When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Edmunds.com Discovers CAFE Discrepancy; New Goals Not What They Seem
SANTA MONICA, Calif. -- Even supporters of CAFE might be surprised to learn that the standards announced this week will actually require automakers to make much less progress than implied...
Mike-
That's a real game-changer, thanks for pointing it out.
If the Edmunds commentary from both 2007 and 2009 is correct, we may indeed have healthy Corvettes (and other cars) for a good while.
Guess I don't need to run out and trade my 2006 for a 2009 after all.
The Obama Adminstration is preparing to send General Motors into bankruptcy as early as next week under a plan that would give the struggling automaker almost $30 billion in additional federal loans, the Washington Post reports today .The Obama Administration has previously indicated that it would hold at least 50 percent of a restructured GM and the right to name directors.
Autoweek maintains that GM's leadership doesn't have a clear plan for what the future holds for the 'Vette, not to mention the rest of the General's lineup.
"Corvette's chief engineer said the 2009 Corvette ZR1 may be the last in a long tradition of Detroit performance cars, endangered by stronger federal fuel economy regulations and limits on carbon dioxide emissions. The next-gen C7 Corvette platform was put on indefinite hold, with no official or set timetable."
The 35-36 mpg is the average for all vehicles, not cars. Trucks will need to get around 30-32mpg, meaning the cars will have to get close to 40+ in order to get the "average" of 35-36 mpg. Any car "not" getting the 40+ will have to get, at a minimum 32-35 mpg and those cars (Caddy maybe) will have to get a premium price. The 2010 model year is pretty well set, so no changes for next year. After that the V-8 will probably disappear except for trucks and be replaced by a very fuel efficient gas and/or diesel engine. What this probably means for the Corvette is that either a low HP V-6 goes in the current size Vette, or it's cancelled for a while altogether. GM does not have the money, or will be willing to devote the resources to develop a smaller size car as a replacement for the Corvette, especially since its a low volume car.
Forget what you hear about someone at GM saying the Corvette is safe, that's pure P.R. The reality is that GM is totally under the direction of the gov't and all investments in future products will be looked at under a magnifying glass. HP V-8's that can't get the new benchmark mileage will not be allowed.
The 35-36 mpg is the average for all vehicles, not cars. Trucks will need to get around 30-32mpg, meaning the cars will have to get close to 40+ in order to get the "average" of 35-36 mpg. Any car "not" getting the 40+ will have to get, at a minimum 32-35 mpg and those cars (Caddy maybe) will have to get a premium price. The 2010 model year is pretty well set, so no changes for next year. After that the V-8 will probably disappear except for trucks and be replaced by a very fuel efficient gas and/or diesel engine. What this probably means for the Corvette is that either a low HP V-6 goes in the current size Vette, or it's cancelled for a while altogether. GM does not have the money, or will be willing to devote the resources to develop a smaller size car as a replacement for the Corvette, especially since its a low volume car.
...
Did you read post #81 above, and check out the link?
Did you read post #81 above, and check out the link?
The gov't will not accept anything less than an honest 35-36 mpg. You have to remember who is running the gov't now and who is catering to all the whims of the greenies. Edmunds is way off base on their thinking. They pass there statement on the past, not the future,
...
Edmunds is way off base on their thinking. They pass there statement on the past, not the future,
Edmunds based their statement on what the government did just this very month. This would have been the perfect time to change the grading system, but it didn't happen. Maybe some day, but not now.
Now that the government basically owns GM, and is going to end up loaning them a ton of money more in the near future; at some point the pendulem will start to swing toward the "let's allow these guys to make some money so we don't need to keep supporting them" direction.
Edmunds based their statement on what the government did just this very month. This would have been the perfect time to change the grading system, but it didn't happen. Maybe some day, but not now.
Now that the government basically owns GM, and is going to end up loaning them a ton of money more in the near future; at some point the pendulem will start to swing toward the "let's allow these guys to make some money so we don't need to keep supporting them" direction.
That sort of thinking might apply if anyone but the government owned them. But the government never tires of spending other people's money. They never met a subsidy or unfunded federal mandate they didn't like. Their decisionmaking process is driven by ideology, and the Obama Administration's ideology is socialist/green.
BTW, what happened to keeping politics out of this thread?
...
BTW, what happened to keeping politics out of this thread?
You are correct, we should keep the discussion based on the technical issues as we know them today. Things like direct injection, cylinder deactivation, turbines, and the CAFE numbers/grading system as already announced do fit into that category; what the government might or might not do some time in the indefinite future should go into another thread.