I agree. Strengthen the product line with your green vehicles or what have you. Just keep 1 maybe 2 enthusiast minded vehicles in your line up. I don't see why that is such a far fetched possibility.
Hell they wouldn't even need to sell a whole lot of em to offset the " gashogs " we love. Manufactures are granted credits on MPG that can be used to also offset low MPG vehicles.
All GM would have to do is have each branch Chevy, Pontiac and maybe Saturn carry a ECO friendly car and new V8 projects can continue.
I will however say I will forever hate GM if they put a hold on sports cars that get 28MPG just to keep making trucks that get 10mpg.
Hell they wouldn't even need to sell a whole lot of em to offset the " gashogs " we love. Manufactures are granted credits on MPG that can be used to also offset low MPG vehicles.
All GM would have to do is have each branch Chevy, Pontiac and maybe Saturn carry a ECO friendly car and new V8 projects can continue.
I will however say I will forever hate GM if they put a hold on sports cars that get 28MPG just to keep making trucks that get 10mpg.
Your off a bit on this. They calculate CAFE from a mix of city and highway giving city mileage a 2 to 1 count. A Corvette is rated at 17 and 26. That works out to a CAFE average of 20. to pull one Corvette up to 35 you would need to sell 3 eco friendly 40 mpg cars that aren't made yet and nobody wants. Throw a dozen Impalas at 24 mpg into the mix with one Corvette and you now need to sell 35 of these not yet produced cars that get considerably better mileage than an Aveo. Throw trucks into the mix and the numbers of the eco friendly cars become unreachable.
There is only three ways they are going to be able to meet these regs.
1) Stop or slow truck sales. That isn't going to happen.
2) A bunch of breakthroughs in technology in the next 6 years. It has to happen in the next 6 years too, so that it can meet production cycles and actually be available on vehicles in 2020.
3) The vehicles we like are going to get extremely expensive, so that no one buys them and when they do they can subsidize the price of cheap tin boxes that no one wants so people will buy more of them. Think Aveo sized tin boxes with 1.0 l 70hp engines selling for $7500 and the Corvette subsidising it at 3,000 per car. That means the price of a new Corvette goes up $9,000. With the base Vette at $57,000 and an average Vette costing $64,000, they are going to sell a bunch less. If Vettes continue to sell they may have to raise the price even further and lower the tin box price more.
Most of the design, technology and developement is going to be focused on getting the Impala to reach a 32 mpg average and a truck to 26mpg. The resources aren't going to be available to develope a more powerfull, more efficient engine for niche cars like a Corvette or Camaro. We will probably see them stay with the current engines they have and any breakthroughs will be added to them to make them slightly more efficient. Prices will go up considerably to direct consumers to more eco-friendly choices.
Let's face the fact that the government doesn't think you need or should be able to buy a gas guzzler. The easy answer is to raise CAFE numbers and make us buy underpowered, tiny little tin boxes like most of Europe buys.
What I don't understand is, why doesn't the government focus it's energy and our tax dollars on real solutions to our carbon dependency. For the one trillion dollars we spent on this war in Iraq, we could have set solar panels up all over the Nevada desert and windmills all across the plains and gulf coast region. The electricity developed would have been cheap if government had helped businesses with the infrastructure and donated government land for power generation use. We could then shift away from oil and where we still need carbon to generate power and such, used coal which we have an excess of.
By eliminating our dependence on oil and natural gas, we would end up keeping more dollars here in this country which will benefit the average U S citizen. The oil we produce in Texas, California, Alaska would make us nearly energy independent. Then we could open up ANWAR, the gulf coast and Florida Keys, Utah and Colorado for energy exploration and have reserves that would eliminate the need to send nut cases like Hugo Chavez any of our money.
Also with extremely cheap electricity we would see a bunch of electric powered plug in vehicles that would further reduce our need for oil. This would make the U S a leader in reducing CO2 output, completely energy independent (Screw the mid east wack jobs) reduce our trade deficit, strengthen the U S dollar and allow us to be safer and more secure because we wouldn't be dependent on others that hate us.
I was talking to a friend about the solar panel idea and the windmill idea using government help to achieve it.
He brought up a great point. We have a precedent that the government has done this exact thing before. The Tennessee Valley Authority that built hydro electric dams along the Tennessee river was a government project. People in that area have benefitted for 60 plus years by having the lowest cost electric power in the US.
I think the real issue is, the policy makers that write these laws and push for the US to change, want exactly that. They want us to change our lifestyle and not come up with solutions that allow us to live as we are. They believe that America is wasteful and excessive and that they know what is better for us than we do.
Great points fergy!! You always have great insight! Now what really baffles me is the fuel economy that a lot of the 4 cyl cars are getting. In the newspaper this past sunday, they had a review of the new impreza (not sti). I know its a turbo and that requires more fuel, but its rated at 19city/25 highway. I mean COME ON!! My last car was a 2000 camaro ss. The best mileage i got was 31 mpg on a trip to western NY going over lots of hills. My goat gets between 25 and 26 highway with only 7,000miles. With the mods my goat has, it has almost double the horse power of the impreza, the engine is almost 3x larger in displacement, and the goat in about 650lbs heavier, and both cars are about equal in fuel economy. It seems to me manufacturers should be concentrating on increasing the fuel economy in economy cars to get to that magic CAFE number, but hey maybe i'm wrong
Also, what about the DOCH motors. Yes they produce more power with less displacement, but the fuel economy is much worse than a proven small block push rod engine. Its amazing with technology that is as old as the small block is and a couple of tweaks through the years, that we can get mid-high 20mpgs out of a 364ci motor.
