Quote:Agreed.  I have a Ford F150 with the Ecoboost V-6, and while the fuel economy is good, it just doesn't have the "behind" that my Dodge pickup had with the V8 Hemi.  I've only had the truck for a year, but I have been thinking about getting out of it and getting another with a "real" engine.

Glad to hear that because I had actually considered the Ecoboost to replace my 5.3 l GM. 

 

I spoke to a guy who owns a business where he travels and tunes GM engines.  Most of what he works on is for performance and racing, but he'll do trucks like mine as well for a pretty hefty fee, but most of what he does is reprogramming the computers to undo a lot of the stuff the manufacturer has to put in place to meet the CAFE standards.  The first thing he pointed out was that as far as emissions go, the vehicles we're driving today are so much more efficient, and run cleaner than at any time in the past.  He was talking about how the mileage standards set by the federal government were ridiculous, and forced companies to do all sorts of things to meet the guidelines that made the engines less reliable.  For GM, they went to shutting down cylinders at speed as a way of increasing gas mileage.  It's effective in bumping up the mpg by a few miles if you do a lot of highway driving, but he was saying that this fuel management system made it almost impossible for a vehicle to get past 100k without having to have something rebuilt.  Much of his business in recent years has been shutting that off in the computer for owners because it does more harm than good, and any money saved in fuel costs is eaten up in maintenance.

 

A friend of mine owns a Honda Pilot that has a similar system.  His SUV is their top of the line touring edition.  Very nice SUV.  He's already had to have the top end of the motor rebuilt because of this fuel management system.  Fortunately, the vehicle was still under warranty and Honda at the cost of the work.

 

CAFE standards established by the government are really unnecessary.  The market will determine what people want and what they're willing to pay for with their vehicles.  They're building these little econoboxes that get 40+ mpg, but they don't sell, so most of them get dumped into fleet sales, and then flood the used car market where they sell them cheaply because they don't retain their resale value.

 

I've got nothing against more fuel efficient vehicles, or vehicles that run on alternative fuels.  What I have an issue with is government mandating standards instead of allowing the market to decide what they prefer.  That doesn't preclude companies from continuing to strive for more efficiency and reliability with the vehicles they're manufacturing, but it would allow them to focus more on innovation than just meeting some number the government has pulled out of their posterior.

 

Quote:You are so naive. Big Brother is planning to put trackers on everyone's car and tax people according to mileage.

 

That is how progressives are trying to manage collecting tax dollars that are lost because of more fuel efficient vehicles.  Unintended consequences are always fun.  It's like taxing tobacco products out the wazoo to finance children's healthcare initiatives, and then being shocked when smoking has dropped off dramatically and the tax revenue isn't hitting projections.  So, the answer?  More taxes! 

---