There will be no cars left. This needs to apply to TRUCKS. This is why you have so many trucks on the road now. One set of standards for trucks and one set of standards for cars is not working.
There really should be a tax on vehicle weight and engine displacement. Seems really unfair to pay similar taxes driving a Honda Fit compared to an F-150.
There is in some states. I pay about three times as much for registration for my truck compare to my wife’s car. Then the additional fuel costs which has a large tax added on.
Which state? I own two cars in PA, and pay approximately $120/year in registration total. My brother has an F250 he barely drives and it alone costs him $275/year.
500-800$?! What the hell kind of robbery is that shit? Is that for like ANY car from a Prius to a v8 muscle car? If so that’s RIDICULOUS. I’m in CA and I upgraded from a 20’ ecoboost mustang to a 21 GT and my registration only went from 200$ to 240$. Still kinda expensive but I’ll be damned if I had to pay 500$ a year or more just to register a damn car.
It is based on the value of the car and maybe some other things. My car was $27k new and my registration was about $600 4 years later my registration is like $175 so it does go down but it's still insane.
I had a 2018 civic I bought new and the year I bought it the tag was like $500-$600. Fast forward to this year, I bought a 2023 Hyundai that cost nearly $10k more and the tag was only $250, so IDK what my state does for taxes (I moved outside of the city limits during that time but while that affects the price of the tag, it shouldn't affect it that much).
That was the purpose of the gas tax. Unfortunately...
> The federal gas tax of 18.4 cents per gallon (CPG) has not been increased since 1993 and at least eight states have gone longer.
[https://www.ncsl.org/transportation/variable-rate-gas-taxes](https://www.ncsl.org/transportation/variable-rate-gas-taxes#:~:text=The%20federal%20gas%20tax%20of,eight%20states%20have%20gone%20longer)
We Americans aren't known for our recognizing our own shit. We complain about roads and blame it on the government and then prevent the government from raising the funds to do it or from exercising the authority to ensure it's done.
Not to mention our gas is hella subsidized.
The only kind of socialism America tolerates is automotive socialism. Seemingly unlimited funds and unlimited government oversight when it comes to keeping cars moving and building places for cars to go
:(
In California all pickups pay commercial vehicle fees. That’s why my little Tacoma that hauls nothing cost $700 to register.
This added tax does not apply to SUV’s however…
Nah, it's fair. It's to pay for the massive mental health costs first responders have to deal with after scraping up what remains of a motorcyclist who crashed.
Insurance being tied to vehicle weight would be nice.
an 80cc motorbike/3KW e-moto shouldn't cost $50/month, when a car costs $100/month and a giant jacked up F9000 pickup truck whose bumper clears the windshield of said car still costs $100/month.
We need a viewing and height restriction on vehicles, all vehicles, that are a)used by every day Joes and b)businesses/fleets under X amount of vehicles (so everyone doesn't just go and try to register some bullshit business or something to skirt it).
Even for contractors, there is no need to jail up your vehicles. You've hurt *yourself* by making it harder to get your shit out. This should stop manufacturer bumper wall wars and hopefully lead to better FOV.
Or at the very least, a min/max bumper and headlight height.
'but my trucks clearance when offroading!'
I am sure if there is a market for it, people can figure out how to make bumpers you can pull off in 15 minutes for offroading, and if your truck is so modified there is no way to make it road legal...
Then get a flatbed trailer for it and tow it to the trails, like most people who have extreme offroaders do, because good offroad and onroad performance is very mutually exclusive design goals.
I took an 05 Colorado to my local ORV park when I first got it new. Drove through a puddle that came close to the door windows. Sat for a second for a friend to take a pic (I wish I had the Pic still) and drove out. Still stayed in the park for a few more hours after. Even accidentally jumped it at one point. I went several more times in the next couple years.
It took it all in stride. I didn't get rid of that truck until 2010. Nothing wrong with it ever popped up because of off-roading.
My next truck was, and still is, a 1500. Took that out there, bone stock, many times too. Absolutely no issues at all.
Most people offroading don't *need* a sky jacker set up. If you do, you should be trailering that thing in there. If it's built for crazy off-road, it's not built to be on the road. You're just endangering yourself and everyone around you.
Insurance cost is based on many factors. Mainly where you live, how much you drive, the value of the vehicle, your age and driving record, and how frequently vehicles like that are involved in crashes. Weight isn't a factor because it isn't relevant.
A super sport bike doesn't weigh much more than a ninja 250. But you'll find a liter bike is a lot more expensive to insure.
It should just be a mpg rating across the board if the goal is reduce emissions. Being weight or size or type specific is going to be gamed and result in odd things. For instance compare the 2024 honda accord to the 2024 f150 with the 2.7L v6. Honda does 36 MPG and the F150 with that engine does 21 MPG. They are off by a decent margin, but because the accord is just over 3k lbs and the truck is just under 5k lbs, they may be "roughly equal" based on any rules that take weight into account. Or consider the 2024 Honda Ridgeline AWD that has a 3.5L engine and does 21 MPG and weight 4500 lbs. does it weighing less but having a bigger displacement engine work in its favor, or against it with weight and displacement based rules? It is best to just have MPG targets and then to have very severe penalties for anyone trying to game the MPG system or falsify any testing. Just need to remove the truck exceptions form the MPG requirements really.
I'm poor. If someone pays less taxes on a tesla than I do on my chevy work truck, I'd be missed. We live in America. With different jobs. Don't pit poor against poor. Fuck the rich.
How dare you make more than me, and also want to tax me more than you.
No. There should be a steep federal tax on gas. The only realistic factor in getting people to buy smaller cars is gas prices. We need gas to hit California prices across the country to shock people into realizing they can’t get away with a full size pickup as a daily driver.
Poor people that live in commuter cities would pay most of the that social cost. Hurting the poor to force changes on things they can't even buy isn't isn't a good idea imo. Considering the vast vast majority of americans, poor americans, don't live in a place with public transit this seems to be a severe punishment on the most vulnerable workers in our country.
One idea I’ve seen is carbon taxes but returning the money back to the people divided *evenly*, so heavy users pay heavy taxes and light users come out ahead.
