Why can't we have these???

[Wyldesoul]

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.

You want facts?
Sure!
I CAN support my statement.

Fifteen minutes on google turns this up:

European Union standards for automobiles on a chart compared directly to the USA standards: (Look at the chart on page 3)
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/arch...ase_study4.pdf

And so it's not just from one source, here you go some more!
European Union standards (the 6 different levels)
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/eu/hd.php
US Tier 1:
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld.php
US Tier 2:
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_t2.php
Cali:
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_ca.php



Here is a simplified comparison (Strictest standards as of 2012)
(Underscored for formatting purposes)
_______ EU _____US______CA
CO2___1.5______3.4______1.7
HC____.46______.075_____.04
NOx___2.0______.2_______.2



Laymans terms, while the EU is stricter on CO2 output, the USA has standards 5 times as strict for hydrocarbon output, and ten times as strict for NOx output.

The big problem there is the NOx emissions. with such strict emissions agains NOx, car manufacturers are not as able to run the lean burn that is capable in Europe, and thus part of what helps European cars get such good MPG.

Anybody remember why the beloved VX was ended? Not because it was too small, I can assure you that.

And Japan? Ever wonder why "JDM" cars are more powerful than US cars? It's not because the japanese are jealously keeping the best for themselves, as they'd LOVE to win the horsepower wars and get the sales.
They have to be detuned to meet US emissions.



So FIND, why don't YOU do a little research before you regurgitate the koolaid that holier than thou academia is feeding you.

[8$PG]

Originally Posted by Biffmeistro

Here is a simplified comparison (Strictest standards as of 2012)
(Underscored for formatting purposes)
_______ EU _____US______CA
CO2___1.5______3.4______1.7
HC____.46______.075_____.04
NOx___2.0______.2_______.2



Laymans terms, while the EU is stricter on CO2 output, the USA has standards 5 times as strict for hydrocarbon output, and ten times as strict for NOx output.

The big problem there is the NOx emissions. with such strict emissions agains NOx, car manufacturers are not as able to run the lean burn that is capable in Europe, and thus part of what helps European cars get such good MPG.

This is an interesting discussion. In Europe we haven't had the same problems with smog etc (yes in some very big cities like paris and london but mostly not) because we have lots of public transportation. The lack of space in older cities (like Stockholm) makes a purely car based infrastructure difficult. It is easier in younger cities or ones that have developed into larger cities in a short period of time. The possibility to commute without getting stuck in traffic from one part of the city to the other in a short time is a great contributor to the growth of the economy which many countries in europe have recognized investing in and encouraging public transportation.

This might be one of the reasons US-regulations are stricter on other emissions than CO2. In Europe on the other hand the priority has been fuel-consumption because of the higher gas-prices. They are taxed closer to the real economical loss of value of using up (actually accelerating) all of the resources too fast ending up with a bigger economy crisis in the future when all of the money that has been invested in and made from the use of oil is gone and no investments in alternatives have been made. Managing the environement is considered as a contributor to the economy in the long run rather than for maximizing short term personal winnings.

This has actually little to do with right/left politics (at least here in europe) and more to do with recognizing the real economical value of natural resources. Anyone can pour a lake of something they find lots of in the ground and sell it fast and cheap to the first person that comes around but it's the art of turning it to the advantage of the future economy that's the tricky part as seen trouble with in many parts of the world.

[madnessspirit]

Originally Posted by bowtieguy

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.

That is because the individual countries in the EU self-regulate.

Also, $6 gas is cheap compared to most of the world, and I don't know of anyone calling for higher gas prices.

[madnessspirit]

Originally Posted by Biffmeistro

You want facts?
Sure!
I CAN support my statement.

Fifteen minutes on google turns this up:

European Union standards for automobiles on a chart compared directly to the USA standards: (Look at the chart on page 3)
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/arch...ase_study4.pdf

And so it's not just from one source, here you go some more!
European Union standards (the 6 different levels)
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/eu/hd.php
US Tier 1:
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld.php
US Tier 2:
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_t2.php
Cali:
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_ca.php



Here is a simplified comparison (Strictest standards as of 2012)
(Underscored for formatting purposes)
_______ EU _____US______CA
CO2___1.5______3.4______1.7
HC____.46______.075_____.04
NOx___2.0______.2_______.2



Laymans terms, while the EU is stricter on CO2 output, the USA has standards 5 times as strict for hydrocarbon output, and ten times as strict for NOx output.

