4 ms·

The phenomenon of emissions regulations pushing this trend toward turbocharged engines is ridiculous. Look at the small commuter cars from decades ago, and you

by m52go 12y ago

The phenomenon of emissions regulations pushing this trend toward turbocharged engines is ridiculous. Look at the small commuter cars from decades ago, and you'll see them putting out efficiency numbers comparable to some of today's best hybrids. The root problem driving this trend is ballooning vehicle weight due to misguided government regulations. My question: which would do more for passenger safety (as measured in number of deaths per year)? Safer car design, or safer road design? I think it's road design. Being idealistic for a minute, because this won't ever happen, but what if the government decided to focus on more efficient road design & traffic rules to increase safety instead? From what I've read about Vision Zero in Sweden and other traffic design experiments (subtle traffic sign changes to better focus driver attention on narrow roads, roundabouts instead of 4-way intersections, etc)...these kinds of design changes would make driving MUCH safer without needing each car to be a hulking 4000lb turbocharged beast.

sciurus 12y ago
Can you provide some citations for 1) vehicle wait is ballooning 2) and it's because of government regulations ?
- nemo 12y ago
  Average passenger car weight has steadily increased in the last 25 years or so. From 1987's 2805 lb curb weight to today's 3239. http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/CAFE/NewPassengerCarFleet.htm http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/CAFE/NewPassengerCarFleet.ht... Some of that is due to the addition of steel safety cages, airbags, ABS, and other safety equipment, some of which is mandated in new cars. A small increase is related to emissions equipment like catalytic converters (they only weigh like 8-10 lbs, though). Not nearly all the increases in weight come from safety and emissions requirements, though. Part of the increases are due to manufacturers adding more bells and whistles to even their standard models. In 1987 there were more cars with standard transmissions (autos weigh more), AC wasn't always standard, cars tend to have nicer seats that are heavier, and even things like power windows and power locks weren't always standard. Also cars have tended towards more powerful and heavier engines. Also Americans for whatever reasons like big cars, gas prices were cheap enough for a long time, and car makers were happy to keep bloating them up since people liked buying big fat cars. There's another factor - the government did play an unfortunate role in the bloating of vehicles due to CAFE regulation loopholes that give businesses tax breaks to buy SUVs and other bloated vehicles that classify as trucks, and the ways automakers have abused the standards to keep bloating up their lines: http://jalopnik.com/5948172/how-the-government-killed-fuel-efficient-cars-and-trucks http://jalopnik.com/5948172/how-the-government-killed-fuel-e...
- m52go 12y ago
  See my comment above to nl. I edited it to add numbers regarding modern vehicle weight ratios, and how they've gone up over time in part because of safety regulations.
  - 1stop 12y ago
    But generally even with the weight cars are WAY more fuel efficient. There are some fords (non-hybrids) approaching 3 litres/100km. Even mini-vans that get 7-8 litres/100km. When 15-20 years ago a 3 door hatch back would be 6-7 litres/100km... So I don't really see your point. Yeah cars are getting heavier, and engines are getting smaller and more efficient.
jfb 12y ago
I'm not 100% certain you can point to government regulation as the sole or even the primary driver of car mass increases. Much of that is market driven. That said, I loved my twin-turbo BMW, but much of that was the inline-six.
- tonyedgecombe 12y ago
  Yes, each model iteration gets bigger and eventually there is enough space at the bottom of the range for a new small model.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
nl 12y ago
I'm alive today because some anonymous bureaucrate decided to make sure cars through pedestrians up in the air rather than under the car. Each of those safety measures is useful in a very specific circumstance.
- m52go 12y ago
  Pedestrian safety is a small portion of all the other safety measures that have increased vehicle weight. The point I'm trying to make is not that these measures aren't useful, but that had these resources been spent on more clever road design and traffic rules, the overall safety increases would have been higher. You don't need seatbelts on a subway train (heck, you can even stand up!) because the likelihood of an accident is almost nil. It's my opinion that that's the ideal governments should have been after with road safety for passenger cars. -------- EDIT: I guess I made some pretty big claims without any numbers to back them up. Here's something [0]. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) found that weight ratios for modern cars have been getting worse, in part because of safety regulations. The top commenter on the original IEEE article cites additional beams inside doors and more metal in the roof supports to meet rollover standards [1]. For some perspective, the average vehicle-to-passenger weight for the Model T was 7.7. A Boeing 787's ratio is 6.3. For the average modern passenger car, it's 25.7 (!!). Both figures assume the only occupant is a single 154-lb person. [0] http://www.autoblog.com/2015/01/02/breaking-down-vehicle-weight-to-payload-ratio/ http://www.autoblog.com/2015/01/02/breaking-down-vehicle-wei... [1] http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/policy/cars-weigh-too-much http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/policy/cars-weigh-too-much
  - nl 12y ago
    Air bags are the biggest safety-related weight contribution. Maybe reinforcements for rollovers, but in most non-convertibles this isn't that big a difference. Airbags make a huge difference to safety. Much of the weight increase has come from luxury features. I agree that road design needs addressing too, but I think you are creating a false dichotomy by making it seem you do one or the other.
    - 12y ago
esaym 12y ago
My dad's 1991 Honda CRX got 49mpg.
- m52go 12y ago
  That's exactly one of the cars I had in mind when writing my comment. It was BETTER than the CRZ that we now have 2 decades later!
  - esaym 12y ago
    Indeed. It is amazing how the cars that sell and make money are not the fuel efficient ones... I only know the gas mileage of that car because my step dad that owned it would write down the current mileage and the amount of gallons fueled and then once there were a hundred entries like that on a piece of paper, he would make my calculate the mileage for 'extra practice' homework -__-

by m52go 12y ago

sciurus 12y ago

Can you provide some citations for 1) vehicle wait is ballooning 2) and it's because of government regulations ?

