- 70,049
- 24,223
because they're doing it now at a impressive clip right?
we're in a new golden age of muscle cars, trucks, and SUV's...and as long as shale is plentiful it'll continue to be as such.
56 MPG mandate by 2025 = SCRAPPED BY current EPA
because they're doing it now at a impressive clip right?
we're in a new golden age of muscle cars, trucks, and SUV's...and as long as shale is plentiful it'll continue to be as such.
- 70,049
- 24,223
Trump Administration Announces Rollback of Obama-Era Vehicle Emissions Standards
The new rules will likely lead to cheaper, safer vehicles.
Christian Britschgi
Apr. 2, 2018 6:35 pm
Chris Kleponis/CNP / Polaris/NewscomIn a widely expected move, the Trump Administration announced today that it would be rolling back stringent fuel efficiency standards imposed by former President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Under the Obama-era rules, makers of cars and light trucks were expected to raise their average fleet-wide fuel economy to 54 miles per gallon by 2025. The currentfleetwide average is 38.3 miles per gallon.
In a press release, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said that the Corporate Average Fuel Economy or CAFE standards that the Obama administration imposed "made assumptions about the standards that didn't comport with reality, and set the standards too high."
https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/02/trump-administration-announces-rollback
The new rules will likely lead to cheaper, safer vehicles.
Christian Britschgi
Apr. 2, 2018 6:35 pm
Under the Obama-era rules, makers of cars and light trucks were expected to raise their average fleet-wide fuel economy to 54 miles per gallon by 2025. The currentfleetwide average is 38.3 miles per gallon.
In a press release, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said that the Corporate Average Fuel Economy or CAFE standards that the Obama administration imposed "made assumptions about the standards that didn't comport with reality, and set the standards too high."
https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/02/trump-administration-announces-rollback
- 63,609
- 50,740
yeah was a mistake them tryna spin off the impala ss
into the ss
its dumb imo
the ss is nice imo
but no reason to add that to the lineup
that engine shoulda been put in the impala
- 63,609
- 50,740
whats up with folks
just cause someone doesn't agree with u
u throw shots like that
people been getting bold lately
- 190
- 153
All facts
- 27,787
- 12,451
because they're doing it now at a impressive clip right?
we're in a new golden age of muscle cars, trucks, and SUV's...and as long as shale is plentiful it'll continue to be as such.
I'm just saying fuel efficiency is important. I know you love quoting articles and statistics.
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/fu...t-factor-in-vehicle-purchases-study-says.html
https://www.statista.com/chart/13075/most-important-factors-when-buying-a-car/
That being said, yes, there will always be a market for more powerful, less fuel efficient vehicles.
- 1,370
- 1,923
Gas has continued to creep up over the last few weeks. I already seen many people around my way thinking about trading their big trucks and gas guzzling SUVs in for something more fuel efficient.
I think more consumers are going to downgrade from big engine trucks/suvs to more practical ones. No surprise certain CUVs have been big hits. I'm betting a lot more companies will try and make more fuel efficient engines like turbo engines in trucks.
Most people have learned their lesson from the crazy gas spikes we had in the late 2000s and will try and avoid that as much as possible. Especially with the unpredictable presidential cabinet that we have right now.
I think more consumers are going to downgrade from big engine trucks/suvs to more practical ones. No surprise certain CUVs have been big hits. I'm betting a lot more companies will try and make more fuel efficient engines like turbo engines in trucks.
Most people have learned their lesson from the crazy gas spikes we had in the late 2000s and will try and avoid that as much as possible. Especially with the unpredictable presidential cabinet that we have right now.
- 21,633
- 10,252
My next car would be electric if prices were affordable. I do think car makers should strive to at least sell cars that are super fuel efficient for a reasonable price.
Currently driving a 2009 toyota corolla. Got 215K miles on it. My next car will probably be another corolla, a civic or a camry. I drive a lot so i def would have range anxiety. If the electric car can't go over 150 miles per charge i can't see myself getting one. I also never plan on spending over $20k on a car. Cars are utility to me they transport from A to B. When i want to have "fun" driving im on my motorcycle.
Currently driving a 2009 toyota corolla. Got 215K miles on it. My next car will probably be another corolla, a civic or a camry. I drive a lot so i def would have range anxiety. If the electric car can't go over 150 miles per charge i can't see myself getting one. I also never plan on spending over $20k on a car. Cars are utility to me they transport from A to B. When i want to have "fun" driving im on my motorcycle.
- 70,049
- 24,223
da complete opposite has been happening, especially now.... there are articles that actually demonstrate previous owners all of hybrids trading them up for full size SUV and pickup trucks.
