Bye bye Obama 1.3L turbo hybrid electric cuckboxes. 6.0L pushrod V8 power is bad, bitches.
>>28747297>6.0L pushrod V8 power is bad, bitches*back, bitches I mean
extremely fucking basedi voted for this and also to get rid of undesirables
Cool, I'm waiting to read the details, but how will it make cars more affordable? Maybe years in the future because companies will spend less in R&D, maybe?
>>28747304they're also bad. bad ass. fuck yeah.
>>28747308>how will it make cars more affordable?
>>28747297Im so pissed off at the redditoids complaining about this.Having a port injected engine that makes 1 mile per gallon less than a direct injection engine while simultaneously:-lasting three times as long-costing $2,000 cheaper to make and infinitely less to maintainIs the most no brainer decision ever.You cant complain about expensive shitty new cars and not support this.Buy a fucking prius, no one is stopping you. Its not gonna stop China/India from literally burning all that garbage you think just magically disappears from your kitchen can each week.
>>28747308Not sure, but it'll probably shift subsidies and government-imposed "incentives" (fines) so that heavy-duty trucks, SUVs, EVs, and PHEVs aren't the only profitable types of automobiles anymore
>>28747308See this:>>28747316Parts costs alone would save thousands in manufacturing instantly and thousands more in costs to service under warranty.You would see that shit instantly
>>28747308Oh and the amount of money spent on R&D in efforts to capitulate to the now ridiculously strict emissions standards can now be spent on producing the cars themselves more efficiently
Those Obama cuckwagons will not be remembered by history any more fondly than the cars of the first malaise era which also got that way due to Democrat regulatory policies.
>>28747315Seriously. It's not like new cars will magically have different engines in them. It costs money to R&D and re-tool to produce new engines, even less-efficient ones. The only savings I can see for the consumer are minor and after many years. I'm happy about this, it opens the door for more fun cars potentially, but it doesn't scream "cars will magically be cheaper" to me.
>>28747308Most automotive manufacturers have been forced to switch to advanced engine technologies like direct injection in order to more precisely control combustion which allows them to meet tough efficiency regulation. This engine technologies are inherently unreliable and expensive to build compared to other technologies. Like just off the top of my head, direct injection engines have no way to clean carbon fouling off of the intake valves that builds up because of the positive crank case recirculation system. The shit builds up quick and when chunks of it start falling in engines, you suddenly have massive problems with having to replace entire engines. Your best case scenario is putting it in a luxury car where someone might not care about spending $800 to clean it every 50,000 miles.Another example would be the fuel system. Direct injection engines have to have two separate fuel pumps for low pressure and high pressure. They also have to have a set of very expensive fuel injectors that sit in the combustion cylinder itself, which is not an ideal place for any car part to be for obvious reasons. Port injection you just have one fuel pump and you don't need expensive fuel injectors. The only thing in the cylinder is the spark plug and I guess the valves of course.
>>28747328It took a few years in the 80s to recover from the 70s too. We'll get there eventually.
>>28747305Sorry, 100M more H1Bs have just been granted.
>>28747308in addition to what the other posters said, something that should have an immediate impact is the money car companies will save from the fines they will no longer have to be paying. they have been recouping them by adding them on to the price of their cars but they won't have to do that any more. for example, a V8 camaro doesn't meet the mpg/emissions standards. especially not a ZL1. most of chevy's V8 trucks probably don't meet them either. corvettes, same story. they try to offset this by selling millions of 3 cylinder shitboxes to normies to bring their fleet average down but they sell so many trucks and vettes they'll never get under the line. so they pay a fine every year. that fine gets spread out and tacked on to every vehicle they sell. probably moreso on the vehicles responsible for not meeting the standards to disincentivize their purchase in favor of the 3 liter shitboxes. pretty much every manufacturer does this and it's a big reason why the 'cool' cars everyone wants cost double what you think they should. probably half that money was going to the government as an effective 'gas guzzler tax'. all of that should be gone now.
>>28747331I hope so. Wet belts and CVTs need to go. We'll see I guess, I'm just skeptical of good news. Yuros still have their standards so any international models would have to abide by their standards or have special versions made for the US.
>>28747341it was like that in the 70s. US versions of European cars were a lot shittier than the Euro ones which didn't have 5 mph bumpers or smog hardware. they couldn't even use composite headlights until 86.
>>28747327my great aunt had a Fairmont but not for very long. they were ass.
>>28747297I am offering FREE cat recycling for all AmericansRemove those liberal chokersBetter gas mileage and powerRaise hellPraise Dale
>>28747353Fun fact is that Chrysler's Lean Burn system eliminated the need for cats and was ahead of its time but boomer mechanics hated it just because they didn't understand it.
>>28747297We're so fucking back bros
But won't cars still have to conform to European emissions regulations? So German and Japanese cars sold in the US won't be any less complex and overstressed as they are now.
>>28747297Chrysler at least mostly didn't cuck themselves, they never tried more than the minimum to meet fuel economy standards and their emissions hardware is also just barely enough to pass EPA regs and they design it so it's easily removable.
>>28747393>>28747353That's not how it works. It means they would get the shitty versions and we get the good ones.
>>28747329The correct way to implement DI is the toyoda approach of having both port injection as well. This unfortunately adds unnecessary complexity to the fuel system but at least it keeps your valves clean.
CAFE existed in the first place because of the discredited 70s peak oil meme.
>>28747297miggers think this is going to actually improve cars. you're still going to be driving cuckboxes and you will be paying even more money for them.
>>28747404We're already past peak oil as far as conventional reserves go. It only gets more expensive from here as we try to squeeze blood from a stone.There's a reason gas isn't under $1/gal anymore.
>>28747397Probably only marginally so, like we see with the OPF on performance cars in Europe but not in the US. It's not like Mercedes will cook up a US-exclusive V8 C63 or anything.
>>28747409LOL yeah it's called inflation, moron.
>>28747308>how will it make cars more affordable?it will makes simplier to produce, giving manufacturers higher profit marginswait, you thought they'll make cars more affordable for YOU? lol @ lmao
>>28747329>direct injection engines have no way to clean carbon fouling off offYeah the do. It's called having a port injector. Just one that runs once in a while to clean those intake valves off.Or meth injection.
>>28747398True, Ive seen this design but the additional complexity is silly. Is the PCV recirculation mandatory, like in the terms of its design? It would be nice to just capture particulate in a disposable filter medium or find another way to deal with it.I think the whole thing is nuts. I think efficiency should be approached FIRST from a position of reliability. I dont give a shit if you save 1mpg, if the engine has to be replaced on a sizable chunk of cars before 100k miles, youre not being productive. There is no way 1mpg is more environmentally friendly than replacing an entire engine or in many cases sending the car to a scrap yard and buying a new one.
