Tom, Ray and your car's MPG

Maintenance/Repairs
61

The $600 toilet seat you mentioned was not paid by a business or private individual, it was paid by government - most individuals and businesses manage their money better than that. So why would you want the govt. making management decisions for business?

The $600 toilet seat was NOT built by the government…Was not MANAGED by the government…The cost came from the company that built and designed it.

I know of a $1500 ashtray…Built by GE Aerospace (now Lockeed). Nothing to do with GOVERNMENT waste…Has to do with GE’s wastefull design and management system that was MILKING the US government on a Radar project.

62

Well, over the last 15 years I’ve adjusted my driving habits and have been using additive in the oil and fuel that have resulted in the following: 2001 E-150 Passenger Van, 5.4 l engine getting 27 mpg h/w, '96 Chrysler Concorde, 3.3 l getting over 34 h/w, '96 Ford Escort, 1.9 l engine getting 50 mpg h/w, '87 Ford Crown Vic, 5.0 l engine getting 32 mpg.

Lets me get this straight…

You say that Government intervention will NOT improve gas mileage…That free-market is the ONLY thing that will work.

And on the other hand you use the magical chemicals that give you these ALLEGED gas mileage increases…

Here’s the flaw in your logic (or lack there of)…If the Free Market is going to drive gas mileage increases and EVERYONE wants better gas mileage (especially with the rising gas prices)…then WHY isn’t the market driving the automanufacturers to use the magical chemicals in every car they sell to increase gas mileage??

63

I said nothing about magic. The oil in your car contains as much additive as oil. But I have presented specific examples of vehicles that have the documentation on before and after the use of said additives to prove it. (FYI, I was actually setting out to prove the product a sham along with so many others that are out there and now use it in all my vehicles as does my family and friends.) But I have yet to see ANY evidence that MAN has caused any global warming.

By the way, the only way you could know my view on global warming is if you read what I wrote. Did you happen to read some of the historical evidences that I mentioned? Evidence which is common knowledge?

But I notice you missed my main point. Let me guess. You believe the war in Irag is actually over oil and you are disturbed that we would trade blood for oil yet you’re willing to increase the number of lives lost on the highways by causing auto manufacturers to decrease the weight of the vehicles in order to save a few miles per gallon. Note that the only small car in the list I provided is a '96 Escort. That car no longer exists. You see while I was getting 50 mpg, it wasn’t very safe. A trucker who says he couldn’t see me in his side view mirror changed lanes, hit me, flipped me and tumbled me down the highway at 65 mph. I survived. But I will never buy another compact. I will buy a larger vehicle and tweak it to get the best mpg I can.

64

Let me straighten you out…

I never said that government intervention will NOT improve gas mileage or even that free-market can.

What I did say is that the government squeazing the manufacturers by mandating them to GREATLY increase the gas mileage of their vehicles WILL result in vehicles that will not hold up as well in a crash with a weightier vehicle.

I agree that the auto manufacturers are more interested in $$$$ then making any changes that will cost them $$$$$. So when this product, which by the way is used by many trucking fleets internationally, was introduced to the Big 3 auto manufacturers and it was found the the products primarily protected the engine and transmission making them last longer and that the improved mpg was a side effect, the response was that they made more profit on replacement parts than the sale of the vehicle so they were not interested.

But all this is besides the point. I am not wealthy. I am still paying large sums of money in medical as a result from the accident I mentioned in my response to Jeremy R Hoyt (above). But, for safety, I will never again own a small car. For this reason I must do all I can to increase the gas mileage of the vehicle I own UNTIL the better idea becomes reality. Personally I believe the most immediate answer is the type of clean diesel that VW has introduced until a hydrogen fuel cell or maybe an engine that will burn water (as I mentioned earlier) can be introduced.

REMEMBER: more than CAFE standards, it was Toyota, Datsun and Honda that caused the Big 3 to improve fuel economy. (Remember the Chrysler bail out?) Someone outside the USA will most likely develop the next generation of engines. They, say Honda or Toyota, will introduce it, make a mint and force American manufacturers to follow suit or die. History seems to show that this is the only way the free market can make an effect - for someone to actually introduce an alternative for people to flock to before American manufacturers will act.

What do you think?

65

During the Carter administration, I was serving in the Navy. It was found that the government was paying $600 for toilet seats and something like $750 for hammmers due to the rule that small and minority businesses had to be given first dibs on the bids reguardless of what the bid was. Based on this issue I based my statement that not business or the private citizen but only government would mismanage OUR money like this.

