Last post on Jul 28, 2011 at 4:56 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
#32 of 36 Re: F-150 [andre1969]
Jul 07, 2011 (11:06 am)
andre: Good point. But a lot of people buy something like an F-150 more for style and light duty, not really for super heavy duty stuff. For them, once they get used to the idea, a full sized cab plus truck that can get 30 mpg on the highway will be a plus. And more than that it will be required whether people or manufacturers like it or not by the new CAFE requirements for 2025.
People who truly need heavy duty trucks with huge towing capacity will still be able to get an ecoboost 6 or 8 cylinder, but my guess is that in a dozen years a large 4 might become standard....Just a guess.
#33 of 36 Re: voters don't want an increased gas tax [bhill2]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
Jul 27, 2011 (10:59 am)
I'd support job creation (public works) on a large scale, since US corporations refuse to hire--they are hoarding cash big time. We really need to curb the massive re-distribution of wealth going on right now.
62 mpg would only benefit the oil companies, who hardly need benefitting, (people tend to drive more with higher mpg cars) and probably winnow down automakers into the Big Two, (Chrysler won't cut it) which of course decreases competition.
The real problem is not being addressed. The price of gasoline does not reflect the environmental damage being done, and the oil companies therefore don't have to bear it.
I'd also consider *exploring* the possibility, in the interests of national security, of nationalizing the oil industry. Of all the world's major producers, only the US and Canada don't do this.
Why exactly is the oil under our feet not the property of us all, as a country? How does the USA compete without energy for the future?
Right now, if YOU don't buy the gas, the oil companies will just sell it to anyone willing to pay for it.
I'm not sure I'm for this, but sometimes it makes more sense than burdening everyone EXCEPT the oil companies with taxes, regulations, etc.
#34 of 36 Re: voters don't want an increased gas tax [Mr_Shiftright]
Jul 28, 2011 (11:22 am)
I agree with what you wrote there, Shifty, but I think you're howling at the moon a little bit too. Again, I'm with you in spirit, but I just don't think that stuff is going to happen.
Given that we've got CAFE at 54 for 2025 instead, what are your thoughts on that?
#35 of 36 Re: voters don't want an increased gas tax [benjaminh]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
Jul 28, 2011 (4:56 pm)
Well you know, SO FAR, the effect of emissions regulations on automobile design is unarguably positive....although I have to say the *transition* of getting there was sometimes not so good.
To put things in perspective:
If the entire population of the United States of America decided to get into *all* their cars and light trucks at the same time---there would be no one in the back seats of any car on the road.
This suggests to me two things:
1. The extra space in large vehicles is probably used but a small fraction of the vehicle's total use.
2. Many people who own large SUVs and trucks probably NEVER use the extra space.