Posted on 06/22/2007 5:38:46 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
LOL
Stop giving anyone ideas! /s
“exotic batteries made of unobtanium”
LMAO!
I bet that six cycle engine could do that. You get that extra power from steam....so maybe it would work.
Well maybe....but where do the grandkids sit?
2020?
What a bunch of wusses. If they really wanted to “do something” they would have set a 5 year timeline and let the electorate decide if they should remain in office. As it stands, this is firmly over the horizon and will never be implemented, and will be repealed or loopholed to death well before 2020.
I disagree with this, of course, but hey, you can respect a principled stand, even if misguided.
Republicans and Democrats collectively are a bunch complete liberal wusses for passing something so they could claim to be “green” in the near-term elections.
Conservatives have a long row to hoe if they think the GOP is recoverable from this death-spiral that GWB has put us in that makes crap like this possible.
lol.
Agreed, but our government should not subsidize the US auto makers demise through tax policy and cafe standards. People want big cars and SUVs.
They are expecting cars by then to be made of aluminum foil and only the airbag and the seatbelts will be able to protect drivers in the event of a collision.
You’re right - small turbo’ed, computer controlled diesels are the engine of the future.
Now all we need are better transmissions.
These combined still won’t propel a 5000-lb SUV at 35 MPG with today’s drivetrains. One of the big reasons for SUV’s slurping so much more fuel than compact cars is that the SUV is using a classic drivetrain. Non-engineers don’t realize how much energy is lost trying to push energy around a 90-degree angle. When you have differentials in the drivetrain, you’re wasting some of your power as heat.
This is why the early high MPG Japanese cars went to transverse-mounted engines: the engine turns in the same direction as the wheels, without need for diffs.
A front-wheel drive car with a transverse-mounted turbo diesel engine should be able to top 60 MPG at highway speeds. But it won’t have 4WD unless the rear wheel drive setup is used only when necessary, and possibly be electrically driven.
No doubt, congress will include a limo exemption.
No, of course not. The VW itself doesn’t weigh 6,000#. Towing a trailer that is heavier than the towing vehicle is probably something that most drivers shouldn’t do unless they take the effort to become familiar with trailer brake systems.
That said, the CAFE standards are fleet averages. If more people drive high mileage cars, and dispense with driving SUV’s that they don’t need, then lower-mileage SUV’s and pickups will still be allowed.
Most people who own SUV’s are wasting fuel on a truck-type driveline because what they really want is good visibility, cargo room and a little more crash survivability. They don’t want (nor do they know how to use) a 4WD drivetrain, which is what contributes much to the SUV’s fuel inefficiency. Likewise, most SUV owners will never tow anything. Detroit needs to come up with a vehicle that delivers the aspects of the SUV that the typical customer wants, and removes the aspects of the SUV that the typical SUV customer never uses.
Ford’s hybrid SUV driveline gets the mileage up near 30 MPG. Get a small turbodiesel into that vehicle, and you’re up to 35 MPG without breaking a sweat.
Diesels autos in Europe account for about 42% of new auto sales.
I also drive a 1-ton F-350 diesel. I like it just fine.
I have no intention of being a victim of broiler-foil roller skate standards: when the 7.3L engine dies, I’ll put another engine into the same truck. The registration will exempt me from new emissions standards, so I won’t have to put up with urea or exhaust filters and retarded injection timing to reduce NOx for idiot Californian standards.
As I see it, the only people who will comply with this idiocy will be those people who can’t be bothered to learn how to work on older cars.
Well, I have to have 4x4 just to get around in winter and I tow a boat.
Stupid lil toy cars wouldn’t work for me or anyone I know.
It’s called ‘Central Planning’.
I expect that you’ll see a lot more non-metallic body components in these cars — things like fiberglass, carbon fiber, etc. There are plenty of these new materials that will greatly reduce weight, and still be able to protect passengers in collisions. I’ve seen modern bullet-proofing materials where a panel 0.25” thick will stop a .30-06 AP round. That’s pretty strong stuff.
The rub, tho, will be how much these materials raise the price of a car.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.