tk for tu juan said:

---

We went on a family vacation to Colorado (from Dallas) in the 210 sedan. Probably safe to assume we didn't get the 47 mpg loaded down with four people and luggage

---

I did my student driving in a B210. I don't recall if it was a hatchback or sedan. We had the instructor and 3 students, all taking turns driving, so 2 of us sat in the back seat at all times. It wasn't the worst experience of my life, but the car didn't perform all that great. Probably one reason why they choose it. But at the same time, it also had the ability to get on the highway somewhat safely.

My Ram 2500 diesel identifies as an EV.

Works both ways.

World is a changing.

blacksox said:

---

World is a changing.

---

I prefer market forces rather than govt coercion for changes to the world. Usually goes better.

Aggie Jurist said:

---

I was in the market for a car 18 months ago. I wanted to replace my Mercedes ML350 with the newest version of the same machine. No dice. To meet CAFE, they reduced the engine size to a 4 cyl, coupled with an 8 speed transmission. The salesperson tried to convince me my driving experience would be the same - BS.

I moved to a Porsche Cayenne.

As manufacturers chase the standards, they will have to reduce power, weight, and capacity.

---

More gears can improve mpg, especially highway, without much compromise on performance. It just means a more complete and expensive transmission. CVTs should also get better mpg. I'm looking forward to CVT reliability improving, Honda seems to have good CVTs, but not Nissan.

Would love a diesel expedition.

Quote:

---

More gears can improve mpg, especially highway, without much compromise on performance. It just means a more complete and expensive transmission. CVTs should also get better mpg. I'm looking forward to CVT reliability improving, Honda seems to have good CVTs, but not Nissan.

---

Gears help some - but not completely. I drove the 8 speed. Trust me, it wasn't even close to the same.

I had a diesel VW Passat I drove 90 miles each way to college station. Routinely got 50 mpg. Awesome car until they forced it out iof existence

bmks270 said:

---

Aggie Jurist said:

---

I was in the market for a car 18 months ago. I wanted to replace my Mercedes ML350 with the newest version of the same machine. No dice. To meet CAFE, they reduced the engine size to a 4 cyl, coupled with an 8 speed transmission. The salesperson tried to convince me my driving experience would be the same - BS.

I moved to a Porsche Cayenne.

As manufacturers chase the standards, they will have to reduce power, weight, and capacity.

---

More gears can improve mpg, especially highway, without much compromise on performance. It just means a more complete and expensive transmission. CVTs should also get better mpg. I'm looking forward to CVT reliability improving, Honda seems to have good CVTs, but not Nissan.

---

I've learned on the Automotive board, in passing, that CVTs are about the worst development in vehicles ever devised.

But I've never understood why as I really don't know much about them.

Quote:

---

I've learned on the Automotive board, in passing, that CVTs are about the worst development in vehicles ever devised.

But I've never understood why as I really don't know much about them.

---

on paper, they sound great. Execution? Not so much. It's basically two variable-diameter pulleys connected by a belt of chain. This allows for varying gear ratios, optimized for speed, load, and engine dynamics. It can be somewhat odd to drive b/c you can be accelerating with the engine at a constant RPM. The ratios can be optimized for speed, torque, etc. Unfortunately, the technology is still proving to be difficult from a long-term reliability perspective. The Nissans are notorious.

Dark_Knight said:

---

I'd love a jeep with a real diesel engine. Not this Def crap they use now.

---

You and me both. I'm no chemist, but that **** is supposed to be a carcinogen. I'm not quite sure how you mix a carcinogen with diesel set it on fire and then poof it's better for the environment.

blacksox said:

---

World is a changing.

---

Not for the better, the communist ****tards mess up everything good and fun. The world would be a better place without tyrannical leftist trash.

blacksox said:

---

World is a changing.

---

It'll change back in 2025.

YouBet said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Aggie Jurist said:

---

I was in the market for a car 18 months ago. I wanted to replace my Mercedes ML350 with the newest version of the same machine. No dice. To meet CAFE, they reduced the engine size to a 4 cyl, coupled with an 8 speed transmission. The salesperson tried to convince me my driving experience would be the same - BS.

I moved to a Porsche Cayenne.

As manufacturers chase the standards, they will have to reduce power, weight, and capacity.

