Jump to content

None






Sign in to follow this  
probowler

Make V8's Great Again: New Trump automobile mileage standards to gut Obama climate effort

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

To be fair, the hole in the ozone layer repaired itself  because we all stopped using CFCs.

 

We (the US) have cut back on air pollution, but if the rest of the world doesn't it won't matter. They need to stop cutting down the rain forest too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Justdatdude said:

We've reached the end of ICEs and some of you need to get over that. 

 

Yes sir Justdatdude, the long term future of the automotive industry is 100% electric. Ultimately, the lower CAFE standards that took effect March 31 may have a minor impact on what certain automakers do short term to meet regulatory requirements in the U.S. market. Beyond that, automakers are getting ready for the end of the ICE age. 

Edited by rperez817

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping we could get back to Global Warming (oh, that's right its now 'Climate Change' because when it snows a few inches as to inconvenience urban millennial's they need something to blame) - anyhow, I wish we would get back to Global Warming as our greatest existential threat hoax so at least I could buy some toilet paper.

https://realclimatescience.com/

 

I was predicting to some of my 'old school' buddies just a week or so ago that when this Wuhan Flu dies down the crazies will find a way to spin it to global warming.  Like we can't see that coming miles away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

The 7.3L engine shown above isn't impacted by CAFE related fuel economy regulations, as it's only used in commercial vehicles (class 2-7 trucks with GVWR over 8,500 lbs).

 

Yeah maybe so - But we all want it to be available in so many more vehicles! 

And it is only a matter of time before they come after the bigger trucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Kev-Mo said:

 

Yeah maybe so - But we all want it to be available in so many more vehicles! 

And it is only a matter of time before they come after the bigger trucks.

 

Other than as a crate engine maybe, I don't think anyone is clamoring for inefficient, large displacement (>6600 cc), gasoline powered pushrod V8s in anything other than heavy duty trucks and vans. For passenger cars and light trucks, that's last century's technology. And even heavy duty vehicles are now heading down Electric Avenue.

 

Here is the final rule Phase 2 fuel economy rule for heavy duty trucks/vans, requirements to take effect in 2027. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-10-25/pdf/2016-21203.pdf

Edited by rperez817

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always felt the best way to encourage more efficient cars was to raise gas tax. From an economist point of view it's also the most efficient, far more efficient than CAFE and other schemes with their high administrative load. But, a gas tax is politically hard to do so it won't happen.
 

I also don't like the hyperbole from opponents of this move. Statements like Trump gutted the standard is a little over the top. Moving from 5% to 1.5% annual increase in mileage is a rollback but not exactly the end of the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

The 7.3L engine shown above isn't impacted by CAFE related fuel economy regulations, as it's only used in commercial vehicles (class 2-7 trucks with GVWR over 8,500 lbs).

 

To paraphrase Master Yoda though:   "It will be......it..willllll...beeeeeee!"  😉

 

-Ovaltine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kev-Mo said:

I was hoping we could get back to Global Warming (oh, that's right its now 'Climate Change' because when it snows a few inches as to inconvenience urban millennial's they need something to blame) - anyhow, I wish we would get back to Global Warming as our greatest existential threat hoax so at least I could buy some toilet paper.

https://realclimatescience.com/

 

I was predicting to some of my 'old school' buddies just a week or so ago that when this Wuhan Flu dies down the crazies will find a way to spin it to global warming.  Like we can't see that coming miles away.

What is the  Wuhan Flu? Does not exist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/31/2020 at 3:47 PM, rperez817 said:

In addition to Ford, BMW, VW, and Honda also sided with California to retain the higher Obama era standards.

 

Volvo Cars announced yesterday it is siding with California and the higher Obama era standards. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-emissions-volvo/volvo-cars-in-talks-to-reach-emissions-deal-with-california-idUSKBN21I34L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry henry...your pal tried his best in 2nd print editions but there are plenty of 1st editions still around....50k deutsh marks u inculded in the birthday card was always appreciated by your pal as well.....fords move here does not surprise me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jpd80 said:

To be fair, the hole in the ozone layer repaired itself  because we all stopped using CFCs.

Wasn't too long ago that certain fat radio hosts were screaming that the hole was a hoax and that it was our duty as Americans to use CFCs or some such. I swear, there would be pro-asbestos scarf and pro-lead fingerpaint websites today if there were any money in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like the truck air conditioner to blow cold when outsude ambient temp is above 90 degrees...thank you epa for ruining what worked....lead paint is like tide pods...if you dont eat it your good to go......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

Volvo Cars announced yesterday it is siding with California and the higher Obama era standards. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-emissions-volvo/volvo-cars-in-talks-to-reach-emissions-deal-with-california-idUSKBN21I34L


Yeah, I really don't see what the ruckus is... It seems a lot of the auto makers are proceeding under the old standards, despite regulatory easing.  Any "damage" thus will be minimal and enthusiasts will benefit by possibly having a few extra big engine choices in the future.


That's a win/win in my book?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, probowler said:


Yeah, I really don't see what the ruckus is... It seems a lot of the auto makers are proceeding under the old standards, despite regulatory easing.  Any "damage" thus will be minimal and enthusiasts will benefit by possibly having a few extra big engine choices in the future.

 

The thing is that developing a new ICE engine wouldn't return a profit because the window of making $$$ is rapidly shrinking due to regulatory actions in the largest and 3rd largest auto markets. 

 

If certain makers don't invest in BEVs and HEVs, they are going to get caught with their pants down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

The thing is that developing a new ICE engine wouldn't return a profit because the window of making $$$ is rapidly shrinking due to regulatory actions in the largest and 3rd largest auto markets. 

