Smart Car

[John_C]

So who thinks this car


getting 40mpg is going to sell in the U.S. market for $11,000 to  $15,000?   IMHO  it looks like a lot more red ink for Daimler-Chrysler.  

Article here:
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/detroit_auto_show_2007/41/;_ylc=X3oDMTFnNXNlNGJmBF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEc2VjA2ZwLXB1bHNlBHNsawNjb25jZXB0LTAzMDcwNy1zbWFydA--

[glenn-k]

They failed to explain how they managed to keep a little puddle jumper like that down to getting only 40 miles per gallon.  Too much concern for the oil companies I guess.

Cute - small - too small - I wouldn't buy it.

[benevolance]

The Toyota Corolla gets 41 miles to the gallon....It seats 5 comfortably has a huge truck every amenity..A great name warranty everything....

Why would someone ride in a little red wagon with a sheet wrapped around in it to get merely 40 miles to the gallon.

What we talked about in the Micro Cars segment was making a small sacrifice of room and power but that was for 50-60 miles to the gallon and the car was not to be 15,000....More like $10,000

Not only is that smart car ugly...It is teeny tiny... a 2 seater....And it only gives 40 miles to the gallon....It should be 80 miles to the gallon at least!

[John_C]

So much for German Engineering.   They have dumped over   $1 BILLION  in that project.   It appears that in the acquisition they also got Dodge Chrysler's brainpower. And the concept car that gets 70 to 80 mpg and seats 4 languishes on the back burner.   It's why they are bleeding red ink and Honda & Toyota are doing very well.

[benevolance]

I have some links around here somewhere about the car you are speaking of

20 years ago the federal government told the big 3 automakers in America they needed a car that gave 80 miles to the gallon or whatever...all three started working on the project and pumped billions into it.

Chrysler got pretty close with a ultra lighteweight roomy car that came close to the 80 miles per gallon target...I think it was in the 70's somewhere if you drove it under normal circumstances...Pretty impressive when you think about the fact that it was not a hybrid...

GM got over the 80 MPG but they have used advanced electronic systems with their car for efficiency... braking steering etc...

I will try to find those links

[John_C]

I was referring to the car I posted the other day.  Also a Daimler-Chrysler project..  the bionic car patterned after the boxfish

[benevolance]

John

I love that little Car... a little tweaking here and there to take some the freekish look out of it and it would be a winner for sure

[Sassy]

All About Plug-In Hybrids (PHEVs)

[benevolance]

Their math is bad..... a ten year old kid should be able to poke holes in that math....

But the idea is sound enough.... once batteries come around and the tech is there

I also do not think they should be allowed to say a car gives 100 miles per gallon unless it really does... They are saying it gives 100 miles per gallon if you drive less than 20 or 30 miles per day...After that it is just a regular car... running on gasoline

that is like saying your car gives 100 miles a gallon driving down Pike's Peak...

Great even if it is true...How many people are driving down pike's peak on a daily basis?

I think that once the battery tech of litium Sulphide batteries advances the industry and triples the range of an electric vehicle over HiMH batteries...That for commuting short distances Electric vehicles will be extremely practical...Cheap and efficient.

But they need to make sure in the meantime that their statements are accurate and realistic.

The one reason we need nasty dirty combustion engines is the size of this country and the amount of driving around we do.... For Electric cars to work... we need to be able to get in with 4 other people and have room for junk in the trunk....And drive 1000 miles a day without major inconveniences such as extended lay over for re-charging...If this was remotely possible then the gasoline and diesel industry would be in a lot of trouble...Until then there is no danger of that happening.

[Sassy]

I didn't read much of the article, kinda skimmed the 1st section & read the headings... you musta read it with a fine tooth comb, Peter!    The article sounded good on the surface, I guess I better not post something I haven't read very well   .

[Sassy]

Here's an article about an elderly couple who converted their car to use vegetable oil - they were visited by
State makes big fuss over local couple's vegetable oil car fuel - they were visited by to agents of the Illinois Internal Revenue & threatened with possible felony charges if they didn't pay the gas tax - retroactively, at that!  This article was on this website
http://lonelantern.org/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=137&Itemid=140        

Written by Administrator  
Wednesday, 07 March 2007

By HUEY FREEMAN - H&R Staff Writer

DECATUR - David and Eileen Wetzel don't get going in the morning quite as early as they used to.

