The new muscle: AWD, turbos and euro badges

[kevm14]

No, I don't buy it.

http://blogs.motortrend.com/1411_new_mu ... inote.html

But, if you are a 0-60 (or 1/4 ET) person, the specs do seem similar. But look at the MPH. That Mustang would RUN away from that S3 and still walk the MB hard. Stab the throttle from anything above like 20mph and the trap speed is what you'll feel. It would be worth looking at the 5-60 times to get a real idea of drivetrain performance and response. I will try to do that.

[kevm14]

Using C/D because M/T doesn't seem to do 5-60.

Audi S3:
0-60: 4.4
5-60: 5.6

MB CLA45 AMG
0-60: 4.2
5-60: 5.7

Mustang GT
0-60: 4.5
5-60: 4.9

This illustrates my point perfectly. The Audi is over 1 second off its 0-60 time and the Mercedes is pushing 1.5 seconds off (355hp from a 2.0 turbo will do that). But look at the Mustang. The 5-60 illustrates the REAL performance of the car (i.e. stab the throttle and go). The other cars require special sequential trans mode launches with turbo spooling. Not realistic at all for what normal people will do with the car. The Mustang's Coyote provides real performance that is accessible all the time, no abusive launch modes required.

[bill25]

I am posting my source so that it can be checked to ensure that I am interpreting it correctly:

http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulema ... l_Rule.pdf
http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy

My take:

This is the Inconvenient Truth
Average MPG needs to be equivalent to 35 by 2020, 40/41 by 2021 and 54.5 by 2025.

The car industry is being told 2 vastly different requirements. The buyers say HP!!! the gov says MPG. Unfortunately for the carmakers, the gov doesn't buy that many cars.

Some buyers really want high MPG, which doesn't stop the manufacturers from making niche designs for that market. This order does prevent the manufacturer from making enthusiast models though.

How can manufacturers afford to not try to get buyers excited about turbos? It is the only way technically by today's technology that they will get anything to 55 MPG.

The really ridiculous part of this is that Zero turbo cars will get 55 mpg if you drive them hard. The whole idea of a turbo is to force more air and gas into the engine than what it could burn at 0 psi, or atmospheric pressure. The very thing that was created to burn more gas is being proposed as the solution to use less gas. The turbo Mustang gets 19 MPG observed. That is worst than the 8 cylinder. So on paper, it will look like the auto industry is following regulation, but in reality, the same amount of fuel or more will be burned.

[kevm14]

I don't want a 355hp 2.0L 4 cylinder in my FWD-based Mercedes. CAFE sucks. It's best to let the consumer decide (speaking for myself). CAFE that is too aggressive will only result in A) producing cars with performance characteristics that I don't like or B) making them unaffordable and C) potentially less desirable as a used car with all the added nonsense.

I would daily drive my CTS-V as far as gas cost is concerned. No problem.

[bill25]

I think CAFE sucks also, but some of that is an exaggeration: You don't need to buy a Mercedes, and you don't need FWD. Neither of those have anything to do with gas mileage.

I do agree that it will be much more expensive for equal performance. Today, a Twin Turbo 4 has to cost more than an 8 cylinder pushrod. There is also more to break.

I am not anti-turbo but getting 355 HP out of a TT 4 costing 8K to pretend it gets 45 MPG that probably would get 25 observed when you could pay probably 4 to 5 K for an 8 that has 450 HP and gets 25 MPG.

It is too bad that there is a drought of new ideas. Turbos were genius when they were thought up. We can't come up with anything new?

[bill25]

Also, this is very similar to the 70s/80s emissions stuff. That did produce more efficient and better cars, but it took about 40 years and almost cost the American Auto Industry. Granted the American Auto Industry had other problems like cars being made like crap but the 200 HP 454 didn't help. Is that really where we want to go right in the middle of an American Car revolution?

[kevm14]

Here's why misplaced regulation is more harmful than no regulation:

Everyone wants wagons here.. If you really want them, tell our bone headed oil company loving government to stop regulating "passenger cars" while NOT regulating "light trucks" to the same standard. CAFE requirements are why we have the stupid CUV. They jack it up an inch or 2 and now it's a CAFE standard dodging CUV. The very regulation designed to reduce fuel consumption did the exact opposite as evidenced by the friggen F150 being the top seller with no "gas guzzler tax" . Silly they tax cars on that but not trucks, the true needless gas guzzlers on our roads.

Unintended consequences.

[bill25]

I don't disagree. Full size trucks get the worst mileage on of any vehicle on the road, and most people that drive them never put anything in the bed.