Dismiss Notice
Thanks for being a member of our community. Please donate toward site expenses if you can.

Justice Dept. launches antitrust probe of automakers over their fuel efficiency deal with California

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Josephwalker, Sep 19, 2019.

Page 7 of 8
  1. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually the federal government is responsible for that with their own fuel efficiency standards. Those little pickups were great and I loved my Nissan hardbody. The government in its infinite wisdom decided on a fuel efficiency standard for auto fleets and the first thing auto manufacturers did was stop making little pickups because they were built on car frames frames and they drug down the average mpg of their car fleet. Now you can only buy full size pickups on truck frames that are exempt from car fleet regulations and you have government to thank. Learn anything here? Still support California and even more stringent fuel economy standards?
    More in depth explanation here.

    "CAFE's other victim is the compact truck segment. Many consumers don't need a full-size truck (whether they acknowledge it or not), and the Ford Ranger, along with GM's own compact pickups, had respectable followings among consumers looking for a smaller fuel-efficient pickup.

    But the Ranger happens to fall into the "dead zone" of the CAFE footprint formula. Both curve graphs show a flat line at 55 square feet; in practical terms, a Mercedes-Benz S-Class carries this footprint. The Ranger, even in SuperCab configuration, has a footprint of 50 square feet, just short of the magic number. The best Ranger, fuel economy-wise, was a 4-cylinder manual truck, returning 22/27 mpg IRL; a respectable number, but one only available in a configuration that a minority of buyers would opt for. Equipped with a V6 and an automatic transmission, it would only return 14/18 mpg IRL, a figure that can be equalled by certain version of Ford's V6 and V8 F-150 full-size pickups. By 2025, a theoretical Ranger with a footprint of 50 square feet would have to achieve fuel economy somewhere approaching 50 mpg CAFE. The 75 square foot F-150 would only have to reach in the high 30s CAFE"

    https://jalopnik.com/how-the-government-killed-fuel-efficient-cars-and-truck-5948172
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2019
    Josephwalker, Sep 20, 2019
    #151
  2. mdrobster

    mdrobster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    34,339
    Likes Received:
    12,932
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yead right, keep making excuses, don't hold Trump accountable.
     
    mdrobster, Sep 20, 2019
    #152
  3. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So you want to control where people live?
    I don't think so comrade.
     
    ronv, Sep 20, 2019
    #153
  4. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I think if you read a bit you will find at least 4 car companies have signed up over Trump's objections.
     
    ronv, Sep 20, 2019
    #154
  5. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    33,519
    Likes Received:
    17,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The laws actually do..what excuse did I make? And for what? What have you shown that needs to be excused? Not accusations...but something....
     
    struth, Sep 20, 2019
    #155
  6. Adfundum

    Adfundum Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    7,697
    Likes Received:
    4,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I looked at the new Rangers. They're not compact and they don't get the mileage I was looking for. Grrr...
     
    Adfundum, Sep 21, 2019
    #156
  7. Adfundum

    Adfundum Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    7,697
    Likes Received:
    4,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Seriously? I have asked several times to explain how California's standards will become US standards and you respond with an ad hominem? So far, all the responses to that question have been broad generalizations based on what seems to be an assumption that California is some kind of evil entity. That's what the OP was all about.
     
    Adfundum, Sep 21, 2019
    #157
  8. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Seems like I've been crystal clear on this. If California sets higher fuel efficiency standards auto makers will be forced to comply with them due to the fact California is their largest single market. This will force the other 49 states to purchase the same more expensive vehicles because auto makers can't engineer and design and manufacture an entirely separate line of cars just for California. Really don't know how much clearer I can be on this.
     
    Josephwalker, Sep 21, 2019
    #158
  9. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's because they still have to be big enough and built on a truck frame so they don't fall under the auto fleets rigid CAFE standards. If Trump rolled those back we could get our great little pickups back.
    Long ago I had a 4 banger Nissan hardbody I used for commuting long distances to the job. It got good mpg and was all I needed to transport a couple of chainsaws five gallons of gas and some bar oil. Even with the very limited payload I could throw some firewood in after work and bring it home which added up to my winters wood very easy over the course of a summer. Drove the wheels off that little pickup and wish I had one now.
     
    Josephwalker, Sep 21, 2019
    #159
  10. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    38,147
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They all will. No choice. Abandoning California would be a poor business decision.
     
    fmw, Sep 21, 2019
    #160
    Josephwalker likes this.
  11. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    38,147
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have no idea. I see no reason to doubt what the car companies say.
     
    fmw, Sep 21, 2019
    #161
  12. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    38,147
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course they are. The prices of cars all over the US would be lower without them. that is the whole point of this thread.
    Of course and they adopt higher, more expensive standards in order to do so.
     
    fmw, Sep 21, 2019
    #162
  13. Adfundum

    Adfundum Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    7,697
    Likes Received:
    4,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So, it's a choice they have to make? They are not "forced" by any regulation in by the US? That's what I've been saying.
    If they want to compete with those auto makers who are willing to meet Ca.'s requirements, then they need to step up. As far as the cost, that argument is full of holes. That was my complaint about the Ranger--that Ford didn't think it was cost effective to build a cheap little truck when most people were buying full size gas hogs with every option imaginable. Cost doesn't seem to be much of a consideration when it comes to add-ons that lower efficiency.

