Can U.S. Cars Meet the New 54 mpg CAFE Standards? Yes They Can

[one...two...tree 2,762]

A new car in 2025 will go twice as far on a gallon of gasoline than a 2012 model does now, if automakers comply with new federal standards released today. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced aggressive new rules to raise the fuel efficiency of cars, SUVs and pickup trucks. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards require an automaker’s fleet of passenger vehicles to average 54.5 mpg by 2025. That number extends existing CAFE rules, which set the fleet average at 35.5 mpg for 2016, up from the current level of 27.5 mpg. Although many car companies said earlier this year that they would support the then-proposed CAFE goals, grumbling has ensued. Automakers have resisted CAFE increases since the early 1980s, each time protesting that redesigns and technology improvements needed to reach the new targets would either be too difficult to engineer or too expensive to manufacture. An additional chorus has arisen this time around, along the lines of “Well, the companies can only achieve such a jump in efficiency if something like one-third of their fleet is made up of all-electric vehicles, to pull up the average, and the public will not buy that many electric cars.”

Both arguments are smokescreens.

Electric vehicles can certainly raise fleet averages. But changes to good ol’ gasoline-powered vehicles can achieve a great portion of the needed hike in fuel efficiency. The kicker is that many of the technology improvements have been sitting on auto industry shelves for years. And some of the improvements have already been rolled out in high-end gasoline vehicles and in standard hybrid cars.

In the past, independent engineering studies by experts at M.I.T., the University of Michigan, Argonne National Laboratory and the Natural Resources Defense Council have shown that gasoline-powered vehicles can get dramatically higher mileage by incorporating a number of incremental changes. Among them are continuously variable transmissions, which replace the inefficient gear-based transmissions cars have used for a century; starter-alternators that turn the engine off whenever the car is idling, saving gas whether the vehicle is stopped at a traffic light or rolling down a hill; direct fuel injectors that sip less gasoline than conventional fuel injectors; and regenerative braking, which converts friction at the wheels into electricity.

Changes to engines themselves, made possible by advanced, high-power electronics, can also raise fuel economy significantly. Continuous valve timing decreases the fuel that an engine needs. Cylinder deactivation halts two cylinders in a six-cylinder engine when that power is not needed—which occurs often when cars are cruising along at somewhat constant speed—thereby burning less fuel. Conversely, turbochargers can give a four-cylinder car the power of six cylinders during the relatively few moments when hard acceleration is needed, such as passing a truck on a hill, allowing larger cars to function well with smaller engines, thus getting better mileage. Vehicles can also cut weight to consume less fuel. Many of the technologies and the efficiency gains they offer, along with illustrations of how they work, are described in a detailed February 2010 Scientific American article titled Better Mileage Now.

Indeed, the mass-market mileage champ, the Toyota Prius, uses this incremental approach. Although a hefty series of batteries provides power in various circumstances, that only gets the car part way to reaching 45 or 50 mpg. The Prius has a continuously variable transmission. It uses regenerative braking. It has the stop-start feature that turns the engine off instead of idling. It also has a highly aerodynamic shape that cuts air resistance, and it travels on so-called low-rolling-resistance tires that reduce losses from road friction. Every one of these features can be incorporated into cars that run only on gasoline. Some vehicles already have some of the improvements: Honda, for example, has used continuously variable transmissions for years in many of its high-mileage cars.

Furthermore, although the new CAFE numbers sound high, they translate into less taxing goals on the road. The mileage ratings come from running cars on machinery in labs that do only a fair job of mimicking actual road conditions.

“CAFE mpg still comes from the original pair of tests that are now widely viewed as bad predictors of real-world mpg. The 34.1 mpg CAFE target for 2016 is actually equal to only 26 mpg on a window sticker. The talked-about 2025 CAFE standard — usually described as 54.5 mpg — amounts to a figure of 36 mpg combined [highway and city driving] on a window sticker,” writes Dan Edmunds, director of vehicle testing at Edmunds.com, on the company’s detailed CAFE explainer. (The Edmunds.com site is widely recognized as the go-to place for investigating new and used cars and automotive technology.) So if you walk into a showroom in 2025 and see car with a sticker that says it gets 36 mpg “combined,” it meets the CAFE 54.5 mpg requirement. Suddenly the new rules don’t sound so difficult to attain.

