We all know the press wouldn't lie, the government wouldn't fudge figures and Washington, DC is just looking out for our higher good.
Do I need a sarc tag?
Just
No
Oh joy , having fun being blown off the highway by every big rig
If a tractor trailer traveling 50 mph rear ends your SUV and pushes it under the trailer ahead of you, no amount of heavy material is going to keep you alive.
Hmmm, no traction in the snow, getting blown off the road and only costs twice as much? Sign me up!!!!
>> To meet the government’s goal
12 mil caskets on wheels.
I’ve been hypermiling in my Scion FR-S. It’s got a standard six speed transmission and is rated at 30 mpg highway. My average was 30-31 but for the last five tanks I’ve averaged between 37 and 38.5. It’s all about how you drive. It’s also a lot of work. You have to be thinking all the time.
But the savings are substantial. I have a 125 mile round trip commute so I use a lot of gas. I’m able to extend a single tank by about 90 miles, which works out to around $11. That’s eleven dollars savings PER TANK!
“Lighter doesn’t mean less safe. Cars with new materials are already acing government crash tests.”
Great. So a lighter car goes on the road. Gets 60 MPH. Unless the Mac truck that hits it is also light, and the cargo it is carrying also light, this vehicle is useless.
I’ll stick with steel thanks. F series Ford of 70s vintage.I have nothing against Carbon Fiber. I like steel. And if I had to use more gas/spend more on it, so be it.
With car materials there is light, strong, and cheap. You get to pick two.
1. It's still very expensive to fabricate.
2. The manufacturing process is not very environmentally friendly.
There is an alternative--composites made by hemp fiber--that is now getting more and more serious attention. It's almost as strong as carbon fiber, but the manufacturing cost is way lower and is not as bad to the environment when the composite made from hemp fiber is manufactured. We could see at least some body panels made from hemp fiber possibly within the next ten years, which will allow substantial weight savings--possibly as much as 400 pounds off a car now weighing around 2,900 pounds when made with high-strength steel.
My vehicle weighs 2800 lbs and does 53+ to the Gallon.
0 to 60, 9 seconds. 60 to 120 ,9seconds.
Top speed 125mph.
It is made of steel....there is no need for exotic materials.
Acing the crash tests? A 5 to 10mph crash will cause hundreds if not thousands of dollars in damage, versus older cars that barely get a scratch. They might pass the crash test but you have a squished compressed front end.
Long ago when young, was riding with my friend in his 1959 Olds coupe when he spun out taking a right turn too fast (he was a maniac driver). The car slid sideways and slammed into a telephone pole. He cranked the steering wheel and backed away from the pole. We were amazed to see no damage to the door other than scraped paint. Built like a tank, that '59 Olds. Try that in a modern lightweight car and it's totaled.
Maybe next Obama can repeal entropy(?)
CHEVY_VEGA_REDEUX_PING!
That’s why I still drive my 98 GMC Pick-up....
Only have to watch out for 18 wheelers and buses....
I would be a cynic for thinking the test standards have changed, right?
Really doesn’t matter to me, my cars are 14, 21 and 51 years old and with the financial prospects I have endured and foresee in the future, one of these new fangled crap wagons are about as likely to find me behind the wheel as the next entry on the periodic table being unobtanium.
Hey, I want a vehicle I can drive, not a danged tumbleweed. The wind here messes with you enough without making the vehicle so light you have to haul ballast.
I want as much metal around me as I can get. The bigger the vehicle, the better.