I've got a bad feeling the dumb ol' boy George Bush with the new 35mpg crap has sent the V8's into extinction. I think the vette won't be affected, but the camaro is a different story. The only way I could see the camaro, mustang, and challenger surviving is with a supercharged or twin-turbo V6. Maybe a transmission with 8 gears, that would really increase MPG. I think its ironic that out of the U.S.'s daily greenhouse gas production personal cars only contribute to 15% or 20%. The other 80% is from factories and power plants, why doesn't he do something about that. They probably pay better than the auto industry. I don't know I'm nervous about this crap and wanted to vent what does everybody think.
CAFE= Death for the American V8
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
You can't blame Bush for this one.
It was the democrat-controlled congress that pushed this through.
Bush wanted to veto it!
We'll see how it affects things...
With the new hybrids and electric cars coming out, there may be a good enough balance.
It was the democrat-controlled congress that pushed this through.
Bush wanted to veto it!
We'll see how it affects things...
With the new hybrids and electric cars coming out, there may be a good enough balance.
Joined
·
5,229 Posts
They had a strong push from envirowackos as well. They want 35 mpg of gasoline right? So how much of a bonus if the are running on E85 or other fuel? They should be a nice buffer there and if not, someone should explore for the loophole. Maybe the car manufacturers will mention it when it gets a little closer to the start date. A big oooops for the treehuggers I hope.
Joined
·
5,667 Posts
Good point. I would like to know how E85 vehicles are rated as well.
What if they are E85 only? how does than effect the cafe?
What is GM's current CAFE?
I really wasn't sure who was responsible, my bad. It does sound something like the democrats would do, unfortunately because I'm a democrat. I think they should just let things run their course without government involvement. With gas prices as high as they are I'm sure some manufactures would have tried hybrids and alternative fuels. I think there are alot of people who are employed in a field where performance cars and parts are the reason they have food on their table. It seems unfair to punish these people for nothing.
Joined
·
5,667 Posts
I love what Lutz said
Bob Lutz said:
Joined
·
5,667 Posts
Calculation
For the purposes of CAFE, a manufacturer's car output is divided into a domestic fleet (vehicles with more than 75 percent U.S., Canadian or post-NAFTA Mexican content) and a foreign fleet (everything else). Each of these fleets must separately meet the requirements. The two-fleet requirement was developed by the United Automobile Workers (UAW) as a means to ensure job creation in the US. The UAW successfully lobbied Congress to write this provision into the enabling legislation. The UAW continues to advocate this position. The two fleet rule for light trucks was removed in 1996.
Fuel economy calculation for alternative fuel vehicles multiplies the actual fuel used by a "Fuel Content" Factor of 0.15 as an incentive to develop alternative fuel vehicles.[16] Dual-fuel vehicles, such as E85 capable models, are taken as the average of this alternative fuel rating and its gasoline rate. Thus a 15 mpg dual-fuel E85 capable vehicle would be rated as 40 mpg for CAFE purposes, in spite of the fact that less than one percent of the fuel used in E85 capable vehicles is actually E85.
Manufacturers are also allowed to earn CAFE "credits" in any year they exceed CAFE requirements, which they may use to offset deficiencies in other years. CAFE credits can be applied to the three years previous or three years subsequent to the year in which they are earned. The reason for this requirement is so that manufacturers are not penalized for occasionally (due to market conditions, for example) failing the targets, but only for persistent failure to meet them.
Fleet fuel economy is calculated using a harmonic mean, which results in slightly different values than simple averaging
Can someone explain what this means?
What does 15mpg = CAFE rating of 40mpg mean?
For the purposes of CAFE, a manufacturer's car output is divided into a domestic fleet (vehicles with more than 75 percent U.S., Canadian or post-NAFTA Mexican content) and a foreign fleet (everything else). Each of these fleets must separately meet the requirements. The two-fleet requirement was developed by the United Automobile Workers (UAW) as a means to ensure job creation in the US. The UAW successfully lobbied Congress to write this provision into the enabling legislation. The UAW continues to advocate this position. The two fleet rule for light trucks was removed in 1996.
