Survey: What Would You Give Up In A Car?
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 06.25.07
Matthew asks ">"why do cars use so much fuel?" and notes that "A 1980s Ford Fiesta could get 50mpg and comfortably seat 5 adults, but a Prius can’t do that nearly 30 years later." Matthew suggests that we should get rid of the gadgets and reduce weight, but some of that weight comes from safety requirements and devices and even some pollution control equipment.
Sorry How will cutting the speed limit help safety?
Why do I suspect that removing the air conditioner from gas guzzlers won't actually magically make their mileage go up to 50mpg.
Where is a "I'm willing to give up power/HP/Torque" option? Why do we need 200-300hp sedans? I get around just fine in a 53hp 4 door `86 Veg Oil diesel Jetta. It does 85mph no problem getting an actual average of 42mpg.
A 1980 Fiesta comfortably seat 5 adults? I think you need to revisit your definitions of comfortable and adult... That reminds me of the WWII-vintage VW "commercials" showing an "artist's rendering" of a family of six happily driving along in a Beetle.
The two problems facing modern fuel efficiency are weight and performance. That 1980 Fiesta probably weighed a third less than a modern Corolla of Golf. It also took twice as long to accelerate to 60 and probably had a top speed about 75% as fast as a Corolla/Golf. Of course, it had no airbags, steel beams in the doors, or air conditioning, so it also wasn't nearly as comfortable or safe in a crash...
With modern technology, we can get back a lot of the mileage through building cars that are lighter and slower, but people aren't very interested in those... Even in countries where small motors have historically been popular, the trends seem to suggest that larger/faster is better. Compare a European Passat now to the ones from 30 years ago...
Cut the fascination with power. 99.9% of all of the people out there have no need to go from 0-60 in 4.2 seconds.
Car manufacturers need to run ads that say, "Would you like to go from 0 to 60 a second faster... or have an extra $200 in your bank account each month?"
Or show all of the things that saving $200 at the gas pump would buy... then end up with "Yaris. From Toyota."
What if we like none of the options? You morons have your priorities wrong.
Repost of what I put on the other thread-
Think of all the miles driven when you get lost without the GPS. I doubt that sucks more than 1/2mpg. So, on a 200 mile trip in a 34.5mpg car you would use 5.714... gallons of gas. On a 210 mile trip (you make a wrong turn) in a 35 mpg car, you use 6 gallons. Thats 3/10s of a gallon MORE.
Can't you authors THINK before posting. Its not the GPS or heater thats killing fuel economy, its the extra steel they put in to keep you safe.
And anyone getting less than 50mpg in a prius needs to get their car looked at.
Interestingly, the Lotus Elise uses power windows because they are lighter than the hand crank mechanism. So it's not technology being inherently bad, it just has to be optimized.
Yes, cut the drag with better airflow design inside and out, and maybe drop some superfluous gadgets. I wonder how much weight the latter will save. Maybe we're better off saying only one American per car. :)
Really though, why are we still using steel? Aluminum has a lot of potential, and there's a lot of it. Easy to recycle, etc.
The HP issue is correct.
We used to be safer AND more fuel efficient - as Europe is now both safer and more fuel efficient - read wikipedia on their ECE regs v our NHTSA regs.
US safety performance since creation of NHTSA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Highway_Traffic_Safety_Administration
Bring back the old post oil-shock fuel efficient car weights and hp of our small simple cars of the 70's and 80's.
SUVs are designed to make people "FEEL" safe, while actually endangering them - and our planet.
How about halting heavy subsidization of interstate highways, and shifting some of that money to intercity and intracity rail instead? It's not as if 50mpg is all that different from 30mpg in the big picture.
This really is a no-brainer. Here in Europe 40mpg is only a REASONABLE economy figure for a car.... Many many vehicles do far more.. and what's the secret? Small efficient engines that run on diesel! and smaller lightweight cars... Not hard at all! In the UK 78 of the top 100 most frugal cars are diesel, while only one hybrid and one bio-fuel car make an appearance.
With a well-set up engine and a particulate filter, diesel can't be beaten, and if you want to, it is an easy job to convert the vehicle to run on straight vegetable oil (or better still WVO (waste vegetable oil,) from you local restaurants!) If you do that you can effectively run your car free and know that you are contributing next to nothing to global CO2 levels!
