GM Crying Over Better MPG Standards

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Genx87

Also, what about safety improvements? How do they require more power?

I dont have a problem with safety improvements. However the size\weight of the cars have gone up dramactically in the past 30 years from these improvements. With that, the requirement for larger engines to push that extra weight.

Proof please

I don't see a marked increase of the tonnage on the vehicles except for SUV's.

More composites and plastics are being used which lowers weight.

You blinded support of the U.S. giant SUV really shows.

Sorry, Dave, it's a known fact among car buffs that safety improvements, added size, and more options have led to a marked increase in vehicle weight in the past 20 years.
Let's use the Honda Civic as an example: in 1990, it weighed 2322 lbs. off the showroom floor. A similar 2007 model weight 2904 lbs.
Or the Toyota Camry: in 1990, a 4 cyl. model weighed 2811 lbs., a similar 2007 model today weighs 3373 lbs.

Your blind stupidity really shows. Who pays you to be this stupid?

BTW, I drive a Subaru.

I asked for a "marked" increase. The weight of 3 adults is hardly "marked". :roll:

The Civic's 25% increase in curb weight is not a "marked" increase??

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Genx87

Also, what about safety improvements? How do they require more power?

I dont have a problem with safety improvements. However the size\weight of the cars have gone up dramactically in the past 30 years from these improvements. With that, the requirement for larger engines to push that extra weight.

Proof please

I don't see a marked increase of the tonnage on the vehicles except for SUV's.

More composites and plastics are being used which lowers weight.

You blinded support of the U.S. giant SUV really shows.

Sorry, Dave, it's a known fact among car buffs that safety improvements, added size, and more options have led to a marked increase in vehicle weight in the past 20 years.
Let's use the Honda Civic as an example: in 1990, it weighed 2322 lbs. off the showroom floor. A similar 2007 model weight 2904 lbs.
Or the Toyota Camry: in 1990, a 4 cyl. model weighed 2811 lbs., a similar 2007 model today weighs 3373 lbs.

Your blind stupidity really shows. Who pays you to be this stupid?

:roll:

BTW, I drive a Subaru.

I asked for a "marked" increase. The weight of 3 adults is hardly "marked". :roll:

That is a 20% increase in weight in both of his examples.
If the engine is the same efficiency, then there must be a loss in economy.

If the engine is improved, then why the extra weight?

Remove the weight and improve the economy.

Exactly.

Did Kia or Hyundai's increase their weight 20-25% as well?

 

[TheSlamma]

Easy fix.. stop building worthless land cruise liners.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Exactly.

Did Kia or Hyundai's increase their weight 20-25% as well?

1990 Hyundai Sonata: Curb Weight: 2926 lbs.
2007 Hyundai Sonata: Curb Weight: 3458 lbs.

Even with the weight, all of these cars are considerably more efficient. Simply look at the Hyundai (their mileage is actually on the lower end of the spectrum compared to others as far as displacement/power/mileage is concerned)

1990 Hyundai Sonata: Horsepower: 142 hp / Torque: 168 ft-lbs -- 18 mpg / 24 mpg
2007 Hyundai Sonata: Horsepower: 234 hp / Torque: 226 ft-lbs -- 20 mpg / 30 mpg

 

[desy]

Not only have cars gotten fatter they have gotten much faster, the zero to 60 time of the 90 civic would be worse.
There used to be power nothing in a 90 civic, my 95 base model didn't even have air as an option.
NA's won't buy slow featureless vehicles no matter the fuel economy anymore. Ever rode in K car? great gas mileage . . . .

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Exactly.

Did Kia or Hyundai's increase their weight 20-25% as well?

1990 Hyundai Sonata: Curb Weight: 2926 lbs.
2007 Hyundai Sonata: Curb Weight: 3458 lbs.

Even with the weight, all of these cars are considerably more efficient. Simply look at the Hyundai (their mileage is actually on the lower end of the spectrum compared to others as far as displacement/power/mileage is concerned)

1990 Hyundai Sonata: Horsepower: 142 hp / Torque: 168 ft-lbs -- 18 mpg / 24 mpg
2007 Hyundai Sonata: Horsepower: 234 hp / Torque: 226 ft-lbs -- 20 mpg / 30 mpg

LOL, Dave being served up another platter of ownage.......different day, different discussion, same result.

