Why we don't have 50 mpg cars.

[ALS]

newsweek

[DarbyWalters]

Only a couple of those are stellar IMO. Honda Accord LX (21-31) and Mazda MX-5 (22-27) and they are in top ten. Others that can't break 40 mpg highway?

Of course, over half the dirvers here with no major mods...justs driving techniques and psi...could pull some impressive numbers I am sure.

[brucepick]

I say the reason is - car makers respond to the lowest common denominators in consumers, and that l.c.d. in vehicles includes a lack of interest in mpg.

What we should have done years ago:
We should have tasked NASA with the job of creating real, applied solutions to all our energy issues. If powers-that-be gripe that NASA is strictly about space, create a new agency, de-fund NASA severely, fund the new one, and let all the engineers go there. Put it about 30-45 minutes drive away from the Florida "space coast" area so that people could work there without reorganizing their lives seriously.

[bowtieguy]

opening paragraph...

"...when consumers decide they want to but it." says it all.

would that be when gas is $6/gal? yes says the accompanying article "How High Should Gas Prices Go?"

i have no problem with $6/gal gas as long as the govt cuts THEIR spending as well, and eliminates MOST other taxes, "fair tax" style!

[JESSE69]

When gas was less than $2 / gal people thought there was endless gas and they weren't inot buying FE cars. Like I hardly see many Civic HXs in used caar ads or on the road.

[R.I.D.E.]

The technology is there right now, and they don't have to be sardine cans.

Give Gayle Banks a 2 liter diesel engine and he can get 250 HP out of it while passing emissions with ease. Plenty of power for a nice sized pickup truck.

Put a 1 liter 125HP version in a Prius body with a wide range CVT and you can easily get 50. Add a lauch assist hydraulic rear axle and it would get 65 around town, with acceleration that would scare most soccer moms to death.

So lets assume they did it tomorrow. Pick a manufacturer, say Ford (for no good reason) Your Ford dealer has a 2500 pound 5 passenger car that gets an honest to god 55 MPg average. people are waiting in line with their checkbooks, while the rest of the over 100 million cars in the US just became worthless rolling scrap yards.

The other manufacturers go bankrupt and their inventory on new vehicles is sold for scrap while people wait for Ford to build 130 million cars. Ford has to sublet manufacturing to the other bankrupt manufacturers after buying their manufacturing facilities at yard sale prices.

The governments scared to death they will have to double the gas taxes to maintain revenue for road repairs.

Oil company stocks are falling like meterorites.

At 57 MPG average for the last 3 k miles I'm ready.

regards
gary

[theholycow]

That would be an interesting event, but that's not how it would go down. The demand would not be anywhere near as high as you suggest, and the other manufacturers would step up and compete.

The Prius is already EPA rated 48 city, 45 highway, and the Civic hybrid is already 40/45. They're selling but not revolutionarily so.

[dm1333]

I averaged about 45 on the highway over the life of the car. On some trips I actually broke the 50 mpg barrier, including a drive from Forks, WA to Sacramento, CA where I averaged 52 mpg all the way through to Ashland, OR. My speed was a steady 60. At 160,000 miles the compression was still within specs and the mileage was still good.

[96hb]

I think gas prices would have to reach astronomical levels for any of that to take place. Because no matter how much people may gripe about it, there are still tons of people out there that are just willing to bite the bullet and pay whatever it costs to fill up their large SUV's and whatnot. It would have to get high enough to hurt these people's pockets, and that would probably be $10+ a gallon, IMO. It sucks, but it's just reality. Some people just have that kind of money to blow. I will stick to my Civic.

[fumesucker]

I think we are close to the price that will bring on a real change in people's habits.

There are a lot of people out there driving large SUV type vehicles who really and truly cannot afford to put fuel in them at the current prices.

Take a look at the used car lots.. There are a great many gas sucker type vehicles and far fewer number of efficient vehicles.

