Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-28-2012, 09:08 AM   #1
Rivet Master
 
Denis4x4's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari FB SE
Currently Looking...
Durango , Colorado
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,111
Federal MPG regulations

U.S. finalizes 2025 fuel rules for automakers | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com


I'm so thankful that the government is looking out for me! Hopefully, some of the money saved will come back to me in the form of tax credits that will offset the costs to repair the damage on my collector cars caused by ethanol.
__________________

__________________
Denis4x4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 09:18 AM   #2
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,406
Images: 5
"cash for clunkers". They don't want you to HAVE your collector cars.
__________________

__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 09:28 AM   #3
Rivet Master
 
Coastalview's Avatar
 
2002 27' Safari
Carmel-by-the-Sea , California
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,387
Images: 14
Send a message via AIM to Coastalview Send a message via Yahoo to Coastalview
They should offer cash for clunkers on some new car models!
__________________
AIR: 649
TAC: CA-40
Northern California Airstreamers
Coastalview is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 05:34 AM   #4
Rivet Master
 
MrUKToad's Avatar

 
2011 28' International
Chatham , Ontario
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,372
Images: 17
Blog Entries: 13
Just back from three weeks in the UK where my rental car was VW Passat CC, 2 litre diesel. It had a raft of fuel economy measures including a device that switched the engine off when you stopped at a red light and switched it back on when you lifted off the brake - very odd until you get used to it, or switch it off as I did. It was a reasonably sized car and did a respectable 38MPG (US) (45MPG Imperial) across a mix of town and highway driving. According to the standards agreed upon according to the article, though, even VW have some way to go to get close to those figures.

It also had that curious VW transmission that allows you to roll backwards on a hill when you're in drive - another fuel economy measure I think. It had no handbrake like a stick shift so relied on "auto hold", an electronic handbrake, to prevent that roll back but I never really warmed to it, especially when the thing held you tight on a down slope when a bit of roll forward (under braking) might have been handy. Auto hold was a gadget too far in my opinion.

Actually, 38mpg was a bit disappointing given that the old 1.4 litre gas powered Rover 214 (almost a Honda Civic) I used to drive when I lived in England was getting that figure. Sure it was a smaller car, but not a compact by UK standards. More work needed by the manufacturers I think.....
__________________
Steve; also known as Mr UK Toad

"You can't tow that with that!"

http://toadsoftowedhaul.com
MrUKToad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 06:32 AM   #5
2 Rivet Member
 
2007 27' Safari FB SE
Pleasant Valley , New York
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 33
Don't forget to consider what government mandated emission requirements and safety standards do to the mileage on vehicles. Knowing a few folks working in engineering for auto companies I got to see first hand the frustration they felt every time those "here to help you" passed a set of laws not totally based on science but more on getting re-elected. It is all about balance and we can't have it all - something has to give; air quality, mileage, safety in vehicles. Europe has been behind the US in both standard mandates, which is part of why their vehicles have gotten such better mileage. They are not coming closer to our standards, hence their mileage is not as great as it used to be.
__________________
bweybright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 07:20 AM   #6
Rivet Master
 
moparjohn's Avatar
 
1973 25' Tradewind
Ringoes , New Jersey
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 619
Images: 2
new cafe

They can take their new cafe requirements and put them were the sun does not shine. I am taking this so personally, my life is based around cars with V8's and power, and they are trying to take it away! I thought this was a free market, guess I'm wrong, the Feds know whats better for us. I'm so disturbed by this you can't know! MPJ
__________________
moparjohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 07:48 AM   #7
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,406
Images: 5
In order to keep your V8 and power, you'll have to buy something rated as 8600# GVW and up. They are exempt from CAFE as they are "work" vehicles. MFRs will be playing with those GVW numbers to offer what you want in vans and trucks.