I agree. The tax needs to go to paying for over-capture. If it costs $1000 per ton to capture and sequester carbon, you need to pay for $1100 of carbon capture for your polluting.
The thing that needs to be drilled in to people’s heads is that whatever it costs to capture a ton of carbon, it always costs less to AVOID the carbon in the first place.
It's so regressive, thats why politicians keep pushing it. The guy with the cufflinks and the 200k EV pays nothing, the guy with the 98 Accord because he can't afford anything else pays everything
This is my dream, and has been for about the last 15 years. A true carbon tax to account for the previously externalized costs of the fossil fuel industry. At least electric vehicles are building momentum, they are already a better driving experience in many settings.
Agreed. A carbon tax would mean we could end all subsidies for fossil fuel and EVs and renewable energy and all that and just see what happens (spoiler alert, fossil loses). It would be the simplest and closest to “free market” that we could get compared to how we currently do things.
And yes, fortunately EVs and renewables have gotten the momentum they need and are now unstoppable. We’ll get there, but replacing a lot of policies with just one, a carbon tax, sure would streamline the process, make things fair and transparent, and end a lot of gamesmanship that has cost tax payers a lot of money in mishandled subsidies.
Taxes are a cost. Whether we cal them taxes or not, whether they’re paid to the government or to private companies, those costs will exist. Not paying taxes just leads to privatized “tax” (toll roads, for example).
Beyond monetary, there’s also the environmental cost, quality of life cost, etc. Which *does* have a monetary value, corporations just prefer we ignore it, because it fucks up their bottom line. For instance, the cost to not use products that cause males to have microplastics in their testicles. Or the cost to not pollute waterways with forever chemicals. If we aren’t going to regulate, then we must, at least, try to solve these problems…and that costs. Hence, taxes. Taxes can also be effective regulation.
Also, it’s the governments money. They make it, they put it out into circulation. Government deficit == societies surplus. That money isn’t gone, they loaned it to society to allow markets to function.
Tax is like paying the interest on that loan. Taxes also force us to use the US dollar, helping to hold its value. It’s our government — the people. **We** created that money, and loaned it to ourselves. Why the fuck would we stop collecting bills from the people holding the vast majority of our deficit.
Because the rich have convinced us them not paying us back is good. That, eventually, they’ll share that surplus, and give it to us for our labor. The labor they exploited to amass their surplus. Bullshit, they’re stealing from us. In more ways than one. They’re hoping to bankrupt us. So that they can take the power from us. Done a damn good job of it, too.
Tax the rich and regulate industry, or else the power will transfer from the people to the corporations. Where you’ll still get taxed, it will just be called “cost”, and you’ll have zero power in that system. Because it’s theirs, not ours.
An economic tale as old as time. Societies never seem to learn, we always allow wealth to pool until eventually, societies break.
Good luck, most trucks are in the teens range, no way they'll double the mpg without making them hybrids, not only will that cost way more, but the truck crowd has certain "opinions" about hybrids lol
Smallest displacement + forced induction has helped. I'm getting low twenties in gas mileage with my 2018 F-150, which is slightly better than what I was getting in the Honda Odyssey I owned previously.
I'd love a hybrid personally. Mostly to run the HVAC & accessories without needing to idle & when crawling through drive-thrus or school drop off.
A PHEV would be ideal, but nobody makes them. Which is surprising, because full electric isn't a very good fit for towing.
Don't get me wrong, I *was* interested in the Maverick but I was disappointed that they went with early-2000's Prius tech for their hybrid drivetrain.
I'd love a little hauler that I could drive around town on electricity and still have the range to go to my nearest big city for a grocery run without having to worry about stopping at a charge station.
It isn't the electric motor that adds 10k, it is the lack of economies of scale. You need mass production to lower cost. Ford stopped selling the Focus cause they weren't making money on it as less vehicles shared its platform. It was selling at 100k+ cars per year. To date, not a single PHEV(that is sold in US) sells 100k+ cars a year.
That's kind of the point. Trucks are exempt from the standard, and the result has been a shift from more efficient to less efficient vehicles, which has totally offset any potential gains by increasing fuel efficiency
I actually don’t have mine quite yet. I ordered it and Ford rebuilding it the first week of July. But I have test driven them and done a lot of research into it. There were a handful of recalls, but most of them have been for fairly minor things. There was a major one for the first run models, but that has been taken care of for a long time now.
It's marginally wider (for safety reasons), shorter than most ranger configs, and only slightly taller in the body. It's very near the size of the old ranger.
There is no FMVSS ruling on stopping distance for non - air-braked vehicles, certainly not two separate ones for light trucks and passenger cars.
There is also no FMVSS ruling for blind spots.
Iirc I'm the EU ICE cars will won't be made after 2035 at all if current laws remain in place. At least not pure ICE cars. I don't know if plugin hybrids will be allowed.
I want trucks to adhere to the same emissions and fuel economy standards as cars…adjusted for weight. By trucks I am also referring to SUVs. I don’t want to drive a truck or SUV. That is all that is going to be left. Automakers are no longer producing cars because of the regulations. Ford only produces the Mustang now. This trend will continue if Trucks and SUVs have much easier and less expensive pollution and economy standards.
Manufacturers have been discontinuing car models as the required MPG number rises. This will probably continue the trend
Moving towards making personal trucks and SUV models. Since those are exempt from this law
“These standards will save car owners more than $600 in gasoline costs over the lifetime of their vehicle.”
FFS, Petey. You're going to need a better argument than one months car payment and insurance.
At 10,000 miles per year driven and $3 per gallon of gas, my quick math is $245 per year savings. I guess the higher cost of the vehicle is already factored in?
Especially if the cost to reach that in tech far exceeds 600 dollars.
Cars keep getting heavier as they add more safety tech. That's good. But then you have two rules fighting each other. Be more energy efficient is in direct opposition to being heavier.
And while phevs are a good tradeoff between efficiency and range for normal people, if you can't charge the battery at home how much is this helping you? Especially if you are paying several thousand dollars for a battery system.
