New Fuel Standards May Limit GMT900 - 2500's

[Perian]

Link: wsj.com

The Bush administration is considering subjecting the biggest vans and sport-utility vehicles to fuel-economy standards for the first time. The move would please environmentalists but put new pressure on struggling domestic auto makers, particularly General Motors Corp.

The biggest SUVs, vans and pickup trucks -- those weighing between 8,500 and 10,000 pounds -- have been exempt from fuel-economy rules since they were established in the 1970s, a time when regulators didn't foresee such large vehicles being used as the family car.

A new rule would hit GM the hardest. Four SUVs sold last year have versions that weigh more than 8,500 pounds and would be affected by a new rule. One, Ford Motor Co.'s Excursion, is no longer in production. The other three -- Hummer H2, Chevy Suburban and GMC Yukon XL -- are GM products.

The move could force GM to limit sales of its largest vehicles to avoid penalties, meaning fewer would be available to shoppers. The company could also employ new technology to improve the mileage of its biggest guzzlers, which might increase the sticker price but would ultimately help consumers save at the pump.

The administration estimated that requiring these vehicles to improve their mileage would save a half billion gallons of fuel in 2011 and would cost manufacturers between $900 and $2,800 per vehicle. (To increase mileage on a vehicle, manufacturers have a variety of options, all of which cost money, including using lighter materials and adding advanced-technology systems that allow the car to run on less fuel.) Auto makers have lobbied against the change. GM had no comment, but Charles Territo, spokesman for the Alliance of Auto Manufacturers, a trade group, said: "Auto makers are working to integrate fuel savings into all vehicle classes including larger trucks."

The regulation is currently under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget and is expected to be issued as soon as next week. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, which oversees the fuel-economy program, must issue a final rule by April 1, in time to affect the 2008 model year.

Full article at link.

[Perian]

I have a one word reply here...

"Duramax".

Three of the six effected GM models are currently available with a diesel engine. I am willing to bet the remaining three (Suburban/Yukon XL/Hummer H2) will have the diesel option by MY 2008.

Thank God for Isuzu!

[DmaxCC6spd]

I wish the automotive press would learn something. These vehicles do not "weighing between 8,500 and 10,000 pounds". These numbers are the GVWR. While these vehicles could weigh this much fully loaded, it bothers me when the media doesn't report the whole truth accurately.

[wtgkb8]

Originally Posted by DmaxCC6spd

I wish the automotive press would learn something. These vehicles do not "weighing between 8,500 and 10,000 pounds". These numbers are the GVWR. While these vehicles could weigh this much fully loaded, it bothers me when the media doesn't report the whole truth accurately.

This was going to be my comment...hahah. Since when did a suburban weigh 8500 lbs? The newest one weighs what, ~6000lbs? I can see maybe the Hummer H1 weighing these figures...since it is still made of steel! Love how media chooses to not define the specific weight figures they are reporting.

[Z28x]

The new Diesels should fix this problem.

[AndrewGS]

Conveniently, there are no imported 3/4-ton or 1-ton trucks or SUVs.

[DmaxCC6spd]

I agree that diesel is a great solution. The infrastructure is already in place. Why can't tobacco farmers start raising crops to produce bio-diesel as the smoking industry declines? What happens to hybrids when the batteries die?

This is America! Why can't we get something done to reduce our reliance on foreign oil?

I drive a 7000 pound brick in the wind an can get 24 mpg hwy burning diesel!

This isn't great mileage, but sure beats a gas powered version!

[johnny smallblock]

It would be ironic if the one pro-environment act Bush takes is the one that stabs the domestics in the back.

Still, I doubt it will hapopen, and even if it does, it would go into effect for several years; enough time to let GM figure out how to do it cheap.

[stevews602]

I say just tax the hell out of folks with these ugly beasts and put the money towards alternative fuel research and development.

Exempt legitimate use for farm and business (where they belong) and let the soccer mom's foot the bill for reducing our foreign oil dependency.

[Raysz71]

This will only force more people to go to 3/4 & 1 Ton pickups for the towing duties.

But really, how many 2500 Suburbans (recently) did they sell and how much does the really impact them?

I wonder where the Avalanch would fall into, SUV or Pickup.

[mobyss]

Originally Posted by stevews602

I say just tax the hell out of folks with these ugly beasts and put the money towards alternative fuel research and development.

Exempt legitimate use for farm and business (where they belong) and let the soccer mom's foot the bill for reducing our foreign oil dependency.

No kidding - since when does the aveage suburban family need a 3/4 ton crew-cab long-bed diesel to haul the kids to school? It's amazing how FEW of these things you ever see actually pulling a 8000 pound trailer or hauling 3000 pounds of bricks in the bed, like they were designed to. A 1/2 ton pickup or SUV serves the needs of 99.5% of all non-business users.

I say go ahead and add them to the MPG standards - GM will be able to charge more for each of the limited amount of 3/4 and 1-tons it can build. Businesses and farmers can depreciate the cost over time for a tax break.

[wtgkb8]

Originally Posted by mobyss

No kidding - since when does the aveage suburban family need a 3/4 ton crew-cab long-bed diesel to haul the kids to school? It's amazing how FEW of these things you ever see actually pulling a 8000 pound trailer or hauling 3000 pounds of bricks in the bed, like they were designed to. A 1/2 ton pickup or SUV serves the needs of 99.5% of all non-business users.

I say go ahead and add them to the MPG standards - GM will be able to charge more for each of the limited amount of 3/4 and 1-tons it can build. Businesses and farmers can depreciate the cost over time for a tax break.

Don't forget that diesels in vehicles you just described are capable of mileage better than the half-ton gas trucks.

[01cavalier]

I like the idea of diesels and other changes that would increase mileage, DOD, 6-speed automatics. Still forcing fuel economy regulations on trucks that are designed for towing is not the wa to do it.

[Raysz71]

Originally Posted by mobyss

No kidding - since when does the aveage suburban family need a 3/4 ton crew-cab long-bed diesel to haul the kids to school? It's amazing how FEW of these things you ever see actually pulling a 8000 pound trailer or hauling 3000 pounds of bricks in the bed, like they were designed to. A 1/2 ton pickup or SUV serves the needs of 99.5% of all non-business users.

I say go ahead and add them to the MPG standards - GM will be able to charge more for each of the limited amount of 3/4 and 1-tons it can build. Businesses and farmers can depreciate the cost over time for a tax break.

That proposal is just for the SUVs and Vans, not pickups.

[mobyss]

Originally Posted by wtgkb8

Don't forget that diesels in vehicles you just described are capable of mileage better than the half-ton gas trucks.

Well then - maybe it's time for a small diesel V6 or I6 in the half-tons? How about a 3.2 liter V6 diesel making 250hp and 400 lb-ft of torque at 1800 rpm?

It can be done (see the Mercedes E320 diesel specs or the Euro Jeep Grand Cherokee) - and if GM does it first they will dominate the market - how do you think a 22/30 mpg extended-cab 4x4 half ton truck would sell? Compared to the 16/21 mpg gas engines now?