Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Myth of Ever Increasing Fuel Economy
American Thinker ^ | May 23, 2009 | R.H. Higgs

Posted on 05/22/2009 10:41:30 PM PDT by neverdem

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last

1 posted on 05/22/2009 10:41:30 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Have vehicles improved so drastically compared to older models?

My '96 Chevy Tahoe (V8, 4x4) gets 20 mpg on the highway. Not bad. ...and the same as the new ones. And I remember some Japanese models from the '70s getting over 40 mpg.

2 posted on 05/22/2009 10:48:21 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I couldn’t read it all but does it say that improving the efficiency of the older model gas hogs is easier than making new cars that have 35 MPG?


3 posted on 05/22/2009 10:49:49 PM PDT by Selmore (Trying to breath in the World Trade Center was torture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Makes too much sense...

I am so close to being Crispus Attucks, every day is a chore for me.

TT


4 posted on 05/22/2009 10:51:10 PM PDT by TexasTransplant (NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSET)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

+++++++++++++ “By proposing a set limit for economy on all classes of passenger vehicles, Barack Obama has basically said one of two things: In 2016, he wants only economy cars to be sold in the US or he is instructing car companies to squeeze gas from a stone. Since he cannot change the laws of physics, I envision the date those proposed standards take effect will either be repealed by the next administration, or continually be delayed.

This is just another dictate similar to all the rest of Obama’s plans: not based in reality, but wishful thinking “+++++++++++++++

Sorry I should have referenced this first
TT


5 posted on 05/22/2009 10:54:48 PM PDT by TexasTransplant (NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSET)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Higgs has jettisoned himself a gazillion miles ahead of Obama on this topic.

Obama wastes our time with a message the media likes to hear-or a message he wants the media to hear-but Higgs does the research.


6 posted on 05/22/2009 10:55:51 PM PDT by period end of story (Give me a firm spot, and I will move the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

My 1988 V8 powered Crown Vic got 30 MPG. I doubt that they have improved on that.

Tin can cars, here we come.


7 posted on 05/22/2009 10:56:20 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler ("Mr. President, I support you but not your mission. I'm showing my patriotism through dissent.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I have a 1982 Oldsmobile Diesel car. It gets in excess of 35 mpg, and it’s a HEAVY car, all steel and such.... why is it that this car which is heaver, bigger, less aerodynamic, and over a quarter-century old gets BETTER MILLAGE than today’s autos?

Partly because Diesels are that much more effective, and the engine it uses is not a “native diesel” engine, but was rather a v8 that they retrofitted to run diesel. Now, I imagine that a “native diesel” engine would be even better, being designed “from the floor up” with Diesel in mind; however, that is completely disregarding the advances in technologies that could be applied to the engine.

(Just to give you an idea; HCCI, which is a rather new Gasoline effectiveness-booster, is pretty much the same technology/physical-device as Diesel fuel-injectors.)


8 posted on 05/22/2009 11:01:44 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
My hubby purchased a Chevy Sprint in 1985. They claimed that it got 50 mpg. I think that he averaged around 45-47 mpg. Not what they claimed, but close. But far better than most of the economy cars of today. It was totaled in a car accident 5 years ago. He still bemoans the loss of that car.

We have been wondering why they aren't producing the mega efficient vehicles like they were able to in the 80's. The only conclusion that we could come up with was the extra weight from extra safety features like airbags and stronger frames.

In 1991 we purchased an Astro van. I am still driving it. It gets 21-22 mpg highway and 18-19 city. I can still tow our trailer and the interior is still in good condition considering its age, and the amount of use that it has been through. After 287,000 miles it has finally developed a problem with a gasket leaking on the trans. This is the first repair to the trans, while the engine has never been touched. The rear end developed a problem about 100,000 miles ago. I so agree with the article, you would think that with the recent advances in technology, we would have come much further in the development of more fuel efficient vehicles.

