Replies

I'm not an auto expert, but isn't Ford going about this the wrong way? I've got a fully loaded Ford F-150 4x4 pickup truck with the LARGER V-8 (5.7 liters), and I've averaged 16-17 miles per gallon (I can get better than 20 on the highway) since Day 1. The major factor in this case is the transmission (it's got a low gear ratio that makes it run more efficiently at highway speeds), not the engine size.

Why don't some of these auto manufacturers simply take their existing engines and add another gear (5th, 6th, or even 7th) to improve fuel economy?

Conversely, the auto industry could push the U.S. government to do one thing that would probably be quite effective in improving overall fuel efficiency: Increase the number of vehicles with manual transmissions on the road. This isn't a bad idea at all . . . if Congress is going to force people to drive certain types of cars to meet these fuel standards, they might as well force them to drive cars that require a driver who -- well, KNOWS HOW TO DRIVE.

Actually, some of the current generation of automatic transmissions are *more* efficient and get better mileage than their manual siblings. The one in the BMW 530i, for example, gets 1-2mpg more than its manual version in both city and highway regimes.

By the way, 6 speed autos are becoming increasingly common, even before this legislation came out. 7 speed or better autos may not be widely adopted just yet because of various technical reasons.

It is sad, not too many people know how to drive a stick shift anymore. I insisted on learning when I was 16/17 years old. One incentive, at the time, my mom had a RX-7 and I wanted to drive that car. It was a 5 speed. Once I learned, I prefer them over an automatic. Just about all the cars I owned were always standard shift except the vehicles my wife drove. She doesn't even want to learn to drive a standard shift.

I know about ten years ago, some Clinton people were discussing on finding ways to eliminate manual transmission vehicles and using under the guise of EPA rules. Because of EPA rules, if BMW offered the same car, same engine. One with an automatic and the other with a manual transmission, they had to file separate certification paperwork which included all sorts of testing. The paperwork was pretty expensive. What happens, the marketing executives basically the hell with the car enthusiasts and just import the automatic transmission version only.

In fact, automatic transmissions should be banned unless for a medical need. With a standard shift, it is impossible to drive and talk on the cell phone. I don't know how many times I get stuck behind some slowpoke only to finally pass and they are talk on their stupid phone.

Conversely, the auto industry could push the U.S. government to do one thing that would probably be quite effective in improving overall fuel efficiency: Increase the number of vehicles with manual transmissions on the road. This isn't a bad idea at all . . . if Congress is going to force people to drive certain types of cars to meet these fuel standards, they might as well force them to drive cars that require a driver who -- well, KNOWS HOW TO DRIVE.

Torque is a function of RPM and displacement.

Your 5.7L V-* runs down the road at 2200 RPM to give it enough torque to turn the gear and enough RPM to make it smooth. Change the gear, you change the RPM downward (1500 RPM) would make the driveline work harder to maintain a specific speed.

To do this would change the drive-ability of your truck. To create an engine that burns gasoline, and make lots of torque at low RPM’s you give up lots of higher RPM power.