A 1974 Mini Cooper that I personally restored. It gets 45 MPG by the way.

Nope. I was going to purchase one and became disgusted with the idea of 16MPG fuel economy.

The irony here is that I have three boats that I trailer and I use a station wagon that gets better mileage, and has more room than most SUV's.

I was planning on picking up a 2003 F150 to use for the boats but it never happened.

-Don

 

A Hummer or an H2? It is damned near impossible to insure a Hummer in NY. An H2 is a completely different story (and a POS ).

Actually I love where I live.

Here'sa question for you and XLT (Especially since XLT is such a big fan of states rights):
Why can't NY and California set their own standards for fuel economy for vehicles registered in the state? The minority of people in NY drive SUV's and they are ****ing up the air in the city for the majority of people. Why does the minority get to do what it wants to despite what the majority wants?

This is all I have been saying!!!! You guys are acting as if I want to ban SUV's and outlaw V8 engines. All I want is for the auto makers to keep improving fuel efficiency. That just has not happened.

-Don

 

Hell yes! If they can double the fuel efficiency I am all for it.

Different areas of the country. In NYC most of the SUV's I run into are being bought by businesses. I'm sure it is different in NH.

-Don

 

All right then, sounds like we are on to something. Assuming it is you and I setting up this incentive for automakers lets make it interesting.

If they can double the fuel efficient they get to keep 100% of the profits from the sale of those vehicles. First, they have to decide to sign on and the catch is they have 5 years to come up with a vehicle that can double fuel efficient while maintaining horsepower and torque.

Now, to keep them honest we are up front with them when they sign. By signing if they come up with the vehicle in 5 years then they keep all the money they make, if they fail to come up with the vehicle they pay double the taxes and can NOT pass the extra tax on to the consumer…

Ok, that could very well be true. Just hard to understand why there would be so many for a tax write off. Forgive my ignorance on the tax advantage but what exactly can they write off? The entire cost of the vehicle? So if it cost 35k they can write off the entire 35k?

 

If the vehicle is in a certain weight class, they can write off 100% of the vehicle cost. That's a pretty big incentive.

-Don

 

Ok, well please accept my apologizes about your argument not being valid I thought since you were here you owned an F150. So now argue away and you can really go after me since I traded in a V6 that got approx. 17 – 19mpg on a Lightning that gets approx. 13mpg…

I do however have a beater (1986 Dodge 600se 2.2l) that gets approx. 23mpg that I use for errands, running around town and going back and forth to work most of the time…

 

Yes that is one hell of an incentive...

 

Don -

I have read many of your posts and have come to believe that you are a pretty smart guy (for a liberal) (just kidding !!)

However, please don't compare the Model A to a modern F150.

For the weight and capacity and speed that a Model A was/is capable of, 25 MPG is a horrible rating. A car today, weighing what a Model A weighed, with similiar power and speed, would get 75 MPG or more.

As far as knocking all the SUV drivers for making your city polluted, I think your time would be better spent doing something about all the taxis and such.

As far as global warming, I once read this in a National Geographic article on Mount Pinatubo :

When it erupted, it expelled more poisons, CO2, noxious gasses and general pollutants into the atmosphere than all of the fires, engines, etc. ever created by man, all combined, for all time.

I am not saying it is OK for us to pollute indiscriminately, but there is a "price" to be paid, by us all, for living in a modern world.

The real problems lie with depleted forests and the destruction of the oceans. Once the oceans go, we all are sure to follow...

 

Why not? I'm not arguing that they are technologically equal. That would be silly. But when you compare what was appropriate for that time period (with the lack of real roads) with what we have today it is a valid comparison.

Yes but when you consider the inefficiency of the 1930 drive train, the inefficiency of the engine the poor BTU rating for the fuel, and the terrible roads, the Model A was getting good gas mileage.

Taxis account for a very small portion of NYC traffic. You just notice them more because they all look alike

Does that mean we should help it along?

Why not try this:
Set a HP limit for different classes of production vehicles. Say 300HP for a half ton truck (or whatever). Tell the automakers that they can't put more horsepower than that into the engine. If HP doesn't work then set some other sort of pollution limit. The goal would be to stop the HP wars between manufacturers and instead let them concentrate on fuel economy.

None of this would stop you or I from modifying our engines to make more horsepower (assuming they meet the existing environmental regulations). It would, however, keep the average yutz from driving around in a 350HP Dodge Durango

I'd be happy if we addressed _any_ of these issues

-Don

 

It is a HORRIBLE comparison. My 2001 SuperCrew weighed 2 1/2 times what a Model A weighs, can haul way more load, is much safer at 65 MPH and pollutes less than the Model A did, even if it gets a few MPG less.

The available roads are irrelevant. Cars today are way more efficient than those of even 5 years ago.

Face it, the "200 MPG carburetor" is not a possibility.

They may account for a small % of the vehicles, but I bet they account for large # of operating hours and miles driven. There are over 12,000 of them and I would be willing to bet the majority are operated 24/7, are very high mileage and don't run nearly as clean as the SUVs you are complaining about.


Car manufacturers can't win. We all want comfort, safety, reliability, style, performance, etc. for the lowest possible price. Your Mini may get 45 MPG, but how clean does it run? Would it pass todays emission standards? How practical of a vehicle is it for your average person? How safe is it? Pollution is only 1 item in the list of reasons to choose a vehicle.

 

I'm getting in on this debate a little late and just skimmed the previous posts; however, it has do to with Milankovitch cycles (Earth's orbit), greenhouse gases, ocean currents, albedo (reflectiveness), weathering (erosion), and the carbon cycle. It's a complex interaction of several items.

Let put this question to you 01 - what happens if you melt the north polar ice cap? Little, other than giving Russia year round ports and screwing with global ocean circulation patterns.

Now what happens if you melt the south polar ice cap? Sea level rises, coastal cities and a large portion of the midwest would become great places to SCUBA dive. (There is a continent under that ice cap)

And it was pointed out earlier extreme weather seasons occur as a result of global warming - i.e. hotter summers and colder winters.

 

In a city of 10 million people???

You would be very mistaken.

It passes all of the NYC emissions tests.

In NYC? It is the most useful car anyone could own. I can park it anywhere, fit down side streets no one else can, and to top it all off, I get great gas mileage. Exactly how many people need to drive their 2.5 ton SUV into the city with only one person inside?

For a while NYC was requiring car pooling to use the bridges (because of 9/11) and quite frankly, it was a brilliant idea.

That depends. If I get hit by a 3 ton SUV? Not very. If I get hit by a Toyota? It is very safe.

You still haven't answered my question:
Why can't New York dictate their own pollution and fuel economy standards that are more stringent than the Federal guidelines?

-Don

 

No but the 240 MPG fuel injected engine is.

-Don

 

Sirket--
If you are refering to the state of and not NYC they can. Look at California. I am unfamilier with all the laws in NY state so I can't say if the city can. I'm not real familier with the population of NY state, but the reputation of Californians is very liberal. I don't know if California has stricter MPG requirements but they definantly have stricter emmissions.

 

For the record, there are 1.8 million vehicles registered in NYC. This leaves out all of the vehicles registered in NJ, CT, Upstate and Long Island and driven into NYC every day.

That is .67 percent or .0067. Add to that the fact that most Taxi cabs are not driven 24x7 and they aren't a big factor any more.

-Don