GE is doing darn well if they can find a buyer stupid enough to pay $1500 for an ash tray. Unfortunately that buyer was our gorvernment. The same government so many want to decide how to run American auto makers (not to mention healthcare, retirement, etc.).

66

Jeremy, by the same argument all the small businesses drive up fuel costs for the average burger flipper or retired person. What if a person with low income was able to get financing to buy that fleet of limos for a limo service. He’s paying for the gas while providing a service. I suppose you would have the cab companies shut down in order to reduce consumption? The Lincoln quote does not apply here. It might if you were talking about, say, second hand smoke. But because someone requires more fuel for his business than you do, I don’t think so.

As for Teddy, second best president after Washington in my oppinion, he also recognized the rights of private property and the need to keep a tight rein on the Federal government which he learned from a Democrat named Grover Cleveland. Boy, the Democrat party has really fallen since these great men led with courage and wisdom.

67

Maybe you should re-read what I wrote. You don’t think glacieers forming so fast that entire towns were destroyed in a matter of months is a rapid change in temperature? Let me fill you in - it was a whole lot more rapid then we are seeing now! And again, I am pointing out information that is common knowledge and all you have as evidence for your view is to say I have a “complete lack of any scientific knowledge.” WOW! YOUR ARGUMENT IS AMAZING!

As for suggesting that I am “nieve” as to how buseiness involves itself in government, may I say as a former lobbyist, you have no idea.

As for your wifes Lexus, which is a fine example of a modern full size luxury car, you should try putting it up against my '73 Lincoln Town Car and see how it hold up. As for your '73 Vega, it’s modern equivilant would be the Chevy Aveo and let me say that your Vega would run through it like running through tissue paper.
But, according to you I’m ignorant and a liar and should do some reading? Just like a liberal to start calling names when proven wrong. Let me suggest some reading for you:

James R. Healey, “Death by the Gallon: Push for Better Mileage Raises Death Tolls,” USA TODAY , Special Reprint Edition, reprinted from MONEY, July 2, 1999; based on previously unpublished fatality statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Leonard Evans, D.Phil., “Causal Influence of Car Mass and Size on Driver Fatality Risk,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 91, No. 7 (2001). The author cites three studies from 1971-1974, including a study presented at an international conference in Washington, D.C., hosted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Robert W. Crandall and John D. Graham, “The Effect of Fuel Economy Standards on Automobile Safety,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. XXXII (April 1989).

You can start there.

68

What I did say is that the government squeazing the manufacturers by mandating them to GREATLY increase the gas mileage of their vehicles WILL result in vehicles that will not hold up as well in a crash with a weightier vehicle.

I can give you HUNDREDS of examples that totally negate that…I gave you ONE earlier about my wifes Lexus and my 73 Vega…Nice of you to totally ignore it…

So when this product, which by the way is used by many trucking fleets internationally, was introduced to the Big 3 auto manufacturers and it was found the the products primarily protected the engine and transmission making them last longer and that the improved mpg was a side effect, the response was that they made more profit on replacement parts than the sale of the vehicle so they were not interested.

So what is this miricle product…It would be far cheaper for the Manufacturers to use this product then spend MILLIONS of dollars every year in R&D to reach their cafe’ numbers. Sorry…but it’s totally bogus…You haven’t a clue.

more than CAFE standards, it was Toyota, Datsun and Honda that caused the Big 3 to improve fuel economy.

WRONG…If that was the case then the Big-3 cafe numbers would be that of Toyota, Nissan and Honda. And they’re NOT…they are FAR FAR behind.

What do I think…You haven’t a clue…

69

it’s modern equivilant would be the Chevy Aveo and let me say that your Vega would run through it like running through tissue paper.

Talk about twisting the example to side-step the answer.

Yes the Aveo is about the same size as the Vega…but gets MUCH BETTER gas mileage then the Vega ever did…

Lets compare a car that gets the SAME MPG as the Vega (23)…

The 2wd Chevrolet Colorado gets about the same MPG…As for a car…NOTHING I see gets the same MPG…Even the Malibu (which is a MUCH bigger car gets better gas mileage.

EVERY manufacturer that I know of makes a car that is heavier and gets better gas mileage then the Vega…Sure they make smaller cars…but those cars get a LOT better gas mileage then the Vega. Nice try though.

