PDA

View Full Version : Discussion: US government CAFE fuel regulations are causing future cars to be prohibitively expensive to own



stephenkirsh
02-20-2015, 08:12 PM
Intro:
So I'm one of those people that always focuses on the future. After having my ZHP for about 3 months I was already thinking, "what will be my next car?" even though I planned to keep the car for 10 years, and still do. For a while now there have been a decent number of cars based on performance, cost and the availability of 4 doors (they're more functional, and look better!) that have peaked my interest. But there's always something nagging at the back of my mind with any car that's newer than ~2006 will be a maintenance disaster.

TLDR:
I have a theory; is it crazy?

Backstory:
- In 2007 President Bush passed laws that any car manufacturer selling cars in the US had to reach a fleet average of 35mpg by 2020.
- In 2011 President Obama passed laws that any car manufacturer selling cars in the US had to reach a fleet average of 54.5mpg by 2025.
- In 2014 the fleet average was 25.4mpg.
- We're short by 30mpg with only 10 years to go.


So here are my thoughts. In the 1990s and 2000s, cars started to enter into a period of supreme reliability. The core components such as drivelines, main engine components, chassis, and other solid metal pieces actually lasted a long time. Starting in the early 2010s, things have started to change. Manufacturers have to suddenly increase their MPG by an INSANE amount. In 2014 we had the highest average fleet MPG of all time, but we’re not even halfway to 2025 CAFE regulations with only 10 years to go. How do manufacturers accomplish this? They have to severely push the limits of technology.

To me, this seems like a recipe for disaster for car reliability. Their goal is no longer to make cars that last 300,000 miles but to meet 55mpg. They’re a business; their goal is to sell a car with 0 miles, not a used one with 100,000 miles on. Reliability after that 4 year/50k warranty doesn’t matter. They have 10 years to meet those fuel regulations.

One method that is new, and I think will be ubiquitous by 2020, is plugin hybrids. I think the next M3 will be based on what the current i8 is and the next i8 will be fully electric or hydrogen. That’s awesome for fun/mpg/performance, but what about reliability?

I’m going to use the 3 series as an example, because it’s the car I know the most about. The E46 was probably one of the most reliable cars BMW made (in addition to E36/E39). It was relatively simple, it’s engine’s base had been around since the early 1990s (as the M50), but what came next? Suddenly we have an N52 with a $450 water pump and N54 with massive carbon build up problems and failing turbos. The N55 is still in use today, and while the turbos and carbon issues are a bit better, I really don’t trust them to be easy to maintain over a 300,000 mile life period. Non-major engine components suddenly became very technical, and very expensive to replace.

I know there’s a few members on here with reliable E9Xs, but I’ve heard so many horror stories with these cars from “normal” people. The worst is probably from my dad, who has a coworker with an E90 335 (not sure if N54 or N55) and has had $14,000 worth of work done to it in ~3 years. That’s at the inflated stealership price, but things he’s had done are full replacement of turbo(s), fuel injectors and other major components I’ve forgotten. My dad has an E46 ZSP. When he talks about this guy with the 335, he’s always like “I feel really bad for him.” Again, this is just the worst example, but I’ve never really heard of somebody with an E46 with only ~75,000 miles having to basically rebuild the entire engine outside of just the cooling system. This 335 owner hasn’t even done suspension or cooling system yet. My dad has sent me pictures of this guy’s receipts before; they’re for major engine components. Please keep in mind that people like us on this forum are probably 1% of the population.

Then there’s my coworker who has a 2012 F30 328. He’s had his fuel injectors replaced THREE TIMES in under 60,000 miles. That just seems NUTS to me. I ran into him at the stealership when I was getting my airbag replaced and he said “this lease has another year on it and then I’m out. I’ve had this car at the dealership for a total of 4 weeks in 3 years of ownership.” Seriously!?

There are a lot of other stories I’ve heard. I don’t want to pick on the BMW 3 series, but is this big list of problems because all 3 series after the E46 are crap, or is it because I only pay attention to BMWs? I’m thinking it’s the later. My theory is that new cars are being pushed to the absolute limits and they’re not functioning well because of that.

I’ve been mulling this theory around for a bit and wanted to post it here to see what you guys think. I’ve been lazy, but then I saw this story that backed up my thoughts that it’s not just BMW; it’s everybody. All manufacturers are trying to meet those CAFE regulations, and quickly.

“Direct-injection engines improve performance and save fuel, but at a price”
https://autos.yahoo.com/news/direct-injection-engines-improve-performance-save-fuel-price-193000698.html

If you don’t want to read the article, it’s basically “DI engines improve fuel mileage, but cause problems that manufactures know about and won’t help you with.”

Direct Injection engines have been out for.. 10 years now, right? So it's taken 10 years for this article to come out. What technology are manufacturers using today to increase MPG that we will find out greatly increases the cost of reliability in the future?

OVERALL TLDR:
CAFE regulations requiring 54.5mpg for fleet average by 2025 is pushing car manufacturers to make unreliable cars simply to meet government regulations. Used cars will become stupidly expensive to maintain as the technology is not fully developed.


2007 regulations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy#2006_reform_attempt _and_lawsuit

2011 regulations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy#Agreed_standards_by _model_year.2C_2011-2025

2014 US fleet average:
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/unintended-consequences-ambitious-fuel-economy-standards/


What do you guys think?

Hermes
02-20-2015, 11:17 PM
I really don't want to get into this conversation, but I will...

