US car options
 

Didn't want to get the other topic on CAFE standards to OT but why can't we get the FE car options that are avialible in Europe? I know in reality it's probably profit per car and what they believe will be lack of sales but what is the US car manufactors or government party line. Is it safety standards (and what's different) or emissions or both?


Edit:
Moderator if you need to move this to another forum feel free to.

Taxes, aka fuel costs.

that and since this an oil run country, less profits = bad idea....even if it is for the good of the country and the world, they dont care...

The automakers believe that people will not buy them. I think that they have good reason to believe that. The Echo, Tercel, Metro, etc just have not been as popular here as overseas... We (as a buying public) have much different priorities than other places, because our gas is so much cheaper and our average speeds are so much higher.

yea i think in britan or somewhere that the ford focus is selling like mad! yet it sells like crap over here...

It's a different car. The Focus in Europe is a recent design that has received good reviews. I believe it shares a platform with the Mazda 3. In North America, Ford has chosen to continue selling the crummy old Focus.

That's my point. We can't get the cars that they sell in Europe not even as an option. I think Matt tried with the Fit with the smaller engine and they said no dice. So why not?

The real culprits are politicians. They are addicted to gasoline taxes. Now, it's politically difficult to raise gas taxes.... BUT raising consumption is easy..... in effect, by not raising CAFE.

All I needed for proof was back in the '70's or '80's, which was the last time Massachusetts raised the gas tax. The reason cited in the news was declining demand. due to the new crop of fuel efficient cars like the K car, the Chevy Cavlier and the Escort.

I've recently read that Oregon is trying to find some way to tax hybrids. Same reason. Not enough gas tax.

So, no balls to raise gas taxes means no incetive to raise CAFE.

Very good points. Excellent

This is it exactly.

[rant]
As I've mentioned before, Honda won't even sell the 1.3L version of the Fit in America. You KNOOOOW that it gets better fuel economy. Instead of offering that as an option, Honda splits hairs about weight and safety features.

C'mon Honda! I'm certain you could sell a decent number of them here in the states.

It's all about perceived wants. I bet that no one ever thought that the Prius would be as popular as it is, yet it's selling like crazy. Fuel economy is obviously important to enough people for it to matter.

[/rant]

Oh, and some of the smaller European/Asian cars don't meet the US safety standards, nor do they meet the emissions regulations.

But then vehicles like the Hummer are except from emissions regulations due to their size.

I've heard that about the safety standards also. Do you know what safety standards they don't have that make them so dangerous?

I've heard it's enough padding for an unbelted occupant for the most part.

If they aren't safe enough to sell here, why are they safe enough to sell in other places? Are Asian and European lives worth less than American lives? How many South Americans or Africans does it take to equal one American?

I know that for me many of these cars are too small, anything smaller than a midsize car and my knees are in the dash, and the kids won't physically fit behind me because of their height. Gotta have a full size at a minimum, and we fit best in a minivan.

I think the Prius was a stroke of genius. Best FE aside from the Insight (I think that's correct) and in terms of inside space and comfort I think it really serves as a mid-size car. Plus the hatch lets you stuff just about anything into it.

Now Toyota is kinda the GM of Japan. In that their cars are user-friendly, not usually cult-type cars like say a Volvo or a Mini. So while the technology in the Prius is way out in front, Grandma could drive it once you explain that it gets fueled up at any gas station.

Honda- I think they made the mistake of starting to listen to the youngsters who are souping their cars up into mini hot rods. Recently they've been slanting their line more towards "performance" instead of FE.

Instead, I always thought of Honda as an economy car company. I susptected the first ones in US actually had oversized motorcycle engines. IIRC they were 1300 cc. Cheap to run, cheap to buy, and durable. My cousin is still driving her '89 Accord SFAIK.

The politicians that you elected decided that you needed to be safer. The euro and asian pols don't feel the same way. Why? Maybe something to do with liability laws? Or cultural feelings on personal responsibility? Or cultural feelings about death?

