Jump to content
William Maley

Industry News: President Trump Announces EPA Will Reopen Reivew of 2025 Fuel Economy Rules

Recommended Posts

@hyperv6 @ocnblu @Drew Dowdell 

Check out this review by a Tesla Owner on his test drive of a BOLT when visiting California. Pretty impressive and even he says GM did good. He does not believe it will affect the Tesla 3 and there are things he does not like compared to his Tesla S. There are also things that he states shows GM superior engineering over Tesla. Over all he liked it and was very happy to go to a chevy dealer and find plenty of BOLTS out front by the Street clear and easy to find unlike the East coast that has them hidden in the back lot.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1109388_chevy-bolt-ev-tested-by-tesla-model-s-owner-his-assessment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Do the mid-sizer have AFM yet?  I bet that would help substantially.  It seems to be the main driver as to how a 5.3 liter Suburban can manage it. 

My dad's truck is a 2004 extended cab 5.3L 4X4... built before all the extra complications, and his truck can easily match mine in fuel mileage.  So what is the problem?  He's no hypermiler.  This is what we're talking about with the burden of regulations that don't solve anything... they just add cost.  A truck is a truck.  It still needs to move loads, it still needs to be a capable vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

My dad's truck is a 2004 extended cab 5.3L 4X4... built before all the extra complications, and his truck can easily match mine in fuel mileage.  So what is the problem?  He's no hypermiler.  This is what we're talking about with the burden of regulations that don't solve anything... they just add cost.  A truck is a truck.  It still needs to move loads, it still needs to be a capable vehicle.

Not on the highway he can't. Remember, I had the same vintage Avalanche and 19 was the best I could do even when I was being careful. You've posted 26 or 27 highway on here before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Do the mid-sizer have AFM yet?  I bet that would help substantially.  It seems to be the main driver as to how a 5.3 liter Suburban can manage it. 

They have it on the new 3.6 and the numbers remained the same. It also has the 8 speed and yet the same numbers in mpg an HP.

though the drivability is much better and low end performance is much stronger. It picked up about 8 tenths in the quarter mile.

i see the aluminum/steel mix coming to the next gen. 

If nothing changes the half ton could go away as a full size and makers may just default to the 3/4 ton as the base full size. They have much less numbers to meet.

i think this was one reason GM went back to the mid size and why Ford has been waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Not on the highway he can't. Remember, I had the same vintage Avalanche and 19 was the best I could do even when I was being careful. You've posted 26 or 27 highway on here before.

He says he gets 22-23 on the highway.  After researching my Members Rides thread, my best tank was 25 MPG, which consisted of a road trip to Ocean City, MD. 

Edited by ocnblu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dfelt said:

@hyperv6 @ocnblu @Drew Dowdell 

Check out this review by a Tesla Owner on his test drive of a BOLT when visiting California. Pretty impressive and even he says GM did good. He does not believe it will affect the Tesla 3 and there are things he does not like compared to his Tesla S. There are also things that he states shows GM superior engineering over Tesla. Over all he liked it and was very happy to go to a chevy dealer and find plenty of BOLTS out front by the Street clear and easy to find unlike the East coast that has them hidden in the back lot.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1109388_chevy-bolt-ev-tested-by-tesla-model-s-owner-his-assessment

I was impressed by the Bolt I was in. The room is great and even with cheap interior it felt decent. I liked the designs in the light color trim.

The first thing Chevy needs to do is stop any comparisons to either Tesla as neither are comparible.

The S is a total different class car in price and size. The 3 is going to be much more expensive than the Bolt by the time you get the option you want. Even Musk said the base price of $36k was going to go up. I am sure it will be a fine car but it will slot in over the Bolt and under S and still be more than the average buyer will pay.

Autoweek has a very good story on the Bolt this week.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2017 at 9:27 AM, ccap41 said:

Go on...

We'll see what happens. Part of the reason I went for the Malibu was the new power train and its FE. It drove so much smoother than older gm 4 bangers and the turbo really helps with torque. 

