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 How The 35 mpg Law By 2020 Will Affect The Cars We Will Drive
538 messages, Last post on Jul 31, 2008 at 6:28 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
"And oddly, when they went from the 3-speed automatic to the 4-speed automatic, fuel economy didn't change much, if at all." Andre, did the substitution of the 4-speed for the 3-speed coincide with the introduction of the second (and last) generation Neon, which was a little larger and heavier than the first, or did the transmission change come while the gen II was already in production? Thanks for the clarification, boaz.
|
|
|
|
|
California will get the go-ahead (a waiver from the EPA) on their new program to reduce CO2 emissions, along with eight other states that will follow California standards. That would mean that new cars and trucks for sale in California in 2016 would have to achieve about 36 mpg, going up from there, effectively superceding the new CAFE regs with more strict standards, and without the CAFE loopholes like E85 etc. We could see change even more quickly than we thought...OR automakers could choose to merely change the mix of vehicles offered in California and the other 8 states so as to meet the higher standard only for those areas. |
|
|
Replying to: hpmctorque (Dec 17, 2007 8:00 am) Nah, Chrysler was REALLY late to the game with a 4-speed automatic in the Neon. The gen II Neon debuted in April 1999 as a 2000 model. Chrysler rushed it out because they wanted to lay claim to "first new car of the new millenium". So it was stuck with the 3-speed automatic, which dates back to the 1978 Horizon/Omni. As equipped, it was EPA-rated at 24/31. The 4-speed automatic was finally added for 2002, and the EPA ratings stayed the same...24/31. The only thing I can think of is perhaps the 4-speed automatic was just the larger unit that's used in midsized cars such as the Stratus/Sebring, as opposed to something that's actually sized for the lighter-weight, smaller engine Neon? So while the extra gear could theoretically help fuel economy, maybe the internals were just beefier, requiring more power to operate, and that offset it? I just looked up the EPA ratings for the older Neon. The 1999, with the 2.0/3-speed automatic was rated at 23/32. So a bit less on the city cycle, a bit more on the highway cycle. The 2000 Dodge Stratus was rated at 20/28 with the 4-cyl/4-speed automatic and an almost V8-like 18/26 with the 2.5 V-6/4-speed automatic. So heck, when I bought a 2000 Intrepid rated at 20/29, I was actually making a more economical choice! Even compared to the Neon, there wasn't much difference in those ratings. |
|
|
|
|
"when I bought a 2000 Intrepid rated at 20/29, I was actually making a more economical." Well, sure, that's because yours came with the 7-speed Benz automatic and the light weight carbon fiber body...just kidding. |
|
|
|
Can't we just adapt the diesel engines that they have in Europe. I mean they get around 45-50 MPG for the small cars and the SUV's get around 30-35 MPG. The only problem is the emissions standards. But, we could adapt those engines to work with our emissions standards here. Mercedes Benz has made the BLUTEC which meets emissions standards for all 50 states.
|
|
|
|
|
Check out this link: http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.autos.toyota/2007-12/msg01394.ht- ml It talks about how Toyota will be offering E85 Tundras and Sequoias within a year. They are "jumping on the bandwagon" in order to boost their CAFE average. In their case, it will boost their overall average more than a point, even though they don't sell that many of these two models annually. But then I read further down, and discovered something I didn't know, namely: The E85 loophole closes after 2014! Interesting. No wonder the domestics are scrambling, and this puts Lutz's comments in a different light for me. While that is still 6 or 7 years out, it means they will have to have major changes ready by that time.
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Dec 16, 2007 6:19 am) [EDIT: Before posting I didn't see your several excellent followups to your original post] First things first. CAFE is administered by the NHTSA. It has it's own rules for how vehicles are tested which are entirely different than the ones on the Maroney labels mandated by the EPA. Across the board the CAFE fuel economy numbers are signicantly higher than the EPA numbers right now today. As a matter of comparison the current averages for 'trucks' under the outgoing CAFE is 22 mpg!!! That's Silverados, Tundras, Tacomas, Frontiers, Odysseys, CRVs, etc. This is also before any of the new technologies are applied to the current fleet. The average number for autos presently is 27.5 mpg. With a few exceptions all vehicle makers meet these standards today. When you begin to add the new technologies to the whole fleet of vehicles you have to take the EPA numbers and then inflate them by some factor due to the different testing cycle of the NHTSA ( CAFE monitor ). As an example a hybrid Camry ( 34 mpg EPA ) might actually be a 40 mpg vehicle for CAFE purposes. A 46 mpg Prius might be a 55 mpg Prius for CAFE purposes. We just don't know a lot about the NHTSA methodology AFAIK...only that it's more lenient. |
|
|
Replying to: tgkoenigsegg (Dec 17, 2007 9:53 am) So the engines will have to be larger and they will have to have additional equipment added to make them comply with our emissions standards. Both are economy reducers. But we will know soon enough when the new Jetta debuts this Spring and the 2.2L Accord diesel debuts in Sept. At that time we will have a good feel for how the efficiencies migrate from Europe to here....and what the extra costs might be. |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Dec 17, 2007 11:15 am) Yes this gives them a cycle or two to press the technologies while not putting a knife in the heart of any existing programs. Also the final level of 35 mpg is at the end of a ramp-up period. This actually was good business/good politics in recognizing that changing a vehicle maker's direction takes a long time. |
|
| As others have said, the technology is here. Its just a matter of cost efficiency and production-ready. This homogenous charge tech seems to be promising. And Benz says their Dies-Otto (if i'm spelling that right) can get 36 mpg in an S-class. I think we are right on the cusp of fairly big changes. | |
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views How The 35 mpg Law By 2020 Will Affect The Cars We Will Drive
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