Fuel economy calculation for alternative fuel vehicles multiplies the actual fuel used by a "Fuel Content" Factor of 0.15 as an incentive to develop alternative fuel vehicles.[16] Dual-fuel vehicles, such as E85 capable models, are taken as the average of this alternative fuel rating and its gasoline rate. Thus a 15 mpg dual-fuel E85 capable vehicle would be rated as 40 mpg for CAFE purposes, in spite of the fact that less than one percent of the fuel used in E85 capable vehicles is actually E85.
Manufacturers are also allowed to earn CAFE "credits" in any year they exceed CAFE requirements, which they may use to offset deficiencies in other years. CAFE credits can be applied to the three years previous or three years subsequent to the year in which they are earned. The reason for this requirement is so that manufacturers are not penalized for occasionally (due to market conditions, for example) failing the targets, but only for persistent failure to meet them.
Fleet fuel economy is calculated using a harmonic mean, which results in slightly different values than simple averaging
Can someone explain what this means?
What does 15mpg = CAFE rating of 40mpg mean?
Joined
·
2,665 Posts
Well, I think a point system would be needed to make this right. I hate for a E85 vehicle to be used in the CAFE average. Its uses more fuel. But if they had points on it being a cleaner and renewable fuel to put the CAFE score right. The same for an electric car, I doubt infinity can be averaged into CAFE. A points system I think would do it justice. But then again it would make people in Congress head go Ouchy.
Joined
·
5,667 Posts
The way I understand it is that E85 vehicles only count for the 15% of gas they use. So if it gets 10 mpg on E85 then take the 15% of gas. So it used .15 gallons of gas in that one gallon of fuel to go 10 miles. 10/.15=6.66, 6.66 x 10 miles = 66.6 mpg.
So if it gets 10mpg on E85 then it would be rated at 66.6mpg. Is that right?
So if it gets 10mpg on E85 then it would be rated at 66.6mpg. Is that right?
Joined
·
5,667 Posts
Here is where they stand now:
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=fuel&story=cafe&subject=fuelList
Domestic Passenger Cars
1. Honda 33.7
2. Nissan 33.4
3. Toyota 31.7
4. GM 29.6
5. Ford 28.8
6. DaimlerChrysler 28.6
Imported Passenger cars
1. Honda 39.9
2. Toyota 38.5
3. GM 32.0
4. Kia 31.9
5. Hyundai 31.8
6. Lotus 30.6
.........
Light Trucks
1. Subaru 27.2
2. Hyundai 25.2
3. Mitsubishi 24.9
4. Honda 24.8
5. Suzuki 23.9
6. Kia 23.8
7. BMW 23.4
8. Toyota 23.1
9. DaimlerChrysler 22.8
10. Nissan 22.7
11. GM 22.5
12. Ford 22.2
13. Volkswagen 19.8
I think it should be noted that car based suvs count as trucks.
Models that can run on ethanol-based E85, for instance, are allowed mileage calculations based on the small fraction — 15 percent — of regular gas that's used when running on E85. That means E85-compatible SUVs like the Chevrolet Suburban or Dodge Durango could register gas mileage similar to an economy car. Mileage figures are averaged across a range of engines and transmissions per vehicle, too, so a particularly high- or low-mileage trim level could skew the numbers for an entire carline. Heavy-duty models, like the Ford F-Series Super Duty and Chevrolet Silverado HD, are exempt from the calculations.
I found this list on that link:
best bang for your buck, The Chevy Aveo5 is #5 which is only $700 more cost over 8 years than the Toyota Yaris.
