New US Emissions ...rollbacks might not matter.

Status
Not open for further replies.

wemay

Site Donor 2023
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
17,252
Location
Everglades
*Not a political post. Strictly looking at this from a consumer demand point of view.

https://carbuzz.com/news/new-us-emission...ng-fuel-economy

Originally Posted By: Carbuzz
..."Manufacturers aren't saying 'We're going to stop all our r&d.' That's a fallacy," said Rebecca Lindland, the executive analyst at Kelley Blue Book. "Twenty percent of Generation Z says it is interested in an environmentally friendly vehicle. Demand is coming, so that's why manufacturers will continue to develop these types of vehicles."


How is this so when trucks and SUVs lead in sales??
 
90% of consumer demand does not support vehicles that get 47mpg. Even in my own family I cannot garner support to drive anything efficient. Trucks, suv's, cuv's are today's vehicles, as evidenced by consumer demand.
 
Last edited:
Well Calif. will probably continue to require more efficient vehicles that are cleaner. Manufacturers would prefer not to have two versions of cars sold in the USA. I suspect the car companies will continue to do research into more efficient and cleaner vehicles. The actions of any president are short term compared to the business cycle.
 
I've mentioned before for the gas engine in non hybrid form to continue, you gotta accept the Skunkworks engines the auto makers are working on. There will be a day when some will remember the good ole 2.7 gas 4 in the Chevy Silverado.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
How is this so when trucks and SUVs lead in sales??


And don't forget high performance cars. I have a hard time wrapping my head around this as well. The whole thing becomes hypocritical. It seems everyone talks out of both sides of their mouth on this subject. People carry on about how we need to, "protect our environment". But at the same time they want their Supercharged 700 H.P. Demon HEMI Challenger's, ZR-1 Corvettes, and the like. And let's not forget the twin turbo, high output pickups, big displacement high torque diesels, and the big RV motor coaches that are lucky to get 8 MPG on the highway pulling a vehicle behind them. And furthermore, who say's these high powered, high performance vehicles are damaging the environment in the first place?

It becomes an impossible task for automakers to meet these silly "fleet averages". And it really serves no purpose when they do. They can't control what people want. If they want more HEMI's than they do Priuses, then that's what the people will buy. There is a big difference between what a manufacturers fleet average is rolling off the assembly line, against what the actual sales mileage is for all the vehicles sold for that year. And something as stupid as a, "Gas Guzzler Tax", isn't going to make up the difference.

Americans like big trucks and SUV's. And they like them with big engines, high horsepower and towing capacity. So that's what they're going to buy. And even those run very clean, and don't get too bad of fuel economy these days. So when you have a Presidential administration that puts these ridiculous mileage demands on the automakers, it hurts everyone. People still want what they want. Not what some liberal government administration tells them they should be driving. Or what the manufacturers should be making and selling.

In short, this is yet another area of business and economics the government needs to get out of.... And STAY out of. Let the free market dictate and rule. Not governmental greenies. They've got about as much business dictating which cars we should buy, as what guns we should be able to own.
 
It shows the power of the market. If there is perceived demand for something, industry will try to provide it.

Government regulation doesn't create demand, consumers create demand.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
Originally Posted By: Carbuzz
..."Manufacturers aren't saying 'We're going to stop all our r&d.' That's a fallacy," said Rebecca Lindland, the executive analyst at Kelley Blue Book. "Twenty percent of Generation Z says it is interested in an environmentally friendly vehicle. Demand is coming, so that's why manufacturers will continue to develop these types of vehicles."


How is this so when trucks and SUVs lead in sales??

Majority of Generation Z isn't yet old enough / doesn't have money to buy new vehicles. They are just starting to get into the workforce. It'll take some years before Gen Z makes a big impact on new vehicle sales.

Right now I'm guessing it's Gen X and Baby Boomers that buy the most, and they like trucks and SUVs, I guess.
smile.gif
 
"A government cannot regulate its population into prosperity." -Me

People want to by bigger and less economical vehicles. I wish politicians would stop trying to artificially manipulate the free market.

Also, perhaps small engines like those found on lawn mowers, leaf blowers, and chain saws could be made to pollute less... They have a long way to go to catch up to modern automobile engines.
 
Originally Posted By: dblshock
much predicated on fuel prices.


