I've noticed that most drivers don't own premium cars that they can afford. Why?

Why do you drive much less than you can afford?

  • Just don't wanna appear flashy or showing off

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I like to appear as an everyday blue (brown?) collar worker

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I have different priorities than nice cars

    Votes: 19 50.0%
  • I have a big family so the money isn't as much as it seems

    Votes: 2 5.3%
  • Hey, I'm one of the one's with a luxury car. Gotta problem w/ that?

    Votes: 8 21.1%
  • Other

    Votes: 9 23.7%

  • Total voters
    38

purplesky

Well-Known Member
Sorry, but you don't really know what you're talking about. Obama has very little to do with vehicle fuel economy.

Did Obama push for the creation of the Toyota Prius introduced in Japan in 1997? Which lead to a huge success in the US with its 50 MPG rating that other automakers have been trying to catch for years. Heck, Obama had zero to do with GM's Chevy Volt which was in development long before he became President.

Automakers are making big gains in fuel efficiency largely because of the price of fuel. When gas was $1-$2/gal, there was little incentive to increase efficiency. Now it's a steady $3-$4/gal. One could argue that Obama has something to do with these prices, thus making him partly responsible for fuel efficient cars.

Customers are demanding higher efficiency. So it's competition among automakers that is driving fuel efficiency.

The one major influence the Feds have is CAFE standards. But mainly what this does is manipulate the offerings by automakers that the market may not desire. You'll see them build low volume niche vehicles (like electrics) that helps their fleet average. You'll also see the death of full size SUV's that a lot of customers still want but no longer have the choice. 10 years from now, you may not be able to buy a Suburban for example even though there would be a market for it (large family hauler that can tow a boat).

Automakers build cars for the world market that already demand fuel efficiency. US CAFE standards aren't going to improve efficiency single handily.

If your argument is to say that Obama has increased American brands fuel efficiency, that's just not accurate as well. American companies have an interest in staying in business. If they're going to compete with Toyota, Honda, and Nissan's fuel efficiency, then they'd have to make the gains they have in the last several years. Or they'd be left rotting on dealer lots.

Dude how the hell can you say Obama has done nothing to help improve fuel efficiency of ANY CAR BRAND NOW SOLD IN THE USA? What planet do you live on?

DO YOU NOT REMEMBER THE REPUBLICANS BITCHING ABOUT OBAMA AND HIS LEADERSHIP AND VISION ON IMPROVING MPGs FOR VEHICLES SOLD NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE IN AMERICA?

​IN 10 YEARS A SURBURBAN WILL PROBABLY GET 50MPG ON THE HIGHWAY. DUH!

The Obama administration issued final rules Tuesday that require a major boost in vehicle mileage standards, highlighting a clash with Mitt Romney as the GOP convention gets under way.


The Transportation Department and Environmental Protection Agency announced joint mileage and carbon emissions rules for model years 2017 through 2025 that will eventually force automakers to meet a standard equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon.







Administration officials have made the rules a cornerstone of their energy agenda, noting that alongside earlier 2012-2016 rules, the mandate will eventually save consumers an estimated $1.7 trillion in fuel costs and save 12 billion barrels of oil.“These fuel standards represent the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” President Obama said in a statement Tuesday, noting that by 2025 cars will get almost twice the mileage they provide today.
“It’ll strengthen our nation's energy security, it's good for middle class families and it will help create an economy built to last,” Obama said.

The rules will provide an average fuel cost savings of more than $8,000 by 2025 over the lifetime of a vehicle, according to the White House. The administration estimates the auto mileage program will cut oil U.S. consumption by more than 2 million barrels a day by 2025, which the White House emphasized as a way to further curb reliance on OPEC.

A draft of the rules late last year estimated they would cost the auto industry a total of $157 billion to make cars and light trucks that comply with the tougher standards.

The rules drew a quick rebuke from the Romney campaign, which emphasized higher upfront costs for consumers buying vehicles that meet the new requirements.

Last year, in the draft of the proposal, the administration estimated that the 2017-2025 rules would add costs that reach an average of $2,000 per new vehicle in 2025.

“Governor Romney opposes the extreme standards that President Obama has imposed, which will limit the choices available to American families. The President tells voters that his regulations will save them thousands of dollars at the pump, but always forgets to mention that the savings will be wiped out by having to pay thousands of dollars more upfront for unproven technology that they may not even want,” Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said in a statement.

Environmental groups cheered the standards.

