200 to 300 Miles Per Gallon for a car is to good to import to America ? Mileage tax ?

crazyewok
And America meant to be free market?

HAHAHA yeah right

edit on 8-4-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

It truly is an embarrassment to the nation.

JimTSpock
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

If you really want to use less fuel you're going to have to go to a hybrid car. Or buy a scooter. Or maybe a tiny little 4 cylinder Honda.

The fossil fuel powered internal combustion engine has already been engineered to the nth degree. The future is probably with hybrid petrol or diesel and electric motors or further into the future hydrogen fuel cells running electric motors.

lets consider another angle. LEVERAGE. via gearing.

with the proper gear ratio a 20hp motor could drive a 5ton truck. the transmission should be the R&D holy grail.

We know that when using a pulley system you can multiply the lb/ft of torque, why not apply this concept to vehicle transmissions, transfer cases, axles, etc?

the tech is there..

a 4,000lb v6 Honda accord gets roughly 25mpg at hwy speed.
a 6,800lb diesel Excursion with proper tuning/mods can achieve 25mpg also. (yet, all the morons in the cars think the "big suvs" guzzle fuel)

reply to post by HanzHenry


I drive a Ford f-150 with the 5.4L "Triton" V8. If i put on the pedal while cruising at 30mph, i will still fishtail and leave rubber on the road. It is ridiculously powerful.

With that said, I still get almost 20mpg.

I know that there are American car companies that produce cars for the European markets that are very fuel efficient. In fact, 40 MPG would be on the low end of the scale. But they dodge the question of why they cannot be sold in the US as being due to "regulations". Safety and EPA are the big cop-out words added to "regulations".

Every now and then, we hear talk of "fleet milage standards for efficiency" such as all models made Ford have to average out to 25-30 MPG by 2020 or words to that extent. Often we hear that Americans want more power, bigger/safer cars; the reality is that a person is hard pressed to by a car in the UK or Europe that is below 40 MPG. The exception being high end sports cars.

But as others have said, it comes down to oil company profits and tax revenues on those per gallon sales. If you figure 15 gallons per car at 19 cents per gallon per week. that is $2.85 per week or $148.20 per car per year. There are as of 2009 254,212,610 registered passenger vehicles (does not include commercial vehicles nor motorcycles) so we can just round that off conservatively to $30-$35 Billion per year in taxes for those that don't use 15 gallons per week. (actual math is $37.67 Billion).

reply to post by Ahabstar


you should look at how the EPA has KILLED diesel trucks in America.

1. DPF filters, these things greatly damage the motors, lower efficiency, rob power, etc.
2. urea, some additive you have to buy, along with fuel, in order to use.
3. regen., it is where extra fuel is sprayed into the system so that it can 'operate more efficiently'

they have cut the achilles heal of the diesel truck market. look back 10 years ago, many truck buyers were buying diesel. Now, there are way more new gas trucks on the road. hmm, service life of a gas motor 200k mi, service life of a diesel 400-500k mi, the powerstroke was designed to go 350k mi, the tritons (gas) were made to go 200k mi. hmm

plus, a 89-98 model year dodge with the Cummins diesel will get BETTER MPG than a brand new "high tech" diesel, and go a Million miles commonly with proper maint, plus they have MASSIVE aftermarket potential for producing more HP/TQ.

the best years motor Ford ever made was the 1999-2001 7.3 powerstroke. they quit using all forged internals after that.. hmm wonder why?
those trucks also will go 400k mi (+) before needing rebuilt.

reply to post by HanzHenry


That concept has been applied to automotive technology. It's called a gearbox. You can't drive round in a truck with 20hp that is ridiculous. Even if you had 1,000 gear ratios to choose from it would still be a top speed of 8mph. wow. You do realize you have a limit on the rpm of the engine don't you? You can't rev to 50,000rpm and even if you could you still only have a weak 20hp which would be eaten by the drivetrain friction. It would take over 20hp just to transmit power through the truck gearbox and diff. Trucks have bigger more powerful engines than cars because they have to move more weight.

Most cars sold now have 5, 6, 7 or even 8 speed gearboxes and some have CVT or continuously variable transmission. I think they've got gear ratio selection covered. They don't need any more gear ratios. Plus more gear ratios means a bigger heavier gearbox which must be driven around by the engine.

You know you can't drive on the highway at 60mph in first gear don't you? (unless it's a Ferrari) Why? Because the engine revs too high and blows up. And 20hp is not enough to overcome drivetrain friction and wind resistance let alone give decent acceleration and top speed or get up a hill.

