Get Ready to Kiss Your Chance at a V8 Goodby

CSIROC, the wolf IS at the gate.

I've already sold crap to people that would have been crushed in the 1970s for obscene prices due to the increasing shortage of buildable '60s cars.

The left plans to increase CAFE regardless of fuel prices because of their beliefs about climate change and other environmental issues (e.g. restrictions on drilling).  

The OEMs will be powerless to stop it.  In fact, they'll go along to get the loan guarantees they need.

Moreover, the automotively-ignorant general public (who always wants something for nothing) won't figure out that a 50+ m.p.g. CAFE means econobox vehicles until it's already happened.  (Gee, we can't even convince those of you who should know enough about cars to understand the threat, so how will we persuade some bozo who looks at cars as a magic black box and believes that Detroit has been sitting on 100 m.p.g. miracle technology for decades).

Making the case against "cap and trade" will be even harder.  The utility companies will show some smoking, rusted out heap on TV as an example of the types of cars that will be crushed and they won't show "saveable" stuff like Hot Rod's infamous Crusher Camaro from the 1990s.   And there will be plenty of salvage operators and poor folks who will just turn over their restorable RWDs and parts cars for a quick buck.  

I'm sorry you're such an optimist that you cannot see the storm clouds and Katrina-sized hurricane of regulation that's about to swamp at least a generation of V8 Car Crafting and street machining.  
--------------------------------
460_BBF_Turbo-in-CC (formerly Dr511scj) "This guy has no life other than posting endlessly on carcraft.com." -- Car Craft, July 2005
-------
October 1, 2003: " I'm thinking a couple of...turbos, blowing through an old Powerstroke intercooler...on a Super Cobra Jet-head 460 would be mad cheap and make sick power."
-------
"I have no problem with your...talking to several versions of yourself...or pointing out our failure to do a turbo story ...." --Douglas "CC/Rambler" Glad

The wolf is NOT at the door...only the truly paranoid believe it is.  There is no legislation being proposed where I'm from that has any impact what-so-ever on my hobby.  CAFE is for manufacturers...and the current proposal isn't terrible (though it is stupid...a higher gas tax would work better to curb demand for less fuel efficient vehicles as shown by the recent rise in gasoline prices).  No proposal for 50 mpg will go through...the manufacturers, from GM to Toyota and Honda will make it clear it isn't possible.  Loans to reach 50 mpg CAFE is not the issue...demand for such vehicles is the issue...there is none without higher gas prices.  Even if they somehow manage to get it through...we're talking about 2030 at the earliest.

I'm not an optimist...simply a realist.  I don't go around crying the sky is falling every time I hear a RUMOR of bad news.  As I said...there are more doom and gloom scenarios out there that are a heck of a lot scarier than having to park my Cutlass in a garage for the rest of my life...and I'm not panicking over those.  
68 Olds Cutlass ~ 350 Rocket
85 Delta 88 ~ 425 Rocket
02 Silverado 4X4 ~ 5.3L

[/QUOTE]"1) Detroit will be lucky to survive the downturn in the market.  The reason for their troubles is not a lack of high performance offerings, but good transportation for a number of years.  They need to correct that first...THEN worry about the small group of performance enthusiasts.  To think the world revolves around Mustangs and Camaros is comical."

That's not what I said.  

BTW, you don't think that prices for "American muscle" will go up even more if the "Big 3" don't survive and can NEVER build any more?

Saddling the stuggling Detroit 3 with a huge 50+ m.p.g. CAFE standard means that virtually all of their limited resources will have to go into NON PERFORMANCE APPLICATIONS (See 1970s -- When Detroit could actually could afford to reinvent the automobile. Now the situation and challeges are even tougher.)

We're only a blip on Detroit's radar and our types of cars will be history if the going gets tough.

The 1960s muscle car only "worked" for Detroit because they were built using platforms and basic engines common to mainstream models.  Mustangs were reskinned Falcon econo-cars. GTOs were just Tempests with a big Bonneville/Grand Prix engine.  Even the ultra-expensive Corvette had to make do with a sedan-based front suspension until the Gen IV model.

I'm not sure RWD V8 offerings will survive in meaningful numbers under the present 35 m.p.g. CAFE law passed last year. But I'm certain they won't when it's increased by the liberal greens to 50+ m.p.g.

2) You are assuming gas prices stay constant.  If that happens, no one will be for a rise in CAFE...not the manufacturers (because there is no demand for such vehicles)...not the consumers (who won't want to pay for the tech or downgrade their vehicle)

I have to agree with the Doc on this one.