It's all bs and what the car companies/lobbyists want. What is best for the earth is secondary.

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c288/jhermes/320i/3EDDE96B-D18F-4364-88B5-B0617F17A4D1.jpg

Two way cat car... 32 years old... per L/displacement it puts out less hydrocarbons than my OBD2 three way cat on my ZHP which is 23 years newer. How does this make sense?

terraphantm
02-21-2015, 07:36 AM
I really don't want to get into this conversation, but I will...

It's all bs and what the car companies/lobbyists want. What is best for the earth is secondary.

[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c288/jhermes/320i/3EDDE96B-D18F-4364-88B5-B0617F17A4D1.jpg [/ IMG]

Two way cat car... 32 years old... per L/displacement it puts out less hydrocarbons than my OBD2 three way cat on my ZHP which is 23 years newer. How does this make sense?

How about per horsepower or torque? And hydrocarbons aren't the only form emissions take. CAFE has nothing to do with emissions anyway; it's mpg.

I do think the CAFE standards got ridiculous. Pushing these expensive and unreliable technologies on customers is causing the turnover rate of cars to increase, which in the long run will just do more harm to the environment

Hermes
02-21-2015, 10:40 AM
Ok, but my E21 averages 27mpg on the same drive that my E46 averages 23mpg. If I didn't have all the emissions crap it would probably be over 30mpg

TigerTater
02-21-2015, 11:00 AM
Very nice topic. I've often wondered this myself. What is the line we can push our current technology without causing more harm than good!

stephenkirsh
02-21-2015, 01:03 PM
Ok, but my E21 averages 27mpg on the same drive that my E46 averages 23mpg. If I didn't have all the emissions crap it would probably be over 30mpg

My mom got me a book for xmas called "100 worst cars of all time." The majority of the book had cars from the 1960s-1980s. So many of the cars from 20-40 years ago were getting 30-40mpg. Kind of amazed me. Granted, your knees were the only crumple zones.

Hermes
02-21-2015, 02:29 PM
I've seen that book before. The products of British Leyland and American Motor Co. would fill 80% of that book had I written it

stephenkirsh
02-21-2015, 02:54 PM
Yea most were American or British. No AMC or BLC specifically, although there were pleeeenty of those too.

SoarinZHP
02-22-2015, 01:30 PM
Pushing these expensive and unreliable technologies on customers is causing the turnover rate of cars to increase, which in the long run will just do more harm to the environment

It's not about what's good for the environment. It's about what's good for business. The quicker they wear out, the quicker a replacement is purchased.

terraphantm
02-25-2015, 11:47 AM
Ok, but my E21 averages 27mpg on the same drive that my E46 averages 23mpg. If I didn't have all the emissions crap it would probably be over 30mpg

That's mostly because the e46 is heavier. I imagine the ZHP does better on highway drives, where weight plays less of a role.

I would be very surprised if the emissions equipment hurt your efficiency by more than 1 mpg.

Dave1027
02-25-2015, 01:20 PM
What do you guys think?

Meanwhile, you can always go buy a diesel pickup truck that belches smoke like a steam locomotive under the guise of it being a "commercial vehicle".

Fenrir
02-25-2015, 02:21 PM
Aaand subbed. This is a topic I've long wondered about.

stephenkirsh
02-25-2015, 02:54 PM
Meanwhile, you can always go buy a diesel pickup truck that belches smoke like a steam locomotive under the guise of it being a "commercial vehicle".

I haven't seen a stock new pick up do that in years. It's only the bro trucks that mod them to make more smoke. I'm guessing they remove some equipment?

stephenkirsh
02-25-2015, 02:54 PM
Aaand subbed. This is a topic I've long wondered about.

The discussion has kinda died off :(.

Maybe the collective answer is simply "yup"

Fenrir
02-25-2015, 03:08 PM
The discussion has kinda died off :(.

Maybe the collective answer is simply "yup"

I guess so lol.

And on the subject of the smoking diesels, most of the bro dozers around here use cheap smoke switches or even intentionally tune their trucks to run extremely rich to produce that smoke. I grew up hauling with and tuning diesels and those trucks NEVER do that with a "proper" tune. The act of doing it is actually called Coal Rolling and they actually make DIY lists for it. http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/10/smoke-responsibly-and-roll-coal-the-right-way-with-these-truck-modification-options/ But a properly tuned diesel truck or car can make outstanding MPG and power. Personal preference I suppose, but for most diesel owners, coal rolling is the equivalent of fart can exhaust and fake blow off valves.

Dave1027
02-26-2015, 09:48 AM
I haven't seen a stock new pick up do that in years. It's only the bro trucks that mod them to make more smoke. I'm guessing they remove some equipment? Even though they don't visually smoke as much (they still do when they romp on the accelerator) even brand new they still have a stench and that can't be good to breath

LivesNearCostco
02-26-2015, 10:02 AM
I read a story some years ago about truck companies getting in trouble with the EPA or AQMD (California Air Quality Management District) because they tuned their big rig motors to get better gas mileage but make more pollution. They would pass smog checks with one tune but in the field customers used the regular tune for the best gas mileage. Because those customers didn't care about emissions, just saving money on fuel.

stephenkirsh
03-12-2015, 08:29 AM
Well this is interesting...

GM shrunk their warranty and their 2-year-no-maintenance at a time when, according to Car and Driver, there's a lot of exploded engines.


http://blog.caranddriver.com/wait-what-chevy-and-gmc-powertrain-warranties-just-got-40000-miles-shorter/