Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

How The 35 mpg Law By 2020 Will Affect The Cars We Will Drive

1567810

Comments

  • 1stpik1stpik Member Posts: 495
    "...you're averaging 47 mpg...not sure from your tone if you're disappointed with that figure..."

    I'm not disappointed. I'm not ecstatic, either. I'm merely satisfied that I'm getting exactly what I paid for. The Civic Hybrid has saved me $1,300 in gasoline costs in less than a year, and it paid me $2,100 cash back (federal tax credit).

    For a brief period last summer, after the break-in period, I was getting 50-52 mpg regularly. I had visions of achieving a long-term average of 50+. Then winter came.

    The cold weather dropped mpg to the mid 40s, no matter how wimpy I drove. So the 50 mpg mark remains the province of hyper-milers. BTW, 49/51 was the OLD EPA estimate for the Civic Hybrid.

    The best part about owning a hybrid is that it immunizes me from rising fuel prices. It's almost like a little time machine; it takes me back to the 1990s, when I neve gave a thought to the price of gasoline.
    .
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    If one did post that fact about $11000 for a hybrid system then it was done as a troll post. It's impossible. Unless the user somehow knows how to void the warranty, and I don't, the minimum is 96 / 100000. the CARB warranty is 120 / 150000.

    The hybrid warranty includes the battery, MG1, MG2, the inverter and converter.

    The 60 / 60000 Powertrain warranty is the same as yours the engine and transaxel.

    The 36 / 36000 Basic warranty is the same as yours also. The electronics and all the controllers are covered by this warranty.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Agreed. It's my insurance policy against fuel going to $4+. At $5+ I may have to upgrade again.

    From Pre-Katrina days when I was buying 1200 gal a year at about $2 per gallon for my I4 Camry now I'm buying 750 gal a year at about $3 per gallon. At $4 I will be spending more than I was back in 2004.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    Read the following, then decide and comment on whether you believe the proposed fuel economy regulations for the 2011-2015 period are fair for the auto industry, and will serve the consumer well.

    Although I believe petroleum consumption should be reduced, I think that the new NHTSA based rules are an example of how a well intentioned NHTSA bureaucracy, and our law makers, can achieve very bad results. I could have used stronger language, but I restrained myself. Your thoughts?


    By HARRY STOFFER, AUTOMOTIVE NEWS

    Mercedes' cars would have to achieve better average fuel economy than Toyota's. BMW's light trucks would have to get 4 mpg more than those built by General Motors.

    These are among the startling outcomes projected for the 2015 model year under proposed federal fuel economy regulations. Under the new rules, the relative increase is highest for the smallest vehicles.

    Vehicles are measured by their footprint--roughly the area bounded by the wheels.

    The rules, unveiled last week by the Bush administration, represent the first big step in enforcing a landmark new energy law. The law mandates a 40 percent increase in car and truck fuel economy by 2020, to an industry average of 35 mpg.

    The administration regulations anticipate a fast start, calling for 25 percent improvement in the 2011-15 model years.

    The effects of the rules would vary dramatically among automakers. The winners are companies such as General Motors, Toyota and Chrysler — mass-market manufacturers with broad product portfolios. The losers are independent luxury brands such as Porsche, BMW and Mercedes.

    Regulators based the new standards on their projections of the number of cars and trucks of different sizes that the industry will produce by 2015.

    "It's just part of the new world," said John DeCicco, senior fellow for automotive issues with Environmental Defense, a nonprofit advocacy group that supports tougher fuel standards. "Fairness is in the eye of the beholder."

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration developed the rules. The agency's plan creates two sliding scales of fuel economy targets for cars and trucks of different sizes.

    Each automaker is assigned its own separate fuel-economy standards for cars and trucks, based on the number of vehicles of each footprint size that it sells.

    The sliding scales aim to achieve better fuel economy in vehicles of all sizes. Under the rules, automakers that build large vehicles might find it advantageous to keep doing so. If they downsize, their standards would go up.

    At the same time, industry and government officials argue that if gasoline prices remain high, consumers will demand smaller, fuel-efficient vehicles.

    Small Cars, Big Numbers

    The proposed system creates anomalies. The most extreme example is Porsche Cars North America Inc. The company's powerful sports cars have short wheelbases and consequently small footprints, thus higher fuel economy targets.