70

You challanged me on the statement that I made that everytime the CAFE standard was increased highway fatalities went up due to the car manufacturers reducing the weight of the cars to get better gas milage. You not only challenged me but called me ignorant and a liar that needed to read up on the subject and gave me the example of your wifes Lexus being safer than your '73 Vega. As far as safety goes, you can’t compare the Vega with the Lexus because you’re comparing a modern full sized luxury car with a '73 sub-compact. What you need to do is compare the '73 sub-compact (Vega) with a present day sub-compact (Aveo). Yes, the Aveo get’s better gas mileage but at what cost? At the cost of decinigrating if it were to hit a much heavier car! Hence, the result of the CAFE standards is better gas mileage but at the price of more deaths on the highway. As for evidence I provided you with a Money magazine article, an American Journal of Public Health article and an article from the Journal of Law and Economics. Yet you still do not say “interesting, maybe I should check that out” niether do you say “Oh yea, well why don’t you read articles A,B and C which refute your arguement.” you just insult me and walk away. Why can’t you just accept that you were in error and learn something.

71

The difference between the millionare that I described and the small business owners and cab companies you described is that the small business owners and cab companies have a ligitmiate need for the fuel they use. They also have incentive to use fuel efficiently, unlike the millionare that I mentioned. No, I won’t let you misrepresent my position. Yes, the use you described drives up demand, and I am willing to accept that. I am against waste, not efficient use. My position is moderate. Try as you might, you can’t mislead us into believing that it is radical.

“We’ve got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?”
–Lee Iacocca

72

“You believe the war in Irag is actually over oil and you are disturbed that we would trade blood for oil yet you’re willing to increase the number of lives lost on the highways by causing auto manufacturers to decrease the weight of the vehicles in order to save a few miles per gallon.”

You really should give up quessing what I think. You are wrong on all accounts and I think it shows desperation on your part to redefine my position incorrectly rather than debate in a civilized manner.

I will say that as a professional driver and an in-training future Motorcycle Safetey instructor that I believe that how you drive has more impact on safety than what you drive. I believe that collisions are caused by a number of factors and the the elimination of any single factor can lead to the avoidance of the collision. Notice that I don’t call collisions accidents. That is because I believe most are avoidable. You have a choice about how much risk you choose to expose yourself to and I will defend your right to buy as large a vehicle as you want if driving a large vehicle makes you more comfortable. However, I don’t personally associate vehicle size, weight, or fuel economy with safety. I put more weight on training, practice, and ability to recognize hazards and avoid them, especially the blind spots around big trucks. There is rarely a single cause for a collision. There is usually an interaction of factors that accumulate to cause a collision and therefore, most collisions are predictable and preventable.

Big Trucks are involved in about 2% of accidents nationwide. There are several small sedans that are fuel efficient while also being relatively safe. I believe in government-mandated increased fuel economy standards because I believe that they can be achieved without sacrificing safety. So if you want to know what I think, ask me. Don’t tell me what I think. That kind of talk has no place in a civilized debate.

73

GE is doing darn well if they can find a buyer stupid enough to pay $1500 for an ash tray. Unfortunately that buyer was our gorvernment. The same government so many want to decide how to run American auto makers (not to mention healthcare, retirement, etc.).

The point is…which you can’t seem to grasp…Is that GE was RAPING us for that $1500 ashtray…And you want Big Business to run you live…NOT me…

74

You challanged me on the statement that I made that everytime the CAFE standard was increased highway fatalities went up due to the car manufacturers reducing the weight of the cars to get better gas milage.

Show me WHERE it was Cafe’ numbers that have INCREASE highway fatalities…I worked as a Software consultant to the Insurance industry for over 10 years…There has NEVER been a study that says Cafe’ numbers are the reason for increase highway fatalities. There are M.
ANY MANY other factors. A LOT more cars on the road, Much much denser populations and traffic, faster cars that handle better…and people who don’t know how to drive them.

As far as safety goes, you can’t compare the Vega with the Lexus because you’re comparing a modern full sized luxury car with a '73 sub-compact.

WHAT…You made the stupid statment that the ONLY way to make cars with better gas mileage is to make them LESS safe…Here I show you a car (Lexus)…that’s FAR SAFER then my Vega and is 50% MORE fuel efficient…and NOW you say it’s not a fair comparison because it’s a MODERN full size car…what a piece of crap.

What you need to do is compare the '73 sub-compact (Vega) with a present day sub-compact (Aveo).

Here’s that LOGIC problem you keep having…That does NOT prove that you can make a heavier/safer car and get better gas mileage then it did 30 years ago…All that proves is that Chevy choose to build a small car that get’s MUCH better gas mileage. And for the Record…The Aveo outweighs the 73 Vega by about 400lbs. And with the added MODERN safety features I’d rather be driving in a Aveo over a Vega ANY DAY…But don’t let the FACTS get in the way of your argument.

