LexFather

His entire argument is based on a C&D article from 2010. My argument is based on one that literally just got posted up this week and it is showing that even with more stringent regulations car sales are up and people continue to buy large engine vehicles.

This is no different than the anti left rant in the Toyota moving to Texas thread.


So you basically didn't read the link I posted disproving his entire premise. So why would anyone read your post exactly? This is the flaw of the arguments by the same people positing in the debate forum, one sided rants based on biases with no facts to back up their statements.

Your post about Acura makes little sense. We have an affordable V-8;
Mustang
300C
Challenger
Charger

So please explain to me how we don't have V-8s due to CAFE???? We have more V-8s than ever, I just bought a V-8. We have never had affordable V-8s unless you are counting the 1960s.

The market has now moved to turbo and forced induction V-8s. Anyone saying that large engines are dead is completely out of touch with reality.

We needed more fuel efficient vehicles and it seems only Toyota and maybe Honda/Ford were actually interested in doing so without government intervention. The government stepped in and cars have never been better, have never had more power and have never been more fuel efficient while continuing to being affordable.

So what is the problem?
Actually gas prices have been pretty flat, the market has adjusted to higher gas prices. Gas prices actually were down until the summer came. Again your post isn't based in reality, "no one" seems to be "a ton of people" since the luxury market is up, trucks are up, V-8s are up, SUVs are up and small cars are down.

There is no doubt that some engine/vehicle choices have been effected but it seems car brands are figuring out ways to offer more power and more MPG. You and others acting like people have abandoned these vehicles is internet hype not based in reality.

Here is a link from Fox so some of you understand
http://www.foxbusiness.com/industrie...pril-us-sales/

LexFather

Nice post Gengar and I agree with some but not all. The O,P would have us believe only 4 cylinder cars are being offered and they all suck. That is not the case. You brought up Porsche. Today Porsche has
1. 2 SUVs, both guzzle gas even with hybrid/diesel options
2. More 911 Variants than ever, with more power and MPG than ever
3. A gas guzzling Panamera even with hybrid/diesel option

and they didn't stop making the supercar, they ADAPTED. They offer a TT V-8 hybrid.

Today Porsche sells more vehicles than ever, with more power than ever, with more MPG than ever with more engine choices than ever.

What is the problem?

Porsche was going mainstream a long time ago, the writing was on the wall way before "environmentalists". They Cayenne was the first step to this over a decade ago.

I look around and see cars being better than ever and its really a shame to see rants over and over that are unfounded.


I agree with your insight but Lexus as you know is in a funky fight internally with going with hybrid power vs forced induction. While a V-8 GS would be great, we are talking maybe 40-50 sales a month here. Guess what the 30 MPG 340hp hybrid GS also sells the same. Even with a 400hp GS, sales would still be incremental. Why?

The market has changed. Let us remind ourselves that 4 cylinder luxury was what we knew back in the 70s, 80s, 90s and early 2000s. Lexus only offered a 6 cylinder or higher for ages, until the IS 220d in Europe. Lexus never got any kudos for being "real luxury" for not offering a 4 cylinder. People still called them tarted up Toyotas. So the O.P saying 4 cylinders are not luxury is odd since that is what we mostly know until recently as the luxury market has expanded tremendously.

Mind you I am not pro 4 cylinder at all, I do prefer a smooth 6. However the market has changed, luxury has changed and perceptions have shifted. I can understand a person's choice for a 4 cylinder luxury vehicle. In Europe you can get a FWD, I-4 Audi A8! Clearly someone is buying it.

I completely disagree with this thread and the purpose. We have never seen more luxury,sport, exotic cars made and sold. Ferrari can't even build enough cars, they are cutting demand. Companies have answered the challenge with the best cars we have ever seen from entry level cars to a Rolls Royce.

So what is the issue? How could anyone hate or be pissed off that we have
1. More MPG
2. More Power
3. Happy Consumers
4. Better Emissions
5. More Profits
6. More Sales

If it took the government slapping the car industry to make it happen so be it. I am not one to think everything the government does is evil and wrong.