- 53,481
- 21,060
My current car only gets 15-16 mpg and I have to use premium. It sucks.
- 70,049
- 24,223
what u pushin?
- 63,609
- 50,740
Yeah I but that engine sound
Be worth it
- 70,049
- 24,223
smiles per gallon.
Mr.Guy
formerly timidtebow
- 23,944
- 8,608
U getting da hemi for tha summer ninja?
- 70,049
- 24,223
no, chain & ring in June 1st.
Mr.Guy
formerly timidtebow
- 23,944
- 8,608
Congrats! You going to La Casa Del Mofngo to celebrate ?
- 70,049
- 24,223
no, thats old hat for me.....
carwise im doing a 4.3 V6 swap on my truck and strapping a supercharger on it for a new whip feel.
carwise im doing a 4.3 V6 swap on my truck and strapping a supercharger on it for a new whip feel.
- 70,049
- 24,223
U.S. moves forward with revised fuel economy targets
May 15, 2018 @ 6:23 pmComments Email
David Shepardson
ReutersFacebook0TwitterLinkedIn0Google+0
CAFE Litigation EmissionsMore +
WASHINGTON -- The Trump administration is moving ahead with plans to submit a series of options for easing fuel efficiency standards to the White House for approval in the coming week, two officials briefed on the matter Tuesday said.
The Transportation Department has drafted a proposal likely to be made public this month that would freeze vehicle requirements at 2020 levels through 2026. It is set to formally go to the White House for review next week, officials said. The freeze is the preferred option, but is one of many options in the proposal set to be made public in the first week of June, two officials said.
On Friday, President Donald Trump met with auto industry leaders over the vehicle emissions rules. Afterward, two major auto industry trade groups said in a joint statement that Trump expressed an "openness to a discussion with California on an expedited basis."
California, the most populous U.S. state and biggest new-vehicle market, has long been allowed by an EPA waiver to impose stricter standards than Washington does on vehicle emissions of some pollutants, but the state agreed to adopt the emissions rules of the Obama administration in 2011.
California and 16 other states covering about 40 percent of the U.S. population sued earlier this month to block the Trump administration’s efforts to weaken the fuel efficiency requirements. On Tuesday, a group of environmental groups including the Environmental Defense Found, Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club and Union for Concerned Scientists also filed suit.
The Transportation Department proposal asserts that a 1975 federal law preempts states from imposing emissions rules.
Automakers want the White House and California to reach an agreement on maintaining national standards, fearing a prolonged legal battle could leave them facing two different sets of rules and extended uncertainty.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
TrueCar's Perry: 'We embraced the need to change'
Do consumers want the lowest price or a fair price? TrueCar is betting on a fair price.
Read more >
White House aides met with EPA and Transportation Department officials on Tuesday to talk about the status of the effort.
Automaker and administration officials say more talks with California are expected to take place -- including a long-planned meeting next week where fuel rules are expected to be discussed -- but the administration will not delay the rollout of the proposal for more talks with California.
Mitch Bainwol, who heads the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers representing General Motors Co., Volkswagen AG, Toyota Motor Corp. and others and who attended the Trump meeting, said Tuesday he still thinks a deal can be had.
"This is a solvable problem. There's an outcome here that's good for California, that's good for this administration and terrific for the men and women who work for this sector."
A California Air Resources board spokesman, Stanley Young, said Tuesday the state has not been contacted by the administration since Friday's event.
http://www.autonews.com/article/201...ised-fuel-economy-targets?X-IgnoreUserAgent=1
May 15, 2018 @ 6:23 pmComments Email
David Shepardson
ReutersFacebook0TwitterLinkedIn0Google+0
CAFE Litigation EmissionsMore +
WASHINGTON -- The Trump administration is moving ahead with plans to submit a series of options for easing fuel efficiency standards to the White House for approval in the coming week, two officials briefed on the matter Tuesday said.
The Transportation Department has drafted a proposal likely to be made public this month that would freeze vehicle requirements at 2020 levels through 2026. It is set to formally go to the White House for review next week, officials said. The freeze is the preferred option, but is one of many options in the proposal set to be made public in the first week of June, two officials said.
On Friday, President Donald Trump met with auto industry leaders over the vehicle emissions rules. Afterward, two major auto industry trade groups said in a joint statement that Trump expressed an "openness to a discussion with California on an expedited basis."
California, the most populous U.S. state and biggest new-vehicle market, has long been allowed by an EPA waiver to impose stricter standards than Washington does on vehicle emissions of some pollutants, but the state agreed to adopt the emissions rules of the Obama administration in 2011.