>>28747404that was back when they believed oil was a bunch of dead ancient animals who died underneath Saudi Arabia instead of being a sluice of pulped up organic matter that is continuously being regenerated as things decay; it regenerates about as fast as a typical tree takes to grow.
>>28747398I’m surprised they don’t just add one injector in the throttle body and at a set interval or WOT turn it on while adjusting the DI quantity. Use it as fuel cleaning for the valves occasionally. Same with factory supercharged engines… port injection at low loads and engage pre blower nozzles at high loads for blower/charge cooling.
>>28747414>everything became half price between 2012 and 2014Dude, use an ounce of criticality when looking at something.
>>28747297new turbo rotary when>>28747316>>287473297GDI is a stupid example because it makes more power. actually it tends to generate more soot emissions than port injection. it wasn't done recently because of regs, it was done recently because the tech finally caught up but having more precise control over combustion is better overall for power, reliability, emissions, and fuel consumption. sorry you can't afford one extra maintenance every 70k miles.
>>28747441lol what are you talking about you fucking retard look at the red line, gas is cheaper than it was in the 70s when adjusted for inflation. holy shit you're fucking stupid.
An interesting story is that there was a Congressional hearing in 1875, a hundred years before CAFE and a decade before Daimler's first horseless carriage, in which the possibility of self-propelled carriages was discussed and it was said that Congress might in time need to regulate "such noisy, smoking, and dangerous beasts for the public good."
>>28747452THE TIME IS NOW MAZDAYOU AREN'T GOING TO GET ANOTHER CHANCE
>>28747339>should have an immediate impact is the money car companies will save from the fines they will no longer have to be paying. they have been recouping them by adding them on to the price of their cars but they won't have to do that any more.the problem here is this is entirely dependent on the company not being greedy as fuck
>>28747391kinda hard to imagine that was all the way back in 1976. it did pretty much everything we take for granted now. its reputation wasn't helped by it being placed on the air cleaner where it sees constant heat and vibration.
EVs are the future. Not this lung cancer/COPD enabler. The old host of Top Gear recently died of lung cancer and nobody connects the dots. Car emissions need to go. We have two billion chinks/pajeets on the verge of becoming car consumers and when that happens, we will all probably choke.
>>28747484>get rid of real man’s cars>instead of getting rid of billions of jeets&chinks
>>28747466if anything GM over the years have been guilty of not being greedy enough. when CAFE started they really badly didn't want CAFE taxes that were passed on to their less well-heeled customers and did dumb stuff like shitty downsized Cadillacs. Mercedes and Jaguar just bit the bullet and paid the taxes since they figured their customers were rich and could afford it.
dear USA, pls annex ust. australia
>>28747484only genetically inferior trash die out from ICE emissions
>>28747493you'd have to drive on the correct side of the road
>>28747484>EVs are the future.>Car emissions need to go.Create a free energy / perpetual motion machine first. Look at picrel, look at it.>Muh Indians and ChineseBoth countries primarily use burning coal to make electricity.
>>28747484Gonna have to pass on your overpriced golf cart that looks retarded
>>28747492That was part of their decline in the 80s-90s, really. They leaned too hard into working class Midwestern car buyers and forgot about the noveau rich like they used to do in the 50s while German car brands ate up that audience.
>>28747321>You would see that shit instantlySure, if Tariff Taxes weren't in place.>oh but ackshully..Actually nothing.Tariff Taxes are about to be RAISED in order to replace Income Tax.You actually thought that we were gonna benefit here..Sorry, Charlie
>>28747377>they were ass.Literally made a K-car seem like a Cadillac.
>>28747519in the 50s GM did have a glamorous image, moreso than Ford and Chrysler and they basically threw it away after the 70s.
>>28747460You're my kind of anon.A Gnostic in essence.Reminder too that the (literal) Horseshit problem granted the horseless carriages a bunch of latitude, thankfully.
>>28747499deal, now gib v8
>>28747538at that time the idea of self-propelled carriages was being discussed in engineering journals. the pieces that led to the automobile revolution slow came together over the XIX century.
Or I should say more accurately they believed that gasoline combustion was a potentially powerful and dangerous form of energy generation that Congress might eventually have to regulate.
>>28747547>was being discussed in engineering journalsDoes your jaw drop when you open an early 1900's Scientific American? Mine does.That Industrial Ecosystem and average level of competency has been eradicated (yes, by design).Side topic:Know anything about the ultra-efficicent "Hit and Miss" engines of the early 1900's?Fairbanks Morse was a Titan (even in Railroad prime movers) and nobody even knows about them today :(
>>28747547The idea of launching satellites was also discussed well before the actual tech to do it existed, as late as 1952 the tech just wasn't up to it, there was very rapid progress over the next couple years.
>>28747547Sorry, forgot link.https://www.old-engine.com/engines.shtml
>>28747525Dude if income tax disappeared I wouldnt give a fuck, I paid like 60k in income tax last year fuck this gay earth
>>28747611Texas recently amended into their state constitution a provision banning income or sales taxes.
>>28747499>>28747540sweden did it in the late 60s (dagen-H) although it was made easier by the fact that they were using standard sealed beams.deal because i want moar aftermarket support
>>28747484skillful b8, kudos
>>28747428Some oil is also abiotic and generated by geological processes.
FUCKING FINALLY
>>28747297basically nothing will happen in the amount of time before the next fag comes in and reverts everything back.
>>28747670It was a good 30 years between Carter and Obama so I wouldn't worry too much.
>>28747308It does, but to a minor extent. The real problem has to be flat out legislation to kill retarded regulation, because all this will do will maybe save 1-5k from a 60k car
>>28747321>You would see that shit instantlySavings wouldn't be passed onto the consumer, that's just more profit for shareholders. Don't delude yourself
>>28747297Biden and Obama were fucking over motorcycles as well
>>28747547>>28747460>An interesting story is that there was a Congressional hearing in 1875...Blah blah. I more interesting story is that the first horseless carriage was made in 1770. Daimler was not even the first commercial operation, they just made some patent. BEVs outsold ICE by a factor of 2 in the late 1800s. Most electricity is made by burning fossil fuels, ICE cars have catalytic converters, population is a bigger factor, yadda yadda yadda.
>>28747297MASSIVE PROFITS FOR THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY.win-win
>>28747772lol back to >>>/n/, tranny
>>28747459Wages haven't kept up with inflation even a little bit, so the average person has less to spend on gas.
>>28747484The guy smoked until his 60s
>>28747336Yeah, for me exclusively
>>28747297Holy fucking based. Pushrods pushGODS
>>28747297Does this mean Subaru will bring back the Sti?
>>28747308affordability is a left wing hoax
king nigger bros....
>>28747308Affordability is a democrat myth. Cars are already cheaper and it hasn't even been a year.