I'd read once (I don't know jack-# about cars) that catalytic converters which are required cause a loss of MPG but are only functional for carbureted engines - not fuel-injected ones. Their purpose was to burn off excess gas residue that wasn't used during the combustion process so your car wouldn't leak unused fuel. With fuel-injection, the efficiency is to the point where there is no need for these because there is no excess fuel to burn off.

This VW X1 is not a good car. It costs over $120,000. You're not going to save any money on fuel paying that much for a tiny VW when you could buy a decent hybrid car in America for about $30,000.

You can have the 2014 Ford Fusion hybrid for $25,881. A better car at a fraction of the price.

usnews.rankingsandreviews.com...

Oh but the government and big oil are in a conspiracy to deprive Americans of economical cars. I forgot.

The fact is the American market is very different to the European market. Their fuel prices are much higher so they tend to buy smaller cars.
Americans want bigger more powerful cars and they buy them. Americans love their big huge SUVs and they buy them in huge numbers.

reply to post by 727Sky


Wow.... So if a car is built to last, has no cheap inefficient parts, it saves money on gas, goes extremly long distances on one tank is not allowed; but on the other hand North American car companies are alowed to sell vehicals that are ment to break down relatively soon with cheap inefficient parts, burn lots of gas and oil, polute the air (not that the other car wont but the NA cars must have worse emissions), and they can only go short distances in between refuelings.

Or is it that the North American car companies don't want any compitition for their new age hydrogen or Electric cars with built in gas generators incase your batteries run low?

Or is it that maybe they dont want to put those tracking devices in their cars? Doesnt Obama want all new cars to have a black box type device in them to record every thing that happens?

What a cool thread! S&F for you!!!


Edit: I saw this qoute on another thread I thought it fit perfectly here too

Michael Ellner: "Just look at us, everything is backwards; everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, Lawyers destroy justice, Universities destroy knowledge; governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information and religions destroy spirituality." 

JimTSpock
This VW X1 is not a good car. It costs over $120,000. You're not going to save any money on fuel paying that much for a tiny VW when you could buy a decent hybrid car in America for about $30,000.

You can have the 2014 Ford Fusion hybrid for $25,881. A better car at a fraction of the price.

usnews.rankingsandreviews.com...

Oh but the government and big oil are in a conspiracy to deprive Americans of economical cars. I forgot.

The fact is the American market is very different to the European market. Their fuel prices are much higher so they tend to buy smaller cars.
Americans want bigger more powerful cars and they buy them. Americans love their big huge SUVs and they buy them in huge numbers.

What ever happened to free market?????

Shouldnt the people choose if they want to buy the car or not?

There is no free market in America anymore, Cant sell tesla cars in acouple states, cant sell extremely feul efficient cars anywhere in America.

Americans complain when the government trys to implement national healthcare, saying that it takes away their freedom of choice, is that not what is happening here? You have be stripped of the chance to make a decision for your self.

I feel like I go crazy because I can never understand Americans way of thinking. Im not saying your wrong, but to me as an outsider to the situation, I find your mentality hard to grasp.

In the end the American Government Robbed Americans once again by not giving the American people the right to choose if they want to buy it or not.

If I was an American I would be LIVID about this.

Like I said earlier the government is slowly doing the same thing to Tesla Cars. Anything that is efficient and is not from GM or Ford gets silenced, Just like those magic carborators back in the day!

Edit: I forgot to mention one thing....

Your only reason why it is a bad car is the fact that it costs $120,000? That is a pretty weak attempt at trying to degrade this car and its potential.

Haven't we learned anything from dollar stores?!?!?!?!?! cheaper is not always better.

reply to post by JimTSpock


So I was looking at the cars on that list and the best city mpg was 51.... how does that even compare with 180mpg with the VW? It doesn't. THE ONLY thing that those cars have going for them is the price and thats it.

Your opinion has some flaws, or is it that you are just partial to American/Canadian made cars?

You need to provide more information to try and discredit something.

reply to post by JimTSpock


you are correct that 20hp can't get you up a hill. But with enough gears to shift through, and an appropriate rear end, you can create increasing amounts of forward momentum.

Now, is 20hp enough to start any forward momentum at all? Probably, given that i can push a truck on flat ground. Would the engine last very long? Nope. It certainly isnt the most efficient way to operate.

I used to drive my dads bucket truck when i was a teen. I learned to drive a stick on a 32 speed transmission.