So David Wetzel, 79, was surprised to hear a knock on the door at their eastside home while he was still getting dressed.

Two men in suits were standing on his porch.

"They showed me their badges and said they were from the Illinois Department of Revenue," Wetzel said. "I said, 'Come in.' Maybe I shouldn't have."


Gary May introduced himself as a special agent. The other man, John Egan, was introduced as his colleague. May gave the Wetzels his card, stating that he is the senior agent in the bureau of criminal investigations.

"I was afraid," Eileen Wetzel said. "I came out of the bathroom. I thought: Good God, we paid our taxes. The check didn't bounce."

The agents informed the Wetzels that they were interested in their car, a 1986 Volkswagen Golf, that David Wetzel converted to run primarily from vegetable oil but also partly on diesel.

Wetzel uses recycled vegetable oil, which he picks up weekly from an organization that uses it for frying food at its dining facility.

"They told me I am required to have a license and am obligated to pay a motor fuel tax," David Wetzel recalled. "Mr. May also told me the tax would be retroactive."

Since the initial visit by the agents on Jan. 4, the Wetzels have been involved in a struggle with the Illinois Department of Revenue. The couple, who live on a fixed budget, have been asked to post a $2,500 bond and threatened with felony charges.  (go to website for rest of story)

[benevolance]

Sassy

In theory it is a great idea.... The problem is that they cannot back up the claims in the headlines...And when you read the story you see the 100 miles per gallon  is only achieved when you run on the batteries until they are dead and then run a few miles on gasoline and combine both distances for the mileage.

Another thing that they do not add into that calculation is the cost to charge the batteries.

They do mention that it is 25% the cost of Gasoline at $3.00 a gallon to run a car on electricity.... But in the 100 miles per gallon they are not adding in the cost of charging the car to drive that combined distance.

Maybe in 5 years when the range has been tripled...And you can go 300 miles on a charge and pull in and get re-charged in 10 minutes at a filling station....Maybe then the claims testimonies about electric vehicles will be all true and worth reading and getting all warm and fuzzy about

For now it is just a great idea and something to strive for.

[Amanda_931]

I can't really imagine buying an electric car with a 40 or even 60 mile range.  Cool if you are delivering stuff within a mile range of a plug, and it charges fast.  

Scooter maybe.  (if it will get that with the lights on)

And the hybrids that get better "mileage" in the city than the country don't do me much good at all.

These guys are cute.  But at last report the good ones have not hit the market yet.  Battery problems and/or the wonderful new ones aren't available yet.

http://www.evtamerica.com/

[benevolance]

range of 30-45 miles with the lead acid batteries...

Right idea...Great innovation....battery tech is keeping it from flying...

Lithium ion would extend the range of the scooter to 150+ miles...

And it does 45 miles an hour pretty fast for a scooter

[jonseyhay]

What do you reckon Pete, do you think this is a goer?
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/03/30/spark.air.car/index.html

This site for a bit of the tech on this system
http://www.aircaraccess.com/faq.htm

A bit more from Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_engine

[benevolance]

Jonesy

I think it is an amazing idea...There are questions I have...

I am worried about the range...Because this is still an electric car... It has a compressed air tank which we could fill up at home with a cheap simple compressor....

I wonder what the range is on a tank of air?

The car runs on electricity at cruising speeds...And on air when starting off and accelerating....So it used batteries...Which as we have discussed here many times have a very limited capacity for energy storage currently.

But the potential for this is limitless...Pull into a filling station and get a tank of Air for a buck or 2 bucks and drive on!

Wow!

Of course they would start charging 25 bucks for a tank of air that today costs 25 cents at the gas station if this came about...

Remember the government would need to get taxes out of it to replace the taxes lost by you not consuming oil and gas....

[benevolance]

I just spent the last hour googling all kinds of sites on the air engine...And it is intriguing...

Again how is the government going to make money off this...Until the government can get their cut... it has in my mind no chance of success

the three minute fill up of the air tank is encouraging...and they are working on carbon fiber tanks for higher pressure that would allow a 5 passenger gar to have a 5-600 mile range.... Which is excellent...And would allow everyday people to use them as they use gasoline cars.