“This is truly a watershed moment. Twenty years from now we’ll be looking back on this as the day we chose innovation over stagnation,” said Michelle Robinson, director of the clean vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

But the announcement follows sharp criticism of the gas-mileage standards by some Capitol Hill Republicans, in particular House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).

Issa has criticized the rules’ effect on vehicle costs, and he has suggested that the Obama administration used leverage from the bailouts of U.S. auto companies in 2008 and 2009 to convince them to back the new rules.

"Increased fuel efficiency is a goal all parties support — but pursuing new standards that increase vehicle cost and decrease vehicle safety is dangerous for consumers and unacceptable from regulators," he said in a statement earlier in August.

The trade association for the U.S. auto industry, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said Tuesday that new gas-mileage standards unveiled would level the playing field for car companies that have been dealing with differing state rules.

"The Auto Alliance has called for a single, national program because conflicting requirements from several regulatory bodies raise costs, ultimately taking money out of consumers' pockets and hurting sales," the group said in a statement. "We all want to get more fuel-efficient autos on our roads, and a single, national program with a strong midterm review helps us get closer to that shared goal."

However, the auto alliance added that the market's reaction to fuel-efficient cars is still to be determined.

"After years of billion-dollar investments by automakers, consumers have a lot of choice in fuel-efficient cars and light trucks, and automakers are working to sell these high-mileage vehicles in high volumes," the group said. "Compliance with higher fuel-economy standards is based on sales, not what we put on showroom floors."

Car dealers, who would have to sell the presumably higher-priced cars that meet the proposed emission standards, were not as happy about the new rules as automakers were, however.

"America’s new car dealers support continuous fuel economy increases [but] NADA remains concerned that model year 2017-2025 mandates, coupled with previous Obama administration fuel economy regulations, will hike the average price of a new vehicle by nearly $3,000 when fully implemented," the trade group for dealerships, the National Automobile Dealers Association, said in statement.

Such a price increase would shut "almost 7 million people out of the new car market entirely and prevents many millions more from being able to afford new vehicles that meet their needs," the NADA added.

Administration officials called the rules a landmark step in efforts to battle global warming.

“Combined, the Administration’s standards will cut greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks in half by 2025, reducing emissions by 6 billion metric tons over the life of the program – more than the total amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the United States in 2010,” the White House said.

The rules include incentives for electric vehicles, hybrid systems in large pick-up trucks, and other technologies.

The White House said the standards are achievable but also allow a “mid-term evaluation” that could enable the Transportation Department and EPA to make adjustments.

Officials said the standards will boost industry innovation, and argue that a range of technologies are already available, such as advanced engines and transmissions, air conditioning improvements, weight reductions, better aerodynamics and other steps.



Read more: Obama finalizes auto mileage mandate - The Hill's E2-Wire
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
 
Last edited:

1BROWNWRENCH

Amatuer Malthusian
what are your thoughts on fuel brands? I try to use Mobil or Sunoco, & stay away from the no name gas stations, especially with my motorcycles. With those I always use 93 octane.

I've also tried using techron full additive on occasion, but I really don't know if it helps.
About every 20,000 miles, I'll have a fuel injector service done. That seems to help, maybe it's all in my head idk.

Techron is supposedly beneficial if used on a regular basis in conjunction with lesser grade fuels. ARCO gas is not considered a top tier fuel according to a contact with the Dept of Ecology. I have not had or done any injector "service". After a certain amount of mileage and religious filter changes, I find it is more effective to replace injectors with new or remans. The process is ridiculously easy in most cases.
 
what are your thoughts on fuel brands? I try to use Mobil or Sunoco, & stay away from the no name gas stations, especially with my motorcycles. With those I always use 93 octane.

I've also tried using techron full additive on occasion, but I really don't know if it helps.
About every 20,000 miles, I'll have a fuel injector service done. That seems to help, maybe it's all in my head idk.

​Despite the many brands there are actually few fuel suppliers. What defines the brand is what they do with the base gasoline and add their proprietary additives. One of the greatest complaints about one brand making a car run worse,etc, is more dependent on water and dirt getting into the fuel once it's at the station.
 

1BROWNWRENCH

Amatuer Malthusian
​Despite the many brands there are actually few fuel suppliers. What defines the brand is what they do with the base gasoline and add their proprietary additives. One of the greatest complaints about one brand making a car run worse,etc, is more dependent on water and dirt getting into the fuel once it's at the station.

There are very few refineries relatively speaking, so initially it all starts of the same. It would not be economically or logistically practical for every gasoline brand to have it's own proprietary refinery.
 
