34mpg fleet average by 2016?

[Nick R]

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/01/autos/cafe_standards_final/index.htm?hpt=T2

Are they kidding? 30mpg for trucks? I don't see this in any single way being acheivable. And 39mpg for cars? Good god, what are they trying to do, bankrupt the automakers AGAIN?

 

[expat]

About time and Do-able!

 

[AuthorEditor]

They could achieve this today if they wanted to. Lots of cars that get 40+ mpg, and some trucks that get close to 30 mpg. Sure, we'll need lighter vehicles and more efficient engines, but it is doable. I drove a diesel Rabbit back in the '80s that got 55 mpg on the highway, and there was a small pick up version. I actually miss those mini pickups that Toyota, Datsun, VW, and Mazda made. To me they were a lot more practical every day vehicles than a lot of the monster rigs people drive instead of cars. Of course some need big trucks with power, but again diesels are the way to go there too.

 

[DeeAgeaux]

The average American losing 20% of their body weight is "doable" too.

There was a reason the Founders passed the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Nick R]

Ok, so how are they going to get the Expedition, the F-150, the Silverado, the Tundra, RAM, and other large trucks/SUVs to get anywhere NEAR 30mpg, they can barely top twenty. Unless everything goes diesel..... It will be pretty difficult, if indeed possible at all.

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: DeeAgeaux
The average American losing 20% of their body weight is "doable" too.

There was a reason the Founders passed the 2nd Amendment.


Huh....The FF did not want Americans to live long, healthy lives??

 

[Kaboomba]

heh heh--smaller "payloads" use less fuel

GM might end up only selling to skinny people

 

[CharlieJ]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Ok, so how are they going to get the Expedition, the F-150, the Silverado, the Tundra, RAM, and other large trucks/SUVs to get anywhere NEAR 30mpg, they can barely top twenty. Unless everything goes diesel..... It will be pretty difficult, if indeed possible at all.


I think by 2016 people will be asking, "What's a Ford Expedition? F-What 50? Silverwhat-o? What's a Dodge?"

 

[m37charlie]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Unless everything goes diesel..... It will be pretty difficult, if indeed possible at all.


Everything SHOULD go diesel.
New passenger car sales in Europe are >55% diesel. Gasoline 4X4s are virtually unheard of and gasoline trucks aren't even offered.
But we need a range of diesels for light trucks: not just 400hp monsters but 4 and small 6cyl versions with 150-250 hp.
It's been estimated that a switch in the US vehicle fleet to European levels of dieselization could save 2 million bbl. oil/day = $60billion/year. Not small potatoes.

Charlie

 

[EricF]

I dunno.. if you trim more weight, that'd help mileage, but what about strength? Colisions? Overall toughness? Take away the strength, take away the payload.

I think they really need to make an exception for some people, like construction companies, and the like.. they need big 4x4 trucks. a small tacoma p/u wouldn't stand a chance with the loads these big trucks have to carry. And Diesel's nice.. but it's not everywhere yet, but close to it.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: m37charlie
Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Unless everything goes diesel..... It will be pretty difficult, if indeed possible at all.


Everything SHOULD go diesel.
New passenger car sales in Europe are >55% diesel. Gasoline 4X4s are virtually unheard of and gasoline trucks aren't even offered.
But we need a range of diesels for light trucks: not just 400hp monsters but 4 and small 6cyl versions with 150-250 hp.
It's been estimated that a switch in the US vehicle fleet to European levels of dieselization could save 2 million bbl. oil/day = $60billion/year. Not small potatoes.

Charlie


I'm not saying we shouldn't go diesel, it would be a great idea. However automakers are very reluctant for several reasons. 1. Most people think of diesels as noisy, smelly, clattery, and sooty things. Second, emissions restrictions on diesels in the US are extraordinarily higher than in europe.

 

[Billy_D]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/01/autos/cafe_standards_final/index.htm?hpt=T2

Are they kidding? 30mpg for trucks? I don't see this in any single way being acheivable. And 39mpg for cars? Good god, what are they trying to do, bankrupt the automakers AGAIN?


It's a fleet average. Trucks don't have to achieve 30 mpg. For Cars sold in 2012 the EU went a step further. They want 52 mpg for a diesel-fueled car, and 47 mpg for a gasoline-fueled car.