[96hb]

Yeah it is getting there. I must confess that my wife drives one of these guzzlers, a 2001 Navigator. At the time we bought it, I got it for about $8k under blue book and gas was not nearly as expensive as it is now. I am thinking of getting rid of it pretty soon. And even though it costs upwards of $100 to fill the tank now, we can still 'afford' it. Do I like paying that much for fuel? Heck no! But we can afford to do it. I am trying to talk her into getting an Accord sedan or something like that and probably triple the FE over what she drives now.

[fumesucker]

Originally Posted by 96hb

Yeah it is getting there. I must confess that my wife drives one of these guzzlers, a 2001 Navigator. At the time we bought it, I got it for about $8k under blue book and gas was not nearly as expensive as it is now. I am thinking of getting rid of it pretty soon. And even though it costs upwards of $100 to fill the tank now, we can still 'afford' it.

Good luck with getting the distaff side into a more efficient vehicle..

$100 plus fillups are changing a lot of people's minds about what and how to drive. I know the price of gas has my attention and I don't see things changing back to cheap fuel any time soon now.

The problem as I see it is that those who need the efficient vehicle the most are those with the least ability to go and purchase another car right now.

[1993CivicVX]

the gas prices aren't as bad as the oil crunch in the 70s right? And remember how cheap gas got in the 90s. So while it has a ways to go up yet. It may very well become very cheap again down the line. But hopefully the big squeeze will come on such that the automakers really have to close down the SUV factories.

Originally Posted by fumesucker

The problem as I see it is that those who need the efficient vehicle the most are those with the least ability to go and purchase another car right now.

I have a friend in this situation. I think he's driving around an old Pontiac Grand Prix.

[Zvolen]

I think a lot could be done right now, but whats the use, the majority are still satisfied with what they have. The economy is a strange place, it will change when we as a majority want it to change.

[bowtieguy]

Originally Posted by R.I.D.E.

The governments scared to death they will have to double the gas taxes to maintain revenue for road repairs.

and congress(and local govt reps) is scared their pockets will not be filled.

[bowtieguy]

Originally Posted by 96hb

And even though it costs upwards of $100 to fill the tank now, we can still 'afford' it. Do I like paying that much for fuel? Heck no! But we can afford to do it.

this is THE argument for moving to lower fuel prices. many cannot afford it which will have economic consequences the more nothing is done.

but, i applaud you for looking to make a change tho it's not necessary!

i feel not for those that bought new trucks and SUVs NOT out of necessity. something must be done, as said previously for those that bought older used cars that fit their budget.

fuel prices presently could cost more for fuel PER YEAR than the purchase price of a vehicle. my typical purchase is $3k price range, for example. even an economy car could apply to said example.

[fumesucker]

Originally Posted by bowtieguy

fuel prices presently could cost more for fuel PER YEAR than the purchase price of a vehicle. my typical purchase is $3k price range, for example. even an economy car could apply to said example.

If you get 20 mpg and drive 20K/year then you are very close to $4,000/year fuel cost right now..

20,000/250 commuting days per year = 80 miles per day commute.

Up until a fairly recent job change my wife was doing close to that kind of mileage for commuting, it's not all that unusual around where we live.. But Atlanta is very spread out and has no real natural barriers to sprawl.

[1cheap1]

Right now the states put there taxes on a gallon of gas. When the mpg goes higher they are set to tax us on miles driven, instead of a gallon of gas or some plan blending the two. They never stop trying to come up with ways to extract more money from the public.

[Big Dave]

The link touched on a number of reasons but the single sentence about the consumer is the trump card.

Most consumers do not want a small car unless it is cheap enough that they can have a small commuter car AND something big enough to meet other missions.

Most consumers (foolishly IMO) want an automatic transmission so they can jabber on the cell phone while they drive.

Most consumers want a decent level of soundproofing so they can jabber on their cell phone. Old 60s cars have no soundproofing and it is like riding in a drum.

Safety regulations militate against lightweight cars. Volvos are safe but gas hogs. You can make lightweight, safe cars but only Bill Gates can afford them. Given the state of air pollution regs, making a carbon fiber car body in mass quantities would have to be done outside the US. The layup process emits a lot of volatile organic compounds.

