Lutz: CAFE standards will push prices up $6,000 per car

[hidden_bull]

Is Lutz just trying to get everyone talking again? Sorta like the "we're scrapping Zeta" thing?

GM's outspoken Vice Chairman Bob Lutz told reporters today at the Detroit Auto Show the U.S. government's 35 mpg CAFE standard will push car prices up by $4,000 to $10,000 per vehicle, or an average $6,000. Lutz has been a vocal opponent of the regulations, which he believes will harm the U.S. auto industry.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/lutz-caf...0-per-car.html

[shabodah]

How about we get direct injection into every model line before we put the cart in front of the horse?

[I-Love-Pontiac]

Originally Posted by shabodah

How about we get direct injection into every model line before we put the cart in front of the horse?

That cost money. And last time I checked it doesnt boost efficiency 20%... which is how much GM needs.

[mgescuro]

So what if it's going to boost cost $6,000?
It's not like GM is going to be the only one not affected right??

If GM cars go up $6,000... so will Ford, Nissan, Toyota, Mazda, Jaguar, Lexus, Mini, etc etc etc.

Lutz thinks GM is all alone in this?? They're not.

[JVal14]

In another twelve years, inflation will push the price tag that high anyway. And I don't buy that making a hardy effort to improve mileage accross the board will be destructively expensive, especially for GM with it's massive economies of scale, not to mention the many ways of doing it today.

Back in the 70s there were essentially two ways to improve mileage: smaller engines or lighter cars. Now we have hybrids, diesels, turbos, DI, DOD, etc. I just don't think the burden will be as great as the automakers would like everyone to think. I love Bob, but I think he's looking for public sympathy here.

[minnfang]

I'm a big Bob fan, but sometimes...

[minnfang]

...sometimes he should keep his thoughts to himself.

Nothing like perpetuating the image of GM as an anti-green whiner.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

So what if it's going to boost cost $6,000?
It's not like GM is going to be the only one not affected right??

If GM cars go up $6,000... so will Ford, Nissan, Toyota, Mazda, Jaguar, Lexus, Mini, etc etc etc.

Lutz thinks GM is all alone in this?? They're not.

For once we agree .

Also , if I as a consumer using accurate and truthful numbers that account for all costs actually lower my operating costs by an equal amount in a time frame thats reasonable ...... why not .

We need true energy independence as a Nation , and as a Nation we need a strong and vigorous DOMESTICALLY HQed and produced auto industry .CAFE is just a smallish piece of a solution .

On the otherhand , maybe Mr. Lutz has reasons that we don't fully understand .

[I-Love-Pontiac]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

So what if it's going to boost cost $6,000?
It's not like GM is going to be the only one not affected right??

If GM cars go up $6,000... so will Ford, Nissan, Toyota, Mazda, Jaguar, Lexus, Mini, etc etc etc.

Lutz thinks GM is all alone in this?? They're not.

This isn't a Toyota vs GM thing. This is an automotive thing. If people can't afford new cars, then they are going to stick with the ones they have. And that's not good for anyone.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by I-Love-Pontiac

This isn't a Toyota vs GM thing. This is an automotive thing. If people can't afford new cars, then they are going to stick with the ones they have. And that's not good for anyone.

NOt really. Because cars will come to the end of their useful life eventually.
People will still buy new cars.
They might stick with the ones they have now for an extra year or two. But they will buy.

Furthermore, $6,000 is an industrywide figure -- not GM-centric.

THe competition starts when a company figures out how to reduce the cost of that $6,000 figure to something signficantly less. So that company will only have, say, a $3,000 markup.

Welcome to the free market.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by I-Love-Pontiac

This isn't a Toyota vs GM thing. This is an automotive thing. If people can't afford new cars, then they are going to stick with the ones they have. And that's not good for anyone.

Yes thats a legitimate concern - there are ways around it - when we get there where its sticky .

Used will become more important - which also is no bad thing .