Dave kinda reminds me of a character from Cheers. Cliffy knew a lot about nothing, Dave knows nothing about a lot.

 

[imported_dna]

I see a lot of posts about acceleration and safety, but fact is that if the merge lanes were longer, then you wouldn't need a jet engine to get you up to speed.

Recently I had to merge into a 3-lane highway with no merge lane -- had a stop sign; to top it off, the point where the ramp enters the highway is right after a twist, leading to limited visibiliy. How retarded is that?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
If you're towing 8000lbs regularly, and you aren't using a diesel, there's probably somehting seriously worng with your buying logic.

Big gas V8s have one advantage - they're cheap to manufacture. In terms of truck performance and fuel efficiency under load, they suck, and always will compared to a diesel.

There is no good reason that a 3L diesel with a 50-60 lb-ft electric boost (available at zero rpm) wouldn't tow your trailer nicely, and get better mileage both loaded and unloaded than a 5-6L (or larger!) gas engine.

Can you please provide a link to the automobile manufacturer that produces this 3.0L diesel engine in a full-size 4x4 pickup?

The pickup my father uses in his line of work, is the exact same model the others have been using for years. They usually put around 300-400k miles on them before they trade them in and get a new one...with a lot of life still on them.

I didn't say you could buy one - you made fun of a truck with that power-train, when in fact one would be perfectly suited to towing.

If you're pulling 8000lbs with gas, there had better be a really good reason (like 'they don't have diesel within 50 miles'), because fuel-economy and reliability aren't it. Diesels are simply better at moving weight around. A gas powered heavy duty truck is kind of like a diesel ferrari; neither one makes a lot of sense.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I didn't say you could buy one - you made fun of a truck with that power-train, when in fact one would be perfectly suited to towing.

If you're pulling 8000lbs with gas, there had better be a really good reason (like 'they don't have diesel within 50 miles'), because fuel-economy and reliability aren't it. Diesels are simply better at moving weight around. A gas powered heavy duty truck is kind of like a diesel ferrari; neither one makes a lot of sense.

First of all, I never really made fun of diesels. In fact, they are great! The problem with a Diesel truck is that they are considerably more expensive without the savings. I overestimated with 8,000 lb towing, but a 6.0L gas motor will tow that much without any problems and you'd save around $8,000 on the initial cost. If you're consistently towing that much and more...yes a diesel would probably be good.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I didn't say you could buy one - you made fun of a truck with that power-train, when in fact one would be perfectly suited to towing.

If you're pulling 8000lbs with gas, there had better be a really good reason (like 'they don't have diesel within 50 miles'), because fuel-economy and reliability aren't it. Diesels are simply better at moving weight around. A gas powered heavy duty truck is kind of like a diesel ferrari; neither one makes a lot of sense.

First of all, I never really made fun of diesels. In fact, they are great! The problem with a Diesel truck is that they are considerably more expensive without the savings. I overestimated with 8,000 lb towing, but a 6.0L gas motor will tow that much without any problems and you'd save around $8,000 on the initial cost. If you're consistently towing that much and more...yes a diesel would probably be good.

It will, and for occasional towing it might be a good buy, but if towing is what the vehicle does, the cost of a diesel is going to pay itself back easily within the life of the truck, even at the low price of $2/gallon.

Put it this way - $8000/400k mi is $0.02 per mile. That's all you have to save to make the 'back of the envelope' calculation work; roughly 10% better fuel economy pays for the diesel. If you're driving around unloaded, you might come close, but if you're towing or have a decent payload, it's hard to argue in favour of gas.

 

[JPSJPS]

Many of you folks need to learn a little elementary physics!

Torque related to this discussion is a completely meaningless term!

Horsepower is the only factor that is used to calculate the rate of acceleration, hill climbing speed vs load and % grade etc.

So the posters that talk about comparing equal horsepower vehicles (apples to apples) have it right.

If you would like to see an example calculation of the horsepower required to climb a hill based upon % grade, speed, and vehicle weight let me know.