    My ranger did have a truck frame. As far as rolling back the standards, I don't think that would bring back the little Ranger. Ford's decision was based on a shrinking market for small trucks. In other words, people wanted to spend more money on bigger and less efficient products.
    https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/best-cars-blog/2011/06/why-ford-is-discontinuing-the-ranger
    https://www.popularmechanics.com/ca...s-us-why-the-ford-ranger-is-no-more-15388686/

    Long ago, I bought an F-150 4WD. Told my self it was better to have it and not need it. Back then, I lived in the snow-belt just south of Lake Erie. I kept it for 7 years and never needed 4wd. I got by with a stack of firewood and some sand bags. Even worse, the mileage on that tank was awful, and the maintenance on the whole front drive system was never ending. I swore I'd never fall for the "better safe than sorry" thing again.

    I don't haul stuff all the time, but often enough that a truck was kind of a no-brainer. At the same time, my drive to work was about 40 miles each way. Mileage was very important. Because the Ranger satisfied both those needs, I was quite happy--until someone pulled out in front of me and I totaled it. By then it impossible to buy a new one, and none of the used ones I looked at had the 4 cyl 5 speed to give me the efficiency.

    The new Rangers are mid-sized and so far, I haven't seen the kind of cheap and dependable vehicle I'm looking for.
     
    Adfundum, Sep 21, 2019
    #163
  14. Adfundum

    Adfundum Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    7,697
    Likes Received:
    4,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not required, but grudgingly accept any added cost.
    But hey, it's all about state's rights, right? :)
     
    Adfundum, Sep 21, 2019
    #164
  15. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    38,147
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It would be if it affected only California auto makers and California citizens. Since it doesn't then it goes beyond states' rights. I'm a big fan of states' rights but this isn't it.
     
    fmw, Sep 21, 2019
    #165
  16. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Overpopulation of the world is a big issue and everyone is to scared to talk about.

    Human contribution to climate change ...overpopulation.

    In my life time I have watched the world's population more than double from 3 billion to 7 billion.

    Watched America's population more than double.

    Watched California's population quadruple.

    During the early 20th Century progressives in America made overpopulation an issue and even Congress recommended that America's population should be capped at around 170 million.

    It became an issue again when America's population approached 170 million during the late 1950's and the government use to run commercials on the radio telling Americans stop having so many children.
     
    APACHERAT, Sep 21, 2019
    #166
    Josephwalker likes this.
  17. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it's not a choice. California is the auto consumer capital of the world and auto makers would be forced to comply with their regulations of face financial ruin.

    From link you provided.

    "Add on the fact that Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (CAFE) are disproportionally tight on compact trucks, and it's understandable why Ford ceded the relatively small compact truck market to its competitors."
     
    Josephwalker, Sep 21, 2019
    #167
  18. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Right. California would in essence be bucking the feds rights to regulate interstate commerce
     
    Josephwalker, Sep 21, 2019
    #168
  19. Adfundum

    Adfundum Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    7,697
    Likes Received:
    4,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It really is a states' rights issue in the sense that if one state wants to require standards, those standards only apply in that one state. Any spill over is the result of business decisions.
     
    Adfundum, Sep 21, 2019
    #169
  20. Adfundum

    Adfundum Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    7,697
    Likes Received:
    4,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Wrong. It's a business decision. They aren't required to sell vehicles in Ca., so it can't be forced unless they want to do business.

    As far as the CAFE standards, those would have had little impact if the market for small trucks had been higher rather than declining.
     
    Adfundum, Sep 21, 2019
    #170
  21. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    38,147
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OK. I accept that. I think states should exercise their rights by living with national standards. We are a union of states. It is fine for states to compete with one another but there are some benefits to staying in your lane.
     
    fmw, Sep 21, 2019
    #171
    Josephwalker likes this.
  22. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's a business decision to stay in business or lose your single biggest customer so they would be forced to comply or face the wrath of stock holders as their stock plummeted.
    CAFE standards made it impossible to manufacture the little pickups.End of story.
    From my previous link.

    "By 2025, a theoretical Ranger with a footprint of 50 square feet would have to achieve fuel economy somewhere approaching 50 mpg"

    "Ford will offer a new Ranger in world markets, but again, it won't come here."


    So you see any new small pickups in America will never be the small pickups of old. They have to be larger to get out of CAFE requirements. The Taco is about as small as you will get with CAFE around and it's a huge seller. People still want small pickups.
     
    Josephwalker, Sep 21, 2019
    #172
  23. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    33,519
    Likes Received:
    17,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A state doesn’t have the right to impact interstate commerce, the constitution specifically states that is the role of the federal govt. read Art 1 Section 8
     
    struth, Sep 21, 2019
    #173
  24. Adfundum

    Adfundum Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    7,697
    Likes Received:
    4,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, but Isn't that what we fought a civil war over?
    Ca. is not imposing standards on the other states.
     
    Adfundum, Sep 21, 2019
    #174
  25. Adfundum

    Adfundum Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    7,697
    Likes Received:
    4,178
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Exactly. It's a decision. They voluntarily comply. And the CAFE standards, though they are different because they are national standards, do not make it impossible to build small trucks. As the article said, the lack of sales made it unprofitable, not impossible. Manufacturers will build what the market demands.
     
    Adfundum, Sep 21, 2019
    #175
Page 7 of 8

Share This Page