UK, you'll see a rapid expansion of the use of "start/stop" anti idle technology here in the states prior to 2016.
__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 08:03 AM   #8
Rivet Master
 
MrUKToad's Avatar

 
2011 28' International
Chatham , Ontario
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,372
Images: 17
Blog Entries: 13
Bwey, I don't think Europe is behind the US in targetting fuel economy measures - the price of gas is the key there and manufacturers work hard to get good consumption ratings for their vehicles as that's what the public wants and will buy. The governments there may not make specific laws about MPG but they do load gas with tax, which has the same end result. I don't think law making or taxing gas is palatable to Americans so I'm not sure where all this will go.
__________________
Steve; also known as Mr UK Toad

"You can't tow that with that!"

http://toadsoftowedhaul.com
MrUKToad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 08:25 AM   #9
Rivet Master
 
purman's Avatar
 
1968 28' Ambassador
Cedaredge , Colorado
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by dznf0g
"cash for clunkers". They don't want you to HAVE your collector cars.
Problem was they would only take cars up to 20 years old. So really they were not clunkers. I did a ton of research on cash for clunkers. Ca the state that benefited the most only reduced emission by 1/16 of a percent. This was best case. Most traded in car was the ford explorer . And most who traded in we're going to do it in the next year any way.

I couldn't trade in my 1975 dodge truck. Was to old. They just wanted new cars so they couldn't be resold as used. So people who couldn't afford new cars now didn't have good used cars to trade up from their crappy ones. It was a total bust. Other than another bail out for the auto companies.
__________________
Jason

May you have at least one sunny day, and a soft chair to sit in..

2008 5.7 L V8 Sequoia
AIR # 31243
WBCCI # 6987
FOUR CORNERS UNIT
purman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 08:52 AM   #10
The Hawk's Lair
 
cooperhawk's Avatar
 
1985 34.5' Airstream 345
BACK WOODS , Minnesota
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 922
Images: 9
We recently purchased a new 2012 VW Passat TDI. So far with almost 3000 miles on it our city driving is averaging a little over 42 MPG, however on a recent 800 mile trip the vehicle averaged 50.2 MPG. Not too shabby. We have loaded it on a tow dolly and towed it behind our motor home as well. No problems.

That hill hold thing takes a little getting used to. From what I've been told it something that has been mandated by the govt and will soon appear on all vehicle.

The vehicle is for my Wife but she complains that I like to drive it too much! She is right of course. It is a very nice car. I drive it whenever I can talk her out of it.
__________________
AKA THE GUNNER
There is no "I" in the word "team," but there are four in "Platitude Quoting Idiot!"

AIRSTREAM 345 TURBO-DIESEL
VFW, LEGION, NRA


cooperhawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 10:35 AM   #11
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
If the government didn't require increased gas mileage years ago, our big trucks we use to tow with would still get 10-12 mpg without towing. But under pressure, auto and truck companies figured out how to increase gas mileage and still deliver lots of power—more power in bigger trucks than we had decades ago.

My '72 Chevy pickup got about 12 mpg and was smaller and lighter than my Tundra. The Tundra is much more powerful, heavier and more comfortable, has 4WD, and gets 16-17 mpg.

I am going to hold off buying a new pickup as long as I can so I can have better mileage figures. How this will shake out is unclear—hybrids, turbo, superchargers are among some of the possibilities.

If we don't increase fuel mileage, we will have to import more and more oil at higher and higher prices. As other countries develop, there will be more and more demand for fuel. Even with increased drilling in the US, there is not enough oil for our long term future. Nobody likes to be told what to do, but there's no other way the manufacturers are going to make big changes in fuel mileage. Every time we take a trip, half of the cost is gas. I'd like to reduce that.

Gene
__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 11:27 AM   #12
Rivet Master
 
Wayward's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari FB SE
Cary , North Carolina
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 803
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrawfordGene View Post
If the government didn't require increased gas mileage years ago, our big trucks we use to tow with would still get 10-12 mpg without towing. But under pressure, auto and truck companies figured out how to increase gas mileage and still deliver lots of power—more power in bigger trucks than we had decades ago.
Gene
The observation is correct that vehicles are more fuel efficient, but your assumption as to why. is not necessarily correct. There is a reasonably sound argument that had the government left the competition of a free market to do this, it would have happened even sooner and even cheaper.

I can add some perspective to the "accepted wisdom", as an engineer who has worked on command and control software ranging from aerospace launch systems, to consumer vehicle electronics.