I like little cars when it's just me making my way to work. The more go-cart like the better - lol. I had one small car with a fast shifting five speed that was super quick. I bet it was the fastest car on Earth, 0-5 mph. And don’t forget, those cars are so bouncy you can do Dukes of Hazard style maneuvers without even trying. What’s not to love.
I went to the new car show in Omaha last week and was blown away by what some small cars get for mileage these days. With all of the advances and not to mention most have 6 speeds you would think a 2.4 Liter could do better than 26mpg.
Anymore it seems as if technology hasn't helped at all!
There isn't one V8 with cylinder deactivation that is one bit impressive. The Dodge lineup being my main focus, a V8 with this feature gets 26mpg. Yet GM can pull the same numbers out of a 505HP LS7.
My 2007 Silverado Vortec 5.3 2WD is also a decent example. GM claims 22mpg highway and I have yet to see 20mpg, and I have even tried!
Think how much bigger, heavier and more powerfull cars have gotten since 1988. The full sized LeSabre was 3300 lbs. It had a 165 hp 3.8L V6 and was sized about like a Ford Fusion. The Ford Fusion is considered a smaller midsize car today. It weighs about the same as the LeSabre, but again it's considered small mid size. It has a 2.3l with 160 hp. The 3.0 V6 makes 221hp and it's considered underpowered as far as V6's go. The 4 cyl gets 20/29 versus a 1988 LeSabre getting 19/27.
I know, your thinking well DUH the 4cyl is going to get better mileage, where's the improvement. Well the 2.3L makes almost as much power as the 3.8 did in 1988. The 3.9L V6 in the Impala makes almost 100 more hp than the 3.8 did and gets the same mileage in a larger heavier car. A 2.4 L Eco-Tech now makes the same power as a 5.0 L V8 in 1988.
Where I'm getting at with this is the American public is going to need to accept an Impala with a 2.4L 170hp Eco-tech that is smaller and a little less solid feeling so it can be lighter. The gearing is going to be focused towards efficiency again and you will see a 9.5 second 0-60 Impala 4cyl that gets 24 city and 32 hwy. The Cobalt is going to end up a 1.6l with 110hp and a 0-60 of 10.0 and 30/38mpg or the base will get a 1.3L with 95hp and a 0-60 of 11.2 and 33/41mpg. The Aveo will end up with the old Metro 1.0L with a whopping 62hp, 38/45 and 0-60 sometimes, especially if there is a downgrade.
Don't get me started on pick-ups. In 1988 most full-sized pickups made do with 170 to 190 hp. The V6 and straight 6's made 110 hp for a full size pick up. That's what we are headed back to. A Full size pick up with a 2.5L 210hp V6. It will get 19 City and 26hwy. It will do a 11 second 0-60. A 4cylinder turbo diesel full size with 175hp but lots of V8 style torque. Pick-ups will go back to being a work vehicle.
That's what your government thinks you should be driving. The problem in America, acording to the Government, is You gross pigs with your unneccessary 400hp V8's. You need to conserve so they can continue to ride in their limo's. So they can fly all over the globe countless times and save the world. They are smart and important. They need 10,000 sf houses to entertain dignitaries. You get the point I'll stop here.
Great points fergy!! You always have great insight! Now what really baffles me is the fuel economy that a lot of the 4 cyl cars are getting. In the newspaper this past sunday, they had a review of the new impreza (not sti). I know its a turbo and that requires more fuel, but its rated at 19city/25 highway. I mean COME ON!! My last car was a 2000 camaro ss. The best mileage i got was 31 mpg on a trip to western NY going over lots of hills. My goat gets between 25 and 26 highway with only 7,000miles. With the mods my goat has, it has almost double the horse power of the impreza, the engine is almost 3x larger in displacement, and the goat in about 650lbs heavier, and both cars are about equal in fuel economy. It seems to me manufacturers should be concentrating on increasing the fuel economy in economy cars to get to that magic CAFE number, but hey maybe i'm wrong
Also, what about the DOCH motors. Yes they produce more power with less displacement, but the fuel economy is much worse than a proven small block push rod engine. Its amazing with technology that is as old as the small block is and a couple of tweaks through the years, that we can get mid-high 20mpgs out of a 364ci motor.
One thing I noticed with my Formula and Trans Am: These, and other GM V8's have loads of torque, right where you settle in at a cruising speed. The 6-speed manuals (prolly the same with the auto) loaf along at about 1500 to 1800 rpms at highway speeds. Most 4 bangers have to rev much higher than that, and don't have the torque, so you have to apply more throttle to maintain the same speed. The F-bodies, and 'Vettes are very aerodynamic, which I'm sure helps also. I have no scientific data to back this up, so feel free to pick this apart.
I wasn't suggesting that cars like these should be all that GM sells, or that we, as in enthusiasts should drive. My logic is that if more of these are produced, that would help GM continue to make the stuff we like, as in RWD V-8 toys, and yet be more capable at reaching these new CAFE standards. Making Hybrid SUV's and such is all well and good, but I doubt a full-size SUV is ever going to bring the average MPG down enough to justify the continued development of cars like the GTO/Monaro.
Yup, I agree. Cars like those (for the great unwashed masses) are what allow guys like us to drive cars like ours.
AutoForums.com is the premier network of enthusiast-owned
enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
We operate more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share
experiences and opinions as a community.
Linear Mode