Having had an older brother with a Ford "Party", I should be a pro on the comfort of riding in one with 4 other people. It was just as comfortable as riding in my grandparents HUGE so-called luxury sedan. And just for reference everyone in my family is 5'10" or taller, we are no Schrumphs.
As far as no AC, why would one need AC if they would just put wing windows back in ALL cars? You often see that little piece of glass in modern cars but It doesn't open anymore!?!?!?! WTF???
Remove from my jeep
1-automatic transmission
2-power windows
3-power locks
4-A-C
5-stupid annoying lights/buzzers
6-carpet
7-useless plastic garbage bod/misc
8-stereo replace with on board laptop mount
9-stupid safety sensor that locks in park.linked to axles.
10-that pos transfer case chain drive.replace with atlas case 4.3 low range.
In france gas is around 12 bucks / gallon, so we just have more diesel and more efficient cars :)
the Citroen C4, which CAN seat 5 comfy has 60mpg in highway driving. and the Lupo 3L has 80mpg in whateverdriving... energy efficient cars are here ;) just forget the V8's and start getting some Diesel engines :)
The main thing about cars that is crazy is that we haul around a structure that weighs around 1500kg to provide transport for a human being that only weighs say 75kg. That just can't be an efficient use of fossil fuels, not to mention the CO2 emissions it causes.
Beyond that fundamental idiocy, travelling at a slower speed improves fuel economy enormously, since fuel consumption essentially has a square relationship to the speed at which you travel. So reducing the speed limit to 55mph and rigorously enforcing it would have a very substantial effect on fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.
To believe (as most poll respondents appear to believe) that not having electric windows or aircon would solve the problem is naive wishful thinking - oh that it could be so easy! Between them they may contribute 2-3mpg at the very most, which in the great scheme of things is not that significant, certainly when compared to the savings possible from travelling at a slower speed.
The key things are reductions in weight and performance, and people just don't seem to be ready to sacrifice either to a great enough degree yet to make any difference.
Wouldn't it be great if car manufacturers actually tried to market their products on the basis of how good they were for the environment? The problem is that they make all their profit from the top end of the line, those vehicles which have the biggest engines and the greatest number of gee-gaws. The profit motive strikes again, and once again it is counter to the needs of society.
"A 1980 Fiesta comfortably seat 5 adults? I think you need to revisit your definitions of comfortable and adult..."
I think Eric's comment is interesting - it shows that the consumer perception changes quicker than engineering improvements. Back in the 80s, you may actually have felt that it was a comfortable car! You didn't know any better, you couldn't buy anything better, so you accept what you have. But we all like performance, speed, comfort, legroom, so we adapt to those improvements, and they become the new norm. I think that's why we should clamp down on 4x4s now - otherwise if the trend continues, in 2050 it'll be a winebago each, with 2m crumple zones all round and a 1000hp engine. Just to get your milk.
The latest boom has been fuelled by these new big diesel engines.
"Hey, diesels get twice the mpg!"
"Really? OK lets give 'em twice the power, and keep the mpg the same....they'll love it!!"
"Great, and by the way here's the concept for a new sport 4x4.....it's a bit heavy though...any ideas??"
"Hmmmm how about a big diesel engine!! They can have the same acceleration and mpg as their old car....except this one's twice as big!!!!"
"Mmmmm road presence and a higher driving position, they'll never notice it weighs 3 tons!! Result!"
As the owner of a ford excursion.I can tell you what i can not give up.
1-Towing ability.
2-4x4
3-cargo room.
4-durability and bash ability.
I tow ten to twelve thousand pounds on a routine basis.Two or three times a week.Being able to accelerate quickly is vital to.Especially when some moron puts you in a bad spot or cuts you off.You need get away from them.They do not know how to drive.
Now for my 79 bronco.It has the needed features for my area.Roads here will rattle your teeth.It is durably-strong and paid for.A lot of people live in very rural areas.Modern cars can not withstand the abuse-use.If you push up the mpg.Go for it.But build some that can tow.Take severe abuse-use.And do not fall apart or break so easily they become useless.