You must be doing something wrong. Every feeder driver I ever see is skinny!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I stay on the pleasingly plump side in respect for my wife to keep all the other chicks away as best I can.

Then again, I've made a few beneficial modifications.:happy-very: I saw a Subaru WRX with a hitch the other day. That was wrong on several levels.

When I pick up a new work car I'll tweak the GT up a bit. I'll stay normally aspirated but the rubber band will definitely be wound a little tighter.
 
There are very few refineries relatively speaking, so initially it all starts of the same. It would not be economically or logistically practical for every gasoline brand to have it's own proprietary refinery.

Correct.

One of my thoughts was I'd rather have a tank of fresh clean fuel from a smaller brand , we have Speedway here, than a water/dirt filled tank from one of the top brands. Odds are follow the trail back to the refinery and both companies tankers will be parked there.
 
Dude how the hell can you say Obama has done nothing to help improve fuel efficiency of ANY CAR BRAND NOW SOLD IN THE USA? What planet do you live on?

DO YOU NOT REMEMBER THE REPUBLICANS BITCHING ABOUT OBAMA AND HIS LEADERSHIP AND VISION ON IMPROVING MPGs FOR VEHICLES SOLD NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE IN AMERICA?

​IN 10 YEARS A SURBURBAN WILL PROBABLY GET 50MPG ON THE HIGHWAY. DUH!

The Obama administration issued final rules Tuesday that require a major boost in vehicle mileage standards, highlighting a clash with Mitt Romney as the GOP convention gets under way.


The Transportation Department and Environmental Protection Agency announced joint mileage and carbon emissions rules for model years 2017 through 2025 that will eventually force automakers to meet a standard equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon.







Administration officials have made the rules a cornerstone of their energy agenda, noting that alongside earlier 2012-2016 rules, the mandate will eventually save consumers an estimated $1.7 trillion in fuel costs and save 12 billion barrels of oil.“These fuel standards represent the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” President Obama said in a statement Tuesday, noting that by 2025 cars will get almost twice the mileage they provide today.
“It’ll strengthen our nation's energy security, it's good for middle class families and it will help create an economy built to last,” Obama said.

The rules will provide an average fuel cost savings of more than $8,000 by 2025 over the lifetime of a vehicle, according to the White House. The administration estimates the auto mileage program will cut oil U.S. consumption by more than 2 million barrels a day by 2025, which the White House emphasized as a way to further curb reliance on OPEC.

A draft of the rules late last year estimated they would cost the auto industry a total of $157 billion to make cars and light trucks that comply with the tougher standards.

The rules drew a quick rebuke from the Romney campaign, which emphasized higher upfront costs for consumers buying vehicles that meet the new requirements.

Last year, in the draft of the proposal, the administration estimated that the 2017-2025 rules would add costs that reach an average of $2,000 per new vehicle in 2025.

“Governor Romney opposes the extreme standards that President Obama has imposed, which will limit the choices available to American families. The President tells voters that his regulations will save them thousands of dollars at the pump, but always forgets to mention that the savings will be wiped out by having to pay thousands of dollars more upfront for unproven technology that they may not even want,” Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said in a statement.

Environmental groups cheered the standards.

“This is truly a watershed moment. Twenty years from now we’ll be looking back on this as the day we chose innovation over stagnation,” said Michelle Robinson, director of the clean vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

But the announcement follows sharp criticism of the gas-mileage standards by some Capitol Hill Republicans, in particular House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).

Issa has criticized the rules’ effect on vehicle costs, and he has suggested that the Obama administration used leverage from the bailouts of U.S. auto companies in 2008 and 2009 to convince them to back the new rules.

"Increased fuel efficiency is a goal all parties support — but pursuing new standards that increase vehicle cost and decrease vehicle safety is dangerous for consumers and unacceptable from regulators," he said in a statement earlier in August.

The trade association for the U.S. auto industry, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said Tuesday that new gas-mileage standards unveiled would level the playing field for car companies that have been dealing with differing state rules.

"The Auto Alliance has called for a single, national program because conflicting requirements from several regulatory bodies raise costs, ultimately taking money out of consumers' pockets and hurting sales," the group said in a statement. "We all want to get more fuel-efficient autos on our roads, and a single, national program with a strong midterm review helps us get closer to that shared goal."

However, the auto alliance added that the market's reaction to fuel-efficient cars is still to be determined.

"After years of billion-dollar investments by automakers, consumers have a lot of choice in fuel-efficient cars and light trucks, and automakers are working to sell these high-mileage vehicles in high volumes," the group said. "Compliance with higher fuel-economy standards is based on sales, not what we put on showroom floors."