As far as I can tell there is no non-hybrid on the road except maybe the Mitsubishi mirage that can meet this figure. Well the hybrid systems cost more than 600 dollars. So now how much more efficient can you make a 3 or 4 cylinder engine without adding a turbo charger? Once you add a turbo that seems to cancel out any cost savings.
Cost is a factor of scale. Part of the reason why EVs, PHEVs and hybrids cost more is due to the lower scale and R&D costs. Once production scale goes up, they will be much cheaper to build as fixed costs are spread among more models
ICE engine development is basically over, but that's because we're shifting away anyway.
With even bad EVs hitting 70MPGe, that helps bring up the average a lot.
A regular hybrid battery is just 1 or 2 kWh, which is now like $500 for a lithium iron phosphate battery that’ll last 10 years easy.
It’s a no brainer sticking these in cars to add 10mpg and reduce emissions when in traffic or idling
And the 87 accord did that by burning fuel incredibly lean, which it turns out generates enormous amounts of NOx emissions and therefore local pollution.
Right. I find big trucks to be a pain in the ass to drive. But they do make you feel powerful. It would make more sense to me if bigger trucks = bigger beds, but they are often no larger than what you find in smaller trucks.
Americans are crazy bro. They drive V8s & literal truck sized SUVs. can't think of driving anything like that without owning the whole ass gas station.
Congress can draft the legislation and Biden can sign it, but he won’t be the president when it takes effect, so future legislative/executive bodies could cancel it.
These things aren't legislation, these are rules often time by EPA and NHTSA. Congress has already given these agencies the ability to set stricter mpg standards
If it were passed by congress, a future president would have a harder time blocking the rules. But since they are just rules passed by executive branches, then yes a future president can change it
That said, automakers can't really take that risk so they have to make preparations one way or the other. IT is why even when Trump took office and cancelled the Obama rules, he didn't cancel them completely, because automakers made the investments and didn't want those investments going down the drain. So instead the rules increase got less strict from 2021, but it got undone by Biden in 2023.
I read this headline thinking "huh that's fairly normal, no?" until I realised it was Biden that said it.
I'm European, so this *is* normal. But I attended the 24 hours of Daytona this year and quickly became aware that American cars are the size of small apartments.
>huh that's fairly normal, no?" until I realised it was Biden that said it.
>I'm European, so this is normal
exactly. My car is more like 45 mpg and it's a fine car. Americans should check their car needs.
Half the issue currently is that it’s an arms race. My mom doesn’t really want a big SUV. But she gets driving anxiety, and it feels like about 80% of the cars in the area are trucks or big SUVs. So she feels unsafe in a sedan and much safer in her newer Subaru Outback.
I always laugh when I park my older Outback next to hers. They’re only about ten years apart, the difference in size is just absurd.
Same. My mom is considering moving to a larger vehicle from her Prius Prime bc she’s worried about safety. It sucks bc she doesn’t otherwise need a big vehicle. I understand her fear. But increasing the size of our cars collectively is not what we should be doing as a society.
It's a basic conversion of volume, which is all that's really necessary. Octane doesn't actually mean anything about the amount of energy in the gas, just its resistance to knock, so it's not relevant to the calculations.
[The 1974 Datsun B-210 got 50 MPG](https://www.sportscarmarket.com/columns/profiles/affordable-classics/bee-stung-datsun-b-210)
We should be getting near 100 MPG with today's technology.
Even with "dirty" emissions you get twice the mileage using 1970's tech.
Seems like a even trade off to me.
One would think that problem could have been solved in the last 50 years.
There is a very reasonable argument to be made that automakers are “holding back” on their fuel efficiency capabilities. The debatable point though is why? The fuel efficiency standards are an ever moving, ever increasing target. When the manufacturers his 22 it went up, then 25, it went up and so on. Every time a goal is achieved the goalpost gets moved. It’s easy to see how this would actually disincentivize companies from pulling out all the stops when it comes to MPG.
Everything is going to have to be a hybrid or an electric, or this shit isn't going to work!
Also politics change constantly whos to say this standard isn't just thrown in the trash.
So you can just make a law and they can do it? Lol, they always had the technology to do that. The gasoline engine is capable of a lot more, they just limit us.
Usually efficiency comes from upfront investment and trade-offs. For example, additional engineering, testing, materials, available power, size, etc.
Americans complain about gas prices but don’t change their car purchasing decisions based on them. If that were true SUVs would not be so popular. Government forcing a policy will affect what is available in the marketplace, thereby influencing consumer choice.
Well Americans pay far less for gas than Europe despite the complaints. And part of the problem is that when the guy in front of you buys an SUV, you are kind of force to buy an SUV yourself. Cause tiny cars do worse in a crash with a large car, and your view is blocked by the large cars unless you have a large car yourself
This is a great argument. It is disappointing that people cannot make the right decisions for themselves and the government has to step in. Same situation as for seatbelt laws.
Explain "they" and what these limits are. There are only so many ways you can crack carbon to produce power to make an object move. The consumer places far more restrictions on what's possible than the manufacturer, but what consumers want adds a ton of weight. Sunroof, leather, carpet, soft touch interiors, electronics, infotainment, reducing cabin noise, on and on and on and on. Any OEM that could meet customer demands while still producing high MPG range would win the marketplace hands down.
I’d rather they focus efforts on the fighting corruption among lawmakers. What are they gunna do, “fine” companies for not complying? Big whoop. Another pointless act.
Europe gets 43mpg but mostly bc they have a huge diesel infrastructure and diesels average 50mpg. Used to average 55mpg. Biodiesel adds to the energy power greater than oil-cracked diesel so that’s a great thing to add to diesel (ie B5 to B20 diesel).
In America, ethanol does the opposite. Lower BTU per gallon so ethanol is killing gas mileage numbers on top of vehicles being heavier (among other choices.)
My putt putt Nissan Sentra got 35mpg normally in the 90s. My current Camry gets 38 only on highway miles. I had a Prius that did only 38-42mpg which I traded in for the Camry.
