Karl on Cars

Clearly, we're quite a bit closer than people think. The last four of these don't have any fancy fuel saving technology, and others like the Rav4, CRV are only one mpg behind.
 
Now the naysayers will point out that some of these aren't really SUV's, but they're close enough for most. And they probably will do better in five years than now.
 
Interesting to see how well the Highlander Hybrid does, it's significantly larger than the rest (size and weight). I'm surprised they don't push that into the Rav, but it looks like Ford has that market cornered (for now...).

"It will take a shift in demand from consumers to actually kill them off, and I'm not sure I see that happening"
 
Oh I do. Sales of compact cars have skyrocketed in the past year and they're only gaining momentum. SUV sales have crashed and even the mighty truck is faultering. If one is pro-mpg, that has to be scored as progress.
 
Lutz must have been out of his mind when he stated that all vehicles will require a $10K markup to meet CAFE. I imagine the real reason had more to do with lobbying.

Estreka,
 
Lutz is nuts. He said it in a sad attempt to get sympathy. Just some basic switches to the CRV/Rav4 will get the extra bump in MPGs. BMW's efficient dynamics only involves a few changes (adding start stop, shifting to electric steering racks, regen braking) and they've seen a 5-10% increase on their european cars with it. This is just the beginning...

"Sales of compact cars have skyrocketed in the past year "
 
No. They haven't. That's what I find most surprising about the gas pump charging me 3.79 a gallon.
 
The Accord/Camry are still the best selling cars, and the larger engine in each is becoming more common. Sure some large SUV sales have declined, but that's it as far as changes from consumers go.
 
Take Toyota's April 08 sales:
 
Corolla down 18% from last year, despite new model.
 
Yaris has skyrocketed to 25% of Camry sales???? They sell more Tacomas than the Yaris.

Karl, in the long run the small SUV's will match the 26 mpg. mandate. The medium size will get there by different type of technologies in the coming years. The full size SUV's will have a harder time but some eventually will pay the gas guz. tax. Wait and see.

Karl,
 
Your list is missing the Jeep Patriot at 23/28 mpg. :)

Karl,
 
I think the real question is whether or not SUVs will be able to meet any additional increases in the CAFE standards in upcoming years. If both the Congress and the White House are controlled by Democrats come January, I would expect an increase to be proposed sometime in 2009, and quite possibly during the first 100 days of the new administration.

I don't know if I'd classify the Compass or a Patriot as an SUV really, to my eyes they're just hatchbacks or small wagons with limited off road capability like the old Subaru wagons. Used to be easier to define what a SUV is when most were body on frame/ truck based, these days the lines seem very blurry especially since the advent of the CUV.....is a RX400h a CUV now? It used to be a SUV, but it seems to have more in common with a Edge or CX9 that a LR3.

bepperb, estreka was right, currently 20% of new car sales were compact.
 
mini sales are up around 30% (mainly due to clubman)
ford focus sales up 32%.
 
mazda has seen sales of the 3 grow.
 
The corrola is sagging because its a new 'same old' eventually people will just get bored.

That raised, FWD hybrid wagons can (barely) reach the required numbers isn't really encouraging.
 
Since most drivers use their SUVs exactly like cars that isn't any loss to them, but this doesn't make things look very rosy for the minority of people who used them as a real truck - unimproved roads and 5000lb boat trailers and all.
 
The miraculous improvement of the next 12 years will be diesel, which from a consumer perspective isn't very miraculous at all but if the government mandate wants high miles per gallon without really caring what it's a gallon of then diesel is the way to get it.

Karl, the "gas-guzzling, selfish and wasteful American" SUVs are already disappearing. With the sales of smaller cars increasing as opfreak and estraka have said, coupled with the fact that all the SUVs on the list are smaller SUVs or CUVs, it appears that large SUVs are in trouble
............but only temorarily. Improvements in hybrid and diesel technology should make large SUVs make better fuel economy numbers. For example, I really believe that if the Tahoe hybrid had a diesel instead of a petrol engine, it would make about 24/24 mpg or more instead of the current 21/21.
 