This seems to be a huge factor. I think "emissions" are down across the board even for larger SUVs and half tons. But Fuel economy is still relatively low (much better than previous years for sure). BUT with relatively low fuel prices in the US, most people think "why not drive a tank?". When our gas prices double just guess what type of vehicle people will swarm towards.
 
Originally Posted By: Carbuzz
... "Twenty percent of Generation Z says it is interested in an environmentally friendly vehicle.

Not all environmental friendliness concerns the tailpipe and fuel consumed. Some of it is how expensive it is to manufacture such a car, and the costs of repairing it. It's not very environmentally friendly to take a car in for repair, nor environmentally friendly to earn the money for repairs.

And on another point, though Generation Z may say they're interested in environmentally friendly vehicles, we'll have to wait and see what their hearts tell them when they are ready to buy new vehicles. It wouldn't be the first time a group of people said one thing then did another. There hasn't been a generation yet that wasn't interested in owning cool cars.
 
I'm not sure how this will end but this issue (like this thread) is all political anyways.

Will people pay for it? They will when the fuel cost (politics) and government incentive / mandates support it (politics).

Manufacturers will be stupid to assume roll back will be forever, because politics is never forever. They'll still have to R&D just in case, anyways.

The biggest demand driver to Prius originally weren't California mandate, but the car pool lane stickers, and the cab drivers.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Donald
Well Calif. will probably continue to require more efficient vehicles that are cleaner. Manufacturers would prefer not to have two versions of cars sold in the USA. I suspect the car companies will continue to do research into more efficient and cleaner vehicles. The actions of any president are short term compared to the business cycle.


I think that's a great idea and companies should grow a pair and tell them to bad we're not making those anymore.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
*Not a political post. Strictly looking at this from a consumer demand point of view......How is this so when trucks and SUVs lead in sales??
From the manufacturers POV, they have to meet CAFE, EPA, NHTSA & other govn't rules and standards even to sell a vehicle period.

They also constantly emphasize SAFETY, greeness, eco-responsiblity, recycled materials, and features to make up for any shortcomings you may have as a driver.

From the buyers POV however, many are obese, overweight and fat. Even their families...and dogs. Blunt but true. Fat people desire more room both for themselves and their big stuff. They don't want to feel confined or 'stuffed' inside. They need big, wide doors that open WIDE to ease access. They don't like to bend over either; to get in, get out, load or unload their stuff.

It's rather amazing just how big some of these vehicles are compared to the sled. Some tires are the height of my hood! They have huge mirrors, trim pieces, corner headlight assemblies, etc. To access the roof racks the owners need a ladder. Even 'small' SUVs. The big ones are just land yachts.

Given this, many are the same interior size as the sled! While larger on the outside, not so much on the inside. Particularly behind the back seats. It's an odd optical illusion. Fender flares, big bumpers, mirrors, light clusters, large tires, big tailgate (that now needs electric opener due to its weight). All of this weighs a lot. Propelling this amount of mass down the highway at 75 mph takes considerable force to overcome the aero-drag. It takes big brakes to stop it. Big suspension to support it. Big gas tank to keep it going.

IOW, it all has to be overweight to support it.

On the politics side, the govn't wants higher MPG even to the point of imposing a 'gas-guzzler' tax if not met. They also want the public out of cars and into mass transit. More 'greeness'. More safety features. Competition is fierce making a product to satisfy all. Meanwhile, consumers resist being scolded out of their cars and lifestyles particularly in this age of 'you can have it all!'.

Gen "Z" may see this as all waste, unaffordable, 'bloat', not even interested in getting a drivers license much less owning a car, even an 'eco-car'. "I don't need to own a car, just a credit card. I'll just Uber/Lyft instead. Works for me!" No doubt such thinking sends panic into the car industry and all the businesses that support it.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: wemay
How is this so when trucks and SUVs lead in sales??

Americans like big trucks and SUV's. And they like them with big engines, high horsepower and towing capacity. So that's what they're going to buy. And even those run very clean, and don't get too bad of fuel economy these days.


That is what the gas guzzler tax is for, not what the fuel economy rules are for.
 
I think we should follow Germany. A cultured and well developed society of intellectuals. A few years older than the States. Especially their engineering!
 
Originally Posted By: Onetor
I think we should follow Germany. A cultured and well developed society of intellectuals. A few years older than the States. Especially their engineering!


And burn obscene amounts of coal? I'm not sure that's a model one wishes to follow
21.gif


France on the other hand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top