4 Engineering Steps to 34.1 MPG

Back in the 50's and 60's and into the 70's, Volkswagen and other foreign car makers were getting better than 34.1 mpg. What changed was stiffer emission control, but it was the American V-8's that were polluting the atmosphere. Stiff emission control was directed towards the big gas guzzlers and as a result, the small efficient cars had to pay the penalty of the gas guzzlers. European countries didn't have emission standards because their cars were not big polluters.

I drove a carbureted 1975 VW Rabbit. It could get about 25 MPG. Even my dad's sixties something VW bug with the 34 hp engine didn't top 30 MPG. No emission controls there. No nostalgia for old engines. They were not efficient except in size.

executives from Chrysler, Ford, Honda and Hyundai/Kia discussed how they plan to meet the new criteria.

"Let's bring our 50 - 70 mpg low emissions (<130g/kWh CO₂) engine technology designs over from the Europe and Japan"

"Good idea. Drink anyone?"

Wake up America...you are a long way behind the curve on this one. And I'm bored of saying so.

What prevents any company from using the same technology here that you superior Europeans have had for decades?

Don't you think fuel efficient cars would sell well here? Or do we just like to waste our money?

In Europe, not everyone drives a Mercedes or a Ferrari. The majority drive small cars with small, fuel efficient engines. In the U.S. the public has been weened on big gas guzzlers and huge engines; and once they were bit, it was difficult to go from large and fast to small and slow. It's pretty much a matter of Detroit dictating what they want to sell, which equates to higher profit. Small cars made by Detroit, have a very small profit margin. That's why, if the American public wants an economical car, they are forced to go to offshore car makers. Detroit counters this by producing Japanese and European style cars with a lot of high cost options to keep the profit going.

The big three would keep on building big gas guzzlers if it wasn't for government mandates limiting gas consumption. Don't forget, the oil companies are also involved in the overall picture. Government is in bed with the oil companies and the car manufacturers. To a lesser extent, all industries from steel to tires to railroads have a stake in the automobile business. What happens in Detroit doesn't stay in Detroit.

I would contest the statement "Large and fast to small and slow". I would say, "Large and lumbering to small and nimble". Most Euroboxes would beat the equivalent US car with it's corresponding larger engine hands down. I will be glad to demonstrate this at Cadwell park in the next few weeks if anyone disagrees....

I totally disagree. Detroit builds what the people want to buy. There have been no shortage of econoboxes available for decades. It's not what everybody wants. Now, there are no shortage of people who think they should limit what the public is able to buy. It's for our own good, because we don't know any better. It's that kind of elitist thinking that's going to bounce a bunch of politicians in the next few years. Profit margin be damned, if you sell enough of them, you will make money. It is just that the people sometimes prefer to buy "off-shore" small cars because they believe they are (better made, more fuel efficient, better value, etc.) whether it is true or not. The Dodge Neon was a huge hit for while. What about that?

Government mandates are just another case of elitist thinking. Oh yes, the oil companies run our government. Isn't that a bit tired? The government attempts to manage our federal resources for the best benefit of the country. If you increase the royalty fees on mineral extractions from federal lands, those cost just get passed onto the consumer in the form of a hidden tax. Not unlike the insidious VAT that so many think will "save" us.

The government attempts to manage our federal resources for the best benefit of the country.

Isn't that a little naive given the reports this morning that Obama's latest finace bill to control banks is likely to fall thanks to the effect of $1M/year spent by the banks on lobbying, which has been stepped up recently?

Check out the protests outside the Bank of America shareholders meeting.

I do mean "attempts". Depending on one's point of view they may or may not always succeed on any given subject. I tend to be a minimalist when it comes to government. I prefer to have as little as we can survive by. The economy does best when the gov't stays out of the way, but I will concede there has to be some limits for (fill in the blank here). The trick is to have a balance between "needs and desires" of the various groups. It is a very delicate balancing act and one that lends itself well to the (primarily) two-party political system, where institutionalized "grid-lock" actually helps keeping things in balance by preventing any one side from swinging the country too far either direction.

Many people will decry the "partisanship" politics. Actually, I believe it is healthy and good for the country.

I think the average America has been raised thinking that bigger is always the best. (I may have bought into a stereotype here!) It's all about fuel efficiency, getting the most power from the least amount of fuel. The US market has never seemed to understand this, for some reason, and the US manufacturers have haven't helped, never promoting smaller more efficient engines. I mean, on the most basic level, how many US made engines have Aluminium blocks compared to whats available from elsewhere?

As I understand it, legal max speed on any US road is 60 mph. Is this correct?

In UK, max speed allowed is 70 mph

In Germany, certain autobahns have no limits and drivers do 100+ mph, in the small (even our big cars have much smaller engines than most US cars) European models.

Slow these cars are not! Many are advertised with top speeds of 150 mph.

I was accused of having a big car the other day - I drive a 1.9 litre TDI Skoda Octavia. It does 85 - 90 mph comfortably. I've not tried taking past there as on public roads, I don't think that sensible (I'm ok, it's all them other idiots!)

A major impression Europeans have of American drivers is that the "all" have F150 pickups with V12 petrol engines doing <6 mpg. To import an F150 into the UK, you'd have to have a 4-cyl 4 litre diesel bus engine dropped into it to have any hope of being able to afford to run it. I happen to know these engines do about 9 - 12 mpg in service in buses...

Max speed is generally determined by each state. Usually the highest speeds are 70 in most states, but some may be 75. Someone please correct me if they have a higher speed in their state. (Except Montana where at one time there was no "daytime speed limit" per se). I haven't driven the huge expanses of the western states since 2004.

Do not forget the American gallon is only 75% of the Imperial gallon. 40 mpg in US equates to 50 mph in UK

Tony

I've just done a rough calc in my head, so I may be wrong here, but I reckon a US gallon of Gas cost about £2.19. So that's about 58p a litre. I just paid £1.21 a litre. That's a good reason to be more efficient.

'I just paid £1.21 a litre. That's a good reason to be more efficient.'

And that is the bottom line. When gas was $4.00 a gallon here Detroit couldn't give big SUVs away.

I response to your previous post, in the '70s I had an American made car that would eat almost anything you could put up against it. I am cheating a little because, I believe, it was based on a British design and had a British engine and transmission.

It had a Cotina GT engine and a Hewland transmission. It the the letters FF on the side ;-) The British inspiration was the Merlyn.

Lew