Car Prices and the free market
Posted by frodo_b 9 years, 12 months ago to Government
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
There are a lot more of them than you think.
The elio is neat but looks a lot like a coffin. I would also be uncomfortable plunking money down on a car that the website shows only CAD generated pictures and also touts the 84 MPG gas milage but when you read further they say..."As we continue to engineer the Elio for up to 84 MPG, we officially have liftoff. " I smell advertising Hype!!! Especially when I see the word "Green" mentioned so many times!
My motorcycle (HD sportster) gets about 80 mpg on the highway, and from what I can tell the Elio is basically a 3-wheel motorcycle with protection from the elements. Safety features be damned. If I can get about the same mileage as my bike, but with protection from the elements, ac/heat and a radio then count me in.
They have a 4th generation prototype they have been driving around the country on a tour to show it off. It has a production-ready chassis and body but a placeholder Geo Metro engine. The prototype engine was undergoing final assembly prior to testing back in early November by the engine supplier IAV. Barring any significant increase in final engine weight, the overall vehicle weight is about 1230 pounds (base model), which is just over half the weight of a typical entry level small car...
They purchased (for pennies on the dollar) the old GM manufacturing plant and its equipment in Shreveport, Louisiana, where the big GM Hummer vehicles were made years ago. Louisiana is a right-to-work state. They also have a long list of established North American suppliers, which results in over 90% North American content in the vehicle.
As far as the coffin shape is concerned, that is a result of the aerodynamic design. Any small car that tangos with a large truck will instantly become a coffin. The Elio just conveniently is already shaped like a coffin; so, they can just drag you over to your final gravesite and plop you in, car and all... (I couldn't resist throwing in some humor there...).
Sure, it got crappy mileage, but I was paying for it. If I had ever asked anyone to help me pay for gas, I would have been justly subject for criticism; as it was, the truck's mileage was nobody's damned business but mine.
Someone said that was like measuring rainfall by weighing the earth before and after a storm...
http://www.eliomotors.com/
Not saying they can't achieve 84 mpg, just that the reason may not be what they claim.
I'd be looking for a 200cc-500cc engine and roughly motorcycle weight.
I have an optional motor for my bicycle that gets 100-150mpg. No licensing required. (only 30mph maximum and no airbags;^)
Yes, the other big variable in overall system efficiency is the weight of the vehicle. But the Elio is doing what no other car does because it is aggressively minimizing air drag by using a tandem seating arrangement to minimize the frontal area...
Since the Elio is a brand new American company and American made vehicle, I wouldn't be surprised if it falls a little short of 84 mpg highway. But they are on their 4th generation vehicle prototype for the chassis, body, etc... So, their aggressive design goals for a lightweight, aerodynamic vehicle appear to be achievable. All that is left is the weight and efficiency of the 3 cylinder gas engine.
It should be exciting to see how it turns out...
I hope they can achieve the objectives and find a ready market for their product.
I see their specs include a 900cc 55hp 55ftlb engine. That should provide decent performance if they keep weight low enough which is also required for 84mpg.
they may also be able to avoid some fedgov requirements if it is considered/registered a motorcycle, not a car.
we'd all be richer and more comfortable -- and
the government would be about 10 percent of its
current size. -- j
You answered your own question of who would regulate the nuclear industry, the insurance companies. I for one would prefer that the oversight of a plant to be overseen by the insurance folks as opposed to a government guy/gal that has no profit incentive. Ditto goes for the drug industry. We also do not need the FDIC or the SEC. They should be replaced by the private sector. Government should protect us and settle lawsuits and not much else. The first question to always ask is, "What government agency is better at something than the private sector?".
Think of a cheap electronically driven car that is virtually incapable of being in an accident.
Completely disagree with that assertion...
Virtually all of the cost/price increases we see in current models COME FROM all of the extra stuff that's been mandated IN by government regs and/or market/consumer pressure to deliver the safest, most reliable, least-maintenance, lowest-polluting vehicles possible.
The EPA obsoleted the simple, fix-it-yourself carburetors after about 1973 because ONLY an electronically-controlled fuel injection system could control fuel mixtures accurately enough to 'meet exhaust specs.'