CAFE increases have often been divorced from what Detroit or the car buying public wants.  And most of the Toyota & Honda driving, non-Car Crafters ("appliance motorists") don't care if there's never another RWD V8 supercar, I suspect.  They'll lap up the propaganda from NPR's "Click and Clack" and Consumer Reports and ask for more.  
http://speedzzter.blogspot.com

"There is no legislation being proposed where I'm from that has any impact what-so-ever on my hobby.  CAFE is for manufacturers...and the current proposal isn't terrible (though it is stupid...a higher gas tax would work better to curb demand for less fuel efficient vehicles as shown by the recent rise in gasoline prices).  No proposal for 50 mpg will go through...the manufacturers, from GM to Toyota and Honda will make it clear it isn't possible."

What current proposal? 35 m.p.g. CAFE is already the law and the hits to the product mix will start kicking in in 2011 (This is so much like a repeat of the '70s I can't believe it).

You grossly overestimate the power of the OEMs.  They opposed the 35 m.p.g. CAFE and said it wasn't possible. It went through anyway. But with a liberal supermajority in the Congress and "the Messiah" as president, do you really believe that "the One" won't be able to DOUBLE CAFE as he's promised?

They'll trot out Toyota Priuses, Smart cars and Teslas and claim that all cars can be this fuel efficient. They'll claim there's huge technological breakthroughs just around the corner. They'll say the auto makers are "dragging their feet" and ignore market realities.  They'll say that CAFE opponents are "just crying wolf" and trying to "kill the planet."  They'll say we "have to do it" to keep our money out of the hands of terrorist regimes.  They'll brand those who want automotive freedom as selfish and stupid.

UNDERESTIMATE THESE PEOPLE AT YOUR OWN PERIL.

But then, if Car Crafters don't care about the impending death of new quasi-affordable V8s, perhaps the battle is already lost.

Maybe I should start reading a ricer magazine to get up to speed on the four-cylinder FWD future . . . .  
http://speedzzter.blogspot.com

Or do the smart thing and get a motorcycle!

Sorry guys...I'm not going to panic over nothing...I'll leave that to you guys.  
68 Olds Cutlass ~ 350 Rocket
85 Delta 88 ~ 425 Rocket
02 Silverado 4X4 ~ 5.3L

DR511SCJ: "I've already sold crap to people that would have been crushed in the 1970s for obscene prices due to the increasing shortage of buildable '60s cars."

I suppose you mean the "crap" would have been "crushed in the 1970s" and not the PEOPLE . . . .  Crushing people is very messy (See Smart microcar under 80,000 pound 18-wheeler . . . .)  
*****
TURBO TED --Internationally known as the "John Force of the Yugo Racing Association."

Sergeant-at-Arms and immediate Past President of the SoAL Yugo Owners Group.

