Finally Some Positive CAFE opinions

[stovt001]

So we've all heard a lot of doom and gloom stuff about what CAFE is going to do to our beloved muscle and pony cars, especially from the automotive media. Obviously, bad news grabs attention. So it was a little surprising that coming from Motor Trend, of all places, was this article in the most recent issue concerning the effects of CAFE on mainstream performance cars. Here's a notable excerpt:

To find out what sorts of "replacements for displacement" might power the next generation muscle cars, we contacted the go-fast gurus at the Detroit Three, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz AMG. All were adamant on one point: performance cannot be sacrificed as it was in the 1970s and 1980s. Corvette chief engineer Tom Wallace echoes everyone else's sentiments: "What matters is pounds per horsepower. Horsepower is technology and displacement. If you can take mass out, you can take horsepower out. If you can take horsepower out, you can take displacement out and improve fuel economy." Lowering mass improves every sporting aspect of a car, so this is exciting news for Mustangs, Camaros, and Chargers, which can afford to shrink a bit. Further reducing mass from cars like the Corvette, however, will require exotic, expensive materials. And, unfortunately, many other efficiency technologies like gasoline direct injection, cylinder-shutoff, variable intake and valvetrain systems, and active aerodynamic aids add weight...Bottom line: expect muscle cars to evolve, offering equal or better performance in a lighter, smaller, more aerodynamic form bristling with new technologies.

Article: Muscle CAFE by Frank Markus, Motor Trend April 2008

Isn't it so refreshing to hear that the performance guys at the auto makers aren't going to just surrender performance cars so we repeat the 70s and 80s again? In so many other articles we hear "cancel this" or "delay that". I'm always worried that by the time I can afford a Camaro, the only thing I can buy is a 75 hp subcompact because everything else we've heard indicates they're just going to throw in the towel and take the easy way out. It is so nice to hear that through innovation, we may actually have great performance cars that are also very efficient. I definitely needed this little attitude pick-me-up.

[DGthe3]

Well thats good. It would be a real shame to have a Camaro making less than 200 hp out of a V8, again. I think that GM's performance cars are in the best position out of anyones. I'm still a fan of using the apparent E85 loophole, or tacking on a $500 CAFE penalty to the car when I buy it. That would take care of the fines that the automares would have to pay for such cars, then everybody gets what they want.

[NOODLESgoneWILD]

I agree...with the strides in carbon nano tech. It won't be long before the cars weight little more that the engines.

So we’ll be able to save all the weight we need to save the almighty HP.

[Cubanaso]

Weight is the Holy Grail to all things good in the car world, finding how to do it inexpensively is the key that opens the Holy Grail.

My RX8 comes in, just under 3K and that helps in everything...handling, responsiveness, ride, balance and fuel economy.

Note: It still has a little piggy rotary engine so it's fuel economy aint great. I've averaged 19mpg over the life of my RX8 in all city driving.

[radz28]

I would not mind having to pay a $1000 CAFE penalty if I had to in order to get 400-500 horsepower in my Camaro. The way I see it is that GM is trying to give the enthusiast what he/she wants, and if it takes a small penalty to do that I'm willing to pay that. What's another $1000 for a $30K+ car?

[DGthe3]

Another option is to make all heavy comfort items options instead of standard, then charge much more for them. Most cars on the market could lose 10% of their weight without much trouble. That would make for a few mpg increase in all cars.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by radz282003

I would not mind having to pay a $1000 CAFE penalty if I had to in order to get 400-500 horsepower in my Camaro. The way I see it is that GM is trying to give the enthusiast what he/she wants, and if it takes a small penalty to do that I'm willing to pay that. What's another $1000 for a $30K+ car?

I don't know that I like this idea.... I'd probably do it... But for this I'd better be able to get 500hp... I don't think i'd do it for 400...

hmmmmm.

[The_Blur]

This is exactly what I wanted to hear. The last time I saw anything about CAFE, it was GM complaining about having to axe upcoming developments. I'm glad they're going to step up to the challenge.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by gtahvit

I don't know that I like this idea.... I'd probably do it... But for this I'd better be able to get 500hp... I don't think i'd do it for 400...

hmmmmm.

OH NO, I feel you on everything you've said. I'll pay more for 500 horse, but not for 400. My car has about that much now.

[asrapid]

i think ohv 5.0 l V8 with DI, vvt supercharger/turbocharger and about 500 Hp would be nice engine for camaro.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by asrapid

i think ohv 5.0 l V8 with DI, vvt supercharger/turbocharger and about 500 Hp would be nice engine for camaro.

Agreed!!!

I want every fuel saving technology available... Now, I'd also like to be able to turn them off when I need to

[blindingillusion]

Agreed, I would pay more for something over 500hp, but 400hp doesn't impress me enough to pay for it.

[Kyle2k]

Why can't manufactures tune cars for MAXIMUM fuel efficiency, really crappy performance, and then just sell a tuner that brings it up to a performance number that they truly intended. Like, go from 250hp, up to 400 lol

[fbodfather]

well - the article is correct to a point.

Here's at least two things missing:

One -- the "rules" -- the law has been passed --but the rules have not yet been written -- and, knowing our elected officials - that may take QUITE some time!

Two -- COST -- what is the cost to you, the consumer to get there?