    If the industry builds the mix of vehicle sizes that NHTSA projects, Porsche cars would have to average 41.3 mpg in 2015--about 7 mpg better than Toyota, Lexus and Scion cars collectively. The current car standard, 27.5 mpg, has not changed since 1990.

    Other automakers with smaller, less diverse product offerings--such as Volkswagen Group of America Inc., Mitsubishi, Subaru and Suzuki--also face much higher standards under the proposal.

    Variations among the six largest manufacturers are less striking because of their broader product lineups. But they are still significant. For cars, Chrysler LLC's 2015 fuel economy standard would be the lowest, at 33.6 mpg. American Honda's would be highest, at 36.4 mpg.

    For 2015 model trucks, GM--which generally has bigger pickups and SUVs--would have the lowest standard among the six biggest companies, at 27.4 mpg. Honda trucks would have the highest standard, at 29.6 mpg. Today, trucks must meet a fuel economy standard of 22.5 mpg.

    "They are certainly aggressive" numbers, said Ed Cohen, vice president of government and industry relations for Honda North America Inc. "The truck hurdle will be the more challenging of the two."

    Play or Pay

    The requirements that Porsche faces in 2015 help explain why the company lobbied Congress hard to give it an exemption in the energy bill. Lawmakers refused.

    Some industry executives predict Porsche and several other automakers will pay hefty fines rather than change their lineups. NHTSA concedes fines would be less expensive than investing in new fuel-efficient powertrains.

    The agency is seeking public comment on whether it should increase its penalties. The former DaimlerChrysler paid a fine of about $30 million for the 2006 model year because its imported cars missed the fuel standard.

    Automakers generally support the new fuel standards, despite the anomalies. They say a tough national standard is preferable to state-by-state greenhouse gas regulations, which they claim would create market chaos.

    Environmental advocates mostly expressed satisfaction with the proposed rules as well. An exception was Joan Claybrook, a former NHTSA chief and longtime president of the consumer group Public Citizen.

    Claybrook said the rules do too little too late. The proposed sliding scales, she said, would create "an unadministrablecq mess."

    NHTSA is taking public comments over the next two months. Regulators must adopt final rules by April 1, 2009. The Bush administration plans to act by the end of the year.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    My thoughts? If I were you I would have used stronger language.

    Good thing it is fair though, eh?!

    One of my faves, Subaru, is going to suffer a ton at the hands of the new NHTSA.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    One thing that concerns me is that you don't read much about the proposed 2011-2015 rules. I can't imagine that firms like Porsche and Subaru aren't lobbying against these asymmetrical regs. As I see it, it's outrageous.

    I suppose one thing Subaru could do, to meet the mileage requirements, would be to make AWD optional, as it was in the '80s and early '90s. I know the AWD feature as standard equipment differentiated the brand, but, frankly, do most drivers in the Sunbelt benefit from AWD? And Porsche could dial back the horsepower some, and put greater marketing emphasis on handling and the other attributes of its cars, but these are just ways of dealing with what, in my opinion, are grossly unfair regulations.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Subaru is rumored to be dropping AWD in a model or two to help meet fleet regs, much to the consternation of Subie fans who think that will dilute the brand's reputation irrevocably. Adding a diesel to the boxer engine fleet is another idea being kicked around.

    I think they'll just add another Justy-like vehicle to the line-up to get the fleet numbers to fall in line.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    I think they'll just add another Justy-like vehicle to the line-up to get the fleet numbers to fall in line.

    Great idea. I'd buy one. If Suzuki can sell the SX4, Subie can sell another Justy.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I saw a bright red SX4 a couple of days ago - my first sighting. It looked sharp - maybe it was a tricked out Cobra version because I've never really noticed one before. I thought it was a MINI at first. I guess people are getting ~30mpg on the highway with them.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    As far as I can tell, there is still limited ability to just pay fines and continue business as usual, and Porsche could probably just pass along those costs to its customers.

    OTOH, Porsche is having an even bigger fight with the EU over new emissions standards set to take effect there shortly (stricter than those in the U.S., of course). Porsche can't win - all its models are gas guzzlers in the context of global 2020 CO2 emissions standards.

    Subaru plans to implement the new diesel in its larger models in 2010 or so, which will help. There are plans afoot to bring in a rebadged Daihatsu in Europe to help meet CO2 goals there, I don;t know what they will do in the U.S. It is true that the Subaru fans are howling about the possibility of making AWD optional again, but it is also inescapably true that AWD drags down fuel economy and offers a benefit that few in the southern states will pay extra for.

