Jump to content

Recommended Posts

EPA - Fuels New Standard - Premium?

Current administration has been doing everything they can to gut the EPA even though Auto companies have stated just push out the MPG standard till 2030 or so giving us time to delivery the results. Yet with that, the auto industry is trying to get onboard with Europe to a single standard. In Europe, 95 RON is their baseline fuel standard. This is equal to our 91 octane and while we have a 40 to 50 cent premium standard for 91 octane fuel, this only makes up 11% of the gas produced in the US. Making 91 the new base standard would increase gas creation resulting in lower prices for that gas and cleaner running engines along with a 3-4% increase in fuel economy for new Auto's.

The story does say that you would not see a drop right away overnight but over a couple of years in the price of premium.

This brings up some interesting questions:

What about the cost hit to the lower income parts of society? Could they handle seeing a hit to buy gas as automakers stop producing auto's that run on regular or mid grade?

Could they just drop Mid grade and like Costco, offer only regular or premium at the same price to help transition people to Premium autos everywhere?

What else could be done to help with a change to a superior fuel?

The Drive Story

Share this post


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

and cleaner running engines along with a 3-4% increase in fuel economy for new Auto's.

Why would they be cleaner? 

Also, it seems like a wash because the fuel will cost more to get better fuel economy.. they should just make a standard octane for everything.

I feel like they were saying with economies of scale with 91 octane that the price would come down some.. okay so I'm assuming it would be priced like mid grade is now..  seems fair enough. So we'll pay $0.15-0.20/gallon more and get up to 11% gains in economy? I'm not seeing the benefit to any party other than the engineers themselves getting to play around more. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I did a little math for my car and over the course of the 15,587 miles I've driven if I got 11% better fuel economy and fuel cost me $0.20/gallon more I would have saved exactly $26.93.

$26.93

Edited by ccap41
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Why would they be cleaner? 

Also, it seems like a wash because the fuel will cost more to get better fuel economy.. they should just make a standard octane for everything.

I feel like they were saying with economies of scale with 91 octane that the price would come down some.. okay so I'm assuming it would be priced like mid grade is now..  seems fair enough. So we'll pay $0.15-0.20/gallon more and get up to 11% gains in economy? I'm not seeing the benefit to any party other than the engineers themselves getting to play around more. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I did a little math for my car and over the course of the 15,587 miles I've driven if I got 11% better fuel economy and fuel cost me $0.20/gallon more I would have saved exactly $26.93.

$26.93

I also thought it was very little gain for the required premium. Yet I also see the business case for auto companies building global auto's with a single powertrain and not dealing with various octanes. A single grade gas would be best.

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
      The EPA has officially released its assessment of the 2020 Jeep Wrangler EcoDiesel. The EcoDiesel is only available as a 4-door with an 8-speed automatic and in that configuration, the EcoDiesel manages to get 29 mpg highway, 22 mpg city, and 25 combined. That is slightly better than a 4x4 Ram 1500 with the same powertrain. The next closest model in terms of fuel efficiency is the 2-door, 4-cylinder, manual transmission, rear-wheel drive Wrangler at 24 highway mpg, 22 city mpg, and 23 combined. 
      The diesel engine is a $4,000 option though so you may not ultimately save money. Instead, Jeep believes the EcoDiesel option is best suited for those who need the gobs of torque generated by the V6 diesel when going off-road. With 260 horsepower and 442 lb.-ft of torque, the Wrangler EcoDiesel has torque in spades. To the dismay of many, the Ecodiesel does come standard with electronic stop/start.
      If diesel isn't your thing, there is the 2.0T 4-cylinder which produces 270 horsepower and 295 lb.-ft of torque or the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 which produces 285 horsepower and 260 lb.-ft of torque.  Both engines also come with stop/start or can be upgraded to the eTorque system that smooths out the torque band and either engine is available with a manual transmission or 8-speed automatic.
       