Or maybe the fact that something happens, the media smells a story, and the politicos find a sound byte? I think Homer Simpson nailed American politics to the wall with his garbage man campaign of "Can't Someone Else Do It?" Americans as a whole are lazy and easily led by their emotions. I get to say that being I'm born and raised here, and come from a long line of Americans. Even have some Cherokee in.

In the US we want the machine to do it. That goes for safety as well as fuel economy.

We buy a Prius and drive it 70-75 mph, get 45-48 mpg and are happy. We buy an auto tranny and are happy, even though a standard will gets better mpg.

For safety, we want big and solid, and/or lots of air bags. Forget about seat belts, we wish we could leave them off and rely on the air bags to save our a**es.

The Europeans on the other hand design cars for better handling and for better outward visibility (so you can see what's around you). Much better for accident avoidance. But that puts the safety responsibility on the driver.

Same for fuel economy. They make - and buy - mostly standard trannies and people learn how to use them, I would imagine.

The best thing we could do for fuel economy in this country would be to require a real-time mpg display in every car, small truck and SUV. Right in the middle of the instrument cluster, the digits to be the same size as the ones on the speedometer. Tell the people what they're doing. Let them see what happens to their wallet every time they out-testosterone some other driver. Start putting the US driver in control of fuel economy by giving him some information.

We also should be teaching fuel-economy principles in driver ed. If people would start out with some good basic information they would be better off than they are now. As it is you have to hunt for an education in fuel economy.

Our culture wastes what appears to be free. If you pay taxes, you're buying down the price of gas indirectly through subsidies, waived-royalties on public land, publicly funded security for foreign oil industry infractructure (called the US Armed Forces).

This way you get to buy gas even if you don't use any. Those of us who use less gas than the average, are buying some of the gas the guzzlers' use. Though this myopic policy guarantees waste, I don't think it's by accident.

Our choices of vehicles are just as much a symptom as are our buying habits.

I'd have loved a Focus with the 1.6 TDCi even though I've never owned any diesel ! It seems as though Ford America is missing out on sales . There are so *many* options available for the Focus it nearly dwarfs their entire US spec line . They say it is Too costly to offer the same here :thumbdown: . What do I know ?

It would prolly be too costly to meet emissions and safety standards, :p

It comes up again. Do you know what safety standards their talking about?

Well, to be US certified you have to pay a lot of money to do the tests. There is also something about body construction they didn't do with the lupo that would require a complete redesign to make US spec. Also, and prolly most importantly, Euro tests assume seat belts are used, US tests do not. So to pass US tests the car needs to be designed to cushion unbelted passengers.

Ok thanks. I can see the Lupo but geez how much would it cost to pad the passenger side?

It's not the cost to pad the interior iirc, anyone can do that, and the importers who sold the Smart had to. It's the cost of all the tests to certify this "new" model.

I think it also includes having things placed so as to not compress legs and hips and things...I don't see why we should test for people not wearing their seatbelt. I don't believe in seatbelt laws, but I think if you don't wear it you're taking your life into your own hands and everyone else shouldn't be responsible for it...

And part of it is the sheer number of vehicles available for sale in the US now. Did you know there are nearly 300 different models of cars and trucks -not counting the GM and Ford clones (who are they fooling anyway - geez!) That means if you sell 200K vehicles a year of any one model that is a big success. In the past GM was able to sell Impalas by the million. Those were the days my friend they thought they'd never end. They sang and danced until they closed the plants! Showing my age - sorry!

So introducing more choices fragments the market even further - resulting in even less profit. Hell, it's more profitable to sell movie tickets to the masses than by selling cars these days.

Gasoline prices will continue to climb in an upward sloping line. Technology will continue to make cheaper replacements for the ICE in ways that may today be cost prohibitive. This is a downward sloping line.