But the government needs their cut....When you fill up and it costs $40 bucks... $10-15 of that go directly to the government. So when you pull in with the air motored car...Will you pay a $15 fee in addition to what the station wants to fill the tank....Most people would think this outrageous... A non fossil fuel burning tax....Or some such...

All this foolishness could be avoided simply...if each state took the number of motorists they have on the road (best guess)..and took the money they were likely to collect in gasoline taxes...  Take that figure... divide it by the motorists in the state...And apply that to each motorist in their drivers license and license plates....And they could leave taxing gasoline the hell alone...

This would eliminate the government wanting to arrest 80 year old couples who use veggie oil (another post on this site) or the government in Arizona proposing a tax for Prius cars because they give too much fuel economy....

while people would bitch and moan about their license and plates doubling and tripling in price... This change in the way we are taxes would be fair to all motorists....And...It would remove the restrictions that have been in place for new technologies...

This would truly allow independence on foreign oil and gas...And it would allow us to choose other ways to commute and travel across the country.

This way when someone converts their car to burn veggie diesel or buys an electric car...They can save the environment without having to worry if IRS agents are coming to get them...

[MountainDon]

All About Plug-In Hybrids (PHEVs)

I guess I missed this post. Interesting.

I never could understand why they didn't make it possible to plug in a hybrid at home. Makes a lot of sense.

If the at home impedance power connection could be standardized between makes we could have some real competition.

Peter did hit a nail right on the head tho with the note that we Americans need big vehicles because of the big distances. Partly true. Partly we're spoiled.

However, for me a car that would run totally electric for most of my normal short trips would fulfill most needs. Longer trips would be no worse than a regular gas only vehicle, unless the battery weight caused to much deterioration in fuel mileage.  

More of us have to adjust our thinking as to just what we need in our motor vehicles. Not what we want, what we need.

Of course we want our luxuries, our perks, and I'm one of them. I do have a daily driver Honda Civic I like. I have the Cherokee, mostly recreational, the RV (a recreational luxury), an old Land Cruiser I can't bear to part with (an emotional luxury). A smart thing I have is my 30 year old utility trailer (custom made 4'2" wide, 10'2" long box with extendable tongue (for longer loads). I can also pull it behind the Honda when the load is light but bulky.

[MountainDon]

All this foolishness could be avoided simply...if each state took the number of motorists they have on the road (best guess)..and took the money they were likely to collect in gasoline taxes...  Take that figure... divide it by the motorists in the state...And apply that to each motorist in their drivers license and license plates....And they could leave taxing gasoline the hell alone...

It's absolutely unreasonable to charge some retired person who drives maybe 10 miles a week back & forth to the grocery store, or someone who rides a bicycle, takes the commuter train/bus, etc but maintains a driver's license/car for personal recreational trips, or someone who doesn't even own a car, but has a driver's license so he can rent a car on vacations, whatever the same as someone who drives 100+ miles a day because he chooses to commute in an gas guzzler between home in the country and his city job, as well as all those other normal trips.

Pay for use, is what I say. Work around that.

If and when we reach the day that gas (road) tax revenues are down far enough to have an effect on the government coffers/spending, all it will take is a new tax on something or a tax increase here and/or there....

[benevolance]

Don

I do see the validity in the pay for what you use...But putting a much steeper price on a license is pay for use...If you do not have a car or need a license...Do not get them.... Simple as that.

The gasoline tax is another matter though....It  is a cut and dry pay for use...

But because of this...When people do things like Switch to Veggie oil....They are breaking the law.... And they will be hunted down simply because the government is fearful of losing taxable revenues.

Not only is this a statement that to drive on Highways (which are federal property I think) you have to burn state fuel and pay state tax...It also means that your car is not going to give very good mileage...because despite the cars in europe getting 60 miles to the gallon....In America 30 miles to the gallon is about all you can expect...Unless you pay twice as much for a hybrid.

The real benefit from changing the tax system is that auto makers can produce cars that give 50-60 miles to the gallon without backlash from the government....If GM had all their cars Giving 40-50 miles to the gallon today the government would throw a fit.... Detroit and the Federal Government are in bed together...and they are using oil and the revenues that come from it's taxes to regulate us.

