Mazda3 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So the Obama Administration has mandated to have car companies fleets avg out to 35.5 mpg. If he loses, will the standards still take into effect in 2016 still?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,662 Posts
[quote author=jdebo link=topic=201586.msg4159541#msg4159541 date=1323670156]
So the Obama Administration has mandated to have car companies fleets avg out to 35.5 mpg. If he loses, will the standards still take into effect in 2016 still?
[/quote]

Since such a figure is entirely attainable given the plethora of ridiculous loopholes, I'm sure the standards will remain no matter who wins.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,357 Posts
There's so many loopholes its not even funny. For example lets look at say, a Fusion. There's a 4 cylinder, a 6 cylinder, and a hybrid 4 cylinder. The first 2 models don't get 35.5, but the hybrid does. So by default, since one version of the car gets 35.5 mpg, the Fusion automatically does as a whole. That's probably one of the loopholes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,451 Posts
Its not to the best of my knowledge. They look at number of sales and average it against the fleet.

You could have a 1mpg car, but if you sell 10,000 of them, you'd need to sell 100,000 cars that get around 200mpg to offset those 10,000 at 1mpg.

To the best of my knowledge, it is all about total sales volume per vehicle and average fuel economy of each of those vehicles sold. So yeah you can have high milage and low milage vehicles, but if you sell a boat ton of low milage vehicles, you are going to have to sell enough high milage vehicles to offset that.

I do believe there are built in "protections" if you fall short, or exceed, etc. So long as generally you are hitting the target. Also large trucks are exempt, so most large SUVs were not included before. I think one of the moves was to include light trucks (IE most SUVs) this time around, but I don't recall. Before it was just small SUVs and most medium SUVs that fell under CAFE standards and most large SUVs/trucks were exempt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,662 Posts
[quote author=azazel1024 link=topic=201586.msg4159815#msg4159815 date=1323718255]
I do believe there are built in "protections" if you fall short, or exceed, etc. So long as generally you are hitting the target.
[/quote]

Yes, you can claim "credits" for years where you exceed the standards and use them for up to 3 years for years where you have a deficit.

I'm all for reasonable CAFE standards. Further, you can't just look at the EPA ratings for a vehicle and tie that directly to the CAFE ratings, i.e. the ratings for CAFE aren't the same ones issued for consumer labels.

Now if they would just lose the ridiculous "alternative fuel" credits that allow E85 ready vehicles to have ridiculous ratings for CAFE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,357 Posts
As long as they aren't going to kill sports cars / supercars by wanting higher fuel economy standards.

Obviously certain brands might be screwed in the states....Ferrari and Lamborghini for example, since they don't offer anything capable of getting anywhere close to those numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,662 Posts
[quote author=smokinAMD link=topic=201586.msg4159823#msg4159823 date=1323719165]
Obviously certain brands might be screwed in the states....Ferrari and Lamborghini for example, since they don't offer anything capable of getting anywhere close to those numbers.
[/quote]

I don't think they sell enough cars to be affected.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,451 Posts
Yeah, I don't mind seeing low volume classification increased a bit, but frankly I think it should be less than .1% of the market. Sure that isn't much of an expansion, but it does up it from less than 10,000 to less than 16,000 in sales, and it would also then track the overall size of the market.

Beyond that, if your vehicles are that damned fuel efficient, you should have to pay fines, sports cars or not. Heck if they are that inefficient, that to me says you probably should be able to afford the fines easily as your margins are probably pretty high per vehicle. Porsche's fines last year amounted to only about $100 per vehicle sold. Even for a big automaker that isn't really all THAT severe a penalty.