As time marches on, those lines will eventually cross. At that point, CAFE and any car company incapable of evolving will be irrelevant. I don't think that point in time is all that far off.

So while the lazy and greedy big three bicker over how much time they should be allowed to do nothing, the world will simply move on without them. The question is whether we'll entertain their shrill whining until they're finally gone. I hope not.

I just hope that battery technology continues to advance the power/weight density and wattage/$ ratio. Pretty much everything else is there to make EV a better choice. It won't matter to the consuming public until we reach that critical price point.

There will be relief in the future as the world becomes more of a global economy. Things will have to change. One of the reasons the GTO sold poorly in the US is because the gas tank was placed in the trunk. Due to in Aus. it was behind the axle, not allowed here. REGS. remember the Pinto?Buyers didn't like it. Ya I know fuel econmy stunk just stick with me, it's an example! Now GM is beginning to design with world sales in mind. Cars are being designed to be sold anywhere.
The statement was made about liability. That spells LAWYERS this country is run by them! There are no accidents someone has to be responsible. Can't be the nut behind the wheel! So cars are over built here like no were else. Lots of the cars designed and powered by FE engines could not pull the load here. Remember most of us commute one to a car, but they are designed with more in mind plus luggage. I can take all day to get to 55 but most won't deal with what we do. I get passed daily by Priusis and Insights in the high speed lane doing 80+. Most people vote with their right foot no matter what kind of car they drive.

I love these kind of statements. Do your homework, one of the main companys pushing batt. development is GM. They are investing tons of cash to do so. This will benefit all of us and the industry. Remember one thing you have to charge those cars. What are we going to charge them with? Calif. can't even keep all the lights lite. Let alone charge millions of cars. Plus be ready for taxes on them. Either in higher plate charges or a meter on your house to pay for road tax! Already talk is buzzing about the loss of revenue by charging cars instead of gas tax. Also the energy to build electric cars is higher. What do we do with all the dead batt.? Recycling them are more expensive. Not to mention the power plants cause more green house gasses than gas cars do. No one wants a power plant in their backyard! still I'd buy a Volt in a minute.

The energy used to run them is less. You recycle the battery? What do you do with old oil? Pour it in the rain gutter?

Show me some statistics showing that the average power plant produces more GHGs than the average car. I would like someone to show me how a powerplant is less fuel efficient than an ICE.

I would rather have a powerplant in my backyard than a permanent smog cloud over my city!

Check the thread I just posted on emissons. Do a google search on power plants. Cars are not producing smog clouds any longer. Anyone that is in there 50 nows what smog used to be compared to today. As to oil down the gutter thats illegal! Batt. recycling is energy inefficent that is what was trying to be put across. Gas tanks are plastic they turn into vinyl sidding quite easily.

-https://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3864/is_200001/ai_n8894949

Your comparing Apples and Oranges. Go back to the emissions thread, you are using years old data. The Geo has not been built since 01 which was a Chevy anyway in that year. 6 years in the emmisions game is decades in other industries. Cars are now nearing O emmisions and running on gas. One of the reasons the industry loves hybrids, natural gas, EV's, and hydrogen is the power source gets them out of a hot seat, and makes them look like a hero in the eye of the uninformed puplic.

I'm a little slow, could you explain what you mean by this please?

Which cars that run on gas are nearing 0% GHG emissions? That's all my quote references.

I looked at the emissions thread, and I don't see a link to anything about particulate emissions...

Yeah, me too... :)

"Existing U.S. power plants could provide enough juice to switch 84 percent of the 220 million American vehicles on the road from gasoline to electricity.
Scientific American - 14/Dec/2006 "

The fact is, dead batteries are a money-making proposition, not an expense. Standard car batteries are reportedly THE most recycled consumer item because the lead is valuable. Base metal prices that support old fashioned lead-acid as well as "advanced" battery chemistries have been rising dramatically in recent years, increasing the financial incentives for recycling.

