So getting bigger is more fuel efficient?

So these guys claim.

In short: Rather than making smaller cars, researchers claim automakers will simply make larger cars to fit into better categories.

Good I was just thinking that light trucks werent big enough! About time!

Wow that is shocking ^ Didnt know that before

I think what it's saying is that CAFE standards are more relaxed for larger vehicles. So it might be easier to make a car big enough to bump it up into the next category, than to engineer it to be more fuel efficient.

Would we like fries with that?

Salanis wrote: I think what it's saying is that CAFE standards are more relaxed for larger vehicles. So it might be easier to make a car big enough to bump it up into the next category, than to engineer it to be more fuel efficient.

this is why cars like the PT Cruiser and HHR (and probably all those other goofy looking box cars) are classified as trucks. same with every minivan and "crossover" ever built.

they don't count against the CAFE numbers of the actual cars they sell.

mguar wrote: In reply to DoctorBlade: The Ranger will only pull something like 3100 Pounds w

Really? is that the base 4-cylinder? My 4.3 S10 pulled twice that

As soon as someone makes a pickup that gets 30 mpg unloaded and can haul 10k lbs, I'm buying it!

Wow, a government regulation doing the opposite of what was intended. Imagine that.

What I read is a simplistic view of the CAFE rules, implying that larger vehicles don't have to increase their fuel economy, which is very false.

While true that the CAFE for a company is dependant on the actual cars it sells, it does close the loophole for small vehicles offsetting larger ones. Which is probably the real reason the Ranger will be stopped vs. the F150 (I,too, wish it were staying, or at least we would get the global ranger). The new rules say full size trucks must be X, and can not be increased by small trucks. Just like full size cars must be Y, and can not be increased by smaller cars.

Yes, Honda will have a higher number to reach vs. Toyota, or GM. But since they do not make full size trucks or vans, they don't have a requirement for them. Toyota won't have to deal with full sized vans or body off frame sales, so it's target will be higher than GM. All in all, it's going to be an increase of FE for everything.

Will it result in more large car sales? Since people tend to buy large cars over small ones, probably. It will also mean that small cars will not have to be deeply discounted to force sales just to bump up CAFE numbers.

BTW, do also note, the original intention of the CAFE rules wasn't to increase fuel economy, but to reduce our depenence on imported energy. Which is why domestically produced Ethanol will continue to get it's "loophole". For the Greenhouse Gas argument- same applies- since ethanol is theoretically neutral. (whether you buy that or not, that's up to you- being both parts of the ethanol "credit").

So, in summary, the report was a simplistic view, and was a graduate thesis, and the new laws will increase all cars fuel economy one way or another.

novaderrik wrote:

Salanis wrote: I think what it's saying is that CAFE standards are more relaxed for larger vehicles. So it might be easier to make a car big enough to bump it up into the next category, than to engineer it to be more fuel efficient.

this is why cars like the PT Cruiser and HHR (and probably all those other goofy looking box cars) are classified as trucks. same with every minivan and "crossover" ever built. they don't count against the CAFE numbers of the actual cars they sell.

Maybe not cars, but they do count for the CAFE number for trucks. Which DOES exist.

Not sure the Ranger example is really a great one. The Ranger is an ancient truck that was on its' way out, and I doubt it had the latest and greatest fuel saving technology. OTOH, the F150 is Fords' life blood. It gets the benefit of the most modern fuel saving technology and other goodies.

Don't know that physics can be completely overcome. If you took two cars that had the exact same level of technology, one weighed 2000lbs, the other 4000lbs, there's no way the heavier car would get equal fuel mileage.

alfadriver wrote:

novaderrik wrote:

Salanis wrote: I think what it's saying is that CAFE standards are more relaxed for larger vehicles. So it might be easier to make a car big enough to bump it up into the next category, than to engineer it to be more fuel efficient.

this is why cars like the PT Cruiser and HHR (and probably all those other goofy looking box cars) are classified as trucks. same with every minivan and "crossover" ever built. they don't count against the CAFE numbers of the actual cars they sell.

Maybe not cars, but they do count for the CAFE number for trucks. Which DOES exist.

do they help or hurt the CAFE numbers for trucks, and would they help or hurt the CAFE numbers for cars if they were classified as such?

CAFE is a bunch of crap.. it forces the manufacturers to build cars and trucks that people don't really want and makes them try to force the public to buy them. they should just let the public decide what they want the manufacturers to build for them. it's one area where the free market really shines.

Klayfish wrote: Not sure the Ranger example is really a great one. The Ranger is an ancient truck that was on its' way out, and I doubt it had the latest and greatest fuel saving technology. OTOH, the F150 is Fords' life blood. It gets the benefit of the most modern fuel saving technology and other goodies.

5-20 years ago, it was a good example. But the last decade showed no change to the Ranger at all. So IF (which isn't going to happen, btw) a 250hp 4cyl EcoBoost engine was installed in a Ranger, I would bet that it could get well north of 20mpg. Easy.

Sadly, the Ranger may have sold in very good numbers, it was never a life blood to anyone but the people making it..... I really liked that truck, too. A lot.

Sigh......

novaderrik wrote: do they help or hurt the CAFE numbers for trucks, and would they help or hurt the CAFE numbers for cars if they were classified as such? CAFE is a bunch of crap.. it forces the manufacturers to build cars and trucks that people don't really want and makes them try to force the public to buy them. they should just let the public decide what they want the manufacturers to build for them. it's one area where the free market really shines.

