backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 255 comment(s) - last by TheGreek.. on May 11 at 10:59 AM

Toyota Camry SE V6

Dodge Charger SRT-8
The auto industry says that a proposed Senate bill has requirement that are unattainable

It seems that while traffic congestion has gotten progressively worse over the past ten years, Americans have had a hankering for going nowhere faster. Fuel economy numbers haven't increased nearly as much as horsepower has in today's vehicles.

Your garden variety family sedans are now considered underpowered if they don't have at least a 250HP engine available on the option sheet. The Toyota Camry, America's best-selling car, is available with a 3.5 liter V6 engine putting out 263HP and can blast 0-60 in the low six second range. The V6-powered Camry is rated at 19/28 (highway/city), under the new 2008 EPA mileage ratings.

Chrysler is no stranger to high horsepower sedans, either. The company's Chrysler 300C and Dodge Charger R/T come equipped with 5.7 liter 340HP Hemi V8 engines (15/23) -- if that isn't enough, the 6.1 liter 300 SRT-8 and Charger SRT-8 pump out 425HP (13/18).

America's thirst for speed and auto manufacturers' propensity to quench that thirst may be coming to an end if a proposed Senate bill introduced by Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) passes. The new bill would require fleetwide CAFE standards for auto manufacturers to increase dramatically over the next 13 years. Fuel economy would have to rise from 27.5MPG for cars to 28.5MPG by 2015. That number would then jump to 35MPG by the year 2020 with 4% annual increases thereafter.

The 27.5MPG standard has held steady for nearly 20 years due to lobbying by auto manufacturers.

Not surprisingly, auto manufacturers aren't too happy with the proposed bill. "Basically, it is unattainable up until 2020 and unattainable afterward," said Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. "We think this is still going to be a big burden on Americans who need work vehicles."

The auto manufacturers, however, aren't the only ones against the new bill. Fellow democratic senator Carl Levin represents Michigan and thinks that the bill is misguided. "More progress can be made in reducing oil consumption and greenhouse gas emissions if we focus our resources on leap-ahead technologies instead of forcing companies to make incremental improvements to meet an arbitrary standard," said Levin.

In early April, President Bush called for the United States to reduce its gasoline usage 20 percent by the year 2017. Bush noted that the move would cost the industry roughly $114 billion USD between 2010 and 2017 to comply.

Updated 5/8/2007: The U.S. Senate Commerce Committee today approved the bill.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 5/7/2007 12:56:46 PM , Rating: 4
They only "push" on us what we want to buy. Do you think that all there is to buy in the US are SUV's and pick ups? There are plenty of fuel efficient cars out there but WE won't buy them. So the only thing left is to legislate out the cars the WE want. Do you think GM would make vehicles if it thought it couldn't sell them? Well, in fact, GM lost market share to Toyota based on pick up sales, not pass car sales... so let me eat my words. It has taken GM a few years to ramp up its truck plants.

Anyway, if we all bought fuel efficient cars and demanded fuel efficient cars, then that is what any sane auto maker would deliver. The oil companies can't force GM into making gas hogs. Not when there are more profits to be made selling what your primary market demands. Did anyone take economics? Help me out here.

Buy the right cars, and only the right cars, and that is what they will make. YOU stop buying the pick ups and SUV's.

(For the record, I own a Camry Hybrid [39 mpg], and a Toyota 4Runner [???]. Well, my wife bought that before we were married, but she only commutes 10 miles per day.)




RE: It is US to blame, not the auto manufacturers
By Xenoid on 5/7/2007 1:15:25 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. Everyone wants their 5.0+L V8 that gets terrible mileage because everyone needs a 1-ton truck to go grocery shopping on the weekend, especially here in Canada it seems.

People buy what they want. If they want a Honda Fit, they will buy it. If they want a V12, they will buy it. Nobody forces you to get the 3.5L Camry. I'm sure there is an econo (2.0L~) version as well, and it sells better.

And no, family sedans are not 'underpowered' if they don't pack at least 250hp, what a joke. A family sedan needs around 150hp, and thats assuming it's going to suffer loss due to an automatic, fwd drivetrain, while carrying 4 adults and suitcases in the trunk. Why? Because it's not a roadster, it's a family sedan! You just need some space, a cheap price tag, good fuel economy, and good safety features.


RE: It is US to blame, not the auto manufacturers
By OxBow on 5/7/2007 1:27:27 PM , Rating: 2
The choices aren't there for the average car buyer. The typical dealership has mulitple versions of SUV's, trucks, etc. but your choice for economy cars is limited to suck, suckier or suckiest among the Big 3. I live in the country, so a hybrid would give me hardly any savings (all highway driving). If they put as much effort into fuel efficiency as they do into designing the plush interiors of their SUV's and trucks, we wouldn't have nearly as much trouble.

Just give me a four seater that gets 45-50 mpg highway with adequate airbags, ac and antilock brakes (I live in Texas, AC is a must).


By masher2 (blog) on 5/7/2007 1:46:03 PM , Rating: 3
> "The choices aren't there for the average car buyer..."

