Why you can't buy a high mpg car....

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

I think when Ford puts the 1.0 Ecoboost in a 2 dr Fiesta, hopefully with a 6 speed that gives you about 2k RPM at 70 MPH and a CD below .25 it should be good for about 60 MPG at 60 MPH, maybe a little better, with start stop.

regards
Mech

As much as I'd love to see powertrains like that become more common, there is no way that it would sell in America.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by hat_man

IMHO I think the auto industry, the oil industry, and the gov't are in bed with each other. As long as cars aren't as fuel efficient as they could be then the fed. and state gov'ts can collect $$$'s in fuel taxes and use them wherever they want...

Really? You find it more probable that some massive conspiracy exists between the many thousands of people involved in government, oil, and the auto industry, instead of manufacturers simply building the vehicles they believe the consumer wants? "The Man" developed technology it never intended to use, but releases it only when forced by market conditions?

Do we really need 220+hp in our cars? Do we need incredible 0-60 times?...

We don't "need" these things, but how many people live their lives based on consuming only what is absolutely necessary? If need was the measure by which we live, then why own a computer? We should all be living in caves and forage for berries.

If fuel were $1/gallon like it was when I started driving in '98, I would drive a 350hp car. Striving for powerful cars is fun; just as striving for fuel efficiency is fun. Neither is necessary.

Originally Posted by niky

...It's up to the US market itself to cooperate and latch on. But what are you going to do with a population that wants nothing but big, bigger and even bigger cars? ... but look at the US and see how, even with the gas guzzler tax and various incentives, buyer preference still trends towards cars with larger footprints and displacement than anywhere else...

You're blaming companies for selling products people will buy. Blame the people for buying those products! Blame the people who buy yet another CamCord or TrailExplorerRango when all they need is a Fit

Exactly! I was waiting for a rational comment.

Coming up with conspiracy theories is easier than accepting that human nature is irrational. We blame the government and Wall Street for the housing bubble and financial crisis when we (consumer/investor) played our role in the insanity. The truth is, we (collectively) deserve what we get. We deserve our Obamas, our Bushs, our irresponsible banks, and our gas-guzzling autos. We got nothing less than what we demanded.

*Speaking from a U.S. perspective, but the point stands elsewhere.

[user removed]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

As much as I'd love to see powertrains like that become more common, there is no way that it would sell in America.

It would sell if it was available, but your point is certainly valid. Would it sell in a high enough volume to be profitable for Ford? Remember the Blue Oval was the company that took no gov't money and pre-empted the 2008 recession.

They seem to get the smaller engine higher output scenario.

Personally if they built an aero Fiesta coupe with a 1.0 and 6 speed for a decent price without gobs of crap options I will never use, I might just write them a check for one.

regards
Mech

[pete c]

what^^^^ said.

a 12000 dollar 60 mpg fiesta will sell. It would still be quicker than damn near anything on the road from the dark ages of the 70-80s. Ever take a look at the acceleration times from that period. Anything uder 10 seconds to 60 was quick. Under 8 seconds was extremely fast and cost big $$$$.

make that fiesta with roll up windows, manual steering and brakes and i think it can be done for that price. There is one thing I am not sure about though. Can manual brakes have ABS? ABS is one of the few teatures that has come along that I am not willing to give back.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by pete c

make that fiesta with roll up windows, manual steering and brakes and i think it can be done for that price. There is one thing I am not sure about though. Can manual brakes have ABS? ABS is one of the few teatures that has come along that I am not willing to give back.

Isn't the Lotus Elise the only car you can get nowadays with roll up windows? I read somewhere that the motors and wires for power windows weigh maybe like 1 pound more than a roll up mechanism. Doesn't seem like something that people would be willing to give up for the most part.

I think ABS can only happen with power assisted brakes. Manual steering rack would be awesome though, although considering the typical massively overassisted Ford racks that might as well be steer-by-wire, I can't see that happening either.

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by hat_man

Just throwing my two cents here but during the "gas crisis" a few decades ago we could get fairly fuel efficient cars. Not efficient by todays standards, but efficient by the standards of the day.

IMHO I think the auto industry, the oil industry, and the gov't are in bed with each other.

RIGHT.........

As long as cars aren't as fuel efficient as they could be then the fed. and state gov'ts can collect $$$'s in fuel taxes and use them wherever they want. I have two reasons for this opinion........

1) If you look at some older cars and trucks they out perform some of todays vehicles. Then we get a hold of them and "tweak" them to get even better mpg's. If we can figure it out why can't the "geniuses" in the R and D departments of the auto industry?
******************
I realize that you qualified this w/ 'in your opinion', but......
1. our 'tweaks' would not survive the abuse of a normal consumer.
2. our tweaks (boat tails etc) would not survivie a day in the normal world of driving
3. the majority of the mpg improvements are at the nut behind the wheel

all of this has been stated before.
To think that everyone is sitting on their hands and not trying to creat the next big breakthru is silly.
****************************************8


Makes you wonder doesn't it?

***************
No.**************************

You see a new car come out today and the advertisements say it has "improved" fuel economy because it went from 20mpg to 22mpg. So what they really mean is that it went from really cruddy mpg to just a bit better cruddy mpg. It's only been in the last few years that there has been an increase in domestic mpg "technology". My opinion is that the auto industry saw that they were losing market share to the more efficient imports and proposed to the gov't that they needed to "release" some of the "technology" (that they probably already had sitting on a shelf in the R and D department)

************
Really.........'sitting on the shelf' ??????
*******************************


to compete or the gov't would lose out in tax dollars on many different levels. Fuel taxes, income taxes on domestic workers, etc. As long as we were making vehicles that were "almost" as good as the imports the auto industry was happy with sales figures, the oil industry was happy because the fuel efficiency was "technologically hindered" and the gov't was happy with it's influx of tax dollars. When the imports started getting a foothold on domestic car sales, all three saw a drop in revenue and something had to be done.

2) Look at the big auto industry bailout. All arguing aside about wether it was a good idea or not, it was supposed to help the auto industry get back on its feet (compete in the marketplace).
**************
You missed the point of the 'auto bailout'.
The $$$$$$ went to the unions. THe bondholder got zero. The manufactures have a failed business model. The labor/healthcare cast are too high. Forcing the manufactures to make expensive cars to cover the overhead. Since nothing was done to change the business model (which a true bankruptcy would have done) then the money did not go to create new technology. I really cant believe that you think that is what the money was for???!!!!!!
The manufacture were running MASSIVE unfunded debt due to the unfunded union healthcare costs.***************************************

You would think that the first cars coming out after the bailout would be something the majority of consumers would buy and be comparable and competetive with the import market that was "hurting" them.
************************
THe unions are hurting them, not the import market.
Think about it.........why do they have to sell expensive vehicles????
because of the total cost to produce them.
**********************
What did we see? Gas guzzling Camaro's, Mustang's, and Charger's. Cars designed to be too powerful, too expensive, and too fuel INefficient for domestic consumers needs. Why couldn't they build a fuel efficient family 4-door that would compete with the imports and appeal to the majority of car buyers? I realize there are cars out there now like the Ford Focus and other similar cars, but why now and not before or immediately after the bailout?

Do we really need 220+hp in our cars? Do we need incredible 0-60 times? Not really. My little truck has just over 110hp and can get up to 85mph and when driven realistically gets 26mpg (before mods) and does it with engine and fuel injection "technology" that is 15 years old and the disadvantage of rear wheel drive and crappy aerodynamics.

********************
the reason mpg is 'different' is because the epa recalibrated (down) the epa # to be more realistic. This fact has also been discused here at length. So your arguement is false******************************
Just think what could be capable today without even having to pay for a hybrid. A fuel efficient mid sized car with 100hp, advanced front wheel drive, aerodynamic styling to keeps it's Cd low, 6-speed transmission to give it a higher highway gear without sacrificing the needed lower in-town gearing, and whatever else can be thought of to help it be fuel efficient, practical, and affordable. Can you imagine the mpg on a car like this? Would you buy it? Do you see this car on the market? Of course not. The auto industry would never build it. Too much money to be lost by the other two groups in this venture.

Again this is only my opinion, but it begs the question.....WHY?

hope this answers you 'why'

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by niky

But what are you going to do with a population that wants nothing but big, bigger and even bigger cars?

If the US population really wants nothing but big, bigger and even bigger cars, how do you account for the fact that over the last 50 years or so, US automakers have lost about 50% of the domestic market to the likes of VW, Honda, Toyota, &c, all of which started out by selling cars that were a lot smaller than anything Detroit would build?

[Vman455]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

If the US population really wants nothing but big, bigger and even bigger cars, how do you account for the fact that over the last 50 years or so, US automakers have lost about 50% of the domestic market to the likes of VW, Honda, Toyota, &c, all of which started out by selling cars that were a lot smaller than anything Detroit would build?

Because the Japanese are all building big, bigger, and even bigger cars? When it first came here, the Honda Accord was 171.9" long, 63.8" wide, 53.3" high. Today, the Accord is 194.9" long, 72.7" wide, and 58.1" high. Then, it weighed 2240 lbs; now, it rings in at 3216 lbs for a barebones LX and more than 3600 for a loaded EX-L. Then, the only engine available made 75hp, today the base 4-cylinder dwarfs that output with 177hp. Heck, even the current Civic dwarfs what the Accord used to be, a full 6" longer, 4" higher, 5" wider, 10hp shy of being exactly twice as powerful, and 400-500 lbs heavier. While Honda doesn't make any "full-size" cars, Toyota/Lexus and Nissan/Infiniti do, and what we call "small" today is still much, much larger than what was small 50 years ago. Compared to their domestic competitors, imports long ago achieved parity in terms of size, weight, performance, and number of large vehicles/SUVs/trucks offered (just take a look at this chart from a recent Car & Driver comparison).

[minispeed]

Originally Posted by Vman455

Because the Japanese are all building big, bigger, and even bigger cars? When it first came here, the Honda Accord was 171.9" long, 63.8" wide, 53.3" high. Today, the Accord is 194.9" long, 72.7" wide, and 58.1" high. Then, it weighed 2240 lbs; now, it rings in at 3216 lbs for a barebones LX and more than 3600 for a loaded EX-L. Then, the only engine available made 75hp, today the base 4-cylinder dwarfs that output with 177hp. Heck, even the current Civic dwarfs what the Accord used to be, a full 6" longer, 4" higher, 5" wider, 10hp shy of being exactly twice as powerful, and 400-500 lbs heavier. While Honda doesn't make any "full-size" cars, Toyota/Lexus and Nissan/Infiniti do, and what we call "small" today is still much, much larger than what was small 50 years ago. Compared to their domestic competitors, imports long ago achieved parity in terms of size, weight, performance, and number of large vehicles/SUVs/trucks offered (just take a look at this chart from a recent Car & Driver comparison).

Wow you said exactly what I was going to say, let me just add that if you look at all those cars from the Japanese manufactures they have all jumped up one class almost exactly.

Civic - old accord size
Altima - old maxima size
Sentra - old altima size
Corrola - almost old camry size
mazda3 - old 626 size

Then they all went out and brought out new cars because they no longer had a player in the small car segment

Fit
Versa
Yaris
mazda2


As for the 1.0L ecoboost, it'll be niche. You won't really have it catch on until it's the base motor, until you have people who would never have paid for it test drive it, love it, buy it and tell all their friends "I would have never thought it, I can't believe it's only a 1.0L 3cyl". It's damn hard for me to convince any of my co workers that the prius is a great car because they know that fuel economy was my main focus buying it. They see me as bias because I was willing to pay more for an economic vehicle.

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Isn't the Lotus Elise the only car you can get nowadays with roll up windows?

And the Porsche Spyder.
The basic compact cars that we get in Europe (and that still are basic and compact) often come with manual windows.

There's lots of variations depending on the market though.
The base versions of the Fiesta don't have power windows in Belgium, but they do have them in the UK.

Manual steering rack would be awesome though,

Its electrically assisted.