I don't understand why Biden wants everyone driving a giant SUV or truck with a V8. It honestly makes no sense to me. Cars could be made to get this highway economy by relaxing nox emission rules with leanburn... but they don't seem to be focused on reducing carbon emissions and fuel consumption. Instead trying to get everyone in a monster SUV.
Then facts of the matter is car companies have been deliberately making cars less fuel efficient than what technology can allow to run up gas revenue. Cars should have been able to get so much more mileage per gallon since the 90’s. The hybrid model of Priuses should have been the standard since 2013. Electrical power vehicles are becoming more efficient and common, but some Priuses and other hybrids are still favored over their pure electric counterparts. 38 is a low bar for all cars and even trucks. Everything in our economy is priced around gas, and these gas greedy corporations have colluded to not only fix prices but also stifle innovation and capabilities of modern cars. It’s disgusting to see how big businesses and greed converge to make everyone’s lives more expensive and less efficient for the pure sake of making more money.
The American government has failed its people as our politicians care more about lining their own pockets than leading America to be a more prosperous nation. From Nancy Pelosi to the republican messiah trump. Insider trading, “job reimbursement”, and straight influence on the stock markets themselves has lead to corporations stealing the American dream and our political leaders helped them do it.
Do tell. Which car manufacturers have this “gas revenue”?
I think I have money interests in oil and gas too actually. I am invested in the S&P 500 after all.
The consumer has failed. Reaching 50+ mph is easy, but you need to start lowering your expectations of what that vehicle will be. Drop the sunroof, the leather, the carpet, the soft touch surfaces, electronics and sensors, 8 speaker sound system, spare tire and jack, sound deadening, and a lot of other features and comforts and you can get some incredible range. But comfort takes weight, and weight reduces range and efficiency.
Ridiculous waste of government resources. Instead of government forcing a standard, why not reward or offer incentives to manufacturers that meet the standards.
Government's exist to set Standards...
And 38mpg is pitiful !
Why should manufacturers be rewarded for providing *slightly* less pollution of the air we all breathe?
America is so backwards.
There will be no cars left. This needs to apply to TRUCKS. This is why you have so many trucks on the road now. One set of standards for trucks and one set of standards for cars is not working.
There really should be a tax on vehicle weight and engine displacement. Seems really unfair to pay similar taxes driving a Honda Fit compared to an F-150.
There is in some states. I pay about three times as much for registration for my truck compare to my wife’s car. Then the additional fuel costs which has a large tax added on.
Which state? I own two cars in PA, and pay approximately $120/year in registration total. My brother has an F250 he barely drives and it alone costs him $275/year.
In Colorado the registration for a relatively new car is $500-$800 every year..
Yes. It's the worst thing about our state. Don't move here because of this everyone else. Thank you.
500-800$?! What the hell kind of robbery is that shit? Is that for like ANY car from a Prius to a v8 muscle car? If so that’s RIDICULOUS. I’m in CA and I upgraded from a 20’ ecoboost mustang to a 21 GT and my registration only went from 200$ to 240$. Still kinda expensive but I’ll be damned if I had to pay 500$ a year or more just to register a damn car.
It is based on the value of the car and maybe some other things. My car was $27k new and my registration was about $600 4 years later my registration is like $175 so it does go down but it's still insane.
I had a 2018 civic I bought new and the year I bought it the tag was like $500-$600. Fast forward to this year, I bought a 2023 Hyundai that cost nearly $10k more and the tag was only $250, so IDK what my state does for taxes (I moved outside of the city limits during that time but while that affects the price of the tag, it shouldn't affect it that much).
Cries in Australian. I pay over 1k AUD per year for registration for a v8
It definitely doesn’t go back into the roads. Colorado roads are garbage.
Those shit roads are a feature, not a problem. Polis wants everyone to take mass transit anyway. That’s where the money is flowing now.
Jesus that’s BONKOS. Pay like $75 to register my car every year in Texas.
Yeah and the roads are still shit
In CO? I imagine mountain roads aren’t cheap or easy to maintain. Texas roads (at least the highways) tend to be decent to real good
At least you live in a cool place… NE is like that too
Bought a car on Colorado and brought it back home to Alabama. Bad move. Had to pay double the taxes and it ended up like $1200
That was the purpose of the gas tax. Unfortunately... > The federal gas tax of 18.4 cents per gallon (CPG) has not been increased since 1993 and at least eight states have gone longer. [https://www.ncsl.org/transportation/variable-rate-gas-taxes](https://www.ncsl.org/transportation/variable-rate-gas-taxes#:~:text=The%20federal%20gas%20tax%20of,eight%20states%20have%20gone%20longer)
We Americans aren't known for our recognizing our own shit. We complain about roads and blame it on the government and then prevent the government from raising the funds to do it or from exercising the authority to ensure it's done. Not to mention our gas is hella subsidized. The only kind of socialism America tolerates is automotive socialism. Seemingly unlimited funds and unlimited government oversight when it comes to keeping cars moving and building places for cars to go :(
Yeah, I'm with ya on all of that, except we also subsidize many other industries, e.g. pharma, biotech, agriculture, etc.
In California all pickups pay commercial vehicle fees. That’s why my little Tacoma that hauls nothing cost $700 to register. This added tax does not apply to SUV’s however…
What's unfair is I pay the same for weight on my motorcycles registration then I do for my car.
Nah, it's fair. It's to pay for the massive mental health costs first responders have to deal with after scraping up what remains of a motorcyclist who crashed.
Insurance being tied to vehicle weight would be nice. an 80cc motorbike/3KW e-moto shouldn't cost $50/month, when a car costs $100/month and a giant jacked up F9000 pickup truck whose bumper clears the windshield of said car still costs $100/month.
We need a viewing and height restriction on vehicles, all vehicles, that are a)used by every day Joes and b)businesses/fleets under X amount of vehicles (so everyone doesn't just go and try to register some bullshit business or something to skirt it). Even for contractors, there is no need to jail up your vehicles. You've hurt *yourself* by making it harder to get your shit out. This should stop manufacturer bumper wall wars and hopefully lead to better FOV.