9 posted on 05/22/2009 11:02:41 PM PDT by notpoliticallycorewrecked (According to the MSM, I'm a fringe sitting, pajama wearing Freeper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Higher fuel economy sounds good on paper.
I THINK oBAMA IS PLANNING ON PEOPLE parking THEIR VEHICLES for fuel economy.

More fantasy from Disneyland on the Potomac.


10 posted on 05/22/2009 11:03:48 PM PDT by o_zarkman44 (Obama is the ultimate LIE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Obama won’t stop until cars are made to run off unicorn farts and wishful thinking....


11 posted on 05/22/2009 11:04:16 PM PDT by dirtbiker (Obama is America's first Affirmative Action president....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: period end of story

Indeed you are most correct.


12 posted on 05/22/2009 11:07:32 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

I bought a Mazda B3000 pickup, nearly the same as the Ford Ranger (actually built by Ford, but sold by Mazda) and am alive because of it.

I was in a head on accident in January of 2008. The bigger car meant that I wasn’t decelerated so fast. The other driver was going over 70 miles an hour. I was stopped, waiting to take a left turn. He had 30 feet of rubber left in the road leading up to the impact.

With lighter and smaller cars you get better gas mileage. You also get higher death rates from accidents.

An example: Take a basketball and a tennis ball. Old each out at arm’s length, with the tennis ball on top of the basket ball. Drop them. The momentum of the Basketball will go into the tennis ball with a nearly elastic collision. Do this outside kids.

In an accident the change in momentum is not elastic, but rather it does work on your car and on you. A bigger car is safer for its occupants.


13 posted on 05/22/2009 11:07:46 PM PDT by donmeaker (Invicto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker

I hear ya — my old ‘79 Caddy 7-liter sedan saved my butt in a head-on collision (on ice) with a large city truck back in the late ‘80s. Only large vehicles for me.


14 posted on 05/22/2009 11:13:28 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: notpoliticallycorewrecked
We have been wondering why they aren't producing the mega efficient vehicles like they were able to in the 80's. The only conclusion that we could come up with was the extra weight from extra safety features like airbags and stronger frames. .

As well as the federally mandated safety content, there is also the market mandated luxury content. This is a more affluent country than it was 25 years ago. Very few shoppers will settle for a slow, noisy car with no AC. The ones who will won't pay new car prices.

Regarding claimed mileage, you can't compare 80s window sticker numbers to modern cars. The EPA changed the test to give lower results in 1984, and again in 2007. 50 then would be about 35 now.

15 posted on 05/22/2009 11:18:05 PM PDT by CGTRWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I think in the not so distant future the years of 2005-2010 will become known as the “golden years” for the combination of selection, power and comfort that is currently available.

I doubt I will ever buy a new car again. My next purchase, whether next year or 2020, will be something with at least 425hp, and I doubt that will be available new come 2020.


16 posted on 05/22/2009 11:24:06 PM PDT by VeniVidiVici (Putin warned Obama not to pursue Marxism. Obama has ignored him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

What is HCCI?


17 posted on 05/22/2009 11:30:13 PM PDT by dr huer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Something not mentioned but very important is Ethanol.

Ethanol mixed with gasoline reduces the MPG.

Ethanol has less energy per gallon. I wouldn’t be surprised that adding 10% Ethanol costs 5% on MPG.


18 posted on 05/22/2009 11:30:54 PM PDT by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DB

If they can use ethanol efficiently and without subsidy, that’s fine with me. I want cheap energy and energy independence.


19 posted on 05/22/2009 11:41:46 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Ford has a car that will get 65 mpg available right now.

Thing is, it's Diesel, it's only 88 hp, 1.6 liter engine, and...
It's only available in Europe and Great Britain.

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons Ford didn't need a bailout, these Ford ECOno Fiesta cars are selling like hotcakes in europe.

But Ford doesn't think they will sell in the U.S., cause of the low horsepower and the diesel engine, so we don't get the option to buy a car that can get 65 mpg.

It's not the technology, it's the economics.

20 posted on 05/23/2009 12:10:18 AM PDT by Drammach (Freedom - It's not just a job, It's an Adventure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson