http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30810514/

New emissions standards are set to raise the mpg for vehicles by 30% in 2016. Cars are looking at a whopping jump from the current 27.5 average to 42 mpg. Light trucks have a much smaller jump to make...from an average 24 to 26.2 mpg.

So, what does everybody think...better engineering or will we all be puttering around in underpowered shoeboxes?

Quote from: bing_oh on May 18, 2009, 02:54:49 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30810514/

New emissions standards are set to raise the mpg for vehicles by 30% in 2016. Cars are looking at a whopping jump from the current 27.5 average to 42 mpg. Light trucks have a much smaller jump to make...from an average 24 to 26.2 mpg.

So, what does everybody think...better engineering or will we all be puttering around in underpowered shoeboxes?

Underpowered shoeboxes.

We are looking at a 100% hybrid and or diesel fleet at that point, and other than the large pickup truck diesels and the one in the R10 they aren't exactly barnstormingly fast.

To GM, Ford, and every other company that has no hope of complying to this standard:

Quote from: R-inge on May 18, 2009, 02:57:10 PM
Underpowered shoeboxes.

How about option #3? The US has a come-to-Jesus reckoning in 2012 and elects an administration that by executive order quashes this insanity...

Quote from: GoCougs on May 18, 2009, 03:03:01 PM
How about option #3? The US has a come-to-Jesus reckoning in 2012 and elects an administration that by executive order quashes this insanity...

This is possible, but not likely at the moment.

Quote from: the Teuton on May 18, 2009, 03:01:28 PM
To GM, Ford, and every other company that has no hope of complying to this standard:

If anything I think companies like Jaguar-Land Rover will have the most difficulty.

The Swift barely gets 40 mpg in mixed driving, and if I try really hard, 47 mpg highway.

It's kinda hard to save an industry when you regulate the crap out of them like this is doing.

I want to know what the fine will be for every company that doesn't comply.  As it is, Ferrari can already unload all of that burden onto the buyers with its cars. 

I just wonder how much it's going to go up and whether some smaller manufacturers will pull out of the US because of it.

Quote from: the Teuton on May 18, 2009, 03:35:59 PM
I want to know what the fine will be for every company that doesn't comply.  As it is, Ferrari can already unload all of that burden onto the buyers with its cars. 

I just wonder how much it's going to go up and whether some smaller manufacturers will pull out of the US because of it.

Well, there will be, as always, ways to dodge the regulation.  Such as classifying more vehicles as SUVs a la the Subaru Outback and using "carbon offsets" of some kind.

lolz... well the government will own the second half of GM by 2016

Quote from: hotrodalex on May 18, 2009, 03:18:25 PM
It's kinda hard to save an industry when you regulate the crap out of them like this is doing.

+1018930919839094.

Someone needs to tell the socialist(s) to cut it out.

Quote from: NACar on May 18, 2009, 03:14:14 PM
The Swift barely gets 40 mpg in mixed driving, and if I try really hard, 47 mpg highway.

Keep in mind that CAFE numbers are not the same as EPA window sticker numbers.  Window sticker numbers are adjusted for real world conditions, CAFE uses unadjusted numbers (numbers straight from the test before they are put through the adjustment equations that generate the window sticker numbers).

Quote from: bing_oh on May 18, 2009, 02:54:49 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30810514/

New emissions standards are set to raise the mpg for vehicles by 30% in 2016. Cars are looking at a whopping jump from the current 27.5 average to 42 mpg. Light trucks have a much smaller jump to make...from an average 24 to 26.2 mpg.

So, what does everybody think...better engineering or will we all be puttering around in underpowered shoeboxes?

Everytime the government splapped a regulation on the automakers the industry, mainly the domestics, whined tht they couldn't do it.  But they did, and cars today are lightyears better than they were.  I think this challenge will be good for the industry.

Quote from: GoCougs on May 18, 2009, 03:03:01 PM
How about option #3? The US has a come-to-Jesus reckoning in 2012 and elects an administration that by executive order quashes this insanity...

That or military coup d'etat, yeah.

I'm all for fuel efficient cars, but this jump in mpg is ridiculous. It's pretty scary since most of the rationale for it seems to be limiting greenhouse gases.  This is the tip of the iceberg - a foolish dumbass regulation with draconian and arbitrary requirements to "save the planet" from the biggest lie of global warming.  Holy shit!  We're spending tens of billions of dollars to "save" our automotive industry because they are too big and too important to our economy to let them fail, allegedly.  And now the same retards who just pulled this off are now driving a whole box of nails into the car industry's coffin with this bullshit regulation.  Seriously, is there any doubt that congress and this administration think that Americans are the stupidest and most gullible people on the planet?  I hope they're not right, but I'm not betting my lunch money on it!

