Posted on 12/22/2007 3:22:32 PM PST by bruinbirdman
Like those 5 mph bumpers that cost thousands of dollars to fix?
A VW 50 mpg clean diesel Jetta may arrive stateside in a few months:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4235586.html
Biodiesel is probably worth pursuing. Ethanol is a scam that has the sole purpose of transferring money from taxpayers to the politically connected.
I can see the headlines now for 2017—fatalities rise, Bush’s fault—women, children, minorities hit hardest.
VW is selling a 70 mpg compact in Europe, and apparently has an 80-90 mpg car as well:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4219904.html
The 5mph bumper standard was in force for one year, about 25 years ago.
Current standards are the bumper must protect the body and safety equipment (headlights) in a 2.5mph frontal crash, or a 1.5mph corner crash against a defined barrier. There is no requirement that the bumper survive that single tap.
You’d think that law was written by the body shop industry.
IMHO, targeting SUVs because they are too large and bulky tends to miss the target.
Considering most SUVs are built on the same frame/chasis as the 1/2 ton trucks are constructed, it appears most of the development of those series are spread over light trucks and SUVs.
Trying to impose 35mpg limits on light trucks merely limits their robust design and hinders their longevity in multiple utility functions.
Work is force times distance. There is an lower limit to fuel consumption if one is hauling a 500lb payload routinely. If one forces the 35mpg limits on 1/2 ton chassis’, then anticipate the empty GVW to be minimal to achieve those limits. That also implies a half laden and full laden truck will probably be even more inefficient.
IMHO, far better to design for a 5/8s laden 1/2 ton pickup than an empty shell to lower pollution numbers over the hundreds of thousands being deployed. BTW, changes in those designs also have impact on fuel mixtures over time. Those past design trucks tend to become even more inefficient with each change in fuel mix/blend as they are modified by refineries over the years.
Don’t forget the engine blocks are must lighter than in the 50s and 60s. Then again, with the lighter mass blocks, the less overhead available to absorb heat if your cooling system malfunctions. Be it a busted hose, gunked up oil, or low water levels, today’s engine blocks aren’t nearly as forgiving in the event of coolant malfunction. Good way to crack a block, bend a camshaft or throw a rod, disrupt a harmonic balancer or transmit some horrible vibration through the tranny.
All these things compound the damage done by a faulty cooling system.
Now, in the event of a faulty lubrication system, things are even worse since engines are designed to operate with higher lubricant pressures and thinner lubricant and less lube in the oil pan. With a higher oil pressure, the bearing areas are reduced to minimize rotating and reciprocating mass and friction losses. Take away the oil pressure and things really go to sh1t fast.
Gone are the days when an engine run out of oil would simply seize up, then free up once cooled off and be good to go simply by pouring some oil into the crankcase.
It used to be that a motor might have some knocking or ticking or sounds or wear and a careful owner could milk quite a few more years of use out of it. Nowdays, once you start to hear a little bit of valvetrain noise, the motor is very near it’s final days.
A 1960 VW Beetle weighed 1609 lbs.
A later Super Beetle weighed 1984 lbs.
A 2007 New Beetle weights from 2884 to 2965 lbs.
I accept you may not simply take my word that the latest cars are heavier, but the figures above illustrate my contention.
I read an article in the motoring press during the last year. It cited several examples about the increased weight of vehicles.
It noted that new vehicles weigh more due to engine pollution controls, airbags, air conditioning units, power window units, audi equipment, stronger and therefore heavier frames and bodies.
The point of the article was all about how as vehicles got heavier, they became safer, had more features standard, and that engine technology achieved more power per cubic inch and yet increased or maintained fuel mileage economy.
Some changes were government mandated and others were not.
Weight is one factor in crash survivability, but crush zones are a vital part of the engineering. The earliest cars to utilize crush zones were Volvo, Mercedes, BMW and I assume Audi, Saab, etc.
The Smart cars from Mercedes are tiny, yet reported to withstand crashes well due to current engineering and build technology.
I don’t claim to be an expert or engineer. But I read extensively because I am an enthusiast. Some call that a German Car Lover.
An even closer comparison would be Porsche.
A 1964 911 weighs 2381 lbs.
A 2004 Carrera S weighs 3296 lbs.
Ford Mustang.
1969 weighs 3122 lbs.
2004 weighs 3519 lbs.
Toyota Corolla.
1966 weighs 1587 lbs.
2006 weighs 3097 lbs.
Fiat. I have no stats, but the old tiny Fiat 500 was a typical budget Euro basic transport skate. Very light.
Talk in the press is they are doing an up to date similar car, bigger, heavier, safer, more powerful.
I checked Corvette and found little increase in weight.
Increased weight is the result of safety and features. Crush zones and other technologies advance safety as well as weight.
This is why you should NEVER use automotive oil in motorcycles any more, especially if the bike shares the crankcase and transmission, or has a wet clutch.
Mark
Isn't reduction of dependence on oil the primary impetus for this new law?
As a conservative, I don’t mind seeing the CAFE miles-per-gallon limit raised.
NOT because I think it will ‘save us’ from global warming, which is a myth.
But because it will help us stop importing so much freakin’ crude oil from MidEast Muslim tyrants.
If I lived in the city, and needed a car mainly to get to work, and to drive solely in the city, I would be looking to get the smallest vehicle I could.
Not for better gas mileage, but because a smaller car is infinitely easier to maneuver on city streets than a bigger vehicle.
Parking spaces, making right or left turns, turning around.
All things which are waaay easier with a small car.
Popular Science just published about one for bicycles. There doesn't seem to be much reason to think it can't be used for cars.
BTW: Leonardo da Vinci drew up the prototype!
...and in Europe, diesel is not taxed as high as gasoline, making it cheaper per gallon. We don't have that arrangement in the US because liberals have already raised fuel taxes on diesels to "punish" those evil trucks out there.
Therefore, any benefit we might get from diesel technology will be offset by the costs of the fuel.
This bill explains all the hype of recent months regarding “global warming”.
This is what the media does. They act in concert with the left. They promote an agenda very heavily and at every opportunity. Meanwhile the lawmakers are working on legislation that needs the hype to pass.
The left is currently working on extreme “hate crime” legislation. That explains all the hype about nonsense like the “jena 6” and nooses, and why they totally IGNORE all black on white crime. The plan is to get the public properly brainwashed so that it will support this proposed legislation.
The curren nissan altima has a CV tranny.
“Therefore, any benefit we might get from diesel technology will be offset by the costs of the fuel.”
I have observed the retail price of diesel range from 90% to 110% of the price of premium gasoline.
If mileage is better with diesel by 25% to 35% it is more correct math wise to say the improved mileage may be PARTLY offset by higher fuel price. (As contrasted with saying ANY benefit)
And if our local representatives at the federal and state level felt voter pressure, perhaps tax inequalities could be adjusted.
Until recent years, diesel was lower in price in my state, rather than being higher.
I think your blanket contention is open to change.
You may be dead, but at least the nanny-staters will have their warm smug feelings.
/s
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.