Ok my stand on politics is out the winow here....Obama can say he's gonna do whatever he wants. Not all Democrats support him, that is socialogically impossible. I agree the wolf is at the gate. I need to correct something though. Engines generate Carbon MONOXIDE emissions, not Carbon Dioxide(CO2). Carbon MONOXIDE is a poisionous gas. Also there are oxides of nitrogen(NOx), and hydrocarbons. NOx is dictated by combustion temperature, hence why they use an EGR valve. Pumpins ehxaust gas into the mix reduces combustion temperatures. Hydrocarbons, and CO are from unburned fuel and fuel/air ratio. In the mid seventies and eighties automakers put catylitic converters, and AIR pumps(somg pumps) on to reduce these. You can reduce emissions by mixing the fuel more homogenously with the air BEFORE combustion, it will burn more fuel off, which increases pressure in the combustion chamber(more force pushing the piston), which equals more TORQUE, increasing TORQUE, increases HORSEPOWER. YOU CANNOT CHANGE ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER! Horsepower is the numerical figure for the rate of work the engine is doing. 500 HP @ 5252 RPM= 500 ft.lbs. 500 HP at 7878 RPM= 333.33 ft.-lbs. Both engines are making the same work, but which one is burning more efficiently, and generating less emissions? The 500 ft.-lbs. @ 5252 RPM engine. The smaller engine is spinning so fast the engine does not have enough time to mix the fuel and air properly and results in alot of unburned fuel out the exhaust. That smaller engine will blow up first too. As far as Tampering, the ECO-NAZI's will tell you that removing your emission control device does nothing to improve economy, or efficiency. This is totally false. If you use less fuel, driving the same distance, you have put less emissions into the air. Burning fuel produces emissions, you change the amount of fuel, you change the emissions. The problem with removing pollution control devices, is this, emmision requirements are set so low in ppm, that you are not likely to pass emissions tests, without these devices. Why is it that HONDA, TOYOTA, and other Japenese automakers, can produce ULEV(ultra-low emission vehicles) that get better gas mileage, and have more power than american automakers. They desing their engines to better mix air and fuel, resulting in a better burn, cleaner tailpipe emmsions, and more torque, which automatically increases HP at the same RPM. All combustion engines are held to the laws of physics, and as science has dictated, you cannot break laws of physics, they are absolute. Throw all the technology you want into them, they will always produce emissions, they will always get only so much gas mileage. Power does require fuel, more power~more fuel, somewhat. Making more EFFICIENT power will result in performance gain, with gains in part-throttle economy, but you will sacrifice that 500 HP gas guzzling racecar, that you can drive on the street, only by towing a gas pump behind it. It depend on what you want. The Government does not care as long as they are making money, but the current DEmocratic canidate is pretty much telling the American public what they want to hear to get vote, just like our current one with his stand on abortion. All of them do it, that will never change, PERIOD. All 536 lawmakers will do what they can to get votes, once in they will do whatever they want, and it has een that way for over 200 years. Obama ain't gonna change nothing. He will do what democrats do, get in the car and just keep turning left, like nascar drivers..... McCain is a republican, and will do what republicans do, cut jobs, give tax break to the rich, etc. and as working blue collar employees, we are completely screwed, and 10 years from now we'll all be migrating to Mexico to find a friggin job.  
Guzzling gas and hauling ass, the true American way.

1. I hate to break it to you, but complete combustion of any carbon-based fuel creates carbon dioxide.   No less of an authority than the U.S. Supreme Court says so.

["Even leaving aside the other greenhouse gases, the United States transportation sector emits an enormous quantity of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere --according to the MacCracken affidavit, more than 1.7 billion metric tons in 1999 alone. . . . That accounts for more than 6% of worldwide carbon dioxide . . . To put this in perspective: Considering just emissions from the transportation sector, which represent less than one-third of this country's total carbon dioxide emissions, the United States would still rank as the third-largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world, outpaced only by the European Union and China. Judged by any standard, U. S. motor-vehicle emissions make a meaningful contribution to greenhouse gas concentrations and hence, according to petitioners, to global warming."  Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct. 1438 (2007) http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/adlaw/mass-v-epa.htm]

The EPA is developing motor vehicle CO2 standards.

2. Detroit builds ULEVs.  The Japanese fuel economy "advantage" is mostly because the Japanese have imported subcompacts known in the industry as B-Cars while the Detroit 3 generally have not. B-Cars tend to have engines of 1.8 liters or less.   Most Detroit subcompacts have engines of 2.0 liters or more.  But comparing similar-sized cars, Detroit's products are competitive on fuel economy.

The Japanese government also underwrote most of the costs for development of Toyota's hybrid system, according to Toyota-ex Jim Press (now with Chrysler).

3. There is no magic fuel economy solution. Reduction of weight, better aerodynamics and reduction of engine size are the principal ways of increasing fuel economy and cutting C02 emissions.  Technologies such as electric hybrids can help by cutting "0 m.p.g." idling and by electrically assisting an otherwise too small engine, but less weight, more aero and reduced engine size are still the keys to 50+ m.p.g.

4. Formula One cars turn 19,000 r.p.m. with decent B.S.F.C., so the point about fuel not mixing in small engines is not accurate.  In fact, smaller cylinders tend to be more thermally efficient.

5. Smaller engines tend to save fuel because of reduced frictional and thermal losses and higher mean effective pressures for a given torque output.  Highly throttled large engines have an effective compression ratio as low as 3:1 or less.  A smaller engine running at a higher effective compression ratio (e.g. less throttled) can be more efficient.  

6. Smaller forced induction engines have what is in essence a variable compression ratio and variable breathing capacity. Therefore, they can idle and produce low speed power like an economy engine, but on boost yield the torque of a much larger powerplant.   That's why you may see a return to the turbocharger (just like in the 1980s) as engine displacements start to fall (See e.g. Cobalt SS, Ford's soon-to-be-released EcoBoost engines).   That's also why a GT500 can make more power than a LS-6 454 but with about double the part-throttle fuel economy.

