I still regret trading it. As good as if not better fuel mileage than a lot of hybrids, without all of the expensive unnecessary technology.

If it doesn't have TV screens, 20 speakers,wifi and bluetooth, cameras, etc etc, americans don't want to look at it these days though.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
At four bucks a gallon, it would look like a very wise purchase to have made in 2015.


Most people care far more about comfort and convenience than fuel economy, which is why the US government has to force them to buy economy cars that they don't want. This is how the whole SUV fad began, after all, as they didn't have to meet the same fuel economy numbers as cars.

At $8 a gallon, I'd be paying about the same as I did for my last car in the UK. And if oil hits $200 a barrel, the global economy will be screwed, and we'll have much more to worry about than how much a tank of gas costs.

 

[VNTS]

Toyota announced they are dicontinuing the Prius with the plug in due to low sales and market rejection

 

[lovcom]

Originally Posted By: Vuflanovsky
I don't know about anybody else but I'm paying prices for regular unleaded that are currently hovering between $3.80 and $3.85 per gallon. There's no cheap gas here and it's more expensive than that in some of the metro downtown areas. If I'm doing a 45-50 mile commute each way ( not uncommon here ) a hybrid can be a significant savings considering not only the highway mileage but the amount of stop and go where the high equivalent e-mileage really shines.

A Prius C gets in the neighborhood of 50 mpg combined in the EPA cycle. By comparison, my car will get 38-40 mpg on the highway but city driving/stop & go will take away about 10-12 mpg from that figure. A delta of as much as 20 mpg over approximately 100 miles a day versus my already efficient commuter module is significant. Wouldn't want one myself but it's a misnomer to say that there's not much of a cost savings without comparing such things as what you're using now, type of usage, and factoring in if your gas price is typically as much as .40 to .50/gallon above the national average.





Even at today's gas prices, a Prius C is massively less expensive to gas up than a conventional car of the same size.

My Prius gets 65 MPG around the city most days. If a conventional 2015 late model car was following me around the city, it would not even come close to 36 MPG.

It easily gets 50 mpg on the freeway if the speed is 65 or less.

Even at $2/gallon, a C will provide significant savings in gas costs.

By the way, we have 2 2014 C's, one tier One and the other tier Two models. The One we paid $17,800 and the two we paid $18,400.

 

[Jarlaxle]

If saving money is the objective...the Prius fails. Offhand, I have seen Mirages (37/44MPG) advertised for $11K. $5800 buys LOTS of gas.

 

[Cujet]

I drive an S2000 convertible. It's responsive, fun and simple. I can't imagine what would happen to the price of this type of car when it has to meet absurd MPG requirements. Either by the application of a hybwid drivetrain, or by limiting production numbers to keep it from skewing the CAFE target.

In fact, I'd rather see the car as a pure electric than a hybwid.