>>28747868>affordability is a left wing hoax>>28747884>Affordability is a democrat myth.OP's pic is from Fox News saying this will make cars more affordable...>Cars are already cheaperNo they are not.
Where does it say the entire CAFE standard is abolished? From what I see he's just going back to pre-biden, which is still a shitshow.
>>28747859fellow pushGOD king
>>28747926>From what I see he's just going back to pre-bidenYep, that's all that's happening. "Footprint" calculations that give breaks to larger vehicles are still in place.What a joke.
>>28747938fines were already reduced to zero back with the big beautiful bill in july so this doesn't change much but it's another step in the right direction. a total removal of cafe would require an act of congress, but this is the next best thing.
>>28747309Bad to the bone
>>28747316>Its not gonna stop China/India from literally burning all that garbage you think just magically disappears from your kitchen can each week.I think it mostly gets thrown into rivers. Actually burning it would take organised effort.
This news saddens me. Was looking forward to: >purchasing a $40k+ EV>it burning down my garage/house>dealing with insurance company(s)
>>28747341>Yuros still have their standards so any international models would have to abide by their standards or have special versions made for the US.You say that like it is a bad thing. Just drive better cars in America. Euroslavia is descending into hell and probably the only thing that can be done is America to set a good example. There is hope then.
>>28747393Just don't buy them. Anyway the Euro manufactuers will soon bring out America/Middle East models that they just don't sell in the former Europe. I want a carborettor 2-stoke BMW with wind ul windows.
>>28747409Not true. Oil is limitless. They find more all the time. Gas costs more due to inflation.
>>28747960You can still buy a used EV and do exactly the same thing. In fact, they'll probably be even cheaper with how flooded they'll be in the used market
>>28747967True, there are already cars like the Z, some Porsches, and most American trucks that just aren't being sold in the Euro market due to stifling regulations.
>>28747984based enjoyer of the abiogenic petroleum origin fact
Libtards in shamblesAll they bring to the table are Somalians and taxes
Also gas was under $2 a gallon for the first time in like 15 years in my state at least.I had a spit take at the pump when I saw it.
>>28747308It won't. Prices in the current market have almost nothing to do with assembly costs and everything to do with what the market has shown it is willing to bear.Any production efficiency savings will be pocketed by shareholders. Believing literally anything else is a cope because there is zero incentive for the industry to reduce prices when everyone is willing to throw themselves into a debt hole to buy cars at even more extreme markups instead.This is an industry giveaway disguised as "helping consumers," same as it ever was.
>>28747414dumbass
>>28747950they didn't remove it under Reagan either, but CAFE standards were dropped a few pegs in 86. that was why stuff like the Firebird GTA came out in the late 80s.
>>28748005prices really have more to do with the particular target market you're going after than the actual manufacturing cost (that does matter although not as much as you'd think). if you're going for richfag snob appeal you'll charge more for the car. to use a non-car example Apple has always since the 80s charged stupid prices for their computer shit because they intentionally don't want poorfags owning them because it's not as prestigious.
>>28747297Did your orange god make you rich overnight as well?
>>28748014>>28748005yes and no. the industry goes after what it sees as the most lucrative market. it so happened to be that during the Obama years, the most profitable market was rich Democrat voting hipsters because the system was intentionally set up to redistribute wealth to them as a favor for electing him.
>>28748017You mean a crushing hellworld where all the cars become 1.2L turbocharged grey bars of soap like some sort of neo-Soviet shithole?Except Russian cars were actually tough and made to last and we have to go 40k in debt for some ugly garbage on wheels.Yes I don't mind at allGlad I voted for him three times.
>>28748023>You mean a crushing hellworld where all the cars become 1.2L turbocharged grey bars of soap like some sort of neo-Soviet shithole?but when it was made in the 80s and had a Japanese nameplate, that was kino, right?
>>28748023So no, got it.
>>28748023what it means is the government not the free market decides what you can drive, that's straight out of the 1970s Eastern Bloc
>>28748026I always thought those things were fucking gay like most JDM cars.Libtards were turning all the cars gay.It was a spiritual emergency.Large displacement engines are part of my culture.I just can't help myself when I have a horsepower emergency judge fudge.Guess my skin isn't brown enough for you to care tho.
>>28748014most cars are not veblen goods.
>>28748026Thing is the original CAFE standard was still in effect then. As I said, it was lowered a few mpg in the late 80s. I believe it was originally 22 mph and then they reduced it to 19.
>>28747466>the problem here is this is entirely dependent on the company not being greedy as fuckActually it's dependent on them not being stupid. Dumb fucks like you seem to think>higher cost = more incomeBut not when >higher cost = no saleWhich is where the current market is right now. Inventory sitting on lots and people just holding on to their old car rather than deal with the current price shock.
>>28748043leftists really don't understand economics. like he said, GM in the 80s did a lot of retarded stuff to not pay CAFE taxes because it would be unfair to pass the cost onto their Billy Bob customers in the Midwest. Mercedes just put up with it because their customers were rich.
>>28748043>and people just holding on to their old car rather than deal with the current price shockand, uh, the fact that nobody wants to drive a 1.3L turbo with a dash iPad that no one but a loathsome thing known as a hipster would want to drive
>>28748049What? That's not hipsters. Hipsters are guys with anime tattoos who masturbate to 80s Jap turbo shitboxes.
>>28748043>higher cost = more incomemaybe i am dumb but i mean if they keep the prices the same despite the costs being lower that's greed
>>28747712People buy Kias, so your theory is false
Does this mean small trucks are back?
>>28748032Holy insecurity, Batman.
>>28748135No. People clearly don't want them. A change in regulations won't change their price or size.
>>28748135those died during the Obama years, this is only rolling back Biden's regulations
>>28748135>>28748141>No. People clearly don't want them.The Maverick has been selling well. People are broke; but they still need trucks. There's definitely a market for cheap trucks.
>>28747414Fake and gay.Dude inflation has been going up steadily every single year. Your chart is absolute bullshit. Anyone who's been alive and has been buying gas over the past 20 years knows that gas hasn't just been steadily changing with inflation.Your chart also shows gas prices going down several times while somehow still staying almost unchanged relative to inflation. For that to happen there would have had to be a concurrent deflationary period and we haven't had one of those since the 1970s.
>>28748026If you put a dinky engine in a super dinky car, yeah it works. The problem is that we have midsize SUVs using 1.3L 3 cylinder turbos.
>>28748135>>28748197CAFE in its entirety is gone. Including the insane Obama footprint-based system that made it illegal to build small trucks. Trump specifically mentioned small trucks and kei cars (lel) at the presserhttps://x.com/RSBNetwork/status/1996321348092567623 This is the greatest news ever. We are getting our autismo cars after all this time
>>28747795More ass or grass for me, then.