7. Clinton -- A Democrat -- negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement, which kickstarted migration of jobs to Mexico.  On the other hand, if you're a business owner and you have a choice between setting up shop in the over-regulated, high tax, unionized U.S. or somewhere that's cheaper, where would you go?   There are a lot of costs of doing business in the U.S.A. that are lower in other places.  

8. The Democrats will do what Democrats do (enable more expensive lawsuits to enrich their trial lawyer friends, pass more costly regulations, increase the size of government, raise taxes, put more small businesses out of business, kill the secret ballot for union elections, force corporations to increase overseas investments to avoid sending in more money to the government, send out more checks to people who did absolutely nothing for them . . . .)  
--------------------------------
460_BBF_Turbo-in-CC (formerly Dr511scj) "This guy has no life other than posting endlessly on carcraft.com." -- Car Craft, July 2005
-------
October 1, 2003: " I'm thinking a couple of...turbos, blowing through an old Powerstroke intercooler...on a Super Cobra Jet-head 460 would be mad cheap and make sick power."
-------
"I have no problem with your...talking to several versions of yourself...or pointing out our failure to do a turbo story ...." --Douglas "CC/Rambler" Glad

dr511scj_1  is absolutely correct on the combustion issue.  Complete combustion of a hydrocarbon (the basis for gasoline) and air will result in carbon DIoxide, water, and the nitrogen (78% of air) will pass right through.  Its chemistry and thermodynamics.

Its incomplete combustion that leads to carbon monoxide, NOx, and a host of other junk from a combustion process.



Actually after reading though...he pretty much hit everything right on the head.  
68 Olds Cutlass ~ 350 Rocket
85 Delta 88 ~ 425 Rocket
02 Silverado 4X4 ~ 5.3L

Yeah and when you exhale out your lungs you exhale CO2, so go get a catylitic converter for your mouth as well. Take a biology course. Plants use CO2 and sunlight for a process, known by many people as photosynthesis, to change CO2, into O2. So who cares about CO2 emissions? Plant a few trees, instead of bulding more condominiums. Oh and I'm well aware the Clinton signed NAFTA. Yeah he is a Democrat. If he hadn't signed it Bush would have anyways. Bush wants to give all our illegal immgrants amnesty, there goes more American jobs. You guys can agrue about what you learn in classrooms all day long. I'll learn from turning a wrench, as experience is the best teacher. Oh and smaller cylinders are more thermally efficient??? That great, who cares? Smaller cylinders don't flow as well with natural aspiration. As for complete combustion? Why can't we achive it with our technology? Oh yeah that's right, cause we don't live in a perfect world. So my statements prove to be quite true. You can rant about the 'ideals' to chemistry and thermal dynamics all day long, and it won't change the fact, that  a perfect combustion occuring in an engine is almost impossible. Air would have to be the right temperature, fuel would have to be cmpletely mized and burned, engine itself would have to be a specific temperature, there are too many variables. If automakers haven't perfected it in 100+ years, they aren't gonna. Oh and for the record, my 92 Honda Accord, built right here in Ohio, is a ULEV vehicle, the best selling car in it's class 3 years in a row and has the same displacement as Chevrolet's Cavalier. So you can say they are comparable in gas mileage, but Honda knows how to program ECM's and build good car. Cavalier had 2.2L of displacement, up to 25 less HP, depending on engine in the Accord, and had higher overall emissions. I like Cavaliers, they were good cars, and competitive vehicles, and very dependable. So when you guys talk all these technicallities, remember you are talking to someone who EXPERIENCES automobiles, from production to dismantlement. I get to see both sides of the coin. I also have ASE books at my house for the tech courses. It shows all the ideals of physics in acombustion engine, how to use emissions test to diagnose engine problems, blah, blah, blah. We don't live in a perfect world and will never see an engine that CAN and WILL burn all the fuel, with little emissions, and get 50 MPG, and still performs. When you post, try to leave the technical stuff out. You sound intelligent, by saying, "complete burn produces CO2, blah, blah, blah." Let's face it though, the NOx, HFCs, and CO emissions are far more detrimental from engines NOT completely burning fuel. Like I said when you breath out, you produce CO2. Go vote Obama in and you'll have a catylitic converter, EGR valve, AIR pump, and O2 sensor sticking out of your mouth. Why are people so blind to live in the mindset of, "Well is everything is perfect...this will happen...."  
Guzzling gas and hauling ass, the true American way.

