Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 528 posts

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#381

Post by hvidgaard »

davewritescode wrote: post #380
hvidgaard wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you don't have lag or reliability problems, turbos make everything better. Smaller, faster, more fuel-efficient. No. Mazdas SkyActiv-G do the exact opposite, because, as Mazda states it: "When you add forced induction the combustion becomes harder to control, resulting in lower efficiency". Car companies collectively research EVs and high compression Atkinson style engines, because the real world efficiency are…

Mazda has a turbocharged SkyActive-G 2.5 these days they're using on the CX-9 and it's been pretty well recieved - https://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/press-release/mazdas-turboc... It makes a ton of torque very low down low (300 ft/lbs) which makes it very suitable to push around a midsized CUV.

According to their engineers it was a compromise because they needed a more powerful engine, and adding a turbo was simpler and faster, than design larger one in line with their SkyActive-G design philosophy.

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#382

Post by falsedan »

m_mueller wrote: post #297
bpodgursky wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(most) libertarians are perfectly happy to structure a market to internalize the externalities of pollution, since it's not practical to privatize air O2 and CO2. A different, possibly more market-oriented, solution would have been a carbon tax on emissions instead of mandated efficiency standards. I think it would have gotten us to a similar place. But there's not anything inherently anti-market in saying "you canno…

Does anyone here know how accurately current sensor technology could map O2 output on a satellite? I.e. could we get down to, say, 10 meter precision? Here's what I was thinking: Take the current approach with the Carbon certificate and decentralise it using blockchain technology (e.g. Ethereum) hooked up to (to be made) publicly available sensor data on O2, as well as a public data on land ownership; Give every patc…

Atmospheric sensors have to be deployed at the location they're sampling, so step 0 is: cover the earth with air quality monitoring stations. Step -1 is convincing someone to pay for this (governments have limited funding for this, so choose their monitoring sites carefully & extrapolate from the recorded data).

There's a few sites which aggregate the public datasources, like http://aqicn.org/map/world/

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#383

Post by flurdy »

systemtest wrote: post #372
flurdy wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re: parking spots My family keeps growing (in numbers, age and size) and as I'm approaching midlife affordability I would love a decent large SUV, like the Volvo XC90 etc to replace my ageing Ford Focus estate. But for the life of me, I can't imagine the pain of owning such a large vehicle. Parking would be a nightmare. At home, in town, anywhere. I live in Hampshire in England and the parking spots around here are a…

Wouldn't automated reverse parking create problems for others? And leave dents and dings in your door?

Yes. Should really have been a "For me at least*" with a note that it would piss others off until most cars can be summoned.

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#384

Post by falsedan »

grandalf wrote: post #197
azinman2 wrote: post #165

For all the talk by liberatians and their ilk that regulation is bad and unnecessary, that chart of median fuel effeciency due to government requirements should give them pause. Wow. Well over a decade of non-progress until a path forward is mandated. Suddently the needle starts moving, with car owners, the environment, and energy import needs as big winners here.

Libertarians are not anti-regulation, they just believe that the good and bad consequences of regulations should be understood. Often, those who are not libertarians will support a regulation simply because they agree with its stated aim... things like "the patriot act" or "the affordable care act". Those names are chosen to sound good, not because they reflect the intent of legislation or the outcome of it. To give…

> To give you an example of the folly of fuel economy regulation, consider that 90% of automotive pollution is created by the oldest 10% of cars on the road. Does it really make sense to force all buyers of new cars to pay extra? Why not charge a tax that increases for every year a car gets older, so that the person driving the smoke-emitting clunker has an incentive to upgrade into something that is cleaner and safer.

Isn't the problem the pollution emissions, not the age of the car? Charge people an emission tax based on manufacturers' guidelines, and then switch to periodic measurements after the car is greater than N years old (N>5). That way, people can buy new, polluting vehicles as they wish & their budget can stretch to.

This is the UK's approach, which works because cars have a yearly check for roadworthiness.

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#385

Post by davewritescode »

irixusr wrote: post #63

Article is interesting but gets a few things wrong: 1. Starting the analysis in 1975 is misleading (the Ford administration). The most interesting cars are from the late 60s early 70s before emission regulations, oil crisis, car bumpers, ect kicked in (and dealt a huge drop in power, increase in weight, ect). 2. Cherry picking a muscle car for its weight is also misleading. Muscle cars weren't light. Some had 6 or 7…

Minor nit:

1. I think you have to start with 1975 because emissions requirements are the biggest component of why car performance started to drop in the late 70s. It's really hard to compare a car with and without emissions equipment.