We shouldn't disincentivise (did I just make that up?) fuel efficiency for a lot of reasons. If it is that important that fuel efficiency by at best a tertiary concern, then well you can afford to pay more for the vehicle because of the fines levied. I don't see too many supercar or high end sports car owners wanting for money that at most a couple of hundred dollars on the price tag is going to make any difference to them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I've been researching the case of what will happen with muscle cars, for the Camaro, it will get redesigned around 2015 on the Alpha platform. It will be ranging from Compact to Midsize (like in between sizes of a Cruze and a Fusion). I've also read an article on GM producing fuel efficient V8's... yes you heard me. Fuel efficient V8's. The Gen V small block v8 will be MUCH lighter consisting of mostly aluminum and will be certainly capable of producing over 30mpg with cylinder deactivation, larger pushrods, and a direct injected system. It will be put in the Next gen Corvette as well. 7 speed manuals will be introduced and possibly 8 speed dual clutch autos.

The Camaro will probably have the V6 option killed off in exchange for turbo 4, 2.0L putting out 260 HP, which i think is a good idea. I only will buy a car for gas mileage or power, nothing in between. The V8 will definitely stay because GM said they no plans of abandoning it.

I'm not sure of what Ford is doing with the next gen mustang. I hear it's gonna be modern looking though instead of retro. As far of engine choices I'm unsure. I think theyre still gonna keep the 5.0. Right now, muscle cars are at there peaks as far as performance. New technologies need to be created to help keep them where they are now while still maintaining CAFE laws.


Here is the new V8 article

http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/gm-speaks-directly-about-next-gen-small-block.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,290 Posts
Muscle cars will always be around and will always have a V8 offering.

The key for manufacturers is to keep evolving their smaller engines into more efficient and higher potency little powerhouses. As stated, CAFE standards are averaged over the entire line-up really so there isn't much need to improve the efficiency of the V8 offering vehicles since most buyers who can afford them are not concerned with MPG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,404 Posts
yay. screw capitalism! consumers can't choose what they want... force dealers to sell hybrids so they can sell normal cars... so logical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,451 Posts
[quote author=Canadian_LX link=topic=201586.msg4160066#msg4160066 date=1323756102]
Muscle cars will always be around and will always have a V8 offering.

The key for manufacturers is to keep evolving their smaller engines into more efficient and higher potency little powerhouses. As stated, CAFE standards are averaged over the entire line-up really so there isn't much need to improve the efficiency of the V8 offering vehicles since most buyers who can afford them are not concerned with MPG.
[/quote]

Overall they do need to improve milage some. The issue is if they have large sales of them, it balances their fuel milage negatively. If the Mustang average sales between V6 and V8 models are 10% of Ford's sales, and the average combined milage ends up as say 24mpg, then you have a pretty big negative balance on your sheet. Combine that with the large number of SUVs and pickups that they sell and you have a big issue hitting those numbers if you completely ignore fuel efficiency of things like V8 engines and your muscle cars.

Some models need more attention to milage than others. If you can improve milage quite a bit with "minor" changes, then they are going to do that.

For things mention with GM, like cylinder deactivation, lighter engine weight, direct injection, etc generally there are no performance penalties and in a lot of cases power and power to weight actually INCREASES. So you not only have a vehicle that gets better milage, but one that is faster. That is a pretty big win. It costs money to do, but they are investing only a couple of hundred dollars per vehicle to improve milage to make it easier to hit CAFE standards fleet wide and making their vehicle perform better, that isn't a particularly big loss for the company.

They can advertise things like, "The new Chevy Camero, not only the most powerful muscle car in its class, but now the most fuel efficient!" Many won't care, but being fuel efficient as well as fast is not really a negative in anyone's book.

Same goes triple with SUVs and pickups. The big automakers will have to shift towards more diesel engine production as well as more fuel efficient engines. I think we are likely to see turbocharged V6 and I4 engines start hitting some of the pickup truck and SUV models as well as really fuel efficient V8 engines (as well as those diesels that I mentioned). Probably you'll also see some "exotic" materials be used here and there, like, gasp, aluminum in parts of the vehicle that it makes sense, or going to things like unibody construction instead of frame rail construction (OH NOES!)