If gas and diesel prices don't go up too much, and if diesel/hybrid technology is improved and applied to large SUVs, I don't see them disappearing soon. Small SUVs and CUVs are here to stay and will/have replaced minivans and station wagons to a large extent.
 
Karl, I'm really impressed by the Escape/Tribute/Mariner Hybrid fuel economy. If their drivers drive mostly city, these would put a Corolla or Civic to shame.....that's impressive! I think the Toyota and Lexus hybrids are disappointing, although I suspect they are fast vehicles.

"the 'gas-guzzling, selfish and wasteful American' SUVs are already disappearing".
 
Good riddance. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out as they say.
 
My infantile comment of the day. I'm too tired this late Friday afternoon to offer anything constructive ;0)

"Lutz is nuts. He said it in a sad attempt to get sympathy. Just some basic switches to the CRV/Rav4 will get the extra bump in MPGs. BMW's efficient dynamics only involves a few changes (adding start stop, shifting to electric steering racks, regen braking) and they've seen a 5-10% increase on their european cars with it. This is just the beginning..."
 
Care to name those "basic switches"? You are constantly lecturing folks about how simple this stuff will be but you dont give any details. BTW, it silly to compare a vehicles highway number with its combined number. A lot of vehicles get 26mpg or better on the highway but that isnt the same as a combined number. As for electric steering, thats on tons of vehicles today. Every GM vehicles with an I-4 has electric steering and its good for a whopping 1mpg. Gm's mild hybrids have auto stop start and the media has deemed them "fake hybrids" that dont save enough fuel. The stuff you are talking about saves fractions of a mpg in many cases.
 
The hybrids on that list are mostly small volume and have not been very successful. THe RX is too expensive for most families (as is the Highlander hybrid) and isnt a realistic option. The only models on that list that do well are the CR-V, RAV4 and non hybrid escape.
 
On top of that the reality is to average 26mpg OVERALL you will need your small SUVs and cars to exceed that number substantially because your pickups, large SUVs and luxury models are not going to be close to that number. If you need 26mpg as a whole you may need your compact SUVs to average 30mpg.
 
Also, we have to assume that congress doesnt revise the EPA's standards so that 35mpg REALLY is 35mpg. I cant believe that no environmental group is going to expose this loophole between now and 2020. I'm surrprised we have gotten this far without someoone calling the EPA out on this.

We all have to remember that CAFE is sales weighted so offering a fuel efficient model that people dont want or that is capacity strained wont help you. GM's hybrids arent going to do squat for their CAFE number (although they will help image wise) because they are small volume. Same goes for the Lexus hybrids or Altima hybrid. The Prius on the other hand is likely doing a lot for Toyota's CAFE score.

1487 - You claim everything is impossible and nothing more will be achieved and that no other tech will ever be accepted. You are the second coming of the anti-catalytic converter crowd.
 
start/stop - you say it doesn't save enough
regen braking - not enough savings
electric steering - not enough savings
diesel - nobody wants it
li-ion - it's too expensive
plastic/carbon body parts - too expensive
turbo or twincharging - too complex
cylinder deactivation - not enough saving
smaller engines - people only want big engines
7-8 speed transmissions - too complex/expensive
 
From your point of view, nothing more can be done and we've peaked as a species and as car makers. This is all basic stuff that exists today but it's not possible, apparently, to go beyond this.

1487, I agree fully with blueguy about your point of view. I mean, it's great that you point out the other side of the story, but I still think blueguy has a point.
 
Secondly, I must add, you defend the Big 3 manufacturers fanatically! Man, we all want US manufacturers to succeed but man, you seem to even praise them when they do something wrong. 1487, be a bit more objective.
 
rascal99, I also say good riddance to huge SUVs! The only thing is that I feel for people who really need them and I hope they'll continue to be available, with improved economy, for them.

I will ignore 1487's comments b/c well... as usual, they're not very helpful and it certainly doesn't help to comment on them (although I guess I just did)...
 
the biggest problem I have with your post Karl (and the reason I had to respond to it) is the highly ironic fact that nearly all the cars on the list (except for one, the Toyota Highlander) has been completely panned by the reviewers on your staff i.e. Edmunds.com Inside Line really didn't like any of these cars. If memory serves, the Ford Escape twins were described by your site as being based on a fairly ancient design, the Lexus hybrid was judged as being decidedly un-efficient in your long-term test, and the Vue? Well...it seemed to live up to its billing as a GM Hybrid product i.e. it DIDN'T work.
 