Most consumers feel helpless in a vehicle that won?t do better than 12 seconds in the 0-60 unless it is a large pickup or SUV.

I wish the electric car guys all the luck in the world. I hope the lithium-ion battery is the answer. But acceptable electric cars beg the question: Where are you gonna get all that electricity? The grid is stretched tight as a banjo string right now. Without Congressional intervention, just getting the permits for a new power plant takes over a decade. If electric cars become viable the US will need hundreds of them practically overnight.

None of these objections are insuperable, but will require a definite change in the minds of consumers, manufacturers, voters, elected officials, and bureaucrats.

[JoeBob]

Part of the problem is the pundits who write these articles. If you read the article, you see they are playing to the crowd who wouldn't buy a 50 mpg car on a bet. 50 mpg cars? We had them over 20 years ago! The Chevy Sprint/Geo Metro did that in the '80s. (But of course, anybody who's on here KNEW that already!) Ditto (I think) with the Honda CRX. Go back a little further? The King Midget claimed about 50 mpg. Consumers don't want them? Well, Chevy sold more Metros/Sprints than they did Corvairs, 'course the Sprint/Metro is about 10 times the car a Corvair ever was. Having been pretty intimate with both, I should know! Unfortunately, I've only gotten intimate in a Corvair, but that's another story...

[R.I.D.E.]

They got the date side guard beams were introduced wrong.

I think it helps to make the public aware of the fact that fuel cost have reached a point where they will surpass all other vehicle costs combined.

While some people just don't get it and probably will never get it, those with some math skills are beginning to understand the logic of having another car that gest great mileage offsets the additional costs involved.

regards
gary

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by Big Dave

Most consumers (foolishly IMO) want an automatic transmission so they can jabber on the cell phone while they drive.

Most consumers want a decent level of soundproofing so they can jabber on their cell phone. Old 60s cars have no soundproofing and it is like riding in a drum.

Loosen your iron grip on your agenda and think about these things realistically.

Most consumers don't want to be bothered with shifting -- they don't even want to have to adjust the temperature controls or hold the window button, so there's automatic climate control and express-down/express-up windows (I love the windows, and don't have the climate control, which is just fine with me). And really, it is a pain in the ***. This is the 21st century. Humans landed on the freakin' moon almost 40 years ago now. You'd think we don't have to operate a personal conveyance so barbarically. I enjoy shifting, but that doesn't mean everyone should have to.

Do you seriously think that people should ride in something that's "like riding in a drum"? Perhaps you were being sarcastic, because I can't imagine someone who would describe it that way would actually promote the idea.

But acceptable electric cars beg the question: Where are you gonna get all that electricity? The grid is stretched tight as a banjo string right now. Without Congressional intervention, just getting the permits for a new power plant takes over a decade. If electric cars become viable the US will need hundreds of them practically overnight.

When people can't get to work, watch how fast those hurdles get destroyed. I don't think electric cars are practical or realistic, but if they were and if they were common, things would change.

I actually have this prediction that I've thought of if, as the doomsayers say, we run out of dinosaur juice: Nuclear plants to make the energy, and hydrogen or something similar to store it and fuel internal combustion engines. Again, it will not be an energy source, just a storage medium. I predict nuclear because I think it will be the source that is fastest to make a whole schittload of in a hurry -- actually designing a building a nuclear plant can probably get done in 5 years with enough motivation.

Understand, I'm not pushing that as a plan, and I don't necessarily prefer it or any of its components, nor do I particularly dislike them. I just imagine that it will go down that way because people won't want to go without internal combustion powered vehicles for long and that will probably be the quickest way.

Originally Posted by R.I.D.E.

While some people just don't get it and probably will never get it, those with some math skills are beginning to understand the logic of having another car that gest great mileage offsets the additional costs involved.

If you do the math, it doesn't work out for most people. It does work for me, though, which is nice because I like having another vehicle.