---

More gears can improve mpg, especially highway, without much compromise on performance. It just means a more complete and expensive transmission. CVTs should also get better mpg. I'm looking forward to CVT reliability improving, Honda seems to have good CVTs, but not Nissan.

---

I've learned on the Automotive board, in passing, that CVTs are about the worst development in vehicles ever devised.

But I've never understood why as I really don't know much about them.

---

Most of them are sealed and non serviceable. They are also described as rubber band transmissions.

In theory they are suppose to deliver max torque throughout the RPM range as the pulleys slide apart and allow the belt/band to shift. Its like 2 pulleys where there size is dependent on the other. As one increases the other decreases. One pulley is the power side and the other is the drive side. I'm sure the manufacturers have a myriad of design choices for the materials and mechanisms to work the details out. I have one in my Subaru 3.6 outback, sometimes you get a delayed reaction stomping on the gas trying to drive. Subaru has set some points in theirs to try to make it feel like a normal transmission, it's okay. I think i'd rather have a true auto or stick.

Philip J Fry said:

---

Thank you for convincing me to get the Dodge Durango Hellcat as my next purchase. **** you libs.

---

TRX for me! Love that horsepower!

pacecar02 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Aggie Jurist said:

---

I was in the market for a car 18 months ago. I wanted to replace my Mercedes ML350 with the newest version of the same machine. No dice. To meet CAFE, they reduced the engine size to a 4 cyl, coupled with an 8 speed transmission. The salesperson tried to convince me my driving experience would be the same - BS.

I moved to a Porsche Cayenne.

As manufacturers chase the standards, they will have to reduce power, weight, and capacity.

---

More gears can improve mpg, especially highway, without much compromise on performance. It just means a more complete and expensive transmission. CVTs should also get better mpg. I'm looking forward to CVT reliability improving, Honda seems to have good CVTs, but not Nissan.

---

I've learned on the Automotive board, in passing, that CVTs are about the worst development in vehicles ever devised.

But I've never understood why as I really don't know much about them.

---

Most of them are sealed and non serviceable. They are also described as rubber band transmissions.

In theory they are suppose to deliver max torque throughout the RPM range as the pulleys slide apart and allow the belt/band to shift. Its like 2 pulleys where there size is dependent on the other. As one increases the other decreases. One pulley is the power side and the other is the drive side. I'm sure the manufacturers have a myriad of design choices for the materials and mechanisms to work the details out. I have one in my Subaru 3.6 outback, sometimes you get a delayed reaction stomping on the gas trying to drive. Subaru has set some points in theirs to try to make it feel like a normal transmission, it's okay. I think i'd rather have a true auto or stick.

---

I appreciate your explanation and the other one above. I still really have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to the mechanics of it, but I do appreciate it. I simply made a note a while back to research and rule out any car that had it next time I buy one.

BDub3 said:

---

I definitely don't agree with the regulation, but you cannot tell me these car companies aren't in cahoots with the oil companies to keep fuel efficiency from improving. I bet these companies can hit this goal fairly easily.

---

Well, obviously you are far better at physics and chemical engineering than all of the world's automotive engineers - so tell us how.

Because at some point you just reach max efficiency when you get a whopping 20% energy transfer rate. We aren't in Star Wars yet where we have magic crystals that provide unlimited clean power.

Also, one of the single best ways to improve diesel mileage is to get rid of the stupid ass EPA sulfur mandates and make diesel actual diesel again.

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

BDub3 said:

---

I definitely don't agree with the regulation, but you cannot tell me these car companies aren't in cahoots with the oil companies to keep fuel efficiency from improving. I bet these companies can hit this goal fairly easily.

---

Almost certain if that was possible, our military would be using the technology. I know they're stupid and woke af now, but the sheer military advantage would be for good use. Plus it would be a big eff-you to private sector that it could be done. Unless you think the gov is in on the conspiracy as well in your scenario?

---

Well then they'd have to pay to replace all their Humvees and IFVs and tanks

---

They wouldn't care, it's not their money in their eyes anyway

bmks270 said:

---

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Hybrids can do it. They will just have to make all vehicles hybrid.

---

You know how I now you have no idea what you are talking about?

---

CRV and RAV4 hybrids already get 40 mpg….