    With all the woes Porsche faces (because it sells only one "truck"), I wonder how much trouble this will cause for BMW. Mercedes, of course, is truck-heavy, so they get more of a break.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • michaellnomichaellno Member Posts: 4,120
    I saw a bright red SX4 a couple of days ago - my first sighting. It looked sharp - maybe it was a tricked out Cobra version because I've never really noticed one before. I thought it was a MINI at first.

    You aren't the only one to make that comparison. Where I live in Colorado, there is a Suzuki dealer in town and the SX4 (hatch) is becoming a popular vehicle. Every time my wife sees one, she comments on how it reminds her of a Mini.

    I, personally, don't see the resemblance, but I suspect that the SX4 is, to my wife, "distinctive", like the Mini.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Your wife is very perceptive. :shades:
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    I think if Porsche were to merge with VW, in which it already owns a major stake, that would go a long way towards resolving its 2011-2015 mileage delemna. I also read that Porsche is developing a hybrid powertrain. This may be more appropriate for their SUV and their upcoming super sedan than for their sports cars.

    As for Subaru, reintroducing an updated version of the Justy might be part of the answer. The Justy was a neat car, by the way. I'd like to see it in the Subie lineup again, with a new 3 cylinder engine.

    Another solution for Subaru, now that Toyota owns a stake in the company, is for hybrid versions of some models. So, between making AWD optional, the diesel. a new mini car, and hybrid technology, it looks as though Subaru has options.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    You do realize of course that the Fed Govt knows nothing about vehicles. It's a political organization representing multiple constituencies so that when it does write a law or create new rules it goes to the experts in those fields to gather 'expertise' in order to write the rulings.

    Guess who might be the constituency that would have the most expertise in writing rules about automobiles? How about the US auto industry?

    Look closely and you will see the subtle hand of GM / F / C / T actually writing these regs. Oh they hurt Porsche, Merc and Subaru.... Oh Darn.
  • huntzingerhuntzinger Member Posts: 356
    Look closely and you will see the subtle hand of GM / F / C / T actually writing these regs. Oh they hurt Porsche, Merc and Subaru.... Oh Darn.

    Such examples of politics is why there's no GM / F / C / T products parked in my driveway: I vote with my wallet. In the meantime, I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop (or perhaps it already has), where an E85 - capable vehicle gets some sort of "bonus" in the CAFE numbers game.

    -hh
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    The quoted title, above, refers to an article that appears in today's Wall Street Journal, page D4. The article discusses how the fuel efficiency targets recently proposed by the federal government, which would regulate the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks according to "footprint," would force manufacturers to make some very tough choices, including paying large fines, radically redesigning their high performance vehicles, implementing significant price increases to cover lighter, more exotic materials and new powerplants, increasing the size of vehicles in order to qualify for more lenient requirements for larger vehicles, or discontinuing certain models.

    Footprint refers to the number of square feet a vehicle covers. For example, the Toyota Camry and the 540 horsepower Ferrari Scaglietti are both categorized as "mid-size cars", according to the EPA, and by 2015 will be required to average more than 30 mpg. The Porsche 911, by contrast, is classified as a "mini-compact car", and should be able to deliver ~40 mpg by 2015.

    Per the WSJ article, under the proposed rules, by 2015 BMW is supposed to sell a fleet of cars that average 37.7 mpg, while GM's and Toyota's fleet-wide passenger car targets will be 34.7 and 34.6, respectively.

    The way the government's footprint/mileage curves work, a BMW 3-Series, with its 45 sq. ft. footprint, will need to average 37 mpg, and the 49 sq. ft. 5-Series' target is 31 mpg. One way to move toward compliance would be to increase the size of the 3-Series, but BMW has said it won't take this approach.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    This highlights one of the major weaknesses of the latest CAFE legislation: that the automakers can simply make their vehicles a lot bigger (especially the trucks) in order to go around the regulation and have easier targets set.

    Geez, how freakin' big are the light trucks of 2020 going to be?! They're ALREADY a nuisance on the roads at their current size!

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I don't think CAFE will have any impact by that time. With fuel doing what it is everything except 'work' trucks might be obsolete with $6 and $7 and $8 fuel prices.

    Yes they could make a huge truck but who'd buy it? It looks like a loophold that the Big 3-1/2 had written in to the regs in the hope that at sometime next decade fuel drops back to $.90/gallon. Not likely I think.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    the California rules, much stricter than the new CAFE regs, will go ahead after all. At least, according to this article:

    http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080513/AUTO01/805130358

    not only are the automakers meeting with the CA governor to hammer out the details, but also all three presidential candidates support California on this, and the Congress is expected to put together legislation to allow it to happen as well...