California and 16 other states covering about 40 percent of the U.S. population sued earlier this month to block the Trump administration’s efforts to weaken the fuel efficiency requirements. On Tuesday, a group of environmental groups including the Environmental Defense Found, Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club and Union for Concerned Scientists also filed suit.
The Transportation Department proposal asserts that a 1975 federal law preempts states from imposing emissions rules.
Automakers want the White House and California to reach an agreement on maintaining national standards, fearing a prolonged legal battle could leave them facing two different sets of rules and extended uncertainty.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
TrueCar's Perry: 'We embraced the need to change'
Do consumers want the lowest price or a fair price? TrueCar is betting on a fair price.
Read more >
White House aides met with EPA and Transportation Department officials on Tuesday to talk about the status of the effort.
Automaker and administration officials say more talks with California are expected to take place -- including a long-planned meeting next week where fuel rules are expected to be discussed -- but the administration will not delay the rollout of the proposal for more talks with California.
Mitch Bainwol, who heads the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers representing General Motors Co., Volkswagen AG, Toyota Motor Corp. and others and who attended the Trump meeting, said Tuesday he still thinks a deal can be had.
"This is a solvable problem. There's an outcome here that's good for California, that's good for this administration and terrific for the men and women who work for this sector."
A California Air Resources board spokesman, Stanley Young, said Tuesday the state has not been contacted by the administration since Friday's event.
http://www.autonews.com/article/201...ised-fuel-economy-targets?X-IgnoreUserAgent=1
- 63,609
- 50,740
U.S. moves forward with revised fuel economy targets
May 15, 2018 @ 6:23 pmComments Email
David Shepardson
ReutersFacebook0TwitterLinkedIn0Google+0
CAFE Litigation EmissionsMore +
WASHINGTON -- The Trump administration is moving ahead with plans to submit a series of options for easing fuel efficiency standards to the White House for approval in the coming week, two officials briefed on the matter Tuesday said.
The Transportation Department has drafted a proposal likely to be made public this month that would freeze vehicle requirements at 2020 levels through 2026. It is set to formally go to the White House for review next week, officials said. The freeze is the preferred option, but is one of many options in the proposal set to be made public in the first week of June, two officials said.
On Friday, President Donald Trump met with auto industry leaders over the vehicle emissions rules. Afterward, two major auto industry trade groups said in a joint statement that Trump expressed an "openness to a discussion with California on an expedited basis."
California, the most populous U.S. state and biggest new-vehicle market, has long been allowed by an EPA waiver to impose stricter standards than Washington does on vehicle emissions of some pollutants, but the state agreed to adopt the emissions rules of the Obama administration in 2011.
California and 16 other states covering about 40 percent of the U.S. population sued earlier this month to block the Trump administration’s efforts to weaken the fuel efficiency requirements. On Tuesday, a group of environmental groups including the Environmental Defense Found, Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club and Union for Concerned Scientists also filed suit.
The Transportation Department proposal asserts that a 1975 federal law preempts states from imposing emissions rules.
Automakers want the White House and California to reach an agreement on maintaining national standards, fearing a prolonged legal battle could leave them facing two different sets of rules and extended uncertainty.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
TrueCar's Perry: 'We embraced the need to change'
Do consumers want the lowest price or a fair price? TrueCar is betting on a fair price.
Read more >
White House aides met with EPA and Transportation Department officials on Tuesday to talk about the status of the effort.
Automaker and administration officials say more talks with California are expected to take place -- including a long-planned meeting next week where fuel rules are expected to be discussed -- but the administration will not delay the rollout of the proposal for more talks with California.
Mitch Bainwol, who heads the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers representing General Motors Co., Volkswagen AG, Toyota Motor Corp. and others and who attended the Trump meeting, said Tuesday he still thinks a deal can be had.
"This is a solvable problem. There's an outcome here that's good for California, that's good for this administration and terrific for the men and women who work for this sector."
A California Air Resources board spokesman, Stanley Young, said Tuesday the state has not been contacted by the administration since Friday's event.
http://www.autonews.com/article/201...ised-fuel-economy-targets?X-IgnoreUserAgent=1
I mean China puts waaaaaay more pollution
Into the air
Then the cars we have
Looks like long live the v8
- 63,609
- 50,740
Maybe now we get a real nsx and ford gt successor
- 5,596
- 4,723
living in nyc anything more than a V6 is dumb... a v8 is nice to drive but stop and go in this traffic will have you second guessing your decisions.
- 42,319
- 44,187
Can we do something about that weirdo 25 year rule?
- 70,049
- 24,223
honda was gonna go V10 RWD for da NSX before da world wide economic collapse.
- 70,049
- 24,223
- 70,049
- 24,223
FDR, BQE, westside HW says otherwise. vrooooom!