 

[drnickriviera]

Originally posted by: JPSJPS
Many of you folks need to learn a little elementary physics!

Torque related to this discussion is a completely meaningless term!

Horsepower is the only factor that is used to calculate the rate of acceleration, hill climbing speed vs load and % grade etc.

So the posters that talk about comparing equal horsepower vehicles (apples to apples) have it right.

If you would like to see an example calculation of the horsepower required to climb a hill based upon % grade, speed, and vehicle weight let me know.

I don't follow you. Are you saying I could take a motorcycle engine, get it to rev to 20k rpm and generate 265hp, then just replace the engine in my ram 2500 with its 5.9L diesel and it will be able to tow the same? Wouldn't you need like 50 gears to do it?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
It may cause some retooling, but the ability to increase the MPG does exists.

Please elaborate on this.

Electronic power steering. Hydraulic power steering robs power as it run off a belt and that constantly steals power. Electric power steering only needs power when you turn the wheel. Good for about 5% mpg increase.

Direct injection this is good for about 10% increase

Dynamic cylinder deactivation - save alot when idling/cruising

CVT/6speed transmission 5-10% increase

Then there is lighter materials. However alumunum has gotten more expensive the past few years, so that is less of an option now.

There quite a few little things that can be done and they are starting to implement some or all of these things.

 

[senseamp]

Hopefully GM will be successful in killing these anti-american regulations.

 

[sdifox]

Is there any particular reason why we have not switched over to carbon fiber body yet? I mean, I can understand not getting all the way to all carbon fiber unibody (because of fender benders) but the body panels can surely be replaced by carbon fiber at lower weight for equal strength. Volume should take care of the cost no?

http://www.azom.com/details.asp?ArticleID=1662

 

[JPSJPS]

Originally posted by: drnickrivieraI don't follow you. Are you saying I could take a motorcycle engine, get it to rev to 20k rpm and generate 265hp, then just replace the engine in my ram 2500 with its 5.9L diesel and it will be able to tow the same? Wouldn't you need like 50 gears to do it?

Sounds like you have the picture but lets expand on your statement "Wouldn't you need like 50 gears to do it?" because obviously you know that HP is NOT constant vs RPM.

For an apples to apples comparison, the number of gears required for optimum HP to the rear wheels depends upon the HP vs RPM curve (over the same *%* of RPM range).
If the HP vs RPM power curve for both engines is "equally flat" over the same % RPM range then you would need the same number of gears.
If the HP vs RPM of the gas engine is "peaky" but the equivalent diesel curve was flatter then the diesel would require fewer gears.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: sdifox
Is there any particular reason why we have not switched over to carbon fiber body yet? I mean, I can understand not getting all the way to all carbon fiber unibody (because of fender benders) but the body panels can surely be replaced by carbon fiber at lower weight for equal strength. Volume should take care of the cost no?

Because of GM. GM is holding back the carbon fiber, and stopping everyone else from using it. It's also holding back on the water powered engine, goose down pedestrian safe bumpers, biodegradable interiors, potpouri smell exhaust systems. Holding back on all these things just to piss off environmentalists. :roll:

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: redgtxdi

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: bctbct
BTW foreign car makers fuel ecomy is not better on bigger cars with bigger engines.

Very true. If Toyota starts building a truck that gets the exact same gas mileage as a GMC Sierra, will their be a consumer fee on that?

Probably not. I think it's pretty evident that even our own government likes foreign cars better than our own........(aside from those bitchin' lookin' Suburbans in the presidential caravan)

However, if both automakers were put to the test to create a 1-ton truck that gets the best mpg it can, given a specific criteria on weight, mass, size, engine size, etc... etc............I'd put all of my money on Toyota and probably borrow a little more to bet ta' boot!!!! :thumbsup:

Amazing then how GM's 6.0L V8 full-size trucks get the same or better gas mileage as Toyota's 4.7L V8 Tundra, eh?
Cool... paypal me all your money now.

Brainwashed tool. :roll:


edit: there's a lot of reason to dislike American cars, but the fuel economy reason is for the idiots who know jack sh!t about cars in general. Pound for pound, displacement for displacement, power per power, GM cars get the best gas mileage bar none. A Corvette Z06 gets 26 hwy with 505 bhp.

