American automakers are losing the race to make more fuel-efficient vehicles : technology

[+] KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 99 points 11 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

[deleted]

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 62 points 11 months ago

Yeah hah, they are largely not even in the race.

They are still able to sell SUVs and basically at this point road legal monster trucks to a consumer base that still cannot grasp the concept that they could do 99% of what they use a car for with a sedan or hatchback, and that 1% of the time just rent a uhaul.... they could do that and save tons of money on gas with the greater fuel efficiency.

But American car owners are not exactly known for making rational decisions or being good drivers.

Much more important to flaunt status and lifestyle with a car.

Much more important.

[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

The US government created this issue by exempting trucks and SUVs from fuel economy standards imposed on cars. That was the initial motivating factor behind car manufacturers pushing these large vehicles. Now it doesn’t upset car dealers that they can sell them for more money. Also, consumers feel safer in larger vehicles… largely because all the other vehicles on the road are now bigger and will do more harm to smaller vehicles. And, because it’s America, there is a special individualism factor baked in that prioritizes ego over rational sound decision making for the collective betterment of humanity and the environment.

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Gonna be reeeeallly fun when all the people who daily drive these things realize:

Wait a minute...

what even is peak oil ?

WHAT?! Gas prices are basically never going to go down again and just keep going higher?!

-===-

My guess is they will then all start complaining about the lack of public transportation, having spent their entire lives voting against funding it.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Gas prices are basically never going to go down again

Unfortunately they will, and this is where a responsible government should step in to manage the market for our future, not just for our right now or oil companies profits.

The problem is that we’re not running out of oil reachable with current technology, fast enough. Peak oil is likely driven by reductions in demand, rather than supply, which pretty much guarantees lower prices. I would bet this will be a drawn out process with multiple cycles of demand decreases driving down prices, leading to shrinking oil supply industry leading to higher prices.

[-] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Buyers feel safer in a taller car, and car dealers are happy to sell this bullshit, even though SUVs are far more likely to roll over in a crash.

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 13 points 11 months ago

The reason people feel safer in a taller car is because of everyone else that has a tall car.

The driving american seems to use the mutually assured destruction doctrine from the cold war as a how to guide rather than a warning.

Worse, this is spreading ocer to Europe as well, though governments are starting to tax heavier vehicles more than normal vehicles, and that is fantastic.

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

One of the funniest things in the world to me is that I first saw an Aston Mini in I think the Bourne Identity in the late 00s. Or maybe it was some other Spy Thriller from around the same time?

Fast forward to today and there is now an American version, still called a Mini, that is just as big as every other SUV.

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/american-trucks-suvs-almost-bigger-world-war-ii-tanks/

These are not exactly precise, and I cannot believe I am actually citing the DailyMail, but you get the idea:

[+] helenslunch@feddit.nl 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

[deleted]

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 4 points 11 months ago

I mean I agree that this should be done, but the problem is that basically that would instantly destroy what is left of the entire economy.

People and shipping business are operating on razor thin margins right now, and if the price of gas basically doubled in a 3 to 9 month period from ending all of the subsidies to oil and gas companies, basically logistics firms would go out of business, large retailers with their own shipping would make up the slack by cutting standards and raising consumer prices, and a huge amount of peoples personal budgets would collapse as they can no longer afford their daily commute.

This of course was and is the plan of oil and gas companies. You cannot double the price a what is functionally a drug the economy is and has been addicted to for quite a long time (cheap gas) without, at this point, life threatening withdrawals.

[-] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 4 points 11 months ago

You are an idiot if you think the consumer base wants larger vehicles. It is the manufacturers who want larger vehicles. Widen a car's stance by 3 inches and lengthen it by 6 inches, and it's suddenly in a class that allows higher emissions and lower economy.

Every manufacturer has killed off all of their subcompact options rather than even trying to meet the tightening standards for that class. The perverse incentives they have push them to build bigger.

Paradoxically, the only thing that is going to bring back efficient subcompacts is eliminating economy requirements on the smallest, most efficient class of car, rather than tightening them.

[+] helenslunch@feddit.nl 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

[deleted]

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

This consumer made that decision because the Model 3 has a tiny triangular door that is frustrating for tall people to use, plus I want to give my teenagers room to be comfortable in the back seat. It’s reasonable to upgrade from a car that “seats 5” legally to one that actually seats your family comfortably.

I understand that to some of you I’m part of the problem, but I see an awful lot of single people commuting to offices in trucks and full sized SUVs, so I like to think that’s different

[-] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I don't see how the door on a Model 3 is tiny? I've been in my friend's, as well as in countless taxis, and never had an issue, just seems like a normal size/shape door to me.