Electronic ignition supplanted the 'obsolete' points/plugs/rotor/distributor mechanism for similar reasons... near-perfect timing of the ignition was required to meet pollution specs and not screw up the catalytic converters (more cost, lower pollution) with any raw gas getting into the exhaust system.
Air bags and front crumple zones to protect drivers and passengers WAY beyond what simple lap-belts could do in the mid 1960's, too.
Rigid chasses and roll-bar protection combined with soft bumpers that wouldn't tear up the underlying chassis in minor collisions... ditto.
"The Whole World Is A Tradeoff" and these kinds of lists are perfect examples of how and where those changes to our cars came from and evolved.
Or go back far enough and notice that fractured wrists and hands became less commonplace after the advent of the built in self-starter motor in cars, too...
:)
In the late '60's, Eaton Corp developed the first practical air bag system. Ford originally planned on adding this safety system in 1971, but found that customers would not pay the additional $300 and so dropped it.
By the late '80's, Eaton could not get sufficient orders for the systems to make any money on the product and sold the rights to their patents (to TRW if I remember correctly). They (the new patent holders) then went to Congress and got a law passed that mandated air-bag use. Suddenly use and profits soared.
Did the market cause the proliferation of air-bags? The evidence would say no, since it was stymied for nearly 20 yrs until gov't mandated use.
These are facts.
We can never know if the same proliferation would exist today without mandates, but I dare say that there are auto manufacturers in other parts of the world that do not serve markets that mandate air-bags that do not have a similar level of deployment.
Please don't misconstrue this post as me advocating gov't regulation, I do not. But those who say that the market itself would drive adoption and implementation of technology at a more rapid pace are mistaken, at least in some cases.
Talk about a prime example of crony capitalism or something of that sort! Excellent!
Now, today, as far as I know, folks like the NHTSA are looking or thinking about sophisticated collision-avoidance systems, some have already appeared on high-end luxury makes and models. e.g., Mercedes and maybe some others.
Back-up Cameras started to appear some years back; my wife's '12 Prius-V came with it as part of a high-end package on that model. I believe that some government agency or agencies is/are looking into making such cameras (as well as collision-avoidance systems) mandatory in the next few years, too.
I stipulate that cars ARE 'getting safer,' but I see an inherent tug of war between companies and Naderite-types of do-gooders trying to push the features in as 'standard equipment' versus "Joe Public" who gripes about the added costs and expense when they go to sign the sales contract.
Oh, and lest I forget, there's that nagging aspect that, by adding all of these options, features and systems to cars, what we're also doing is removing more and more responsibility AND skills requirements from the Drivers... Sort of Darwining ourselves down an evolutionary ladder, rather than improving our skills.
That, TOO, is 'a tradeoff,' as I, for one, am pretty ok with accepting assistance From My Vehicle to keep me safer (or just plain alive) if someone ELSE does something stupid behind Their steering wheel! But I'm also lucky enough to occasionally afford myself a new vehicle WITH those features.
Can _I_ / should I be the 'one' to make that decision for all other car buyers? Or even most of them, or a few? Or should the car companies? Or the NHTSA?
Interesting questions, I think... :)
And yes, they were totally inept in getting regulations to mandate airbag installation. Had they been more successful, it would have been installed much sooner and they would have made much more money. But believe me, it wasn't due to any philosophical position against regulation, merely incompetence.
Nothing we haven't seen before or commented on here before...
Now, as to changing that... ?????????????
While that MAY be true, we can't know that, because we haven't been down that future track. It's pure conjecture.
But to claim that cars 'aren't safer now' is patently absurd!
They might have become EVEN MORE safe if the free market had been free-er to respond, but cars today are NOT 'less safe' than they were decades ago!
I don't understand how you can make that assertion. Explain or elaborate, please? Thanks!
Examples?
Most coins have two sides....
And everyone gets excited over 40+ MPG in a "hybrid"...what lunacy!
And that doesn't even address all of the OTHER negative impacts of Gasohol, either!