Friday, October 1, 2010

Gas 2.0

Gas 2.0

White House Wants Up to 62 MPG Standards by 2025

Posted: 01 Oct 2010 05:47 PM PDT

In my humble opinion, the greatest failure of the automotive industry of the 20th century was its inability to convince consumers that there were better alternatives to gasoline. There was so much promise, from turbine cars to nuclear hot rods to electric vehicles. Maybe the 21st century will be different, but for the next few decades, most of us are going to stay chained to petrol stations.

There seem to be people in government who realize this. The Natural Resources Defense Council issued a statement that the EPA and DOT plan to push through regulation that demands automakers get a fleet-wide fuel economy average of up to 62 mpg by 2025. Sounds good to me.

You might be saying “But Chris, why do we need to do that so far ahead when we haven’t even gotten to 35 mpg yet?” Well my friend, you have a valid point. 2025 is far away, and the world can (and likely will) be a very different place. Perhaps you are an optimist, and believe most of us will be buying electric cars by then. Maybe you don’t want the government mandating what cars automakers should be building.

Here’s the thing. The current CAFE standards have not budged a single mpg since 1990. For 20 years, we’ve let automakers get by without forcing them to improve their products. Look what happened. Many of the cars from the mid-to-late 90′s  were awful, especially the American-made ones. Remember, I am an American car fan too. All of my cars are American, yet none of them are newer than 1992 for a reason. We also got those lousy SUV’s everybody seemed obsessed with for far too long. We’ve gotten away with it so far, but the world is set to outpace America if we don’t start striving for better and better cars and other green technology initiatives.

Automakers are whining that 60 mpg is too high. The White House says the increase could be anywhere from 47 mpg to 62 mpg. I think 60 mpg is a nice, round number, and in 15 years it is certainly achievable. It took us about that long to put a man on the moon. Why can’t we get we bring our cars up to a higher fuel efficiency standard?

Source: Green Car Advisor | Image: Chrysler Turbine Car

Ford Fears Fewer Government Incentives For Electric Cars

Posted: 01 Oct 2010 11:12 AM PDT

I try to stay out of politics. I don’t vote, I avoid cable news channels, and I generally shy away from political conversations. It isn’t easy to stay out of politics these days though, especially as talk about the economy, trimming the fat from the government, and such ramps up ahead of the midterm elections. Over in Europe though, the talk is much the same, and one of the items on the chopping block is cutting incentives for electric and alt-fuel cars.

Ford, who is preparing to enter the EV market with an electric Focus and Transit Connect van in the coming years, is afraid that the government might cut incentives before many of these cars even hit the road. Unfounded fears, or grounds for concern?

We know by now that electric cars cost more than conventional automobiles, mostly because of their battery packs. Government incentives, like the $7,500 tax credit we have here in America, are supposed to help offset those higher costs. Many European countries are offering incentives of up to 5,000 Euros, not exactly chump change. Hopefully, this will get more electric cars into the hands of people who otherwise can’t afford them, or might not consider them due to the higher price. Chief Financial Officer of Ford Europe, Lewis Booth, told Automotive News that “We believe government assistance will be a challenge in the next few years,” Booth said at the Paris auto show. He added that electric cars sales will not take off without incentives.

Cutting these incentives would likely cut into sales. Honestly, I could care less what Europe does because they already have plenty of cars that get 60 mpg or better. America doesn’t have a single car with that kind of gas mileage. Right now, it is looking like conservative candidates running on a cut-back-the-government platform are poised to take control of Congress. I have little doubt that they plan on putting a number of green initiatives, including green car incentives, on the chopping block.

If that happens, the question becomes…can electric cars stand on their own four wheels?

Source: Automotive News | Image: Ford

Diesel Wrangler Unveiled For Europe, Not America

Posted: 01 Oct 2010 11:09 AM PDT

I absolutely love my Jeep Wrangler, though lately I am getting that sinking feeling that this particular automotive relationship has run its course. I’ve had my Wrangler longer than I’ve had any other car, and while it has been mostly trouble free, it also isn’t exactly a comfortable ride. The new Wranglers, however, are a lot more high-tech than my archaic ’92 YJ and have a ton of create comforts like power windows, air conditioning, so on and so forth.

Now you can add a diesel engine to the features of the new Jeep Wrangler. Jeep will be adding a 2.8 liter turbo diesel engine to its lineup… at least over in Europe. Seriously Jeep? Where’s the love?

I’m on a few Jeep forums, and one topic I see come up time and again is the desire for a diesel engine option on the Wrangler. The reasons are many, though mostly it boils down to more torque and better gas mileage. Some enterprising individuals have done diesel engine swaps. One of my favorite swaps sees a Mercedes W123 diesel engine swapped into a Wrangler, with many users reporting gas mileage of 30 mpg or more. In a Wrangler! There is a veritable gold mine for Chrysler, should they add a diesel engine to the Wrangler… and they finally are. The problem? For now, it looks like it will a European-only powertrain.

This 2.8 liter turbo diesel engine makes my sturdy 4.0 liter I6 look like something from the stone age. Making 200 horsepower and and up to 340 ft-lbs of torque when fitted with a five-speed automatic transmission. The six-speed manual makes due with just 302 ft-lbs of torque.  This diesel engine gives the Jeep a 13% increase in fuel economy. Going by the Wrangler’s current EPA rating of 15 mpg/19 mpg, this would bump fuel economy up to about 17/21. And that is with start/stop technology that keeps the engine from idling while at a stop.

Actually, that fuel economy is not that great. I get better than that in my ’92 Wrangler. It’s not like Chrysler is going to bring this to the U.S. anyways… or will they?

Maybe I’ll hold on to it after all.

Source: Chrysler
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)