    So forget 35 mpg, look forward to 43 mpg by 2015, and after that who knows! With gas at $8/gallon by then, I am sure folks will appreciate much more efficient choices than the pathetic ones they have today...

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • chadxchadx Member Posts: 153
    "While they probably sell smaller Mercedes and BMW diesels in Europe, it's unlikely that they get 35 mpg in mixed driving."

    Oh contraire. Many small and midsize diesels acheive that in mixed driving. And on the highway is even better. The BMW 1 series offers two different small diesels and get great mileage city and highway. The BMW 118d get around 60 miles per gallon while the 120d gets around 55 miles per gallon from most reviews and real world driving I've read. We rented on in Germany and even at 100+mph for several hours, it sipped gas (over 40mpg).

    We need cars like this in the US! The only engines offered in the 1 Series here are the 3.0 liter inline-6 gas engines. One naturally aspirated and one with twin turbos.

    From some literature on the diesels:

    "Diesel Engines

    BMW 120d: Third generation common-rail diesel engine with aluminum crankcase achieves zero to 62mph in 7.5 seconds (7.6 seconds for five-door) before going on to a top speed of 142mph. Output is 177hp (up 14hp) while peak torque is 350Nm (up 10Nm). Combined fuel consumption is 57.6mpg (improves by 16 per cent) and CO2 emissions are 129g/km (down 15.1 per cent).

    BMW 118d: Third generation common-rail diesel engine with aluminum crankcase achieves zero to 62mph in 8.9 seconds (9.0 seconds for five door) before going on to a top speed of 130mph. Output is 143hp (up 21 hp) while peak torque is 300Nm (up 20Nm). Combined fuel consumption is 60.1mpg (improves by 19 per cent) and CO2 emissions are 123g/km (down 18 per cent).
    "
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    One problem is that if those cars were "retrofitted" to meet U.S. crash requirements, the weight goes up and the MPG goes down.

    That's one of the MANY reasons we cannot get those cars here. Another is that typically, high mileage but "econo-box" type cars have sold poorly here.
  • chadxchadx Member Posts: 153
    "One problem is that if those cars were "retrofitted" to meet U.S. crash requirements, the weight goes up and the MPG goes down. "

    Incorrect. The BMW 1 series easily passed crash tests. They are currently selling the gas powered version here. The diesel equipped cars do not have structural differences. Only engine, tranny, etc.. Many of the other manufacturer's diesels would pass US crash tests. Do you think Europe doesn't have safety standards?

    You are correct that the main reason we are not seeing small diesels here is simply because demand has not been there in the past. US consumers won't buy them. But that is changing. Also, the more recent emissions standards have thrown a new wrench in the works, but many manufactures can now pass those requirements.
  • chadxchadx Member Posts: 153
    Current BMW 1 Series deisel mileage chart. For many people in the US, diesels just make more sense than a hybrid. Unless you spend 90%+ time in city driving (stop and go or less than 30mph), deisels will get better mileage. Now, the extra cost of deisel needs to be added into the equation, which is a whole nother issue. Where I live, I only drive in stop lights about 5 miles a week. The rest is 45 - 75 mph driving. Many other folks are in the same position. It all depends on where you live.

    1 series-118d - 120d- 123d
    City-------44mpg, 39mpg, 36mpg
    Hwy-------59mpg, 57mpg, 53mpg
    Combo --- 52mpg, 49mpg, 45mpg
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Europe and Japan have safety standards, but there are laws preventing importing of said vehicles without safety retrofits. That's why you don't occasionally see a modern Euro-spec vehicle in the USA.

    If it were easy and cheap, you would see Euro-Spec Honda Accord diesel cars all over the USA because that is an awesome car which has set numerous world records.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 235,188
    Guessing those numbers are miles per imperial gallon... :surprise:

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    Between the high gasoline prices, principally, the promise of lighter, longer lasting lithium ion batteries, and the law that will begin to take effect in 2011, there seems to be renewed interest in manufacturing pure battery powered cars. Until recently, it seemed as though battery powered cars didn't have much of a future, but Nissan, for one, and Mitsubishi, have important plans for battery powered cars.

