: Disaster! Mercedes-Benz hit with second-largest fuel efficiency fine ever by NHTSA



Lord Cadillac
01-08-09, 05:05 PM
Mercedes-Benz has been fined $28.9 million for failure to meet federal fuel efficiency standards by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this week. The amount is the second-largest in the history of agency.

Read more (http://www.motorauthority.com/mercedes-benz-hit-with-second-largest-fuel-efficiency-fine-ever-by-nhtsa.html)

This comes to about $120 per car. :eek: What a F'in tragedy... I can totally understand, now, why the Ultra Northstar was canceled and BIG cars have no place in society anymore. (CAFE)

hueterm
01-08-09, 06:55 PM
If I were M-B, I'd have someone hand deliver that check in person, driving up in a Maybach 62, with an extended fist/middle finger combo and the check taped to the tip of that finger.

$120 per car is nothing -- who cares. If I were in the market for a new high end M-B, I'd pay 100 times that to get the car I wanted and to tell anyone who supported (Environmentalist NutJobs) or voted for these idiotic standards (Republican or Democrat) alike to go F themselves.

The Tony Show
01-08-09, 06:56 PM
How is this a disaster again? Surely GM must be about to receive a fine 10 times larger than this, since everyone knows that GM makes huge, gas guzzling, inefficient dinosaur cars compared to the efficient, gas sipping teutonic masterpieces from Germany.

Right? Right?

Hello?

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-08-09, 08:17 PM
How is this a disaster again? Surely GM must be about to receive a fine 10 times larger than this, since everyone knows that GM makes huge, gas guzzling, inefficient dinosaur cars compared to the efficient, gas sipping teutonic masterpieces from Germany.

Right? Right?

Hello?



This is exactly what you wanted. And you're spinning it like it's another "Anti GM" thread. I don't see why.

It's no secret that Mercedes Benzes' cars are not leaders in fuel efficency. They never have and probably won't ever be. My six cylinder S320 gets worse fuel economy on the highway than any FWD Northstar powered Cadillac, or a LT1 Brougham, even though they're longer, less aerodynamically efficient and have an additional two cylinders. Is that pretty sad? You bet. Do I care? Kinda, but I know what I'll be buying if I want a "fuel efficient" car. :D

Hell, back in the '80s, any of the V8 powered S Classes were lucky to break 18mpg on the highway....and they had relatively small (3.8, 4.2, 5.0 and 5.6L) SOHC modern V8s with four speed transmissions and super high rear ends (2.47:1), but they got mileage comparable to a '77-'79 deVille or Fleetwood with the "BIG" "INEFFICENT" 7.0L OHV V8, equipped with a great depression era medium of fuel delivery...the CARBURETOR, and the transmission only had three gears to get forward on. So even back then, Mercedes was never a fuel efficent car, in the mainstream. And even now, with their small, high technology V8s and seven <<<((7))>>> speed transmissions, they still have a hard time breaking 26mpg....when Cadillac has been doing that since the early '90s.

Now even GM's current trucks get great mileage...they're rated up to 21mpg, if you get the right configuration, and that's with the V8. Hell, I suppose if you really grannied it, you could get 22mpg out of it. Ford claims 21mpg also for their '09 F150. Toyota's (the king of fuel efficiency :bigroll: ) Tundra is only rated at 18mpg, tops.

So yeah, Cadillac fuel efficiency >>>> Mercedes fuel efficiency.







Unless we take diesels into consideration, then it all kinda goes out the window. :hide:

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
01-08-09, 09:21 PM
Unless we take diesels into consideration, then it all kinda goes out the window. :hide:

Aye, but it take 1.5-2 times more crude oil to produce a gallon of diesel than it does to produce a gallon of gas, so in the long run you aren't really doing any better.

Eric Kahn
01-08-09, 10:19 PM
Aye, but it take 1.5-2 times more crude oil to produce a gallon of diesel than it does to produce a gallon of gas, so in the long run you aren't really doing any better.

you can get MORE diesel out of a barrel of oil than you can get gas, it is less refined than gas

93DevilleUSMC
01-08-09, 10:52 PM
This is exactly what you wanted. And you're spinning it like it's another "Anti GM" thread. I don't see why.




If you don't sing GM's praises on here, some people get cranky.

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
01-08-09, 11:14 PM
you can get MORE diesel out of a barrel of oil than you can get gas, it is less refined than gas

But that's not what it comes out to be. Just because it is less refined does not mean you get more of it per barrel.