Everything "new" you see in vehicles today has been in an R&D "pipeline" for 10 years. Automotive engineers long ago realized that increasing displacement to increase power had practical limits in the consumer market.

For example in the 70's US R&D engineers in car companies and their suppliers were, as demanded by a competitive free market, working on technologies like multi valve cylinder heads, variable camshaft timing, electronic fuel injection, closed loop air/gas management, direct injection, electronic ignition control and a range of other highly competitive technologies to improve power, torque curves and drive-albility without brute force displacement increases.

As we see today in our contemporary engines, we of course knew that more efficient and controlled combustion delivers more power on the same amount of fuel, or the same amount of power on less fuel (better mileage). Smaller engines, more power, better fuel efficiency, lower emissions. This is just the basic stuff we all learn in engineering school. In the 70's there was a missing piece to bring it all together. We knew it, and were working on it.......

What changed the game in engine technology was microprocessors and Moore's Law, not the government. Engineers were anticipating digital engine management. The knee jerk regulations and mandates ordered by EPA bureaucrats and environmental activists in the 70's, sabotaged the US automotive R&D pipeline, because US engineers were forced to drop major technology investments, to go "bolt on" all sorts of garbage on US cars like EGRs. PCV, air injection etc. It was a terrible mistake which set the technology back by a decade or more, and gave the German and Japanese companies a huge advantage.

Had the US government not meddled in private industry, we would have better technology sooner and not have been playing catch-up.

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help"
__________________
2006 Safari SE FB
2000 F150 4.2L
2011 F250 6.2L
Raleigh, NC
Wayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 11:49 AM   #13
Moderator
 
DKB_SATX's Avatar

 
2017 26' Flying Cloud
1976 Argosy 28
Alamo Heights , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,401
Images: 1
Blog Entries: 7
@Wayward: I'll happily give you the point with respect to fuel economy and specific power, the market would get there, to a certain extent. The fine points about diminishing returns when the market as a whole prefers larger vehicles but economy prefers smaller are more or less noise in comparison to the technological advances.

However, while improving overall efficiency improves emissions somewhat as a byproduct, the market as a whole doesn't care about emissions and would probably not have gotten anywhere near the level of "clean" the industry has attained today.

Also, saying that the emissions regs gave the Germans and Japanese some sort of special advantage is not supportable. They had to meet the same emissions requirements in the US that the US manufacturers did, they were just faster (especially the Germans) at finding ways to meet the standards without completely undermining vehicle performance.

It's definitely true that many federal regulations are overly prescriptive. Airbags come to mind... by the time airbags were in wide use auto manufacturers had realized that there were big performance improvements to be had by using bags that had different deployment characteristics than the initial mandate prescribed, and it took a while to get the feds to loosen up.
__________________
David

Zero Gravitas 2017 Flying Cloud 26U | Il Progetto 1976 Argosy 28 Center Bath | WBCCI# 15566

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. Sir Winston Churchill
DKB_SATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 11:50 AM   #14
Rivet Master
 
Wayward's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari FB SE
Cary , North Carolina
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denis4x4 View Post
I'm so thankful that the government is looking out for me! Hopefully, some of the money saved will come back to me in the form of tax credits that will offset the costs to repair the damage on my collector cars caused by ethanol.
I use far less gas every week in my pickup than my "green" buddy and his wife, who relish this regulatory garbage but drive 2 Beemers separately to work, and commute every weekend to their vacation home. They are agast that I "drag" an RV across the country with my "gas guzzler", while they do not think twice about boarding a jumbo jet for a European get away,

Food for thought. If the central planners care so much about us and the environment that they insist on regulating and controlling an entire industry, why not simply ration gasoline?

I mean it makes sense right? If we all had only 20 gallons a week, think of the great choices we could make. Car companies would be climbing over one another to sell a 50mpg mini car. We might rush out and by ultra efficient diesel. We might decide to buy a house closer to work. We might decide to walk to work so we could save our gas coupons so we could spend the summer blasting across Route 66 in a 1969 big block Camaro or towing a shiny Airstream.?

Now of course they never will..........I wonder why? Never mind - dumb question.
__________________

__________________
2006 Safari SE FB
2000 F150 4.2L
2011 F250 6.2L
Raleigh, NC
Wayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.