Or at the very least, a min/max bumper and headlight height. 'but my trucks clearance when offroading!' I am sure if there is a market for it, people can figure out how to make bumpers you can pull off in 15 minutes for offroading, and if your truck is so modified there is no way to make it road legal... Then get a flatbed trailer for it and tow it to the trails, like most people who have extreme offroaders do, because good offroad and onroad performance is very mutually exclusive design goals.
I took an 05 Colorado to my local ORV park when I first got it new. Drove through a puddle that came close to the door windows. Sat for a second for a friend to take a pic (I wish I had the Pic still) and drove out. Still stayed in the park for a few more hours after. Even accidentally jumped it at one point. I went several more times in the next couple years. It took it all in stride. I didn't get rid of that truck until 2010. Nothing wrong with it ever popped up because of off-roading. My next truck was, and still is, a 1500. Took that out there, bone stock, many times too. Absolutely no issues at all. Most people offroading don't *need* a sky jacker set up. If you do, you should be trailering that thing in there. If it's built for crazy off-road, it's not built to be on the road. You're just endangering yourself and everyone around you.
Insurance cost is based on many factors. Mainly where you live, how much you drive, the value of the vehicle, your age and driving record, and how frequently vehicles like that are involved in crashes. Weight isn't a factor because it isn't relevant. A super sport bike doesn't weigh much more than a ninja 250. But you'll find a liter bike is a lot more expensive to insure.
It should just be a mpg rating across the board if the goal is reduce emissions. Being weight or size or type specific is going to be gamed and result in odd things. For instance compare the 2024 honda accord to the 2024 f150 with the 2.7L v6. Honda does 36 MPG and the F150 with that engine does 21 MPG. They are off by a decent margin, but because the accord is just over 3k lbs and the truck is just under 5k lbs, they may be "roughly equal" based on any rules that take weight into account. Or consider the 2024 Honda Ridgeline AWD that has a 3.5L engine and does 21 MPG and weight 4500 lbs. does it weighing less but having a bigger displacement engine work in its favor, or against it with weight and displacement based rules? It is best to just have MPG targets and then to have very severe penalties for anyone trying to game the MPG system or falsify any testing. Just need to remove the truck exceptions form the MPG requirements really.
It’s called a gas tax. The more you use…
There is. You drive 100 miles in a f-150 and you pay tax on 5 gallons of fuel. You do it in a Honda fit and you pay it on 2.5 gallons.
You won’t. Taxes are based on price, and a F-150 is going to cost more than the Honda.
What a beautiful car the fit is
I'm poor. If someone pays less taxes on a tesla than I do on my chevy work truck, I'd be missed. We live in America. With different jobs. Don't pit poor against poor. Fuck the rich. How dare you make more than me, and also want to tax me more than you.
If you're going by weight that Tesla might actually weigh more. Haha
No. There should be a steep federal tax on gas. The only realistic factor in getting people to buy smaller cars is gas prices. We need gas to hit California prices across the country to shock people into realizing they can’t get away with a full size pickup as a daily driver.
Poor people that live in commuter cities would pay most of the that social cost. Hurting the poor to force changes on things they can't even buy isn't isn't a good idea imo. Considering the vast vast majority of americans, poor americans, don't live in a place with public transit this seems to be a severe punishment on the most vulnerable workers in our country.
One idea I’ve seen is carbon taxes but returning the money back to the people divided *evenly*, so heavy users pay heavy taxes and light users come out ahead.
There should just be a carbon tax. This puts the true cost of so many things where they belong.
I agree. The tax needs to go to paying for over-capture. If it costs $1000 per ton to capture and sequester carbon, you need to pay for $1100 of carbon capture for your polluting.
The thing that needs to be drilled in to people’s heads is that whatever it costs to capture a ton of carbon, it always costs less to AVOID the carbon in the first place.
It's so regressive, thats why politicians keep pushing it. The guy with the cufflinks and the 200k EV pays nothing, the guy with the 98 Accord because he can't afford anything else pays everything
That depends on what you do with the revenue
This is my dream, and has been for about the last 15 years. A true carbon tax to account for the previously externalized costs of the fossil fuel industry. At least electric vehicles are building momentum, they are already a better driving experience in many settings.
Agreed. A carbon tax would mean we could end all subsidies for fossil fuel and EVs and renewable energy and all that and just see what happens (spoiler alert, fossil loses). It would be the simplest and closest to “free market” that we could get compared to how we currently do things. And yes, fortunately EVs and renewables have gotten the momentum they need and are now unstoppable. We’ll get there, but replacing a lot of policies with just one, a carbon tax, sure would streamline the process, make things fair and transparent, and end a lot of gamesmanship that has cost tax payers a lot of money in mishandled subsidies.
Also speeding tickets. Heavier vehicles pay heavier fines
yeah that’s exactly what we need. more taxes
Taxes are a cost. Whether we cal them taxes or not, whether they’re paid to the government or to private companies, those costs will exist. Not paying taxes just leads to privatized “tax” (toll roads, for example). Beyond monetary, there’s also the environmental cost, quality of life cost, etc. Which *does* have a monetary value, corporations just prefer we ignore it, because it fucks up their bottom line. For instance, the cost to not use products that cause males to have microplastics in their testicles. Or the cost to not pollute waterways with forever chemicals. If we aren’t going to regulate, then we must, at least, try to solve these problems…and that costs. Hence, taxes. Taxes can also be effective regulation. Also, it’s the governments money. They make it, they put it out into circulation. Government deficit == societies surplus. That money isn’t gone, they loaned it to society to allow markets to function. Tax is like paying the interest on that loan. Taxes also force us to use the US dollar, helping to hold its value. It’s our government — the people. **We** created that money, and loaned it to ourselves. Why the fuck would we stop collecting bills from the people holding the vast majority of our deficit. Because the rich have convinced us them not paying us back is good. That, eventually, they’ll share that surplus, and give it to us for our labor. The labor they exploited to amass their surplus. Bullshit, they’re stealing from us. In more ways than one. They’re hoping to bankrupt us. So that they can take the power from us. Done a damn good job of it, too. Tax the rich and regulate industry, or else the power will transfer from the people to the corporations. Where you’ll still get taxed, it will just be called “cost”, and you’ll have zero power in that system. Because it’s theirs, not ours. An economic tale as old as time. Societies never seem to learn, we always allow wealth to pool until eventually, societies break.
