IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 Forum Rules 
Unbalanced EngineeringBlaine Fabrication.comHotpart.comSolo PerformanceUMI Performance
> New Economy and Emissions Standards, 1973 all over again?
KeithO
post May 19 2009, 04:59 PM
Post #1


Veteran Member
*****

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 2,647
Joined: 23-December 03
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Member No.: 14



The supposed standards about to be enacted might make performance cars more difficult to get for a while. I am wondering if we aren't looking at new-car performance similar to what we saw from 1973 through around 1987...

This is just more motivation for me to maintain my f-body.

Do you guys think that we will be able to achieve this? Regardless, how slow do you think new cars will get before performance returns?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
prockbp
post May 20 2009, 06:28 AM
Post #2


Advanced Member
**

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 440
Joined: 25-December 03
From: Newport Beach, California
Member No.: 41



39 mpg for cars by 2016.... What is the problem with that? You can absolutely still have badass performance vehicles that get that mileage.... The difference? Size.

The thing I like about this is that it forces vehicles to become smaller and lighter... That will help prepare us for real electric vehicles which will have to be much smaller than the average vehicle on the road today....

Don't take me the wrong way though... I'm sick of more-and-more-and-more law... but this law, it doesn't tell me what to do with my life. The intent of this law is to improve our environmental conditions.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/18...eage-standards/

Priuses and Fiestas are not the answer.. those cars blow chunks.. I had a f'ing 1986 Honda that got 50mpg... And my point here is that we took a wrong turn somewhere when 40mpg became more efficient than 50mpg.

This post has been edited by prockbp: May 21 2009, 12:36 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd
post May 20 2009, 02:14 PM
Post #3


Member
*

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 154
Joined: 15-February 07
Member No.: 1,682



QUOTE (prockbp @ May 20 2009, 02:28 AM) *
39 mpg for cars by 2016.... What is the problem with that? You can absolutely still have badass performance vehicles that get that mileage.... The difference? Size.

The thing I like about this is that it forces vehicles to become smaller and lighter... That will help prepare us for real electric vehicles which will have to be much smaller than the average vehicle on the road today....

Don't take me the wrong way though... I'm sick of more-and-more-and-more law... but this law, it doesn't tell me what to do with my life. The intent of this law is to improve our environmental conditions.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/18...eage-standards/

Priuses and Fiestas are not the answer.. those cars blow chunks.. I had a f'ing 1986 Honda that got 50mpg... And my point here is that we took a wrong turn somwhere when 40mpg became more efficient than 50mpg.