Intelligent, and not terribly expensive design, could easily realize reductions of 5-15% in curb weight of big SUVs and pickups without sacraficing offroad ability, cargo capacity or size. Better aerodynamics are also well within the reach of both as pickups especially and to a lesser degree SUVs tend to not only be bigger objects to move through the air, but also tend to have much higher coefficients of friction (IE they are more like bricks than passenger cars are). So some minor changes in materials, design, aerodynamics (impacting asthetics, depending on how you define impacting) and engine design could easily yield big increases in fuel efficiency without impacting price a lot or "functionality", not that SUV and pickup drivers often actual use any of the functionality of their big vehicles.

Things I am very interested in are things like Mazda's Sky drive that stops the engine at idle saving a lot of gas in city driving. Also Mazda's upcoming capacitor technology is really interesting. It utilizes regenerative braking to charge up an ultracapcitor and then uses the stored power to run the vehicle's electrical systems. Claims by Mazda are that it can save up to 10% in fuel economy, but again I suspect that is mostly in city driving with AC on. No AC use and highway driving probably will save almost nothing. Even in city driving with no AC use it probably won't save much, maybe a couple of percent. The entire electrical system probably doesn't draw more than 200-400w at night with the lights on and maybe 150-250w in day time driving (ignition system, ECU, gauges, sensors, electrical power steering, etc). Highway cruise is maybe 10,000w of draw from the engine at 55mph (about 15hp), so a 200w savings is only 2%. AC on the other hand draws 1-2hp, plus parasitic drive train losses, so that could potentially save upwards of 10%...downside is I doubt the ultracapacitor can store more than maybe 5-10 minutes of AC powered use from full charge, of course 1-2 stops from 60mph should charge the capacitor to full, so in city driving you could run off the capacitor full time most likely, and even in highway driving without AC use, you could probably run the electrical system (saving 1-3% fuel depending on speed) for 10-30 minutes from a single highway speed stop.

Upside is that the ultracapacitor, regenerative braking gear, higher output alternator (12-25V DC) and DC converter (to step down the 25V of the ultracapacitor to 12V of the electrical system) weighs very little. I think Mazda is saying it won't add more than about 20-25lbs. Other upside is around town driving with the AC on won't bog the engine at all, as it is running electrically and off the ultracapacitor. Also if there is charge in the ultracapacitor there will be less/little drain from the alternator, freeing up a tiny bit of engine power for go juice. Course at full engine output, the amount of power savings for just running the electrical system isn't even 1%, but it is something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,662 Posts
[quote author=Verto link=topic=201586.msg4160073#msg4160073 date=1323758120]
yay. screw capitalism! consumers can't choose what they want... force dealers to sell hybrids so they can sell normal cars... so logical.
[/quote]

Right, because, as we all found out leading up to 2008/2009, high gasoline prices and an over reliance on said product are great contributors to the overall good. Fuck economic and national security, I want my cars to get 10 mpg max.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,290 Posts
[quote author=azazel1024 link=topic=201586.msg4160119#msg4160119 date=1323782538]
[quote author=Canadian_LX link=topic=201586.msg4160066#msg4160066 date=1323756102]
Muscle cars will always be around and will always have a V8 offering.

The key for manufacturers is to keep evolving their smaller engines into more efficient and higher potency little powerhouses. As stated, CAFE standards are averaged over the entire line-up really so there isn't much need to improve the efficiency of the V8 offering vehicles since most buyers who can afford them are not concerned with MPG.
[/quote]

Overall they do need to improve milage some. The issue is if they have large sales of them, it balances their fuel milage negatively. If the Mustang average sales between V6 and V8 models are 10% of Ford's sales, and the average combined milage ends up as say 24mpg, then you have a pretty big negative balance on your sheet. Combine that with the large number of SUVs and pickups that they sell and you have a big issue hitting those numbers if you completely ignore fuel efficiency of things like V8 engines and your muscle cars.

