NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 What does CAFE have to do with California? It was enacted by Congress in the 70's. But who introduced it to Congress? I'm trying to find it on Google, but not having any luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 question of the hour is can it support something as big as the Flex?...if anything the Taurus could be introduced over in Europe slotted over the Mondeo under a different name, plus if Ford still owns Volvo, it can share the D3 with the S80 and XC90 IIRC, D3 (P2 for Volvo) is no longer used. S80 went over to EUCD. As for XC90, I am not sure but I thought once Ford got D3, Volvo dumped it after a year or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 IIRC, D3 (P2 for Volvo) is no longer used. S80 went over to EUCD. As for XC90, I am not sure but I thought once Ford got D3, Volvo dumped it after a year or so. XC90 still uses it, but only because it hasn't been redesigned yet. It will be EUCD with its redesign. It appears to be flexible enough to support something as large as Flex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted August 30, 2007 Author Share Posted August 30, 2007 question of the hour is can it support something as big as the Flex?...if anything the Taurus could be introduced over in Europe slotted over the Mondeo under a different name, plus if Ford still owns Volvo, it can share the D3 with the S80 and XC90 most likely not which is why 2010 Taurus will remain on D3 ... the EUCD might be flexible enough, but there is a chance the D3 will simply continue going it alone. Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wescoent Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 IIRC, D3 (P2 for Volvo) is no longer used. S80 went over to EUCD. As for XC90, I am not sure but I thought once Ford got D3, Volvo dumped it after a year or so. The XC90 remains on P2/D3, but for the next generation, it will switch to a platform similar to the S80. Let's clarify something. The current S80 has a lot more in common with D3 than it does with EUCD, since EUCD is indeed limited in how much it can stretch. Ford will be keeping D3 around long into the future, since EUCD cannot stretch big enough to accomodate a Taurus-sized vehicle. Ford is also considering making the Taurus RWD on the Huntsman platform. The 2010 Taurus and MKS will be on a heavily upgraded and modified version of D3, and the 2012-2013 versions of both models is still up in the air, in terms of RWD versus FWD. If it is FWD, it will remain on D3, if RWD, it will go to a Huntsman platform with certain D3 structural components, the same way the Huntsman Mustang and Falcon will retain some S197 and Orion structure elements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonofford Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 But who introduced it to Congress? I'm trying to find it on Google, but not having any luck. This is a tough one. CAFE is part of Title V of the Energy Conservation and Preservation Act of 1975 (PL94-163). According to the Congressional Information Service (CIS) database, the following bills pertain to this act: 93 S. 2589; 93 H.R. 13834; 93 S. 3267; 93 S. 3717; 94 H.R. 4035; 94 H.R. 7014; 94 S. 621; 94 S. 1849; 94 S. 677; 94 S.Res. 145. The history is probably best covered in the Congressional Record, vol. 121, but I don't have access to it online (not sure if it is online). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 most likely not which is why 2010 Taurus will remain on D3 ... the EUCD might be flexible enough, but there is a chance the D3 will simply continue going it alone. Igor I think the reason '10 Taurus would remain on D3 is because the next generation EUCD platform won't be in service by then. It sort of gets itself into the same situation as the Focus right now, where it would be too late in the current product phase (C1 in the Focus' case) to make it worthwhile to switch over. I REALLY can't wait until Ford finally gets all its global platforms and product cycles in line with one another. These hold-over platform scenarios are killing them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 most likely not which is why 2010 Taurus will remain on D3 ... the EUCD might be flexible enough, but there is a chance the D3 will simply continue going it alone. Igor One way of looking at it is the whole D3/P2 always smelled like a Volvo/Ford hand-me-down. It doesn't mean the platform is bad mind you. IIRC, Ford used more steel vice Aluminium parts for the basic setup. Another way is, I think Volvo was deciding to lower the number of platforms themselves so why waste? Personally, I can see trials on the EUCD to see if it is flexible enough, who knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 California has all the movie stars who push all this crap on everyone. They want us all to drive Prius hybrids, yet they fly on private jets! They have San Fran, LA, Arnold as a gov. They are different than most. You mean to tell me whenever some dopey political idea comes up like CAFE, you don't notice it ususally starts in California? No, it's true that not everyone thinks that way, but you have a mush higher percentage of people who do. Massachusetts, my home state is the same way! How can Ted Kennedy be re-elected so many times? The only other state he could flourish is CA! Ma has most of the nutty stuff as CA. We just dont have all the "stars" to make things worse. hmmm...you seem National Equirer inspired...and your sign on contains the words Tom Cat.....interesting, have you been this way since childhood?......and cudos to the Californian for being whack jobs BUT being pro-actively environmentally responsible. movie stars don't push this crap...its just positive PR basically.