Trump Thinks Your Car’s Gas Mileage is . . .Your Business . . .

Guest Post by Eric Peters

The Clovers are aghast that Trump is threatening to do the unimaginable – and stop threatening the car companies with federal fuel economy fatwas (and add-on fatwas forbidding or restricting how much plant food – carbon dioxide – cars may emit).

He appears to be entertaining the horrible idea that the people who buy cars ought to be free to decide for themselves how much fuel economy matters to them – since they will be the ones paying for both the car and the gas. And – oh my god! – that this is really none of the business of the “concerned” scientists and other professional busybodies who regard their opinions and preferences as holy writ enforceable at gunpoint.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

“We’re going to work on the CAFE standards so you can make cars in America again,” said Trump. He should have added the qualifier – affordable cars in America again.

Leaving aside the moral issue – who are these people to tell anyone whether their next car should get 10 MPG or 40 MPG? – the issue never addressed by the media, including the automotive media, is how much will all this cost us?

Obama’s mullahs uluated about the many billions (allegedly) which would be “saved” by force-marching every automaker to build cars that average 54.5 MPG. It is the sort of “savings” one realizes by emptying your bank account to buy something you don’t need that’s 5 percent off.

Only worse, because you’re not given the option to keep your money in the bank.

A week or so ago, executives from the major automakers came to the White House to explain to Donald – who probably already grokked it – that to get a single car to average 54.5 MPG requires more than merely ululating that it will be so. A new Prius hybrid almost manages it – and the hybrid Prius costs several thousand dollars more than an otherwise similar but not 54.5 MPG non-hybrid car.

And to get every car made to average 54.5 MPG – which is what Obama’s EPA ululated in the last weeks of his regime – won’t magically just happen, either – even if the entire regulatory Mecca ululates in unison for a week straight.

In the first place, it requires technology – and new designs. These generally involve work and resources, which cost money. New components don’t generally rain from Allah’s merciful bounty, upon ululation.

The executives pointed this out to Trump – who almost certainly grokked it beforehand, since he appears to be a man who probably knows where the dipstick is under the hood of a car and also what it’s for.

It is doubtful Obama knew – or did.

Or cared.

The current CAFE fatwa is 35.5 MPG and to achieve this without going hybrid across the board has required some very elaborate – some very expensive – technology. Two specific examples: Direct injection and transmissions with eight, nine and lately ten forward speeds.

These are coming online (the new Ford F-150 pick-up, reviewed here,  has a ten-speed automatic and probably two-thirds of all new vehicles are already direct-injected) because of the existing CAFE fatwa.

But they offer no particular advantage to the buyer, in terms of how the car drives or performs. Indeed, cars with these too-many-speeds automatics often have strange driving characteristics.  I can vouch for this; I test drive and review new cars each week.

For instance, the sensation that the car is surging forward (it is) when the transmission skips up three or four gears on a downhill because the computer is desperate to get the transmission into the top overdrive gear as quickly as possible in order to cut engine revs to the minimum in order to squeeze out a teensy uptick in MPGs, for the sake of CAFE.

Direct injection, meanwhile, has supplanted port fuel injection (PFI) with a two-stage system that operates at extreme pressure (3,000 psi vs. 35 or so psi) and which has created a carbon deposit problem inside the engine. In engines fed fuel via PFI or TBI or even a carburetor, the fuel washes over the backsides of the valves as it enters the combustion chamber – and because gas is a solvent, that action keeps the valves from crudding up. But in a DI system, the fuel is sprayed through a hole inside the combustion chamber and there is no solvent effect.

And so, crud forms.

To fix this problem the automakers are adding a separate, additional port-fuel circuit to keep the valves clean. So now you car will have two fuel injection systems – and multiple fuel pumps rather than just one.

It is not free.

What would it take to get all cars to average 54.5 MPG?

Keep in mind that not a single non-hybrid/non-electric new car comes close to that. Obama’s fatwa was in a way an ululation demanding that most if not all cars be hybrids or electric cars – because that is probably the only way to get to a “fleet average” (CAFE terminology) of 54.5 MPG absent the discovery of miracle technologies such as Roswell Crash-style ultra-light metal that is also ultra strong (so that other fatwas regarding “safety” can also be complied with).

This brings us back to the moral issue: Why is how much or little fuel our cars use anyone else’s business, since we pay for the car and the fuel? If gas “costs too much,” we can buy a different car that uses less.

And there is another issue, very obvious, but – like the cost of the fatwas – never asked or discussed:

If the market is so “concerned” about fuel economy – as the various scientists, “public citizens” and other such self-appointed voxxers of the populi claim, why not allow the market to apply the pressure?