Some models need more attention to milage than others. If you can improve milage quite a bit with "minor" changes, then they are going to do that.

For things mention with GM, like cylinder deactivation, lighter engine weight, direct injection, etc generally there are no performance penalties and in a lot of cases power and power to weight actually INCREASES. So you not only have a vehicle that gets better milage, but one that is faster. That is a pretty big win. It costs money to do, but they are investing only a couple of hundred dollars per vehicle to improve milage to make it easier to hit CAFE standards fleet wide and making their vehicle perform better, that isn't a particularly big loss for the company.

They can advertise things like, "The new Chevy Camero, not only the most powerful muscle car in its class, but now the most fuel efficient!" Many won't care, but being fuel efficient as well as fast is not really a negative in anyone's book.

Same goes triple with SUVs and pickups. The big automakers will have to shift towards more diesel engine production as well as more fuel efficient engines. I think we are likely to see turbocharged V6 and I4 engines start hitting some of the pickup truck and SUV models as well as really fuel efficient V8 engines (as well as those diesels that I mentioned). Probably you'll also see some "exotic" materials be used here and there, like, gasp, aluminum in parts of the vehicle that it makes sense, or going to things like unibody construction instead of frame rail construction (OH NOES!)

Intelligent, and not terribly expensive design, could easily realize reductions of 5-15% in curb weight of big SUVs and pickups without sacraficing offroad ability, cargo capacity or size. Better aerodynamics are also well within the reach of both as pickups especially and to a lesser degree SUVs tend to not only be bigger objects to move through the air, but also tend to have much higher coefficients of friction (IE they are more like bricks than passenger cars are). So some minor changes in materials, design, aerodynamics (impacting asthetics, depending on how you define impacting) and engine design could easily yield big increases in fuel efficiency without impacting price a lot or "functionality", not that SUV and pickup drivers often actual use any of the functionality of their big vehicles.

Things I am very interested in are things like Mazda's Sky drive that stops the engine at idle saving a lot of gas in city driving. Also Mazda's upcoming capacitor technology is really interesting. It utilizes regenerative braking to charge up an ultracapcitor and then uses the stored power to run the vehicle's electrical systems. Claims by Mazda are that it can save up to 10% in fuel economy, but again I suspect that is mostly in city driving with AC on. No AC use and highway driving probably will save almost nothing. Even in city driving with no AC use it probably won't save much, maybe a couple of percent. The entire electrical system probably doesn't draw more than 200-400w at night with the lights on and maybe 150-250w in day time driving (ignition system, ECU, gauges, sensors, electrical power steering, etc). Highway cruise is maybe 10,000w of draw from the engine at 55mph (about 15hp), so a 200w savings is only 2%. AC on the other hand draws 1-2hp, plus parasitic drive train losses, so that could potentially save upwards of 10%...downside is I doubt the ultracapacitor can store more than maybe 5-10 minutes of AC powered use from full charge, of course 1-2 stops from 60mph should charge the capacitor to full, so in city driving you could run off the capacitor full time most likely, and even in highway driving without AC use, you could probably run the electrical system (saving 1-3% fuel depending on speed) for 10-30 minutes from a single highway speed stop.

Upside is that the ultracapacitor, regenerative braking gear, higher output alternator (12-25V DC) and DC converter (to step down the 25V of the ultracapacitor to 12V of the electrical system) weighs very little. I think Mazda is saying it won't add more than about 20-25lbs. Other upside is around town driving with the AC on won't bog the engine at all, as it is running electrically and off the ultracapacitor. Also if there is charge in the ultracapacitor there will be less/little drain from the alternator, freeing up a tiny bit of engine power for go juice. Course at full engine output, the amount of power savings for just running the electrical system isn't even 1%, but it is something.
[/quote]

I agree with just about everything you've said, except you lost me when you started talking physics lol.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top