>>28748220If you don't want to besmirch the great Ron Paul's name, feel free to criticize the source:https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/gasoline-prices-adjusted-for-inflation/>U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: 12-Month Average Gasoline, all types, per gallon/3.785 liters in U.S. city average, average price, not seasonally adjusted. CPI Average Price Data.>12-Month Average Gasoline (all types) in U.S. city average, all urban consumers, not seasonally adjusted. CPI-All Urban Consumers.
>>28748282Yeah, the source failed third grade math. You can’t selectively take the gas out of the CPI basket, measure it against today, and call the difference in price “inflation”. You’re just measuring the price difference against itself so of course it stayed the fucking same. The only reason that graph isn’t a laser straight line is due to slight differences between how the average gas price for the year and the gas price for the CPI are measured.>I sell widgets for $1 each. You buy 10. The next day you come back and they’re $1000 each. You decide to “adjust for inflation;” note that 10 will cost you $10,000, which is 1000x more than yesterday. You then multiply your 1000x “inflation rate” by the $1 it was yesterday and convince yourself that the widget is the exact same price as yesterday once adjusted for inflation.It’s… always going to be the same if you define inflation solely in relation to the thing you’re trying to measure against inflation.
>>28748282I use the inflation calculator all the time; but whoever made this chart is a retard.Lets look at two data points shall we.1998 Average gas price $1.12 2022 adjusted for inflation $4.23 Yet if I enter in $1.12 cents into the inflation calculator for 1998 and adjust to 2025 prices I get $2.23 cents a gallon.Now lets look at 1990 Average gas price $1.22 and a supposed adjusted for inflation cost of $4.19 cents.So 10 cents a gallon more per gallon than gas cost 8 years later and yet somehow adjusted for inflation its supposed to be 4 cents a gallon cheaper in 2022 money.Yet, if I enter in $1.22 into the inflation calculator and adjust it into 1998 dollars I find that it equals $1.52 adjusted for inflation. Likewise if I adjust $1.22 in 1990 into 2025 dollars I discover that it equals $3.03 a gallon, 80 cents a gallon more expensive than the 1998 gas which the chart claims should cost 4 cents a gallon more.The math they're using is just bullshit.
>>28748301>>28748324fair enough, thanks for actually analyzing the source
>>28748326Yeah no prob dude. Just get in the habit of asking questions when you see something counterintuitive like that chart. Statistics can be played with to show all sorts of things, its one of the ways that we're controlled. God knows I've fallen for BS statistics plenty of times.
This is getting reversed again in three years and everyone knows it. All you're gonna get is minor tweaks on current platform vehicles which automaker marketing will try to play up to bait retards (and you'll fall for it) while they pocket all the emissions tax money they don't have to pay anymore and keeping or even raising the price because now it's a REAL PATRIOT FREEDOM VEHICLE ONLY POSSIBLE WITH RED BLOODED MERICAN LABOR (it's the exact same car it was a year ago but with a less restrictive cat and maybe 5 hp more)
>>28747770Pretty good motivator to put your fire right on the front to get people out of your way.https://youtu.be/KP_oQHYmdRs
>>28747297>Bye bye Obama 1.3L turbo hybrid electric cuckboxesObama pushed chrysler to make this monstrosity a 5.7 hemi hybrid
>>28747308>Cool, I'm waiting to read the details, but how will it make cars more affordable?Emissions and fuel economy standards won't do anything about that. You'd have to cap the maximum allowable loan term to force prices to go down, because people will sign up for whatever the maximum loan term allows for, similar to how mortgages have loan limits so you don't get generational debt or have people die before they pay all of the debt off.People really do not like hearing this, because it'll get framed as an affordability issue, but people do not choose affordable options; they usually max out.There's also the issue with rolling over negative equity into new loans, but I'm not sure about how to solve that issue because it involves the same retards rolling over debt until a bank won't approve a loan for them.
>>28748382But to add onto this, before the covid price spikes, most banks wouldn't approve loans over $50k for most drivers without substantial down payments, so prices were capped at $50k. This was the hard limit that automakers tended to leave their mid-trim vehicles at.Today, banks and auto lender financing will approve well above $100k with mortgage level timeframes, knowing it's guaranteed to send debtors into instant negative equity.
>>28748047I learned recently that their manual transmissions force you to shift directly into 4th gear from 1st so they could claim higher mpg on their v8s.Super gay feature, but they made it easy to disable at least.
>>28747611Pro-tip: If you’re single, “move” to texas or whatever, then digital nomad overseas in various countries. 0 taxes owed anywhere.
>>28747308Next you're gonna ask them to release the Epstein files. Cool it with the antisemitism.
>>28748343why would vance reverse this?
>>28747297Can things like auto stop/start be permanently shut down with a software update?
>>28747308>Cool, I'm waiting to read the details, but how will it make cars more affordable?Supply and Demand.Allowing cheaper to manufacture cars to be sold will create a supply of more affordable new vehicles that can be imported from abroad initially and that can be manufactured locally in the future.Increasing the supply of affordable vehicles relative to demand creates a market pressure that drives prices down across the board. Selling a used car? Well you might have to ask for less since someone could buy a cheap $20,000 car new. Selling a new car? Well now you have to convince buyers its worth the extra cost over the $20,000 econo box and that probably means you're going to have to lower your prices.
>>28747329>direct injection engines have no way to clean carbon fouling off of the intake valves that builds up because of the positive crank case recirculation system.remove the head every 200k miles and walnut blast the inside
>>28748004crazy how you forgot about the scamdemic so quickly
>>28747297It's amusing how /o/tards think manufacturers are going to suddenly change entire car designs now that regulations are loosened under Trump who will be gone within 2 years and back to Democrat control.
>>28748557Chrysler has already canceled the copiccane i6 to restart v8 production
>>28748557>back to Democrat control.Democrats are polling at like 20% approval. Tim Walz just got exposed for helping Somalis defraud Minnesota out of a billion dollars, they don't really have a platform to run on other than hating Trump. The idea that they're going to sweep back into power seems far fetched unless they change their trajectory and actually offer the American people something other than hating Trump.
>>28747428I used to be on that resource worry until my brother in law who works in that biz told me that drained oil wells just so happened to be found replenishing themselves years after the site had been abandoned. And not by insignificant amounts or number of wells. And that's just wells that have been tapped. There are a lot of Wells out there that they're aware of that they're just not allowed to drain because of like land restrictions or other stupid factors. Crude oil is just sitting there under the Earth's surface by the Trillions of gallons. And I'm just talking about the stuff that we know of and that we found
>>28747428I mean why would dead animals somehow only get pulped up 50 million years ago? It seems like it would happen continuously.