Oh really? What are you towing with that Corvette? :roll:

I tell you what, it wouldn't get 26 with ME driving it.

Why do you have to use language such as IDIOT, BRAINWASHED TOOL, JACK SH!T MORON?

I ask merely for information?
Or are you towing 10 CY of crushed stone with your Corvette again.



:laugh:

You missed the point. And I use that language because it's the truth. You conceitedly spout propagandist brainwashed nonsense that flies in the facts, and it's annoying like a buzzing fly. Toyota already manufactures commercial trucks for foreign markets, and they don't get better gas mileage than GM's comparable products. That's why Toyota doesn't bring them here to the US, despite how eager they are to break into that lucrative truck/SUV market.
Like I posted above but you quoted and ignored, "Amazing then how GM's 6.0L V8 full-size trucks get the same or better gas mileage as Toyota's 4.7L V8 Tundra, eh?"

HAHA. Shut your ass down and you can't just shut up and admit it. Yeah, you're towing 4 tons with that Corvette alright. Let's see how fast you can get that load up to speed! :laugh:
:roll:

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: Elfear

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium


There are 4 cylinder diesel trucks that produce more torque than daddy's POS gas hog.

http://trucks.about.com/od/autobuying/a/torque.htm

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/07/mitsubishifuso_.html

Stop being suckered by the American car companies. The government needs to let them die the death they so richly have earned.

Which 4 cylinder diesel trucks are you referring to? The hybrid-diesel in the 2nd link? Even with both the electric motor and the diesel engine working together they only produce ~170hp and ~300ft-lb. GM's smallest truck V8, the 4.8L, produces 305ft-lb. The largest V8 produces 375ft-lb. I'm sure Ford's and Dodge's truck V8s have similiar output (in fact Dodge's V-10 produces 450ft-lb). Where are you getting the information for your presumption?

I believe that the search for mpg has it's place but there are good reasons to buy a vehicle that isn't the most economical in the world. Little hard to cram a bunch of kids in a Honda Fit or tow a large payload with a RAV4.

Besides, if we let American car companies die where would we get our cheap horsepower fix??

Look jackass, if your vaunted gas engines are so wonderful, point out which tractors use them, as in Volvo, Freightliner, etc. Which one? Hellloooo? Speak up smart guy! You want torque and the best fuel mileage, diesel is it. Period. End of story.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: Vic
It's amazing the things you learn on ATPN. For example, I had no idea that only Ford and GM sold fullsize trucks and SUV's... or that GMs cause global warming but Toyotas don't... or that people who call themselves Democrats eagerly await the loss of tens of thousands of high-paying union jobs at domestic auto manufacturers...

So yeah, if I lash out the occasional harsh word, maybe YOU should look at the self-evident stupidity you post.

Quoted for.....well, just because.

Yeah exactly. Because as usual, you got nuthin. :laugh:

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
There are 4 cylinder diesel trucks that produce more torque than daddy's POS gas hog.

Please show me where I can pick one up that will tow a 8,000+ lb trailor please. I would love to purchase this truck so that I can tow anything I want and still get 30mpg.

You're denying that there are diesel trucks that can tow what your stupid gas truck can tow?
Whatever.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: redgtxdi

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: bctbct
BTW foreign car makers fuel ecomy is not better on bigger cars with bigger engines.

Very true. If Toyota starts building a truck that gets the exact same gas mileage as a GMC Sierra, will their be a consumer fee on that?

Probably not. I think it's pretty evident that even our own government likes foreign cars better than our own........(aside from those bitchin' lookin' Suburbans in the presidential caravan)

However, if both automakers were put to the test to create a 1-ton truck that gets the best mpg it can, given a specific criteria on weight, mass, size, engine size, etc... etc............I'd put all of my money on Toyota and probably borrow a little more to bet ta' boot!!!! :thumbsup:

Amazing then how GM's 6.0L V8 full-size trucks get the same or better gas mileage as Toyota's 4.7L V8 Tundra, eh?
Cool... paypal me all your money now.

