Topic: Economy, what's left of
Group says steep CAFE hikes would come at great cost
The Center for Automotive Research (CAR) in Ann Arbor, MI, says the average increase in vehicle price automakers would need to charge for compliance with long-term corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) mandates that are now being considered by the U.S. government range from $3700 to more than $9000. The government is considering annual increases between MY2017 and 2025 of 3 to 6%, for a final-year CAFE standard of between 45 and 62 mpg. In most scenarios, the additional vehicle cost would be more than the amount of money consumers would save over a five-year period due to better fuel economy—even with gasoline retailing for $6/gal. CAR researchers predict that, rather than pay the much higher vehicle prices under any of the scenarios, many consumers will hold onto their vehicles longer. That would translate into fewer new-vehicle sales and fewer automotive jobs. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration this fall are expected to formally propose CAFE standards for MY2017 to 2025. CAFE standards already have been adopted to MY2016. (Source = SAE)
1.) Notice the word "MANDATE" Like Ive said before, the car companies are NOT the root problem, its the All Knowing, All Efficient GUBMINT who are MANDATING LOW FUEL MILEAGE VEHICLES TO KEEP OIL COMPANY PROFITS UP.
Economic management isnt all bad, but this? I dont know...
2.) Another 3-9K for 60 MPG? Possibly, but THEN realize:
a.) add on the percent-wise increase in fuel prices
b.) and realize they aint gonna get there with gasoline. Gasoline engines are 30% efficient on a good day because they are low compression and cannot be made high compression due to the chemical nature of gasoline. Diesel, alcohol and propane are kings in the high compression world, so well be using them. "E95" is my guess (there is no such thing as "E100" for chemical reasons)
FACT. Chevy produced a 1985 Chevette diesel that got 65 mpg highway when new, Ive ridden in it, its still getting 55 hwy. Tin can rattle trap on wheels, uncomfortable on long trips, but the interiors can be updated to take care of those problems.
3.) "CAFE" means average of all vehicles produced which means no more heavy trucks or pickup trucks- anywhere, or very small sales of them at a high price.
4.) The idea of "higher price in trade off for fewer jobs" is more or less a scam. Where else is a product engineered to DEATH over 100 years and still more is needed? EMS computers, FI computers, yes, but thats ALL thats needed, not this garbage they are loading into vehicles just to keep engineers busy and prices constantly going up.
Take the 85 Chevette up near 100mpg .. a heavier bottom end, more compression, fuel pre-heater and control computers - then modernize the interior and shape the exterior and there it is, 60-100 mpg on clean diesel, and "clean diesel" (meaning combustion through tailpipe emission) has been around for a while, it was tested on fire trucks so the environmental whackos have nothing to cry about as far as diesel fuel goes.
5.) B.S statement:
"In most scenarios, the additional vehicle cost would be more than the amount of money consumers would save over a five-year period due to better fuel economy—even with gasoline retailing for $6/gal. "
ANYONE fool enough to believe that some profit mongering company wont do anything possible to steal that savings? GAS AND DIESEL ARE $4 + NOW, hows using 1/3rd of the amount of fuel, and causing prices to rise by 3X (?) going to work out THAT way? Youll see $10-12 Ill bet.
6.) " That would translate into fewer new-vehicle sales and fewer automotive jobs."
Say WHAT? Fewer than what - NOW? Not likely. When Detroit stops making the GARBAGE they are turning out now, I bet sales will go UP. I refuse to buy their crap because I know whats inside it. Like the Chevy pickup in Iowa with a small snow blade on front, with the wheel hub busted out on the rear. TRASH.
