Why can't we have these???

[8$PG]

What you are saying is true, the gearbox doesn't know whats in front of the car, but the car still knows better how to shuffle the gears and engage the clutch in the smoothest and most wear free manner so I would like it to do that like it does everything else by itself mechanically.

On a bad day you may miss a gear or slip on the clutch or something, the car doesn't.

You can still choose gear and coast in N with an automatic. And wouldn't it be better if the driver didn't control the trottle directly but instead commanded the car to accelerate and the gearbox would control the throttle according to the level of acceleration wanted among the other things, knowing what gear you're in and what gearchanges will be made next. Then one of your pointed out problems with automatics could be elliminated. But we have inherited the ways of doing things from how older cars with carburators and a buff? of engines and gearboxes to choose from where put together and thinking outside the (gear-)box is not very common in the autoindustry. Another thing to consider is NOx-emissions. Anyway...

The BMW 8-speed I believe is a double clutch story of some kind because it does the same or better MPG than the manual gearbox depending on the engine. Lower RPM in the highest gear might be one explanation too.

[theholycow]

You can coast in N in an automatic, but you can't engine-off coast if you like to do that sort of thing. If you don't then that won't matter to you.

I agree about inheriting legacy behavior from carburetors. Fuel injection systems are programmed to act too much like carburetors and we all pay for it.

As you implied, it would certainly be possible with drive-by-wire throttle and an automatic/dual clutch to make the same gear and throttle choices I would, using the accelerator pedal only as an input for requested acceleration. When that starts to become common it will be a very good thing for automatics. For cars you can actually buy now, it's either uncommon or non-existent.

I'm less concerned with NOx emissions but I can understand if that issue is more important to you.

[8$PG]

I hope they will extend the auto start/stop to auto EOC too (like the hybrids) That would be a nice development.

[Sludgy]

Originally Posted by FIND

Ecoboost is only such a high priced option in the base model, and I suspect most of the ecoboost sales come from the models above the base, where the difference in price are not so great.... For instance, on the F150 Platinum, the price differential is only a few hundred dollars. So saying the average buyer is willing to pay thousands more is a mis-characterization.

But, even against a base model V8, the price differential on an Ecoboost truck would be paid off in fuel savings in around 2 years, given the average American's driving habits of 15,000 miles per year. Plus, there is the smug that comes along with ownership, something that helped bolster the sales of early Prius models. All this, and the ecoboost V6 is a more capable engine than the base model V8, and certainly a powerhouse compared to the base model V6, which is all most buyers of an F-150 really even need in the first place. That N/A V6 will pull the boat around all day or tow a car/small camper. Don't get me wrong, there are buyers that need more power, but generally speaking, those guys would be better off in a larger platform, or their best engine option in this platform is the ecoboost.

As far as maintenance.... No, maintenance is not more expensive in the ecoboost. I suppose, if things broke out of warranty, there are some more parts, and more expensive parts to replace, but yeah. All things being equal, the ecoboost engine should be just as reliable, if not more so than its N/A V8 counterparts. Sometime in the first 150,000+ miles of (most likely trouble free) service, I think one would make up the additional cost of repairs in fuel savings. Then again, most owners will sell them before they have any major engine problems anyways.

The fact that 60-65% of f-150 buyers haven't realized that the ecoboost is a better engine than the V8, or that they don't need the V8 or ecoboost in the first place, tells me that yes, they are still pretty resistant to the change.

I bought the base 3.7 V6, not the ecoboost. It gets better EPA mileage than the ecoboosted 3.5 V6. The 3.7 has plenty of power, 300+ HP. I can't see buying the 3.5.

[madnessspirit]

Originally Posted by Sludgy

I bought the base 3.7 V6, not the ecoboost. It gets better EPA mileage than the ecoboosted 3.5 V6. The 3.7 has plenty of power, 300+ HP. I can't see buying the 3.5.

