Autoweek article of 54.5 mpg

[linklaw]

"I have always maintained that the people that voted for Potus are those who believe that Americans owe something to the blacks because of slavery."

Looney to call you a racist? Yeah, you are right. Nobody could ever have voted for him because he was the smartest candidate who best connected with the American people, or because he promised to end the war in Afghanistan, or because he wanted to stop greedy health insurance companies from abusing their policy holders, or because he wanted to stop reckless banking practices that plunged us into a recession, or for a myriad of other reasons that made him a better candidate than McCain/Palin. Your original post (as quoted) surely sounds racist to me.

[landrovered]

Folks the quickest way to end political threads is not to post on them. Don't get lured in to wrestling with the pig, all you get is dirty and the pig likes it.

[linklaw]

Agreed. Porsche only from now on.

[Perfectlap]

Im not going to weigh in on the CAFE standards issue but i just have to quickly opine that your basic assumptions about the cause of the housing mess really leave out nearly the whole rest of the story. The securitization of mortgages and the complicity of the credit rating agencies to sell those securities to investors worldwide was the real culprit that kept the musical chairs game going year after year. It was corporate greed that BOTH political parties enabled. also, if you removed subprime and fannie and freddie from the equation ENTIRELY, we still would have had a once in a life time bubble that wiped out $20 trillion globally, enough to buy China three times over. The SEC lifting capital requirements for the five largest investment banks in 2004 which allowed Lehman and Bear to bet 40 to 1 was another principal cause. Point is the notion that this catastrophe was forced on the financial institutions by the government is false. They were given all the rope they had been begging for years. As Roger Lowenstein famously wrote in " When Genius Failed" its always the leverage that blows you up not the fatal flawe of the investment idea.

[cvhs18472]

Originally Posted by linklaw

Agreed. Porsche only from now on.

These " no politics " statements that have been posted on this thread remind me of what my Mother used to say when she would start a discussion, and when she would see that she was losing badly say" I don't want to talk about it any more". The political climate in our country does effect our ability to enjoy our cars.

[RobbieKnobbie]

Is there a way to tell if my spoiler has deployed once I exceed 75? I can't see it with the rear view mirror, and when I'm driving that fast I usually don't have the free time to get out and check it.

Sorry, am I out of place?

[NoGaBiker]

Originally Posted by RobbieKnobbie

Is there a way to tell if my spoiler has deployed once I exceed 75? I can't see it with the rear view mirror, and when I'm driving that fast I usually don't have the free time to get out and check it.

Sorry, am I out of place?

Not out of place at all. Really, the only way to confirm deployment is to get a photo-camera speeding ticket. This way you can see the license number AND the spoiler, and have absolute confirmation.

Good luck, and let us know how it works.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by NoGaBiker

Not out of place at all. Really, the only way to confirm deployment is to get a photo-camera speeding ticket. This way you can see the license number AND the spoiler, and have absolute confirmation.

Good luck, and let us know how it works.

you give great advice. Are you in the mortgage business by the way?

[NoGaBiker]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

you give great advice. Are you in the mortgage business by the way?

Is that still a business??? It sounds so 2008...

[linklaw]

Originally Posted by cvhs18472

These " no politics " statements that have been posted on this thread remind me of what my Mother used to say when she would start a discussion, and when she would see that she was losing badly say" I don't want to talk about it any more". The political climate in our country does effect our ability to enjoy our cars.

I agree. The political climate does impact our ability to enjoy our cars. I am not a fan of driving on broken, pothole pocked roads or over bridges that might fall down. We have plenty of both in western Pennsylvania. Unless and until some dollars are spent on infrastructure, I am afraid the road situation is only going to get worse and we'll be facing additional bridge closures due to safety concerns. I just learned that the US is now a net exporter of oil. Until that changes and speculators are taken out of the energy market, we will be faced with ever increasing fuel prices. The president of Exxon/Mobil said that speculation accounts for an extra dollar to dollar and a half per gallon of gasoline. As far as political discussions are concerned, winning or losing has nothing to do with keeping the discussion here centered around our cars, which is the common thread among those who frequent the forum. There are plenty of other places to rant about our government.

[Pilot2519j]

Originally Posted by cvhs18472

These " no politics " statements that have been posted on this thread remind me of what my Mother used to say when she would start a discussion, and when she would see that she was losing badly say" I don't want to talk about it any more". The political climate in our country does effect our ability to enjoy our cars.

For those who believe CAFE standards don't affect car design, performance are simply sticking their heads in the sand. I don't understand what has happened to all these anti-politics censors because since I joined which was years ago Bruce, the founder of this group, used to have political comments every day. Nothing was sacred. Maybe the PC crowd and the liberal intelligentsia has taken over. As far as I am concerned I will make my comments when I see fit as I have done in the past and will do in the future. I love Porsche cars and will do forever or in your case until EPA allows me to enjoy it. I don't mind being criticized but being called a racist is personal since I been called lots worst names and attacked by both blacks and white because my wife and I were speaking Spanish. I know the effete snobs will be saying oh my god but c'est la vie.

