Continued: Lutz mentions engine options for Camaro -- 4 cylinder turbo a possibility

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by Roflmao

My last thought on the whole political thing is I agree that the government doesn't always purely have people's interest in mind. But the fault lies with people in the fact that they don't care or are too lazy to do anything. All I was saying was there should be an attempt to overthrow the CAFE regulations, not just sit around and say they are bad. The government at the moment won't respond, but the system it is built on will allow us to make it respond... I figured it was semi-on topic because a good reason for the engines being discussed like this is because of those regulations.

Anyways, I still haven't seen too many responses to the question I keep coming to after reading all this.

Would you go with a v6 engine if it made as much power as a v8? Keep in mind I am talking practical power here. I know a v6 can't compete with a v8 when it comes to drag street race sheer speed needing 650 horses type of power. I'm talking "just" 400hp type of numbers. Ever since I joined this board I have seen the magic 400 hp number thrown all over, but does it need to be a v8? Would people turn down a 400hp v6 just because it is a v6? All hypothetical...

+1

All CAFE did was divert the responsibility of decreasing our dependancy on foreign oil from the Gov to the car manufacturers. So what happens when we reach the projected CAFE MPG numbers? OPEC will simply decrease production and increase prices so they get an even better deal than they get now. This fixes NOTHING where gas prices are concerned.

Now for the environment it's not all that bad of a deal as far as making cars more efficient.

[CaptianSam]

this thread is still going ...lol

[Kyle2k]

Well until the department of transportation starts manufacturing cars, I see no other place to put the responsibility on. Usually, more efficient cars also appeal to foreign markets so the sales of US companies could substantially increase from thoughts like this.

Besides threating to bomb countries that are a part of opec what are we going to do? If we boycott them, China and other nations will just fill in the void for them, isn't the captilist way-supply and demand, you can't love it and hate it at the same time. People will always turn to hate something they used to embrace when it isn't working in their favor.

Edit: lol don't say anything to heat the situation please lol, I get way to into stuff like this and I don't want to spend the rest of the night on this thread I got a test to study for haha!

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

Well until the department of transportation starts manufacturing cars, I see no other place to put the responsibility on. Usually, more efficient cars also appeal to foreign markets so the sales of US companies could substantially increase from thoughts like this.

You put the resposibility on the People. If they complain for more efficient cars, give them incentives to buy one. Like...say, a gas tax. If it costs more to fuel up, people are going to use less fuel in better vehicles. If they are given better cars, they are going to use the same amount of fuel - but go more places. (i.e. People are dumb)

All CAFE is going to do is drive up the prices of cars, (since Automakers are being demanded to produce more fuel efficient cars) as the price of gas continues to go up on its own. Resulting in an even more restrictive financial environment. Not a smart situation, and whoever thought it up needs to be kicked in the arse...

EDIT: I posted before you added your edit...oops!

[Kyle2k]

I can see that, but it will also make future technologies cheaper. Can you imagine how much an LS7 would have cost next to the v8's of the 60's just because of all the technology? But if it did, the ls7 now would probably be as cheap as the L76. Do you get what I am trying to say lol, I could have probably explained it better but...

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

I can see that, but it will also make future technologies cheaper. Can you imagine how much an LS7 would have cost next to the v8's of the 60's just because of all the technology? But if it did, the ls7 now would probably be as cheap as the L76. Do you get what I am trying to say lol, I could have probably explained it better but...

I think so. but take it from an aspiring tech teacher, as cheap as this could pave the way for future tech - this is not the time for it. And second, it's NEVER safe to rely on "expected" technology advances to save you/us/them.

[Roflmao]

I think CAFE as is at the moment is a good thing, its the fact that it could get higher regulations that is the real problem, you can't let the regulations get ahead of the technology curve. That is where, as voters, we need to make sure this doesn't happen. I would even like to see the taxes collected by it go directly to funding the advancement of powertrains and alternative fuel.

[Kyle2k]

Agreed.

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

Just to quote your thing about the republic a few posts up too, you need to realize this is also a democracy.

Sorry, you are sadly mistaken, this country has been a Republic from day one, it has never been a democracy.
Clyde

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

Well until the department of transportation starts manufacturing cars, I see no other place to put the responsibility on. Usually, more efficient cars also appeal to foreign markets so the sales of US companies could substantially increase from thoughts like this.