>>28748578>but we won three races on Nov 4 in absolutely safe blue districts where a half-eaten McMuffin would win if it had a D next to it
>>28748578>Quinnipiaclol... remember also how in 2020 all the polls showed Trump would win leading up to his loss and you retards all went ape shit saying polls don't matter and now suddenly they do since they are showing in your favor again lmao
>>28748223the difference between the malaise era and now is more like this.>back then smaller cars were sold in the interest of economy>as it turned out nobody liked them or wanted to drive an oversized Hot Wheel toy>the response to Obama cuck regulations was to just put small engines in a full sized SUVwhat i mean is the regulations were a part of it but some was also just market reasons because American consumers simply didn't like driving a golf cart
>>28748569I appreciate Chrysler for not going full bore into EV stupidity like Ford has and just meeting those bare minimums. Ford isn't competent making regular cars so it's baffling how eager they are to get into hybrid and total electric vehicles.
>>28748201The gas Maverick is one of the three good vehicles Ford makes. It's inexpensive relatively speaking to newer vehicles. it's pretty good mileage and out of all the vehicles that come into my service department it's the one I see the least for a stupid repairs or noises or something gone wrong compared to the F-150s or the Explorers or those fucking bronco sports
I don't think anyone on this board who would attempt a serious reply can explain to me how a pre Biden-era cafe rollback is going to make significant vehicle changes.Vehicles were already moving to small 4pot turbos in the early 2010s.This "rollback" is essentially keeping things as-is and allowing for less electrification.If Trump wanted something substantial to happen he would force the EPA to make CAFE standards that aren't completely retarded. You know, the whole footprint thing, light duty classifications, etc. And it would fuck up whats become entrenched in the US automaker's business model (65k for a 4 door v8 truck/suv family vehicle)
>>28748686>Vehicles were already moving to small 4pot turbos in the early 2010s.it's as if that happened after Obama was president
>>28748691Again what does that have to do with the 2020s CAFE stuff. You know the whole 45s+ mpg average for sedan thing mandated by whatever year in the future.
>>28748702Because Obama set some insane target of 55 mpg by 2020.
>>28748713Was that obama in 2015 or was that biden in 2021.
>>28748686imagine seeing a 3-pot turbo and thinking it'd ever have existed without bs regulations
>>28748718nta but obama set them to expand significantly after his term, which trump paused/rolled back when he got in office the first time. then when biden got in he restarted the expansion and ramped it up significantly so it'd be where it would have been if trump hadn't paused it. the whole thing is retarded and needs to be done away with which needs congress. the much bigger deal than this is the reduction of the fines to 0 that trump already did months ago, effectively eliminating cafe at least for as long a the gop is in the white house.
>>28748735Congress hates passing legislation, always have.
>>28747308All the answers are completely wrong kek Car companies don't have to buy carbon credits in order to sell high emissions vehicles.
>>28748735Ah okay so this actually does nothing of any substance to vehicles because it takes 5-10 years to design and release new cars, much less the engines, and only a complete moron would allow their company to plan for a time in the future which has uncertain and unknown political actions that will happen.Ok. Ok.So like I said this changes nothing and none of you understand any of it.
>>28748752the companies already have the engines, they put them in their trucks where they can still be sold. they just don't offer them in the cars when regulations prevent them from doing so. chevy is already coming out with two new small block V8s next year, a 5.7l and a 6.6l, both bigger than their current offerings. and the hemi is reportedly going back into the charger next year after the EV version completely flopped.
>>28747328>how will it make cars more affordable?by getting rid of stupid complicated and useless bullshit like start-stop, ridiculous CARB spec $5,000 cats, and GDI>>28747315>It costs money to R&D and re-tool to produce new enginesThe tooling and engineering still exists for 15+ year old engines which were mostly very good quality and very reliable. They can literally just switch back and it costs almost nothing.
>>28748713There's really nothing insane about it. With some plastic aerodynamic bodywork and just regular off the shelf smallish engines you can get there with no advanced tech.Saturns from the late 80s and early 90s were checking in at ~2400lbs dry. It's really not hard for these companies to make products like this.
>>28748752it's always been like that. nobody can predict market trends several years ahead. example was all those V12 and V16 Cadillacs designed in the booming 1920s which didn't come out until the Depression was underway so nobody bought them.
>>28747408This. Cars will still be a fucking display-centered buttonless hell, AI powered even.
>>28748786>>28747408SAAR
>>28748767just as long as you don't make the mistake Iaccoca did with destroying the 440 V8 tooling because he didn't think Chrysler would ever need it again
>>28748713That would have basically ruled out anything bigger than a Geo Metro.
>>28748777Crash regulations get tougher every year
>>28747316THEY ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE THE SHITTY COMPUTERS THAT BRICK THE CAR WHEN THEY FAIL TO UPDATEMODERN CARS ARE SHIT WHETHER THEY RUN ON LEADED GASOLINE OR THEY EMIT PURE OXYGEN
>>28748763Ah ok I see now so the LFX and pentastar get another 5 years of life or something, and somehow this just brings back the v6 camaro and charger or something.Ok, ok. Yeah you have zero understanding about any of this.>>28748783Not anything close to the same as what I'm talking about nor the thread topic.
>>28748861it is though. you can never know what happens half a decade in the future, you can only make plans based on what you think will happen.
>>28748861lol you are a sad little man.
>>28748752>Trump ends not-even-legislation that's been ruining cars for 15 years>oh but that doesn't magically fix every car on the road right now? Wow it's fucking nothingEvery so often I am reminded that a lot of you think of the world like children doThe cars on sale now were designed years ago to comply with CAFE regs as they were supposed to be over the expected model run, including a lot of convoluted garbage and overstressed tiny engines required to try to meet CAFE regs that were openly designed to slowly make it illegal to make ICE cars. Some stuff, like getting rid of stop-start that solely exists to improve scores on government city-cycle fuel economy testing and trashes engines and starters, can go right away. Savings will take a product cycle or refresh to appear, that's how making big complicated things works.Part of the increase in prices has been the necessity of ICE vehicles, which people buy, subsidizing the cost of developing and producing EVs, which noobdy buys. This is because the ever-escalating CAFE rules especially set by Biden effectively meant that even with SUVs being powered by overstressed 1.3L 4 pots that will burn out after 60,000 miles but deliver 2mpg extra on the highway, physics means an increasing percentage of vehicles sold every year would have had to have been EVs even though buyers don't want them. That's why the Hellcat went away and Stellantis was trying to sell the Charger as an electric car and put I6s in Rams - surprisingly the Go Fucking Fast company's average fleet economy sucked and they were going to have to sell something like 50% EVs just to keep Ram and Jeep legal in 2030. Now that's gone and the Hemi's back right away. The next cycle of cars will be a lot cheaper and last longer.And, as of right now, it's legal to sell small ICE cars and trucks in the US again. Before 2025, if you wanted to sell a truck the size of a Camry in the US, it had to get the fuel economy of a Camry. Now it doesn't.
