Detroit's 2020 35 mpg Challenge

[culver]

Well consider the orignal Mondeo sold in the US as the Contour. Great car but it sold poorly because it cost as much as the larger (yet much older) Taurus. What did Ford have to do, they discontented and cost cut the car. Many of the nice things such as fully adjustable seats on even the base cars and heated mirrors were removed. Equipped as it would be in Europe, Ford couldn't sell the car for a profit. I suspect they were thinking about that when the elected not to give us what was promising to be a more expensive gen 2 Focus. Perhaps that wasn't a bad move when gas prices were lower (when that choice was made). It certainly seems like a bad move today but it is unfair to judge the choice in historical context. To be fair to those who made the decision we have to ask was it the right choice at the time, not in retrospect. Sometimes we just get lucky in retrospect.

Also, keep in mind without general road system handling is likely less important and ride quality more important. It’s not just the domestics who seemed to have reached that conclusion. The Japanese have largely followed the same path. Look at the size of the US Accord vs the Euro model (sold here at the Acura TSX).

BTW, I think the Focus choice was dab.

[culver]

I think in general it is safe to assume that the United States exhibits a pride in home made products more than Europeans do, especially when it comes to cars - however this is only a cultural observation I have made and this could be incorrect.

I have heard the opposite. I suspect it's case by case. I have known people who seem to take pride in things that are not domestic. Perhaps it stems from the days when domestic goods were the common, mass produced stuff while imports were the high dollar rare items. I also have known people who want domestic because it's domestic.

I suspect we would find the spread on the "local bias" bell curve is very wide.

[Ferrer]

Well consider the orignal Mondeo sold in the US as the Contour. Great car but it sold poorly because it cost as much as the larger (yet much older) Taurus. What did Ford have to do, they discontented and cost cut the car. Many of the nice things such as fully adjustable seats on even the base cars and heated mirrors were removed. Equipped as it would be in Europe, Ford couldn't sell the car for a profit. I suspect they were thinking about that when the elected not to give us what was promising to be a more expensive gen 2 Focus. Perhaps that wasn't a bad move when gas prices were lower (when that choice was made). It certainly seems like a bad move today but it is unfair to judge the choice in historical context. To be fair to those who made the decision we have to ask was it the right choice at the time, not in retrospect. Sometimes we just get lucky in retrospect.

Also, keep in mind without general road system handling is likely less important and ride quality more important. It’s not just the domestics who seemed to have reached that conclusion. The Japanese have largely followed the same path. Look at the size of the US Accord vs the Euro model (sold here at the Acura TSX).

BTW, I think the Focus choice was dab.

I think that basically we are agreeing.

Let's see how the Astra does in the US market. It'll be an interesting indicator.

[culver]

I forgot about the Astra. You may be right about it. I think it is being delivered without any reduction in interior quality. Would I be correct in assuming it represents the "average" of its class in fit, finish, handling, etc? I do wish it would get more displacement over here. Again this is a US vs Euro difference but here we could happily have say a 2L vs the 1.8(?) it's coming with. It likely wouldn't hurt mileage yet would give it more available power. Then again, I believe it is unchanged but for the badges, but I don't know that for certain.

[Matra et Alpine]

Well consider the orignal Mondeo sold in the US as the Contour. Great car but it sold poorly because it cost as much as the larger (yet much older) Taurus. What did Ford have to do, they discontented and cost cut the car.

And lost market share to the Japanese et al imports who retained quality
Selling more at less profit isn't good sense other than keeping factiroies open and UAW workers wages.

[Ferrer]

I forgot about the Astra. You may be right about it. I think it is being delivered without any reduction in interior quality. Would I be correct in assuming it represents the "average" of its class in fit, finish, handling, etc? I do wish it would get more displacement over here. Again this is a US vs Euro difference but here we could happily have say a 2L vs the 1.8(?) it's coming with. It likely wouldn't hurt mileage yet would give it more available power. Then again, I believe it is unchanged but for the badges, but I don't know that for certain.

Yes, the Astra is a good indicator for an average C-segment hatchback. If americans (and canadians) like it they might as well like our Focus, the Bravo or the C4.

About the engine I believe it is the biggest displacement normally aspirated unit currently available, which may be the most US-like choice and it still features a four speed auto (or a five speed manual). So sadly you don't get the turbocharged 1.6-litre engines (which would be my choice) or the more powerful 2 litre turbo nor the automated manuals but I think in essence nothing else has been changed.

[culver]

I could see it being the biggest motor offered. We never got the smaller Fiesta motors back in the day. Who would want the 1.1L when the 1.6L doesn't use much extra gas, cost no more to maintain and gas is relatively cheap (though it came over during a fuel price spike).

[Kitdy]

Ok, so would canadians pay such money for such car?

No.

Yes, the Astra is a good indicator for an average C-segment hatchback. If americans (and canadians) like it they might as well like our Focus, the Bravo or the C4.

I appreciate your inclusion of my modest nation.