nemo 12y ago
Average passenger car weight has steadily increased in the last 25 years or so. From 1987's 2805 lb curb weight to today's 3239. http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/CAFE/NewPassengerCarFleet.htm http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/CAFE/NewPassengerCarFleet.ht... Some of that is due to the addition of steel safety cages, airbags, ABS, and other safety equipment, some of which is mandated in new cars. A small increase is related to emissions equipment like catalytic converters (they only weigh like 8-10 lbs, though). Not nearly all the increases in weight come from safety and emissions requirements, though. Part of the increases are due to manufacturers adding more bells and whistles to even their standard models. In 1987 there were more cars with standard transmissions (autos weigh more), AC wasn't always standard, cars tend to have nicer seats that are heavier, and even things like power windows and power locks weren't always standard. Also cars have tended towards more powerful and heavier engines. Also Americans for whatever reasons like big cars, gas prices were cheap enough for a long time, and car makers were happy to keep bloating them up since people liked buying big fat cars. There's another factor - the government did play an unfortunate role in the bloating of vehicles due to CAFE regulation loopholes that give businesses tax breaks to buy SUVs and other bloated vehicles that classify as trucks, and the ways automakers have abused the standards to keep bloating up their lines: http://jalopnik.com/5948172/how-the-government-killed-fuel-efficient-cars-and-trucks http://jalopnik.com/5948172/how-the-government-killed-fuel-e...
m52go 12y ago
See my comment above to nl. I edited it to add numbers regarding modern vehicle weight ratios, and how they've gone up over time in part because of safety regulations.
- 1stop 12y ago
  But generally even with the weight cars are WAY more fuel efficient. There are some fords (non-hybrids) approaching 3 litres/100km. Even mini-vans that get 7-8 litres/100km. When 15-20 years ago a 3 door hatch back would be 6-7 litres/100km... So I don't really see your point. Yeah cars are getting heavier, and engines are getting smaller and more efficient.

jfb 12y ago

I'm not 100% certain you can point to government regulation as the sole or even the primary driver of car mass increases. Much of that is market driven. That said, I loved my twin-turbo BMW, but much of that was the inline-six.

tonyedgecombe 12y ago
Yes, each model iteration gets bigger and eventually there is enough space at the bottom of the range for a new small model.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

nl 12y ago

I'm alive today because some anonymous bureaucrate decided to make sure cars through pedestrians up in the air rather than under the car. Each of those safety measures is useful in a very specific circumstance.

m52go 12y ago
Pedestrian safety is a small portion of all the other safety measures that have increased vehicle weight. The point I'm trying to make is not that these measures aren't useful, but that had these resources been spent on more clever road design and traffic rules, the overall safety increases would have been higher. You don't need seatbelts on a subway train (heck, you can even stand up!) because the likelihood of an accident is almost nil. It's my opinion that that's the ideal governments should have been after with road safety for passenger cars. -------- EDIT: I guess I made some pretty big claims without any numbers to back them up. Here's something [0]. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) found that weight ratios for modern cars have been getting worse, in part because of safety regulations. The top commenter on the original IEEE article cites additional beams inside doors and more metal in the roof supports to meet rollover standards [1]. For some perspective, the average vehicle-to-passenger weight for the Model T was 7.7. A Boeing 787's ratio is 6.3. For the average modern passenger car, it's 25.7 (!!). Both figures assume the only occupant is a single 154-lb person. [0] http://www.autoblog.com/2015/01/02/breaking-down-vehicle-weight-to-payload-ratio/ http://www.autoblog.com/2015/01/02/breaking-down-vehicle-wei... [1] http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/policy/cars-weigh-too-much http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/policy/cars-weigh-too-much
- nl 12y ago
  Air bags are the biggest safety-related weight contribution. Maybe reinforcements for rollovers, but in most non-convertibles this isn't that big a difference. Airbags make a huge difference to safety. Much of the weight increase has come from luxury features. I agree that road design needs addressing too, but I think you are creating a false dichotomy by making it seem you do one or the other.
  - 12y ago

esaym 12y ago

My dad's 1991 Honda CRX got 49mpg.

m52go 12y ago
That's exactly one of the cars I had in mind when writing my comment. It was BETTER than the CRZ that we now have 2 decades later!
- esaym 12y ago
  Indeed. It is amazing how the cars that sell and make money are not the fuel efficient ones... I only know the gas mileage of that car because my step dad that owned it would write down the current mileage and the amount of gallons fueled and then once there were a hundred entries like that on a piece of paper, he would make my calculate the mileage for 'extra practice' homework -__-