Why haven’t American auto-makers come up with more hybrid cars or small SUV’s, like the Ford Escape?
November 6, 2009 in Civic Participation
Did you know that you can save fuel and run your car on water
younglieutenant asked:
Why does it take the Japanese to develop more than 4-5 models of hybrids, before U.S. automakers even attempt to pick a model to put a hybrid engine into? Are the U.S. automakers trying to “Escape” (pun intended) from this newest reality?
Did you know that you can save fuel and run your car on water
Because they have pressure from American oil tycoons. Look at your president! We have capability to have cars run on hydrogen but because oil people don’t like it, no one make it in great numbers.
Try lack of demand. The hybrids just haven’t caught on here because Americans are still in love with horsepower and the hybrids don’t have it like regular gas burners do.
Don´t know. My main means of transport is my bike.
Because American automakers are part of the conspiracy between themselves, the oil companies, and the government. They are not about to spend millions of dollars to re-tool just to manufacture cars that are more fuel-efficient or environmentally friendly.
What incentive is there for American companies to produce anything that is cheaper; last longer, saves the customer money; or protects our fragile environment? The technology has existed for decades to make more fuel-efficient cars that can run on corn,air, or water (remember the Stanley Steamer?).
American corporations don’t care about anything except profit.
Pure and simple. They will only mass-produce hybrids when they see that they’re losing even more market share to the Japanese, or Koreans. -RKO-
hmmm. if all cars suddenly converted to the use of alternative fuels, i wonder what that would do to the economy……..of the world…….
Because the UAW is such a drain on American auto manufacturers that they don’t have the capacity to be leaders in their industry.
Automakers only produce what people demand,we will blame every one else for being dependent on oil,but lets face it,it’s the consumer that dictates it,it’s the consumer that wants that big car to move around with all the luxury’s that go with it,the very same persons that complain about global warming,air pollution,high prices and long lines at the gas station,are the same persons that have three or four cars at home,and every one in the family drives one,even though they might all go to the same place.
Nope not in reality; more like Oil Company profits: Pressure from the oil companies:
the United States had both steam powered cars and electric cars in the early 1900′s. PLUS THE UNITED STATES ALSO HAD HYBRID CARS ON THE MARKET IN THE EARLY 1900′s. It is not new technology. It is over a 100 years old.
The Stanely Steamer held the land speed record of over 200 miles a hour in the early 1900′s as well. No internal combustion engine could come close to it. Not only that but the Stanely Steamer and other steam powered car on the marker then could run on almost anything that burned.
gasoline.
diesel fuel
home heating oil.
grain alcohol
Vodka
Rum
coal oil (as made from coal)
If it would burn they could run on it. Big problem with all of them! They did not use much fuel or gas to run on! Cost the big oil companies sales.
Thanks to government regulation it takes a long time to get a car (or any other product) to market. Not to mention that you have to retool factories and that involves laying off workers (temporally). The unions don’t like that. They will however have to do something eventually because if they don’t give the people what they want the people won’t buy their products. Just look at how they are losing money now. They will lose money until they produce cars and trucks that people want to buy.
I want to know when someone will come out with an engine powerful enough to tow a heavy load, but still efficient. I’m getting tired of feeling like I need to defend my choice in vehicles; I need a powerful engine for towing. I think it could be done, but I won’t be holding my breath!
Plus, there’s this little tidbit:
Fuel Economy:
Why You’re Not Getting The MPG You Expect
Hybrids Fair Worst
Consumer Reports v.70, i.10 1oct2005
For years, automakers have been criticized for producing vehicles that get so-so gas mileage. But as gas prices climb and consumers seek more miles per gallon, it turns out that fuel economy is much worse than it appears–50 percent less on some models, a new Consumer Reports analysis reveals.
Drivers who track their own fuel economy have long known that their results seldom match the gas mileage claimed by the Environmental Protection Agency on new-car stickers. Our study, based on years of real-world road tests over thousands of miles, quantifies the problem across a wide swath of makes and models.
We compared the claimed EPA fuel economy with the mileage per gallon we measured for 303 cars and trucks for model-years 2000 to 2006. Our selection represents a good cross-section of mainstream, high-volume vehicles. We looked at city highway, and overall mpg.
Highlights of our study:
* Shortfalls in mpg occurred in 90 percent of vehicles we tested and included most makes and models.
* The largest discrepancy between claimed and actual mpg involved city driving. Some models we tested fell short of claimed city mpg by 35 to 50 percent.
* Hybrids, whose selling point is fuel thriftiness, had some of the biggest disparities, with fuel economy averaging 19 mpg below the EPA city rating.
* The EPA ratings are the result of 1970s-era test assumptions that don’t account for how people drive today Automakers also test prototype vehicles that can yield better mileage than a consumer could get.
* Despite federal certification, it appears that U.S. vehicle fleets, all cars and light trucks produced in one model year, don’t meet government fuel-economy standards. For example, fleet mpg for 2003-model-year vehicles we studied was overstated by 30 percent.