    Of the three factors listed, the law is probably the least important one for introducing battery powered cars in large numbers. It's premature to speculate on whether pure battery powered vehicles will be as popular as hybrids in several years, but if they are it will have a major impact on the driving experience and the industry. Small countries, such as Israel and Denmark, have big plans for battery powered electric cars, where there are plans to build networks of battery swapping stations. Instead of pulling into a station for a gasoline or diesel fuel fill up, the driver will pay for a quick battery pack exchange, when the battery/batteries needed recharging. The removed battery/ies would then be recharged for another motorist. You'd essentially pay for a battery charge, without having to wait for the recharging. It'll be interesting to see how this will play out. From what I've read, the economics of this plan are favorable, compared to high priced oil.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    You'd essentially pay for a battery charge, without having to wait for the recharging. It'll be interesting to see how this will play out. From what I've read, the economics of this plan are favorable, compared to high priced oil.

    Yeah, until Big Oil lobbies Congress to give the electric vehicles a "fuel economy rating" equivalent to the amout of fuel used to recharge the battery pack. ;)
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,384
    Who on earth uses imperial gallons? I don't think there's any place now that both Canada and the UK went metric.
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    UK still uses imperial gallons alongside liters per 100 km.

    http://www.landrover.co.uk/gb/en/Vehicles/Discovery/Specifications/Discovery_eng- ines.htm

    Check out the fuel consumption figures at that link.
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,384
    Ouch!
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Hey now mid 30s imperial gallon highway isn't bad for a 6,000 lbs plus truck.
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,384
    Pardon me - I was reading the wrong line. Been taht kind of day.

    No, that's not bad at all.
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    No, it isn't that bad and that is one of the things that drives me crazy right now. There isn't any mid-sized to full sized vehicle on the market that can seat seven adults and get over 30 mpg highway. The LR3 with the TDv6 can do that and it is available right now if California would get its head out of its [non-permissible content removed] in regards to diesel emissions.

    The Mazda5 comes close but it only seats six and doesn't have the all around capability that the LR3 does.

    I don't know if the TDV6 would do very well in the US market as 0-60 comes along in a leisurely 12.8 seconds with the automatic. :surprise:

    Still the TDV8 from the Range Rover only gives up a couple of mpg to the TDV6 and is just as fast as the V8 petrol motor.

    http://www.landrover.co.uk/gb/en/Vehicles/Range_Rover_Sport/Specifications/Engin- es%20and%20performance.htm
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,384
    Don't be trying to sell me an LR3 now..... I can't think of where the nearest Land Rover is...

    If I ever do manage to move myself back into the hills I could have a lot of fun in one of those.
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    GM is taking the whole thing seriously: they are going to power their next compact models with a turbo 1.4, and may even make that engine standard in their midsize cars too:

    http://www.autonews.com/article/20080602/ANA02/847106937/1176/emailblast02&refse- ct=emailblast02

    Sounds like the Cobalt as we know it will be going away after 2010. They expect 40 mpg from the new powertrain, and 120-140 hp.

    They are also apparently reconsidering bringing the Beat to the U.S.

    In a separate piece of news today, it looks like Ford is already expanding the Fiesta lineup before it has even gone on sale, by adding 3- and 5-door hatches to the proposed launch in two years.

    Two automakers taking the new mandate seriously and making early strides to meet its goals...

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    It all looks very interesting, and I'm rooting for the success of these efforts, and a fair market return for the risks associated with these enhancements, but I wonder about the durability of a highly stressed turbo engine.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    That link requires registration. Any more info about that new model? Sounds mildly interesting....I wonder if there will be a hatch version...
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Sorry about that, here is the text as it pertains to the new car:

    "DETROIT -- General Motors will unveil a Chevrolet compact car at an auto show this fall, with production slated to begin early next year, say sources familiar with GM's product program.

    The vehicle will be built on the Delta compact car architecture at GM's plant in Lordstown, Ohio.

    The car will use a new 1.4-liter global engine that GM developed and recently announced in Europe. The turbocharged four-cylinder engine will be used in several GM vehicles worldwide.

    The Chevrolet compact will not be called the Cobalt, says one source familiar with the plans. GM will produce the current-generation Cobalt through June 2010 as a 2009 model. It was unclear from sources whether GM will continue to build the Cobalt after that.

    Shared among five nameplates

    The car's engine will be capable of developing between 120 and 140 hp. Sources say mileage could easily exceed 40 mpg.