If we as a nation allow our own government to destroy our automotive industry in the name of global warming, next will be farming, technology, airlines, etc.  This global warming hoax, coupled with the perverse intent of our power elite to control the populace and limit our freedoms, has the possibility of relegating our country to 2nd world status.  Let's hope enough folks can extract their heads out of their colons and stop this slide.   

I'm going to wrap myself in the fairy tale cloak that will see US consumers simply stop buying new cars choosing rather to buy used illustrious gas guzzlers of a bygone era.

Quote from: GoCougs on May 18, 2009, 10:38:00 PM
I'm going to wrap myself in the fairy tale cloak that will see US consumers simply stop buying new cars choosing rather to buy used illustrious gas guzzlers of a bygone era.

That's no fairy tale; that's exactly what I'll do if 42 mpg means puttering around in either an underpowered shitbox or a $30,000 hybrid family sedan

shit... i'm going to pick up a RS4 and drive it like i stole it to make up for this... that should be like 9 mpg

I can see a significant new line of underwpoered showboxes and family sedan hybrids to placate the government, with the car companies retaining gasguzzling SUV's and the new generation of muscle cars with a significant Federal emissions/MPG tax tacked on at time of sale.

Quote from: GoCougs on May 18, 2009, 10:38:00 PM
I'm going to wrap myself in the fairy tale cloak that will see US consumers simply stop buying new cars choosing rather to buy used illustrious gas guzzlers of a bygone era.

The government will give you checks to buy the new cars and scrap the gas guzzlers. 

I will then buy the gas guzzlers used for dirt cheap

Quote from: hotrodalex on May 18, 2009, 03:18:25 PM
It's kinda hard to save an industry when you regulate the crap out of them like this is doing.

The left has its collective head so far up its ass its unbelievable...

How much is this going to cost the already broke car companies in development dollars?

Quote from: bing_oh on May 19, 2009, 06:04:10 AM
I can see a significant new line of underwpoered showboxes and family sedan hybrids to placate the government, with the car companies retaining gasguzzling SUV's and the new generation of muscle cars with a significant Federal emissions/MPG tax tacked on at time of sale.

Underpowered? Adequately powered. People bought Saturns in droves and for awhile it achieved high MPG's, Upwards of 35 MPG. It only had 100HP (SL). So why not add some technological advancements, and see what will happen.

Quote from: 2o6 on May 19, 2009, 09:06:54 AM

Underpowered? Adequately powered. People bought Saturns in droves and for awhile it achieved high MPG's, Upwards of 35 MPG. It only had 100HP (SL). So why not add some technological advancements, and see what will happen.

To a point, that's kind of like how Airbus aircraft are designed. 

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/may2009/db20090519_855156.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_top+story

get out your pocketbooks once again, bend over, and let obama ass rape you

Quote from: 2o6 on May 19, 2009, 09:06:54 AM

Underpowered? Adequately powered. People bought Saturns in droves and for awhile it achieved high MPG's, Upwards of 35 MPG. It only had 100HP (SL). So why not add some technological advancements, and see what will happen.

There is something to be said for the fact that in reality most cars do a pretty good job of keeping up with traffic.  I never had a problem getting our Focus up to freeway speeds on an on-ramp, our Outback does a good job of it too.  You just have to grab it by the scruff of the next and throw it around to so speak, but it works.

The primary problem however is that the average american family believes it needs an SUV, and even our large cars and wagons aren't as economical as say a Fit or other hatchback.

What really bugs me is that now people are saying that not only do we need these new standards, but we need excruciating fuel prices to force people to buy the smaller, fuel efficient cars.  Europeans might think that sort of social engineering through taxes is a good idea, because they've grown up with it, but over here ludicrous taxation caused an armed revolt, so forgive me if I'm not too excited about the idea of having my hard earned cash taken from me in even greater amounts just to satisfy a bunch of elitist liberals.

Quote from: Byteme on May 18, 2009, 06:45:17 PM
Everytime the government splapped a regulation on the automakers the industry, mainly the domestics, whined tht they couldn't do it.  But they did, and cars today are lightyears better than they were.  I think this challenge will be good for the industry.

But after the regulations, the cars sucked ass because the technology wasn't there.