[Vigilante375]

Originally Posted by Railgun

Really? Tell that to Audi. I think their LMP car will change your mind.

Race cars? Who is talking about race cars? We're talking about every day driving cars.

Originally Posted by Railgun

You realize there have been cars that were close to that 20/30 years go, right?

Let me rephrase that: There is no way ALL vehicles will get a minimum of 55 MPG. All as in SUVs, trucks, cars, wagons, mini vans, etc. Yes I know there were car getting outstanding MPGs a long time ago. But there is no way every single vehicle will get a minimum of 55 MPGs in 10 more years.

[NickyC]

Every vehicle could get 55mpg, but it would take 18 seconds for some of them to get to 60mph. Horsepower levels will need to come way down.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by NickyC

Every vehicle could get 55mpg, but it would take 18 seconds for some of them to get to 60mph. Horsepower levels will need to come way down.

That or weight. But then you sacrifice safety. Until lightweight materials become more economically viable anyway.

[NickyC]

Originally Posted by fecurtis

That or weight. But then you sacrifice safety. Until lightweight materials become more economically viable anyway.

Indeed, I wish carbon tubs would become affordable to the point they start showing up on base model KIAs. Haha.

[gtaccord]

Originally Posted by Railgun

Because the small engines aren't powerful by any stretch, and the only electric car is out of many people's reach from a pricing point. Tesla is the only name of the game right now. Once the tech evolves a bit more (read, is more accessible), and SOME competition comes around, that will change.





From 2008 to 2013, Ford has only increased their car line by 6MPG. Their truck line by 1.4....one point four! Overall, 3.5MPG. That's their line...not what people are buying. Where's the investment?!

You think that if every manufacturer builds a car that's 50% more economical than it is now, but done with a three or four cylinder and some hybrid goodies, people will full on stop buying cars? No. People are going to buy cars. Yeah, people WANT something else, but if it's not available, they're not going to simply stop buying cars.

How many cried that the F8x didn't' have a V8? How hard is it to order one now? That mileage increased by 3/6, and is a more powerful motor. And that's on one end of the performance scale, not the run of the mill vehicle.

God forbid you still have a 200hp mid size car with a FI 3-pot. If you really think people are going to care, then you're of the same mind set that's the exact problem you're describing. Get over it.

However, it's a moot point. We'll be saying the same thing in another five years.

This is because manufacturers work on 5 to 8 year power train design cyciles. They can't just develop, test and build a new engine in a few months. What has Ford done since 2013? Last I looked they were doing quite a bit better (not a Ford fanboi at all btw).

10 years is a long time but the engines in use mow will probably not cycle out for another 3- 5 years. Unless the next generation are twice as efficient (highly doubtful) I just don't see those standards being met.

I could also care less about the power train but I am an enthusiast. The only performance hybrids and electrics are well out of my price range. Maybe they will trickle down within 10 years but we will just have to wait and see.

[Diver]

A lot of members have something to say about this. One part I don't understand is manufacturers have to meet an efficiency target based on the footprint of the vehicle. There are 6 size classes with the larger ones requiring less than 55 mpg and the smallest ones more than 55 mpg. It is possible for a manufacturer to be in compliance even though it does not sell many small cars as long as what they sell meets the target for its size class. The part I don't understand is what happens if across the industry sales do not meet the 55 mpg target in 2025 (or whatever it is now). There is supposed to be a review of the regulations in 2018 and the review requires taking both technological and commercial considerations into account.

The other emerging trend is autonomous cars. It is likely there will be a lot of those around in 10 years. Many city dwellers may opt to not own a car preferring call up a car on their mobile phone when they want to go someplace, assuming the rates decline sufficiently by eliminating a driver. Autonomous cars will probably be very efficient with a "perfect" driver and the fun factor extinguished. Uber, here we come.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by Diver

The other emerging trend is autonomous cars. It is likely there will be a lot of those around in 10 years. Many city dwellers may opt to not own a car preferring call up a car on their mobile phone when they want to go someplace, assuming the rates decline sufficiently by eliminating a driver. Autonomous cars will probably be very efficient with a "perfect" driver and the fun factor extinguished. Uber, here we come.

Most people who live in large cities already don't own cars for several reasons:

1. Driving through a city, like DC for example, is miserable.......always. Shit we put traffic lights on roundabouts, because DC. No one in the city also gives a shit to bother to time the lights properly. Hit a green light on one block just in time to see the light at the next block turn red.
2. If you live in DC proper, you're likely going to have to pay a considerable amount of money to even get a parking spot. Or you can risk it and try your luck with street parking, and enjoy the many dings and hit and runs you'll receive.
3. Public transportation is good enough (despite how people love to complain about the metro around here) to get you to most major hubs in the DC, Maryland, and Virginia area.

So if you live in a place that isn't fun to drive, is considerably more expensive to drive, and there's many viable alternatives there's really no point in owning a car. If I lived in downtown DC, I likely would forego owning a car myself. Practically all of my friends who do live in DC do not own cars.

[Vigilante375]

Originally Posted by Railgun

The point is they're not boring. The 335d is boring?

And no, not all cars need to hit 55. The average needs to be 55. They can offer some that get 70 and some that get 35 so long as it evens out.

Never driven a 335d, so I have no idea.

The diesels I'm familiar with are the Jetta's (as they have been the only ones in the US for years).

For SUVs and trucks to get, we'll say a combined 35 MPG, they'll have to lose a lot of weight and go with a smaller engine with a turbo. So like a weeny 4.6l V8 with a turbo all the while dropping at least 1k lbs. S-10s got good MPGs but also weren't bloated up like full size trucks were.

I can only imagine what horrific design they'd come up with.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by pgviper

Name a Hybrid car that is actually fun to drive and easy on the eyes that falls into the "appliance" car category (< $40k when optioned out)...

THERE IS NONE.

Fill that spot with a hybrid capable of 55 mpg and it will sell.

I've driven both the Chevy Volt and the Ford Fusion hybrids. While maybe at 8/10ths or 10/10ths they may fall down a bit on the fun-to-drive category (where a 3-series stays there), but at street-level speeds and a bit beyond legal driving limits, both are pretty good drives. But the question is oxymoronic. The terms "fun-to-drive" and "efficient" are somewhat mutually exclusive as well as relative depending upon what one considers fun. There are many hybrid owners that find fun in hypermiling. I think your definition of fun is one that is in opposition to efficiency.