    "It's a pretty incredible engine; it's direct-injected with great power," the source says. "The small-displacement turbos make it possible to get great power so that GM might put it in the mid-sized products, too. It's an extremely important engine and a very capable powertrain."

    The new engine will be shared among five nameplates: Chevrolet, Pontiac, Saturn, Opel and Daewoo, sources say. That means the Lordstown plant could build cars for export.

    The engine continues the trend that GM started with such cars as the Pontiac Solstice GXP and Saturn Sky Red Line. Those cars use smaller engines and high-technology devices such as direct fuel injection and turbochargers to boost fuel economy and performance."

    So the news is mainly powertrain-related, it doesn't talk about body styles. As for durability concerns, the turbo in the Sky/Solstice has a very high specific output, and it hasn't become known for problems so far. I expect that one of the very common techniques for meeting the new CAFE targets will be small engines with turbos...

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Given the engine size and horsepower numbers I've seen floating about, it sounds like they're going to be low-boost turbos, maybe in the 5-7 pound range which isn't very much these days. Saab has been doing that with some of its cars the last few years.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    GM cuts truck production, considers selling Hummer brand
    "General Motors said today that it is shuttering production at four of its plants that build full-sized pickups and SUVs and it is considering "all options" with its Hummer brand -- including a possible sale.

    The moves are the result of high gas prices, which GM now views as a permanent market condition, CEO Rick Wagoner said.

    The automaker also announced it will add a third shift to its small-car plant in Lordstown, Ohio, Wagoner confirmed.

    GM will be building an all-new Chevrolet compact car at the Lordstown plant, as first reported by Automotive News on Monday.

    Finally, GM's board of directors has approved the production funding for the gasoline-electric car, the Chevrolet Volt, Wagoner says.

    "In other words, the Chevy Volt is a go" Wagoner said in a teleconference before the company's annual meeting today in Wilmington, Del.

    Wagoner said GM still intends to put the Volt for sale at the end of 2010 and to build it at its plant in Hamtramck, Mich.

    PRODUCTION CUTS

    GM is reacting to $4-a-gallon gasoline prices by making major cuts in its full-sized pickup and SUV production.

    The automaker said it will cease production at its Oshawa, Ontario, truck assembly operations in Canada, which builds the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra, likely in 2009.

    GM said its plant in Moraine, Ohio, which builds the Chevrolet TrailBlazer, GMC Envoy and Saab 9-7x, will end production at the end of the 2010 model run, or sooner, if demand dictates.

    Janesville, Wisc., will cease production of medium-duty trucks by the end of 2009, and of the Chevrolet Tahoe, Chevrolet Suburban and GMC Yukon in 2010, or sooner, if market demand dictates."

    "WILMINGTON, Del. - GM today announced a range of strategic initiatives to aggressively respond to growing demand for fuel-efficient vehicles and to economic and market challenges in North America. Rick Wagoner, GM chairman and CEO, made the announcements here as part of the GM annual meeting of stockholders.

    Major initiatives announced by Wagoner include:

    • A new global compact car program for Chevrolet, a next generation for the popular Chevy Aveo, and a high efficiency engine module for the U.S. market.

    • Funding for production of the Chevy Volt extended-range electric vehicle.

    • Addition of third shifts to Lordstown and Orion, which build hot-selling Chevy and Pontiac cars.

    • Cessation of production at four plants that build pickups, SUVs and medium-duty trucks.

    • A strategic review of the Hummer brand.

    "From the start of our North American turnaround plan in 2005, I've said that our goal is not just to return GM to profitability, but to structure GM globally for sustained profitability and growth," said Wagoner.

    "Since the first of this year, however, U.S. economic and market conditions have become significantly more difficult," he said. "Higher gasoline prices are changing consumer behavior, and they are significantly affecting the U.S. auto industry sales mix."

    In North America, GM has been moving rapidly and successfully to revitalize its car lineup and grow its crossover business. New GM cars and crossovers, including the Cadillac CTS, Chevy Malibu, Pontiac Vibe and Buick Enclave, have been selling strongly, and GM intends to build on this success. In fact, 18 of the next 19 new GM products for the U.S. will be cars or crossovers.

    Additional operational and strategic actions will be required to position GM for sustainable profitability and growth. These initiatives fall into three broad areas: product and technology, manufacturing facilities and capacity, and the Hummer brand.