Generally, help. Yes, it's a loophole, but when the rule was written during the fuel crisis of the '70's- few would ever dream of SUV's and the various versions of are really tall station wagons. So it's not something that I find all that much fault over.

CAFE is interesting- yes, you have people like yourself who think the free market is the way to go, but you have others who want the manufacturers to make cars that are not so wasteful, and even others that want to reduce the amount of energy we import. Even on this board, without CAFE, there would be no real reason to bring in any diesel vehicles at all- way too expensive for what you get. Now, it's part of a broad energy policy to reduce CO2 and reduce energy usage (imports). That, since there's not the will to tax the energy.

smarty pants car jeanyuses say bigger cars are better...

50 years ago, doctors prescribed cigarettes to pregnant moms...

370 years ago, people though the sun went round the earth...

We are always wrong. Saying something is better doesnt make it better, something actually being better makes it better. Its a shame that the sheeple take things at face value...
Its ok, no need to make all that effort thinking on your own, let us do that for you. Here, dont forget your drool bib...

alfadriver wrote: 5-20 years ago, it was a good example. But the last decade showed no change to the Ranger at all. So IF (which isn't going to happen, btw) a 250hp 4cyl EcoBoost engine was installed in a Ranger, I would bet that it could get well north of 20mpg. Easy.

Completely agree.

My wife's '08 Honda Fit gets 38-40mpg, and it doesn't have all the latest fuel saving technology available. Hell, the only reason it doesn't get more on the highway is because 5th gear is really short. If they made an EcoBoost style engine for that, I'd bet they could get 50mpg easy...with good power, without any hybrid technology needed.

I wouldn't be surprised if within a decade just about anything that gets less than 25-30mpg combined, small-midsize trucks/SUVs included, would be considered a gas hog.

mguar wrote: In reply to DoctorBlade: There is some real truth to those statements.. For example Ford's Ranger pick-up gets notably worse fuel mileage than their full sized 1/2 ton 4x4 extended cab pick-up truck does.. It's 17MPG in a Ranger and 21 in the full sized pick-up with the echoboost.. The Ranger will only pull something like 3100 Pounds while the full sized pick-up with the echoboost will pull 13,400 pounds..

i think you might be lookiing at the 4cyl manual version, the big v6 autos have been rated to tow 5000+ for a while. the old explorer with the same drivetrain could be optioned to tow 7000 lbs.

the mileage issue is real though, but like has been said, it was being neglected since long before people cared about mileage in pickups.

mguar wrote: ....For example Ford's Ranger pick-up gets notably worse fuel mileage than their full sized 1/2 ton 4x4 extended cab pick-up truck does.. It's 17MPG in a Ranger and 21 in the full sized pick-up with the echoboost..

Where are you getting these numbers?

From what I can see the Ranger is rated at: 22-27

The F150 is rated at: 16-21 (4x4 Extended Cab)

Not a huge boost, but certainly not worse, like you are indicating.

mguar wrote: In reply to mguar: OOPs I just checked and the F150 ecoboost is rated at 23 MPG

FYP. Eco not echo.

Avg commute is 55 min each?

Got any facts to back that up?

mguar wrote: In reply to novaderrik: Please do a little outside thinking.. We import something like a Billion dollars of oil daily.. Reducing the money going out would be a good thing.. To some it would mean a reduction in taxes.. to others it would mean this country could compete better with the rest of the world.. Now they are talking about 50 plus MPG standards.. It will happen. if we are around say 15-17 MPG average now (remember all the SUV's, pickups and fat luxobarges there are on the freeways some of which are 10+ years old or older) Getting to 50 means we'll need to spend 1/2 or less of what we are spending.. How we are going to do it? Plug in hybrids will help as will electric cars.. Before you Pooh pooh those realize the average American is now approaching 55 minutes commute to and 55 minutes from work..That SUV already costs more to drive to and from work than the payments on hybrids. Here's a rough guess of the math involved for soccer Moms SUV. 6 gallons of gas a day.. X 5 X52say $4.00 a gallon* that's $6240 a year for gas only. add say $500 a month payments. that's $12,000+ a year.. * I know it's cheaper right now but don't expect that to last. Remember 1 billion 300 million Chinese are now starting to buy cars . Add another Billion 1 hundred million Indians, and if you've paid attention lately the third world has been buying more and more of them as well. Yes I know you and your wife drive a 15 year old paid for Honda and don't use but $7.00 a week worth of gas but hey! you're smart.. Your boss doesn't mind if the car breaks down once in a while and you're late plus you could always ride a bicycle or the bus.. I know your wife will love riding the bus with the kids and groceries while you repair it..

i am doing the outside thinking.. you're the one that's doing the inside thinking.. we have more than enough energy here that we don't need to import a damn thing.. we have more oil, natural gas, coal, wind, water, nuclear, solar and every other form of energy than we will ever be able to totally utilize. there is a reason the little crapcan cars that are so popular in Europe and Japan aren't popular here- we aren't Europe or Japan. in general, we like to be comfortable when we drive. we like to know that we can get things done. we like our cars and trucks big. if someone wants a plug in hybrid- fine, they are available. if someone wants a small diesel that gets 50mpg- they are available.. if someone wants a truck that can haul 5000 pounds of stuff in the back without breaking a sweat- they are also available. if someone wants a car that's big enough to haul their family and still have a big trunk for all the stuff they might need for a weekend camping trip- they can get them. the main thing is that each person gets to choose what they want and why they want it.