A: 42 gallons per barrel makes about 19 gallons of gasoline, 9 gallons of fuel oil, 4 gallons of jet fuel, and 11 gallons of other products, including lubricants, kerosene, asphalt, and petrochemical feedstocks to make plastics. That adds up to more than 42 gallons because of something called "refinery gain" - the processing and chemical changes increase the volume.


2. From American Petroleum Institute (API) statistics an average barrel (42 gallons) will produce 46% gasoline, 22% diesel, 10% jet fuel, 5.5% heavy fuel oil, and the remaining 16.5% would be everything else including lubricants, asphalt, petrochemical feedstocks, etc.


One barrel of crude oil, when refined, produces about 20 gallons of finished motor gasoline, and 7 gallons of diesel, as well as other petroleum products.

Aron9000
01-09-09, 02:20 AM
Mercedes could charge another $300 a car to cover that cost and nobody would notice or care.

Brizzal
01-09-09, 02:40 AM
usually if your buying a new mercedes, your not worried about gas anyways...lol
plus i dont think $120 is going to stop them from selling their cars

CIWS
01-09-09, 09:08 AM
Mercedes could charge another $300 a car to cover that cost and nobody would notice or care.



120.00 per car fine +
100.00 to ad printed text of fine to window sticker +
80.00 F.U. American CAFE standard =

300.00 :D

The Tony Show
01-09-09, 10:20 AM
This is exactly what you wanted. And you're spinning it like it's another "Anti GM" thread. I don't see why.

I was taking a stab at Congress, not the thread- my comment was almost verbatim what one of the Congressmen said to the Big 3 at the loan hearings.

Easy, tiger. It was a joke.

Submariner409
01-09-09, 11:08 AM
Less than peanuts for MB..........take a look at the window sticker fuel tax on a Ferrari or Lamborghini - any of the limited production sports or luxury cars.

Sandy
01-09-09, 11:20 AM
You guys are funny. You'll "fight" over any/everything....

FACTS:

M-B has never been viewed as an economy leader
NO M-B is a "big" car!
Big Car ?
Check out a 1974-76 Fleetwood Brougham; a 1974-1978 Imperial or a 1975-1979 Lincoln Continential. THEY are big (actually the biggest) cars EVER!

My 1975 Imperial Lebaron with 440 Cu In V-8 got the same mileage as my current Town Car that has only 60% of the horsepower of the Imp.

It's not so terrible with the M-B but the competition will run with it. It will not hurt sales at all 'cause the M-B buyer will buy ANYTHING with that name on i(See "Smart Car")

Brett
01-09-09, 11:50 AM
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center-article_193/

Lord Cadillac
01-09-09, 12:12 PM
Sarcasm undetected?


How is this a disaster again?

Lord Cadillac
01-09-09, 12:16 PM
The point of me posting this discussion was to prove how ridiculous the CAFE fees are and that they really shouldn't affect ANYTHING anyway. Who wouldn't pay the extra hundred or two hundred bucks to get their 6.6 liter Super Guzzling 800hp Northstar? Let everyone worry about higher CAFE fees in 2050, long after I don't care anymore.

The Tony Show
01-09-09, 01:17 PM
CAFE is a crock of crap foisted on the Automakers by a bunch of politicians trying to get votes by appearing "green".

Lord Cadillac
01-09-09, 03:24 PM
CAFE is a crock of crap foisted on the Automakers by a bunch of politicians trying to get votes by appearing "green".
I know! :o

orconn
01-09-09, 06:30 PM
While it'sot perfect by anymeans, without CAFE we'd still be getting 6 to 12 mpg on our cars or as an alternative we'd be driving low performing pieces of crap brought to American roads in the eighties by the high cost of OPEC oil. CAFE force the automakers to improve the efficiency of their engines and for awhile lighten up their cars. But the American people spoke loud and clear "gimme big and heavy" cause loans are cheap and so, relatively, is gas. Hell I may be only middle class and who cares if my salary's buying power is shrinking, I can borrow at low rates and continue to live like I was really making bucks! My oh my, how times change!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-09-09, 06:48 PM
I guess CAFE is kinda good in a way. Take my Astro for example. It gets 12 miles to the gallon. Even with "free" gas, it still sucks watching that fuel gauge drop oh so fast. Without CAFE, everything would get 12mpg and we'd have to go to the gas station practically twice a week.

93DevilleUSMC
01-10-09, 12:57 AM
So if the M-B buyers aren't looking for fuel efficency, then why release the Smart car?

Aron9000
01-10-09, 01:48 AM
So if the M-B buyers aren't looking for fuel efficency, then why release the Smart car?