[goblue]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

NOt really. Because cars will come to the end of their useful life eventually.
People will still buy new cars.
They might stick with the ones they have now for an extra year or two. But they will buy.

Furthermore, $6,000 is an industrywide figure -- not GM-centric.

THe competition starts when a company figures out how to reduce the cost of that $6,000 figure to something signficantly less. So that company will only have, say, a $3,000 markup.

Welcome to the free market.

I would still rather have the government do nothing and let the free market dictate what people buy. CAFE is counterproductive government meddling - and its totally unnecessary. Its also unfair as its fleet specific - and that makes no sense to me. If a company wants to specialize in large vehicles, they are screwed. Thats not right.

If the government feels the need to do something, then simply raise the gas tax and lower the income tax, thus the government earns nothing more or less, but it incentives the purchase of fuel efficient vehicles. Thats really what needs to happen - let the buyers demand the product they want via the free market - and the automakers will respond.

[Hunid Racks]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

So what if it's going to boost cost $6,000?
It's not like GM is going to be the only one not affected right??

If GM cars go up $6,000... so will Ford, Nissan, Toyota, Mazda, Jaguar, Lexus, Mini, etc etc etc.

Lutz thinks GM is all alone in this?? They're not.

GM isn't alone in this. But the market segments they are in will be much more costly to bring up to the insane politically based standards. When GM commits to a product,tooling & the platform is billed for a number of years. Costs are writen over those years. And you get to pay over those years. So to get votes you have been misled by "representatives" that don't know or even care about those factors. They are going to raise gas mileage by legislation. Are they doing the best for the voters and their jobs or are they pandering to the lowest denominator to keep "their" elected jobs? Yes it will cost far more for GM, Ford and Chrysler to retool. And lot has to do with the fact they will have to scrap stuff before it was intended. In the meantime, here come overseas transplants complete with American government subsidies to build to the market.IOW, Lutz is right.

[t-rex]

I'm not even going to read further. The title alone is a load of horseshyte. Detroit said this about emissions back in the 60s. They said it about safety regs in the 60s and 70s. They said it about the first round of CAFE in the 70s and 80s. It's a tired argument and I don't buy a single word of it.

Detroit's obsession with maintaining a corporate status quo is costing them dearly. And this is yet another bit of bellyaching from them.

And for the record, I vehemently oppose CAFE simply because it's a stupid concept concocted by stupid people. O I pray for the day that sense and rationale return to America...

Lutz is like my uncle Shmooey down in Boca. Nothing but stupid crap comes out of his mouth, most of which you disregard, but ya can't help but love the guy!

[shabodah]

Originally Posted by I-Love-Pontiac

That cost money. And last time I checked it doesnt boost efficiency 20%... which is how much GM needs.

Last I checked, it was upping torque output by 13% or more WHILE increasing fuel economy on an engine that does not have direct injection but was otherwise identical (3.6L HV engine).

http://www.gm.com/explore/fuel_econo...eup-082707.jsp

• For 2008, GM has three engine variants with gasoline direct-injection fuel-saving technology in 17 models.
• A new 3.6L V-6 with direct injection for the Cadillac STS and CTS sedans delivers improved fuel economy and performance. In the all-new Cadillac STS, fuel economy improves by 1 mpg in city and 3 mpg on the highway. That’s an increase of up to 13 percent in highway fuel economy. Furthermore, the new engine delivers an increase of 47 hp (35 kW), an 18-percent improvement (302 hp/225 kW and 272 lb.-ft./369 Nm) over last year. In the CTS, the new engine delivers a 1-mpg improvement in both city and highway fuel economy and an increase of 49 hp, or a 19-percent improvement (304 hp/227 kW and 273 lb.-ft./370 Nm for 2008).

So, on it's own, it doesn't hit 20%, but, if you apply this technology to an engine that is 20% smaller (2.88 liters technically, but the 2.8L already in production would do fine), you've got MORE than the needed fuel economy.