US declares Biden fuel economy rules exceeded legal authority

[Sherminator98]

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-declares-biden-fuel-economy-rules-exceeded-legal-authority-2025-06-06/

 

Quote

The department's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in writing its rule last year under Biden, had "assumed significant numbers of EVs would continue to be produced regardless of the standards set by the agency, in turn increasing the level of standards that could be considered maximum feasible," it said Friday.

 

[Biker16]

So the Trump Administration declares Biden fuel economy rules exceeded legal authority. 

 

[Rick73]

Penalizing manufacturers seems a little unfair when the other 7 billion people on Earth are not directly affected by these same regulations, yet we all share the same atmosphere.  To be clear, not saying we do not need regulations, just maybe a different and simpler approach.

[Biker16]

23 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Penalizing manufacturers seems a little unfair when the other 7 billion people on Earth are not directly affected by these same regulations, yet we all share the same atmosphere.  To be clear, not saying we do not need regulations, just maybe a different and simpler approach.

I don't think it's unfair, but I agree There are Simpler ways to like $2 a gallon Federal gas tax, that would be much simnpler.

[jpd80]

Just my opinion,

If the overall fuel economy targets were based on assumed BEV sales numbers that are not happening then, yes those target numbers should be revised lower.

[Sherminator98]

7 hours ago, Biker16 said:

I don't think it's unfair, but I agree There are Simpler ways to like $2 a gallon Federal gas tax, that would be much simnpler.

 

No it wouldn't, no politician is going do that because they'll never get voted in or they'll get voted out in the next election. 

[Biker16]

On 6/9/2025 at 7:15 PM, Sherminator98 said:

 

No it wouldn't, no politician is going do that because they'll never get voted in or they'll get voted out in the next election. 

 

True Americans are Americans. 

[blazerdude20]

On 6/9/2025 at 4:15 PM, Sherminator98 said:

 

No it wouldn't, no politician is going do that because they'll never get voted in or they'll get voted out in the next election. 

Simpler doesn’t mean it’s realistic. Lots of simple solutions to problems, that’ll never happen due to politics. In hindsight, congress should have tied the federal gas tax rate to inflation. It hasn’t increased since the 90’s. Combined with increased fuel economy, this has led to the federal highway funds being sapped. 
 

If they really “want to help” the everyday user, then I’d suggest eliminating the CAFE credit for auto start-stop. Lots of extra wear and tear for minimal, if any, real world gain in fuel economy. 

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, blazerdude20 said:

If they really “want to help” the everyday user, then I’d suggest eliminating the CAFE credit for auto start-stop. Lots of extra wear and tear for minimal, if any, real world gain in fuel economy. 

 

I dunno about the wear and tear thing with stop-start, you'd think that hear more about starters failing then you do since that was implemented. It became wide spread about 12 years back and has been around since the 1980s.

 

Personally I get about 20 MPG out of my Bronco, which the best mileage I've gotten out of any of my cars, save the Fusion hybrid (which was an unexpected purchase I only put 3K on) and my old Escort GT. Stop Start I'm sure helps with that. 

[akirby]

Auto stop start saves about 3-4% fuel and they beefed up both the battery and the starter to handle the wear.

[SoonerLS]

On 6/11/2025 at 8:13 AM, blazerdude20 said:

If they really “want to help” the everyday user, then I’d suggest eliminating the CAFE credit for auto start-stop. Lots of extra wear and tear for minimal, if any, real world gain in fuel economy.

The EPA is reportedly considering just that:

 

[akirby]

At the very least they need to allow it to be turned off permanently.  Forcing people to hit the button every time accomplishes nothing.  People who don’t want it turn it off.

 

Remember what Mark K had to do to get around the EPA rules on the 2000 LS selectshift manual mode?  Had to start in 2nd gear but if you nailed the throttle it would immediately downshift to first because the EPA test never went full throttle.  Stupid games.

[jpd80]

21 hours ago, akirby said:

At the very least they need to allow it to be turned off permanently.  Forcing people to hit the button every time accomplishes nothing.  People who don’t want it turn it off.

 

Remember what Mark K had to do to get around the EPA rules on the 2000 LS selectshift manual mode?  Had to start in 2nd gear but if you nailed the throttle it would immediately downshift to first because the EPA test never went full throttle.  Stupid games.

Had the CX7 in for gearbox repair the other week (broke reverse hub, common fault when they get old)

Anyways, I got onto the subject of later autos and stop/start, the transmission specialist advice was to

deactivate as much as possible. Says it’s hard on auto, they are supposed to keep internal pressure up

in the box but many don’t and when the power comes back on it shocks the transmission. 

[blwnsmoke]

On 6/12/2025 at 7:21 PM, akirby said:

At the very least they need to allow it to be turned off permanently.  Forcing people to hit the button every time accomplishes nothing.  People who don’t want it turn it off.

 

Remember what Mark K had to do to get around the EPA rules on the 2000 LS selectshift manual mode?  Had to start in 2nd gear but if you nailed the throttle it would immediately downshift to first because the EPA test never went full throttle.  Stupid games.