As for fuel-efficient technologies being too expensive to incorporate, the new rules (pdf) allow automakers to obtain significant tax credits for rolling them out. For consumers, EPA and the highway administration estimate that the technology needed to create cars that get 54.5 mpg—which will satisfy stiffer requirements for emitting fewer greenhouse gases—will raise the price of a car by about $2,000 in 2025. But they also estimate that car owners will earn that money back in two to three years through savings at the gas pump.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2011/11/16/can-cars-meet-the-new-54-mpg-cafe-standards-yes-they-can/

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

New Recreational Vehicle: COCO mini car now in US

Kandi Technologies, Corp. (KNDI), one of China's leading designers, manufacturers and exporters of all terrain vehicles (ATVs), utility vehicles (UTVs) and its number one exporter of go-karts, announced today that the first shipments of its exciting new, gasoline powered, off-highway low-speed super mini cars, that can achieve up to 60 mpg, have begun to arrive in the U.S. It expects shipments will continue to build in succeeding months to meet anticipated strong customer demand.

Features of the New Two-Seated KD08A KANDI COCO CONVERTIBLE:

• Engine: 250cc, single cylinder, 4-stroke, water cooled, Rear Wheel Drive
  
• Transmission: Automatic
  
• Brakes: Disc
  
• MPG: up to 60
  
• Top Speed: 25 mph
  
• Gas Tank: 5.28 gallons
  
• Driving Range: up to 300 miles
  
• Dimensions: 103.6" x 60.9" x 61.5"
  
• Curb Weight: 1166 lbs.
  
• Colors: Red, Yellow, Blue, Green, White, Black, Orange
  
• Distributor's Suggested Retail Price: $9,900, excluding tax, delivery other (depending on individual dealer)
  

http://www.smartmotorist.com/motorist-news/new-recreational-vehicle-coco-mini-car-now-in-us.html

[Obama 2012 1,714]

a better article on it and explainnig that no matter what the US does, the standard will rise.

Of course like everything else, it's not about "greenhouse gases" at all. It's about another tax on the poor/middle-class while the wealthy get exempt from the "pain" of everything else. It's easy to legislate things like this when you don't stop and look at who the additional costs are going to hurt.

---------------

http://www.motortrend.com/features/auto_news/2011/1109_obamas_epa_seeks_56_mpg_by_2025/#ixzz1dzAg7rAd

How much will a 56.2-mpg Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard cost consumers? On average, $6714 per car (in 2008 dollars), says the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan. "This model requires a 20 percent PEV (plug-in electric) market share to meet the standards-drastic by any measure," CAR says in its analysis.

The Obama administration is expected to formally propose in September the second strictest of four proposed standards to succeed the 2011-2016 ramp-up to 35.5 mpg. Thanks to the rather convoluted math that has plagued CAFE for decades, these numbers do not really mean every automaker's fleet must average 35.5 mpg in 2016 or 56.2 mpg in 2025. CAFE uses an S curve to determine the fuel-efficiency increases necessary across the automotive spectrum.

A 56.2-mpg standard assumes a 5-percent cut per year in CO2 emission in an automaker's fleet. The most lenient proposal would have cut CO2 by 3 percent per year, to 47 mpg by 2025, while the standard that environmentalist groups most favored would have cut CO2 by 6 percent per year, to 62 mpg.

CAR says the 47-mpg standard would have added $3744 per vehicle. A 4-percent per year/51 mpg standard would have added $5270 per vehicle, and the highly green 62-mpg standard would have added $9790 per vehicle.

Shortly before the administration proposed its CAFE standard, a Boston Consulting Group survey found that, based on consumer demand, gas internal-combustion engines will remain the predominant source of power in North America through 2020.