[Ghostrider 310]

Politics aside, if you take this approach : (Quote) "As far as I am concerned I will make my comments when I see fit as I have done"


Maybe this: "I been called lots worst" is in your approach or the boulder on your shoulder. Try getting to know people, they run deeper than left right leaning morays which I noticed you took a minute to backhand bash but hey nobody better try it on you and the Mrs. got it.. You are the only dude I ever saw use the term " liberal intelligentsia" on a motorhead BB

[linklaw]

In response to the comment "For those who believe CAFE standards don't affect car design, performance are simply sticking their heads in the sand.", I thought about cars of today vs. cars of the 1960's and early 1970's, before CAFE standards came into effect and concluded that pre CAFE standards cars are definitely slower, worse handling and less safe. Maybe someone can think of a 1960's car that can out accelerate a new 997, but they are few and far between. Maybe an AC Cobra could do it, but you would never want to drive one of those every day, let alone in the winter or foul weather. There are many mini vans that can out accelerate, out handle and stop quicker than the "muscle cars" that were worshiped in the 60's and early 70's. For crying out loud, a base 986 Boxster gets 30 miles per gallon on the highway and out handles just about any 1960's or 70's Porsche. It's zero to 60 times are comparable to a pre 1990 911 and it may even have a higher top end. Is there any evidence out there that CAFE standards have had a negative effect on performance and/or car design or is it just someone's opinion? Have any performance car manufacturers come out and said they would be building a 300 MPH car that does zero to 60 in 2.3 seconds if it weren't for CAFE standards? I understand that manufacturers have to work harder and build a better, more innovative product to meet the standards, but is that necessarily a bad thing?

[Pilot2519j]

? I understand that manufacturers have to work harder and build a better, more innovative product to meet the standards, but is that necessarily a bad thing?[/QUOTE]


All I am saying is the following that the EPA agency is now dictating where the car industry is going rather than the consumer. I know no one is a saint including car makers but now the EPA is mandating standards that will change cars radically by going double the gas mileage, that is a huge leap of technology, can it be done ? Positively yes but only god knows the pricing for such a lightweight and diminutive car. The market should decide which companies will survive and which won't. I will bet that some other President will hopefully soon after Nov will deal with reigning back the EPA and modify the targets. There is plenty of oil and gas out there that could be used in the cars if only we apply ourselves to extract it instead of being at the mercy of OPEC and seeing our wallets fleeced by speculators, hedge funds and the like. I don't see how this is an upsetting issue since it goes down the consumer deciding rather than some bureaucrat deciding what is good for you.

[RobbieKnobbie]

The same thing happens every few years; the Gov sets new, unobtainable mileage standards, then the auto industry weighs in, the standards are eased, and life goes on.

Why is the 'same old dance' suddenly such cause for overreaction?

[san rensho]

Originally Posted by Pilot2519j

? I understand that manufacturers have to work harder and build a better, more innovative product to meet the standards, but is that necessarily a bad thing?

All I am saying is the following that the EPA agency is now dictating where the car industry is going rather than the consumer. I know no one is a saint including car makers but now the EPA is mandating standards that will change cars radically by going double the gas mileage, that is a huge leap of technology, can it be done ? Positively yes but only god knows the pricing for such a lightweight and diminutive car. The market should decide which companies will survive and which won't. I will bet that some other President will hopefully soon after Nov will deal with reigning back the EPA and modify the targets. There is plenty of oil and gas out there that could be used in the cars if only we apply ourselves to extract it instead of being at the mercy of OPEC and seeing our wallets fleeced by speculators, hedge funds and the like. I don't see how this is an upsetting issue since it goes down the consumer deciding rather than some bureaucrat deciding what is good for you.[/QUOTE]






Consumers do not dictate what type of cars the auto companies will manufacture. Automobile manufacturers would never leave something as important as consumer choice to the consumer. The auto manufacturers dictate what consumers want by paying billions of dollars a year on advertising.

Why do you think starting in the 80s that all of a sudden trucks and SUVs became popular? Was it because consumers wanted them? No. That was the time that the EPA started putting the screws on auto manufacturers to raise gas mileage. But guess what, trucks and SUVs are not cars so the auto manufacturers had a free pass on the auto EPA restrictions, which meant that they could realize more profits on trucks and SUVs. Exploiting that loophole, auto manufacturers spent billions of dollars on advertising, showing macho guys in jeeps and SUVs, with hot chicks on their arms and the consumers fell in lockstep and bought trucks.

So don't think that the EPA causes consumers to give up their right to choose. That right has always been taken away from them by the auto companies.

[Pilot2519j]

Consumers do not dictate what type of cars the auto companies will manufacture. Automobile manufacturers would never leave something as important as consumer choice to the consumer. The auto manufacturers dictate what consumers want by paying billions of dollars a year on advertising.


So don't think that the EPA causes consumers to give up their right to choose. That right has always been taken away from them by the auto companies.[/QUOTE]

In a free market consumers dictate with their purchases the market , it is up to manufacturers to get it right. If not they go out of business. If I don't like what I see I won't buy it. That's not such a difficult concept is it. The EPA forces the manufacturer to comply with their mandates by redesigning the cars to be more fuel efficient , lighter with smaller engines whether you like it or not not the other way around.