OBAMA car plan

[landlord]

By the year 2016 passenger trucks will have to average 29mpg!!!!Should be a big turd for towing!!!!!!!That will make people want one for sure!!!!!What a joke!!!!!!

[F5RACING]

I saw a sticker the other day and smiled. ILL KEEP MY GUN<< MY BIBLE<<and MY MONEY> YOU CAN KEEP YOUR CHANGE!!!!

[Sonic Racing]

Better make plans to buy a real truck before they change and try to keep it running long enough to last until you are old enough to never nee to tow or haul anything again. Or at least until they figure out a way to make cold fusion a reality.

[Blue Moon Motorsports]

Yes. We can use our 29 mpg turd truck to tow our 2016 Pelosi Motors Spotted Owl race turd to the outlawed race track for some illegal racing........

[STREET02]

What gets me is....the auto industry is already in poor shape...so lets start forcing them to spend money on R&D ....Re-tooling , add cost to consumer

who is not likely going to buy a small compact car or truck anyway. Our only hope is to get this Socialist out of office in 2012.

Obama is a cult idol with a telegenic face....fluent speech who can read a telepromter well , who somehow convinced people to drink the kool-aid of "Change"

and hire him without ever revealing substance or having even the minimal experience to govern from that office. You did'nt fool me !! or 53 million others!!!

Wake up America before its too late !!!

 

On this Memorial day ..we should really take the time to reflect where we have been and where we are going!!

 

God Bless America .....we are going to need it !!

[NickHolt]

While it is true that many of our Lone Star Speedzone members have strong conservative political views, there are other members who may hold a more moderate or even liberal view.

 

LSS is not a "political" discussion board. But, of course, politics impacts all of our lives and certainly will impact the racing community at many points in the future. So could we please keep the political rhetoric in the context of stock car racing?

 

Thanks.

 

Nick

[txtom]

1. The following is NOT a political statement, no it is a defense of any proposal by any administration.

 

It is merely an analysis of the mileage proposal that has so many folks worked up.

 

The article is written by Mike Levine from the news.pickuptrucks site. I have highlighted a ccouple areas that i feel need special attention to help define what the proposal really means:

 

Today, President Barack Obama officially announced a new federal policy to raise the mandated average gas mileage of cars and trucks, as well as reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By 2016, the fleet fuel efficiency standard for all passenger cars will be 39 mpg, and it will be 30 mpg for light trucks and sport utility vehicles. The average of these two equals a passenger-car and light-truck fuel efficiency standard of 35.5 mpg.

 

So what does this mean for future pickup truck buyers? It depends.

 

What's still to be determined are the exact rules that will have to be followed to determine fuel economy. First, it's unclear whether manufacturers will have to hit fleet-wide or segment-based goals for their vehicles. Fleet-wide goals would make it more difficult for manufacturers to meet the fuel economy standards if they have a narrow choice of vehicles in their fleet (think Porsche versus Toyota). Second, it hasn't been decided if fuel economy will be based strictly on a vehicle's "footprint," meaning its physical dimensions, or whether another set of "attributes" will be used, such as weight or personal- or commercial-use-only designations.

 

Still, there are a few things we can start to make educated assumptions about to build a picture of what the pickup truck of 2016 will be like.

 

Current light-truck fuel economy standards are 23.1 mpg for all SUVs, pickups, vans and crossovers. Hitting 30 mpg will require a 30 percent rise in fuel efficiency. A 2009 Chevrolet Silverado with two-wheel drive has a combined 17 mpg rating. That same Silverado would have to achieve approximately 22.1 mpg combined by 2016, an increase of about 5 mpg.

 

This means we're likely to see an increase in the number of direct-injection turbocharged gasoline engines in the next few years, and the phase-out of traditional naturally aspirated eight-cylinder engines.

 

This also increases the odds you'll buy a truck with a hybrid powertrain. The two-wheel-drive 2009 Chevrolet Silverado 2-Mode Hybrid with its 6.0-liter V-8 is rated at 21/22 mpg city/highway today. Combine the Silverado's batteries and electric motors with a direct-injection turbo gas mill, and you're likely well over 22 mpg combined.

