01-18-2013, 08:53 AM | #99 | |
Drives: Jeep Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
|
Quote:
http://www.soundracer.se/
__________________
'It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.' -Samuel Adams |
|
01-18-2013, 09:12 AM | #100 | |
Drives: Jeep Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
|
Quote:
When San Francisco banned the Happy Meal, McDonald's came up with a brilliant idea to skirt it. The law as written prohibited toys to be given with food. So McDonald's kept the price the same, but did not include the toy. Then they offered customers the opportunity to purchase a toy, for $.10, with the purchase of a Happy Meal. So McDonald's profit margins on Happy Meals went up! GM could do the same thing in essence. Say the Camaro V8 will fall short of the CAFE standard by 15mpg. GM would have to pay $825 in fines per V8 Camaro sold. They could pass on the $825 to customers, or they could even charge, say $1000, and thus increase their profit margins on V8 Camaros. Of course the Government could then increase CAFE standards and/or the fines, which would then raise the price further for V8 customers....
__________________
'It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.' -Samuel Adams |
|
01-18-2013, 09:50 AM | #101 | |
I used to be Dragoneye...
|
Quote:
If they run into trouble with the fleet average (remember, the EPA numbers are about 20-30% lower than was CAFE uses), they will probably avoid the fines at all costs by proactively charging more on "special cars" that have poor fuel economy, in order to limit the volume sold...that, and they'll do what they can with the small cars to increase average fuel economy. |
|
01-18-2013, 11:38 AM | #102 |
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
|
Or they may "water down" V8 engines in order to get better fuel economy out of them but still offer a V8.
|
01-18-2013, 09:38 PM | #103 | |||
Account Suspended
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
|
Quote:
Quote:
I suggest reflashing the audio memory with the digitized sound of George Jetson's car. Quote:
The only place they can find a lot of extra MPG ground to gain would be in the truck and specialty cars like Camaro. To make these gains, the camaro mileage is going to have to really go up, and that means: Expect smaller engines for the majority of buyers. Expect major price increases to pay for the engineering needed to raise the MPG of the Camaro. Expect to pay an ungodly amount for the very limited V8 model. This is the equvalent of charging $0.10 for the Happy Meal Toy and putting extra $1.10 items on the "Dollar Menu" for $1.00 Your toys are jacked up so someone else to get fat cheaply. |
|||
01-18-2013, 09:58 PM | #104 |
Drives: 2010 SSII w RS & Sunroof Yellow Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: West Suburbs of Chicago, in a Courthouse Somewhere
Posts: 953
|
I agree with one of the previous posts, that single most asked question should be enough to forever alert GM what American boys and girls dream about and desire, "Did your get the big V8 in that thing", I hear this more then any other comment or question.
|
01-19-2013, 08:51 AM | #105 |
Moderator
|
Don't forget that a new generation of V8s is coming out, and we haven't really seen what GM can do as far direct injection and VVT on a platform specifically made for these technologies. The 3.6L V6 was modified to handle those new technologies. Imagine if an engine were designed from the start to include components that improved fuel economy and performance simultaneously.
__________________
RDP Motorsport//GEN5DIY//Cultrag Performance//JPSS//Rodgets Chevrolet//
Operation Demon//Buy at Invoice//RACECARWEAR RESPECT ALL CARS. LOVE YOUR OWN. warn 145:159 ban |
01-19-2013, 10:46 AM | #106 |
I used to be Dragoneye...
|
Try to stay on-topic, gentlemen....
|
01-19-2013, 11:18 AM | #107 | ||
I used to be Dragoneye...
|
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, all vehicles will be required to make improvements in order to contribute to the company's overall average...but don't over-estimate the weight on Camaro's shoulders alone. It's not exactly a high-volume vehicle like Malibu, Impala, Cruze, or the trucks.... Camaro has a huge advantage over those vehicles...and that is that while it will always (I believe) have a V8 and, in general, have a performance model(s)...it also sells 1/2-3/4 it's volume in lower-powered V6 versions. These customers want a "sporty car", not necessarily a "fast" one. They want something that looks cool and puts a smile on their face. You don't need 400+ hp to achieve that goal. "Fun" has many definitions for many different people. What that means, is that the Camaro team can take advantage of this portion of sales to integrate smaller, more fuel-efficient engines, that don't take away from the experience one bit. I know these people's dedication to the car...they won't build an "iron-duke". If it's not even a little bit exciting, it won't be engineered into a Camaro. So yes, I agree we can expect to see some smaller engines for the larger Camaro market - but I don't see that as a bad thing, because they won't be bad cars. And I don't agree we'll see drastically increase prices for these cars. Increased, yes...but not enough to seriously alter the segment. Then, they can implement less drastic changes on the higher performance models to achieve more marginal gains in fuel economy that keep up with the trend. As much as CAFE sucks...customers apparently look at these things, too. When competing, wouldn't you agree you want as many advantages as possible on paper? This won't cost "ungodly" amounts for a V8, especially if the LT1 is as good as they say it is....but it may cost some more. These changes won't harm performance, as per what I mentioned earlier about the Camaro team's dedication. Now, a model like the ZL1...that's already very expensive, and relatively unattainable for most. I'm sure it won't be getting any cheaper...not a huge surprise, there...you get what you pay for in that example. The SS and ZL1 models of Camaro...account for about just 1.5% of all Chevrolet's sold in the US...there are far bigger fish to fry, and Camaro will benefit from 1) the fact that CAFE is fleet-wide...and 2) the car has huge corporate support behind it. I'll take things a step further, and say that I did some quick math...if you combine Volt sales with Camaro...the mpg numbers are *just* shy of the expected standard in 2025 or whatever the year is. Of course, that doesn't tell the whole fleet story, which I'm sure is much lower...it's just interesting, is all, and worth mentioning. |
||
01-19-2013, 03:38 PM | #108 | |||||||
Account Suspended
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
|
Quote:
I'm only using the Camaro as an example in this forum because the deleterious effects of CAFE will be much more apparent to the enthusiast when prices go up as performance and choices go down for the buyer. CAFE has much more serious effects, but those are largely invisible to the average person. Partly due to the fact that the effects are confined to a small group of drivers over a long period of time. The CAFE standards caused between 1,300 and 2,600 traffic deaths every year since they were established in 1975 (National Academy of Sciences 2002). This is because the best way to achieve fuel economy is to build lighter cars, which do not protect passengers as well as heavier vehicles during traffic accidents. People are generally unaware of these dangrous side effects of CAFE because this type of fact based reporting is actively suppressed from the major media outlets. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
01-19-2013, 05:38 PM | #109 |
I used to be Dragoneye...
|
I have no love of CAFE, and I promise you I've written certain officials continuously about the reasons why it should be at the very least adjusted, if not altogether repealed. So we're reading the same book...but I don't see things nearly as dark and dreary as you do.
That's what I meant with "despair", and the rest was to explain myself. I have no intention to debate the issue, here. |
01-19-2013, 10:32 PM | #110 | |
Drives: 2013 Porsche 981S Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: TN
Posts: 329
|
Quote:
|
|
01-19-2013, 10:36 PM | #111 |
I used to be Dragoneye...
|
Arithmetic...factored different models sold and weighted the mpg of said models appropriately. Quick and dirty...
|
01-19-2013, 11:10 PM | #112 | |
Account Suspended
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|