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The EPA has officially released its assessment of the 2020 Jeep Wrangler EcoDiesel. The EcoDiesel is only available as a 4-door with an 8-speed automatic and in that configuration, the EcoDiesel manages to get 29 mpg highway, 22 mpg city, and 25 combined. That is slightly better than a 4x4 Ram 1500 with the same powertrain. The next closest model in terms of fuel efficiency is the 2-door, 4-cylinder, manual transmission, rear-wheel drive Wrangler at 24 highway mpg, 22 city mpg, and 23 combined. 
      The diesel engine is a $4,000 option though so you may not ultimately save money. Instead, Jeep believes the EcoDiesel option is best suited for those who need the gobs of torque generated by the V6 diesel when going off-road. With 260 horsepower and 442 lb.-ft of torque, the Wrangler EcoDiesel has torque in spades. To the dismay of many, the Ecodiesel does come standard with electronic stop/start.
      If diesel isn't your thing, there is the 2.0T 4-cylinder which produces 270 horsepower and 295 lb.-ft of torque or the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 which produces 285 horsepower and 260 lb.-ft of torque.  Both engines also come with stop/start or can be upgraded to the eTorque system that smooths out the torque band and either engine is available with a manual transmission or 8-speed automatic.
       
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The Ford Explorer hybrid got its EPA ratings finally. They're an improvement over the base 2.3 liter 4-cylinder delivering 27 city, 29 highway, 28 combined for the most efficient RWD model. That is an improvement of 6 mpg for city and 4 mpg combined. The AWD model comes in a bit lower at 23 city, 26 highway, and 25 combined. Unlike the Lincoln Aviator GT, the Ford Explorer Hybrid is not a plug-in model. 
      Powered by a 3.3 liter V6 plus the electrified drive train, the Explorer hybrid has a lot more power than the 4-cylinder with 318 horsepower and 322 lb-ft of torque. It comes with the same 10-speed automatic that all Explorers come with. Compared to the 2.3 liter turbo with 300 hp and 310 lb-ft of torque, we expect the Hybrid to feel faster and more refined due to the extra torque at the low end from the electric motor. 
      The Explorer Hybrid has more power and torque than its only direct competition, the Toyota Highlander Hybrid.  The Highlander does slightly better in fuel economy, but comes up 1,500 lbs short in towing capacity, though the next generation Highland Hybrid is supposed to get 34 mpg in front-wheel drive form.
      The Explorer Hybrid is available as a Limited trim model and starts at $51,780 after delivery charge, a $3,555 increase over an equivalent Limited trim. 
       

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The Ford Explorer hybrid got its EPA ratings finally. They're an improvement over the base 2.3 liter 4-cylinder delivering 27 city, 29 highway, 28 combined for the most efficient RWD model. That is an improvement of 6 mpg for city and 4 mpg combined. The AWD model comes in a bit lower at 23 city, 26 highway, and 25 combined. Unlike the Lincoln Aviator GT, the Ford Explorer Hybrid is not a plug-in model. 
      Powered by a 3.3 liter V6 plus the electrified drive train, the Explorer hybrid has a lot more power than the 4-cylinder with 318 horsepower and 322 lb-ft of torque. It comes with the same 10-speed automatic that all Explorers come with. Compared to the 2.3 liter turbo with 300 hp and 310 lb-ft of torque, we expect the Hybrid to feel faster and more refined due to the extra torque at the low end from the electric motor. 
      The Explorer Hybrid has more power and torque than its only direct competition, the Toyota Highlander Hybrid.  The Highlander does slightly better in fuel economy, but comes up 1,500 lbs short in towing capacity, though the next generation Highland Hybrid is supposed to get 34 mpg in front-wheel drive form.
      The Explorer Hybrid is available as a Limited trim model and starts at $51,780 after delivery charge, a $3,555 increase over an equivalent Limited trim. 
       
    • By dfelt
      The Trump Administration and the EPA officials have scrapped all further talks with California and canceled the $929 million in federal funds for a California high-speed rail project.
      California's Governor has responded that this is in response to California leading a 16 state coalition challenge to President Trump's national emergency to take funds from the defense department and apply it to building a wall from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean.
      California has already filed suit to block the Trump administration proposal to roll back federal fuel economy targets for 2022-2025.
      CARB Chair Mary Nichols is on record that they are willing to work with the auto industry in giving more flexibility to comply with the greenhouse gas limits. This came as the White house administration instructed the EPA to break off talks before Christmas and have not responded to any suggested areas of compromise by California and the 19 states they are representing nor the auto industry suggestions for compromise.
      While FCA declined to comment, GM and the Alliance for Automobile Manufacturers did not respond to a request for comment. Ford has stated they are very disappointed in the failure of continued talks. Joe Hinrichs, Ford's president of global operations said in a statement: "The auto industry needs regulatory certainty, not protracted litigation."
      The auto industry is on record as opposing freezing the emissions / fuel efficiency standards to 2020 levels but also want relief from the roughly 5 percent annual carbon reduction targets for all vehicle classes fuel efficiency.
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...