The big problem there is the NOx emissions. with such strict emissions agains NOx, car manufacturers are not as able to run the lean burn that is capable in Europe, and thus part of what helps European cars get such good MPG.

Anybody remember why the beloved VX was ended? Not because it was too small, I can assure you that.

And Japan? Ever wonder why "JDM" cars are more powerful than US cars? It's not because the japanese are jealously keeping the best for themselves, as they'd LOVE to win the horsepower wars and get the sales.
They have to be detuned to meet US emissions.



So FIND, why don't YOU do a little research before you regurgitate the koolaid that holier than thou academia is feeding you.

As I said, individual countries self-regulate more, though as the last poster said, they also do not have the same problems with smog you see in many parts of the US as we do. Either way, even going just on your comparison between the US and the EU, it still doesn't support what you said about the Lupo now does it? The engine they use in it easily meets Tier II Bin 5 standards, which means it is ready to sell in California or anywhere else in the US. Though.... I seem to notice quite a glaring contradiction between your statements and Bowtieguy's. Did you also notice that you are comparing standards for heavy-duty vehicles in Europe to light duty in the US, or are you just trying to manipulate information to support your point of view?

As for why JDM cars are more powerful than us cars? Why don't you compare the octane ratings on gas sold in Japan to the octane of gas sold in the US. Japanese cars are detuned to run on American gas, because we sell much lower octane gas. Next, compare fuel economy between the US and Japan. Our numbers are higher. It has nothing to do with emissions, they sell what sells here. I can't understand why you all believe there is some kind of conspiracy to keep clean, fuel efficient vehicles out of this country. It is entirely market driven. Besides, car companies are good at buying politicians. That is why we allow red or amber rear turn signals in this country, it is a styling option, despite the fact that tons of research show that amber turn signals are safer.

Why do I believe academia? Probably because they do research instead of presenting cherry picked information and bending the truth to support their political goals. Hell, that would be like watching Bill O'Reilly or Rachel Maddow and thinking you are getting real news.

[Wyldesoul]

Originally Posted by FIND

As I said, individual countries self-regulate more, though as the last poster said, they also do not have the same problems with smog you see in many parts of the US as we do. Either way, even going just on your comparison between the US and the EU, it still doesn't support what you said about the Lupo now does it? The engine they use in it easily meets Tier II Bin 5 standards, which means it is ready to sell in California or anywhere else in the US. Though.... I seem to notice quite a glaring contradiction between your statements and Bowtieguy's. Did you also notice that you are comparing standards for heavy-duty vehicles in Europe to light duty in the US, or are you just trying to manipulate information to support your point of view?

As for why JDM cars are more powerful than us cars? Why don't you compare the octane ratings on gas sold in Japan to the octane of gas sold in the US. Japanese cars are detuned to run on American gas, because we sell much lower octane gas. Next, compare fuel economy between the US and Japan. Our numbers are higher. It has nothing to do with emissions, they sell what sells here. I can't understand why you all believe there is some kind of conspiracy to keep clean, fuel efficient vehicles out of this country. It is entirely market driven. Besides, car companies are good at buying politicians. That is why we allow red or amber rear turn signals in this country, it is a styling option, despite the fact that tons of research show that amber turn signals are safer.

Why do I believe academia? Probably because they do research instead of presenting cherry picked information and bending the truth to support their political goals. Hell, that would be like watching Bill O'Reilly or Rachel Maddow and thinking you are getting real news.

So. I will admit that I mistakenly referenced EU HD vs USA LD emissions.
For this rebuttal, I spent more than ten minutes on google, and did a bit more research into that site that I had that was very useful.

However, there is something very, very important.

NOx.

HC emissions and CO2 emissions are moot to the point here, as those emissions levels decrease with fuel consumption, no matter the method used to reduce fuel consumption. So those 2 emissions standards are not what limits the MPG ratings of USA cars.

It's the NOx.

The primary, and easiest way to radically improve the MPG of an engine (to an engineer) is to run the engine in a leaner state. If you manage to find a way to control detonation, you can run some very, very high AFRs. The VX is a testament to that, with AFRs as high as 25:1 (quick check, no in depth research). Nearly half the fuel used in a stoichiometric AFR.

But with a leaner mix comes higher combustion temps, and with higher combustion temps comes more NOx emissions. As 8$pg pointed out, NOx isn't a big deal in Europe, as they don't have as high of car use as in the USA, and as such they don't have as high of smog levels, so they don't have to worry about the smog producing NOx.