The 2010 North American powertrain mix was 95-percent gas internal-combustion, 3-percent hybrid electric vehicle and 2-percent diesel. In nine years, it will be 88-percent gas if oil costs $130 per barrel, and 85-percent gas if it costs $180 per barrel, BCG says.

Hybrids would account for 7 percent whatever the price of oil, as would diesel at 2 percent and compressed natural gas at 1 percent. Electric vehicles, including plug-in hybrids and such range-extenders as GM's Voltec technology, would take 2 percent of the market if oil costs $130, or 5 percent if it's $180 per barrel. The U.S. market would at least have to quadruple its electric-vehicle consumption in five years to meet CAR's projections for the proposed CAFE standard.

We know what you're asking: Why not diesel? In Europe, the 2010 mix was 46 percent diesel/54 percent gas. "I don't think we're going to bridge that gap any time soon," Xavier Mosquet says about diesel sales in North America versus diesel sales in Europe. Mosquet is senior partner in BCG's automotive practice and lead author of "Powering Autos to 2020: The Era of the Electric Car?"

BCG sees CNG, a negligible part of the U.S. market now, as growing to no more than 1 percent of the market in 2020, whatever the price of oil. It cites the lack of infrastructure, though recent reports that natural gas reserves in the U.S. have been highly overstated will be a bigger impediment. BCG sees gasoline combustion engines as improving faster than expected, while battery technology is improving about as expected.

Internal combustion and plug-in electrics seem to be the powerplants of the future. To the consternation of the hydrogen industry and the California Air Resources Board, Energy Secretary Steven Chu wants to cut federal funds for hydrogen fuel-cell development by almost half.

A National Resource Council study cited in CAR's research shows low-friction lubricants, low rolling resistance tires, better aerodynamics, dual clutch transmissions (DCT), dual cam phasing with continuously variable valve timing, stoichiometric gas direct injection, turbocharging/downsizing, electric assisted power steering (EPAS), reduced engine friction, improved accessories and 5-percent mass reduction would cut fuel consumption by 29 percent at a consumer cost of $2159.

Switching to a clean diesel engine employing low-friction lubes, low rolling resistance tires, better aero, DCT, EPAS, improved accessories, and 5-percent mass reduction cuts consumption by 37.5 percent for $5909. A hybrid with those technology improvements cuts consumption by 43.9 percent costs consumers $6027.

Automakers have been using more high-strength steel to reduce mass while preserving the rigidity of the body structure, though so far, additional standard equipment and safety gear have more than offset any weight loss.

The future of the automobile is clear, though. We'll see better, lighter, and perhaps smaller cars with gas internal-combustion engines, constantly improved after 125 years of development, combined with a slowly, steadily rising share of plug-in electrics-especially those with range-extending engines.

Aside from government tax incentives and some huge, unexpected breakthrough in battery technology, automakers most likely will have to provide "disincentives." By 2025, they'll have to make it less attractive to buy a non-electrified car, padding the profit margins on one to help pay for the other. Also, we'll need more plug-in stations at workplaces and in public locations.

Before you get angry about our proposed new standards, keep in mind that auto industry globalization makes it inevitable. The European Union's 2015 CO2 standard equal 45 mpg, and a proposed 2020 standard would equal 61 mpg. In Japan, the equivalent standard is 47 mpg by 2015, says BCG. In China, where the booming auto industry is helping push up oil prices, the proposed 2015 standard is 36 mpg.

The future will bring a wider diversity of transportation modes, with more bike lanes and light rail, and fewer middle-class Americans buying brand-new cars and trucks.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Tata nano: cheapest car to challenge the automarket, Technical and Model Specifications

Never mind the Jugaad and Chhakda. As the real Nano prepares to hit the road, what will the world’s cheapest car do to the competition, namely two-wheelers and new ‘first’ cars, such as the Maruti 800? Not a lot, say industry analysts, but the real loser may interestingly be the used car market.

