|
But my point is that the 85 engines were not optimally effecient. That is the problem with the whole article.
85 was not some magical moment in mpg nervana.
I will agree that 2 cars come to mind as first steps but the rest of the industry was still behind the curve.
1. is the honda crx
2 corevette
what is intesting is both of these cars were as light as possible and were FAST.
Key words: Light and fast. as a byproduct, the also got good mpg.
The article is take a broad swipe at numbers that include everything from crx to Ford F-350 dually trucks.
As we have seen in the last year, auto manufacturers in america were not really making cars. The were making items with overinflated prices to fund 'unfunded' pensions and healthcare for retirees.
Much like Greece and soon California and the US, the product was irrelevant. It was just away to redistribute wealth.
The only reason car companies can't build little fun eco cars is because there is not enough margin to cover the add-on costs.
It becomes frustrating when people complain about 'the good old days' and have no grasp what so ever on the outside forces that cause things to happen.
When I was in college from 76-81 I said that if unions REALLY believed that their members built quality products then they should get stock options instead of additional benefits. Guess the unions were smarter than me........
|