I've had the oil pan fixed twice for leaks and the Ecm was reprogrammed under recall to stop preignition issues that have been melting pistons  per what I have been able to tell, my drivability is less and power seems a bit less  Mpg has been quite reduced but I still may chalk that up to winter blend gas (I've logged every tank since I got it)  one time I pulled well over 40 mpg on a 50 mile stretch on a road trip where the car rode like silk  lately not as smooth  on another forum site the theory is the ecm recall has neutered the car and it was origInally set up to score big fe ratings for cafe  

ford had complaints when their fusion and escape came out that there was issues and fe was  not as advertised  my car was getting advertised fe before the issues and before winter no problem  I only have about 8400 miles on it  I would hope gm didn't screw this up  it's not worth the low power output of this little 1.5 if the fuel economy doesn't come with it  

i would like to see them dial back the fe and cafe pressures for awhile. Let's work on improving reliability and making the technology more affordable  I still love turbo though  I'd like to see technology move towards smaller v6 turbos  like 2.5 turbo v6 for sedans  

 

Edited by regfootball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideally, we should switch from a CAFE mandate to an all-electric option mandate. This would 

1) Boost electric volume, creating greater economies of scale.

2) Greater competition would increase range and decrease costs of electrics

3) Rapid charging stations would become commonplace,since charging times are supposed to be dropping from 20 minutes to 2 within 5 years thanks to ultracapacitors . We could even mandate major gas stations offer rapid chargers to encourage the trend further, like we did with E85. 

4) I think this could get wide bipartisan support. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, carman21 said:

Rapid charging stations would become commonplace, since charging times are supposed to be dropping from 20 minutes to 2 within 5 years thanks to ultracapacitors .

Here is a story on Ultracapacitors from 2013 were they do talk about the benefits of them with EV's and Hybrids..

http://evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=30444

2016 MIT Story where they finally admit that Ultracapacitors did not take off in EVs due to limitations especially around carbon in in the capacitor. MIT now has a carbon free capacitor that has far greater storage and power capacity and should help to fulfill the dreams of fast charging and boosted power needs with carbon free capacitors.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/10/12/mit-adds-new-material-to-supercapacitor-for-better-evs-maybe/

Future is looking Green! :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-03-17 at 1:45 PM, surreal1272 said:

Agreed but only one of those has had them for a century while bemoaning the other two for the exact same thing. 

Id say...to have a level playing field...

EV and ethanol should ALSO get 100 years of subsidies, then we could call it quits!!!

FAIR is only FAIR!!!

Edited by oldshurst442

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that if we were to use actual dollar valuation of the times that they were spent that we aren't too far from even now but that's just an in uneducated gut feeling I could be in the outfield with this but I don't have the time to research it properly. It's just so much money has been spent lately like the amount spent in Presidential terms.

Edited by 67impss
Spell check

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving technology fast takes a lot of capital. While private companies are spending a lot it is no where in relation to what the space program used to spend. The government used a lot of seed money to push the program and that is where our technology boom came from. China is trying this now along with stealing more tech info.

Cost of development is just so high it is hard to do all they used to do even with today technology.  

The government also has little seed money today with the budgets out of hand. 

While many push for the Mars program to drive technology it is just so expensive no one can afford it easily. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Piss poor mgmt. of the Gov fiscal responsibility with social service and defense run amuck. 

Plus forced inflation by crazy over paying of Chariman of the board to CEO all the way down to the cashier with the stupid Living wage minimum wage crap.

$15 hr for no knowledge or training is BS.

All of this is killing America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest tank:  390.5 miles, put 19.626 gallons back in.  19.897075 MPG.  If we're counting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Latest tank:  390.5 miles, put 19.626 gallons back in.  19.897075 MPG.  If we're counting.

Not to shabby for a truck like yours.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. 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
Reply to this topic...

×   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.




  • Social Stream

  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      In this week for a review is a 2019 Mazda CX-5 Signature with the turbocharged 2.5-liter Skyactiv-G engine.  This engine is shared with the Mazda CX-9 and Mazda 6 Turbo and produces 227 horsepower and 310 lb.-ft of torque on regular gasoline, but bumps up to 250 horsepower on 93 octane. All-wheel drive is standard.
      This is the most loaded of the CX-5 trims with only the paint ($300) and rear bumper guard ($125) as additional charges.  That brings the MSRP to $38,360 after destination charges. 
      What do you want to know about this Mazda while I have it for a week?  Let me know in the comments below. 