Och

iTrader: (3)

The problem is, a transversely mounted engine in a FWD car is a b##ch to service. Economy cars need to be cheap to purchase, and cheap to keep on the road - and if you ever worked on a transversely mounted V6 vs an I4, you would know what I mean. Not even to mention 50% more serviceable engine parts that cost money.

We have basic cars today with 4 cylidner engines that all make 150hp and up. I just simply fail to see the OPs argument about people not getting to enjoy a decent engine anymore. I think a young person buying a basic car such as a Honda Civic would enjoy its engine a lot more than a young person in the 90ies, when these economy cars were severely underpowered.

LexFather

I just did a quick search on Flagship V-8s..the numbers are quite astounding...

The lowest power is the LS

LS-4.6 V-8-386hp-19 MPG Overall
750-4.4 TT V-8-440hp-20 MPG Overall
S500-4.7 V-8-449hp-20 MPG Overall
S8-4.0 T V-8, 520hp, 19 MPG Overall (this is just insane)

You want perspective? When I joined here I had a GS 400 over a decade ago...

GS-4.0 V-8-300hp-18 MPG Overall

So today an Audi S8 makes 220 more hp in a larger vehicle and gets 1 MPG more.

To me that is progress, not a reason to complain.

A 2000 C5 Corvettes gets 18 MPG, a 2014 gets 20 MPG.
A 2000 C5 Corvette made 345hp, a 2014 makes 445hp.

Not sure what the issue is?

mmarshall

Yes, I did. I just saw it from maybe a slightly different viewpoint.

Same reason they read yours. And the same reason you and I both read posts by others.

CAR CHAT, on some subjects, can be as much of a debate as in that specific forum. One of the reason we HAVE that debate forum (and to a lesser extent, CAR CHAT) is to help determine fact from fiction from different viewpoints. And that can sometimes be difficult.



In what way? From some of the things you yourself have said about Acura, you seem to think (or, at least, that's my impression) that few things in the division itself make sense.


Although one can agree (or disagree) on what is considered "affordable"or not, V8 versions of these vehicles, while inexpensive in comparison to V8 cars like the LS460, A8, BMW 7-series, etc.....can hardly be considered cheap for many people. I could easily afford one if I wanted it, but that's not the case for a number of others.

(and, BTW......don't forget the Camaro)


The full effects of the new CAFE laws haven't really been felt yet. I don't know if you are old enough to clearly remember the first major CAFE/emissions round of the early 1970s (I am)...but those are not felt overnight, either. Engines gradually lost power (and sometimes drivability) throughout most of the decade...even with the addition of catalysts in 1975, which permitted some partial re-tuning of the engines themselves.


No one is criticizing you for getting a new LS....heck, especially on this Lexus forum. It is, IMO, one of the world's best luxury cars. I myself congratulated you for it...and I do again. But not everyone can afford one...and it is unclear how long V8 power plants will last even in the LS series, unless they all become hybrids like your former GS460H. .

What we're actually seeing, more of, is turbo/forced-induction V6s replacing older V8s. In general, they are keeping the V8's HP and (usually) the torque, but not the refinement.

The problem depends on how you look at it.

IMO, the best solution to the gas-MPG problem is to develop alternate fuels, not for Congress, the EPA, or the WH to simply dictate gas-mileage standards. Most of the people in those positions are not very knowledgeable about cars (they are usually lawyers or politicians)...and they aren't aware that simply waving a magic wand and making legislation is not necessarily the solution to everything. Democrats, in general, are more likely to knee-jerk legislate like that, but even some Republicans, too, on some issues.


If more cars ran off of propane, natural gas, pure-electrics, ethanol, compressed hydrogen (fuel-cell)....and, more important, IF THERE WAS AN ADEQUATE REFUELING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THOSE VEHICLES, gas-mileage would become less of an issue. Even gas/electric hybrids would help....and, as you note, there are some of those with V8 engines.