The choices are there. GM and Ford both make a staggering variety of small economy cars. But by and large, consumers prefer the larger, more powerful vehicles. Toyota recently passed GM for the #1 spot...but that was primarily on strong growth in the SUV/pickup market segment (up 30.5% from a year ago). Their passenger car sales are actually down slightly.


By theapparition on 5/7/2007 2:06:38 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
But by and large, consumers prefer the larger, more powerful vehicles

Completely correct.

That goes for Europe too. Euopeans with money don't drive Mini's. They drive big, heavy, Mercedes and BMW's. If gas was cheaper there, they'd all drive heavier, more powerful cars. Just consumer preference.


RE: It is US to blame, not the auto manufacturers
By BZDTemp on 5/7/2007 2:26:02 PM , Rating: 2
Not so. Sure it may be so for some but many people prefer smaller sportier fun cars that sofas on wheels.

Also even the big/fast European cars offer better mileage that the similar US ones. Of course there really isn't any European cars as big as the Escalades and Excursions since they make even Audi Q7's and MB M-class look medium size.


By masher2 (blog) on 5/7/2007 2:56:25 PM , Rating: 3
> "so. Sure it may be so for some but many people prefer smaller sportier fun cars..."

When driven hard, my "smaller, sportier" two-seater ragtop gets worse mileage than my SUV. Of course, thats pretty much the only way I drive it.

> "even the big/fast European cars offer better mileage that the similar US ones."

2007 Mercedes Maybach -- 11 MPG city.
2007 Bentley Continental -- 11 MPG city.
2007 BMW M5 6-speed -- 12 MPG city.
2007 Mercedes GL500 SUV -- 13 MPG city.

I won't even mention that Europe is home to the Bugatti Veyron, a car capable of draining its 25 gallon fuel tank in less than 12 minutes.

Sure, you can point to many European cars that get better mileage. But again, thats because of the market to which they cater.


By FITCamaro on 5/7/2007 4:43:21 PM , Rating: 1
400hp 2007 Chevy Corvette - 19 MPG city/29 highway (many see better on both numbers)
505hp 2007 Chevy Corvette Z06 - 16 MPG city/26 highway
400hp 2006 Pontiac GTO - 18 mpg city/27 highway (many see better on both numbers)
My dads 3800lb 330hp 2002 Trans Am WS6 6-speed - 17 mpg city/27 highway


By theapparition on 5/8/2007 7:23:20 AM , Rating: 2
The GTO is ~3800lbs
The TransAm is ~3450lbs

But your point is spot on. With the TransAm, that inferior 10 year old pushrod V8 technology is getting almost the same economy as a 2007 Camry, with ~90hp more (330 was vastly underrated). People should worry less about technology and more about end results.


By hubajube on 5/7/2007 6:35:33 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
When driven hard, my "smaller, sportier" two-seater ragtop gets worse mileage than my SUV. Of course, thats pretty much the only way I drive it.
You need to get yourself a direct injection motor. I get 26 mpg when I drive hard and 29-30 when I drive normally (which is occasional periods of foot to the floor). The non-DI motor in this same car gets 25 mpg driven "normally" and under 20 mpg when driven hard.


By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/7/2007 7:18:17 PM , Rating: 3
If you can afford any of those cars, the last thing on your mind is the MPG!


By AntDX316 on 5/8/2007 2:45:06 AM , Rating: 2
true


By theapparition on 5/8/2007 7:17:04 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
If you can afford any of those cars, the last thing on your mind is the MPG!

But isn't that the point. Gas is cheap in America (very cheap-inflation adjusted) compared to Europe. So Americans don't care that much about fuel economy. They care alot more than 10 years ago, but still not that much. So the preference is to get the nicest car they can afford. If gas were to go to $10/gal, you'd see that purchase decision based more on efficiency.

The same applies to Europe. If gas suddenly dropped to $1/gal there, you'd see a lot more people drop their econo-boxes and get more car. I just don't like the notion that many of our Euopean friends here at Daily Tech claim they are doing it for the enviroment, or for the good of the country. Give 'em the money, and they'll spend it just like us Americans.


By Lonyo on 5/8/2007 7:11:16 PM , Rating: 2
I would disagree. I would stick with a small car, as would a lot of people.
Small roads mean small cars are better, not just for fuel economy, but also things like fitting down narrow lanes, or getting into parking spots :P


RE: It is US to blame, not the auto manufacturers
By madoka on 5/8/2007 2:09:36 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I won't even mention that Europe is home to the Bugatti Veyron, a car capable of draining its 25 gallon fuel tank in less than 12 minutes.


Masher2, are you just retarded or do you just play one on the net?

First off, you're only using some of the rarest/most extreme European cars as your rebuttal. The Maybach, the Bentley, the M5?!?! How many of those are even on the road?

Second, I've had a chance to be in the Veyron. It gets 10MPG on the road. The 12 minutes to drain is if you hypothetically drive it at 253 MPH the entire time. Again, that's so extreme that it is not going to happen/matter in this discussion.


By AntDX316 on 5/8/2007 2:45:52 AM , Rating: 2
but its capable


RE: It is US to blame, not the auto manufacturers
By Cygni on 5/8/2007 6:42:02 AM , Rating: 2
any normal DT reader is now laughing at you. Masher2 is about as opposite as retarded as you can get.