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 hmmm...you seem National Equirer inspired...and your sign on contains the words Tom Cat.....interesting, have you been this way since childhood?......and cudos to the Californian for being whack jobs BUT being pro-actively environmentally responsible. movie stars don't push this crap...its just positive PR basically.... Once again, there's a difference between pro-active and over-reactive: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fus...ec-6880767e7966 And there's also a difference between enacting legislation that is for the common good and enacting legislation that strips away individual liberties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Once again, there's a difference between pro-active and over-reactive: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fus...ec-6880767e7966 And there's also a difference between enacting legislation that is for the common good and enacting legislation that strips away individual liberties. you need to ride a motorcycle for a while nick...you would get a WHOLE new perpective when breathing in...individual liberties parallel abuse sometimes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 (edited) you need to ride a motorcycle for a while nick...you would get a WHOLE new perpective when breathing in...individual liberties parallel abuse sometimes.... Stealing individual liberties exceed abuse. Remember, it's easy to sacrifice a little bit here and a little bit there without really noticing. Before we realize, we'll being forced into particular jobs, forced to see particular doctors, forced to live in certain areas. Once you give up a liberty, it becomes twice as hard to get it back. Edited August 30, 2007 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ehaase Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 But who introduced it to Congress? I'm trying to find it on Google, but not having any luck. I may be wrong about this, but somehow I remember that Democratic South Carolina Senator Ernest Hollings may have been behind CAFE in the 1970's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 (edited) Stealing individual liberties exceed abuse. Remember, it's easy to sacrifice a little bit here and a little bit there without really noticing. Before we realize, we'll being forced into particular jobs, forced to see particular doctors, forced to live in certain areas. Once you give up a liberty, it becomes twice as hard to get it back. I fail to see how this corresponds with having worldwide/ Global emmisions on shared platforms...for that matter everyone seems to like throwing California in the mix constantly....how can enforcing cleaner emmisions worldwide be taking away anyones liberties? man I would hate to get into a discussion about cigarettes with any of you guys.... and road blocks for drunk drivers...whats up with that? Edited August 30, 2007 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I fail to see how this corresponds with having worldwide/ Global emmisions on shared platforms...for that matter everyone seems to like throwing California in the mix constantly....how can enforcing cleaner emmisions worldwide be taking away anyones liberties? man I would hate to get into a discussion about cigarettes with any of you guys.... and road blocks for drunk drivers...whats up with that? Cleaner emissions takes our liberties like this: I own a 1997 Mustang Cobra. It meets emissions here with flying colors. Could I move to California and take my car with me? Nope. It's not equipped with California emissions. In order to get my car there I'd have to pay outrageous penalties or pay to have the car upfitted. And then there are all sorts of fines and penalties that are tossed into the mix under the mask of "clean air" that are really just designed to be revenue streams for the government. If taking my money under false pretenses isn't an infringement on my liberty, I don't know what is. It's the equivalent of legal robbery. As for the cigarettes, as a smoker I have a first-hand perspective on this. I have no issues with any laws barring smoking in any public enclosed places. Prior to being a smoker, it bothered me being around it too. No problem. But now they are enacting laws in certain places making it illegal to smoke INSIDE YOUR OWN HOME and in some cases even in your own back yard. THAT is a crime. Sobriety checkpoints I also have no issue with. If anything, I believe all moving infractions should be enforced MUCH more strictly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 (edited) Cleaner emissions takes our