Tata Group, to create an ultralow-cost car for a new category of Indian consumer: someone who couldn't afford the $5,000 sticker price of what was then the cheapest car on the market and instead drove his family around on a $1,000 motorcycle. And industry watchers and innovation experts soon reported on the engineering and supply-chain breakthroughs behind the car.

Some 14 months later, Tata is set to show off the commercial version of the Nano, the U.S. auto industry is struggling to survive, with General Motors (GM), once the world's biggest carmaker, on the brink of bankruptcy. Look beyond the Nano halo and it's clear that Tata Motors has problems of its own, from the $2.3 billion in debt it took on to purchase Jaguar and Land Rover from Ford Motor last year to the sums sunk into the Nano assembly plant in West Bengal that had to be abandoned. On top of that, there are the Nano competitors in development.

In January, the US navy commissioned its nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George H Bush . A week ago the Tata corporation commercially launched its Nano, the world’s cheapest car. Both are marvels of engineering. One is 333m long and cost €4.6 billion, the other is just three metres and retails for around €1,500. The carrier represents a familiar, if failing, past – the Nano our unfamiliar and challenging future.

The history-making small car — an event which many believe will mark the start of a India, but in other emerging markets by making a four-wheeler affordable to millions who could at best buy a two-wheeler. The significance of the event was not lost on the world’s media which turned out in droves to attend the numerous events through the day, intended to mark the formal unveiling of the world’s cheapest car.

It is not just domestic sales that jumped. Exports also increased by more than 18 per cent as demand increased for compact, fuel efficient cars in several countries. These cheap cars, for which India has become a production hub, are becoming popular as the world grapples with a recession.

In fact most global automakers have signaled that they are going ahead with plans to open new factories in India at a time when many of them are facing a serious slump in their home countries.

If the Nano has limited impact on new purchases, it would be because of its initial small production volumes. “The Nano will be available only in limited numbers, around 50,000-60,000 units in the first year. The initial impact will be marginal and can only become significant once Tata enhances supply in the market,” says an industry veteran. But others say there will be no significant change in status quo even after the Nano’s Gujarat plant becomes operational. Pradeep Saxena, senior vice president of the market research firm TNS Automotive, insists that “two-wheelers will continue to maintain their edge on account of their low price and running (costs).”

Technical and Model Specifications:

Following are some details of the 4-door car, available in standard and deluxe versions:

• Length: 3.1 meters
  
• Height: 1.6 meters
  
• Width: 1.5 meters
  
• Engine: Rear-wheel drive, 2-cylinder, 623 cc, multi-point fuel-injection petrol engine, rear mounted. Tata said it is the first time a 2-cylinder gasoline engine is used in a car with single balancer shaft.
  
• Safety: Has an all sheet-metal body, with crumple zones, intrusion-resistant doors, seat-belts, and rear tailgate glass bonded to the body. Tires are tubeless.
  
• Environment: Tailpipe emission performance beats current regulatory requirements, and the Nano has a lower overall pollution level than two-wheelers made in India, Tata has said. A high fuel efficiency (20 km/liter) ensures low carbon dioxide emissions. * The Team: In 2003, a four-member team at Tata's Engineering Research Center in Pune city started work on a "very low cost transportation with four wheels" and a price of 100,000 rupees. Helped by the Institute of Development in Automotive Engineering in Italy, the team grew to 500, headed by Girish Wagh.
  
• Nano Europa: Will launch in some European markets by 2011:
  
• Length: 3.29 meters; Width: 1.58 meters; Wheelbase: 2.28 meters. Engine: 3-cylinder, all-aluminum MPFI engine with 5-speed automatic transmission and electric power steering. Plus, advanced restraint systems, ABS, ESP and airbags.
  

More details specifications:

• Tata Nano will initially be available in three models — the Nano (base model), the CX (mid-level model) and LX (top-end model). The cost of the base model will not exceed Rs 1 lakh (ex-factory, Pune). The standard and the deluxe models will be 3.1 meters in length, 1.6 meters in height, and 1.5 meters wide.
  