I was comparing it to V8s in that platform. Like I said, most buyers of an F-150 don't need more power than the base V6 gives you. Honestly, it is more power than you could get out of a V8 some years prior. There is this weird mindset in US drivers that says that no matter how much power increases, they need to get at least the same amount of displacement, otherwise they won't be able to make it back and forth to the grocery store.

[jbdesigns]

I know of people that have gone to germany and bought a BMW and had it shipped back to the states. it was a few thou cheaper plus they got to a tour of the plant and a little send off when they picked up the car. then drove it around a bit before taking it to the port.

could we not do this for the BMW 320D? if we paid for the shipping and since the emmissions do meet the uS standards? I believe theymeet the standards based on the low co2 emmissions.

[Wyldesoul]

The problem with the first and this most recent post, and therfore the entire thread is this.


No. They can't pass U.S. Emissions standards.

The USA has the strictest emissions laws in the world, to be honest. The reason we cannot have the 90mpg Lupo TDI is due to the fact that it couldn't even HOPE to pass US emissions regulations.

While there are plenty of states in the US that couldn't care less about emissions, and who don't care if you buy your brand new car and rip the cat right off, to be sold in the US, a new car has to pass a standard of emissions that is much stricter than anywhere else in the world.

Especially since so many cars nowadays are just made to pass Cali standards outright, and Cali is far, far stricter on emissions than even the US, which is in turn, far stricter than the rest of the world.

[madnessspirit]

Originally Posted by Biffmeistro

The USA has the strictest emissions laws in the world

If there was a hint of truth in this statement, then you would probably be right. Quit drinking the Koolaid the politicians are feeding you to buy your votes.

We don't get the Lupo TSI here because it is about the size of a smart fortwo and diesels don't sell as well in the US, END OF STORY. It has a 60 HP engine and seats 2. 4 if you saw your passenger's legs off. That engine runs just as clean as any of VW's other TDIs, which ALL meet Tier2/Bin 5 emissions standards, the strictest standards in America.

I suggest you head overseas and see what it is like in a real nanny state like they have in the UK.

[madnessspirit]

Originally Posted by jbdesigns

I know of people that have gone to germany and bought a BMW and had it shipped back to the states. it was a few thou cheaper plus they got to a tour of the plant and a little send off when they picked up the car. then drove it around a bit before taking it to the port.

could we not do this for the BMW 320D? if we paid for the shipping and since the emmissions do meet the uS standards? I believe theymeet the standards based on the low co2 emmissions.

You cannot do that. To import a vehicle, it must either be sold here in the same configuration (so that it is certified to meet US crash, lighting, safety and emissions standards) or you must submit it for certification, which means buying a couple dozen to crash into walls. The US has its own standards for just about everything, and many times, our standards are so far behind the rest of the world or substandard, it is just silly. Try comparing DOT headlights to E-Code headlights sometime if you want a good idea of the difference between US standards and the rest of the worlds. The problem is that we have so much of our regulatory system tied up in political favors and buying votes that nothing gets done right. If government ever got back to governing instead of 24/7/365 campaigning, the world would be a lot better place.

[bowtieguy]

Originally Posted by FIND

If there was a hint of truth in this statement, then you would probably be right. Quit drinking the Koolaid the politicians are feeding you to buy your votes.

We don't get the Lupo TSI here because it is about the size of a smart fortwo and diesels don't sell as well in the US, END OF STORY. It has a 60 HP engine and seats 2. 4 if you saw your passenger's legs off. That engine runs just as clean as any of VW's other TDIs, which ALL meet Tier2/Bin 5 emissions standards, the strictest standards in America.

I suggest you head overseas and see what it is like in a real nanny state like they have in the UK.

actually the EU(european union) has no standards for co2 emissions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_standard isn't that what we're discussing?...european vehicles? biffmeistro is spot on! not sure about standards outside of the EU however.

yes, gov't overall plays a bigger role in the socialist states that dominate most of europe, but the if enviro nuts and the EPA here in the states had their way we'd all be paying $6 gal for gas and $1 kw for eletricity! small car sales are up...i think the US could support SOME of the vehicles produced/sold in europe in regard to sales.