JimTSpock
reply to post by HanzHenry

 

That concept has been applied to automotive technology. It's called a gearbox. You can't drive round in a truck with 20hp that is ridiculous. Even if you had 1,000 gear ratios to choose from it would still be a top speed of 8mph. wow.

You do realize you have a limit on the rpm of the engine don't you? You can't rev to 50,000rpm and even if you could you still only have a weak 20hp which would be eaten by the drivetrain friction. It would take over 20hp just to transmit power through the truck gearbox and diff.

I think they've got gear ratio selection covered. They don't need any more gear ratios. Plus more gear ratios means a bigger heavier gearbox

i am speechless at the lack of mechanical aptitude. Good thing you know so much about MECHANICAL ADVANTAGE!

also a good thing you don't design trains, tractors, semi-tractors, or the like.

ever were exposed to the offroad community? we take thing called transfer cases and double, triple, quadruple the mechanical advantage.

Have you ever driven a tractor trailer? there are transfer cases there also.

How about a CVT transmission where BOTH pulleys are adjustable? could that supply an endless set of ratios?

HERE.. go study GEAR RATIOS, that would be a VERY good start.

reply to post by snypwsd

Michael Ellner: "Just look at us, everything is backwards; everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, Lawyers destroy justice, Universities destroy knowledge; governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information and religions destroy spirituality."

Unfortunately that statement has more truth than many would admit. As far as the car costing $120,000 has anyone priced Porsche or even a new Corvette @ $ 105,000.... and these cars have long production lines which economy of scale should mean the more they make the cheaper they could be... But why sell for 50 when you can get 100 ?

Without doing a search there was another Euro car that got slightly less than 100 MPG they wanted to import a few years ago...Answer was No, did not meet certain American emission and safety standards.. Reminded me of the American rice growers who were stalled at every avenue trying to export to Japan several years ago. Whatever excuse that could be used was in fact used to protect the Japanese farming consortium.

Some of this stuff about the environment and energy efficiency is nothing more than a different way of scalping the cash cows of their shekels or protecting long established money feeds; unfortunately efficiency or the environment has very little to do with it. Either that or the ones who write the laws are stupid (EPA) and are not flexible enough to change laws that have outlived their usefulness or do not take into effect new technology.. Battery cars may work for some... With battery replacement cost anywhere from $6000 to $8000 every 5 to 7 years or a trade in value of a Chevy Volt with dead batteries.... Hybrids were never was something I was interested in to begin with. Batteries for a Golf cart now cost almost $700 for 6, 12 volt batteries... and even motorcycle or car batteries have had a rather nice price increase in the last 5 years..


Why Are the Most Efficient Cars Not Sold in the U.S.?
www.scientificamerican.com › ... › EarthTalk‎

Since the advent of the automobile age in the U.S., gasoline has been king of the road; today upwards of 95 percent of passenger cars and light trucks on American roads are gas-powered. And the federal government has done its part to keep it that way, taxing diesel at a rate about 25 percent higher than gasoline. A recent assessment by the American Petroleum Institute, an oil industry trade group, found that federal taxes accounted for 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel but only 18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline.

Hard to figure state taxes because it varies from state to state.
Makes sense if most of the products in the country are moved by diesel trucks and you need and want the money. IMO we could have the best roads and bridges anyone could imagine if the monies already collected were spent on what was the original stated use and why the tax was instituted to begin with.
Good news is TPTB are finally pulling their heads out and coming to the realization diesel really is they way to go for mileage and simplicity/ Hybrids will be dead as a dinosaur if the diesel technology is allowed to be marketed.. IMO

Today, though, with so much emphasis on going green, diesel cars—some of which boast similar fuel efficiency numbers as hybrids—are on the comeback trail in the U.S. Recently passed regulations require diesel fuel sold in the U.S. today to have ultra low emissions, which appeals to those concerned about their carbon footprints and other environmental impacts. Also, the increased availability of carbon-neutral biodiesel—a form of diesel fuel made from agricultural wastes that can be used in place of regular diesel fuel without any engine modifications—is convincing a whole new generation of American drivers to consider diesel-powered cars. Right now only Volkswagen, Mercedes and Jeep sell diesel-powered cars in the U.S., but Ford, Nissan and others plan to launch American versions of diesel models already successful in Europe within the next year.

www.forbes.com/.../efficient-cars-emerging-clean-diesels-may-giv.