• The model will have rear-wheel drive 2-cylinder, 623 cc, multi-point fuel-injection petrol engine, rear mounted. Tata said it is the first time a 2-cylinder gasoline engine is used in a car with single balancer shaft. Initially, only the petrol engine version will be available. The 624-cc two-cylinder petrol engine with a single balancer shaft (to avoid excessive vibrations) will have four valves. It will develop 35 bhp at 5,500 rpm and 4.8 kgm of torque at 3,000 rpm. The car should be able to crack 60 kmph in eight seconds and will have a top speed of 105 kph. The car will be available in BS II and BS III variants.
  
• The Nano will weigh 600 kg without load. It will have only one spare tyre which can be used to replace only the front tyre as the rear tyre is of different size. In case of puncture, the car can still be driven slowly but it has to be repaired as soon as possible. The car will come with manual transmission with 4 forward and one rear gear.
  
• Although the Nano’s body and chassis are made of steel and use traditional spot-welding, the bumpers are plastic and are unpainted on base models. Contrary to many reports, no glues or adhesives are used to bond structural components or exterior body panels.
  
• The scoops on both sides of the Nano are functional. The left-side scoop sends air into the engine. The right-side one directs air around the engine, for cooling.
  
• The roof has ridges for a reason other than just a stylistic flourish. They add rigidity to what would otherwise be a very wide and flat piece of sheet metal.
  
• Nano will have a 15 litre fuel tank and is expected to deliver a mileage of slightly over 20kpl. That means a full tank will be able to take you over 300 km. Only the driver’s seat will be adjustable in the base model and the CX model will have air conditioning with a heater. The LX model will have power windows, central locking and fog lamps and will come fully loaded. The car will come with a warranty of 18 months or 24,000 km.
  
• Booking forms for Tata Nano will be available only for 14 days at SBI, Westside, Croma stores and, of course 400-odd Tata Motors dealerships. The company also intends to establish Nano as a brand itself. It intends to launch Nano merchandise, including Nano phones and watches which will be marketed through various retail outlets.
  

http://www.smartmotorist.com/motorist-news/tata-nano-cheapest-car-to-challenge-the-automarket-speci.html

Edited November 17, 2011 by Crusty Old Perv

[Ban Hammer 13,754]

let's all get tatas!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

let's all get tatas!

yay

[Neonred 3,718]

a better article on it and explainnig that no matter what the US does, the standard will rise.

---------------

http://www.motortren.../#ixzz1dzAg7rAd

BCG sees CNG, a negligible part of the U.S. market now, as growing to no more than 1 percent of the market in 2020, whatever the price of oil. It cites the lack of infrastructure, though recent reports that natural gas reserves in the U.S. have been highly overstated will be a bigger impediment. BCG sees gasoline combustion engines as improving faster than expected, while battery technology is improving about as expected.

What infrastructure are they talking about? CNG is very popular in Eastern Europe, and cheap too. The only "infrastructure" I saw was a tanker truck parked at the petrol station. Pull up and they "pump"it into the special tank in your car. Very simple.

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

My 1995 Mercedes E300D, our "road trip car," just got 41.6 miles to the gallon on a recent trip from SoCal to NoCal, visiting the Victorian homes near Eureka and of course the Redwoods. So my 16 year-old whisper-Benz with 196K miles on the clock is already way ahead of many brand new cars in the U.S. (not Europe though -- a VW Lupo D gets 70mpg and the MINI Diesel isn't far behind). Where's the progress?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

BCG sees CNG, a negligible part of the U.S. market now, as growing to no more than 1 percent of the market in 2020, whatever the price of oil. It cites the lack of infrastructure, though recent reports that natural gas reserves in the U.S. have been highly overstated will be a bigger impediment. BCG sees gasoline combustion engines as improving faster than expected, while battery technology is improving about as expected.

What infrastructure are they talking about? CNG is very popular in Eastern Europe, and cheap too. The only "infrastructure" I saw was a tanker truck parked at the petrol station. Pull up and they "pump"it into the special tank in your car. Very simple.