    New Chevrolet models and a high-efficiency engine module approved

    To further strengthen GM's lineup of fuel-efficient cars, the GM board has approved a next-generation compact Chevy for the U.S. and global markets, a next generation of the popular Chevy Aveo, and a U.S. production module of GM's 1.4-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine.

    The new Chevy compact will be better equipped than today's compact cars, and will be designed to set quality and safety benchmarks for the compact class. Production will begin in mid-2010 at GM's Lordstown, Ohio, plant, subject to final negotiations with state and local authorities.

    "This car will represent the first U.S. application of our global architecture strategy," said Wagoner. "This strategy will pay major dividends as we leverage our extensive car product development capability in Europe, Korea, and other locations to accelerate the shift in our U.S. product portfolio."

    The next-generation compact will be pure Chevrolet in design, and will feature the 1.4-liter turbocharged version of GM's global four-cylinder engine. With this engine and a manual transmission, the new Chevy is expected to achieve a 9 mpg improvement over Chevy's current entry in this segment. The engine will be produced in Flint, Michigan, again subject to final negotiations with state and local authorities.

    Also recently approved was a next generation of the popular Chevy Aveo. Based on a global architecture, the Aveo is also expected to have segment-leading fuel economy when it goes on sale in the U.S. market in the second half of 2010.

    These new Chevy models will help build on GM's leadership in fuel efficient vehicles. For example, GM continues to offer more vehicles with a 30-mpg or better highway fuel economy rating than any competitor."

    http://www.autonews.com/article/20080603/ANA02/455137809/1176/emailblast02&refse- ct=emailblast02

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    "Ford F series loses title as top-selling vehicle in May

    Honda Civic sets new record of 53,299 sales


    The Ford F-150 pickup truck has been dethroned as America's favorite vehicle for the first time since 1991 -- by four sedans.

    According to preliminary sales figures released by automakers, Ford Motor Co. sold 42,973 F-series trucks in May, while Toyota Motor Corp. sold 52,826 Corollas and 51,291 Camrys.

    The Honda Civic beat all vehicles with sales of 53,299 vehicles -- an all-time record for any month -- while the Honda Accord raked in another 43,728 in sales, according to American Honda Motor Co.

    The last time a car outsold the F series was October 1991.

    Ford CEO Alan Mulally said the fact that cars are outselling trucks is further evidence that the industry is undergoing a change in consumer preference.

    "We really believe we are seeing a structural shift with the fuel prices going through the $3.40-to-$3.60" range. It's interesting that a lot of others are saying the same thing now," Mulally told reporters Monday, June 2, at a dinner in Washington.

    "So I think we're seeing a structural shift where, with the prices being high in the United States, we're seeing exactly what happened in Europe a number of years ago, where the customers are going to make economic decisions, and they're going to move toward smaller and medium-sized vehicles.""

    http://www.autonews.com/article/20080603/ANA05/959951360/1078/emailblast02&refse- ct=emailblast02

    Looks like gas prices are going to accomplish what the Congress never could, using CAFE: a shift to fuel-efficient vehicles in the U.S. The thing about consumer preference, of course, is that it is fickle, so I'm glad that there is added pressure on automakers to improve fuel efficiency, even if it comes from a relatively weak tool in the form of CAFE 2020.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    Yeah, I saw those articles too. They really have nothing to do with this law though; the trend away trucks is due to current market forces.

    This new CAFE law is already obsolete, as the average mpg will rise quicker and further than this law sets as a goal.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Yeah, that's kind of what I was trying to point out. I guess I didn't need to copy over the whole article to accomplish that, eh? :blush:

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    The automakers went to Washington to go whaa whaa whaa about the schedule of fuel economy increases they must meet by 2015.

    http://www.autonews.com/article/20080701/ANA02/527230349/1128/emailblast02&Profi- - le=1128

    "The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers asked the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to reconsider its plan to raise standards by 4.5 percent a year during the 2011-15 model years.

    By 2015, under the plan, cars would have to average about 35.7 mpg and trucks would have to average about 28.6 mpg -- about 25 percent higher overall than today.

    The proposal "would require manufacturers to expend resources at a pace that is excessive given the fact that the auto industry is already under economic stress," the alliance said in formal comments reacting to preliminary rules NHTSA unveiled in April."

    I find it ironic that many of the automakers are partly or mostly under economic stress because the fuel economy of their vehicles sucks so bad. If only they would comply with the new regs, their economic stress would likely decrease significantly!