 

What doesn't look like a good option to hit 2016 mileage requirements are diesel engines in light-duty pickups. In fact, this probably means light-duty diesel pickups will never arrive.

 

The Obama administration has tasked the EPA with determining a grams-per-mile limit on CO2 emissions for vehicles that fall approximately near the mileage requirements. According to a white paper released by the EPA and Department of Transportation today, those limits will be an average of 250 g/mile for all cars and trucks. However, diesel's CO2 emissions per gallon of fuel (22.4 pounds) are higher than that of gasoline (19.4). A diesel-powered light-duty pickup would have to be about 15 percent more efficient than a gas-powered truck to meet both fuel economy standards and CO2 emission standards. A pickup averaging a combined 22 mpg with a gas engine would have to get about 25.3 mpg if it were a diesel.

 

This doesn't mean the end of diesel pickup trucks, though, at least not any time soon. A government source told us the new regulations will not cover heavy-duty pickup trucks that fall in the 8,500-10,000 pound range. HD pickups are expected to continue to be excluded from CAFE consideration. Perhaps a side effect will be increased sales and market share of HD pickups relative to light-duty pickups, as buyers who need to tow and haul in ranges that a light-duty pickup truck can manage today move up to HD.

 

The truck of the future is also likely to be much more aerodynamic. Tough-truck looks are likely to disappear to get the best fuel economy possible. We could also see substantial use of composite materials to save weight to improve mileage.

 

One other factor not discussed in today's fuel economy standards announcements: Tougher crash-test regulations expected in the near future. Pickup trucks are going to have to support stronger roof-crush and side-impact tests that are likely going to require new reinforcements added to their body structures to pass the tests. This will mean more weight. Perhaps all the weight removed for better fuel economy will be replaced by heavier, stronger frames.

 

There is one certainty in all this: The truck you buy will cost more in the future. The standards are expected to add at least $1,300 on average to the cost of building a vehicle. Obama said drivers would make that back within three years due to savings on gas.

 

Hopefully, this will clear up some of the confusion about Obama's mandate.

[NickHolt]

Tom,

 

You're absolutely in tune with my request. This is the perfect example of a political issue having a direct impact on our racing community. These sorts of issues are fair game for discussion here.

 

To those who have PM'd me about my request to keep the political rhetoric to a dull roar, I understand that virtually any and all political decisions impact all our lives to some degree or other. We are all living in a political/social environment.

 

All I'm really asking is that we keep the political discussions more or less racing related, just as Tom has done in the post directly above this one.

 

Thanks.

 

Nick

[STREET02]

Nick you are correct, the Forum should be for race related topics, sorry I hijacked it and expressed personal view . feel free to edit or delete my post.

 

STREET02

[Definitive]

The Statist's idealog is in direct contrast with everything that is involved in auto racing.In order to be a racer,you have to have the freedom to do many things.The racer hopes to generate sponsors to help fund his hobby.(Capitalism)The racer,at this moment,burns fossil fuels.The racer,no matter how well the car is tuned,polutes.The racer,no matter how hard they try not to,drops fluids on the ground.The racer needs,prefers,depends upon,a low mileage,poluting,unsafe vs. Smart cars on the road,tow vehicle,in order to get their racecar to the track.(sry for run-on)A big percentage of racers,especially in the upper tier of the sport,are small buisness owners.These people depend on the fluidity of their buisness and the soon to be eliminated tax breaks in order to thrive at their level of racing.There are many more facits of auto racing that will,in the future,be affect by our current Progressive Statist administration and congress.I think politics and auto racing,more than ever before,should be talked about because at the current direction we are headed,racing will not survive.

 

Just remember,NASCAR and several of it's racing facilities took bailout money on two different ocasions now.This leaves NASCAR at the becon call of our President who has already shown his "iron fist" rule over other entities that excepted the funds.