The Economist reports that still smaller and lighter engines are in the works for both Mazda and Toyota. To put this into context, Toyota’s Prius lags behind 19 clean diesel vehicles currently available in Europe, with the best vehicles attaining over 60 miles per gallon. And there is additional room for more improvement. If you add these gains to the potential for the efficiency gained from carbon fiber bodies (for example, BMW plans to launch its first carbon fiber vehicle in 2015, with materials created at a new plant in Moses Lake, Washington) there could be big efficiency gains for all types of vehicles.

There is no one word answer to this problem. It isn't all about taxes, or efficiency or tariffs but all of them and more - coupled with a colossal amount of ignorance.

1. The petro dollar is the biggest factor. When we went from gold based money to oil based money we committed to gasoline being out way to regulate inflation. When we print money furiously to pay for wars, we import oil at higher prices to siphon off the inflation problem - the money goes out never to return. If we imported less oil we'd be drowning in inflation beyond our comprehension.

2. Control. Control the energy, control the people.

3. Ignorance. Folks here and there have done things to improve efficiency - better tolerances does it in many cases, but they have been sent to the world of whack job. Acura was met with fury by the first dealerships because the cars were too good - not enough repairs. I know someone who was told his lifetime battery would never be acceptable - GM told him this, and kindly asked him to never show his face again or else. Folks repeat what they learn in school, the see the "laws" of science as something so true the never bother to look past them - in fact they fight for the right to beat down anyone who just doesn't get it. So innovation outside the norm is not only discouraged, it is often made against the law and innovation from within any corporate structure is a joke.

4. Jobs. People want to keep theirs. GM went around the country ending the public transport in most cities in the 50's and 60's, on purpose, to keep their company in power. Now folks are rebuilding the very things GM demanded be torn apart.

5. the DOD vettes all patent apps before then are reviewed by the office itself - those which may prove detrimental to the energy control system are consumed.

6. In the 70's when we switched to the petro dollar there was a gas crises to kick it off - done on purpose. Folks flocked to the cheaper, more efficient diesel engines. Then, remarkably, the retail price of diesel was tied to the retail price of gasoline and the incentive went away. As I recall there was also some requirement to make diesel with some form of crude oil to keep the petro dollar in tact.

None of this is by accident in the end. Why are these men all saying the exact same thing? Exact?

thedailyshow.cc.com...

Stop trying to see these complex problems via the limited pov you get from today. Do gooders who want subsidies for electric cars do not understand the petro dollar, or the battery damage or even how a car is made - they think the are built in a few months from design to the lot. The know nothing of true economies of scale, union obligations or anything else but Al Gore platitudes and the useless stuff the learned in school. I never designed car, I never went to Ford and said "damn it, build me an excursion!" FORD decided to build it all on their own, and, FORD decided to market it, all on their own, and FORD decided everything about the damn thing - not me.

reply to post by alomaha

It's really getting bizarre that majority of cars sold in Europe are diesel while in U.S. it's less than 5%... - See more at:

This baffled me too, but there is more to it than just gov or corp shenanigans. I found some other suggested reasons in a few different articles.

-They're too dirty

First, U.S. emissions standards, especially for particulates, are tougher than European ones. All but the smallest diesels have to be fitted with even more expensive after-treatment equipment than Europe requires.

One variants of the Mercedes-Benz BlueTEC system, for example, includes two catalytic converters and an “AdBlue” urea-injection system to clean the nitrous oxides and particulates from the exhaust.

And that gear has to be added to an engine that's 10 to 15 percent more costly to build than a gasoline engine of the same power. Even without U.S. equipment, the Ford Fiesta Econetic costs $31,000 in Europe; the U.S. 2011 Fiesta costs $14,000 to $23,000.

-Europe keeps diesel cheap

Second, Europe has taxed diesel fuel at lower rates for 30 years to encourage its use. And it's worked; 50% of new cars there have small turbodiesels. But in the U.S., diesel fuel is the same price or more expensive than gasoline.

So there's no obvious cost advantage, meaning that diesel buyers have to calculate whether a higher purchase price and more costly fuel are offset by the higher fuel economy over the projected life of the car.

And you know how people hate to do math.

-Diesel fuel isn't ubiquitous

Third and finally, diesel fuel isn't available to consumers at every fuel station, as it is now in European markets.

Only roughly half of U.S. stations have diesel at all, and of those, only about half have it on the same islands as gasoline. My mum, for one, may not particularly want to hunt for a station, only to have to fill her car out back with the semis.

www.greencarreports.com...