>>28749033I appreciate you explaining this to the mongoloids who don't get it. Thank you.
>>28749033Very good explanation.
>>28749033
>>28749055being retarded is one thing but you really shouldn't be so proud of it.
>>28749033>ends>"we're rolling it back!>to before Biden (i.e. Trump's presidency)!"You:>this means cars go back to normal!It doesn't mean a god damn thing and you're all stupid.
>>28749107How many hours have you been literally shaking about this now
>>28749114You're a pathetic swine parasite. Both the swine you latch onto, and you, are pathetic.
>>28749107Why did you type all that out. Just type "NUH-UH!!" next time
>>28749107>can't readCAFE has been over for months, with fines for violations set at $0. Trump took repeated shots at Biden, who he hates, but this changes everything. Small trucks and cheap small cars were basically outlawed by Obama setting CAFE to a footprint standard, plus something like a fleetwide 62mpg average by 2031, which is basically impossible for anyone to achieve without making a huge chunk of sales EVs.He also specifically directed Sec. Duffy to get regulations in place that will allow small cars and trucks, including keis, to be sold here. That necessarily means completely eliminating the footprint CAFE rules, which means small trucks and cheap small cars are going to be legal again. They have to then draft the new regulations, then there's a ~60 day comment period, then they go into effect. Automakers right now are planning around the changes, like Stellantis bringing back the Hemi which CAFE had basically made illegal.Starting with the next product cycle, cars will be cheaper and last longer, and we'll be allowed to buy small trucks again
>>28749136>cars will be cheaperNothing ever gets cheaper.The price does not go down.
>>28747308Simplicity of design, ease of maintenance, and advanced longevity, and all at the cost of 1-2 mpg. Literally everything Obama did was feel-good bullshit that resulted in nothing but increasing the middle classes expenses exponentially.
>>28749142Are you just forgetting that manufacturers have to be competitive with the competition. Yeah bro the prices are not going to go down theyll just go bankrupt instead.
>>28749142>Nothing ever gets cheaper.>The price does not go down.Jesus, you're stupidYes, actually, the price goes down, especially since thousands of dollars per unit is convoluted and expensive attempts to meet ridiculous CAFE targets, while also subsidizing the development and production of CAFE-mandated EVs that nobody wants to buy.You don't actually need to have a Rube Goldberg 250 hp 1.3L 37psi direct injected stop-start turbo 3-cylinder in mom's CUV that burns out after 60,000 miles, when some cheap, long paid-for V6 will work perfectly and last forever but delivers 2mpg fewer highway miles. All of that adds cost. Plus an extra amount per unit going to EVs, because they have to finance the design and production of the cars that nobody wants but the government says they have to build, using the cars that people do want. Every new car sold has thousands of dollars of needless CAFE compliance tech in it plus you're paying for a fraction of the cost of an EV to be built and sit on a lot.There's a reason why all the CEOs were there and beaming - for years, the government has been openly working to make it illegal to build the cars and trucks people want, forcing them to try to finance that idiocy by adding cost to the cars and trucks people want, and that just stopped.
>>28749147>Literally everything Obama did was feel-good bullshit that resulted in nothing but increasing the middle classes expenses exponentially.This only reverts to pre-Biden. The CAFE update that "killed" small and simple cars was 2012. Crossovers had already taken over a decade ago.
>>28749175>This only reverts to pre-Biden.CAFE has been dead for months. Fines for non-compliance have been $0.00 since the BBB. This is the extent to which an EO can be done. Now Duffy's been directed to draw up the regs to make keis and small trucks legal again, which logically means 2012 is gone.It's regulatory clarity, letting automakers know that setting fines to $0 was not a cute political stunt but a real first step to undoing the CAFE clusterfuck permanently.
>>28749175>The CAFE update that "killed" small and simple cars was 2012tf would CAFE kill small cars? if anything it would be the opposite, V8 boats would be taxed out of existence. Use your head.
>>28749123LOL
>>28747297i cant believe he did something so antisemitic. we are so back in 5 to 10 years.fuck obamna trucks and bloated sedans on suv frames.
>>28749199making posts as intellectually misinformed as this should net a permanent ban
>>28749199you are a dum dum
>>28747316The free market should decide what customers buy, not a cabal of assholes who decide all things behind everyone else's backs.
>>28749199I mean, derf. That should be pretty obvious. From a 460 to a 302 V8.
>>28749199>average democrat voterBecause 2012 switched to from a class-based system to a footprint-based system, where the area between the 4 wheels determined the fuel economy it needed to get, plus the total fleet economy increasing every year. So the smaller a car was, the more fuel efficient it had to be, increasing every few years. If you think about this for one second you understand why this destroyed small cars and trucks. The smaller a car is, the more fuel-efficient it has to be, until it runs into the laws of physics and you have to start putting more and more expensive powertrain packages into your econobox to meet the ever-increasing economy standards, until the econobox costs more to make than a mid-size car. It's even worse for a truck, which in order to do actual truck things needs to have more power, a strong frame, differentials, transmission etc. But if it's the size of a Camry, it needs to get the fuel economy of a Camry, which means more expensive tech. So either small body on frame trucks cost more than big trucks, or they stop existing. Which is what happened.Actually, the larger a car or truck is, the more fuel-inefficient it's allowed to be, so the more cheaply it can be developed and produced, so guess what carmakers made? The things that were possible to make profitably. 2012 actually made it impossible to build small cars and trucks, while encouraging carmakers to make giant boats.
>>28749215the difference between then and now is actually more like a silly way of following consumer demands. in the 80s it literally meant smaller cars and smaller engines. since people don't actually like small cars, what they decided to do instead was just make a giant boat but it had a 2.0L turbo engine. Thus it technically complied with CAFE but was still a boat. That's more to do with the fact that Americans hate small cars than anything. It was tried once in the 80s and nobody liked it so they don't want to go back to Escort-sized vehicles.
Lol at you fucking sheeps.
>>28749193True, and that's good. Was it a temporary executive order though or put into "real" law?>>28749199>tf would CAFE kill small cars?They created separate standards for things classified as cars or "light trucks" with a mileage calculation also based on wheelbase. Crossovers were conveniently classified as light trucks so they became the de-facto vehicle.For some fucking reason they designed the numbers so it cost manufacturers too much to make small cars and trucks and promoted SUVs - sedans basically disappeared in the mid-late '10s because manufacturers would have to pay for credits on every vehicle sold, making them more expensive than CUVs for the average consimer.Yes, something that supposedly was designed to reduce fuel use ended up making cars 1000 lbs heavier on average. Look it up if you don't believe me, it was Ray LaHood's 2012 CAFE standards, look up the "footprint calcultation," it's been posted about above already.