For consumers, the news means that their vehicles typically cost hundreds more per year to operate than they were led to believe. Put another way, when gas in August hit $2.37 per gallon, the mpg shortchange effectively boosted the price for some motorists to $3.13 per gallon.
Demand. Americans don’t want to buy it for various reasons. My reason for not buying one is cost. They are more expensive to purchase and more expensive to maintain. In the long run, it is not cost effective. It’s also a newer technology, so many people are staying away from it. Plus, lower power from it. People want their high horse-power, high tow capacity vehicles. Hybrids just don’t provide that.
For me, I’m thinking my next vehicle I buy will be flex-fuel (E85).
Mostly because the price difference in a hybrid is more than the amount of money that will be saved by using less fuel. (I did the math and determined that a regular engine will be cheaper to operate in the long run.)
Other issues are:
Hybrid technology has not been proven in long term usage (will you be stuck with a lemon in 5 years?)
Hybrids only make sense for people who do a lot of city driving. People who commute on the freeway get worse fuel economy because they are using gasoline to haul those heavy batteries and generator/motor.
American Engineers are too busy designing shams to rip off the American tax $$$
Design a car for $100,000 a year
or
work for Bush and be able to make $9 Billion disappear in Iraq?
Hybrids have been shown to be a waste of time. Americans aren’t buying, especially when they are priced $5-8000 more than their counterparts.
Have you ever noticed that hybrid drivers are overly smug while they’re chugging around in their tuna cans?
America vehicles suck…go look at the reliability reports. Just so you know most “American” cars are made in Mexica,Canada, or China. Most Japanese cars are assembled in the USA! I will never drive American again…..pieces of crud!
supply vs demand duh.
come on people when are you going to learn?
Americans want Big Cars with lots of pep so the big three gave it to us.
Before the SUVs came along we had the problem on the run. For a long time no one would buy a V8. Most were taken off the streets. Many V8s went to the junk yard. The 4 and 6 were the best sellers on the lots. Then came Clinton, he exepted the SUVs from Federal mileage standards and pollution standards. This was done by Clinton to help the Auto Industry contribute cash to his election. Americans love the SUVs.. They are the Current status symbols.
For the same reason that the pharmaceutical companies don’t have lower prescription drug prices: HUGE PAYOFFS.
Why has every person who has answered this question ahead of me and told the truth gotten so many thumbs down? Curious.
What do you think would happen to the oil company’s record profits if all of a sudden, everyone started driving a vehicle that could run on an alternative fuel source? This is not high-brow economics here. It is a no-brainer. And there is nothing new about THIS reality.
The kinds of hybrid vehicles that are being produced now are a joke. If these ever came into wide use, we would be using up more energy, not less. The gas mileage has us so fixated, that it is easy to overlook that these hybrids cost more to manufacture, utilize toxic batteries that can affect the environment with crashes and disposal worse than gasoline emissions, are more costly to repair. We would be using more gas overall, not less, and have worse environmental impact. With the exception of the fuel cell, these other technologies are a sham. The car companies know this, but they are forced into being politically correct. Soon enough there won’t even be any American auto makers anymore, as they continue to mismanage their way into extinction. Oh, and by the way the Ford Escape hybrid is for city driving only; it gets worse mileage on the highway than in traffic.
well if the liberals would let us drill for more oil here in the US gas would cost less and if they would let us make more refineries and hybrids kind of suck now because they cost so much it would take along time to make it back i hate to buy gas but i need it for work because i deliver pizza so i converted my Mercedes to run on vegetable oil
I dunno. I like my pick-up truck… it hauls big stuff better than teensy weensy cars… also, since my area is prone to flooding, I feel safer in my truck than in a teensy weensy – prone to floating – car.
Because the big three automakers are controlled by the big oil interests in this country. They would thwart any “progress” towards reducing our oil dependence.
In world war II Japan tried to kill us with guns and ammo.
To-day they are trying to kill us with hybrids and SUVs.
We Americans should buy cars and trucks made in America.
The Japanese government subsidizes the car makers in Japan.
The American government taxes the car makers in America.
Speed and power are weapons of destruction.
Looks and comfort are necessities for driving pleasure.
There is not a conspiracy and the Prius proves hybrid cars ARE in demand. The Tesla Roadster proves you can get a lot of power from an electric motor. Hybrid cars are much better at carrying high loads because the electric engine can produce a lot more torque.
US automaker CEOs failed to look forward and did not devote the R&D necessary. GM focused on fuel cells, which potentially have greater benefits, but are much more difficult. Toyota took almost a decade to make the Prius powerful enough to be popular.
Hybrid cars are very reliable. I have a Prius and it is fabulous. My 45mpg average fuel economy is far better than any other car on the market. Yes it is lower than the EPA estimate, and farther below it than a gas car. However, in % terms it is not. 5mpg less than 50 is 10% while 5mpg less than 25 is 20%.
The hybrid components have an 8 year warranty, so the long-term reliability seems a moot as the manufacturer is going to fix the problem for me. . . In reliability tests, according to Consumer Reports, the hybrids have done much better.