Another notion is lack of demand. According to some articles a lot of the diesel cars here in US are slow or lack thrust. Some say the batteries are only good for 10 years and have to be replaced.
I wonder how the demand is these days. Here in Oregon I see Prius' everywhere, whereas when I visit family in the deep south, I see none. So I have to check my own perspective when I think everyone would buy an electric or hybrid here in the US.

I do think there should be enough demand to open up the markets just a little more. I know the western states would buy them.

This is relative too, Obamas decision to increase fuel effect standards.

MY 2012-2016 Obama Administration proposal[edit]
On May 19, 2009, President Barack Obama proposed a new national fuel economy program which adopts uniform federal standards to regulate both fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions while preserving the legal authorities of DOT, EPA and California. The program covers model year 2012 to model year 2016 and ultimately requires an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 miles per US gallon (6.63 L/100 km; 42.6 mpg-imp) in 2016 (of 39 miles per gallon for cars and 30 mpg for trucks), a jump from the current average for all vehicles of 25 miles per gallon. Obama said, "The status quo is no longer acceptable."[39] The result is a projected reduction in oil consumption of approximately 1.8 billion barrels (290,000,000 m3) over the life of the program and a projected total reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of approximately 900 million metric tons; the expected consumer costs in terms of higher car prices is unknown. Ten car companies and the UAW embraced the national program because it provides certainty and predictability to 2016 and includes flexibilities that will significantly reduce the cost of compliance. Stated goals for the program included: saving consumers money over the long term in increased fuel efficiency, preserving consumer choice—the new rules do not dictate the size of cars, trucks and SUVs that manufacturers can produce; rather it requires that all sizes of vehicles become more energy efficient, reduced air pollution in the form of greenhouse gas emissions and other conventional pollutants, one national policy for all automakers, instead of three standards (a DOT standard, an EPA standard and a California standard that would apply to 13 other states), and industry desires: clarity, predictability and certainty concerning the rules while giving them flexibility on how to meet the expected outcomes and the lead time they need to innovate. The new policy will result in yearly 5% increases in efficiency from 2012 through 2016, 1.8 billion barrels (290,000,000 m3) of oil saved cumulatively over the lifetime of the program and significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to taking 177 million of today's cars off the road.[40]

en.wikipedia.org...

crankyoldman

5. the DOD vettes all patent apps before then are reviewed by the office itself - those which may prove detrimental to the energy control system are consumed.

the DOE has warehouses in Oak Ridge, Tn that contain MANY inventions and devices
invented by people that will NEVER see the light of day.

the energy scientists sometimes get to 'check them out' and play with in labs to learn something from.

reply to post by 727Sky


I think it was shown in NY, but yeah.. they've had this ability for a long time. They want that gas money. Honestly if I had a car with great mileage id buy more gas because id take more and longer road trips. Now I drive minimum. Gas did its first big jump right around the time I got my license.

The video on the 8 presidents was great . as we all know gas, oil, and coal will not last forever and trying to bring a fuel efficient vehicle to the market is next to impossible because of politics and Big Oil Lobbyists and as soon as someone comes out with a working model vehicle it totally disappears or the person who designed it winds up DEAD. Why isn't there a way to get around politics and politicians and Big Oil ? why are we subjected to someones opinion that we as consumers cannot have a car with excellent mileage ? So some lobbyist that works for Big Oil says the car is no good, so what . there are over 300 million Americans and I'm sure Most of them would want that Vehicle. We are the Majority We Should be able to say " YES WE WANT THAT GAS SAVINGS CAR !" So some Lobbyist Tells us what to do and what to Buy ? There has to be another way Legally to get what We Want and not some jerk telling Congress not to make it. I am not a Lawyer But there Must be another way. If Foreign countries can have Vehicles that get better Mileage than anything we drive in the USA We should be able to have that here. Thanks For letting me Air out. And I Found some information on the man with that carburetor that gets 100 miles Plus per Gallon and "who killed the Electric car" All the Best ATS !

man builds car that got 100 miles per gallon. several sites.
www.bing.com... sk=&cvid=a8c393c73e12468ba87e4f77cd475eb3


who killed the electric car
92 min video - vimeo.com...


who killed the electric car
www.bing.com... aa6e215b


inventors who have died making alternative fuel vehicles
www.bing.com... l+vehicles&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=b0d3335f84334ee7b9aa7252478065c5

reply to post by tinner07


the mileage tax will come right out of our checks based on how many miles away our jobs are from our homes. that's how they'll get the bus and bike riders.