And so, here we have the NOx limits per nation, as of 2012 (Future cars do not count) (strictest standards per nation used):

USA: .02
Canada: .2
Mexico: .25

EU5: .06
EU4: .08
EU3: .15

Germany: EU5
Russia: EU4
Switzerland: 25ppm (A different scale, and I honestly don't know how it compares, but included for fairness)
Turkey: EU4
Japan: .08
China: EU4
India: EU4
S Korea: .02
Singapore: Unregulated
Thailand: .08
Australia: EU4
Argentina: EU4
Brazil: .08
Chile: .03
Peru: EU3


So I still stand that as far as NOx emissions are concerned, USA is the strictest in the world, tied with South Korea.

I say to doubt the rantings of Academia because Academia absolutely loves to find every way that America is evil and wrong.

I will say that American cars are going to be higher polluters, mostly due to the fact that only 8 out of 50 states enforce emissions laws, and as such cars aren't maintained to such rigorous standards as is required in the EU, but to be sold in the USA, they have to pass NOx ratings stricter than any of the cars that we would love to get. And alas, it is the NOx that is helping to choke the MPG down.

I mean, why don't they offer the Twinair Fiat 500 in the USA? They already offer the Fiat 500, so "too small" is not a valid response. "Too weak" isn't a valid response, as it is similarly powerful and similarly quick to the 1.4 offered in the USA. Wouldn't it be such a great selling device to say "60mpg, and it's not even a hybrid!"

Why is the EU Jetta 2.0 TDI rated at 38mpg city, and the US Jetta 2.0 TDI rated at 30mpg city? (Adjusted to both be in US gallons)

Why is the 181HP 1.6 Mini Cooper S Roadster rated at 30mpg combined in the US and 40MPG combined in the EU?

I suspect the answer is that the US models cannot have the lean burn mode that the EU models can.

Do you have any other answer to that?

[VX_Arky]

Originally Posted by Biffmeistro

Anybody remember why the beloved VX was ended? Not because it was too small, I can assure you that.

I apologize for my lack of knowledge, but I'm unaware why the VX was ended. I would really like to know why though. Could you fill me in?

[madnessspirit]

Why don't you go ahead and google the emissions on them before you use them as the basis of another incorrect argument.

In tuning, lean burn, you do produce more NOx, BUT, emissions equipment can be tuned to reduce NOx. Correlation does not imply causation. Just because what you do aftermarket does one thing does not mean that manufacturers cannot release the cars in the US. I can tune an engine for a lean burn, and the NOx will rise by a higher percentage than a VX tuned by Honda for lean burn. And, since you are trying to imply the VX was ended because of emissions, no, it wasn't. Look at sales for the VX. Just because a segment of people love it doesn't mean it was a good seller. Same reason you can barely find a car with a manual transmission in the US. I love manual transmissions, as do a lot of people. Manual transmissions don't sell, or are you going to tell me there is some kind of government regulation making clutches impossible to sell in the US. The VX lost sales because everyone was buying BIG SUVs and weren't as concerned with fuel economy when we had the low gas prices we used to. Also, it suffered from a severe case of underpowered in the mind of the average American consumer. Want to reduce NOx? Increase the surface area of a cat and add EGR. That is what most automakers did in the mid 90s.

Why do the EU versions of those vehicles get higher mileage? Once again, check the octane of fuel sold in the EU compared to the US. Those vehicles are tuned to run on 96 octane. They have to be detuned to run 87 octane here in the states. Just like I told you about Japan, where regular is around 99 octane. That means that those cars can run more aggressive timing curves and get more power out of the vehicles. The fact that the power output is the same demonstrates the fact that the vehicles are tuned for greater fuel economy instead of greater power, which can be accomplished without increasing emissions at higher octanes.

Also, their standards for fuel economy are different from ours, so it isn't really an apples to apples comparison.

lastly, you want to take a stab at guessing how small the difference is from .02 to .06? All those numbers you posted up are in parts per million, Switzerland's compare directly. CARB's standards are .02 parts per million.

I say to doubt the BS you get fed because they just want to gain your support politically by trying to convince you that everyone else is lying to you. You have done the research yourself now, and you found out that the US is only stricter on a small part of our emissions standards, not all of it, which is directly contradictory to what you believed, that the US has some kind of draconian standards that are are so insanely strict compared to the rest of the world that car companies can't do business here.