Can’t have that. Pressure must come from above.

It doesn’t matter that there are already cars available that were designed to deliver much higher-than-average mileage – the Prius, for instance – which people are free to pay for if that is their priority. What the various “concerned” and the mullahs within the EPA and federal apparat are really concerned about is that people can choose not to buy such. That they are free to buy something else.

For the ululators, everyone must buy the same thing – the thing the uluators insist they buy. Or else.

Always, collectivism and coercion.

Never free choice, liberty – the market.

It’s worth recalling that the literal translation of laissez-faire is… leave us alone.

Exactly.

Good on Donald. He appears to grok.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
17 Comments
safariman
safariman
March 16, 2017 3:51 pm

What a horrible person! A bit of liberty in our lives?

David
David
  safariman
March 16, 2017 6:35 pm

It won’t catch on, no money for the kleptocrats in liberty.

Ed
Ed
  safariman
March 17, 2017 12:12 am

It would be good if Trump ordered the charges dropped against VW and their guy who faces felony charges. Of course, it would be even better if everyone at the EPA involved in that shitshow was made to apologize publicly and give back every dime they’ve ever been paid by the US government to a fund paid out to VW employees who have been charged.

I hoped that Trump would jump on Obama and beat the fuck out of him at the inauguration, so you can see that my hopes for the Trump presidency may have been a little unreasonably optimistic.

Trapped in Portlandia
Trapped in Portlandia
March 16, 2017 3:53 pm

Sometimes environmental regulations are needed. Such as to prevent industries and cities from dumping their raw wastes into rivers. But where the market can deal with a problem, we should let the market do its job. But, as Eric says, government can’t stand the thought of citizens making their own decisions. Government knows better and must always be in control.

TrickleUpPolitics
TrickleUpPolitics
March 16, 2017 4:01 pm

Yes, he does grok.

Edwitness
Edwitness
March 16, 2017 5:18 pm

A most excellent plan Pres. Trump. Thanks:-)

starfcker
starfcker
March 16, 2017 5:38 pm

And if he follows this up with getting rid of the goat piss injection on diesels, we will all be happy

peharda
peharda
March 16, 2017 7:36 pm

My european 4.65m long, 1.6 diesel VW 5 speed manual with plenty of space does 50MPG year round and 70MPG on open road. So it is possible…

geo3
geo3
March 16, 2017 7:40 pm

Would be nice to have a car option with 90% less electronic crap which I rarely use or understand. I can still parallel park myself and if I feel a thump then I guess I backed over something/someone. (Sorry Grandma)

travis
travis
March 16, 2017 9:42 pm

My gas 1980 vw rabbit got near 70 mpg. Had an old civic that got 60mpg. Pull off the emissions garbage and you get better mileage.

AC
AC
March 16, 2017 9:52 pm

I was sort of looking forward to an underground conversion economy that gutted electric cars, and secretly installed gas or diesel engines in them.

Oh well. Being able to buy cars that don’t suck, directly off the dealer’s lot, will be nice, too. Maybe Ford will go back to making their truck frames out of steel? If they do, I might consider buying one.

starfcker
starfcker
March 16, 2017 10:19 pm

AC, Ford frames are still steel, and they upgraded to a much higher grade steel when they went to the aluminum bodies.

AC
AC
  starfcker
March 16, 2017 11:10 pm

Huh. They need better marketing people. I was so *certain* they were using aluminum frames. I was horribly wrong, but, hey. Thanks.

Not Sure
Not Sure
March 16, 2017 11:01 pm

I was taught a lesson tonight when a student my wife teaches privately brought up his knowledge of the changes president Trump is making to various agencies. I mentioned specifically the rolling back of gas efficiency requirements that will result in cost savings to the consumer and his immediate response was, “that move would be bad for people”. I was shocked at how quickly this high school student responded, almost without thinking. After spending a few minutes to explain consumers can still purchase fuel efficient cars and still expect a savings because the cost of meeting government standards will be eliminated, he thought about it and finally agreed this will be a good thing. His initial response reminded me of the running gag line in the movie “Idiocracy” that went, “but it has electrolytes”. It was scary to see how in bedded the thought of “the government is always right” was in this young persons mind.

Alfred1860
Alfred1860
  Not Sure
March 17, 2017 12:59 pm

“It was scary to see how in bedded the thought of “the government is always right” was in this young persons mind.”

I envy your circle of friends if opinions like this kid’s are an outlier in your world.

Bob
Bob
March 17, 2017 12:25 pm

If Trump keeps going the way he is going, the country will be better off, he will get re-elected, and a few million liberals will die of shock!