Whose power plants are we talking about? Not everyone gets their electrons from coal or natural gas.

Over half of the standard grid mix where I live is nuclear and renewable hydro-electric. On top of that, consumers increasingly have the choice of buying 100% green power. When I charge the EV at my house, it's feeding on 100% renewable non-carbon emitting electricity.

On top of that, the grid is going to continue to get cleaner, so EV transportation will get cleaner along with it. Can't say that about ICE transportation emissions, which inevitably get dirtier with age simply due to wear and/or neglect.

And on top of that, I've read in several places (can't find it at the moment) that even if all EV's ran exclusively off coal generated power, there would still be a net reduction in pollution of all types because they're that much more efficient than ICE vehicles.

I wonder why you keep saying things like that. Do you mean it to be condescending? If it's directed at me, I want to fully understand your opening remark.

OK I will. Is this the same GM of EV1-crushing fame that developed NiMH (using public funds) only to sell it to Chevron in order to keep it (mostly) off the market? Is it the same GM convicted of monopoly and antitrust for killing electric streetcars and railroads in CA? I have faith that GM will continue to do what GM has done in their past.

It hasn't yet, and how much of the $1.25B in PNGV funds were part of this cash? As late as the end of January, GM was begging the US Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for even more cash for this. Will we ever see something for our investment? Chevron did.

This has been written about extensively and I'm not going to rehash all the possibilities here, none of which by the way, involve CAFE.

Matt -

I agree, but I also think it is product positioning. What happened to the Honda Civic HX? It probably cut into Honda Civic Hybrid sales. A high MPG Fit might hurt Honda Civic Hybrid sales :mad: .

CarloSW2

I had many friends on the EV1 progect. Batt. development was so bad at the time that 25 miles of normal driving would exhaust it. Let me qualify that staement. A/C on heat and accs. on. You know like normal people. Calif. had lots of complaints because they could drive out, but could not get back. Qoutes have been made and no I can't prove this. With development cost and eng. EV's cost in the neighbor hood of $1 mill. each. That is why they were leased and not sold. And no I'm not avoiding the O% statment, check monday I may have spoke out of turn there. If so apology in advance.
New batt. do not have the lead content old ones do.
In Canada hydro is a great source. In the US no one wants to dam anymorre rivers. If you check the news no one does want a powerplant in there area.
I love all the new energy devieces but they for the most part don't work at night. Let me say this and I'll stop. ( I WANT TO BE WRONG!!)

I find the development work GM did on the EV1 (or Impact in the early days) is nothing short of inspirational. I'd love to know more.

I have no doubt that batteries were the car's biggest weakness especially with lead acid. It wasn't their fault: until fairly recently, batteries haven't evolved much in over a hundred years. So they took a fresh new approach to the problem. Rather than wait for battery technology to be market-ready, they designed the car to compensate and be ultra efficient and high performance. Meanwhile, they continued work on batteries and came up with the NiMH for automotive use.

As for the cost, I would figure any such a clean-sheet design and with such a short run would be expensive. So why throw all that away? It was very good.

I have no lack of faith in the American engineers and autoworkers. I recall working with a couple of engineers after they left Ford a few years back who said "they wouldn't let us do it right." It's the management in the ivory tower that troubles me. I've watched the industry avidly for over 37 years and everytime I get my hopes up that they're finally turning the corner on a much needed improvement, it turns out to be another marketing ruse. You see I want to be wrong too.

Maybe the Volt is going to be the answer. It has all the makings of an EV with the range and utility of a gas car more befitting the N.A. markets. It also doesn't have or need the complexity of the Prius driveline. It should also leverage GMs experience with the EV1 and gasoline-engined cars.

I'm just afraid we're waiting on battery technology again. Atleast this time, they've outsourced some of the R&D to companies like A123. I'm really hoping they make it work, and I hope they don't give up on it if it's not yet profitable the first year out the gate.