[Ford27]

With racing already expensive, adding the cost of new emission standards to a tow vehicle, I have made one decision...Trucks are already too expensive. In order to cut costs I will not be buying another vehicle. When mine breaks I will fix it. I know thats not good for the economy but it is good for my racing budget. My problem with this issue ....solved.

[NickHolt]

The Statist's idealog is in direct contrast with everything that is involved in auto racing.In order to be a racer,you have to have the freedom to do many things.The racer hopes to generate sponsors to help fund his hobby.(Capitalism)The racer,at this moment,burns fossil fuels.The racer,no matter how well the car is tuned,polutes.The racer,no matter how hard they try not to,drops fluids on the ground.The racer needs,prefers,depends upon,a low mileage,poluting,unsafe vs. Smart cars on the road,tow vehicle,in order to get their racecar to the track.(sry for run-on)A big percentage of racers,especially in the upper tier of the sport,are small buisness owners.These people depend on the fluidity of their buisness and the soon to be eliminated tax breaks in order to thrive at their level of racing.There are many more facits of auto racing that will,in the future,be affect by our current Progressive Statist administration and congress.I think politics and auto racing,more than ever before,should be talked about because at the current direction we are headed,racing will not survive.

 

Just remember,NASCAR and several of it's racing facilities took bailout money on two different ocasions now.This leaves NASCAR at the becon call of our President who has already shown his "iron fist" rule over other entities that excepted the funds.

As I have said, if political decisions impact racing, let's talk about that impact. No argument there.

 

What we don't want is the sort of political attacks and personality bashing that have little, or nothing, to do with a discussion of political decisions that impact our sport.

 

Thanks.

 

Nick

[ProTree]

so with future vehicles expected to get better mileage,makes you wonder what a gallon of gas is going to cost to make up the difference so the big oil companys can still make the big profits?

[NickHolt]

We already have the hydrogen fuel cell technology that could meet most of our energy needs for centuries.

 

Fuel Cell vehicles store hydrogen gas or liquid on board and convert the hydrogen into electricity to run powerful electric motors. However, the present cost of fuel cell vehicles greatly exceeds that of conventional vehicles in large part due to the expense of producing fuel cells and storing the hyrogen safely.

 

Even with the present high costs, hydrogen vehicles are starting to move from the laboratory to the road. The U.S. Postal Service, a package delivery company, a few Florida Park rangers, and a few private utility companies are using hydrogen vehicles. Unfortunately, it will probably be at least 10 years before you and I can walk into a showroom and drive away in an affordable hydrogen-powered car.

 

The big problem right now is that consumers will need a place to refuel their fuel cell cars. At last count there were less than 100 hydrogen refueling stations nationwide, about half of which are located in California. This is the so-called “chicken and egg” problem that hydrogen developers are working hard to solve. "Who will buy hydrogen cars if there are no refueling stations? And who will pay to build a refueling station if there are no cars and customers?"

 

One possible solution is to eliminate refueling stations entirely. Automobile manufacturers have already designed a refrigerator-sized hydrogen generator for your garage that works off electricity. Consumers would simply refill their cars with hydrogen each night while it is parked. Of course, hydrogen cells would be needed to generate the electricity needed to refill the consumer storage units or we'd simply be burning more fossil fuel to generate that electricity.

 

Another, more realistic solution would be for the Democrat-controlled congress to invest in a government-financed hydrogen distribution system. In the "old days" most public utilities were run by monopolies that were either owned by, or heavily regulated by, government entities.

 

Hydrogen has great potential as an environmentally clean energy fuel. We just need to invest in the infrastructure to safely use it.

 

Nick

[ProTree]

get some free time check out the car company warren buffett bought into at www.byd.com

i saw a deal on it the other day.they have one all electric plug in car that goes around 250 miles before needing a quick charge.

[Blue Moon Motorsports]

According to an article on MSN dated 5/19/09, the administration is wanting to get away from fleet-wide ratings and go to each individual model, thereby getting rid of the "gas-guzzler" SUV's and pick-ups.

[landlord]

We already have the hydrogen fuel cell technology that could meet most of our energy needs for centuries.