2. Like others have said, model bloat accounts for a lot the weight gain within a specific model. The Accord used to be a small sedan that's grown into a full size. The modern Civic is bigger than the 92 Accord my family had when I was a kid.

3. A Nissan GT-R weighs nearly 2 tons as well and will outhustle the Fiat and the SUV around that mountain :)

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#386

Post by pif »

rsync wrote: post #80
kmm wrote: post #60

I always wondered why American cars are so inefficient. Seems such a waste of your significantly cheaper gas :) I drive an Opel Astra H 1.7 CDTI and I can get up to 50 mpg (4.7 l/100 km) on the highway, and I never dip under 40 mpg (5.8 l/100km) even when doing a lot of city driving. I understand that my car is comparatively somewhat smaller (1200 kg) and underpowered (100 hp), yet I can't imagine needing more horsep…

"What do you get in the place for this lower efficiency? Are American cars that much heavier? More comfortable? Faster?" I cannot speak for everyone, but as someone who lives in the US and also spends a lot of time in Europe, there is a very big lifestyle difference at play here. First, I have a five person family (wife and three kids) and you[1], statistically, as a European, have 1.6 children - and as a highly educ…

> Zurich to Transylvania is 1800km

You forgot to mention: 4 different languages (Swiss dialect, German, Hungarian and Romanian) and one border (Swiss - EU).

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#387

Post by eeks »

adrianN wrote: post #365
bagels wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some ways, yes, but excluding dual clutch transmissions, manual transmissions really do have a performance advantage while rotary phones did not have any advantage over touch tone other than, maybe at one point, cost.

I doubt that there are many drivers who can outperform a modern automatic transmission.

Automatic, yes. Semi-automatic, no. With semi, the driver makes the decision, and the system execute it (the best in class is within 10ms IIRC).

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#388

Post by stupidhn »

chrisseaton wrote: post #379
reportingsjr wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multiple people where I work change the oil in their cars at this rate. I explained that you can go further with more modern oils, especially synthetic, to no avail. I think you'd be surprised at how much people spend on car maintenance.

In the UK people are told to change their oil once a year or 10k miles. If you do it every 3k miles in the US, which of us is doing it wrong? Either we're damaging our cars or you're wasting money and oil. They're the same cars doing the same distance, and parts of the US are similar climates.

>Either we're damaging our cars or you're wasting money and oil.

The latter.

Most manufacturers recommend 10,000 miles now, some as high as 15,000 (Jaguar, known for being unreliable):

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/tips-advice/stop-changing-y...

Being as how manufacturers have to cover the warranty issues that could be related to lack of oil changes, I go with what they recommend.

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#389

Post by stupidhn »

mikeash wrote: post #83
DamnInteresting wrote: post #73

A few weeks ago I bought a Chevy Bolt EV...according to the dealer it was the first one sold in my state (Utah). I'd been on a waiting list for almost a year. Sure, ICE engines are getting better, but EVs are rapidly gaining and will soon surpass. The Bolt is a bit expensive for a car of its body type, but "gassing up" at home is amazing, the 200+ mile range is great, and the sharply reduced emissions are a weight of…

I own a Tesla S85 and recently had a Cadillac ATS rental for a few days. It was an interesting contrast, since the official 0-60 times of the two cars are almost the same, yet the Cadillac felt like an absolute slug by comparison. I think a lot of it is that there's a great deal of lag in traditional drivetrains, and we rarely do 0-60 in actual real-life driving. More typically we're doing 0-30 or 30-40 or 55-65. Onc…

>I own a Tesla S85 and recently had a Cadillac ATS rental for a few days.

The MSRP on the Tesla is twice as much as the ATS, so I would expect performance differences.

>and we rarely do 0-60 in actual real-life driving.

Many people would be mostly satisfied with great handling over speed in daily driving, but don't know what that feels like in a car.

Re: America’s Cars Are Getting Faster and More Efficient

#390

Post by cmrdporcupine »

chrismcb wrote: post #328
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, he's not being sarcastic. Are you? EVs don't require oil changes. Or muffler/exhaust service. Or transmission service. And their brakes last longer.

Don't forget battery replacement... Our the environmentalist coast to build a battery

A properly designed EV (Tesla and GM, not Nissan, Kia or VW) has a properly designed cooling and battery maintenance system, and shouldn't need battery replacement for a _long_ time.
Post reply on HN