Do not worry don....There could be a discounted rate for fixed income and senior citizens when getting their license plates and drivers license....So you older folk would not have to complain too much

[MountainDon]

...There could be a discounted rate for fixed income and senior citizens when getting their license plates and drivers license....

Ah, but there you hit upon one of my other pet peeves. I personally don't think that just because I managed to stay alive to a certain age I should get special treatment or prices. Well, maybe special treatment; I'd like to be able to jump to the head of the line rather than queue up.    There are a great many seniors who don't need the discount as much as a younger couple with a kid or two could use it. Yes, there are also less well off seniors, just as less well off youngsters. However, I'm not stupid, or too proud, and take whatever is offered.   Unless I forget, and that happens.    But if the discounts were discontinued I wouldn't loose sleep over it.

...because despite the cars in europe getting 60 miles to the gallon....In America 30 miles to the gallon is about all you can expect...

Maybe I'm thick, but I don't follow that thought. The main difference between EU and US cars is the size of the available cars. Simple physics says small car with small engine = better mileage than bigger car with bigger engine. The EU's don't have a magic bullet.

EU have more smaller cars available than the US or Canada does. It's difficult to compare exactly because of market differences, but a comparable Ford Focus, Honda, Mercedes, whatever gets roughly the same mileage. There are differences due to small weight differences, engine sizes, etc... but compare models matched as closely as possible and there is little discernible difference. Definitely not 60 mpg to 30 mpg if you're comparing apples to apples.

[benevolance]

Don you almost hit the nail on the head here

There is no magic bullet.... People in America needto finally learn this.

To save the world...To save money.... You have to make choices....and that means compromises...

We all loved the big ugly nasty dirty pick ups that ourdads drove ....they drove them even when they were going to church or whatever....Even when a small car would have gotten them around...

It was no big deal because the world was still in good shape (or so we thought) gas was cheap and greenhouse gas and global warming did not exist yet

In Europe people have learned that less is more...And to get the mileage you want...It means a slightly smaller car with a little less power.

Which is the exact opposite message that gets sent to consumers in america...

I feel that the government wants clean technology...But every time they come up with a way to make a truck more efficient they give it more payload and a bigger engine to negate any mileage gains that would be possible.

my 85 dodge 318 half ton in the driveway gives me 18 miles to the gallon and works decently

a brand new V8 dodge half ton might give 3-4 more miles to the gallon despite advanced fuel injection, ignition.. computers you name it... it has it

But it has twice the horsepower and oodles of torque... Where as the same 318 engine with the better fuel injection ignition and advances would net you a truck that gave 30 miles to the gallon on the highway and had more power than the one in my driveway.

But the people here do not want to think about compromise...

Don do a google search for toyota's hybrids...They are coming out with the second generation hybrid for the corolla and camry....They have 280 horse...and only give 38 miles to the gallon or some such....


Which makes me ask... what in the hell would you even bother for? The all gas version of the Corolla gives 41 miles to the gallon now.... They have followed the trend of taking potential mileage gains and adding power to negate them

The new chevy cobalts are mini race cars....They have turbo chargers...They are all twin cam 16 valves... Screamers they make excellent horsepower....And the cobalt only gives middling fuel economy....Where as the 2.2 litre 5 speed cavalier from ten years ago gave over 40 miles to the gallon.

This all goes back to what we have talked about in several discussions here.....Very few people need a 500 ft pounds of torque pick up truck...I would say less than 10% of the people that own one....The SUV's we drive today will do 140 miles an hour...They have 24 valve V6 engines... turbo and superchargers.... Nothing that is needed or prudent in a SUV or a minivan....But there it is...

If the average mileage was double in America the Government would come up with another way to tax us...they would have to...Because their gasoline tax revenue would be cut in half...

Then they would be charging more for driver's licenses and license plates...

All of which I support if it means that they actually allow the Automobile industry produce cars that give great mileage...

We would as consumers still save money...We could pay more for license plates and driver's licenses....But we would use much less gas...Which would lower demand and thus lower the price...Which would save us even more money...

because remember that even in heavy tax states like New York and California...Tax and surcharges is only at most 30% of the cost of gasoline

Example

I dunno what a drivers license cost in New Mexico...Or the plates... So  we will just sort of stumble through this.

