Originally Posted By TomSawyer I am glad to see the Administration finally up the fuel economy standards for SUVs and light trucks. Car makers will have to improve the average fuel economy of their light trucks and SUVs by about 10% over the next five years. I think this is a great move if we are serious about reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Good for the White House. <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060329/ap_on_bi_ge/fuel_economy" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 60329/ap_on_bi_ge/fuel_economy</a>
Originally Posted By PlainoLJoe Honda already meets and exceeds those standards. Guess ford and chevy will have to actually do something about their stuff.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom I'm sure the major auto makers can easily accomidate this request. What I am impressed with is that the White House has finally agreed with greater standards which were already on the book but the Feds allowed the major auto makers to not improve gas milage. Its amazing what happens when you loose domestic auto purchasing to Japan and South Korea.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom Anyone else remember the Zell Miller speach of "leave my pickup truck alone". What an idiot. Zell was all for raising the bar on cars. But completely against raising the bar on trucks.
Originally Posted By woody The US auto makers do not want better fuel economy. They think it costs too much to design and implement. That type of thinking ruined the US auto makers marketshare. They don't make cars the consumers want. They thought US consumers will tolerate a SUV with bad fuel economy. This is short term thinking. Eventually, the marketplace wants a more efficient SUV. The White House can influence the auto industry on fuel economy, but it can't convince the US auto makers to make better cars or be more sensitive to consumer concerns. The gap is for foreign car makers to fill. That's a shame.
Originally Posted By PlainoLJoe and its a not manufacturing costs because alot of Japanese auto manufacturers make their cars here in the US or Canada. Its simply Ford, Chevy, GM, etc not wanting to make a quality product.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom The "Big Three" already make fuel efficient vehicles that they build and sell elsewhere in the world. The technology and manufactoring are all ready in place, just not in this country.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<I think this is a great move if we are serious about reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Good for the White House.>> We reduce foreign oil by drilling for oil in our own country. Like in Alaska or off the coast lines or in Wyoming or Utah. I know that's hard to understand for many people, but it shouldn't be.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Reducing oil consumption in general is a good idea, not just because of our dependency on foreign oil.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <We reduce foreign oil by drilling for oil in our own country. Like in Alaska or off the coast lines or in Wyoming or Utah. I know that's hard to understand for many people, but it shouldn't be.> drilling....er.....uh....Alask....er....ummmm....what? I don't understand.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj A 10% improvement in fuel economy is hardly an improvement at all. If this is ambitious as we can get in our goal setting, we might as well expect to pay $3 or $4 per gallon at the pump from now on. Remember when American industry sought to achieve the unachievable instead of marginable improvements that don't amount to much of anything?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<We reduce foreign oil by drilling for oil in our own country. Like in Alaska or off the coast lines or in Wyoming or Utah. I know that's hard to understand for many people, but it shouldn't be.>> Beau... You're the one who doesn't get it. Say a person makes a decent salary of $100K per year. Unfortunately this person spends WAY beyond his means. He drives a Ferrari and lives in a $750K house. He can't even afford to pay his charge card minimums. He uses a cash advance on a new card to pay the minimums on the old cards. You tell me... what is the problem here? 1) The guy just doesn't make enough and should get another job? Or 2) The guy makes a very decent income and squanders it? I think the answer is #2, and applies to the oil situation too. We squander what we have, using more oil per capita than any other nation on earth. It's high time we got on a budget.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad Well about the original post... This is going to hurt me. I have 5 children, the OLDEST is only 11, and my 6th child will be born in late May of this year. I ONLY have two choices... I can drive the Suburban or the Excursion. I choose the Suburban frame, with the Yukon XL body/trim and have been driving this type of vehicle for about 8 years now. I am terrified that GM is already going to go bankrupt...ofcourse we can get a few more of these as new as they can do the whole reorganization thing and whay not, but what if they do eventually CLOSE all doors for business and disappear? I can't live without my Yukon XL / Suburban! It's all I've got! I wish the gov would butt out and forget this rediculose feul economy thing. It can only make GM even less profitable by having to meet it. I am shocked that Dubya would do this. arggggg!
Originally Posted By PlainoLJoe why not get a pilot? Seats 8, has good cargo area and gets good gas mileage and exceeds emissions standards.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