>>28749215The tl;dr is basically that if it was today they would just have the huge 70s Continental but with a turbo V6 because Ford found their customers didn't like a downsized Lincoln. Actually a lot of people didn't back then; Buckminster Fuller famously bitched that he would never drive a "small" Lincoln.
>>28749229this is literally one of the biggest happenings for this board in a decade. it should be pinned. you can say what you want about the israeli pedo nigger but he has some kino non jewish moments every once in a while.
>>28749228>>28749236they couldn't have done that back then anyway with the less advanced engine or computer tech of that time
>>28749230>Was it a temporary executive order though or put into "real" law?All EOs are temporary, since they are unilateral executive actions that can be undone. CAFE is mandated by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1973, but the executive has broad latitude about how to implement and enforce it so long as it's consistent with the law. The actual new regulations will go through the same process as any new regulation does, with proposal, public comment/challenge etc, and of course there'll likely be court challenges to whatever Duffy rolls out from asshurt communistsSince the BBB set the fines to $0, even though the law's still on the books Congress has made it clear that it's not to be a thing any more, which should help on the legal side
Guy is there any more room for me in America. I hate my eurocuck commies. I just want to drive a 3.0 engine at least
>>28749219Wait wait waitPickup trucks getting progressively larger over time are Obamas fault?!
So Obama set some ridiculous target of 55 mpg for 2020 or something which would rule out any car bigger than Geo Metro. Of course people don't want to drive a Metro-class car so the market for small cars tanked. That's half-regulation, half-consumer demand. A little of both in other words.
>>28749254>Of course people don't want to drive a Metro-class car so the market for small cars tanked. That's half-regulation, half-consumer demand. A little of both in other words.what you're saying at the end of the day is that the problem is really Amerifats when the rest of the world has never had an issue with 1.x liter cars
>>28749228By the late 80s gas was cheap again and the energy crisis era was long past, but manufacturers had already switched over all their production lines to small FWD cars and it was too expensive to change them back to produce RWD V8 boats so instead they just pushed SUVs to satisfy that particular market demand and passenger cars became increasingly irrelevant rental fleet shitboxes.
Massive savings for companies
>>28749251>Pickup trucks getting progressively larger over time are Obamas fault?!YESIn a world where Trump had not been reelected and those CAFE rules stayed in place, in 2030, in order to build a truck the size of a 2002 Ranger (~45 sqft footprint) it would need to get 75-80 real world mpg. Since it needs to have a frame and a powertrain capable of doing truck stuff, that means you are putting Star Trek powertrains and every technological trick in the book (stop-start, light hybrid, radiator shutters, active aero, disconnecting driveshafts etc) to try to make that physically possible. The small truck is now the most expensive truck you sell. Meanwhile the F150 which has bloated up to 75 square feet, because it's so big, only needs to get 35mpg, which is hard but at least technically possible at a price point people can buy (sort of)>>28749254>which would rule out any car bigger than Geo Metro.The opposite. A 2030 Geo Metro would need to get 100 mpg and would cost as much as a Cadillac, and nobody is going to buy that. Obama's rules were the bigger the car or truck, the worse fuel economy it's allowed to have. So small cars disappeared and trucks got gigantic
>>28749254correct.
>>28749289Actually just about as wrong as it's possible to be
>>28747423Ok course you do, but you aren't filled with a maniacal hatred towards whites and a belief that slaves should not be permitted to move around freely.
>>28747484You will die in two years anyway from the death jab so what's it to you what real people drive?
>>28747423>is PCV recirculation mandatoryOf course it is, a literal 1963 law that's ruining cars in 2025. For example, modern cars have catalytic converters, which they didn't in 1963. On a NA car you could route the crankcase vent through a one-way valve into the exhaust manifold, where there's also free vacuum plus a bunch of heat right before the hydrocarbons get harmlessly catalyzed away, instead of slowly coating the intake valves until you need a $1000 walnut blast to make your car work againBut the law says you need PCV into the intake, so that's how cars have to be built
>>28749320There was no EPA in 1963, that sounds like a California regulation.
>>28748613for me it was when an anon here mentioned previously empty reserves replenishing themselves and that was another rabbit hole for me to dive into
>>28749320PCVs are good for the engine, though. You don't want positive pressure in the crankcase unless you enjoy power loss and blown gaskets.
>>28749327Clean Air Act, 1963>>28749350Please reread what I wrote
ditch the wheel skirts, put on side mirrors, stick in a 2.0 liter diesel. you're going to get 70+ mpg
>>28749327CA had the first emissions laws in 62 afaik.
>>28749347for me it was when an anon replied to another post mentioning replenishing reserves and said that he found a rabbit hole of information
>>28749366where was the rabbit hole? i just went into googling and reading all sorts of shit about the phenomenon
>>28749320You seem to be confusing PCV with EGR like a typical moron would confuse things.
>>28749375>You seem to be confusing PCV with EGR like a typical moron would confuse things.No, you seem to be clueless about what causes intake valve coking on direct-injected engines, and then made yourself look like an idiot on the internet
>>28749383Yeah no I see your point.So what's next bring it all back to unfiltered oil, simpme single barrel carbs, etc.?
>>28749389>SoWhy is it that when anyone starts a sentence with "So" what follows is a bunch of retarded bullshit that nobody ever saidIt's particularly stupid on your part because in the post where I very first mention how stupid it is that we're using 1963-mandated emissions tech in 2025, I say>On a NA car you could route the crankcase vent through a one-way valve into the exhaust manifold, where there's also free vacuum plus a bunch of heat right before the hydrocarbons get harmlessly catalyzed away, instead of slowly coating the intake valves until you need a $1000 walnut blast to make your car work againSo not only are you hallucinating a bunch of retarded bullshit that nobody ever said, but the retarded bullshit that nobody ever said that you hallucinated is the opposite of what I actually said in real lifeThere are better solutions for crankcase ventilation than intake vacuum. But the law says PCV into the intake, so cars have to have PCV into the intake. Even though that coats DI intake valves with carbon, which means you're either getting the 4-figure walnut blast every 30,000 miles or like Toyota they have to add port fuel injection as well as direct injection so there's some fuel washing the government-mandated oil buildup off the intake valves. Even though the law was written in 1963 and automotive tech has advanced a little bit since then
did you know that the Mercedes 560SL was never even put in the US because the cost of adapting it for US emissions standards was considered not worth the effort?
>>28747578>>28747547wait until you guys start learning about the insane locomotive and aeronautical engine designs of the mid-late 20th century
>>28747578The modern university system creates dull conformist minds and crushes creativity. Its a broken institution and because all of our accreditation goes through it and the concept of apprenticeship has died out there's no way for anyone to get a prestigious job unless they submit to this broken system.
>>28747297Ding Dong, CAFE is fucking DEAD!Next targets: CARB, the NHTSA, and the EPA.