 

Fuel Cell vehicles store hydrogen gas or liquid on board and convert the hydrogen into electricity to run powerful electric motors. However, the present cost of fuel cell vehicles greatly exceeds that of conventional vehicles in large part due to the expense of producing fuel cells and storing the hyrogen safely.

 

Even with the present high costs, hydrogen vehicles are starting to move from the laboratory to the road. The U.S. Postal Service, a package delivery company, a few Florida Park rangers, and a few private utility companies are using hydrogen vehicles. Unfortunately, it will probably be at least 10 years before you and I can walk into a showroom and drive away in an affordable hydrogen-powered car.

 

The big problem right now is that consumers will need a place to refuel their fuel cell cars. At last count there were less than 100 hydrogen refueling stations nationwide, about half of which are located in California. This is the so-called “chicken and egg” problem that hydrogen developers are working hard to solve. "Who will buy hydrogen cars if there are no refueling stations? And who will pay to build a refueling station if there are no cars and customers?"

 

One possible solution is to eliminate refueling stations entirely. Automobile manufacturers have already designed a refrigerator-sized hydrogen generator for your garage that works off electricity. Consumers would simply refill their cars with hydrogen each night while it is parked. Of course, hydrogen cells would be needed to generate the electricity needed to refill the consumer storage units or we'd simply be burning more fossil fuel to generate that electricity.

 

Another, more realistic solution would be for the Democrat-controlled congress to invest in a government-financed hydrogen distribution system. In the "old days" most public utilities were run by monopolies that were either owned by, or heavily regulated by, government entities.

 

Hydrogen has great potential as an environmentally clean energy fuel. We just need to invest in the infrastructure to safely use it.

 

Nick

It's easier than that Nick,The U.S. has natural gas(clean burning fuel)running out the wazoodle and pipelines to distribute it(in our homes&businesses).Why want they let the manufactures build Natural gas cars.Honda built one but could only sell it in California.Back in the throttle body/carb days they had a cheap conversion kit that you could buy and pump it out of the wall of your house for pennys.With todays cars it's alot harder to do.Big oil will have a say in this yet!!!!

[rebelracewriter]

Putting all these small-ass cars on roads will do wonders for the economy-----

 

More highway deaths=more jobs for morticians and cemetary workers!!!!! Many of the deaths will no doubt be jobless people out searching for employment=less people collecting unemployment!!!! These cars will be total losses after crashes=more money for car dealers!!!!! The more wrecked cars=more jobs at recycling yards!!!! The need for more cars will increase production at plants=more jobs for manufacturers. The more cars distrubuted=more jobs in the trucking industy!!!!

 

See how simple this is

 

 

Where's the "guy" that told me how much better off we'd be with a Socialist/Democrat in the White House?????

[racer61]

so with future vehicles expected to get better mileage,makes you wonder what a gallon of gas is going to cost to make up the difference so the big oil companys can still make the big profits?

They already figured out that we will pay over $4.00 a gallon. Dont see the big politicians and CEO's driving a prius either. Oh wait, I forgot, they dont pay for travel expences, we do.

[thumper]

[edited out by Nick Holt, 5/22/09]

 

As far as electric cars,when someone invents a really good battery or storage cell we will see lots of electric cars.Solar charge them when not being used and thats almost free driving.

 

The internal combustion engine of the future will be a super hi compression,artifically inducted smaller engine.France already has a 2000 pound car with 450cc supercharged engine that gets 75 mpg and will do 100 mph.Thats about the size of an old VW beetle.With 30 to one compression and direct injection these fuel standards can be met.Smaller cars?They have been getting smaller for decades.Citing safty concerns for small cars doesnt wash,people have been killing themselves with big cars.I ride a motorcycle and the most dangerous drivers I encounter are the people in big SUVs and trucks that think their size means no consideration for smaller vehicles.