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • 1stpik1stpik Member Posts: 495
    Their trip to the nation's capital has little to do with fuel economy. They're not so much crying about the new CAFE standards, as laying the groundwork for a bailout.

    GM stock is at $12 per share -- a 40 year low. Ford is languishing around $5 per share. The execs see the meteor coming, and they want the taxpayers to give them shelter.

    However, unlike Chrysler in the 1980s, the Big 3 have fired so many workers in the United States, along with moving so many factories to foreign countries, that they'll have a tough time convincing folks that a bailout is "good for American workers."

    The upcoming dog and pony show will be interesting.
    .
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Interesting. I hadn't thought about that potential angle. I really don't think they will get their way on delaying CAFE increases anyway, now that California's GHG emissions law has passed the courts.

    And I don't support a bailout. The industry has failed to contract sufficiently or quickly enough, and as they are positioned now, I think there is only room for one domestic in the car industry of the future, 20 years out. As of this moment, I am convinced that one survivor should and will be GM, and it doesn't need a bailout to accomplish that. It just needs to aggressively and unswervingly stay the course it has been on for about three years now.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • 1stpik1stpik Member Posts: 495
    "one survivor should and will be GM, and it doesn't need a bailout to accomplish that."

    GM will only need a bailout if it can't secure $15 billion in financing from the private sector. How much of your money are you willing to invest in GM bonds?
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Nah, they won't need a bailout. They need to get that new 2-mode hybrid in everything they possibly can, they need to get Korea cranked up to deliver new small cars with much better fuel economy than the existing ones, and in terms of long-term survival they probably need to cancel Saturn and maybe Pontiac, and make Buick a China-only brand (and dump Hummer and make Saab a Europe-only brand). Let Buick China stand on its own, from R&D through production, and if it can't make it over there then just kill the brand entirely.

    And don't spend one more nickel working on replacements for the GMT900 trucks. These things were supposedly the most fabulous trucks ever built, completely redesigned less than two years ago - let them have a decade-long run and see what full-size pick-up sales look like then. I think they have already made the decision to do this.

    Instead spend the money getting 50-state diesels ready for the big vehicles, new small engines including a turbo or two for smaller cars, and get fuel economy way way UP across the board.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    I would generally agree w/ everything you've said (remember, GM let their trucks go from 1973-1987 w/o a major redesign) except Buick. When GM showed the Park Ave, Riviera, and Invicta concepts in China, people here said why can't we get these here??? So, the designs definitely are a hit, and were designed by teams here AND in China. They would have a big meeting on what would work here and there, discuss it, and go to work. When the team here was done, they would leave it for the crew in China, and when they came in in the morning, they would just pick up where the Chinese left off. Kind of like a 24 hr design team. this cut costs and design time, and insured everybody was on the same page. I'm sure they could be built here AND there, as well.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I hear what you are saying, but the issue with the domestics is not only fuel economy, but also way too many brands and rapidly shrinking market share. GM is the biggest offender there, and if you figure that ultimately the market will probably give about the same amount of share to GM as to Toyota, 8 brands just makes no sense (it is 8, right?). Buick sells mainly large cars and crossovers, one of which (large cars) is a segment that has seen wholesale abandonment in the last 12 months. And can you really see some huge thing like the Lucerne with a turbo 4? Nobody would want it even if GM could engineer and produce it.

    One has to question the business case for GMC if the full-size segment gets down to 1 million annual units total in the U.S., which it well may (it is well on its way already). Seems like a GM with just Chevy and Cadillac for sale in the U.S. would be about right for the year 2025. I could see maybe having one more specialized brand, and maybe you could turn either Pontiac or Saturn into that brand. I know people have just gotten used to the idea of having Buick Pontiac and GMC dealers combined, but in reality all GM will really need in 20 years is Chevy - (Pontiac or Saturn) - Cadillac. And it will need more small Chevys, with Korea standing ready to provide everything smaller than an Impala, hopefully with significantly boosted fuel economy.

    If they keep Buick and GMC, it will tip their product mix too much towards large cars and trucks, and that will screw up their CAFE fleet average. They don't need any more problems like that than they already have, particularly for the handful of sales Buick and GMC produce each year.

    Once the California GHG legislation becomes law and the other 11-14 states follow suit, GMC and Buick will become major major liabilities (as will Hummer of course, but I bet we will see that sold off any day now). Even Pontiac and Saturn will have to change dramatically, but at least they have diverse enough product mixes not to be totally hopeless.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

This discussion has been closed.