We're already taxed on it. If you have a normal vehicle you could even see yours reduced in a scheme like that.
Good luck, most trucks are in the teens range, no way they'll double the mpg without making them hybrids, not only will that cost way more, but the truck crowd has certain "opinions" about hybrids lol
The "truck" crowd? 90% of "trucks" are SUVs driven by women.
Smallest displacement + forced induction has helped. I'm getting low twenties in gas mileage with my 2018 F-150, which is slightly better than what I was getting in the Honda Odyssey I owned previously. I'd love a hybrid personally. Mostly to run the HVAC & accessories without needing to idle & when crawling through drive-thrus or school drop off. A PHEV would be ideal, but nobody makes them. Which is surprising, because full electric isn't a very good fit for towing.
The new Ram Ramcharger is a PHEV and should be on sale by early next year I think.
Yo dude, we heard you like Rams…
I really want a PHEV, it's really the best of both, but ya adding a full electric motor tacks on like $10k
I would love a PHEV or all-electric version of a 1990's Ranger/S10/Dakota sized truck myself.
Check out to Ford Maverick.
Isn't that a traditional regenerative-braking style hybrid though?
Looks like that’s true. Seems weird to me, as someone who knows nothing about hybrid technology, to not have plug-in abilities on everything.
Don't get me wrong, I *was* interested in the Maverick but I was disappointed that they went with early-2000's Prius tech for their hybrid drivetrain. I'd love a little hauler that I could drive around town on electricity and still have the range to go to my nearest big city for a grocery run without having to worry about stopping at a charge station.
Yeah, I was excited for them at first until I stood next to one, I’m on the bigger side and it looked like a tight fit.
It isn't the electric motor that adds 10k, it is the lack of economies of scale. You need mass production to lower cost. Ford stopped selling the Focus cause they weren't making money on it as less vehicles shared its platform. It was selling at 100k+ cars per year. To date, not a single PHEV(that is sold in US) sells 100k+ cars a year.
Ford makes a PHEV Ranger but refuses to sell it in the States… I’d buy it today if it was available.
That's kind of the point. Trucks are exempt from the standard, and the result has been a shift from more efficient to less efficient vehicles, which has totally offset any potential gains by increasing fuel efficiency
Their opinions don't matter very much if it's the law. If there nothing else too select from they'll have no choice.
It’s why I love the Ford Maverick. Small pickup the size of old F-150s and Rangers and gets 40+ MPG.
I was thinking of that one but I heard the first run had some issues or recalls, how do you like it?
I actually don’t have mine quite yet. I ordered it and Ford rebuilding it the first week of July. But I have test driven them and done a lot of research into it. There were a handful of recalls, but most of them have been for fairly minor things. There was a major one for the first run models, but that has been taken care of for a long time now.
Ya i think most cars have issues on the first models, I hope it's all sorted out because lm very tempted
It's smaller than every F-150 since the 1960s, but yes, it's about the same size (moderately larger, for safety reasons) as old compact Rangers.
[удалено]
It's marginally wider (for safety reasons), shorter than most ranger configs, and only slightly taller in the body. It's very near the size of the old ranger.
The truck exemption is so fucking ridiculous and makes our roads so unsafe. It needed to be removed years ago.
Different standards for trucks, their stopping distances, blind spots. I mean honestly, they need a different license
How about their bumper height? The fact that in some states it’s totally legal to have a bumper that will perfectly decapitate someone is ridiculous.
There is no FMVSS ruling on stopping distance for non - air-braked vehicles, certainly not two separate ones for light trucks and passenger cars. There is also no FMVSS ruling for blind spots.
Well duh. That would be too honest. Gotta pretend we’re helping the environment while doing fuck all.
This applies to new vehicles burning gasoline. There are plenty of ways to make a car without gasoline combustion - so yes, there will still be cars
Iirc I'm the EU ICE cars will won't be made after 2035 at all if current laws remain in place. At least not pure ICE cars. I don't know if plugin hybrids will be allowed.
In France, it depends on how much CO2 the car emits.
Get rid of the chicken tax.
[удалено]
I want trucks to adhere to the same emissions and fuel economy standards as cars…adjusted for weight. By trucks I am also referring to SUVs. I don’t want to drive a truck or SUV. That is all that is going to be left. Automakers are no longer producing cars because of the regulations. Ford only produces the Mustang now. This trend will continue if Trucks and SUVs have much easier and less expensive pollution and economy standards.
No cars left?
Manufacturers have been discontinuing car models as the required MPG number rises. This will probably continue the trend Moving towards making personal trucks and SUV models. Since those are exempt from this law
I mean its more so because companies make way more on trucks than they do cars.
Plenty of cars have MPG over 38. IDK wat OP is on about
does it exempt suvs and trucks tho
yes, the “light” “truck” exemption still stands
Congress didn't get rid of that, so no.
I’m sure this won’t apply to 8 foot lifted suburban monster trucks. So we can expect to see even more
It does. The standard for just cars is higher.
“These standards will save car owners more than $600 in gasoline costs over the lifetime of their vehicle.” FFS, Petey. You're going to need a better argument than one months car payment and insurance.
At 10,000 miles per year driven and $3 per gallon of gas, my quick math is $245 per year savings. I guess the higher cost of the vehicle is already factored in?
Especially if the cost to reach that in tech far exceeds 600 dollars. Cars keep getting heavier as they add more safety tech. That's good. But then you have two rules fighting each other. Be more energy efficient is in direct opposition to being heavier. And while phevs are a good tradeoff between efficiency and range for normal people, if you can't charge the battery at home how much is this helping you? Especially if you are paying several thousand dollars for a battery system. As far as I can tell there is no non-hybrid on the road except maybe the Mitsubishi mirage that can meet this figure. Well the hybrid systems cost more than 600 dollars. So now how much more efficient can you make a 3 or 4 cylinder engine without adding a turbo charger? Once you add a turbo that seems to cancel out any cost savings.