Car dealers, who would have to sell the presumably higher-priced cars that meet the proposed emission standards, were not as happy about the new rules as automakers were, however.

"America’s new car dealers support continuous fuel economy increases [but] NADA remains concerned that model year 2017-2025 mandates, coupled with previous Obama administration fuel economy regulations, will hike the average price of a new vehicle by nearly $3,000 when fully implemented," the trade group for dealerships, the National Automobile Dealers Association, said in statement.

Such a price increase would shut "almost 7 million people out of the new car market entirely and prevents many millions more from being able to afford new vehicles that meet their needs," the NADA added.

Administration officials called the rules a landmark step in efforts to battle global warming.

“Combined, the Administration’s standards will cut greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks in half by 2025, reducing emissions by 6 billion metric tons over the life of the program – more than the total amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the United States in 2010,” the White House said.

The rules include incentives for electric vehicles, hybrid systems in large pick-up trucks, and other technologies.

The White House said the standards are achievable but also allow a “mid-term evaluation” that could enable the Transportation Department and EPA to make adjustments.

Officials said the standards will boost industry innovation, and argue that a range of technologies are already available, such as advanced engines and transmissions, air conditioning improvements, weight reductions, better aerodynamics and other steps.



Read more: Obama finalizes auto mileage mandate - The Hill's E2-Wire
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Respectfully, the plans for better fuel economy were in the pipeline long before Obama.
 

purplesky

Well-Known Member
Many people quickly forgot.........

View attachment 10234

So thats about 5 years ago? Did you expect gas prices to freeze in time years ago? :funny:

If you’re not convinced by economic theory or the opinions of economists, consider somerecent history. Presumably, no one would call President George W. Bush unfriendly to theoil industry. Yet the price of gasoline rose steadily during most of his administration. In February 2001, just after Mr. Bush took office, the average price of regular gasoline was $1.45 a gallon. By June 2008, that price had risen to $4.05. Still think presidents and oil-friendly policies can determine oil prices?
It’s true that by the end of the Bush presidency, prices had fallen back to $1.69, as oil prices plummeted with the rest of the global economy. But I think we can all agree that a global financial crisis is too high a price to pay for cheap gasoline.:wink2:
 

JL 0513

Well-Known Member
Dude how the hell can you say Obama has done nothing to help improve fuel efficiency of ANY CAR BRAND NOW SOLD IN THE USA? What planet do you live on?

DO YOU NOT REMEMBER THE REPUBLICANS BITCHING ABOUT OBAMA AND HIS LEADERSHIP AND VISION ON IMPROVING MPGs FOR VEHICLES SOLD NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE IN AMERICA?

​IN 10 YEARS A SURBURBAN WILL PROBABLY GET 50MPG ON THE HIGHWAY. DUH!

And by 2000, we'll have flying cars....

Trust me, I know all about these new CAFE standard regulations. Passed by politicians who know absolutely nothing about engineering. It's really quite ridiculous.

You really think in just 2 redesigns, that the Suburban can go from like 13 MPG to 50 MPG? And remember that automakers usually run engines for 2-3 car generations because of the massive cost in developing new engines. So typically, the engine in today's Suburban could still be used 10 years from now.

For such an efficiency hike, it would have to be a hybrid with a battery the size of a freaking Corolla under the floor.

Think about it, Toyota does everything they can to squeeze 50 MPG out of a Prius. And Toyota has stated that the next Prius' goal is 55 MPG and that they are having a really hard time beating their own record. So we'll likely see a PRIUS at 55 MPG through 2019. A Prius! How the hell are entire fleets filled with trucks and SUV's supposed to average about that a few short years after that???????????

NOT going to happen. Just wait and see. Bureaucrats just can't create arbitrary numbers and dictate that engineers have to miraculously meet them.
 

1BROWNWRENCH

Amatuer Malthusian
And by 2000, we'll have flying cars....

Trust me, I know all about these new CAFE standard regulations. Passed by politicians who know absolutely nothing about engineering. It's really quite ridiculous.

You really think in just 2 redesigns, that the Suburban can go from like 13 MPG to 50 MPG? And remember that automakers usually run engines for 2-3 car generations because of the massive cost in developing new engines. So typically, the engine in today's Suburban could still be used 10 years from now.

For such an efficiency hike, it would have to be a hybrid with a battery the size of a freaking Corolla under the floor.

