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.
Trump's not going to do anything that will affect me car-wise.
The car I want has already been built and my wife will probably get a CUV or large sedan.
Trump has announced plans to role back stricter regulations set in 2011 by the Obama administration which would have required auto makers to achieve an average of 54.5 mpg by 2025.
If I am correct, this has to do with the amount of models on the market. When the gov. upped the regulations, the automakers just made more smaller vehicles and cut some of the larger ones. Therefore, the car companies could save money by not having to produce so many different smaller models. That is, if they are smart enough to see this through.
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata
Several automakers have had major problems with more fuel efficient CVT transmissions and some now produce cars with no spare tire to reduce weight. I support some increase in fuel efficiency but I do think Obama overreached and the result for someone with a new Ford Focus that is unfixable CVT it is effectively a tax on the poor. You can't haul a trailer loaded with cattle behind a Prius.
Overall, your correct that they are skimping on things in order to create space and less weight. My fear is that they will skimp on safety and quality in order to make budget in the coming years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata
Do you think changes to cars will be significant as a result of this election?
I think, from a marketing angle, some will still try to have the highest mpg rating, and won't cut the extra models.
Trump has announced plans to role back stricter regulations set in 2011 by the Obama administration which would have required auto makers to achieve an average of 54.5 mpg by 2025. Several automakers have had major problems with more fuel efficient CVT transmissions and some now produce cars with no spare tire to reduce weight. I support some increase in fuel efficiency but I do think Obama overreached and the result for someone with a new Ford Focus that is unfixable CVT it is effectively a tax on the poor. You can't haul a trailer loaded with cattle behind a Prius.
Do you think changes to cars will be significant as a result of this election?
A Prius is not a CVT engine. It's also not a vehicle made for towing. An SUV with a CVT can tow. Only a heavy duty vehicle made to tow can tow something as heavy as a trailer loaded with cattle.
I hate to hear we are going back in time on cleaning up the environment. We have made great strides in air quality from these regulations. They have been fought every step of the way by conservatives who would make more money in the stock market without added expenses on the companies.
Thank goodness Los Angeles air has made a big turnaround in air quality over the years, or it would be like China by now. The conservatives were dead set against increasing mileage then, for the same reasons you state, which as it turns out were unfounded.
Increasing mileage does not disproportionately affect the poor, who buy used cars most of the time, and are not held to the same standards as new cars.
OP, who cares about hauling cattle? People are driving to work and taking the kids to school. Large haulers are a specialty market.
Many small farms and ranches are being phased out. As equipment and other needs become more expensive, many have folded to larger ones. They mostly use semis, which doesn't affect average makers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal
MPGs equate to real dollars in my pocket.
Yes but a with all the extra electronics and small parts, even minor repairs can cost a good amount of gas. Which would be worth it until it was out of warranty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal
We all know auto makers won't make these changes unless required.
While I agree with you, you do have to remember that many smaller motorcycles get 50 mpg. That is a two cylinder machine with a manual transmission and a very light(in comparison to cars) frame. I think it is nice that we push, but let's be realistic. If we get to a certain point, we will practically have ATV's or 4 wheelers.
Do you think changes to cars will be significant as a result of this election?
The car makers have already compromised safety and quality in the efforts to meet the standards. they also play games (cheat) because the standards are not achievable.
Yes there may be some changes. they may back off some of the safety and quality sacrifices they had to employ in order to shave a few ounces off the weight of the car and add another .2 mpg.
Will they continue to develop electric and other high MPG cars? Absolutely. 1. People want them. MFGs make what people want. 2. In 4 or 8 or 16 years the Democrats will be back in power and the car makers had better have some efficient cars ready to produce. Our country government is a giant pendulum, we go too far one way and then too far the other. Eventually it will swing back and the mfgs will be required to make up for lost time and produce a 100 mpg fleet in two years. They will/better have something ready.
The car makers have already compromised safety and quality in the efforts to meet the standards.
You have stats for that? 'Cause cars are safer now than they ever have been. They also tend to last longer, so actual quality of construction is much better than it ever was.
You have stats for that? 'Cause cars are safer now than they ever have been. They also tend to last longer, so actual quality of construction is much better than it ever was.
Stats? No. Stats are bs for politicians who want to make arguments.
I do have a cadre of friends who design cars for the big 3. Who like to discuss what is going on.
Why no spare tire?
Reduce weight to meet Carb requirements.
Why little cheap plastic fuel pump inside the gas tank?
Reduce mass- it is all about reducing mass.
But if you need to carry three extra gallons of gas to cool the cheap fuel pumps, then you are adding mass.
It is theorteical MPG that matters not real world. We do calculations of the mass of each part and that goes into a formula that determines whether we are meeting the standards. Most of our design work is based on reducing mass.
Doesn't that make cars flimsier and less safe?
Yes, but we can make up for a lot of that with technology. However those things do not matter. We must reduce mass - period. that is why we use so many plastic fasteners now. They are terrible fasteners. However they reduce mass.
Another conversation - different designer:
Are you reducing safety to meet the MPG standards?
Yes. We could make cars a lot safer than we do. Meeting the standards takes precedence over any other issue in design. Styling is second.
And yes. you can find stats if you want to go look for them. In fact like most issues, you can find stats that say whatever you want them to say. Some say cars re safer now (safer than what?) some say not.
Safer than 1960s cars? No kidding? They are safer than 1890s cars too.
Fact is, they are not as safe as they could be. nor are they as well made as they could be. They are being made cheaper and less safe in order to meet Carb requirements. Every inch of the cars is being made a tiny bit lighter. There is a cost to this.
Last edited by Coldjensens; 11-18-2016 at 03:42 PM..
Many small farms and ranches are being phased out. As equipment and other needs become more expensive, many have folded to larger ones. They mostly use semis, which doesn't affect average makers.
Yes but a with all the extra electronics and small parts, even minor repairs can cost a good amount of gas. Which would be worth it until it was out of warranty.
While I agree with you, you do have to remember that many smaller motorcycles get 50 mpg. That is a two cylinder machine with a manual transmission and a very light(in comparison to cars) frame. I think it is nice that we push, but let's be realistic. If we get to a certain point, we will practically have ATV's or 4 wheelers.
It's incorrect that vehicles will practically be ATVs or 4 wheelers. Besides, ATVs are environmentally damaging.
There is the engineering capability to make engines more mileage efficient. There are body design feaures that aid that, like an aerodynamic shape, lighter weight frame. lighter other components, the type of engine.
Remember that the same mileage requirements do not pertain to trucks and other types of vehicles. They have separate requirements.
I don't see why anyone would have a problem with mileage requirements. One reason we don't all have respiratory issues that is so common in some other countries is because we did some basic things. The U S is anything but aggressive in this area, compared to some other countries.
Cars are to get from point A to point B safely and economically, with as little harm to the environment as feasible. There are trucks for special purposes, which is why they have lower requirements.
The more cars that are made with higher mileage, the more cost effective they'll be.
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.