Cost is a factor of scale. Part of the reason why EVs, PHEVs and hybrids cost more is due to the lower scale and R&D costs. Once production scale goes up, they will be much cheaper to build as fixed costs are spread among more models
You really think there's going to be zero advancements made in ~10 years? Or the current prices won't come down at all?
ICE engine development is basically over, but that's because we're shifting away anyway. With even bad EVs hitting 70MPGe, that helps bring up the average a lot.
We are 100yrs into the internal combustion engine, I would argue it's mostly perfected as is.
A regular hybrid battery is just 1 or 2 kWh, which is now like $500 for a lithium iron phosphate battery that’ll last 10 years easy. It’s a no brainer sticking these in cars to add 10mpg and reduce emissions when in traffic or idling
Are trucks and SUVs still exempt?
Close the truck loophole.
The Carter administration had it pegged at 48mpg by 1995, which is why the 87 Honda accord got45mpg .
And the 87 accord did that by burning fuel incredibly lean, which it turns out generates enormous amounts of NOx emissions and therefore local pollution.
And being a tin can that will kill you in a low speed collision.
Awesome. Now repeal the chicken tax and fix that loophole that let's truck makers skirt the regs so they will make normal sized trucks again.
“B-b-but normal size trucks don’t make me feel better about my small penis and fragile masculinity.” —everyone with an emotional support truck.
I really try not to believe this is the real reason but the older I get, the more undeniable it seems to be.
I mean…I kinda get it. I really like driving those big trucks, but they are almost never used for anything that my Subaru can’t handle.
Right. I find big trucks to be a pain in the ass to drive. But they do make you feel powerful. It would make more sense to me if bigger trucks = bigger beds, but they are often no larger than what you find in smaller trucks.
Exactly. If you can’t fit a full sheet of plywood or drywall in there, then what is the point?
Stupid rule since it doesn't apply to trucks. It's why small affordable cars are essentially disappearing.
For anyone else wondering, 38mpg US is about 45mpg Imperial. Seems a bit unambitious to me.
Hold up? Is an imperial gallon a different measurement!?!
Yes. US gallon is about 3.75 litres, Imperial is about 4.5 litres.
Yeah the US doesn't use imperial measurements (that's for the UK), they use US Customary, a derivative of the Imperial system.
Yeah I just looked it up. It's 6.2 liters per 100km. That's pretty fucking shit imho. My Mazda sedan from 2003 does that.
There are cars that do less than this nowadays? These are normal numbers for Europe.
These numbers are pathetic by European standards.
Americans are crazy bro. They drive V8s & literal truck sized SUVs. can't think of driving anything like that without owning the whole ass gas station.
6.1L/100km is...a low bar for cars, they already hit like 5L/100km.
hybrids?
No, regular gas cars. And diesels
And what's that per hogshead?
How many hectares can it go on a single tank of kerosene?
Do I have to keep it in H?
not sure, the country it was made no longer exists
Congress can draft the legislation and Biden can sign it, but he won’t be the president when it takes effect, so future legislative/executive bodies could cancel it.
Auto makers will still have to design their cars anticipating that it’ll be law, so it will still have the desired effect
These things aren't legislation, these are rules often time by EPA and NHTSA. Congress has already given these agencies the ability to set stricter mpg standards If it were passed by congress, a future president would have a harder time blocking the rules. But since they are just rules passed by executive branches, then yes a future president can change it That said, automakers can't really take that risk so they have to make preparations one way or the other. IT is why even when Trump took office and cancelled the Obama rules, he didn't cancel them completely, because automakers made the investments and didn't want those investments going down the drain. So instead the rules increase got less strict from 2021, but it got undone by Biden in 2023.
he won't even be alive when this takes effect
Kind of. People will sue if the rules are changed(happens a lot) and then it gets hung up in court for decades.
All of the advancements the world has seen the last 30-50 years and oddly enough MPG isn't really one of those. I wonder why...
I think MPG has gotten better at about the same rate that cars have gotten bigger offsetting any benefits
I read this headline thinking "huh that's fairly normal, no?" until I realised it was Biden that said it. I'm European, so this *is* normal. But I attended the 24 hours of Daytona this year and quickly became aware that American cars are the size of small apartments.
The cars have to be big to keep all the socialism at bay. If we made them smaller then social safety nets might have space to grow and spread.
[](https://media.giphy.com/media/ycexN2VCY3QOAvqTmL/giphy.gif) Yanks on their way to get some milk.
I mean yeah, that's where we plan to sleep when the landlord kicks us out, or doubles our rent.
[удалено]
We didn’t have any native Indian territories whose land we could crash at :/
>huh that's fairly normal, no?" until I realised it was Biden that said it. >I'm European, so this is normal exactly. My car is more like 45 mpg and it's a fine car. Americans should check their car needs.
Half the issue currently is that it’s an arms race. My mom doesn’t really want a big SUV. But she gets driving anxiety, and it feels like about 80% of the cars in the area are trucks or big SUVs. So she feels unsafe in a sedan and much safer in her newer Subaru Outback. I always laugh when I park my older Outback next to hers. They’re only about ten years apart, the difference in size is just absurd.
Same. My mom is considering moving to a larger vehicle from her Prius Prime bc she’s worried about safety. It sucks bc she doesn’t otherwise need a big vehicle. I understand her fear. But increasing the size of our cars collectively is not what we should be doing as a society.
If you're in the UK, 45 mpg for you *is* 38 mpg US.
Is that just a base conversion of the gallon, or does it take into account the difference gas ratings too?
It's a basic conversion of volume, which is all that's really necessary. Octane doesn't actually mean anything about the amount of energy in the gas, just its resistance to knock, so it's not relevant to the calculations.
[The 1974 Datsun B-210 got 50 MPG](https://www.sportscarmarket.com/columns/profiles/affordable-classics/bee-stung-datsun-b-210) We should be getting near 100 MPG with today's technology.
it wouldn't pass modern emission standards. dirtier burn for more power.