the problem we are facing is that people want fuel economy but the refuse to sacrifice their 18 cup holders, and power butt vibrators. I'm betting that 86 Honda was pretty basic and you'd die a horrible death if hit by one of todays vehicles. I'm not saying its right...hell...I ride my motorcycle to work every day, no side impact protection there. I agree with making changes to protect the environment. I think the big change should be to make most of the cars in high density areas not run on fossil fuels except big delivery vehicles. The rest of the country still needs fossil fuel cars...ie a hybrid/electric isn't really saving much if you are cruising down the highway at 70 mph.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
KeithO   New Economy and Emissions Standards   May 19 2009, 04:59 PM
trackbird   The Corvette can do it, or get really close (not s...   May 19 2009, 05:05 PM
CMC#5   I have no idea why in a country with as many intel...   May 19 2009, 06:13 PM
trackbird   Yea, but if you tax fuel to $5 a gallon, you...   May 19 2009, 06:56 PM
mitchntx   Al works in the petroleum industry ... of course h...   May 19 2009, 07:13 PM
00 SS   Well let's take a broader look at this. Right...   May 19 2009, 07:51 PM
00 Trans Ram   stupid - but I don't much care.There is no car...   May 19 2009, 08:35 PM
StanIROCZ   The good thing about this is that cars are going t...   May 19 2009, 08:50 PM
nape   As a middle leaning Democrat, I think I need to ru...   May 20 2009, 03:58 AM
prockbp   39 mpg for cars by 2016.... What is the problem w...   May 20 2009, 06:28 AM
Todd   QUOTE (prockbp @ May 20 2009, 02:28 AM) 3...   May 20 2009, 02:14 PM
CMC#5   I only used the Prius and Fiesta as examples of US...   May 20 2009, 02:07 PM
mitchntx   QUOTE (CMC#5 @ May 20 2009, 09:07 AM) Tax...   May 20 2009, 04:21 PM
trackbird   I think you'd be farther ahead to implement a ...   May 20 2009, 02:31 PM
bubba353z   QUOTE (trackbird @ May 20 2009, 10:31 AM)...   May 20 2009, 03:41 PM
00 Trans Ram   I don't get it. The overall environmental impa...   May 20 2009, 02:38 PM
KeithO   I guess I have a unique perspective. I think this...   May 20 2009, 02:49 PM
TOO Z MAXX   QUOTE (KeithO @ May 20 2009, 09:49 AM) I ...   May 25 2009, 11:20 PM
00 SS   Keith, I wouldn't call that opinion unique. I...   May 20 2009, 03:09 PM
sgarnett   I'm becoming ever more convinced that "fr...   May 20 2009, 04:08 PM
CMC#5   No worries Mitch, I know you're easily confuse...   May 20 2009, 05:18 PM
sgarnett   Somewhere between Chicken Little and the Grasshopp...   May 27 2009, 11:41 AM
sgarnett   Al, I'm not even suggesting anything as lofty ...   May 28 2009, 11:22 AM
tx_warrior   QUOTE (sgarnett @ May 28 2009, 06:22 AM) ...   May 28 2009, 02:46 PM
sgarnett   QUOTE (tx_warrior @ May 28 2009, 10:46 AM...   May 28 2009, 03:03 PM
c4racer   And of course, we wouldn't want to do anything...   Jun 4 2009, 05:56 AM
sgarnett   What happened? Oil was cheap for a few months. Tha...   Jun 4 2009, 11:20 AM
cccbock   QUOTE (sgarnett @ Jun 4 2009, 07:20 AM) W...   Jun 4 2009, 01:00 PM
mitchntx   QUOTE (cccbock @ Jun 4 2009, 08:00 AM) I ...   Jun 4 2009, 01:35 PM
cccbock   For electric power, I think nuclear and solar are ...   Jun 4 2009, 02:07 PM
CMC#5   Ideally we'd want to be the first to not requi...   Jun 4 2009, 12:51 PM
c4racer   I think the most chilling view into the future of ...   Jun 4 2009, 04:06 PM
Eskimo   QUOTE (c4racer @ Jun 4 2009, 12:06 PM) Wh...   Jun 4 2009, 06:42 PM
KeithO   Eskimo - That was part of the reason that I starte...   Jun 4 2009, 07:14 PM
cccbock   QUOTE (KeithO @ Jun 4 2009, 03:14 PM) Esk...   Jun 5 2009, 03:58 PM
sgarnett   I see a lot of auto parts in my future, but no new...   Jun 4 2009, 11:26 PM
CMC#5   The glass is half full The glass is half empty The...   Jun 5 2009, 08:35 PM
Mojave   QUOTE (CMC#5 @ Jun 5 2009, 03:35 PM) The ...   Jun 6 2009, 01:12 AM
mitchntx   QUOTE (CMC#5 @ Jun 5 2009, 03:35 PM) The ...   Jun 6 2009, 02:03 AM
sgarnett   There is something good that comes from mpg - ligh...   Jun 5 2009, 10:38 PM
sgarnett   Isn't Formula One using regenerative braking n...   Jun 6 2009, 02:18 AM
Mojave   QUOTE (sgarnett @ Jun 5 2009, 09:18 PM) I...   Jun 6 2009, 05:37 AM

« Next Oldest · General Discussion · Next Newest »
 

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th June 2025 - 06:17 AM