Besides threating to bomb countries that are a part of opec what are we going to do? If we boycott them, China and other nations will just fill in the void for them, isn't the captilist way-supply and demand, you can't love it and hate it at the same time. People will always turn to hate something they used to embrace when it isn't working in their favor..........

I acknowledge that someone else will buy the oil that we don't. And I truly don't care if OPEC makes billions or looses billions. I just don't want them to decide how much we pay for oil/gas. This is the only market where the producer determines the price and not the consumer. So I say introduce some healthy competition into the fuel market with some Cellulosic Ethanol and maybe the US can become the biggest supplier of crude oil alternatives!!! Let OPEC sell to whom ever they want. I really don't care.

Originally Posted by Roflmao

I think CAFE as is at the moment is a good thing, its the fact that it could get higher regulations that is the real problem, you can't let the regulations get ahead of the technology curve. That is where, as voters, we need to make sure this doesn't happen. I would even like to see the taxes collected by it go directly to funding the advancement of powertrains and alternative fuel.

If they take the revenues generated by CAFE and put it towards an alternative fuel that moves us away from foreign oil then I say Great. I'm not giving any more of my money to a government (willingly anyway) that has yet to successfully move us away from foreign oil.

The government already uses our tax dollars to research alternative fuels, and all that they have accomplished to date is CAFE. Which again puts the onus on the car companies and does nothing to move away from foreign oil.

I'm not (willingly) going to give them any more of my taxes to do nothing but shift responsibility.

Green is good so please don't get me wrong on that.

[Roflmao]

Originally Posted by gtahvit

I acknowledge that someone else will buy the oil that we don't. And I truly don't care if OPEC makes billions or looses billions. I just don't want them to decide how much we pay for oil/gas. This is the only market where the producer determines the price and not the consumer. So I say introduce some healthy competition into the fuel market with some Cellulosic Ethanol and maybe the US can become the biggest supplier of crude oil alternatives!!! Let OPEC sell to whom ever they want. I really don't care.

The only other instance that I can think of where this type of thing exists is with utility companies, and virtually all of those are government regulated in the country. The problem with oil is we are not self sufficient and need to look to the world market. The CAFE regulations act as a forced way to become more self sufficient. This is why the whole situation itself is VERY tricky, because of the political influence on something that should be purely economical. Hence why every single dollar should be spent to find another way to power cars.

If they take the revenues generated by CAFE and put it towards an alternative fuel that moves us away from foreign oil then I say Great. I'm not giving any more of my money to a government (willingly anyway) that has yet to successfully move us away from foreign oil.

The government already uses our tax dollars to research alternative fuels, and all that they have accomplished to date is CAFE. Which again puts the onus on the car companies and does nothing to move away from foreign oil.

I'm not (willingly) going to give them any more of my taxes to do nothing but shift responsibility.

Green is good so please don't get me wrong on that.

Give them the taxes, but tell them what to do with it. I support tax increases if they are used to fund the correct things. The problem is our entire spending sector needs to be completely blown up and started from scratch. That can't happen with the people who are in office at the moment. Hell if I give up a few hundred dollars more to the government and the ACTUALLY do something good with it, I will double it with another check directly to the IRS. The problem is the spending isn't proportioned right with the tax intake and just isn't proportioned right for anything. HINT HINT- get out of all the wars and major spendings when you have problems at home, fix those first.

I put my responses in Bold.

[Kyle2k]

Originally Posted by wildpaws

Sorry, you are sadly mistaken, this country has been a Republic from day one, it has never been a democracy.
Clyde

Is it just me or are you trying to pick an argument with everything someone doesn't agree with you. The fact is we are both. I'm trying to be civil, but if you can't stand not "winning" atleast I hope you can get one thing out of this. That would be to use a dictionary-

DEMOCRACY
1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
2. a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies.
3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.
4. political or social equality; democratic spirit.
5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.

REPUBLIC
1. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
2. any body of persons viewed as a commonwealth.
3. a state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state.
4. (initial capital letter) any of the five periods of republican government in France. Compare First Republic, Second Republic, Third Republic, Fourth Republic, Fifth Republic.
5. (initial capital letter, italics) a philosophical dialogue (4th century b.c.) by Plato dealing with the composition and structure of the ideal state.

[stovt001]

So I hear they might put a 4 banger in this thing...

[Kyle2k]

lol okay okay, I get the point

Whatever floats the non-V8 owners boat.