---

Well, I'm not driving a gay ass CRV or RAV4....nor am I driving a stupid hybrid either.

schmellba99 said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

BDub3 said:

---

I definitely don't agree with the regulation, but you cannot tell me these car companies aren't in cahoots with the oil companies to keep fuel efficiency from improving. I bet these companies can hit this goal fairly easily.

---

Almost certain if that was possible, our military would be using the technology. I know they're stupid and woke af now, but the sheer military advantage would be for good use. Plus it would be a big eff-you to private sector that it could be done. Unless you think the gov is in on the conspiracy as well in your scenario?

---

Well then they'd have to pay to replace all their Humvees and IFVs and tanks

---

They wouldn't care, it's not their money in their eyes anyway

---

But then they couldn't spend it on new toys to bomb people in the Greater Middle East

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

BDub3 said:

---

I definitely don't agree with the regulation, but you cannot tell me these car companies aren't in cahoots with the oil companies to keep fuel efficiency from improving. I bet these companies can hit this goal fairly easily.

---

Almost certain if that was possible, our military would be using the technology. I know they're stupid and woke af now, but the sheer military advantage would be for good use. Plus it would be a big eff-you to private sector that it could be done. Unless you think the gov is in on the conspiracy as well in your scenario?

---

Well then they'd have to pay to replace all their Humvees and IFVs and tanks

---

They wouldn't care, it's not their money in their eyes anyway

---

But then they couldn't spend it on new toys to bomb people in the Greater Middle East

---

Another idiotic response.

blacksox said:

---

World is a changing.

---

And the market can change with it over time, and not influenced/coerced by governments which inevitably just leads to higher manufacturing / production costs, and less consumer choice.

But you don't care.

Proc92 said:

---

blacksox said:

---

World is a changing.

---

I prefer market forces rather than govt coercion for changes to the world. Usually goes better.

---

People like him will never learn.

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

BDub3 said:

---

I definitely don't agree with the regulation, but you cannot tell me these car companies aren't in cahoots with the oil companies to keep fuel efficiency from improving. I bet these companies can hit this goal fairly easily.

---

Almost certain if that was possible, our military would be using the technology. I know they're stupid and woke af now, but the sheer military advantage would be for good use. Plus it would be a big eff-you to private sector that it could be done. Unless you think the gov is in on the conspiracy as well in your scenario?

---

Well then they'd have to pay to replace all their Humvees and IFVs and tanks

---

They wouldn't care, it's not their money in their eyes anyway

---

But then they couldn't spend it on new toys to bomb people in the Greater Middle East

---

Another idiotic response.

---

Freddy, are you saying the US hasn't been involved in a half-dozen foreign interventions since 2001?

Houstonag said:

---

Mt Vette gets over 30mpg on the highway. Around 20 in town. Not bad for a 500 hp , 6.4 liter. It is the weight that determines gas mileage for the most part.

---

....and aerodynamics
....and gearing
....and transmission
....and tuning
....and how the driver drives it

YouBet said:

---

pacecar02 said:

---

Most of them are sealed and non serviceable. They are also described as rubber band transmissions.

In theory they are suppose to deliver max torque throughout the RPM range as the pulleys slide apart and allow the belt/band to shift. Its like 2 pulleys where there size is dependent on the other. As one increases the other decreases. One pulley is the power side and the other is the drive side. I'm sure the manufacturers have a myriad of design choices for the materials and mechanisms to work the details out. I have one in my Subaru 3.6 outback, sometimes you get a delayed reaction stomping on the gas trying to drive. Subaru has set some points in theirs to try to make it feel like a normal transmission, it's okay. I think i'd rather have a true auto or stick.

---

I appreciate your explanation and the other one above. I still really have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to the mechanics of it, but I do appreciate it. I simply made a note a while back to research and rule out any car that had it next time I buy one.

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

BDub3 said:

---

I definitely don't agree with the regulation, but you cannot tell me these car companies aren't in cahoots with the oil companies to keep fuel efficiency from improving. I bet these companies can hit this goal fairly easily.

---

Almost certain if that was possible, our military would be using the technology. I know they're stupid and woke af now, but the sheer military advantage would be for good use. Plus it would be a big eff-you to private sector that it could be done. Unless you think the gov is in on the conspiracy as well in your scenario?