"You guys can agrue about what you learn in classrooms all day long. I'll learn from turning a wrench, as experience is the best teacher. "

You haven't learned a damn thing...every time you post something on here, it has to be corrected by the rest of us who've taken the time to actually learn the intricacies of our hobby.

"Engines generate Carbon MONOXIDE emissions, not Carbon Dioxide(CO2). "

You can try to forget that you wrote that...but its clearly 100% wrong.  And you can rant about plants all you want as well...fact is cars put out a hell of a lot more CO2 than you're breathing.  CO2 production is a hell of a lot higher than it occurs in nature right now.  Whether or not that is contributing to some "global warming", I'm not fully convinced...but lowering CO2 emissions lowers the amount of fuel burned...and that's a good thing.

For the love of God, go read about this stuff before opening your mouth (or typing).  You can't learn what a catalytic converter does by ripping it off (clearly, as you, for some reason, think it has something to do with CO2 emissions).  Its unbearable how ignorant you are.  
68 Olds Cutlass ~ 350 Rocket
85 Delta 88 ~ 425 Rocket
02 Silverado 4X4 ~ 5.3L

He is just talking about production cars. One should still beable to modify their own cars. Obama won't beable to ban guns or muscle cars because to many people like those things.  

Well that may be so but that doesn't translate to the complete wiping out of an entire subculture. I seem to remember that in the late70's and early 80's seeing several speedshops coming and going as well as a number of interesting evenings with the police trying to shut down the street cruising scenes around here. They were not too successful with it, even considering how bad things were then  

...and even if one tries to perfect any engine to be 100% efficient it won't be so...  

brokenbits:
Well that may be so but that doesn't translate to the complete wiping out of an entire subculture. I seem to remember that in the late70's and early 80's seeing several speedshops coming and going as well as a number of interesting evenings with the police trying to shut down the street cruising scenes around here. They were not too successful with it, even considering how bad things were then



Don't most Car Crafters start with "production cars?"  Right, 1997Camaro? (BTW, under a 50+ m.p.g. CAFE standard, GM wouldn't have been able to sell hardly any cars like the 1997 Camaro (and the price mark-ups would have been huge))

BTW, there are a lot fewer local speed shops today than in the 1960s & 1970s.

Sure, killing the traditional V8 muscle car won't totally wipe out all automotive culture.  Remember when the insurance companies and the government killed off virtually all of the new muscle cars in the 1970s, we got the VAN movement . . . . (Keep on Truckin' . . . .)

However, the harder the Government makes it to play, the fewer the participants.

When increased fuel economy standards force the mass market to tiny FWD fours, the grizzled old timers, "O.G." low riders, and some tattoo-covered rat rodders will zealously hold on to their V8s.  But the laws of attrition and supply and demand suggest that fewer people will be able to afford to build/buy V8-based projects. Just like street rodding is now, not too many kids will be able to cut through all of the bureaucratic and financial hassles to build a smokin' hot street V8.

CC, whether we like it or not, will change under a 50+ m.p.g. CAFE regime.  In a decade or two, it probably have to: (a) abandon "affordable performance" for some sort of old guy street machine/muscle car version of Street Rodder magazine, or (b) return to being a pure drag racing magazine, or (c) have to accept the inevitability of 4 and 6-cylinder powered FWD as street machines.    Given the natural readership cycles, most of the current readers will have moved on or died by then, so maybe it won't be such a big deal.

On the other hand, maybe seeing an octogenarian Jeff Smith hawking the latest E.P.A.-Certified high-voltage battery pack or hydrogen-direct-injected compound-turbo EcoTec VII hybrid crate engine/motor from GM-Chrysler Performance Parts  (Or more likely Toyota Racing Development) in 2038 will be as entertaining as seeing him shamelessly shill for the LSx is today.

Is all of this really worth electing some slick-talking, flyweight chump who buys votes with a promise a puny "tax cut" check to the 40% of taxpayers who already don't pay any taxes?  "Share the wealth" apparently trumps freedom and personal responsibility.

Ralph Nader, Weatherman Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and the psychedelic VW Microbus crowd must all be howling at the prospects of routing us stupid hot rodders once and for all.  
*****
TURBO TED --Internationally known as the "John Force of the Yugo Racing Association."

Sergeant-at-Arms and immediate Past President of the SoAL Yugo Owners Group.