liberties like this: I own a 1997 Mustang Cobra. It meets emissions here with flying colors. Could I move to California and take my car with me? Nope. It's not equipped with California emissions. In order to get my car there I'd have to pay outrageous penalties or pay to have the car upfitted. And then there are all sorts of fines and penalties that are tossed into the mix under the mask of "clean air" that are really just designed to be revenue streams for the government. If taking my money under false pretenses isn't an infringement on my liberty, I don't know what is. It's the equivalent of legal robbery. As for the cigarettes, as a smoker I have a first-hand perspective on this. I have no issues with any laws barring smoking in any public enclosed places. Prior to being a smoker, it bothered me being around it too. No problem. But now they are enacting laws in certain places making it illegal to smoke INSIDE YOUR OWN HOME and in some cases even in your own back yard. THAT is a crime. Sobriety checkpoints I also have no issue with. If anything, I believe all moving infractions should be enforced MUCH more strictly. you are wrong about the car...NOTHING needs to be done if it has 7500 miles, no penalties, NOTHING, ZILCH. NADA!..probably just a small processing fee ....and to enforce Non smoking in ones own home is ludicrous...how the hell that can be enforced would be interesting...and please mention which state that is because it seems everyone thinks all the loonies are in California alone! Personally i think majority rules...throw any legistation that they wish to enforce into a debate and voting system and majority rules....Oh...but thats right.....somehow Bush got bin WITHOUT the most votes...so much for that theory.....oh...and irrespective of mileage on a car...if there was universal emmisions...then that negates ANYTHING...so i rest my case.... Edited August 30, 2007 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 (edited) you are wrong about the car...NOTHING needs to be done if it has 7500 miles, no penalties, NOTHING, ZILCH. NADA!..probably just a small processing fee ....and to enforce Non smoking in ones own home is ludicrous...how the hell that can be enforced would be interesting...and please mention which state that is because it seems everyone thinks all the loonies are in California alone! Personally i think majority rules...throw any legistation that they wish to enforce into a debate and voting system and majority rules....Oh...but thats right.....somehow Bush got bin WITHOUT the most votes...so much for that theory.....oh...and irrespective of mileage on a car...if there was universal emmisions...then that negates ANYTHING...so i rest my case.... I would need to register a car purchase out of state, which, correct me if I'm wrong, costs more than a car that was purchased in Maryland, no? And then there is the bi-annual emissions testing (which we have here too) which is a complete scam. There's no reason any car less than 5 years old should need to be tested, and no reason any car over 20 years old needs to be tested, as there are so few of them on the road that their emissions output is negligible anyway. As a Marylander, I have to put up with as many left wing loons here as California does. Most of these ridiculous anti-smoking laws are things I have either read about in Montgomery County, MD or in Southern California. I believe it is a California county that now makes it illegal to smoke indoors in apartments or other homes that share walls with neighbors. Do they share A/C systems too?? I don't get it. If there were universal emissions systems, we'd just get governments finding other ways to bend us over. Look at the prices of car registrations continuously going through the roof. And then there's still the every-other-year rape of an emissions testing fee to deal with. Luckily, I've never actually had to pay for emissions testing on my Cobra. They always say it's "too low" to get over the rollers, so they just give me another 2-year exemption. If it's not emissions, it's something else. And then there are the left wing loons who refuse to let anybody build another nuclear power plant. They want to talk about really reducing emissions? Try getting rid of all the stinkin' dirty coal and oil power plants our county overly depends on for its electrical grid. What it boils down to: Cars are the easiest scape goat for pollution. Everybody sees them. Everybody hears when something is done to change them. Edited August 30, 2007 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I would need to register a car purchase out of state, which, correct me if I'm wrong, costs more than a car that was purchased in Maryland, no? And then there is the bi-annual emissions testing (which we have here too) which is a complete scam. There's no reason any car less than 5 years old should need to be tested, and no reason any car over 20 years old needs to be tested, as there are so few of them on the road that their emissions output is negligible anyway. As a Marylander, I have to put up with as many left wing loons here as California does. Most of these ridiculous anti-smoking laws are things I have either