However, I will partially agree with you on one point. Government intervention with GM and Chrysler (which can be traced to both the Bush and Obama administrations) did give us substantially better vehicles from both (with the possible exception, IMO, of the Cadillac XTS). But those improvements are not so much in gas mileage as in general build-quality and engineering.

RXSF

Its much easier to build an electric cars since everyone has an outlet at home. Natural gas stations are extremely rare. And if we were going to build new stations, we might as well invest in hydrogen instead of building natural gas stations and then having to move again to another source.

Natural gas while cleaner burning still emits emissions. We need to zero emissions out completely. At least with electricity, it is possible to do. Wind, solar, wave technology -- so much untapped potential. Natural gas will never be the cleanest.

yowps3

It's all a joke. These "turbo" 4-bangers get worst real world gas mileage than most modern N/A V6. Then you have all the complexity and issues that come with the turbo setup.

LexFather

I just posted how cars are more powerful and get more MPG. What is the issue? Who has an issue with cars getting more power and more MPG?

The link shows that while 4 cylinder sales are growing, 6/8 decline slightly. There is no mass exodus. Environmentalists have not scared off car brands from making high power engines.

Maybe people forgot or are unaware

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2012...NEWS/120409988
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2...p-or-more.html

I am hoping these facts presented make it clearly obvious that environmentalists are not destroying the car.

mmarshall

OK....a valid point on some issues, like getting to timing belts/pulleys or the rear spark-plugs on a transverse-mount V-engine. But, these days, plugs usually have to be changed only once in 100K or so, though it is usually a good idea to change them more often simply to prevent accumulated engine-heat from seizing the plug threads in so tight you can't unscrew them. Then, they have to be drilled out, and that can be a mess.


You also have to remember that weight has also gone up, even on economy cars.....and weight is the enemy of engine power. This added size and weight has come from several sources...Government requirements for more standard equipment, safety-regulations, market-pressure from customers for more and more convenience-items in their vehicles, general vehicle upsizing, larger wheel-sizes, and sound insulation for a quiet ride.

So, in general, that little Mickey-Mouse 1.0L 3-cylinder back in that 80's-vintage Geo Metro XFi (or that Honda CRX HF with only 48 HP and a walnut-sized carburetor) was dragging around a lot less car as well....and getting 50 or 60 MPG in the process.

bagwell

mmarshall

Actually, IMO, what will destroy the car as we know it, more than simply having smaller power plants, is hands-off electronics taking over all of the driving functions. This is true not only with steer-by-wire systems like those on the current Infiniti Q where you still have a steering wheel but no direct mechanical connection to the rack, but future projected ones where the car is pre-programmed on electronic roads, and all you will do as a "driver" is to essentially sit there in the front-left seat and look stupid (not to mention bored). The car will drive itself, steer itself, and brake itself. No thanks, I may not be an overly-aggressive driver, but one of my joys in life is to get behind the wheel and DRIVE....and in that sense, I'm a true car guy. To put me into a self-propelled cocoon would be the same as putting me in prison.

Of course, when I'm 90 years old, and my eyes and much of my co-ordination is gone, maybe I'll change my mind and WANT cars that drive themselves, We'll see.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

aaaand that's incorrect. i mentioned that for reference only about epa requiring economy to go up 37% from 2011 to 2016.

newsflash - population increases, ergo sales rise, plus with the economic collapse in 2008 people held onto cars longer so are now coming out to buy, especially cars that get better fuel economy than what they have. and large engine luxury cars are almost all LEASED and written off, so people couldn't care less much about fuel economy.

you mean like your post in the other thread i started about Lexus?
your second sentence is correct. i didn't say that, don't believe that. you're right, that is not the case because i didn't write that.

the problem you're conveniently ignoring or forgetting is that porsche only gets away with this because vw bought them so their CAFE is brought in line by your favorite jetta and other vw's.

