OT: Do subtle market trends finally confirm we are serious about efficiency?

[RPS]

Just in the last few days I heard or read these measureable shifts in our collective purchasing attitudes affecting fuel economy:

1) Ford in March sold 40 percent of F-150 pickup trucks with V6 engines. For the last few years V8 engines were the only available choice whether you wanted one or not.

2) GM is now selling 46 percent of cars with 4-cylinder engines, about double the percentage they sold just a few years ago. The point made on CNBC is that buyers are choosing larger cars with smaller engines to achieve a targeted MPG figure versus going for smaller cars with greater specific power. Seems we are choosing size for safety and comfort over faster acceleration given an MPG goal.

3) Motor Trend reports 40 is actually becoming the new 30 MPG (highway, that is). We’ve gone from only one standard gasoline auto (excluding hybrids and diesels) that could meet that goal last year, to four presently, with six total expected in the very near future.

I’m curious if you guys think these subtle but quantifiable trends represent a permanent mindset shift that is reflected in our collective buying habits, or if it’s just a temporary glitch once again due to $4.00 gas or a weak economy? If gas goes down in cost (unlikely IMHO) or we adjust to its sticker shock, will these trends reverse just like others in the past?



P.S. – No doubt this is OT, but I expect such an “efficiency” mindset shift will precede greater cycling-on-roads acceptance. I hope these are early signs of good things to come.

[rugbysecondrow]

I think there is a greater acceptance of efficiency in vehicle use, but not sure how that is impacted issues like commute distance or net usage. People are still living further from their work, so I wonder what the net benefit is in fuel consumption.

It also seems that auto companies are developing more/better options for vehicles. A v6 truck ten years ago was a POS, but with Ford Flex fuel and other V6 enhancements, it seems to be a good product.

What I have noticed is that previously small cars (camry, accord, corolla, civic) are much bigger than they were ten years ago and much much bigger than 20 years ago. Are they all moving towards the middle?

[Redturbo]

Maybe it's the Pinto and Vega days all over again.

[RPS]

It also seems that auto companies are developing more/better options for vehicles. A v6 truck ten years ago was a POS, but with Ford Flex fuel and other V6 enhancements, it seems to be a good product.
In the past I’ve been disappointed that advances in technologies were used to increase size and improve performance more than economy. In previous cycles I don’t recall it starting out that way, but buyers made choices along the way biased towards greater vehicle size and power at the expense of fuel consumption.

In this cycle which started a few of years ago (it takes time for manufacturers to fully develop new products so we are just seeing them now) new technologies are being used (at least partially) to increase fuel economy in addition to performance. The issue of interest to me is whether we will collectively continue to move further in that direction, or once again reverse it like we did after the early 70s and similar cycles. In the case of Ford F-150s, the base V-6 engine now has 302 HP, making the need for larger V-8s much less likely. However, in the past the mindset of many truck buyers was that they “must” have a V-8 to be a real truck. Maybe that and other preconceptions are finally changing due to technical advances.

[RPS]

Maybe it's the Pinto and Vega days all over again.
If EcoBoost becomes another Pinto that might be the end of Ford. :rolleyes:

[Kontact]

More serious than the '70s, and every other gas crunch period since?

I'd say no, just because every time gas prices do relax a bit there is a corresponding upsurge in large vehicle purchases. And it is difficult to tell whether the recent trend is overwhelmingly about fuel economy or sticker price. With a down economy, smaller, cheaper engined vehicles are more attractive even with no serious difference in fuel economy.

The average US consumer seems to have a memory of less than a year.



On a different note, some of the V8 powered cars have been getting terrific highway mileage in recent years. Big turbo diesels, too.

[Aaron O]

My guess is that Ford and the rest are expecting gas prices to continue climbing (continued mid-east instability combined with expanding developing countries demand)...and they're planning ahead and trying to get market recognition as non-ridiculous cars.

I was expecting the long term answer to include a LOT of the electric cars, but I'd think that would require added electric capacity, which will be difficult to do without nuclear...and nuclear is going to be a really tough sell again.

[Ken Robb]

I think the new more-efficient engines are providing greater economy with no loss of performance than old-tech v-8s so folks can have their cake and eat it too. An added benefit is that the smaller lighter engines contribute to better handling as well.

[Vancouverdave]

I'd love to see news media talk with people (ER docs and nurses, for instance) who can point out the upside of more expensive gasoline such as a lower highway death rate. On another issue related to this, the problem of people living further from their work will probably only be solved by fixed and finite limits to the selling price of real property--we often move to afford housing in this country. Stranger things have happened!

[RPS]

I was expecting the long term answer to include a LOT of the electric cars, but I'd think that would require added electric capacity, which will be difficult to do without nuclear...and nuclear is going to be a really tough sell again.
On that related subject, maybe having “new” design extremes helps us accept a new “normal” more easily.

The prospect of higher fuel costs and a lingering weak economy are probably the most important factors affecting the trends mentioned in OP, but one thing that is different this time compared to most cycles I can recall is that there are additional choices which are even less traditional by comparison, making the purchase of a somewhat normal fuel-efficient car or truck seem run of the mill. Whether buying cars or bikes, many people resist going out on a limb, so they tend to avoid items that are on design fringes. Now that we have hybrids and electric cars serving as new design extremes, purchase of fuel efficient yet traditional vehicles may seem less risky.

[flydhest]

I know there are lots of informed folks on the forum. Anybody know where biodiesel is likely going over the next decade? I have a VW TDi wagon, which I love. Very good mileage, but diesel is still petroleum. Biodiesel seems interesting the way it is pitched. Once you get into the details about the fossil fuels used in farming, the implications are less clear cut for someone like me who is not overly well informed. Nevertheless, if you could use bio inputs to make bio diesel . . . well, give me knowledge that I don't have to work for dammit!!! That's why the forum is here :banana:

[weiwentg]

I think we will need gas to stay above $5 a gallon for an extended period for the US to get really concerned about efficiency.

And even if gas gets and stays above $5 a gallon, our entire national infrastructure is built around people living in the suburbs 30-90 minutes away from their jobs in the cities or other suburbs. We have the land, but this is still a dumb policy. We'll need to adjust in that sense - build cities taller, manage the density and congestion better, use more transit. But most people practically think that the Constitution specifically grants us the right to use cars 100%, and so we build our highways and cities and suburbs around that - except it isn't working in terms of congestion, and when gas gets to $5 a gallon, it won't work in terms of pricing either.