      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      In this week for a review is a 2019 Mazda CX-5 Signature with the turbocharged 2.5-liter Skyactiv-G engine.  This engine is shared with the Mazda CX-9 and Mazda 6 Turbo and produces 227 horsepower and 310 lb.-ft of torque on regular gasoline, but bumps up to 250 horsepower on 93 octane. All-wheel drive is standard.
      This is the most loaded of the CX-5 trims with only the paint ($300) and rear bumper guard ($125) as additional charges.  That brings the MSRP to $38,360 after destination charges. 
      What do you want to know about this Mazda while I have it for a week?  Let me know in the comments below. 


    • By William Maley
      Automakers want to be first into a new segment for various reasons. They can become the icon for the class and grab a fair chunk of sales as competitors rush to get their models in. There is a significant downside to being first as it allows some of the competition to study and figure out where to improve on. This brings us to the 2019 Volvo XC40 which is the focus of today’s review. It was one of the late arrivals to the subcompact luxury crossover class, but it allowed the automaker to study and figure what it could improve on. How does it stack up?
      The XC40 shares various design traits with the XC60 and XC90 crossovers. They include a familiar boxy profile, wide rectangular grille, and LED headlights with the signature “Thor’s Hammer” element. But Volvo allowed their designers to play around to give it a distinct identity. Take for example the side profile with its beltline that sharply rakes along the rear door and meets the rear pillar. There is also the option of a two-tone color palette that gives the XC40 a youthful look.
      Inside, the XC40 follows the ideals as seen in other Volvos with a minimalist look. But again, Volvo gave free roam to their designers to make it slightly different. While my test vehicle didn’t come with the bright ‘Lava Orange’ carpet, there is patterned metal trim where you would expect to find wood and felt-like material covering parts of the door panels. There is a fair amount of hard plastics used, but Volvo made the smart decision of keeping them in places where they make sense such as panels covering the center console.
      My R-Design tester came with leather upholstery for the seats, along with power adjustments for those sitting in the front. The front seats are the best place to sit in as they offer plenty of support and comfort for any drive length. In the back, there plenty of head and legroom for most passengers. But the XC40 falters on the seats as the bottom cushions come up a bit short and the seat-back doesn’t have any form of recline.
      Volvo’s technology story in the XC40 is mixed. The reconfigurable 12.3-inch display for the instrument cluster is a delight to look at with vibrant graphics and different layouts to present key information. Move over to the center stack to find a nine-inch touchscreen with Volvo’s Sensus infotainment system. Many of the controls for audio, climate control, and systems are controlled through the screen, with a row of buttons sitting underneath for volume and a few other functions. This decision does make for a cleaner dash but also makes accomplishing simple tasks very irritating. To change the fan speed or audio input, you have to go through various screens to find that one menu or slider. Adding more physical buttons would clutter up the dash, but would massively improve overall usability.
      What engine comes under the hood of the XC40 ultimately depends on the driven wheels. Go for front-wheel drive and you’ll end up with the T4 - turbocharged 2.0L four-cylinder with 187 horsepower. Opt for all-wheel drive like in my tester and you’ll get the T5 - the same 2.0L four, but with 248 horsepower. Both come paired with an eight-speed automatic.
      The T5 is the workhorse of Volvo’s lineup by boasting decent performance and fuel economy for most of their models. In the XC40, the T5 becomes a surprising performer with excellent off the line performance and a seemingly endless flow of power when needed for passing. Some credit is due to the 258 pound-feet of torque which is available on the low end of the rpm band. The eight-speed automatic provided timely and smooth shifts.
      Fuel economy is rated at 23 City/31 Highway/26 Combined. My average for the week landed around 24 mpg.
      Opting for the R-Design does change up the chassis setup with an emphasis on sporty driving. This is apparent in the bends as the XC40 feels confident with minimal body roll and quick reflexes. Steering is responsive, but there will be some who wished there was a little bit more weight dialed in. The downside to the R-Design’s chassis is the ride feeling slightly rough, not helped by the optional 20-inch alloy wheels fitted to my tester.
      Despite being somewhat late to the party, the Volvo XC40 stands out from the subcompact luxury crossover crowd. The styling inside and out put the model into its own space that competitors dream about, along with offering a strong performer in the form of the T5 engine. Where the XC40 stands out is the Care By Volvo subscription service. Starting at $700 a month for 24 months, this service gives you the vehicle, complimentary maintenance, insurance, and the ability to upgrade your vehicle to another one after 12 months. No one has been able to match what Volvo is offering.
      The XC40 shows that if you bring something compelling to the party, it doesn’t matter how late you are.
      Disclaimer: Volvo Provided the XC40, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2019
      Make: Volvo
      Model: XC40
      Trim: T5 R-Design
      Engine: 2.0L Turbocharged DOHC Four-Cylinder
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, All-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 248 @ 5,500
      Torque @ RPM: 258 @ 1,800
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 23/31/26
      Curb Weight: 3,713 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Ghent, Belgium
      Base Price: $35,700
      As Tested Price: $46,385 (Includes $995.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      R-Design Features - $2,500.00
      Laminated Panoramic Sunroof - $1,200.00
      Vision Package - $1,100.00
      Advanced Package - $995.00
      Premium Package - $900.00
      20" 5-Double Spoke Matte Black Alloy Wheels - $800.00
      Harman Kardon Audio System - $800.00
      Heated Front Seats & Steering Wheel - $750.00
      Metallic Paint - $645.00