good question - maybe it's partly because of the crazy constraints on options. in the NE you can't get a GS with mark levinson stereo without special order wait and full price and almost all are AWD which not everyone wants. lexus only sells 5-10 GS per month per dealer. (of course that varies a lot, some dealer may not sell any and others 20+)

completely irrelevant given the miniscule number of cars they sell for one, plus you continue to conveniently forget a) population growth, but much more importantly, the massive increase in wealth across the world in recent years, in particular in china, russia, and india. those places largely account for all the increased demand for exotics and super high end vehicles. for the uber wealthy, the rules will never matter. it's why al gore can prattle on about environmentalism while traveling around in his private jet burning thousands of gallons of jet fuel a day.

so i take it you'd like more slapping? are you happy that car makers had to adopt craptastic electric steering to improve fuel economy?

false strawman as usual but good for you, i don't know of anyone who thinks EVERYTHING the govt does is evil and wrong. they'd have to be a radical anarchist.

i just looked up the base price of the s8, it's $112,500. so sure you can 'have it all' at an enormous price.

for once i agree with you.

LexFather

Sorry but you have no retort. You and others can hate the government and whatever is in fashion currently all you want but the facts are;

1.Car Sales are up
2. MPG is up
3. Power is up
4. Emissions are down
5. Car Company Profits are up
6. Consumer happiness is up
7. Quality is up
8. We have more high horsepower cars than ever before
9. We have more exotics than ever before
10. THE CAR WORLD IS NOT ENDING

The government challenged the car industry and they have come ROARING back answering confidently. We now have EVs, hybrids, plug in hybrids along with V-8s, V-10s, V-12s many that also include forced induction.

This thread sounds like something Ralph Nadar would write....

Infra

iTrader: (1)

This is such a short-sighted and narrowly-focused rant. Americans have been caught with their pants down several times now over the past 30 years when gas prices sharply spiked, and finally something has been down to curb the extreme disregard for fuel consumption. We have had a gas guzzler tax since 1978, and yet I hear absolutely no one complain about it... why? Because V8s have always been an upgrade from base engine, which means the tax was really a luxury tax, not a tax on fuel consumption, and therefore was wholly ineffective.

Does the federal government not exist to set fiscal policy, and secure liberty for its citizens? If so, then setting an energy policy to reduce the nations dependence on oil is well within scope. If affects not just the decisions consumers make in buying cars, but also the decisions cities make when building infrastructure. The repercussions of bad policy last for decades.

All you need to know about V8s you can learn from the GS430 vs GS350. Roughly same power, roughly same torque and nearly identical "pickup" or 0-60 or however you want to measure it. Here's the official side-by-side of their dynos



Who in there right mind thinks the V8 is better here? Now, of course it's older technology, and the 1UR is much improved, but let's not pretend that what is being mourned in this thread is newer V8s, but V8s like the 3UZ. We could talk about BMW's 4.0L V8, or the Mustangs 4.6L V8, or any number that are simply at par with modern V6s. This simple fact means that the death of the V8 being agonized over here is simply irrelevant! We have a replacement that performs better in every way.

What we really have here is an emotional argument about the nostalgia of feeling and hearing the V8 rumble wrapped up in a red herring of a post supported by zero facts about environmentalists ruining our fun because... I don't know, environmentalists are dumb.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

you're not sorry, and are entitled to your opinion that my responses are hot air.

your list of talking points are all pretty pointless.

population increases.

government mandates.

technology happens, always. quality has various qualities, but tech precision of manufacturing,. improvements in design and material science increases reliability. nothing new.

technology happens, companies get more efficient. adjust plans, make more moneeyz.

must be why the fact is that we're driving LESS and LESS.

http://usa.streetsblog.org/2014/02/2...riving-in-u-s/

must be why the fact is more and more millennials have decided they don't want a car at all, principally because they can't afford one or don't want to spend the exorbitant amount they cost.

no one said it is.

seriously? lol. he's always in favor of more govt regulation and no doubt hates all the car co. profits.