---

Well then they'd have to pay to replace all their Humvees and IFVs and tanks

---

They wouldn't care, it's not their money in their eyes anyway

---

But then they couldn't spend it on new toys to bomb people in the Greater Middle East

---

Another idiotic response.

---

Freddy, are you saying the US hasn't been involved in a half-dozen foreign interventions since 2001?

---

Recently, most of those we drop bombs from the sky which has nothing to do with the topic at hand (gas mileage). You're just another whiny dem wanting to cry about liberal bull****. Where were your comments when your boy decided to leave $billions of weapons in Afghanistan? Probably quiet because you're just another hypocrite.

Proc92 said:

---

blacksox said:

---

World is a changing.

---

I prefer market forces rather than govt coercion for changes to the world. Usually goes better.

---

Market forces is what gets us globalism with the ever ending search for lowest cost resources, and government intervention brings us tariffs.

There are plenty of gasoline vehicles that get 50+ mpg.

Harley Davidson & Honda make a few.

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

BDub3 said:

---

I definitely don't agree with the regulation, but you cannot tell me these car companies aren't in cahoots with the oil companies to keep fuel efficiency from improving. I bet these companies can hit this goal fairly easily.

---

Almost certain if that was possible, our military would be using the technology. I know they're stupid and woke af now, but the sheer military advantage would be for good use. Plus it would be a big eff-you to private sector that it could be done. Unless you think the gov is in on the conspiracy as well in your scenario?

---

Well then they'd have to pay to replace all their Humvees and IFVs and tanks

---

They wouldn't care, it's not their money in their eyes anyway

---

But then they couldn't spend it on new toys to bomb people in the Greater Middle East

---

Another idiotic response.

---

Freddy, are you saying the US hasn't been involved in a half-dozen foreign interventions since 2001?

---

Recently, most of those we drop bombs from the sky which has nothing to do with the topic at hand (gas mileage). You're just another whiny dem wanting to cry about liberal bull****. Where were your comments when your boy decided to leave $billions of weapons in Afghanistan? Probably quiet because you're just another hypocrite.

---

Fred, the other poster and I were talking about how, if the military had access to tech that resulted in increased fuel efficiency, they would be using them. I replied by saying that the military would rather bot spend money updating all of their vehicles. I then followed it up by suggesting that the military would prefer to spend their money on weapons rather than improving their fuel efficiency. I understand how this is moving off-topic (and thank you very much for pointing that out), so this will be the last I speak of it. Also, I don't even think I was here when we pulled out of Afghanistan.
Have a great day!

bmks270 said:

---

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Hybrids can do it. They will just have to make all vehicles hybrid.

---

You know how I now you have no idea what you are talking about?

---

CRV and RAV4 hybrids already get 40 mpg….

---

Those are crossovers, not full size Suvs. That 40 mpg will only be obtainable without ac and a tail wind

I got a kick as a rental car which is the equivalent of these and it sucked. No power at all, thought I was going to die every time I tried to pass someone on a 2 lane road because it took 5-10 secs to start accelerating

I think the car ran on squirrel power and one of the 4 was dead

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Hybrids can do it. They will just have to make all vehicles hybrid.

---

You know how I now you have no idea what you are talking about?

---

CRV and RAV4 hybrids already get 40 mpg….

---

Those are crossovers, not full size Suvs. That 40 mpg will only be obtainable without ac and a tail wind

I got a kick which is the equivalent of these and it sucked. No power at all, thought I was going to die every time I tried to pass someone on a 2 lane road because it took 5-10 secs to start accelerating

I think the car ran on squirrel power and one of the 4 was dead

---

A kick is crap. Rav4 and CRV hybrid models are faster than the non hybrid models. Lower 0-60 times.

But if everything has to hit 40 mpg they probably will perform like the kick.

El_Zorro said:

---

When they can build one that has the same performance on and off road as my 6.2l V8 Chevy Z71 Tahoe, I will consider buying one.

How many years will that take?

---

Supposedly the 2023 Toyota Sequioa has 437 hp, 538lb-ft torque, 9,000lb towing capacity (properly equipped) and with a hybrid engine gets 43mpg.

EDIT: Rumored mpg as it has not yet been published

4WD?

The only way that's happening is if that's city mpg and they're averaging gas engine time with electric motor only time. Either way it's not sniffing 30mpg on the highway.