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.
52b dollars worth of regulations. And what will likely be some profit for automakers as i am pretty sure that figure is inflated.
I kind of understand why the EPA raises MPG requirments, but kind of don't. Being many cars fall far short of the targets, anyway. Or automakers find a way to boost the MPG number with "funny math" and a very lite foot on the gas pedal.
If you want cleaner air why not just make more PZEV vehicles? Its said those pollute less over 150,000m then painting an average sized room and letting it "air out."
Government says cars will cost more, but fuel savings will be over $3000 for the first several years of ownership, offsetting the extra cost. So you see, they are actually SAVING us monies.
52b dollars worth of regulations. And what will likely be some profit for automakers as i am pretty sure that figure is inflated.
I kind of understand why the EPA raises MPG requirments, but kind of don't. Being many cars fall far short of the targets, anyway. Or automakers find a way to boost the MPG number with "funny math" and a very lite foot on the gas pedal.
If you want cleaner air why not just make more PZEV vehicles? Its said those pollute less over 150,000m then painting an average sized room and letting it "air out."
Government says cars will cost more, but fuel savings will be over $3000 for the first several years of ownership, offsetting the extra cost. So you see, they are actually SAVING us monies.
Oh please!!
The new requirement is going to be an average of 35.5 miles per gallon. Say goodbye to V6's and V8's. Obviously, there is going to be a huge outcry over this.
The limitation of PZEV and other such "better than required standards" ... it's all by percentages. I think Ford made an excellent mockery of such a decade ago; the 8mpg Excursion got a "low emissions" label.
Can't put all the blame on the government ... with every advancement in engine technology, the automakers could've pursued the same power/better fuel economy route instead of the same fuel economy/more power that we've been led to nowadays. Consumers voting for more power with their pocketbooks doesn't help either, although that's changed in recent years.
Keep in mind that hydrocarbon emission (CO2) is a distinctly different issue from traditional auto pollution. You can have a vehicle that has very low emissions, but still have a high CO2 output. CO2 output is basically directly related to fuel consumption. Catalytic converters (etc.) do not reduce CO2 emmission.
It is really a shame that American consumers have so eagerly bought so many inefficient, large vehicles. But it has been easy to do because of a strong economy and cheap fuel. Automakers have mostly been fulfilling demand.
I do think though that it is a good time for the nearly constant weight/hp growth take a pause for a while. I would like to see the automakers take some fat out of the vehicles, hold the power steady, and increase efficiency. I don't think V8s will disappear. They will be a bit less common and cost more.
I think the 2011 Mustang V6 is an example of what I think will continue as a trend. Smaller engines that make V8 power with better fuel economy. Although I like the sound of some V8s - I don't really care that much how many cylinders my cars have. I care about power, economy, vibration etc. V8s aren't the only engines that work well.
I think the 2011 Mustang V6 is an example of what I think will continue as a trend. Smaller engines that make V8 power with better fuel economy. Although I like the sound of some V8s - I don't really care that much how many cylinders my cars have. I care about power, economy, vibration etc. V8s aren't the only engines that work well.
The V6 Mustang doesn't have V8 power. The V8 version has over 400hp whereas the V6 has 300.
52b dollars worth of regulations. And what will likely be some profit for automakers as i am pretty sure that figure is inflated.
I kind of understand why the EPA raises MPG requirments, but kind of don't. Being many cars fall far short of the targets, anyway. Or automakers find a way to boost the MPG number with "funny math" and a very lite foot on the gas pedal.
If you want cleaner air why not just make more PZEV vehicles? Its said those pollute less over 150,000m then painting an average sized room and letting it "air out."
Government says cars will cost more, but fuel savings will be over $3000 for the first several years of ownership, offsetting the extra cost. So you see, they are actually SAVING us monies.
Oh please!!
Would you rather this country continue to beholden to the middle least for gas? I look forward to the day we have energy independence. If this is the first step.. and in the long term I will save that money.. so be it.
The V6 Mustang doesn't have V8 power. The V8 version has over 400hp whereas the V6 has 300.
Still, 300 horsepower IS V8 power. The last generation Camaro with the LS1 made 305 horsepower. 300 horsepower out of a normally aspirated six is very good IMO.
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.