Think about it, Toyota does everything they can to squeeze 50 MPG out of a Prius. And Toyota has stated that the next Prius' goal is 55 MPG and that they are having a really hard time beating their own record. So we'll likely to see a PRIUS at 55 MPG through 2019. A Prius! How the hell are entire fleets filled with trucks and SUV's supposed to average about that a few short years after that???????????

NOT going to happen. Just wait and see. Bureaucrats just can't create arbitrary numbers and dictate that engineers have to miraculously meet them.

NOT with internal combustion as we know it today.
 
And by 2000, we'll have flying cars....

Trust me, I know all about these new CAFE standard regulations. Passed by politicians who know absolutely nothing about engineering. It's really quite ridiculous.

You really think in just 2 redesigns, that the Suburban can go from like 13 MPG to 50 MPG? And remember that automakers usually run engines for 2-3 car generations because of the massive cost in developing new engines. So typically, the engine in today's Suburban could still be used 10 years from now.

For such an efficiency hike, it would have to be a hybrid with a battery the size of a freaking Corolla under the floor.

Think about it, Toyota does everything they can to squeeze 50 MPG out of a Prius. And Toyota has stated that the next Prius' goal is 55 MPG and that they are having a really hard time beating their own record. So we'll likely see a PRIUS at 55 MPG through 2019. A Prius! How the hell are entire fleets filled with trucks and SUV's supposed to average about that a few short years after that???????????

NOT going to happen. Just wait and see. Bureaucrats just can't create arbitrary numbers and dictate that engineers have to miraculously meet them.

In 1990 I had a Geo Metro that got 50 mpg. Ran like a top for 250k plus miles. BUT, it was basically a 1500lb pop can on wheels.
"I'll die if I'm hit by a semi-truck because I wasn't paying attention when I'm driving my Geo. I want airbags, door beams, stronger bumpers,etc et al, to keep me safe against Darwinism and my own stupidity!" said the public and safety advocating organizations.
So we have all kinds of stuff that's regulated for safety. "My super safe car only gets 24mpg when I text while driving off the side of a cliff. I want better gas mileage!"

The one thing all the regulators and big brains can't defeat is physics. Take your pick. Which do you want?
 

purplesky

Well-Known Member
Respectfully, the plans for better fuel economy were in the pipeline long before Obama.

Thats true but slowly. I or anyone never said Obama started the BETTER MPGs movement. President Obama AND MANY OTHERS have provided the FINAL leadership and political will to HAVE EVERY VEHICLE SOLD IN THE USA IN THE NEAR FUTURE TO ACHIEVE GREAT MPGs.

Obama got elected 2 times because most Americans agree with his environmental vision AND STANCE.

Twitt Robme if elected President would have just sat on his hands and CRIED ABOUT THE HIGH EXPENSE FOR THE JOB CREATORS AND DONE NOTHING FOR AMERICA TO IMPROVE AUTO FUEL EFFICIENCY FOR THE AVG. AMERICAN and our environment.
 

1BROWNWRENCH

Amatuer Malthusian
In 1990 I had a Geo Metro that got 50 mpg. Ran like a top for 250k plus miles. BUT, it was basically a 1500lb pop can on wheels.
"I'll die if I'm hit by a semi-truck because I wasn't paying attention when I'm driving my Geo. I want airbags, door beams, stronger bumpers,etc et al, to keep me safe against Darwinism and my own stupidity!" said the public and safety advocating organizations.
So we have all kinds of stuff that's regulated for safety. "My super safe car only gets 24mpg when I text while driving off the side of a cliff. I want better gas mileage!"

The one thing all the regulators and big brains can't defeat is physics. Take your pick. Which do you want?

Diesels especially and vehicles in general in this country would be capable of much more if it weren't for the EPA and DOT with respect to MPG.
 

JL 0513

Well-Known Member
Keep in mind I'm just making realistic arguments.

I'm a huge fan of fuel efficiency. One of my favorite cars is the widely hated Prius. And I drive a Yaris mostly for it's fuel efficiency (and reliability).

I bought the Yaris in 2008 when it was the most fuel efficient vehicle aside from the Prius available in the US. That's why I bought it.

Purplesky, what do you drive. :happy-very:
 
Keep in mind I'm just making realistic arguments.

I'm a huge fan of fuel efficiency. One of my favorite cars is the widely hated Prius. And I drive a Yaris mostly for it's fuel efficiency (and reliability).

I bought the Yaris in 2008 when it was the most fuel efficient vehicle aside from the Prius available in the US.

Purplesky, what do you drive. :happy-very:

Nothing better than cruising down the highway with a Prius in front of me with both of us running 80. I bet my mpg is better than theirs at that point.
 
Top