75

So because a person has money, he has less right to use resources? Anyone who is going to build a fleet of limos is not going to waste their money to build them just to say they have them. There is going to be a legitimate reason to build them or their not going to have money very long. I’m not trying to misrep your position, I’m just trying to understand it. How can you say that just because a person is wealthy, saving money on fuel is not an incentive? You know the additives I mentioned before? I used to sell them on the side and the organizations that were most interested in them were those with fleets!

As for the Iacocca quote, are you aware that cars today, due to the ability to better seal the fuel tank, give off less emmissions at highway speeds than cars from the '60s emitted with their engines off? This is one area I admit the government had a hand in. But it also had to do with performance. The more efficiently an engine runs, the better it will perform. When an engine performs efficiently it burns it’s fuel completely so there are reduced blow by emmissions in the form of hydrocarbons.

76

No, what you can’t seem to understand is that BIG GOVERNMENT was stupid enough to pay for it, hence RAPING US through taxes! Just because GE built a nice new shiny toy is no reason for government to take my money and throw it away! I am presently a sales rep for a company that has had many government contracts. The government looks at bids and decides who they’re going to go with. The fact that they choose my bid, regardless of my price, doesn’t mean I’m “RAPING” the government.

I never said I wanted big business to run my life, but I certainly don’t want BIG GOVERNMENT to do it.

77

Car safety is not a function of weight in general. Since 1955, when safety standards were LEGISLATED into cars, the fatality rate per million passenger miles has dropped to 1/5 in North America. Both Canada and the US adopted the same standards. Mexico, on the other hand, did not, and fatalities are still extremely high there, in spite of their vehicles being much smaller. Fatalities (numbers) in the US are about the same as they were in 1955, in spite of many times more cars on the road, much larger population, and many more miles driven per car!

If you pit a large SUV against a small car in a head on collision, the small car will lose. If you pit a Ford Expedition against an 18 wheeler, the Ford will lose!!. So the solution is not ever larger vehicles, but sfer vehcles. A Formula 1 car is tiny, but the driver can suvive a 100mph crash easily.

I draw the line at the new Smart Car; it is not safe on the highway. It was designed as an easy to park city car.

In summary, government legislation is necessay to provide the framework for industry to work in so all companies play by the same rules.

78

I give you multiple studies that prove that what I’m saying is true and YOU accuse ME of avoiding the facts? Now that’s rich. If you would take as much time to read what I’ve written as you do to insult me you would have noticed that I could care less about mpg where safety is concerned.

The FACT is, the cars from the 60’s and 70’s were MUCH MUCH heavier than cars built today. If you did not force the auto manufacturers to increase the gas mileage then we would have a heavy car, like those from pre-CAFE years, with all the safety features of today. Hence, you would be a whole lot safer in a 5800 lb. full sized vehicle with all of todays safety features then a person in 3500 lb. Lexus if they were to collide. Now if you want that 5800 lb vehicle to get better fuel economy, I’m sure the new fuel injected, mega-valved engines of today would make it a whole lot more fuel efficient than the 12-16 mpg highway they got in the 70’s. In fact the 5800 lb. VW Touarge with 4 well drive and a V10 Diesel gets 20 highway. (I love the idea of a clean burning, high perfomance diesel as an alternative as we wait for the next generation of engines.)

79

When it comes to SAFETY then I must agree with the government getting involved. After all, the safety of the people is the primary function of government under our constitution. But that is NOT the same as dictating fuel economy. What’s next, telling electronics companies how many batteries their products are limited to?

Suddenly we have contradictions like telling people they should use fluorescent bulbs to save electricity without addressing the fact that their contents are much more toxic and will be worse on the environment when they all start going into the trash.

Yes, the government should keep us safe but anything beyond that starts to threaten our liberty.

80

The FACT is, the cars from the 60’s and 70’s were MUCH MUCH heavier than cars built today.

What does that mean??..You have to look at SPECIFIC cars for comparison…Pick a car made in the 60’s or 70’s and compare it to a car today with the same weight…I GURANTEE YOU the car today will get better gas mileage…THUS PROVING that you can make a car heavier and IMPROVE gas mileage…and NOT sacraficing safety.

Now if you want that 5800 lb vehicle to get better fuel economy, I’m sure the new fuel injected, mega-valved engines of today would make it a whole lot more fuel efficient than the 12-16 mpg highway they got in the 70’s.

A 6k lb car today will get much better gas mileage then a car from the 60’s or 70’s…Show me the car made today that doesn’t…just ONE…Again…you don’t know what you’re talking about…or trying to twist the facts…