Brainwashed tool. :roll:


edit: there's a lot of reason to dislike American cars, but the fuel economy reason is for the idiots who know jack sh!t about cars in general. Pound for pound, displacement for displacement, power per power, GM cars get the best gas mileage bar none. A Corvette Z06 gets 26 hwy with 505 bhp.

Oh really? What are you towing with that Corvette? :roll:

I tell you what, it wouldn't get 26 with ME driving it.

Why do you have to use language such as IDIOT, BRAINWASHED TOOL, JACK SH!T MORON?

I ask merely for information?
Or are you towing 10 CY of crushed stone with your Corvette again.



:laugh:

You missed the point. And I use that language because it's the truth. You conceitedly spout propagandist brainwashed nonsense that flies in the facts, and it's annoying like a buzzing fly. Toyota already manufactures commercial trucks for foreign markets, and they don't get better gas mileage than GM's comparable products. That's why Toyota doesn't bring them here to the US, despite how eager they are to break into that lucrative truck/SUV market.
Like I posted above but you quoted and ignored, "Amazing then how GM's 6.0L V8 full-size trucks get the same or better gas mileage as Toyota's 4.7L V8 Tundra, eh?"

HAHA. Shut your ass down and you can't just shut up and admit it. Yeah, you're towing 4 tons with that Corvette alright. Let's see how fast you can get that load up to speed! :laugh:
:roll:

It is amazing how obtuse one person can be, but you lower that bar ever so much on a daily basis.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
And for the people blowing their horns for imports, they have their problems too. Look at the Nissan Titan. It's the most unreliable full sized pickup, period.

Predicted reliability

Four models from Nissan -- the Quest, Armada, Titan and the Infiniti QX56 -- are on Consumer Reports' list of 2006 models with the worst predicted reliability. But the new Infiniti M35 and M45 are among the most reliable models.

Absolutely. POS. Wouldn't let my dog sh!t in one.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I didn't say you could buy one - you made fun of a truck with that power-train, when in fact one would be perfectly suited to towing.

If you're pulling 8000lbs with gas, there had better be a really good reason (like 'they don't have diesel within 50 miles'), because fuel-economy and reliability aren't it. Diesels are simply better at moving weight around. A gas powered heavy duty truck is kind of like a diesel ferrari; neither one makes a lot of sense.

First of all, I never really made fun of diesels. In fact, they are great! The problem with a Diesel truck is that they are considerably more expensive without the savings. I overestimated with 8,000 lb towing, but a 6.0L gas motor will tow that much without any problems and you'd save around $8,000 on the initial cost. If you're consistently towing that much and more...yes a diesel would probably be good.

Yeah and die 10 years earlier. Greaaaaaat. :laugh:

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: JPSJPS
Many of you folks need to learn a little elementary physics!

Torque related to this discussion is a completely meaningless term!

Horsepower is the only factor that is used to calculate the rate of acceleration, hill climbing speed vs load and % grade etc.

So the posters that talk about comparing equal horsepower vehicles (apples to apples) have it right.

If you would like to see an example calculation of the horsepower required to climb a hill based upon % grade, speed, and vehicle weight let me know.

BS. Torque for towing. Period. Otherwise, tractor trailers would be...GAS POWERED. DUH.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: JPSJPS

Originally posted by: drnickrivieraI don't follow you. Are you saying I could take a motorcycle engine, get it to rev to 20k rpm and generate 265hp, then just replace the engine in my ram 2500 with its 5.9L diesel and it will be able to tow the same? Wouldn't you need like 50 gears to do it?

Sounds like you have the picture but lets expand on your statement "Wouldn't you need like 50 gears to do it?" because obviously you know that HP is NOT constant vs RPM.

For an apples to apples comparison, the number of gears required for optimum HP to the rear wheels depends upon the HP vs RPM curve (over the same *%* of RPM range).
If the HP vs RPM power curve for both engines is "equally flat" over the same % RPM range then you would need the same number of gears.
If the HP vs RPM of the gas engine is "peaky" but the equivalent diesel curve was flatter then the diesel would require fewer gears.

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.

Yeah. That's the extent of it. BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.

What?

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.

Study up.