If gasoline is $3.00 a gallon....and you drive a vehicle that gives you 30 miles to the gallon... Moderate use per year would result in 20,000 miles...Meaning you spent $2000 at the pumps and About $667 of that went to government in taxes and surcharges...

So lets increase the mileage from 30 miles to the gallon to 50 miles to the gallon

Instead of spending $2000 a year at the pump you would spend ...$1200.... If 1/3rd of that cost was going to the government in taxes and fees.. they would be getting $360....

So you could pay an additional $300 for the license and plates...And the government would get the exact same amount of revenue out of you as a consumer...

You on the other hand just saved $440!...And that is if the price of fuel stayed the same...

Which is unlikely if our cars gave 30-40% better mileage...Demand would go down...

Lets do the same math for an older gentleman who drives half that distance a year....

10,000 miles @ 30 mpg= 333 gallons= $1000 spent per year at the pumps
Government gets $300 of that in taxes and surcharges

10,000 miles @ 50 mpg = 200 gallons = $600 spent per year at the pumps
Government gets $180 of that in taxes and surcharges

Even if they made the guy who did not drive much pay $300 more per year in license and tag fees he would still save $100 bucks a year


Oh and for the guy that just rents a car....well the rent a car company puts their license plate on the car....So no tag fees for the user....He would just have to pay a little more for his drivers license

Point is that we as consumers save money no matter how little or much we drive when we get to have cars that burn less fuel.... This is because only 30% of the gas money is tax...We can just pay the government off what they figure we owe them each year and save as much as we want with increased mileage.

more next message

[benevolance]

the car in europe are small....No question about it.... the 60 mile per gallon Chevrolet Matiz....Which was made in partnership with Daewoo I believe Is a small car

But for it's size it had decent power air bags anti lock brakes...Alloy wheels  6 disc cd changer....etc...

Making it a foot  longer and adding another 10 horsepower would still give you a car with incredible gas mileage...And you would still have all the safety features.....And 50 miles to the gallon!

All in a car that could sell fully equipped in America for Well Under $15,000....The Matiz now sells for under $10,000 if you convert the Pound to US currency

Which leads me to believe that the prius is a lie...And that in this country auto makers are strongly discouraged from producing cars that can give dramatically better fuel mileage

you know...For all the money we spend on Catalytic convertors...Our cars have mega sensors air pumps...all designed to reduce emissions and help eliminate pollution in the air we breathe....

None of these steps even comes close to equalling the effect of cutting the amount of fuel we burn per year in half....Meaning that doubling the mileage of our cars  instantly cuts emissions and pollution per year in half.... No scientific gizmo will ever duplicate that...Unless we have a car that truly runs on air and is filled with clean energy that is Zero emission

This country uses over 20 million barrels of oil per day...and they import over half of it... Simply put... unless they come up with a Star Trek Transporter..We will continue to use Motor Vehicles...The amazing potential of Electricity is still years off...Likewise things like Hydrogen (which the more you examine it is not the answer)...Today if we want to save money.. eliminate the need for middle east oil and clean the environment...The way to do all of that is simply get more mileage per gallon out of our cars.

This is easy to do...It requires no new gadgets or technology...It does require compromise...Meaning you have to drive a slightly smaller car with slightly less power....And our half ton pickups will give 30 miles to the gallon without being hybrids....And our economy cars will give 50 miles to the gallon without hybrids.

This will give us a couple decades  of a cleaner world...Cheaper gas (less demand) until we find a way to make massive amounts of  electric cars that have driving ranges that compare to gasoline vehicles...Or some other technology takes off like the Air car....Which I like more every time I think about it.

The problem with our auto ads industry is that they keep sending the message that faster is better...That more power means more value...You see 4 wheel drive SUV's going wide open in the mud getting air over jumps...You see pickup trucks pulling bulldozers out of the mud....Yeah it is all laughable...But they are sending a message that power is better...Bigger is better...

Simply getting this nation to compromise a little would allow this nation to be free from middle eastern oil.

