Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(remember to multiply by four as they pay by the liter (about a quart))
Here's the Octane conversion before someone says the EU runs on a higher Octane.
87 octane in the USA = 92 octane in Europe
89 octane in the USA= 94 octane in Europe
92 octane in the USA = 97 octane in Europe
Now if we can get EU engines and fill up at US prices that would be great. But we all know how our government ( federal/State) works. They'd just raise the prices (just like EU) by adding taxes into it.
You misunderstood what I said. To rephrase what I said more clearly:
If the diesel model were available in the US and got the same fuel economy as the European model, the fuel costs per mile to run the diesel model in the US would be less than the fuel cost per mile to run the gasoline model, notwithstanding the fact that the pump price for diesel fuel in the US is higher than gasoline prices in the US.
Also, from what I've subsequently read, the "real world" highway fuel economy of the European model Fiat 500 diesel is around 60 mpg (American gallon), not 70 mpg. Still, 60 mpg is 50% better than the 40 mpg originally stated for the Fiat 500 gas engine in the US. I think the actual EPA rating for the Fiat 500 gas is not even 40 mpg, but 38 mpg highway.
If the diesel model were available in the US and got the same fuel economy as the European model, the fuel costs per mile to run the diesel model in the US would be less than the fuel cost per mile to run the gasoline model, notwithstanding the fact that the pump price for diesel fuel in the US is higher than gasoline prices in the US.
Actually understood. But knowing our gov't they would add taxes, as the europeans do, to make up for the short fall in income.
It would be great to have the diesels of Europe. But every city/state/fed has a budget or a break even point to where their revenues need to be to survive.Thus what we might save in gas cost will be lost in taxes. Look up the EV Hybrids, they are already looking into a yearly tax to make up for the tax shortfall it will cause. We may have less visits to the pump but they will be more expensive as time moves forward.
Actually understood. But knowing our gov't they would add taxes, as the europeans do, to make up for the short fall in income.
It would be great to have the diesels of Europe. But every city/state/fed has a budget or a break even point to where their revenues need to be to survive.Thus what we might save in gas cost will be lost in taxes. Look up the EV Hybrids, they are already looking into a yearly tax to make up for the tax shortfall it will cause. We may have less visits to the pump but they will be more expensive as time moves forward.
I agree with you about fuel taxes--they are going to head inevitably higher. The reason is quite simple: The costs to maintain roads--since most of them are built using oil-based asphalt--will increase in lockstep with oil prices. In fact, most road maintenance agencies--from local governments to the federal highway bureaucracy--can't even maintain the existing roads to a decent standard, much less build more of them and also maintain that new road mileage. So, we are likely to see both a massive physical deterioration in our road system, as well as much higher fuel (and other) taxes that support roads. All of that said, if taxes and oil depletion drive the price of fuel in the US to $6 or $8 per gallon, I would sure rather have the option of driving a vehicle that gets 60 miles per gallon vs. one that gets 20 mpg. That is why the EPA needs to be compelled to adopt the European diesel emission standard, so that a whole crop of very fuel-efficient vehicles (including a number built by American manufacturers) could be sold in this country. Congress and the President could give the EPA their marching orders to do that anytime that they choose--they should do it right now.
All of that said, if taxes and oil depletion drive the price of fuel in the US to $6 or $8 per gallon, I would sure rather have the option of driving a vehicle that gets 60 miles per gallon vs. one that gets 20 mpg.
We need to fix our gov't. Lobbyists need to be banned from Washington DC. Term limits for everybody. The Big 3 still control the type of cars we get no matter who manufactures them. American oil companies do not want us to have efficient automobiles. If we get rid of these maybe a high mile per gallon car will exist in the US. They are already in Canada & Mexico for normal use. But they get better specs than we do.
FWIW, in Europe they post Research Octane Number, here in the States at one time they posted both Motor and Research octane, but then the nanny state decided to dumb it down and required posting only the average. The relationship between MON and RON is not constant, depends on the gasoline in question. The numbers you posted, NeilVA, are good reasonable estimates, but without knowing the MON of various US blends, you can't say for sure.
I agree with you about fuel taxes--they are going to head inevitably higher. The reason is quite simple: The costs to maintain roads--since most of them are built using oil-based asphalt--will increase in lockstep with oil prices. In fact, most road maintenance agencies--from local governments to the federal highway bureaucracy--can't even maintain the existing roads to a decent standard, much less build more of them and also maintain that new road mileage. So, we are likely to see both a massive physical deterioration in our road system, as well as much higher fuel (and other) taxes that support roads. All of that said, if taxes and oil depletion drive the price of fuel in the US to $6 or $8 per gallon, I would sure rather have the option of driving a vehicle that gets 60 miles per gallon vs. one that gets 20 mpg. That is why the EPA needs to be compelled to adopt the European diesel emission standard, so that a whole crop of very fuel-efficient vehicles (including a number built by American manufacturers) could be sold in this country. Congress and the President could give the EPA their marching orders to do that anytime that they choose--they should do it right now.
A couple things you touch on... EVs won't pay road taxes. Could be a problem. Highly fuel efficient cars dont' pay as much in road taxes. Also a problem. How ARE we going to maintain roads with less dollars coming in as taxes?
Secondly, and to counter some of the "Detroit controls the fuel and cars we get" sentiment... BMW was instumental in getting US gasoline to be low sulfur in order to not damage the aluminum engines of the '90s. BMW is also instrumental in getting diesel fuel to be more like it is in Europe, in order to sell it's own line of performance diesel cars in the US (BMW only sells two diesel models, but they account for 35-37% of total sales in the US...).
Ford and GM both have efficient diesels available in their European car lines, and Ford is trying to consolidate more of it's worldwide engineering, so why they would be opposed to Euro diesels coming here, I don't know, as it woudl give them even more models to sell (and even more profitability). And with Chrysler now being at least part owned by Fiat, you'd think that there would be even more influence to get European diesels (like fiat's own 500 diesel) here in the US. Yeah, I'm not seeing the conspiracy by the manufacturers to keep us out of diesels.
I don't think it's a "conspiracy" by the manufacturers to keep diesels out of this country. The problem is that the EPA diesel emission standards are different enough from the European standards that the emission systems for diesel vehicles have to be almost completely re-designed, then certified to meet the EPA standard. That is a very expensive proposition that does not make sense for most manufacturers to do, especially for lower sales volume vehicles.
Volkswagen is the main manufacturer to sell diesel cars in the US, primarily because their sales of vehicles would probably be inadequate to maintain their presence in the US if they did NOT sell diesel vehicles here.
Chrysler, before it essentially went under and then was resurrected, did manage to market the Jeep Liberty CRD turbodiesel in the US--an OK vehicle with a great engine. But it could not meet the 2007 EPA diesel emission standard and Chrysler didn't have the money to get it certified, so the US lost what was the best fuel economy true 4WD sold in the US after the 2006 model year.
As I said earlier, if the US ever wants to see fuel-efficient diesel cars sold in this country, the EPA must be compelled to adopt the European diesel emission standard rather than our "home-grown" standard that really is little more effective in controlling emissions than is the European standard. Maybe then we could see a diesel version of the Fiat 500, which is the topic of this thread, plus a whole lot of other vehicle alternatives.
$4 gas which is inevitable is going to help sales. The 500 should do well in the cities along the coast. This car has more practicality than the Smart and has much more appeal than the dull Japanese offerings.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
gas going up