I believe Mercedes bought out the Smart company while the car was in developmental stages.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-10-09, 02:28 AM
So if the M-B buyers aren't looking for fuel efficency, then why release the Smart car?


Market coverage. Mercedes saw an open niche and went to fill it.

93DevilleUSMC
01-10-09, 04:14 AM
Market coverage. Mercedes saw an open niche and went to fill it.

The same niche that Toyota saw with the Prius?

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-10-09, 09:00 AM
The same niche that Toyota saw with the Prius?

Not necessarily, but kinda. The Prius is the poster car for the super environmentalist driver. The Smart (and Mini Cooper) are cars for people who want a cute, kitschy city car that will get great gas mileage but still have a normal drivetrain.

Rodya234
01-10-09, 09:25 AM
sure CAFE sucks, but anyone buying a 80,000 car isn't going to care about an extra 300 bucks when Illinois sales tax alone on a 80k car would be $8,000. Unless the fines get significantly higher per car, they will just pay them and go on like nothing happened.

CAFE == success
For now at least.

The Tony Show
01-10-09, 02:23 PM
The same niche that Toyota saw with the Prius?

The Prius was released for two reasons:

1- To offset the hit their CAFE took when they released the Tundra.

2- To distract the public from the fact that they released a truck that is a bigger gas guzzler than the American pickups.

"Look- we're Toyota and we're greeeeeeeen!!! Pay no attention to the Tundra behind the curtain- check out this Prius!"

93DevilleUSMC
01-10-09, 02:49 PM
Not necessarily, but kinda. The Prius is the poster car for the super environmentalist driver. The Smart (and Mini Cooper) are cars for people who want a cute, kitschy city car that will get great gas mileage but still have a normal drivetrain.

In other words, for those who don't want to pay half of the car's val;ue when the hybrid battery fails.

93DevilleUSMC
01-10-09, 02:53 PM
The Prius was released for two reasons:

1- To offset the hit their CAFE took when they released the Tundra.

2- To distract the public from the fact that they released a truck that is a bigger gas guzzler than the American pickups.

"Look- we're Toyota and we're greeeeeeeen!!! Pay no attention to the Tundra behind the curtain- check out this Prius!"

I thought CAFE regs only applied to U.S. automakers? Assuming that it does apply, shouldn't the Corolla, Echo, and other models have offset the Tundra's CAFE impact?

LS1Mike
01-10-09, 03:20 PM
The Echo didn't sell enough. The Corolla wasn't enough by itself to offset the Tundra, 4 Runner, Sequoia, FJ Cruiser, Land Cruiser and even the Sienna which gets worse gas mileage than my AWD Equinox. The Sienna gets the best HWY Mpg at a whopping 23 MPG in the Mini Van and the 4 runner is next at 21 MPG.(from Toyotas web site) The rest are all worse then a 4WD 1/2 Extra Cab Long bed Silverado.

LS1Mike
01-10-09, 03:45 PM
Oh yeah,
First enacted by Congress in 1975, the purpose of CAFE is to reduce energy consumption by increasing the fuel economy of cars and light trucks. Regulating CAFE is the responsibility of NHTSA and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). NHTSA sets fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks sold in the U.S.; EPA calculates the average fuel economy for each manufacturer.
From the NHTSA site.
Toyota was recently snubbed for aligning itself with GM, Ford and Mopar with their stand on CAFE standards.

These are the only "passenger cars" excempt.
Light trucks that exceed 8,500 lbs gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) do not have to comply with CAFE standards. These vehicles include pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles and large vans.

That is a big Van!

93DevilleUSMC
01-10-09, 03:54 PM
So, in so many words, Toyota's fuel-efficiency sales pitches are BS, as is the social group-think that keeps that stupid myth alive?

LS1Mike
01-10-09, 04:29 PM
I suppose. There are no manufactures that average over 30 mpg.
These are the 2008 averages for the top 10 fuel efficent manufactures as reported by CNN.

1. MINI -- 27.66 average mpg
2. Honda -- 23.81 average mpg
3. Chevrolet -- 23.36 average mpg
4. Lotus -- 22.33 average mpg
5. VW -- 22.21 average mpg
6. Pontiac -- 22.20 average mpg
7. Saturn -- 22.14 average mpg
8. Kia -- 21.80 average mpg
9. Suzuki -- 21.77 average mpg
10. Toyota -- 21.60 average mpg

Except for Mini, everyone is pretty close, so I guess it really dosen't matter. Good marketing is a wonderful thing.

93DevilleUSMC
01-10-09, 09:01 PM
I suppose. There are no manufactures that average over 30 mpg.
These are the 2008 averages for the top 10 fuel efficent manufactures as reported by CNN.

