Vehicle makers say US fuel economy standards put a million jobs at risk

[gone-ot]

Uh, sorry, but RockAuto says a ECM & injectors co$t$ quite a bit more than an equivalent CFM / CID rated carburetor.

[freebeard]

"Interesting how many people will see these dwellings as high tech cool when ..." the optimal shape for a living space is a hemisphere with an oculus.

And the stacking aspect is totally dehumanizing. Not that it can't be done; just not like prison cells.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_67

It's been around (and successful) since 1967, that 50 years. Trailerable houses go back to the invention of the automobile.

"trailer trash"

My R-license park-model 35' (mega-rare) Southern Pacific commercial Airstream resembles that remark.

Seriously, I paid $900 for it.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

Uh, sorry, but RockAuto says a ECM & injectors co$t$ quite a bit more than an equivalent CFM / CID rated carburetor.

Have you factored maintenance costs into that? I've had enough carburetted vehicles to remember the hassle of trying to tune the carbs (along with ignition points, spark plugs, &c) every 10K miles or so, trying ot rebuild them, then buying a replacement when the original just won't work right...

I've never had to do any sort of work on an EFI system, other than to replace one bad sensor, and I didn't have to spend hours chasing down the problem. The OBDII told me that that's what it was, I unscrewed the old one, installed the new, and I was done. No points, plug replacement interval 105K miles...

[gone-ot]

I believe the initial jist was new vehicle cost then and now: carburetors back then cost proportionately less than ECM & EFI do now.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by freebeard

And the stacking aspect is totally dehumanizing. Not that it can't be done; just not like prison cells.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_67

It's been around (and successful) since 1967, that 50 years.

Even though it's doesn't look so dirt, it actually looks roughly like a Brazilian favela (slum). Too ugly.[/QUOTE]

[freebeard]

Here it is from another angle. It reminds me more of the movie Inception than a favela. It was likely inspired by Archigram's Plug-In City, minus the plug-in part. Once the units were stacked, they couldn't be unstacked.

I'm trying to think of something to bring this back on topic. Got nuthin'.

[Fat Charlie]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

All the EPA mandated parts & pieces ADD both weight and co$t to what should be a simple item: engine, transmission, cab, fuel tank, trunk...and wheels.

EPA (and gooberment in general) needs to learn K.I.S.S. rules.

Yeah, it's the EPA's fault that our roads are awash in F-250s instead of Chevy LUVs or cars with trailers.

freebeard- That looks more like a Minecraft village to me than anything else.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Fat Charlie

Yeah, it's the EPA's fault that our roads are awash in F-250s instead of Chevy LUVs or cars with trailers.

EPA might not be the only one to blame for that, but its role can't be ignored at all. Or do you agree that, let's say, a current-model Ford Ranger with a 4-cyl Diesel, should remain illegal back there even though its emissions could be only marginally lower than the ones of an F-250 even though its lower fuel consumption makes it overall less energy-intensive (and therefore less pollutant when we look at the fuel supply chain) to operate?

[gone-ot]

MY POINT: The "Nanny State" role of EPA is NOT my cup of tea: I do not like being mandated to accept (and PAY for) things that *I* neither want nor need.

I'm sorry, but I believe Darwin "...got it right!", ie: 'Common sense' should supercede 'Communal cent$.'

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

MY POINT: The "Nanny State" role of EPA is NOT my cup of tea: I do not like being mandated to accept (and PAY for) things that *I* neither want nor need.

But OTOH I want and need things like EFI and hybrids, but I sure wouldn't have gotten them if the US auto makers had been left to themselves.