Jump to content
Create New...
  • 🚗 Your People Are Here. Get In.

    The internet is full of car content. This is the community.

    Cheers & Gears has been bringing enthusiasts together since 2001. Join the conversation, show off your garage, and find your people.

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Marchionne Comments On U.S. Fuel Economy Standards

      Sergio Marchionne Chimes In On The Upcoming Fuel Economy Standards

    FCA CEO Sergio Marchionne is known to speak his mind and tell it like it is. During the Automotive News World Congress, Marchionne questioned the U.S. Government's mandate of 54.5 MPG by 2025.

    "There is not a single carmaker that cannot make the 54 number. The question is, at what a price?" said Marchionne.

    A possible reason for the CEO of FCA to bring this up is gas prices around the nation are hovering around $2.00. Also, sales of hybrids and electric vehicles have been declining, partly due to gas prices. Now many executives say that low gas prices will pass and that they will continue in investing in newer technologies.

    Now Marchionne does agree automakers can meet that deadline, but questions the timeframe of when it will be implemented.

    "The question is whether 2025 is a realistic date for which to achieve it," Marchionne said. "Fifty-four will not change. The date of implementation might."

    Marchionne also went on to rail the Government's plans for subsidizing electrification technology.

    "Let the automotive industry get there. We'll find a way to get there in the most cost-efficient way. Don't tell me that I need to have electrification as the answer. It's improper."

    Source: The Detroit News, Detroit Free Press


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I think most of us would agree that we hate the Gov mandating MPG for Auto's.

     

    One place I do not agree with is subsidizing new technology. For a limited time using tax dollars to prove alternative concepts work is a good thing. But now that we know EV's can be done, time to get rid of the subsidizing and let the market play out.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Not just "at what a price", but "at what cost".

     

    One way to increase economy is to lighten the vehicle.  Lighter vehicles do less well in real-world collisions than heavier ones (insert physics here).  How may lives would lighter vehicles cost when they come against, say, a current-model Tahoe?

     

    Another is electrification.  Okay, so that adds how much to the weight and cost of the car?  How about the environmental impact to the areas around all those battery factories?  Lost of nasty chemicals in batteries.  Has anyone ever done a net environmental impact study on a hybrid/electric vs a traditional internal combustion?  Not sure these "modern" vehicles are near as clean as the enviro-nuts would want us to believe.

     

    The government should stop creating new subsidies, period, then curtail existing subsidies.  Might have to lay off a few bureaucrats, but we'll get a much better idea of what works, what doesn't; what's efficient, what's not; and what's too damned expensive to survive.

     

    There's more to look at here than JUST economy numbers, and the government either doesn't get that, or doesn't care.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If the government can legislate scientific change with actual fuel economy in automobiles, then why stop there?  Why don't they pass a law to have the flux capacitor, warp drive, and cold fusion to become a reality?

     

    Enough with the snark, here are two points that need to be addressed.

     

    1.  The industry will invest a LOT of money to comply with this mandate but what ever solutions that are found will not be the final answer.

     

    2.  You cannot force the public to buy all options.  Eventually a few or one solution will be determined by the market and there is just no way to predict in the next 10+ years what that might actually be. 

     

    This will be the VHS v. Beta battle only at a much LARGER scale of risk.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think anyone who frequents this board knows my position on this issue.  It is intrusive, destructive and unnecessary to mandate fuel economy standards.  People should have the freedom to choose what they want to drive.  Let the customer decide!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Independent Automotive Journalism

    25 years of honest automotive coverage — because someone has to do it.

    Cheers & Gears has never been filtered by manufacturer relationships or driven by algorithm. Just real people, real opinions, and a genuine love of cars. Subscribers keep the lights on and get an ad-light experience starting at $2.25/month.*

    View subscription options

    *A small number of ads feature member-exclusive coupon deals and will still appear.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Some of these famous buildings are hideous, some are interesting with decent parts to them, and a rare few are really nice. The hideous ones include the newer architecture building at University of Washington, Wurster Hall (also architecture) at UC Berkeley, and perhaps the Salk Institute in San Diego.  These buildings are cold and soul sucking, so they're hard to be in.  They also come from a fairly ugly (on various levels) sixties and seventies granola period. One of these buildings would be a "hybrid" and it's fine.  That would be Campbell Hall (again ... architecture) at the University of Virginia, which is definitely brutalist reinforced concrete at the first taller level or two, with an exposed waffle slab at levels above you.  However, they soften it up by using brick on the upper floors' exterior, as well as lower floor to ceiling heights.  The one brutalist gem would have to be the main library at University of California San Diego.  They definitely did not do this to reduce costs because it's a complicated building.  However, it's probably a nice space to be inside because of the floor to ceiling windows all around. It's just that there was a wave of putting up these buildings on West Coast campuses, surrounded by eucalyptus or fir and hemlock, and it was usually at hippieish campuses and their atmospheres don't gel with me.
    • Happy Mother's Day to the mothers in our lives - family, friends, coworkers  She came to mind, so I looked for a gif on her.  She is originally from Buffalo!  Most people have doubles.  I don't think she does. Happy Sunday.
    • Having looked at all the images online, I have to say that the interior and exterior other than the color which I like is a let down and I would even say for a Luxury brand looks cheap.
    • Due to my tradeshow season, do not have the time till June to do any writeups, but Lexus has released their Luxury version 3 row SUV EV that Toyota released as the Highlander and Subaru also has. Clearly not connected to the ICE Spindale grill or as many of us called the Predator mouth. https://pressroom.lexus.com/all-electric-three-row-luxury-the-all-new-2027-lexus-tz/ The press release says 300 miles of range on Select Grade. Look at the fine print, this is a sea level level road, anything else is 250 to 280 miles of range. FAILURE Lexus / Toyota along with the 400V system.
    • After doing a bunch of research on this, it isn't so much Honda/Acura are limiting charging speeds as it is the battery pack total size directly correlates to the rate of charge they can accept. The Prologue and non-SS Blazer EV have 85kWh batteries at 288 total volts and the ZDX/Lyriq/Blazer EV SS all have the larger 102kWh battery at 345 total volts.  Because of the way the Ultium platforms have multiple pack sizes that can and are linked together to make larger or smaller packs, the total pack volts varies based on the application and why the Hummer/Silverado/Sierra EVs can charge at 800v when they're still on 400v architecture.  Because kW = amps * volts, the bigger packs have more nominal volts because they have more cells.  Below is a Prologue example and change the 288v for the Prologue to 345v for the larger packs of the Lyriq, ZDX, or Blazer EV SS and you get 190kW for the maximum (or do the math for the other chargers, as well)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search