[2001 ZTS]

Discuss.............

I will just mention that the 35.5 mpg (by 2016) standard is an average across the model line, each company will always probably have one 'hot rod' with crappy mileage amounst their model mix albeit in low volume and probably a rather high price.

[meford4u]

At the price of gas these days(and climbing) I really don't have an issue with it.
Drive one car as a daily driver that gets great gas mileage and the other can be the cruise down let er rip fun car that goes out on sunny days.
People will buy what they can afford.
The car companies getting forced into releasing the technology they have had for years is a good thing.
I've always thought the oil companies and the car companies were in cahoots.

[NefCanuck]

I wonder how this will really alter the car buying landscape up here though?

My guess is not that much as Canadians generally have embraced smaller and more efficient cars already and it was the Americans who were still in love with the big SUV's & trucks (Of course we had $1.40/l gas here last year, that tends to accelerate things a tad ;))

Should be an interesting few years automotively speaking, wonder if this neuters talk of a 400hp GT Mustang for 2011?

NefCanuck

[2001 ZTS]

Globe & Mail:

Quote:"OTTAWA and MONTREAL -- Canada will match tough new U.S. vehicle emission standards that President Barack Obama said yesterday will force the auto industry to develop more fuel-efficient cars to deal with global warming.

Environment Minister Jim Prentice confirmed that the Canadian government will match the new standards, which Mr. Obama said would also reduce dependence on foreign oil."

I agree with Daniel, though to the same standard it won't be as hard to do here; may even lead to a few more model choices here than the US.

[NOS2Go4Me]

Let it come - most vehicles are decent enough such that this will mandate better engine tech (Ecoboost) and better transmission tech (Powershift/Torqshift) for us all. Less wasted power = more efficiency.

So if this gets me into an Ecoboost-powered, SMG-shifted nice little Ford truck/small SUV down the road, bring it.

[ZTWsquared]

NOS2Go4Me,May 20 2009, 01:19 PM Wrote:Let it come - most vehicles are decent enough such that this will mandate better engine tech (Ecoboost) and better transmission tech (Powershift/Torqshift) for us all. Less wasted power = more efficiency.

So if this gets me into an Ecoboost-powered, SMG-shifted nice little Ford truck/small SUV down the road, bring it.
[right][snapback]287636[/snapback][/right]

Think about who's been at the forefront of fuel efficient but fun / performance vehicles for the past two decades (the Europeans) ... so ... the faster the Americans need a wider choice of fuel efficient vehicles, the more likely it is we'll see the best of Europe made available for our market.

[darkpuppet]

NOS2Go4Me,May 20 2009, 02:19 PM Wrote:Let it come - most vehicles are decent enough such that this will mandate better engine tech (Ecoboost) and better transmission tech (Powershift/Torqshift) for us all. Less wasted power = more efficiency.

So if this gets me into an Ecoboost-powered, SMG-shifted nice little Ford truck/small SUV down the road, bring it.
[right][snapback]287636[/snapback][/right]

cause nothing says 'cool dude' like a small SUV with paddle shifters. :rolleyes:

how about we save gas by pretending that SUVs aren't performance vehicles?

[NOS2Go4Me]

^^ See? This divisive thinking gets us nowhere fast.

So, either kill the V8 Mustang as a guzzler or kill the chick-model V6 Mustang, especially since it's using a truck motor that's hardly making 50 BHP/L?

What does that kind of thinking solve? Nothing.

Small SUVs are a wicked "compromise" - decent performance, off-road and soft-road capabilities, hauls 5 adults and dog/gear/stuff nicely.

Base-model Mustang - great for your "chances" with the ladies till a guy in a real "performance vehicle" blows the doors off yours and takes the girl at the same time?

Not so appealing now, are they?

Also, what's the deal with the Cherokee SRT8? Faster than a Mustang of either variety, that's what.

Also, the Hybrid Escape is a great alternative for someone who wants to... gasp... save gas while maintaining winter mobility and carrying a bit of gear at the same time. I'd take my chances on a snowy, twisty road in an Escape over a Mustang any day of the week.

Is that enough, Steveo?

[darkpuppet]

Keep going NOS...

You may have missed a lot of previous conversations, since you seem to think I care what people think about me buying a v6 stang.

I'm not a big SUV fan.. I think they're a waste. That you can fit just as much, if not more, in any car. That you can do just dandy in winter in any modern car. That most cars will do the same offroading you've done in your escape without issue.

That the SUV market is half the problem with environmentalism -- that a hybrid SUV doesn't solve anything.

I try to call it like it is... it's a culture of entitlement that lead to a general agreement that 'bigger is better', and we've gone a bit far with it. Besides -- weren't you the one who was using the term 'sheeple' recently?

I'm not trying to solve anything. I shift down to 2nd gear when I enter the tunnel to work because I like the sound.

If anyone was truly interested in saving the environment, people would
a ) change their driving habits
b ) buy cars that met their needs, not their wants.

I can make fun of niteshade, and people can make fun of my racing stripes.

[NOS2Go4Me]

This will be my last post on the subject, because obviously you guys don't get trucks. I can see by Meford's silence he's either being nice or... horror of horrors, he gets it.

The same could be said about your Mustang - it's a sense of entitlement, no one needs a convertible, it doesn't meet your needs but your wants, etc.

I bought the smallest truck that would haul a week's worth of gear, and the dog. Anything smaller was cargo suicide (i.e. the Hyundai Tuscon? Tucson?) and anything bigger was overkill. It'll tow 3500lbs if I get a hitch, the roof racks are useful, it seats 5 adults comfortably (oh no! friends!) and the dog gets the rear cargo area. It's a vehicle for all-seasons, and as for your off-roading argument - hah. I thought you actually grew up up north. Sad.

The funny thing is, I'm not trying to validate my purchase to you. I'm actually attempting to illustrate the folly in your argument. By driving a completely unnecessary vehicle yourself, you negate your own argument toward me. By your logic, you're a ricer and we should set fire to your car because what's the point in having a sports car and then removing one of its testicles? 2 fewer cylinders and 100HP less makes it what... the Mustang Hybrid wannabe?

Harsh, isn't it? Your argument casts the same stones, Steve.

EDIT - 2007 Mustang Conv V6 - 210HP, 3477 lbs (manual) - 12.1L city, 7.8L highway

2008 Escape Ltd V6 AWD - 200HP, 3547 lbs - 12.6L city, 9.0L highway.

Not so different now, are they?

[darkpuppet]

ok.. you win and you're correct, by your arguments alone... our cars are nearly the same -- equally silly purchases.

But then again, I wasn't pretending my car was a practical purchase... or some sort of all-weather performance machine.

[NefCanuck]

I just hope that in chasing the fuel economy holy grail we don't end up fighting amongst ourselves as to who "needs" a particular car for a particular use (Seems like we already started, unfortunately)

Besides, I like my midsized sedan w/AWD, ever see me try to get into the drivers seat of a Suzuki SX4 (smallest AWD sold in Canada)?

It looks like a contortionist's act (and you'll learn all sorts of fun vocabulary too :P)

NefCanuck