I doubt it'd be used so extensively for taxis if it was difficult to get in/out of.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I’ve never seen it as a taxi
the pillar is too far forward, so us talker people need to maneuver in and back. However it’s too narrow to bend a little at the waist to get in, so I need an extra joint in the middle of my back. Usually I make do by jamming my head against the car frame to force my neck to bend down to my shoulder. Not fun

load more comments (20 replies)

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I would argue that it is both. You are certainly correct that manufacturers have many incentives.

But to deny that many, many Americans will openly tell you they want a larger car to feel safe, a big ole impractical truck to signal masculinity, stuff like that... I dont really see how thats a tenable position.

People car shame other people all the fucking time.

"Oh you drive a hybrid, pff, good luck when you need to haul 3 tons up a mountain!"

"You know, if you wanted your kids to be really safe, youve got to get an (insert favorite car company's latest SUV model), they the best safety record."

Now unless you want to argue that ultimately these consumer preferences were ultimately created by the marketing campaigns of manufacturers years ago and today, amd thus all of that counts as 'the manufacturers interest', then I mean well sure yes I agree in that sense, but it seems like that is not what you are saying.

To your last paragraph, I would appreciate it if you could walk me through how removing various efficiency requirements on standard and compact and subcompacts would lead them to becoming more efficient.

I can see that argument working in a relative sense, if you mean that newer such cars post-regulatory removal/relaxation would be more efficient than newer larger cars, SUVs and trucks, but not in an absolute sense, as in significantly more efficient than the previously built models of smaller cars they are no longer producing.

To me it seems the only way to get a more efficient, market viable car is to just switch to a hybrid version or close analog of a gas only sedan or compact or subcompact or hatchback or w/e.

But that will be a hard pill to swallow for especially the truck crowd, which has largely spent the last two decades loudly telling us that hybrid and electrical vehicles are for f*gs and liberal antifa communists, publicly and privately mocking and berating any one who even considers purchasing one.

[-] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Sure, many Americans do have a need for very large vehicles. But there is a similar need for very small vehicles: DoorDash drivers, for example. There are millions of courier drivers in the US. Doordash alone counted 2 million 3 years ago, and their business has only increased since. Paying for their own fuel, these millions of couriers have a considerable financial incentive for the smallest vehicles they can find.

Manufacturers are meeting the demands of consumers needing very large vehicles, with a wide range of models and options. But they are not making any small cars anymore. None. Nothing on the new car market is as small or smaller than the subcompacts of the 90's.

You are not getting a true sense of consumer preferences, because those consumers who do want small cars are being forced to select from larger options.

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Completely agreed, and I know this personally:

Used Priuses, in particular Prius C's, are reliable, easy and cheap to maintain and have incredible MPG compared to many other cars.

This explains why after I was mugged and my Prius C was stolen, I saw it being driven around by a Lyft Driver 2 months after a corrupt used car salesman recycled it into the economy.

Had the same missing hubcap, same minor scratches. Naturally of course, the police didnt give a shit.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 2 points 11 months ago

publicly and privately mocking and berating any one who even considers purchasing one.

Those days are pretty much over. The performance of the pending generation of EVs is so high and they'll be so common place the luddites will exposed as such.

The new Cadillac Lyric is an excellent example. 5 Passenger SUV and if you spend $3,000 extra it goes from RWD with 300 Horsepower to AWD with 500 Horsepower. Hell the new Silverado EV will have 750 Horsepower and nearly 800 ft/lbs of torque in it's top trim. Those kinds of numbers simply cannot be denied, even by the tuned and modified diesel freaks.

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago

Hah, I agree with you that /logically/ EVs and Hybrids are just basically great and often superior options at this point...

...but i feel like you do not know many hillbillies and rednecks.

Logic is not exactly their forte.

People make their conspicuous consumption habits /into/ their personalities, and ... well basically I can easily imagine that if a gun toting, coal rolling truck owner with the biiiiggest truck nuts you have ever seen... i can easily see that if he crashed or had to sell his truck and drive his battered wife's honda civic to work, he could actually become seriously depressed.

Maybe I have just known a lot of really shitty people in my life, I dunno.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

This is also a downside to the cheap gasoline we’ve enjoyed in the US, relative to most of the world. There’s less incentive for us to make a more efficient choice

[-] muffedtrims@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

BuT mA FreEduMb!