Anything else?

[bowtieguy]

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/co...208_589016.htm
from that article...
Right now, California and New York refuse to register new diesel cars because they don't meet emission regulations. Will that change with the newer generation diesels?
If clean-diesel cars fulfill their requirements, they have to give it a chance. The regulations that take effect in 2009 say diesel has to burn as clean as gasoline. California also has targets for carbon dioxide exhaust emissions -- and there's no better off-the-shelf solution for CO2 reduction than diesel. If Mercedes shows its clean-diesel technology is better at reducing carbon dioxide and they meet the requirements on particulates and nitrogen oxides, how can California ignore it?

and yes, we can believe that most of what we're told from the media is politically slanted at best and spun into half truths(lies) at worst. if you haven't heard, media matters has been exposed as such recently. wonder if the usual spin masters(CNN, MSLSD, New York Times etc) will report it?

[Wyldesoul]

Originally Posted by FIND

Why do the EU versions of those vehicles get higher mileage? Once again, check the octane of fuel sold in the EU compared to the US. Those vehicles are tuned to run on 96 octane. They have to be detuned to run 87 octane here in the states. Just like I told you about Japan, where regular is around 99 octane. That means that those cars can run more aggressive timing curves and get more power out of the vehicles. The fact that the power output is the same demonstrates the fact that the vehicles are tuned for greater fuel economy instead of greater power, which can be accomplished without increasing emissions at higher octanes.

Japan and Europe use RON only for their octane ratings.
USA uses AKI octane ratings, which are consistently lower than RON
According to Wiki:
PetroCanada 94 is rated at 101 octane RON, but only 94 octane AKI
EuroSuper 95 octane is only rated at 90 octane AKI
Shell V Power 94 octane is rated at 98 RON.
Even "Regular" 87 octane in the US is 91-92 octane via the RON method.

Originally Posted by FIND

Also, their standards for fuel economy are different from ours, so it isn't really an apples to apples comparison.

So are you then saying that the 57mpg BMW that started this thread actually doesn't get better MPG than a similarly equipped Passat TDI? That it's just different ways of measuring MPG that makes it appear more fuel efficient than it is?

Originally Posted by FIND

lastly, you want to take a stab at guessing how small the difference is from .02 to .06? All those numbers you posted up are in parts per million, Switzerland's compare directly. CARB's standards are .02 parts per million.

Oh, I would say the difference is about 66%, which is a lot.

Originally Posted by FIND

I say to doubt the BS you get fed because they just want to gain your support politically by trying to convince you that everyone else is lying to you.

Ditto

Originally Posted by FIND

You have done the research yourself now, and you found out that the US is only stricter on a small part of our emissions standards, not all of it.

Yup! We're stricter on the only part of emissions that actually prevents a very proven method of improving MPG.

Originally Posted by FIND

Anything else?

Nope!

[madnessspirit]

I notice you left fox news out when you were talking about spin masters... I'd say it is pretty obvious where you get your disinformation from.

This is why I do not watch television. Seriously, that is all Fox does all day, they claim that everyone else has been exposed to be a liberal propaganda machine, everyone else claims that Fox News is a conservative propaganda machine. I'd say there is a lot of truth in both of them, but the Fox News crowd is certainly wearing bigger tin foil hats when they talk about the rest of the media. They want to convince you that everyone is liberally biased, not just the legitimate liberal propaganda sources. This is how they keep you scared of watching anyone but them. There are a few decent media outlets out there, but you would never know it as long as you are watching that BS. No, I am not advocating you switch off O'Reilly and go right over to the other extreme and turn on Rachel Maddow, but I am saying that maybe you should, idk, consider that maybe not everyone is your enemy.

Let's talk simple economics for a minute here. Networks want to sell their programming, right? Therefore networks show things people want to watch, right? If you were to say most of the media has a liberal bias, then that would be like saying most of this country is liberal. About half the media is fairly moderate. There is a chunk of it that goes to the right and the left of moderate slightly, then there is the parts of the media that is at the bat**** crazy extremes. Fox News probably isn't at the bat**** crazy extreme yet, but there is a reason I stopped watching them a few years ago, the same reason I stopped watching some of these other cable "news" networks. Watching MSNBC and FOX for real news is like watching MTV for music videos. It is pointless. But they both do serve a customer base that wants that kind of slanted opinion. In the end they are just selling a product, and the market is controlling their content.