Jimmy Carter takes a lot of heat...People say he was the worst president...It is foolishness. Carter 30 years ago saw that more mileage per gallon was the cure to the majority of our problems. He increased mileage per gallon dramatically under his term...Passed legislation that made it happen...

OPEC took some Valium in the 80's and we had cheap gasoline again and the whole economy save the world thing was thrown in the garbage can....And we got massive 4x4 suv's and 300 horsepower half ton pick up trucks...

We have undone the progress that carter made with fuel economy and mileage

If our fathers could drive something as small and gutless as a 1975 toyota corolla or the 1975 Honda Civic...Then we can compromise too and drive a 60 mile to the gallon Matiz...Or a slightly larger version with more power that gave us 50 miles to the gallon...

All of the economy cars we see on lots today could give 50 miles to the gallon...They would all have about 10-15% less power....

But the Civic, Corolla, Cobalt, Focus, Neon....All of them have an amazing amount of power...They are down right fast...They could all lose a few horsepower...get to 50 miles to the gallon and we would love them just as much.

We have to understand that no matter what the government needs their cut...They have to be paid...But that should not stop us from saving money and cleaning up the environment...

Which is why I advocate changing the way the government taxes us....So that restrictions on fuel economy will go away

[MountainDon]

1. The Chevy Matiz gets about 50 mpg in combination driving. My Civic gets 32 mpg in my combination driving. If I could get 50 mpg with A/C running I could maybe see myself owning something like the Matiz. Most of my daily car miles are done within a 25 mile radius of home... at least 50% within a 15 mile radius. But gas would have to cost more than $3 a gallon for me to want to consider it. Why? Because I like the convenience and safety of my Civic.

2. Why does Europe have so many more smaller cars than the US/Canada? Mainly because they have to pay more for fuel. Europe has always paid more for fuel than the US. Why? Taxes.  Grossly higher taxes on the fuel. So Europeans have always had a monetary incentive to use smaller cars. Back in the early 70's Europeans paid about 3 to 4 times as much in gas taxes. Today it's more like 8 to 10 times as much in tax. The US gas tax has not even kept pace with inflation since 1990; the European rates keep going up.

3. We could have smaller cars if the majority of the people in the US would actually buy them. I don't think the majority will until hit hard in the pocket book. It's nice to "be green" but even nicer to have some "green" left to buy other stuff.

4. The car business is just like any other business in that to survive you have to sell what the people want to buy. If you don't have what they want (not what someone else thinks they need, what they want) you will not sell, you will not make sufficient profits. Profits are needed to [a] have funds for R&D and keep the shareholders happy. The shareholders, by and large, don't care so much what the company makes, but rather what profits are made and what dividends they receive.

5. There does not have to be collusion, a conspiracy, between government and automakers that is keeping more fuel efficient cars from being available in the USA, IF your premise is that they do that to keep fuel use and tax receipts up. If revenues fall because of decreased use taxes can be increased, new ones applied, etc. After all it is the government, they posses the power to tax us. I don't like the idea of higher taxes on anything. But, if that's what it will take to increase fuel efficiency in the USA, then it may have to be.

6. If taxes on fuel were to be increased as an incentive to reduce use, the money collected should be used to reduce foreign oil dependency. Either to develop alternative energies, or interim changes like developing our oil shale resources (just to pick one of my favorites). The increase would have to be significant and phased in a series on steady timed increases. Pigs may fly before this happens.

7. IF there was collusion between the US government and the automakers here, this collusion would have to extend worldwide. Extended to at least to all the world's car makers and all the governments of the countries where cars are made. That's just too huge to even think that it could ever work. Too many people involved, too many chances for somebody to leak it.

8.In closing I say that if we need tax increases to advance fuel conservation, we do not need a different method of taxing us, such as driver's license taxes, just increase the tax on the resources consumed. That seems to be a more direct cause/effect relationship.

9. I think we will have to agree to disagree on some of these points.

10. (A PS of sorts)... I'd go along with a severe tax/penalty/whatever on driver's licenses if it was applied to DUI/DWI offenders. But that is a whole other story. DUI/DWI is another big deal to me. FYI, NM has pretty much been at the wrong end of any DWI list for years.