 

[jsharp]

They'll do this the same way they've always done it. Sell the small vehicles at nearly a loss and make the $$ up on the larger ones.

For those that mentioned the diesel Rabbit -

I worked at a place that had one of the pickups. 55 mph WFO on a flat road with no load and no wind.

Worked at another place that had one of the cars. Slightly faster but just as much a pile. Forget about starting it below 30 degrees unless it was plugged in.

I doubt anyone will put up with cars like those any longer.

 

[John_K]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/01/autos/cafe_standards_final/index.htm?hpt=T2

Are they kidding? 30mpg for trucks? I don't see this in any single way being acheivable. And 39mpg for cars? Good god, what are they trying to do, bankrupt the automakers AGAIN?


My old Dakota gets 31 mpg on the highway, so it's doable.

John

 

[Nayov]

Consumers should be able to save enough in gas to make up for the extra cost. The EPA estimates that the new standards will save auto buyers about $3,000 over the ownership life of a new vehicle.

Did the OP miss this part, or maybe he's independently wealthy so it doesn't matter?

*Wonders to self how this is a bad thing*

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Nayov
Consumers should be able to save enough in gas to make up for the extra cost. The EPA estimates that the new standards will save auto buyers about $3,000 over the ownership life of a new vehicle.

Did the OP miss this part, or maybe he's independently wealthy so it doesn't matter?

*Wonders to self how this is a bad thing*



Hah, I'm not concerned about the cost of the car to the CONSUMER, I'm concerned about if a certain few auto companies can afford to acheive these numbers in 5 1/2 years.

 

[El_Schaf]

Originally Posted By: Nayov
Consumers should be able to save enough in gas to make up for the extra cost. The EPA estimates that the new standards will save auto buyers about $3,000 over the ownership life of a new vehicle.

Did the OP miss this part, or maybe he's independently wealthy so it doesn't matter?

*Wonders to self how this is a bad thing*



Per NPR all things considered this evening, which is generally not likely to contradict the left,(paraphrasing):

Although the Obama administration claims this will add $1,000 to the cost of a new vehicle, independent analysts predict closer to $5,000 (by 2016). (end paraphrasing)

We have to believe that it will increase the costs of cars and trucks more in companies that produce trucks (American 3, to a smaller degree Toyota) because they will have further to go, fleet-wise.

Additionally, there were (back when the automakers were bailed out initially) some analysts that had predicted that this would happen, and materially hurt Ford, as they (at the time) had by far the most popular truck in the f-150 and were not on the government doll ( again i heard this on a marketplace morning report)[DISCLAIMER- I'm not saying its a conspiracy, just reporting]. This sort of thing would have absolutely hurt big three automakers, however maybe not so much now after the bankruptcies? Ford may still be screwed.

 

[MNgopher]

The F150, Silverado, Ram, etc. don't need to meet 30 mpg - only the average does. SO these vehicles will be averaged in with the minivans, suv's, and crossovers that all count as "trucks" to hit the 30 mpg average.

I don't have a problem with ramping up mpg targets. Perhaps the timeframe involved, but considering we've sat on the standards for years, its time. Consider all the massive power increases we've seen over the past timeframe, as mileage standards were stagnant. Consider now some effort being put into mileage, rather than joe will accept a full size truck at 17 mpg, so lets hit that and up the power.

I'd love to see where the $3,000 dollar savings figure over a vehicle lifetime was derived. Factors such as gas costs and expected lifetime might be enlightening (or frightning!).

 

[Nyquist]

Also if this is based off of the best mileage for each vehicle in a fleet, I could see them putting a V-6 turbo diesel in some of those lighter 1/2-ton trucks. If that is done right, I could see nearly 30 mph on those.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: jsharp
They'll do this the same way they've always done it. Sell the small vehicles at nearly a loss and make the $$ up on the larger ones.

For those that mentioned the diesel Rabbit -

I worked at a place that had one of the pickups. 55 mph WFO on a flat road with no load and no wind.

Worked at another place that had one of the cars. Slightly faster but just as much a pile. Forget about starting it below 30 degrees unless it was plugged in.

I doubt anyone will put up with cars like those any longer.


And that's got how much relevence to a modern diesel engine ?

Auto chokes on gassers are known to play up from time to time too, causing difficult to no starting, and engine flooding...I doubt anyone would put up with that either.