AMERICANS: Would you buy a 125cc motorcycle for the street?

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Bicycle Bob

Yeah, the mileage goal can be met by beating the test conditions, ignoring real world conditions and changes with wear. The goal of the companies is to increase sales, so they can boost that showroom number by using complex technology and unfixable components. Then the marketing demons convince everyone that they need two tons of steel for safety and status.
Governments tend to accidentally stifle progress with regulations, often specifying things that are soon obsolete and not adjusting laws to suit. Lawyers don't have time to learn more about technology than the average consumer, and love money more than efficiency. We would be a lot better off if advertising was banned, and public education made heroes out of people who reduce their consumption while improving their lives.

If you truly believe that the government stifles progress in fuel economy explain the chart below of US fleet fuel economy.



CARS:
From 1978 to 1990 the US government increased CAFE from 18 mph to 27.5 mpg. From 1991 to 2010 they held CAFE steady at 27.5 mpg. From 2011 to 2020 CAFE steadily increased from 27.5 to 40.9 mpg

TRUCKS:
CAFE went from 17.5 mpg in 1982 to 20.5 in in 1989. In 1990 CAFE requirements actually dropped to 20 then climbed back to 20.7 in 1996. From 1996 to 2004 it held steady at 20.7 mpg. For 2005 to 2020 truck fuel economy climbed steadily to 31 mpg.

When the government requires manufacturers to increase fuel economy they do. That is the only time we increase fuel economy.

[Bicycle Bob]

Originally Posted by JSH

If you truly believe that the government stifles progress in fuel economy explain the chart below of US fleet fuel economy.



CARS:
From 1978 to 1990 the US government increased CAFE from 18 mph to 27.5 mpg. From 1991 to 2010 they held CAFE steady at 27.5 mpg. From 2011 to 2020 CAFE steadily increased from 27.5 to 40.9 mpg

TRUCKS:
CAFE went from 17.5 mpg in 1982 to 20.5 in in 1989. In 1990 CAFE requirements actually dropped to 20 then climbed back to 20.7 in 1996. From 1996 to 2004 it held steady at 20.7 mpg. For 2005 to 2020 truck fuel economy climbed steadily to 31 mpg.

When the government requires manufacturers to increase fuel economy they do. That is the only time we increase fuel economy.

Generally, it is a good idea to read the next sentence before replying. CAFE was a rare example of regulating results, not means. The push for electrics, with no limits on consumption, is a typical bad one.

[jcp123]

Originally Posted by JSH

If you truly believe that the government stifles progress in fuel economy explain the chart below of US fleet fuel economy.



CARS:
From 1978 to 1990 the US government increased CAFE from 18 mph to 27.5 mpg. From 1991 to 2010 they held CAFE steady at 27.5 mpg. From 2011 to 2020 CAFE steadily increased from 27.5 to 40.9 mpg

TRUCKS:
CAFE went from 17.5 mpg in 1982 to 20.5 in in 1989. In 1990 CAFE requirements actually dropped to 20 then climbed back to 20.7 in 1996. From 1996 to 2004 it held steady at 20.7 mpg. For 2005 to 2020 truck fuel economy climbed steadily to 31 mpg.

When the government requires manufacturers to increase fuel economy they do. That is the only time we increase fuel economy.

It’s undeniable that the regulations work, overall, to increase fuel economy.

However, I feel like current cafe regs work to stifle options which me be more fuel-efficient replacements for some vehicles. Why don’t we have truly small pickups? Their footprints are too small for their inherent drag and mission to be on the market. Instead we have Rangers and Colorados which are basically the size of 90s half tons, or lifestyle vehicles like the Santa Cruz. Or there’s the Ridgeline which I think is the best general-purpose pickup on the market. And consumers don’t want small vehicles either - they’ll even swallow Subaru’s stupid marketing and accept a lifted, AWD hatch (Crosstrek) or wagon (Outback/Legacy, Forester) as an SUV, because actual hatchbacks and wagons are apparently lame and they won’t have to get red cheeks when their neighbors or co-workers see what they drive.

[Isaac Zachary]

Originally Posted by jcp123

It’s undeniable that the regulations work, overall, to increase fuel economy.

However, I feel like current cafe regs work to stifle options which me be more fuel-efficient replacements for some vehicles. Why don’t we have truly small pickups? Their footprints are too small for their inherent drag and mission to be on the market. Instead we have Rangers and Colorados which are basically the size of 90s half tons, or lifestyle vehicles like the Santa Cruz. Or there’s the Ridgeline which I think is the best general-purpose pickup on the market. And consumers don’t want small vehicles either - they’ll even swallow Subaru’s stupid marketing and accept a lifted, AWD hatch (Crosstrek) or wagon (Outback/Legacy, Forester) as an SUV, because actual hatchbacks and wagons are apparently lame and they won’t have to get red cheeks when their neighbors or co-workers see what they drive.

Apparently because the government doesn't want small trucks to come back. Or maybe it's the manufacturers that don't want to make a pickup that meets government standards???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM

[Bicycle Bob]

I have a motor salvaged from a Honda ATV. It has 125 cc, a reverse gear and electric start. I got it for a 1+1 micro car, but here, it would be hard to licence even as a trike. The engineering predicts 400 MPG and highway speeds. Anyone want to take over the project? My pedal trike won a world championship in practical vehicles.

[freebeard]

I, for one, would like to see what you could do with it.

I have a Lexus electric axle, but suffer different impediments.

[Bicycle Bob]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I, for one, would like to see what you could do with it.

I have a Lexus electric axle, but suffer different impediments.

Is that in reference to my ATV motor? What I have in mind is a front engine trike with the cylinder head poking out, for basic stability plus easy engine cooling and cabin heating. Two front wheels, all enclosed, and bobsled seating. With two up, side luggage racks might be used. Here's a chassis model:
https://www.compositesworld.com/colu...mobile-history

BTW, I'm just finishing restoration of one of those CAFE gems just like yours.

[freebeard]

Thanx. What I had in mind was a FWD reverse tadpole like the Blackjack Zero. Then just putting it in a VW Beetle. Now I'm down to wanting a 2nd-hand FUV.

[Bicycle Bob]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Thanx. What I had in mind was a FWD reverse tadpole like the Blackjack Zero. Then just putting it in a VW Beetle. Now I'm down to wanting a 2nd-hand FUV.

I fell in love with the Morgan Trike featured in R&T, but for mileage, we just can't afford to push those shapes around. I also need something all-weather.

[freebeard]

For me it was the Messerschmitt KR200, but that single drive wheel.....

The Arcimoto MLM would have three-wheel drive.