[benevolance]

Don

I agree that in the USA they have been lacking in fines and penalties for DUI/DWI for years..Canada had had much tougher laws and penalties... In America up until recently in many states you did not even lose your license for DWI....

So I agree that they need to double fines and double suspension times for licenses...I think most everyone out there would agree to something like this!

But there are lots of bad, bad drivers... The premise for DWI being illegal is that Alcohol impairs you ability to operate the vehicle safely....

Which legally is no different than someone speeding...Speed limits are set so that on that road be it near a church or school or fire station you have time to react to whatever may happen and stay in control of the vehicle...

When you speed you impair your ability to stay safe under those conditions...And that legally by definition is the same violation as a Drunk Driver...

Some people speed a little...And some people are just barely over the legal alcohol limit.... Some people are falling down drunk and some people drive 30-40 miles per hour over the speed limit....

To me it is a Joke that the Guy who has a few Beers faces Jail time while the guy who speeds often gets a warning.... I think that all motor vehicle violations need to be addressed equally under the law... Or no penalty has merit no penalty is Just

Oh and by the way...More people cause accidents from lack of sleep impaired driving each year than Drunk Driving... Both legally are driving while impaired...

But when was the last time you saw heard or knew anyone that got pulled over and arrested because they looked tired and the cop thought they were impaired from operating the car safely?

Also when drunk driving stats get posted they never ever distinguish between impaired driving and alcohol related offenses...

Okay onto smaller cars....

Every few years the government talks about the need to reduce foreign oil dependancy...Yet nobody since Carter has passed a legislation that forces the automakers to increase fuel economy.... We know from seeing cars in Europe that it is possible

Incredible gains could be a reality in the cars we are already driving just reducing their power by 20%... Used to be that you had to use the passing gear to pass someone on the interstate...Not anymore..

you talked about reducing the need for foreign oil...We agree on this point 100%....Doubling the average fuel mileage for american cars would effectively eliminate the need to import oil from the middle east....

you talked about the Matiz...It gives 60 miles to the gallon on the highway...and I thought 50 in the city???

Forget about the conspiracy theory angle...It is not that complicated....This has to do with the simplicity of the current method of taxation put upon us...

We have to use fuel...Large amounts of it...And because the tax is set on the fuel it is effortless for the government to collect massive amounts of tax from us...

When we file income tax we all try to pay as little as possible...look for exemptions...Cheat on your taxes...Whatever.... The government has to have a massive agency to police the taxation to collect their revenue (IRS)

All they have to do to collect the gasoline tax is just let you drive to the gas station and fill up....

Doubling the fuel economy throws a wrench in their whole taxation system and because of that there is no logical way you can argue that they would not be strongly opposed to this happening.

Doubling mileage also cuts demand in half...meaning lower prices...The Government gets a percentage of the total value of the fuel in most cases....So the lower the price of Fuel the lower the amount of tax collected.... It is a double kiss of death for the government.

We have already seen proposals in Arizona to have a Hybrid tax so that the state can collect from Prius owners the money the state is losing to them because they get better than average fuel economy....

I would think it Naive not to realize that the government has a vested interest in  stable high prices of fuel and the amount of fuel that we burn.... Cutting either of these things dramatically....Will upset the revenue apple cart for government...

This is why for 30 years we have seen the speeches annually that we need to end foreign oil dependence...Yet nothing is ever done about it...We keep using massive amounts of oil and gas and the price keeps going up...

We hear the speeches because people want some relief at the pumps...We hate the thought of our need for gas and oil making some Saudi Arabian family trillionaires...

yet no pressure is put on automakers to increase efficiency and no incentives are given to the American people to buy green cars...To buy cars that give more mileage...

Hell the public is not even given a choice to go green or to buy a smaller car that has all the conforts and safety features of your honda but gives 50+ miles to the gallon... like the Matiz

When the Public was given the option to go green with the prius they did!!! Even though it was 50% more expensive than a comparable economy car that was not a hybrid...And there have been waiting lists to buy Prius cars in America 5+ years running now...

So I do not buy the arguement that the public does not want more efficient cars...we are not given the choice...

Volkswagon make incredibly dependable cheap to run diesel cars...yet despite cleaner diesel fuel they are not offered in the USA....

more nest message