 

You can buy a module that turns it off permanently or you can use forscan.

[fordmantpw]

10 hours ago, blwnsmoke said:

 

You can buy a module that turns it off permanently or you can use forscan.

 

Forscan lets you turn it off permanently?  I didn't think it did.  If so, I'll be doing that to the Bronco...my wife hates it.  It doesn't bother me as much, but hey, it never hurts to score a few extra points with the boss!

[akirby]

5 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Forscan lets you turn it off permanently?  I didn't think it did.  If so, I'll be doing that to the Bronco...my wife hates it.  It doesn't bother me as much, but hey, it never hurts to score a few extra points with the boss!

 

 

[rmc523]

11 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Forscan lets you turn it off permanently?  I didn't think it did.  If so, I'll be doing that to the Bronco...my wife hates it.  It doesn't bother me as much, but hey, it never hurts to score a few extra points with the boss!

 

Ive never understood the hatred for it lol.

 

My folks hate it.  My dad has a tune on his, which deactivates it, but my mom does this dramatic button push in her BMW when she gets in because she hates it that much lol.

[fordmantpw]

39 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Ive never understood the hatred for it lol.

 

My folks hate it.  My dad has a tune on his, which deactivates it, but my mom does this dramatic button push in her BMW when she gets in because she hates it that much lol.

 

lol, yeah, it's not really that big of a deal.  I try to anticipate when a light is going to turn green and ease up on the brake pedal and it is usually fired up and ready when the light changes.  But, then again, only about 1% of my driving is stop lights.

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

 

lol, yeah, it's not really that big of a deal.  I try to anticipate when a light is going to turn green and ease up on the brake pedal and it is usually fired up and ready when the light changes.  But, then again, only about 1% of my driving is stop lights.

 

My Bronco barely engages it anymore too since my commute is so short, I don't think it charges the battery enough to engage consistently.

 

What I don't understand is when I have the doors/roof off (and most importantly A/C), it also barely engages, which should be the time it should without the A/C on...

[akirby]

2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Ive never understood the hatred for it lol.

 

My folks hate it.  My dad has a tune on his, which deactivates it, but my mom does this dramatic button push in her BMW when she gets in because she hates it that much lol.

They decided they hated it the first time they encountered it and never even gave it a chance.  I actually like it on the Nautilus and F150 but not on the boxster.  Luckily it’s automatically disabled in sport mode.

[akirby]

2 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

My Bronco barely engages it anymore too since my commute is so short, I don't think it charges the battery enough to engage consistently.

 

What I don't understand is when I have the doors/roof off (and most importantly A/C), it also barely engages, which should be the time it should without the A/C on...

Weak battery.  There is an info screen that will show you the reason it doesn’t activate.

[rmc523]

4 minutes ago, akirby said:

Weak battery.  There is an info screen that will show you the reason it doesn’t activate.

 

That info screen doesn't tell anything lol.

[akirby]

16 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

That info screen doesn't tell anything lol.

Of course it does.  It tells you why it didn’t activate which could be battery, climate control or a dozen other reasons.

[Rick73]

2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Ive never understood the hatred for it lol.

 

My folks hate it.  My dad has a tune on his, which deactivates it, but my mom does this dramatic button push in her BMW when she gets in because she hates it that much lol.

It probably depends a lot on driving conditions.  I had it on a rental car in DC area and it wasn’t entirely bad until we got stuck in stop-and-go traffic on Interstate due to an accident and it was horrendous.  I hated it so bad I swore I would never buy a car with it.

 

In my opinion the real issue is that government shouldn’t get involved in micromanaging automotive engineering and designs.  Even if this system saves 3 or 4 percent on fuel, and I doubt it does, why shouldn’t drivers have choice to drive 3 or 4 percent less, or buy a vehicle that is 3 or 4 percent more fuel efficient to start with so they don’t have to tolerate a function they don’t like?  That’s just one example.  Losing freedom of choice is a slippery slope.  I’m all for saving the planet and reducing GHGs but there has to be a better way than forcing people to buy features they don’t want.

[Sherminator98]

39 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

In my opinion the real issue is that government shouldn’t get involved in micromanaging automotive engineering and designs.  Even if this system saves 3 or 4 percent on fuel, and I doubt it does, why shouldn’t drivers have choice to drive 3 or 4 percent less, or buy a vehicle that is 3 or 4 percent more fuel efficient to start with so they don’t have to tolerate a function they don’t like?  That’s just one example.  Losing freedom of choice is a slippery slope.  I’m all for saving the planet and reducing GHGs but there has to be a better way than forcing people to buy features they don’t want.

Why should have people been forced to buy cars with catalytic converters/smog pumps that cut power 50% that made vehicles more dangerous to drive? 
 

In my experience with stop/start-it doesn’t engage unless you have the brake completely pressed down to the floor. You can let pressure off the peddle a hair and not have the vehicle move, but the stop start disengages, for situations like that. 
 

It’s pretty much unobtrusive at this point. I do notice that the Fusion hybrid I had did have a more noticeable delay in it vs the Escape or the Broncos I have now.