Hell, I can do worse than an “upgrade” to a Tahoe from a van - Enterprise once “upgraded” me from a a full size sedan to a @#%$#%!% Chevy Trax. Not only is the Trax a god-awful POS, poorly built, and badly appointed, but it is TINY. I wanted a full-size sedan for cruising comfort on highways out west with the family -…

Which then is why people think small turbocharged engines don’t get the mpg they’re rated at - they see the idiot next to them at the light pound the gas and race off from the intersection and they think they have to do the same thing - which means they’re always accelerating with significant boost and killing their…

1) Lack of increased standards has shown time and again that little effort is put into improving fuel economy.

2) The standards were not impossible - large numbers of vehicles were already within spitting distance (or even surpassing them). The fines are miniscule - $55 for every mpg you miss them by. We’re talking…

“Either Automakers will need to literally kill their crossovers and trucks to stop people from buying them”

Complete bullshit here - because Ford can sell NOTHING but Escapes or NOTHING but F-150s and still hit these EPA goals- because they are set on a PER VEHICLE basis. The Escape has a goal for itself. The F-150 has…

“the numbers are going to be skewed in a way that it’s effectively impossible to hit the goal. Period. Full stop.”

But since you didn’t UNDERSTAND it, the requirement was NEVER to hit 54.5 mpg fleetwide - it was a higher requirement for every vehicle on the market and based on that vehicle’s footprint. As people…

You didn’t need to get trucks anywhere NEAR 54.5 mpg. That’s the thing - their targets are much, much lower. The 2.7L ecoboost F-150 damn near hits the 2025 requirement already. The rest of the F-150 lineup would be looking at very minor fines - less than 1% of the cost of the vehicle.

Oh, and the only problem with…

Because vehicles are planned 5-10 years out, so having continuing to make what you currently do will not leave you in a competitive position. Those that took the responsible position of actually trying to achieve these standards are now at a competitive disadvantage.

And those fines? Damned near trivial. The entire…

And yet the footprint of the F-150 has actually dropped since the intro of these standards, which would boost its required mpg.

They didn’t eliminate compact trucks to force people into larger trucks with lower mpg. People made that choice on their own.

And yet when these standards were proposed, they were all MUCH further from achieving them. Now we have vehicles here and there that DO reach those standards. And for the rest, the penalties are tiny in comparison to the cost of the vehicle. And you think no more progress would be made in the next 7 years?

54.5 mpg was a red herring - the actual requirements were based on the footprint of the vehicle and were WAY below that mark if you were looking at the sticker in the window. Numerous vehicles already were above or right at their requirements already. The 2.7L ecoboost F-150 is almost at the 2025 requirement.

And Trump…

And remember, even if you miss your target under CAFE, the penalties are really mild.

They’ve already proposed cutting the fine from $140 per mpg below the standard to $55.

The penalty for a 2.7L 2WD F-150 if it didn’t change one iota between now and 2025 would stand between $44 and $112 per vehicle depending on if…

I wouldn’t doubt it. Keeping the rpms low (and therefore not pushing the turbo) on a rented Fusion I had once had me averaging 43 mpg on the highway at the speed limit when it was only rated at 36. As long as you accelerated like Granny, beating the EPA ratings on that car was EASY. But run up the rpms just a couple…

Impossible? There’s already an F-150 on the market today that gets within 1 mpg of the 2025 requirements.

These weren’t impossible standards by any means. And altering them now throws a massive wrench into the plans of automakers who have been spending billions in R&D targeting these now-defunct standards.

Everyone forgets that CAFE is no longer a fleetwide average requirement - it is based on the size of the vehicle. So everyone could shift from Escapes to F-150 crew cabs and Ford would still be fine when it came to CAFE so long as the F-150 crew cab met the individual CAFE requirement for a truck with its footprint.

Oh,…

“While automakers initially accepted these rules in the wake of the bailouts, they eventually balked at them, claiming they’d be nearly impossible to meet—especially in the current market that trends heavily toward SUVs and trucks.”

I despise this level of sloppy reporting. It ignores the fact that SUVs and trucks have…

And the camshaft sprockets were very prone to failure, which would take out the whole engine, so...

True. But sitting doesn’t mean its an awful car, either.

In one segment years ago, he had a wasp’s nest under the trunk lid.

Concidentally, my fusion that I bought off a relative came with wasps nests under the trunk lid, hood, and in every door opening other than the driver’s side. It wasn’t driven much, and always…

The way that Tesla has been going, higher sales simply mean higher losses.

Ohio/Michigan/Illinois.

Our roads have sucked for decades, and cars handled them ok. You’d have suspension components wear out, but the same is true on trucks. It’s only been the low-profile tires that have been seriously problematic...

5th Gear:

One of the problems with the old Aviator is that it was virtually indistinguishable from the Explorer on the outside. At least this one looks a little different...