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story...fetime&subject=fuelList&referer=&aff=national
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=fuel&story=cafe&subject=fuelList
Domestic Passenger Cars
1. Honda 33.7
2. Nissan 33.4
3. Toyota 31.7
4. GM 29.6
5. Ford 28.8
6. DaimlerChrysler 28.6
Imported Passenger cars
1. Honda 39.9
2. Toyota 38.5
3. GM 32.0
4. Kia 31.9
5. Hyundai 31.8
6. Lotus 30.6
.........
Light Trucks
1. Subaru 27.2
2. Hyundai 25.2
3. Mitsubishi 24.9
4. Honda 24.8
5. Suzuki 23.9
6. Kia 23.8
7. BMW 23.4
8. Toyota 23.1
9. DaimlerChrysler 22.8
10. Nissan 22.7
11. GM 22.5
12. Ford 22.2
13. Volkswagen 19.8
I think it should be noted that car based suvs count as trucks.
Models that can run on ethanol-based E85, for instance, are allowed mileage calculations based on the small fraction — 15 percent — of regular gas that's used when running on E85. That means E85-compatible SUVs like the Chevrolet Suburban or Dodge Durango could register gas mileage similar to an economy car. Mileage figures are averaged across a range of engines and transmissions per vehicle, too, so a particularly high- or low-mileage trim level could skew the numbers for an entire carline. Heavy-duty models, like the Ford F-Series Super Duty and Chevrolet Silverado HD, are exempt from the calculations.
I found this list on that link:
best bang for your buck, The Chevy Aveo5 is #5 which is only $700 more cost over 8 years than the Toyota Yaris.
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story...fetime&subject=fuelList&referer=&aff=national
Also, I'm not sure if CAFE ratings are subject to the EPA rating changes.
EPA rating changes happened in the 1980s and 2008.
Here's an article that says they're not:
http://www.egmcartech.com/2007/12/28/cafes-35mpg-is-actually-more-like-265mpg/
....also ran on several other media outlets (autoblog, LLN etc)
So if this 35mpg is really like 26.5mpg, that's not so bad, but it's still a huge jump, especially for trucks!
Then again, who knows if this article is true or false.......
EPA rating changes happened in the 1980s and 2008.
Here's an article that says they're not:
http://www.egmcartech.com/2007/12/28/cafes-35mpg-is-actually-more-like-265mpg/
....also ran on several other media outlets (autoblog, LLN etc)
So if this 35mpg is really like 26.5mpg, that's not so bad, but it's still a huge jump, especially for trucks!
Then again, who knows if this article is true or false.......
Joined
·
5,667 Posts
I think what it is going to do is make the manufacturers that have trucks produce more car based SUVs to offset the fullsize ones. If they make a few less cars and a few more SUVs it could help there CAFE rating.
Joined
·
370 Posts
Yup.. things don't look too promising for the Future of the Camaro plant in Oshawa or the Truck Plant next door ! With plans for Zeta on hold ( At least that's the rumour) we could be in for a very bumpy ride in 08/09. If GM decideds to keep Impala FWD/AWD we should be ok , but RWD could be a real problem with regards to meeting CAFE requirments.
Joined
·
5,667 Posts
This could also mean more and more cars and trucks without manual trans if they keep getting the efficiency of the auto up so that it would pass the manual. Which has been done is some cases.
I think this will also cost them less money not having to produce both man and auto.
I think this will also cost them less money not having to produce both man and auto.
Joined
·
5,229 Posts
Looks like a big engined RWD car running E85 or at least capable would EASILY pass CAFE standards. That's the reason I raised the question.
Joined
·
5,667 Posts
So why kill all the RWD cars? Why not just make them duel fuel E85?
Joined
·
5,229 Posts
Good question. Somebody should ask higher ups at GM. They can't be that dense. Green lights for the cars people want should be going off everywhere not cancelling cars to be replaced by POS cars I will not buy.
Joined
·
2,774 Posts
totally sucks..and would be nice to have an E85 car..thats 400HP
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