People are worried about carbon dioxide, wait until CNG becomes more prevalent in use. Off the top of my head, methane is about 400 times more reactive than carbon dioxide, although shorter lived by a factor of 12. The net green house effect of atmosperic methane is about 21 to 35 times that of carbon dioxide.

Edited November 17, 2011 by Crusty Old Perv

[Captain Oates 911]

I pull up at my rifle range in my 3.5 liter V6 268 horse power Camry and I can't see to either side - all I see is tires on huge monster trucks that do 10 mpg if they are lucky

I have the ONLY car at the club

America has a long way to go before it starts running around in 1.1 liter cars. Not in my lifetime and that's for sure.

If its a choice between killing Arabs to steal their oil, and getting a smaller car, then a quick read through the opinions on this forum will reveal what that decision will be

[Saddle Bronc 124]

One of these can already meet that (albeit it can't go over 60 km/h

[Captain Oates 911]

One of these can already meet that (albeit it can't go over 60 km/h

It's a Tata for your money (goodbye in English)

Definition of Tata >>

tata

"good-bye," 1823, a word first recorded as infant's speech. Abbreviation T.T.F.N., "ta-ta for now," popularized 1941 by BBC radio program "ITMA," where it was the characteristic parting of the cockney cleaning woman character Mrs. Mopp, voiced by Dorothy Summers.

Can't see these 350 pound cowboys round here riding round in TATAs with their a-huntin' rifles on a rack in the passenger space plus 3 big dawgs and 2 meaty latina hookers from the south side

T'aint gunna happen

T'aint

Edited November 18, 2011 by Ashud Cocoa

[Nina~ 431]

Most Mechanical Engineering departments in Universities usually participate in SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) Supermileage competitions. The winning vehicles usually gets a couple of thousand miles per gallon. So I am sure the auto industry can do it if college kids can do it.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I pull up at my rifle range in my 3.5 liter V6 268 horse power Camry and I can't see to either side - all I see is tires on huge monster trucks that do 10 mpg if they are lucky

I have the ONLY car at the club

America has a long way to go before it starts running around in 1.1 liter cars. Not in my lifetime and that's for sure.

If its a choice between killing Arabs to steal their oil, and getting a smaller car, then a quick read through the opinions on this forum will reveal what that decision will be

America changed when cars started being more about luxury and less about transportation from point A to point B.

I care about transportation more, but you better believe I won't dare buy one of those little POS cars like the Yaris, etc.. Yeah, the gas mileage won't be great, but they are small, uncomfortable, and fugly.

I'll still with your range of car - The Camry. Nissan Altima/Maxima, even the new Hyundai Elantra isn't bad at all with its sporty look... If more small cars followed that model, we'd be doing AOK... but if they follow the prius fugly model, screw that.

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

See . . . none of these legislature is needed. All complicated, time-consuming, confusing, bullsh*t.

If Uncle Sam wants U.S. consumers to use less fuel, all that's needed is a $2-per-gallon surcharge tax. Once a gallon costs $6 to $9 in the U.S., like it's the case in Europe, Americans will want to buy a fuel efficient car and use the truck only for hauling and pulling, which is what it was designed for.

A simple way to reduced fuel consumption is to get rid of all the electronic ####### in those cars. A new MINI weighs more than a 1966 Mustang with honking, cast-iron Vee Eight and a transmission the size of a boat anchor. A new full size passenger car weighs twice as much as an old one, which is why these clunkers now need 300 horsepower engines to keep up with the 150 horsepower cars of yesteryear. One of the reason why I don't want to buy a new car and intend of driving mine until the end of my natural life (which is easy as cars don't rust where I live), is that I don't want to put up with those rolling computers. I don't need a computer screen in my car, don't need motorized gadgets and more black boxes than Apollo 13. I need a car that starts when I turn the key, is comfortable and lasts decades without giving me headaches. Such a car we can't buy anymore. Today's cars are designed to be replaced a few years after being manufactured. Like a cell phone and notebook, it is not viable anymore to repair them once those electronic systems fail one by one.

Edited November 18, 2011 by Brother Hesekiel