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Automakers want to be first into a new segment for various reasons. They can become the icon for the class and grab a fair chunk of sales as competitors rush to get their models in. There is a significant downside to being first as it allows some of the competition to study and figure out where to improve on. This brings us to the 2019 Volvo XC40 which is the focus of today’s review. It was one of the late arrivals to the subcompact luxury crossover class, but it allowed the automaker to study and figure what it could improve on. How does it stack up?
      The XC40 shares various design traits with the XC60 and XC90 crossovers. They include a familiar boxy profile, wide rectangular grille, and LED headlights with the signature “Thor’s Hammer” element. But Volvo allowed their designers to play around to give it a distinct identity. Take for example the side profile with its beltline that sharply rakes along the rear door and meets the rear pillar. There is also the option of a two-tone color palette that gives the XC40 a youthful look.
      Inside, the XC40 follows the ideals as seen in other Volvos with a minimalist look. But again, Volvo gave free roam to their designers to make it slightly different. While my test vehicle didn’t come with the bright ‘Lava Orange’ carpet, there is patterned metal trim where you would expect to find wood and felt-like material covering parts of the door panels. There is a fair amount of hard plastics used, but Volvo made the smart decision of keeping them in places where they make sense such as panels covering the center console.
      My R-Design tester came with leather upholstery for the seats, along with power adjustments for those sitting in the front. The front seats are the best place to sit in as they offer plenty of support and comfort for any drive length. In the back, there plenty of head and legroom for most passengers. But the XC40 falters on the seats as the bottom cushions come up a bit short and the seat-back doesn’t have any form of recline.
      Volvo’s technology story in the XC40 is mixed. The reconfigurable 12.3-inch display for the instrument cluster is a delight to look at with vibrant graphics and different layouts to present key information. Move over to the center stack to find a nine-inch touchscreen with Volvo’s Sensus infotainment system. Many of the controls for audio, climate control, and systems are controlled through the screen, with a row of buttons sitting underneath for volume and a few other functions. This decision does make for a cleaner dash but also makes accomplishing simple tasks very irritating. To change the fan speed or audio input, you have to go through various screens to find that one menu or slider. Adding more physical buttons would clutter up the dash, but would massively improve overall usability.
      What engine comes under the hood of the XC40 ultimately depends on the driven wheels. Go for front-wheel drive and you’ll end up with the T4 - turbocharged 2.0L four-cylinder with 187 horsepower. Opt for all-wheel drive like in my tester and you’ll get the T5 - the same 2.0L four, but with 248 horsepower. Both come paired with an eight-speed automatic.
      The T5 is the workhorse of Volvo’s lineup by boasting decent performance and fuel economy for most of their models. In the XC40, the T5 becomes a surprising performer with excellent off the line performance and a seemingly endless flow of power when needed for passing. Some credit is due to the 258 pound-feet of torque which is available on the low end of the rpm band. The eight-speed automatic provided timely and smooth shifts.
      Fuel economy is rated at 23 City/31 Highway/26 Combined. My average for the week landed around 24 mpg.
      Opting for the R-Design does change up the chassis setup with an emphasis on sporty driving. This is apparent in the bends as the XC40 feels confident with minimal body roll and quick reflexes. Steering is responsive, but there will be some who wished there was a little bit more weight dialed in. The downside to the R-Design’s chassis is the ride feeling slightly rough, not helped by the optional 20-inch alloy wheels fitted to my tester.
