Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Has CAFE reached the end of its usefulness?
507 messages, Last post on Oct 27, 2009 at 11:49 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
| A challenging and meaningful fuel economy target! | |
|
Replying to: rockylee (Nov 05, 2007 6:43 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 05, 2007 7:30 pm)  -Rocky |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 05, 2007 7:30 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Nov 05, 2007 10:01 pm) I would say the average individual is happy with the mileage they are getting. They keep buying new cars with more HP and the MPG has not gotten much better. I think that Toyota and Honda would build smaller engines and smaller cars if they thought the American buyer was interested. Look at the size of the new Accord. Makes our old Lexus LS400 look like a Mini!
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 06, 2007 6:31 am) Yes but for a car of that size and power it gets incredibly good mileage. For people that wish Honda would have kept the Accord smaller and less powerful and instead focus on higher mpg, well, Honda does that too. It's called the Civic. The Civic is yesterday's Accord. The automakers are still producing small vehicles with small engines. So if that's the kind of vehicle you're interested in then it's available. I don't think it makes sense to get bogged down by the fact that the names are changing. If higher CAFE is enacted the primary way that the manufacturers will achieve this is simply by pricing their least efficient vehicles at a point that reduces sales and doing the opposite with their most efficient vehicles. This is essentially the same as the suggestion for a tax on engines based upon their efficiencies.
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Nov 06, 2007 8:20 am) WRONG. Auto makers don't make a profit on the cheap stuff. They make it on the expensive cars. That is why they are resiting CAFE. Not because they can't achieve the target, but because achieving the target will cost them too much money. An engine tax is better because it places the penalty on the person buying the car.
|
|
|
Replying to: volvomax (Nov 06, 2007 9:01 am) Regardless, they're both bad ideas because it only addresses the vehicle purchase and not how the vehicle is used. The goal is reduced fuel consumption, which is vehicle efficiency multiplied by miles driven. An effective approach has to address both sides of the equation. Let's say a person buys a low mpg truck and only uses it on a limited basis when he needs this utility, maybe putting on it 3,000 miles per year. Now let's say someone else buys this same truck and uses it as his daily driver, racking up 15,000 miles per year. Should these two people be penalized the same?
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Nov 06, 2007 11:40 am) Only problem is, there wouldn't be any additional profit. Whatever they would make on the big car would get eaten up to sell the small one. Motor co's would be punished for building what people want to buy. Instead of people having to pay for their own choices. The tax collected could be used to fund alternative fuel programs.
|
|
|
Replying to: volvomax (Nov 06, 2007 2:26 pm) My understanding of this suggestion was that the taxes collected would be used to provide tax credits to those that purchased fuel efficient vehicles. This is what the auto manufacturers would be doing. They'd be using these excess profits to allow them to sell fuel efficient vehicles at a lower cost. Apparentlly you feel that the government would be able to perform this task more cost effectively than the private sector. A novel concept.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Has CAFE reached the end of its usefulness?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
