Wake-up call for Detroit

Dave, I think you're missing the point. There is a hell of alot more to the whole picture than toying with gearing. Back in the 70's the overwhelming majority of cars on the road used carbeurators to mix the air and fuel for making power. Carbs are inherently inefficient, require lots of tweaking to keep them in tune, and to readjust them for changes in altitude, etc. When unleaded gasoline became the norm to allow for the use of catalytic convertors, power dropped down to 150 hp. Remember that the 'Vette is supposed to be a performance car - NOT an economy car. They also put out alot more pollution even with the emissions equipment back then.

A new 2004 vetter puts out 350 hp in LS1 trim, and 405 in LS6 form, gets twice the mileage - when driven conservatively of course - and puts out a fraction of the emissions. This isn't all from just a change in gearing. This is due to the evolution from carbs to mulit point fuel injection, computer engine controls, and improvements in emissions control equipment. That's ALOT of refinement, R&D, and progress made to supply the market with a high performance automobile, that gets excellent fuel mileage for the type of vehicle that it is.

The Corvette is not a Prius. The two vehicles are not marketed anywhere close to the same type of buyer, and they shouldn't be required to meet the exact same standard. The reality is, that for all of the "cool factor" of the hybrid systems in our cars, they are an economy at the expense of performance operation. This is not to say that these cars are slugs, when they most definitely are not. The point that I was trying to make is, that different vehicles are built for different tasks. They are going to vary tremendously in fuel economy - regardless of if the buyer is buying it for it's intended use or not. What I was trying to illustrate, is that there ARE substantial improvements in fuel mileage across the board. While there is ALWAYS room for improvement, this cannot be ignored.

I use the 70's as a benchmark because the industry does. This was when emissions control equipment began to be installed in automobiles. It's also when fuel economy began to enter into the equasion as well. When looking at autombile emissions, which is another part of the equation in fuel economy, you have to look at the entire picture. To ignore any part of it, is to severely limit your viewpoint.

Prior to the current list of acronyms of LEV, ULEV, SULEV, PZEV, etc the industry removed 99.6% of the crud coming out of a vehicles tailpipe. That level was reached with the current OBD II emissions systems, and their benchmark of comparison is pre emissions automobiles.

Now the LEV and other acronyms coined by CARB, are not benchmarked from pre emissions vehicles. They are benchmarked against OBD II compliant automobiles. This means that for all the hype, the automakers are dealing with cutting fractions from fractions in the vehicles emissions.

 

EPA rating for 2004 Corvette SSR ( i dont know diddly
about these cars so im giving you what i find.)

16 city 19 hwy

2005 Corvette 19" wheels!!

18 city 25 hwy.

its interesting that we can take for granted the EPA
estimates of the Corvette which is less tahn 40% of
the Prius and you say the Corvette is cool. well i dont
see how a car that can go 3 times the legal speed
limit is cool. as far as looks go, sure the Corvette is
hot. but it looks the same parked or moving. and btw,
it draws a lot of interest when going 75+. interest
that i dont see as beneficial to anyone but some
middle-aged male in a mid-life crisis.

Oh wait!! i better shut up now... since i am a middle
aged male. but im not in a mid-life crisis. My life has
pretty much been a struggle and one crisis after
another. but i solve my problems the way ive always
solved them... and risking my life and others while
foolishly wasting the planets resources simply isnt
one of the methods i use.

 

OK, first, I'm not taking EPA numbers for granted. Currently they are the only numbers that we have to compare to, be it Prius, Corvette, Yugo, or otherwise. Currently, all the EPA figures are good for, is to compare similar models to gain an idea as to which one should be more efficient given the range of vehicles being compared, and in this case show how technology has improved vehicel efficiency given that the numbers are extracted from the same controlled environment. If you were to put a "brand new" 70's vehicle in competition with today's brand new vehcile, and run them side by side, they would show the same percentage difference out in the real world, as would be shown in EPA figures. The true new car would run rings around the old one all day.

Second, I'm not using the Corvette as vehicle to judge the perspective buyer. Personally, I have no use for one either, and all it is to me, is another overpriced, barely assembled, bucket of GM junk built to suit the beancounters at the expense of product quality. If you don't want one, then that's fine. They won't be getting either one of us in their showroom.


The SSR you listed, is not a Corvette, it's an overpriced boytoy retro truck thingie with little purpose beyond looking "cool" in. THE SOLE PURPOSE of using ANY of the vehicles that I listed in my original post, was to illustrate that there is a MUCH larger picture than what is being looked at here. If people want to buy one, then so be it. The idea of using a Vette is to show that there HAVE been tremendous strides in technology, that HAVE resulted in improvements in fuel economy, and emissions, WITHOUT the loss of performance. ALL vehicles have benefitted extensively from technological improvements. The Prius has raised the bar for subcompact passenger cars. The Escape, if Ford has paid attention to detail, will do the same for small SUV's. The Lexus and Highlander will do the same for larger ones. As Toyota rolls out HSD across their entire product line, they will continue to raise the bar across the board. The rest of the industry will either be forced to follow suit, or go extinct from their complacency.

 

that is the same crap the US automakers have been
putting out. they say that because they are 50% or
even 100% better than the 70's that they are doing
the right thing. I say that 100% better than pathetic
is sad especially if one is satisfied with that.

The corvette would not have made the Cafe
requirements for 2000 much less 2004. Personally i
think any argument to justify the existence of the
corvette especially at 400 HP is just stroking the egos
of a society that doesnt care what happens to their
grandchildren. They are living in the present to satisfy
their own self-centered, short-sighted,
testosterone-fueled, chick fantasies.

I will say that your description of Corvette quality is
dead on accurate. and we all know why its made the
way it is. that somewhat justifies the price that Chevy
charges for the car. they definitely cant charge premium
bucks based on the same things that Lexus, BMW or
Mercedes does.