1. MINI -- 27.66 average mpg
2. Honda -- 23.81 average mpg
3. Chevrolet -- 23.36 average mpg
4. Lotus -- 22.33 average mpg
5. VW -- 22.21 average mpg
6. Pontiac -- 22.20 average mpg
7. Saturn -- 22.14 average mpg
8. Kia -- 21.80 average mpg
9. Suzuki -- 21.77 average mpg
10. Toyota -- 21.60 average mpg

Except for Mini, everyone is pretty close, so I guess it really dosen't matter. Good marketing is a wonderful thing.

It's Chevy for me, then. I need fuel economy, but can't fit it a Mini very well and want something American.

orconn
01-10-09, 09:23 PM
It's Chevy for me, then. I need fuel economy, but can't fit it a Mini very well and want something American.

Save yourself some money and buy the best Buick Regal with the 3.8 litre engine you can find. Get over 22 in stop and go and 34 mpg with freeway driving. And it will accommodate a big guy! Great economy transport on a dime.

93DevilleUSMC
01-11-09, 12:22 AM
Save yourself some money and buy the best Buick Regal with the 3.8 litre engine you can find. Get over 22 in stop and go and 34 mpg with freeway driving. And it will accommodate a big guy! Great economy transport on a dime.

Hmm. Not a bad idea. IMHO, the Regal's styling is a little bland. Speaking of Buick,how's the Riviera on room?

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-11-09, 01:24 AM
Hmm. Not a bad idea. IMHO, the Regal's styling is a little bland. Speaking of Buick,how's the Riviera on room?


I agree, the Grand Prix is the better looking car.

The Riviera isn't as roomy as the Regal or Grand Prix. The biggest difference is headroom...in the Riv, the roof is much lower so it really cuts into the headroom.

Are you looking at a new car?

93DevilleUSMC
01-11-09, 01:27 AM
I'm not looking yet, but I'm kicking the idea around.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-11-09, 01:37 AM
Replacing the SDV or adding to the fleet?

For a economical, yet fun to drive american made car, I'd definitely go for the Grand Prix GTP or Riviera.

93DevilleUSMC
01-11-09, 01:41 AM
Replacing the SDV or adding to the fleet?

For a economical, yet fun to drive american made car, I'd definitely go for the Grand Prix GTP or Riviera.

Not sure yet. The SDV is going up in miles, so I need to be prepared to replace it if anything happens. As of now, I plan to keep it until I'm 25 because of the low insurance.

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
01-11-09, 01:42 AM
Check out one of the '00-'05 Impalas. I know someone who has one and it is a dream to drive. Rides amazingly well (close to my '95 DeVille) and it gets great mileage. It is also nice and spacious. I fit well in the back seat and I am 6'4". The other thing to consider, that most people don't think about, is the roof line. For me, the roof line on the Grand Prix is too low and I have to lean forward to see a stoplight. Very annoying.

93DevilleUSMC
01-11-09, 01:42 AM
Oh, and if I went with a Riviera, I'd want it in Dark Cherry.:cool:

LS1Mike
01-11-09, 02:38 AM
The Regal, Grand Prix and Impala all share the same chasis. The 3800 and 4T65E is the one to get if you look at any of them.
I had an 01 GTP with 1 size smaller pulley, upgraded rocker arms, exhaust and headers. It would touch 13.50's and run good all day long!

93DevilleUSMC
01-11-09, 04:58 AM
The Regal, Grand Prix and Impala all share the same chasis. The 3800 and 4T65E is the one to get if you look at any of them.
I had an 01 GTP with 1 size smaller pulley, upgraded rocker arms, exhaust and headers. It would touch 13.50's and run good all day long!

I'll keep them in mind!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-11-09, 11:41 AM
If I had the money and space for a car to pull winter duty so I could keep the S off the roads and rust free, a 97-03 GTP would top the list of possible candidates. It's great in the snow, reliable, economical, cheap to buy, comfortable (optional heated driver's seat with the leather interior and if you get a 97-00, it would have automatic climate control), and hell, in the summer time, you could take it out and have some fun with it.

I couldn't imagine a better combination. A car that's great in snow, cheap to pick up and modify, while still being very reliable and "nice", yet not overly nice and have the ability to smoke your "nice" car in a drag race. :thumbsup:

93DevilleUSMC
01-12-09, 04:54 AM
Pontiac and Buick are definitely good choices. I might look for a small pick-up truck to have around when I need to haul something or drive in back-country areas. For right now, though, a back-up vehicle isn't in the budget.