 

If certain makers don't invest in BEVs and HEVs, they are going to get caught with their pants down. 

You're probably right, It's not necessarily new engines that I'm expecting from this (though it would be nice) but rather I'm happy to see current engines live on and possibly have a longer lease on life. The 5.0 Coyote, the Hellcat, etc? Updates and improvements to the current lineup are fine for now.

Perhaps this ruling might even make it SLIGHTLY more feasible to say... put a 5.0 into the Raptor and Bronco.  Dodge seems to be making money and fans with their big engines, and the upcoming "raptor-killer" Truck could also help spark a response from Ford. Here's hoping 🤞

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Moosetang said:

Wasn't too long ago that certain fat radio hosts were screaming that the hole was a hoax and that it was our duty as Americans to use CFCs or some such. I swear, there would be pro-asbestos scarf and pro-lead fingerpaint websites today if there were any money in it.

 

Agreed but you've also got the opposite end screaming doomsday and demanding enormous sums of money be spent on it.

 

Let's face it - both sides want your money they just want to use it for different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm not buying the alarmists' arguments. After all, we've been heading for doomsday in 10 years since the 60s. 
 

That said I don't think the auto industry is as big of a problem as the climate change people say. The real problem is cruise ships and heavy industry, especially in Asia where you have authoritarian governments that don't care at all. Cruise ships themselves emit way more pollution (As well as dumping all kinds of sewage and trash into the oceans) than the all the cars in North America combined, and it's completely unregulated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2020 at 2:37 PM, rperez817 said:

 

Yes sir Justdatdude, the long term future of the automotive industry is 100% electric. Ultimately, the lower CAFE standards that took effect March 31 may have a minor impact on what certain automakers do short term to meet regulatory requirements in the U.S. market. Beyond that, automakers are getting ready for the end of the ICE age. 

Sorry, the oil companies will never allow this to happen.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here's the 600 lb gorilla in the room. We could all switch to electric cars today but somebody had better find an environmentally clean, efficient and safe way to produce the electricity to charge all those batteries or it's all a waste of time and money. Nobody is allowed to build a fossil fuel power plant in the US because of climate change fears. No one wants a nuclear power plant anywhere near themselves. Wind, solar and whatever else we have tried so far to replace those two can't meet the demand. You can build all the electric vehicles you want but if you have no way to recharge their batteries you're SOL. Most people would also like to see "build American, buy American" especially considering the pickle we are in right now but that requires more industry which requires even more electric power production. Damned if you do, damned if you don't...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, blksn8k2 said:

. Most people would also like to see "build American, buy American" especially considering the pickle we are in right now but that requires more industry which requires even more electric power production. Damned if you do, damned if you don't...  

 

The power issue isn't as big of a deal as  you make out to be-most recharging will be done in the evening/overnight hours and there are other things on the grid power wise that can be improved to help with consumption or be more efficient. about 15 years ago a guy I know who owned a shop was given more efficient lighting by the power company because it was a cheap and easy upgrade to cut down on the amount of power used by its customers, just as an example.

 

If I wind up getting a MME for my wife, we are going to look at Solar to offset costs-I'd rather pay $50-100 bill a month in the summer vis $250 or higher when the AC is on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Footballfan said:

Sorry, the oil companies will never allow this to happen.  

 

Oil companies will need to invest in renewable energy (non fossil fuel) if they want to stay relevant 20 years from now. Many already are. Also, some oil companies are already providing EV charging products and services, directly or through partnerships. 

 

EV-charging-renewable-energy-BP.jpg

 

BELGAIMAGE-129984344-960x640.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/2/2020 at 9:26 AM, probowler said:

.. put a 5.0 into the Raptor and Bronco.  Dodge seems to be making money and fans with their big engines, and the upcoming "raptor-killer" Truck could also help spark a response from Ford. Here's hoping 🤞

 

  If they put the 5.0 in the bronco, I would buy one, no matter what else they did to it. 

Otherwise,  in no rush to spend 50 grand just to get a V6 (excellent V6 of course, but

"small" turbo motors don't mix well with my intended usage, extreme rock crawling)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, OX1 said:

 

  If they put the 5.0 in the bronco, I would buy one, no matter what else they did to it. 

Otherwise,  in no rush to spend 50 grand just to get a V6 (excellent V6 of course, but

"small" turbo motors don't mix well with my intended usage, extreme rock crawling)


Unless you rock crawl at 5000 rpm, I think you’re underestimating the 2.7L ecoboost torque.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, akirby said:


Unless you rock crawl at 5000 rpm, I think you’re underestimating the 2.7L ecoboost torque.

 

  I drive either a 2.7 or 5.0 every day.  Night and day throttle response and especially just off-idle torque

(and that's with the 5.0 not being a low end torque monster).  The kind of stuff you very rarely find a on

a dyno sheet, but here it is. You don't get even half this torque @ 1200 RPM on a 2.7. 

 

 Combine that with the perf loss of turbos when it's 90 out and you are "sitting" on that converter for

minutes at a time, generating huge amounts of heat on an obsticle. Add in almost mandatory use of high octane

if you tune, especially under above circumstances (and your going to have to tune a 2.7, once you

add 37-40 inch tires and load it down with gear and aero killing winches, bumpers, lights, and no top). 

 

 And finally, you can add a low boost TVS to a 5.0 and have virtually electric motor off idle torque

if NA 5.0 ever becomes not enough. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.0 LOW END TORQUE.jpg

Edited by OX1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×