[jcp123]

Step 1: get the stripped down models back. That would be the easiest way to shed weight. Lose power windows, mirrors, and seats, carpeting, some sound deadening, and a/c for base models and you can even get existing compact chassis back down under 2500lbs. The bonus is that the cars are cheaper and more reliable, too.
Step 2: more diesels. That requires wrestling the EPA and CARB...which is why I think it won't get done.
Step 3: Utilize more lean-burn engines as well as other techniques such as DFCO (decelerative fuel cutoff...you know, when the engine cuts the injectors while coasting in gear on manuals)
Step 4: I hate, hate, hate to say it...but downsizing vehicles will probably become necessary too.

[culver]

All those are good suggestions but let me play devils advocate for a moment.

DA1. Consumers have become used to many of the features and attributes that we would have to strip out to get weight down. We would have to pull back on safety, or NVH controls or accessories that people have come to expect in cars. Consumers are willing to pay extra for most of these ideas. How would we now convince them to forgo those same items?

DA2. Diesels are good but they have issues beyond just the EPA. Currently there aren’t many diesel stations off the highway. That’s kind of a pain to have to figure out where all the diesel stations are. Sure, it’s not like I’m trying to find E85 but still, I can’t just assume the nearest station will have it. Also, diesel fuel smells and is oily if you step in it or get any on your car/clothes etc. Finally, around here diesel costs about 15% more. Between having to pay a lot more for a diesel motor and more for the fuel it doesn’t seem like that great a plan.

DA3. Lean burn is hard to do without NOx issues. However, unlike the above two points it is good because the consumer doesn’t have to know anything changed aside from paying a bit more for the motor. If the emissions issues can be solved this is hard to argue against. Then again the emissions part isn’t trivial.

DA4. Again, a great way to improve mileage but how do you convince someone to do it? Sure I hate to pay a lot for gas but I may be OK getting say 25mpg average because I don’t drive that much or I really just don’t care about the extra cost that much. How are you going to convince me it’s in my best interest to go smaller?

OK, DA mode off. Your suggestions are good but the hard thing from a marketing point of view is how do you get consumers to buy into what you think needs to be done?

[Quiggs]

It's pretty simple. Gas prices are not at a point where people are willing to let it affect their car purchasing decisions, unless they're already in the market for a car. And even then, who wants to go from driving a comfortable full size sedan or whatever, to a subcompact, for another 6 or 7mpg...

[baddabang]

Ummmm I average 34mpg?

[MRR]

It's pretty simple. Gas prices are not at a point where people are willing to let it affect their car purchasing decisions, unless they're already in the market for a car. And even then, who wants to go from driving a comfortable full size sedan or whatever, to a subcompact, for another 6 or 7mpg...

Which is why CAFE is such a stupid idea. I would have supported a higher gas tax (even though I hate this idea in principle as well) over cafe which would change consumer demand for more fuel efficient vehicles and put the burden on the consumer instead of forcing the auto manufacturers to sell cars for which there is no demand.

[Ferrer]

It's pretty simple. Gas prices are not at a point where people are willing to let it affect their car purchasing decisions, unless they're already in the market for a car. And even then, who wants to go from driving a comfortable full size sedan or whatever, to a subcompact, for another 6 or 7mpg...

But perhaps a general downsize would help. And at the same time making it smaller doesn't mean they can't be as comfortable.

[Kitdy]

Which is why CAFE is such a stupid idea. I would have supported a higher gas tax (even though I hate this idea in principle as well) over cafe which would change consumer demand for more fuel efficient vehicles and put the burden on the consumer instead of forcing the auto manufacturers to sell cars for which there is no demand.

But perhaps a general downsize would help. And at the same time making it smaller doesn't mean they can't be as comfortable.

I think MRR is onto something here.

I've just thought of a bit of an odd quirk in the CAFE standards.

Auto manufacturers will probably want to increase their compact vehicle sales - things like the Aveo, Yaris, and Fit. These cars will get them further to their weighted fleet average of 35 mpg. The question is: does the consumer even want these cars? Sales of mid-size vehicles are the bread and butter of the North American car market and I am not sure that even with increasing gas prices people will flock in significant enough numbers to compact cars to boost the fleet average of the manufacturers.

What I can see happening is an excess strive for increased fuel economy in the mid-size segment possibly resulting in a higher percentage increase in price when compared with compact cars as the manufacturers desperately try to increase fuel economy drastically in the car that a plurality if not majority of buyers in this market want.

The question that remains is will the disproportionate in crease in price of mid-size and full size cars change enough people's minds to change to compact cars or will buyers stick with larger cars and possibly create the strange scenario of the manufacturers producing cars that people don;t want to buy? Am I missing something here?

Or will the market somehow work it all out on itself by forcing the larger sized cars to increase in price significantly enough to force people into buying smaller more fuel efficient cars? I am far form an economist so if anyone with an understanding in this field (I am looking at you Ferrer) could chime in it would be of great help.

I can certainly see the advantage of an increased fuel tax if the market is going to be forced to build cars that nobody wants to buy I must admit. Furthermore, the government could make ludicrous amounts of money from this as well. Only problem is, I cannot see a political faction brave/suicidal enough to propose an increase in gas tax significant enough even over the course of more than a decade - to decrease emissions. The people would likely be up in arms about this.