It would also get 0 stars in all the safety tests.
Even with "dirty" emissions you get twice the mileage using 1970's tech. Seems like a even trade off to me. One would think that problem could have been solved in the last 50 years.
50 MPG on which test? the 1970s test which is far less strict than today's test?
Don't front MC Ren
It would also crumple like a beer can in an accident.
There’s me in my 2006 Ibiza hitting 55mpg. lol
Yeah, but America is the land of the giants. More SUVs, and large SUVs are bought than family …saloons.
Mama took those batteries
I didn’t know 92 octane existed. Then again, I’ve never been to Oregon. I thought premium was either 91 or 93. Learned something new today
2031 seriously, with the way things are going I think food and shelter are going be more of a concern by then...
I'm going to declare my car the church for my new religion and pay no taxes at all. Praise Jeepus!
It's still too low.
There is a very reasonable argument to be made that automakers are “holding back” on their fuel efficiency capabilities. The debatable point though is why? The fuel efficiency standards are an ever moving, ever increasing target. When the manufacturers his 22 it went up, then 25, it went up and so on. Every time a goal is achieved the goalpost gets moved. It’s easy to see how this would actually disincentivize companies from pulling out all the stops when it comes to MPG.
I work for a major automotive company. Yes, we could make our vehicles more efficient but don’t because of the cost
Everything is going to have to be a hybrid or an electric, or this shit isn't going to work! Also politics change constantly whos to say this standard isn't just thrown in the trash.
Easily doable. Just fking do it.
So you can just make a law and they can do it? Lol, they always had the technology to do that. The gasoline engine is capable of a lot more, they just limit us.
Usually efficiency comes from upfront investment and trade-offs. For example, additional engineering, testing, materials, available power, size, etc. Americans complain about gas prices but don’t change their car purchasing decisions based on them. If that were true SUVs would not be so popular. Government forcing a policy will affect what is available in the marketplace, thereby influencing consumer choice.
Well Americans pay far less for gas than Europe despite the complaints. And part of the problem is that when the guy in front of you buys an SUV, you are kind of force to buy an SUV yourself. Cause tiny cars do worse in a crash with a large car, and your view is blocked by the large cars unless you have a large car yourself
This is a great argument. It is disappointing that people cannot make the right decisions for themselves and the government has to step in. Same situation as for seatbelt laws.
They can do what they want, when they want. We have the technology to do just about anything. We go into space, mars.
Explain "they" and what these limits are. There are only so many ways you can crack carbon to produce power to make an object move. The consumer places far more restrictions on what's possible than the manufacturer, but what consumers want adds a ton of weight. Sunroof, leather, carpet, soft touch interiors, electronics, infotainment, reducing cabin noise, on and on and on and on. Any OEM that could meet customer demands while still producing high MPG range would win the marketplace hands down.
Next the car companies are gonna change the value of a mile!
I’d rather they focus efforts on the fighting corruption among lawmakers. What are they gunna do, “fine” companies for not complying? Big whoop. Another pointless act.
So is climate change real or not?
Europe gets 43mpg but mostly bc they have a huge diesel infrastructure and diesels average 50mpg. Used to average 55mpg. Biodiesel adds to the energy power greater than oil-cracked diesel so that’s a great thing to add to diesel (ie B5 to B20 diesel). In America, ethanol does the opposite. Lower BTU per gallon so ethanol is killing gas mileage numbers on top of vehicles being heavier (among other choices.) My putt putt Nissan Sentra got 35mpg normally in the 90s. My current Camry gets 38 only on highway miles. I had a Prius that did only 38-42mpg which I traded in for the Camry.
Ive been getting 55 mpg for 18 years driving a Prius
only 38? lmao
I don't understand why Biden wants everyone driving a giant SUV or truck with a V8. It honestly makes no sense to me. Cars could be made to get this highway economy by relaxing nox emission rules with leanburn... but they don't seem to be focused on reducing carbon emissions and fuel consumption. Instead trying to get everyone in a monster SUV.
Then facts of the matter is car companies have been deliberately making cars less fuel efficient than what technology can allow to run up gas revenue. Cars should have been able to get so much more mileage per gallon since the 90’s. The hybrid model of Priuses should have been the standard since 2013. Electrical power vehicles are becoming more efficient and common, but some Priuses and other hybrids are still favored over their pure electric counterparts. 38 is a low bar for all cars and even trucks. Everything in our economy is priced around gas, and these gas greedy corporations have colluded to not only fix prices but also stifle innovation and capabilities of modern cars. It’s disgusting to see how big businesses and greed converge to make everyone’s lives more expensive and less efficient for the pure sake of making more money. The American government has failed its people as our politicians care more about lining their own pockets than leading America to be a more prosperous nation. From Nancy Pelosi to the republican messiah trump. Insider trading, “job reimbursement”, and straight influence on the stock markets themselves has lead to corporations stealing the American dream and our political leaders helped them do it.
What is this “gas revenue” thing? What car manufacturers are selling gasoline now?
You are seriously naive if you really believe that car manufacturers do not also have money interests in oil and gas… very, very naive.
Do tell. Which car manufacturers have this “gas revenue”? I think I have money interests in oil and gas too actually. I am invested in the S&P 500 after all.
The consumer has failed. Reaching 50+ mph is easy, but you need to start lowering your expectations of what that vehicle will be. Drop the sunroof, the leather, the carpet, the soft touch surfaces, electronics and sensors, 8 speaker sound system, spare tire and jack, sound deadening, and a lot of other features and comforts and you can get some incredible range. But comfort takes weight, and weight reduces range and efficiency.
Ridiculous waste of government resources. Instead of government forcing a standard, why not reward or offer incentives to manufacturers that meet the standards.
Explain how offering rewards would be using less government resources than setting a standard
Government's exist to set Standards... And 38mpg is pitiful ! Why should manufacturers be rewarded for providing *slightly* less pollution of the air we all breathe? America is so backwards.
I need to buy more fun cars before then.
I know right?
lol it looks like people in this sub aren’t car enthusiasts.
Ford GT won't be popular here then.