[-] FinalRemix@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

they could do 99% of what they use a car for with a sedan or hatchback

I have an '04 Impala that perfectly fits a cello in a hard case in the trunk, or belted into a passenger seat. My parents' Highlander won't fit that anywhere without folding something out of the way. How the fuck did we lose so much cargo space in a larger vehicle?!

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Mystech@lemmy.world 66 points 11 months ago

"American Automakers Refuse to Participate in Race to Make Accessible, Fuel-Efficient Vehicles"

Fixed that title for you, Verge.

[-] spudwart@spudwart.com 50 points 11 months ago

They are, however, winning the race to make more gas guzzling profit generators that destroy this planet for the benefit of their shareholders.

[-] Poggervania@kbin.social 43 points 11 months ago

Also doesn’t help that the leader of the COP, Saudi Arabia, was literally found making deals for oil and has a huge operation to try to resurge oil consumption everywhere.

And of course, the US Auto industry loves light trucks and SUVs because of how fucked the CAFE standards are, meaning it’s cheaper and easier to create unsafe cars that are not only more dangerous to the environment, but also more dangerous to people and cities.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 16 points 11 months ago

And more dangerous to their drivers as well, because while they may "win" collisions, they also roll over much easier.

[-] theyoyomaster@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago

Until the exemptions for “light trucks” go away this won’t change. The current CAFE standards reward automakers for making even larger, less efficient and more dangerous “passenger” vehicles every year.

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 4 points 11 months ago

On top of that average lifetime of a car in US is 12 years so those car's will be on the roads for a decade or two after exemptions are removed.

[-] TheIllustrativeMan@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Much longer than 12, that's the average age (including new cars). This site says the average lifespan is closer to 17 years.

[-] RainfallSonata@lemmy.world 29 points 11 months ago

Were they trying to win?

[-] AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 11 months ago

Unchanged rules of CAFE standard remain stupid. In other news, water wet.

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago

I thought they already lost during the OPEC oil crisis and then lobbied congress to put import restrictions on foreign cars to save themselves.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They did, decades ago. That is no longer an issue.

Now we have current efficiency standards that focus on cars. However trucks have much lower requirements because businesses might need additional capabilities. No individual would ever buy a truck as a personal vehicle , right? So you have these criteria meant to give a break to businesses, but ever larger vehicles mean that personal vehicles now also qualify. They can be made more cheaply, with more profit.

Somehow, they didn’t consider the criteria would be abused for more profitable personal vehicles

Pickup truck? Clearly a contractor so let’s give you a break
All wheel drive and high clearance? Clearly a rare specialty off-road vehicle that needs a break
Seats 7+, even if they’re only toddlers? Clearly a transportation service, so needs a break in efficiency to carry more passengers
Tow hitch? Clearly in need of extra torque and heavy duty frame for whatever business need you’re towing

[-] itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com 17 points 11 months ago

They lost this race to Japanese car manufacturers like 30 years ago.

[-] Rooskie91@discuss.online 11 points 11 months ago

How can you win when you're running in the opposite direction?

[-] BulbasaurBabu@lemmings.world 3 points 11 months ago

This just in: Obese Man perpetually on the couch isn't going to finish the marathon, experts say.

[-] cyd@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They don't have to worry, because the Buy American provisions in recent legislation (passed under both Trump and Biden) protects them from competition by more fuel efficient foreign competitors.

[-] gian@lemmy.grys.it 3 points 11 months ago

True, but in time they will be able to sell only in the US as their cars will not be allowed anywhere else. So if they will want to compete outside US, they will need two lines of the same products. Then they will realize that it will be less expensive to keep only the one that can sell in more places.
If they have not failed in the meantime.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 4 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Real-world fuel economy in model year 2022 rose slightly to 26 miles per gallon, according to the EPA’s latest Automotive Trends Report.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) finalized that rule back in 2022, and earlier this year, it proposed even higher standards for cars made between 2027 and 2032.

Numbers for real-world fuel economy tend to be about 25 percent lower than official compliance data might show, according to Dan Becker, director of the Safe Climate Transport Campaign at the Center for Biological Diversity.

Average fuel economy for Ford, General Motors, and Jeep and Dodge parent company Stellantis last year ranged between about 21mpg and 23mpg.

Supersized passenger vehicles burn through more gas than smaller cars, which also means that they create more tailpipe pollution that worsens air quality and causes climate change.

Fortunately, the emission rate for planet-heating carbon dioxide from new vehicles still dropped 3 percent to a record low last year, the EPA reports.

The original article contains 689 words, the summary contains 158 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

Technology

Our Rules

Approved Bots