[BenW]

Senator Diane Feinstein, one of the big pushers of closing the "gunshow loophole" is now regulating vehicles with the "SUV Loophole." Maybe we should strike back with a "moron loophole" that the senator seems to have fallen through.

I don't know about anyone else, but I can't see a 3/4 ton truck that gets 30 miles to the gallon being built out of anything but plastic and paper thin metal, with a 0-60 time of 2,400 seconds. Work trucks are heavy because the beds are not supposed to collapse when you throw a few 2x4 studs in the back. Why can't these idiots see that a truck is designed to be used differently than a Toyota Tercel?:fire:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,77132,00.html

Edited to corekt speling

[Hkmp5sd]

Hannity had one of those "SUV's gotta go" celebrities on his radio show the other day. She wants all kinds of restrictions on emissions and MPG. Hannity asked her if she was so dedicated to the cause, would she swear then and there to no longer use her privately owned aircraft for travelling and use commercial airlines.

Guess her response?

[Ewok]

30 mpg pick-ups may not be that far away. There'll be several models of gas/electric hybrid trucks and SUVs coming out in the next few years. Ford has a 40 mpg hybrid version of its car-based Escape SUV coming out next year.

[BenW]

30 mpg pick-ups may not be that far away.
Yeah, but how do you get there? Many truckmakers are already putting 3.08 differentials in their trucks, which sure improves mileage, but severely decreases hauling ability.

I have nothing against increasing fuel economy in principle. I have a problem with doing so at the expense of the utility specific vehicles were designed for. You just can't say that a 3/4 ton truck and a subcompact car should be held to the same standard of fuel economy. You pretty much slam into a wall labeled "laws of physics" when you try. If the proposal was phrased in percentages instead of raw numbers it also wouldn't be as much of a problem.

[citizen]

It's been an IRS deduction for several years now; peak allowance is this or next year; IIRC. Nice; if you can use it.
:p

[Malone LaVeigh]

You just can't say that a 3/4 ton truck and a subcompact car should be held to the same standard of fuel economy. That's not what they're saying. They're saying trucks and SUVs should be included in the same corporate average. If more people bought small cars, trucks could be as inefficient as they want. The question, the perennial question, is "how do you achieve a desirable social good when the free market does not?"

[Ewok]

You just can't say that a 3/4 ton truck and a subcompact car should be held to the same standard of fuel economy.Of course not, but CAFE is the average mileage across the company's product line, for cars. Light trucks and SUVs have their own CAFE. The proposed legislation is to combine them, I think.

[Marko Kloos]

You know, I am leafing through my copy of the Constitution here. Dang it if I can't find a single reference to Congress having the authority to dictate any sort of standard to the automobile industry...

Feinstein is intoxicated on power. That woman has turned into a first-rate bully, and she does it with the approval of her conscience. After all, she's merely trying to make the world a better place...

[Ewok]

What we really need to do is switch to Euro-style clean diesel - Give Rep. Dingell's Plan for Clean Diesel a Chance (http://www.detnews.com/2002/editorial/0208/28/a10-572575.htm). And also get the ethanol rolling. It's ridiculous that we can't get E85 gas (usable by half a million FFV cars and light trucks, such as the Ford Ranger V6 3.0) in California. Of course, we don't grow much corn here, and we do produce gasoline....

[BenW]

CAFE is the average mileage across the company's product line
I understand what CAFE is (no flame intended towards you Ewok). Maybe I am misreading the article, but it sure sounds to me like she is NOT referring to CAFE and is in fact bunching trucks and SUVs in with automobiles to require not a corporate average across vehicles, but a minimum requirement for all vehicles regardless of their configuration (just like when adopting the politically correct BMI index for body fat turned me from normal to a fatty :scrutiny: ).

And really, what burns me most and the reason I posted this, is the usage of the "loophole" phrase. It's not a loophole, it's a freedom to market something. When will manufacturing trucks or SUVs become a "loophole" that needs to be closed? This very much resembles an "Atlas Shrugged" scenario.

[2nd Amendment]

What we really need to do is tell the government to butt out of the auto industry. They stuck their nose in and we got the small POS heaps of the 80's. We have all these SUV's now because Americans LIKE big cars and could no longer buy them, so they went to trucks and demanded that the trucks, while retaining their size, become more "car like" in ride and comfort. The automakers obliged.

So now along come pigs like Fineswine to try and control the populace again. More micro-managing, more "We know what's good for you" from the Elitists who, generally, aren't qualified to wipe my boots. When Americans want nothing but smaller cars they'll buy them and the market will alter to suit that desire. When gasoline has run its' course an alternative will be developed. By the private sector and in spite of government meddling and incompetence. Until then the government needs to sit the hell down and STFU.

[jmbg29]

The question, the perennial question, is "how do you achieve a desirable social good when the free market does not?"Only for statists that want to control others through extortion using the power of bloated government.

Feinswine et al. know that they can make their pinko puppets dance by playing on their envy and jealousy of those that are more successful. That's why they play the "Their using all of the people's gas!" card. That's why they play the "S.U.V.s roll over" card. <Gee, inanimate objects performing murderous stunts all on their own. Where have I heard that one before?...>

That's why they play the "S.U.V.s protect their occupants, so if you hit one in your Mazda GLC, you're toast!" <Life is just so darn unfair!:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:>

how do you achieve a desirable social good when the free market does not?Surely Comrade Stalin has shown you the light and the way on that one tovarisch? :fire:

[Mike Irwin]

There's apparently some group that asks "What would Jesus drive" or some other inane type thing, trying to make a case that he would drive some hypermileagemobile or some such.

I think it's obvious what Jesus would drive.

He was a carpenter.

A pick up truck. :)

[PATH]

More left wing stupidity from the left wing nutsos who gave us the low flush toilet that you need to flush 2 and 3 times.

Why can't they just go away and leave us folks alone!:fire: :cuss:

[larryw]

C'mon Path, you know the answer to that: they're finally learning from us. Don't you just love riling them up on the leftist-whacko boards? I sure do. :neener:

[Mikul]

This issue put me in a bit of a connundrum.

The government has no business regulating the automobile industry. This is supposed to be a free market.

OTOH, we are depending upon enough foreign oil that if OPEC raises prices, our costs go up. So, if OPEC knocks prices through the roof, our economy would collapse. So, our dependence upon foreign oil is a strategic problem.

[ReadyontheRight]

As I've said in earlier threads, the war for the environment has become an Orwellian "continual war" to justify taking away our rights. This is just aonther example.

You can't legislate the laws of physics. CAFE standards force American vehicle manufacturers to make lighter cars. Lighter cars cause more deaths.

CAFE regulations have killed 2000-4000 Americans per year. (http://216.156.132.11/legal.html)

NHTSB tests and ratings are biased to support CAFE standards. They base vehicle safety on a vehicle crashing into a brick wall at 40 mph -- so new, mid-sized cars with tons of airbags test well. In the real world, accidents involve vehicles of different mass, speed and point of impact.

To determine the actual safety of specific vehicles, look at the actual insurance injury claims of vehicles:

http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ictl/ictl.htm

SUVs are safer than cars. Applying CAFE standards to SUVs will kill even more people and probably create a market for the personal semi-truck or some other class of vehicle not covered by CAFE standards.

[El Tejon]

What would Hayzeus drive? Usually the best deal his primo on the westside of Chicago can get him.

DiFi drives SUVs. Why can't I? DiFi flys on planes. Why can't I? DiFi lives in a big house (actually 2). Why can't I?

Better question, when are we going to tell the watermelons to leave us alone?