 

As far as racing,its in big trouble right now.Crappy purses,low car counts,little intrest for newcommers.This is because its the same old show for 50 years.The promoters and racers still think you need an overweight noisy big car to be a race car.Fact it there are lots of clean burning factory built cars that could be excellent race cars with a new program and proper promoting.The dinosaurs are almost gone now.With a small race car weighing 2000 pounds or less on a light trailer can be towed with a 30 mpg small truck or car.Dont tell me about speed,an AWD eclipse with a turbo,even a factory setup can be as fast as anything racing now.But all the small cars are religated to beginners,totally stock,junk that other racers scoff at.The smart promoter someday will see the potential and the advantages of using the science the car builders are using IE fuel injection,turbos,multi cams,multivalves,advanced suspension designs,and then get real racers in the seats and let the smart mechanics tweek them for oval track.AND PAY A GOOD PURSE.Anotherwords,redesign the entire floormat.Move into the 21st century.These types of cars are so much easier to build and maintain that new teams would be easier recruted.Who really wants to spend all their time and money to build a sporting car that will blow up or be destroyed in a minor crash just to hear the noise of a V8?With a good megaphone I can make as much noise with my VW.

 

Even the cookie cutter cars like modifieds,sport mods and even late models could benifit by using modern powerplants and techonology.How fast would a sport mod with a 5.4 mustang turbocharged factory stock engine be?Probably faster than now.And be less polluting.And could be lighter.

 

Until all the theives in government,the stock market and banking are done ripping the US off all we can do is watch like a little kid peeking through a fence.All this money for bailouts was not lost,IT WAS STOLEN.Its hard to invent things when all you feel is dread.Maybe someday we can get back on track.Citizen of the USSR. (United States Socialist Republic )

[Ford27]

UNDER THAT THINKING RACING GO KARTS SHOULD BE DRAWING BIG CROWDS,JUST TAKE THE MUFFLER OFF AND ITS AS GOOD AS A SUPER LATE MODEL. I PERSONALLY THINK WE SHOULD LET THIS THREAD DIE NOW.

[NickHolt]

Actually, this subject will not "die" no matter how many threads get closed...

 

While I think Thumper is off a bit on his "pay a big purse" theory, he's absolutely correct about the fact that the Stock Car Racing community needs to move on or suffer the consequences.

 

In the early 1970's, legendary Pan American Speedway owner and promoter Ricci Ware was telling folks that he believed that four-cylinder short track cars are the "wave of the future." He backed that up by supporting the "Mini Stock" class that ran there for several years before the quarter-mile closed.

 

He may have been a few decades ahead of his time, but I think Ware was on to something.

 

Nick

[thumper]

And now you know the rest of the story

[HiTech]

And now you know the rest of the story

thumper ..look at what kyle is trying ..late model minnies ..problem with that they are haveing a hard time getting poeple to build them .. one problem . i believe no neons .. that right there hurts ..cuz we know neon will would have one out there fast .. those car are a dime a dozen laying around .and i will admit .cheaper to maintain ...and fast ..your car our car will someday die .but untill poeple build what you say is the future and i agree it will happen sometime .we will have to keep running what we have ... us older racers as we are .have our cars built ..and its hard to park em when some track is running them .. ...... now as for the purse ..untill we the drivers help get the fans out in droves and show we are pulling fans in the stands ..forget the purse ..track dont make money we dont get paid what you are looking for ..... i know .all tracks should spend the money .to make the money ..if theres is no money .it cant be spent ...... we have to help ..you not racen cuz of the lower than you want purse .isnt helping anyone out .........

[rebelracewriter]

While I'll tend to agree that smaller, bumble bee sounding cars may be more efficient, economical, blah, blah, blah.......FANS will NOT pay to see a night of "mini classes" racing.

 

Watch at any track that runs "mini classes" and you will see MANY fans take concession breaks, bathroom breaks, whatever breaks when these cars hit the track.

 

Not bitchin'....just my personal observation from tracks all over the state.

 

I'll stand by my statement that these cars are nothing but rolling death traps on the highways.....hell even my Mustang gives me a quessy feeling compared to my heavy metal Firebirds(3) that I owned in the past.

 

Guess I won't be waiting/looking for Pontiac to give me a retro-bird since GM(Government Motors)is giving me the bird!!!!