Small / economy car deathwatch: we've passed "peak econobox" again

[Bicycle Bob]

A better-aimed regulation would look at load efficiency for the manufacturer. and unused capacity by the owners. Some rebels would fill their SUVs with junk to be "hauling" but they might get stopped regularly to tell their latest story.

[redpoint5]

If there's ever a world in which I need to explain what I'm hauling to some authority, only one of us will be leaving that encounter. Fortunately there's enough that think like me that it isn't a likely scenario.

[Xist]

People claim their friends with luxury cars prefer their full-sized pickups.

I prefer to call unnecessarily-large vehicles "ego haulers."

ChrisFix bought a souped-up Hummer when he hit five million subscribers. Apparently, YouTube revenue paid for it. WatchJRGo allegedly lost his job for using saved-up days off to make YouTube videos, which does not sound probable, as long as he properly did his job while he was there.

JR's most popular video has 856,000 views and he just got a monster truck.

The intro says "Compensating!"

[Bicycle Bob]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

If there's ever a world in which I need to explain what I'm hauling to some authority, only one of us will be leaving that encounter. Fortunately there's enough that think like me that it isn't a likely scenario.

Be sure to never have food or a cat in your vehicle. Sometimes the drug dog is just hungry or curious, but his handler can't tell the difference.

[redpoint5]

You just raised an interesting thought to me...

Assuming at some future point in time when vehicles are autonomous and obey the laws of travel, there would never be reason to stop a vehicle for a violation. Trafficking illicit stuff would become nearly impossible to stop because there would be near zero chance of stopping the autonomous delivery.

The future is going to get a lot more interesting, and I suspect, less private.

My personality is one of extreme candor and transparency, and I volunteer more than the information people would want to know. The difference is that I will not be compelled to share information which is not the business of others. It's the difference between giving something, and having something taken from you.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

But as Redpoint points out, what if a company just wanted to make medium duty trucks targeted at say a 15,000 pound tow rating and a 3000 pound payload with 4wd and aggressive off road ability. No way they are going to be able to meet those cafe requirements. That company will have to be absorbed by a big corporation or build something else they don't want to. The big makers would be allowed to because they can average the heavy duty off road versions to their plumber 2wd v6 contractor specials.

Such a niche company would likely choose to just pay the $56 per mpg fine

Originally Posted by Hersbird

Kenworth and Hino don't count as they are outside the laws as they already got a carve out....

There is no carve out for medium and heavy duty truck. They aren’t part of CAFE as they have their own emission and fuel economy standards. Phase 1 covered 2011 to 2020 and Phase II is 2021- 2027. Phase 2 requires a 25% reduction in fuel consumption. .

[freebeard]

You just raised an interesting thought to me...

Assuming at some future point in time [this scenario].

The future is going to get a lot more interesting, and I suspect, less private.

Else if (XNOR?) your social credit score dips, the vehicle delivers you into the portal of the local authorities.

[redpoint5]

I love lamp graphs.







Seems petroleum consumption has way more to do with economic factors than it does with efficiency laws.

Do people setting CAFE MPG targets understand physics and economics, or do they arbitrarily set the targets? The law of diminishing returns applies to everything, and going from 15 MPG to 30 is orders of magnitude easier than going from 30 to 60.

This image which projects future MPG based on proposed CAFE standards shows the opposite of diminishing returns; that it will somehow get easier to improve fuel economy; that the low hanging fruit was left for the end and that we started with the hardest hanging fruit.

[Bicycle Bob]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

You just raised an interesting thought to me...

Assuming at some future point in time when vehicles are autonomous and obey the laws of travel, there would never be reason to stop a vehicle for a violation. Trafficking illicit stuff would become nearly impossible to stop because there would be near zero chance of stopping the autonomous delivery.

The future is going to get a lot more interesting, and I suspect, less private.

My personality is one of extreme candor and transparency, and I volunteer more than the information people would want to know. The difference is that I will not be compelled to share information which is not the business of others. It's the difference between giving something, and having something taken from you.

Traffic cameras can already record your plate number and visible cargo, and, assuming your vehicle is stock, read the weight on each axle at a speed bump. Such a record would give probable cause to stop. The thing is - people who waste resources ar taking from all others. Our grandfathers could grab with both hands without upsetting the balance of nature, but now, there are just too many hands.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Bicycle Bob

Traffic cameras can already record your plate number and visible cargo, and, assuming your vehicle is stock, read the weight on each axle at a speed bump. Such a record would give probable cause to stop. The thing is - people who waste resources ar taking from all others. Our grandfathers could grab with both hands without upsetting the balance of nature, but now, there are just too many hands.

Probable cause of what, having an unknown load of a certain weight? Probable Cause has a specific legal definition, and requires a specific crime to be probable enough to warrant the stop, and an unusually heavy load doesn't meet this criteria.

It's not just that there are many more hands now, it's also that those hands are made much bigger due to tool use and cheap energy. The fossil fuel slaves as Sendler puts it.

Who is to say what is wasteful though? The person with the lowest threshold for waste? There are people that think humans shouldn't live at all, and their threshold for waste would be your next breath.

As I say in other threads, identifying a problem is the relatively easy part. Coming up with workable solutions is where it gets tricky.