read about in Montgomery County, MD or in Southern California. I believe it is a California county that now makes it illegal to smoke indoors in apartments or other homes that share walls with neighbors. Do they share A/C systems too?? I don't get it. If there were universal emissions systems, we'd just get governments finding other ways to bend us over. Look at the prices of car registrations continuously going through the roof. And then there's still the every-other-year rape of an emissions testing fee to deal with. Luckily, I've never actually had to pay for emissions testing on my Cobra. They always say it's "too low" to get over the rollers, so they just give me another 2-year exemption. If it's not emissions, it's something else. And then there are the left wing loons who refuse to let anybody build another nuclear power plant. They want to talk about really reducing emissions? Try getting rid of all the stinkin' dirty coal and oil power plants our county overly depends on for its electrical grid. What it boils down to: Cars are the easiest scape goat for pollution. Everybody sees them. Everybody hears when something is done to change them. its not bi-annual here at all....i think it is every 5 years....and if the car has over 7500 miles you are not required to add or subtract anything...its a visual and a tailpipe sniff...and I have the sneaking suspicion your car sans Cal emmisions would be as clean as a vehicle here. As for the smoking inside...fine if you OWN the house...no way I would rent my house to a smoker...not in love with yellowing drapes, white ceilings changing to a brownish hue and smell permeating everything for the next tenant...so i can rationalize that one. 20 year old cars should be treated a little differently and are...however they need to be treated like in the UK and New Zealand.....yearly check if the car is fit for the road, they check for rust, suspension, brakes and smoke out the back...then it gets a warrant of fitness...wonder how that would go down here?????? no more bouncy smoke pugffing Impalas with chrome lip mouldings and spinners....anyway back to subject...there can be no harm with universal emmisions, yes they would find another way to bend us over but it would sure help cut overall costs at the same time keeping the "loons" at bay..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 its not bi-annual here at all....i think it is every 5 years....and if the car has over 7500 miles you are not required to add or subtract anything...its a visual and a tailpipe sniff...and I have the sneaking suspicion your car sans Cal emmisions would be as clean as a vehicle here. As for the smoking inside...fine if you OWN the house...no way I would rent my house to a smoker...not in love with yellowing drapes, white ceilings changing to a brownish hue and smell permeating everything for the next tenant...so i can rationalize that one. 20 year old cars should be treated a little differently and are...however they need to be treated like in the UK and New Zealand.....yearly check if the car is fit for the road, they check for rust, suspension, brakes and smoke out the back...then it gets a warrant of fitness...wonder how that would go down here?????? no more bouncy smoke pugffing Impalas with chrome lip mouldings and spinners....anyway back to subject...there can be no harm with universal emmisions, yes they would find another way to bend us over but it would sure help cut overall costs at the same time keeping the "loons" at bay..... Fine. Universal emissions. I can live with that. I'm one person, already in the US. Now go try to convince the rest of the world who's standards are the right ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Fine. Universal emissions. I can live with that. I'm one person, already in the US. Now go try to convince the rest of the world who's standards are the right ones. we'll just sen AH-Nold.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 we'll just sen AH-Nold.... And Jesse Ventura from Minnesota. It could be a "Running Man" reunion tour! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 And Jesse Ventura from Minnesota. It could be a "Running Man" reunion tour! y'know...here i am spouting off about universal emmisions etc....just crossed my mind.....are gasoline the same worldwide?..........everything sounds so easy on the surface no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnFan Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Fine. Universal emissions. I can live with that. I'm one person, already in the US. Now go try to convince the rest of the world who's standards are the right ones. Pfft, we don't have any emission rules. Screw you Greenpeace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 (edited) And Jesse Ventura from Minnesota. It could be a "Running Man" reunion tour! Actually, a "Predator" renunion tour would be much cooler! "Ain't got time to bleed!" Edited August 30, 2007 by TomServo92 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Pfft, we don't have any emission rules. Screw you Greenpeace. now I know why you bitch all the time...your'e FRENCH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.