The other problem I have with this list is that it is the Top Ten CROSSOVER list...no one in their right mind should really consider these "trucks" as SUVs in the traditional sense of the Tahoe, 4Runner, etc...they are all unibody, car-based vehicles that have maybe another 2-3 inches of ground clearance (maybe even less) than their car counterparts and perhaps another 30-40 cubic feet of cargo space (with all the seats up).
 
I still think we have the right to look forward to small, efficient diesel engines making true trucks like the Tahoe and the 4Runner a far more palatable option in the future. I for one enjoyed growing up with one of those particular examples and I would like nothing better to get one in the future IF it is far more efficient that is!!!

I guess i would respond with, "If ancient, inefficient CUVs" are pulling these numbers today, what will the redesigned units (with the engineers knowing full well that 35 mpg is necessary before the first sketches are drawn) of tomorrow (or 2020) be capable of? Probably even better fuel mileage, class-leading refinement and confident handling. Thus we won't be panning them (hopefully).

"1487 - You claim everything is impossible and nothing more will be achieved and that no other tech will ever be accepted. You are the second coming of the anti-catalytic converter crowd. "
 
I never said any such thing. YOu said significant gains could be made with a few tweaks but you didnt mention those tweaks. I asked you to explain what simply changes could be made to get another 3-5 mpg out of vehicles with little cost impact. You avoid directly responding by trying to restate my original point to make me seem off base.
 
"From your point of view, nothing more can be done and we've peaked as a species and as car makers. This is all basic stuff that exists today but it's not possible, apparently, to go beyond this."
 
Not my point of view at all. I am saying that much of the "easy" stuff has already been done and it in vehicles today. I never commented on most of the techonogies on your list. As for advanced transmissions, they generally give you no more than a 1-2mpg advantage over 4 speed autos. The Impalal gets 18/28 with a 4 speed and the Malibu gets 17/26 with a 6 speed. The Camry is the most efficient V6 vehicle with a 6 speed and it gets 19/28. I would hardly call that a huge savings over the Impala and its archaic 4 speed.
 
"Secondly, I must add, you defend the Big 3 manufacturers fanatically! Man, we all want US manufacturers to succeed but man, you seem to even praise them when they do something wrong. 1487, be a bit more objective. "
 
what in the world was stated in this topic that relates to defending the Big 3? I dont get what you are saying at all. I stated that GM vehicles with I-4 engines (as well as others from other brands) already have electric steering and its only good for 1mpg. How does that qualify as defending the Big 3? BDC is being a hypocrite because he hates all American cars and yet he is now saying that technology used in GM's mild hybrids is the kind of stuff we need to make gains in efficiency. Now the GM bashing press (whom BDC usually agrees with) has dismissed Gm's mild hybrids as wastes of time since they dont offer the same mileage gains as Hybrid Synergy Drive. Which is it? GM is trying to use some of the solutions that BDC is proposing to get a 10-20% gain in mileage on some models but most of the press and hybrid snobs have said that those models are a joke because they dont get 30mpg in the city and cant run on electric power alone.
 
You are being hostile towards me for no particular reason and you are trying to connect me to things I never even said.
 
 BDC, has a point but its wrong. He is a master of oversimplification and maybe that comes from not having a techinical background. His assertion that all these things can be accomplished quickly, easily and cheaply is unproven and he has yet to provide any good examples of some of the simply solutions he continues to speak about. I guess as long as his name isnt "1487" you will agree with anything he says.

"I will ignore 1487's comments b/c well... as usual, they're not very helpful and it certainly doesn't help to comment on them (although I guess I just did)... "
 
How was my commentary any less helpful than anything you wrote? It is truly a mark of ignorance to dismiss what one says simply because you don't like that person without any regard for what was said. Truth be told you probably don't even know what I said or didnt say but you decided to jump on the 1487 bashing bandwagon to score some "cool" points. Everything I said in the earlier post made sense to anyone who cared to pay attention.