      Despite being somewhat late to the party, the Volvo XC40 stands out from the subcompact luxury crossover crowd. The styling inside and out put the model into its own space that competitors dream about, along with offering a strong performer in the form of the T5 engine. Where the XC40 stands out is the Care By Volvo subscription service. Starting at $700 a month for 24 months, this service gives you the vehicle, complimentary maintenance, insurance, and the ability to upgrade your vehicle to another one after 12 months. No one has been able to match what Volvo is offering.
      The XC40 shows that if you bring something compelling to the party, it doesn’t matter how late you are.
      Disclaimer: Volvo Provided the XC40, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2019
      Make: Volvo
      Model: XC40
      Trim: T5 R-Design
      Engine: 2.0L Turbocharged DOHC Four-Cylinder
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, All-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 248 @ 5,500
      Torque @ RPM: 258 @ 1,800
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 23/31/26
      Curb Weight: 3,713 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Ghent, Belgium
      Base Price: $35,700
      As Tested Price: $46,385 (Includes $995.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      R-Design Features - $2,500.00
      Laminated Panoramic Sunroof - $1,200.00
      Vision Package - $1,100.00
      Advanced Package - $995.00
      Premium Package - $900.00
      20" 5-Double Spoke Matte Black Alloy Wheels - $800.00
      Harman Kardon Audio System - $800.00
      Heated Front Seats & Steering Wheel - $750.00
      Metallic Paint - $645.00
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The X2 is BMW’s entry into the compact crossover vehicle segment. It’s based on the X1, but with a lower roofline and more car-like characteristics. While the base X2 28i comes with a 228 horsepower 2.0-liter engine with either front or all-wheel drive, I got my hands on one with the M badge at a meeting of the Mid-West Automotive Media Association at the Autobahn Country Club in Joliet Illinois.
      The M badge brings a default of BMW xDrive and increases engine horsepower to 302 and the torque to 332 lb.-ft.  BWM claims a 0-60 time of 4.7 seconds and 29 mpg. With that much power coming from a 2-liter engine, there was bound to be a bit of turbo lag and while rolling the small BMW minimizes the lag well. However, from a dead stop, there is a disturbing amount of lag that would scare me if I needed to pull out into fast traffic. Sprints from zero require planning.  When already at speed, the 8-speed automatic is quick to downshift and the engine is willing to rev. Putting the X2 M35i into sport mode does make the engine more lively.
      The suspension setup is stiff and you’ll feel all of the road imperfections except on the most glass-smooth of pavement.  That is the tradeoff for having very nimble handling.  It is rather fun to push this small front driver into the corners. My tester came with 20-inch wheels rather than the standard 19-inchers.
      This is not one of those cars that is bigger on the inside than it is on the outside. The interior is definitely snug and I wouldn’t recommend the driver’s seat to anyone much larger than my 5’10” frame. Because of the lower roof, headroom suffers, especially in the rear. Cargo room is small, but if you’re in the market for a car this size, it is to be expected.
      Still, in spite of its lack of size, the X2 is a comfortable place to sit with bold leather seats in Magma Red. The controls are well placed, though with a large number of buttons. BMW’s iDrive is here too, which always takes some getting used to.  Android Auto is not an option and BMW offers Apple CarPlay as a subscription service.  This is one thing I can’t get my head around as both are offered for free on much less expensive vehicles.
      Because of the smaller dimensions, rearward vision isn’t great and there are a few blind spots that can make things tricky.
      The BMW X2 competes with the likes of the Volvo XC40, Audi Q3, Range Rover Evoque, Cadillac XT4, and the Mercedes-Benz GLA.  All of those, save the GLA, feel roomier inside, making the X2 a more ideal fit for someone of diminutive size. However, the M35i can out power all of them except the GLA AMG 45.
      The as-tested price of my X2 M35i is estimated at $50,400 MSRP. Whether you can stomach $50k for a compact crossover with 302 horsepower is up to you.

      View full article
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...