>>28749492>Next targets: CARB, the NHTSAgo look at photos of 50s car accidents and tell me you want to go back to having no safety stuff at all
>>28749496looks metal as hell
>>28749496In all fairness manufacturers were glad to get rid of metal dashboards as they were heavy and expensive.
>>28749496I have a hard time conceptualizing how dangerous old cars without crumple zones are. You'll see some 50s, 60s, or 70s landwhale get rear ended by a modern car that crumples into a tin can (but protects the driver) on its rear bumper as it sits there unphased. Then you'll see photos of some old car where the frame crumpled up and crushed back into the driver like a juice squeezer.Its seems like the old cars have a breaking point. The bumpers and the heavy steel construction protect you up to a point; but if you go past it you're fucked. Whereas modern cars gradually crumple more and more and more until eventually they crumple all the way into the driver.
>>28747408Nope.I own stock in petroleum.I'm going to be fucking rich.Get fucked.
>>28749496I want to have no safety stuff at all.Not even a safety warning.Banish speed limits.Let the idiots and fools of the world die by their own hands.
>>28749421Yeah no i see your pointYou're pointless and retarded
>>28749514So you want to be India?
>>28749520do you think the only thing that separates india from the US is speed limits lol
>>28749522I mean obviously they're backwards savages. But we've imported a lot of them here and given them CDLs to drive semi trucks. I feel like we need a few laws to protect us from them.
>>28749496>if a government agency didn't mandate specific safety features, every carmaker would decide at the same time to start making shitty tin cans!It's amazing that people like you are allowed to voteThe irony is that many mandated safety features are counterproductive. For example, federal rollover standards means you basically have to be able to drop a car on its roof from a given height and not crush it. How helpful! Except car accidents that involve rollovers are about 1.5% of the total (and most rollover accidents that involve death or injury involve extremely excessive speed which would've been fatal anyway).But since cars have to be safe to roll over, this requires the giant thick pillars that characterize modern cars and make their visibility so shit, making 100% of cars worse in every situation order to potentially improve the survivability of >1% of crashes. This results in more collisions, especially in low speed situations like parking lots, as well as pedestrian and cyclist hits, because drivers can't see as well as they should.
>>28749511It depends on the collision and the speed. T-bones were the most deadly crashes for many years for a reason; no safety anything on the sides of cars, and car frames / unibodies were weakest. That's why high-speed T-bones caused cars to "wrap" around one-another, which was instant Head Crush Maximum for the passenger on that side. Rollovers were also really deadly because tops of the era couldn't support the weight of the car. Head Crush Maximum with a delay of maybe a few seconds if you're lucky.Head-on collision deaths were usually caused via windshield ejection (no seatbelts), a dashboard to the face (lap belts only), or impalement on the steering column (before collapsible variants were produced). Rear collision deaths were usually a result of whiplash as a result of a lack of headrests (or a dashboard to the face if it was violent enough). All of these were caused due to the car's inability to slow down the passenger, meaning that they only jerk to a stop on impact or if pulled by the seatbelt. Gnarly stuff.>t. 60's and 70's car owner.
>>28749537>>28749511As a little bonus meme for you, this is also how the retards in picrel got hurt. The car didn't take nearly as much damage as you'd expect, but because it doesn't slow down the passengers they just got pinballed around and received a complimentary Dashboard Special facial surgery.https://www.motorbiscuit.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/1300-HP-Mercury-Comet.jpg?strip=all&quality=89
>>28749551those two idiots would have been fine if they wore their shoulder belts.
>>28749556Yep. They had a full racing harness that would have kept them in their seats, but because they didn't have them on and the car had no crumple zones to slow them down their momentum carried their heads directly into the dash. It's the main reason why shoulder straps were made mandatory even after lap belts became required by law.
>>28749551>>28749537>>28749527It's kind of funny that at some point some engineers realized that the whole problem is changing the body's deceleration from Instant to Longer Than Instant and the longer they can make that, the more survivable the crash is>>28749556They would've been fine if the retard boomer had followed the build shop's recommendation to have an e-brake, had not installed a retard boomer ratchet shifter which meant he was unable to put the car in neutral, and had not decided to take his huge horsepower car with a stuck open throttle onto public roads to make an internet video. They should've taken his license
when i was a kid my mom walked away from an accident (not her fault, guy ran into her) in our 94 Caravan with some scrapes and a broken pair of glasses. if that was a 50s car she would have been badly injured at the least.
Oh dear. This was not pretty. The engine isn't even anywhere to be seen, just the air filter laying in front of the car. And is that blood on the front seat? Or don't I want to know?
>>28749593>is that blood on the front seat?Likely. Wildest part is the completely vertical steering column.
>>28749593This probably happened at a pretty high speed since it looks like the engine and transmission were launched out the front of the car and are probably somewhere off to the left of the picture. There's also no skid marks suggesting the driver was asleep or drunk.
>>28749593also that cloth or bag looking thing crumpled up there. that better not be the driver's body wrapped up in there while awaiting removal.
>>28749593that's a 52 Chrysler not a 53 btw
She appears to have gotten at minimum a broken nose.
>>28749350...Are you serious?
>>28749625Buick had newly introduced power brakes in 53 but there was a fault with the master cylinder that caused a lot of brake failures. A recall was not issued but affected vehicles could be repaired at dealerships. Perhaps that was what happened here.
>>28749511Eh, good thing my car is from the 30's then.
>>28749496yeah and because everyone now realises their car will kill them if they fuck up they'll actually pay attention
>>28749662People drive more retarded than ever now.
>>28749164What if all the auto manufacturers just agree to sell their shit for insane prices?
>>28749359we need to go back to aeromaxxing
>>28749514what if they kill you and walk away with only a few bumps and scrapes tho?>>28749662fucking lmao
I once saw a death certificate online from Arizona in 1955. The decedent was a lady who had her head crushed in a rollover accident following a tire blowout. Yeah.
>>28749625>>28749625this was the usual result of frontal collisions back then. the steering wheel was a rigid metal pole attached to the front axle that would just ram upward into the driver's face.
>>28749879rollovers are very rare in practice and usually the result of a high speed accident. most likely the woman was driving too fast, perhaps resulting in a blowout that resulted in the car overturning.
Trump is a real one for this
>>28749625nice fur coat, she was obviously quite loaded. back in those days Buick meant something, it was Mercedes E-class level
>>28749625did it hit the lamppost? but the post has no apparent damage and you think it would be wrapped around the post in that case.
>>28749896I think it hit the post and rolled backward. The fact that as anon said 53 Buicks had problems with brake failures could have been the cause of the accident.
>>28749593back in that time cops didn't rope off crash scenes, people would just freely mill around them
>>28749511>The bumpers and the heavy steel construction protect you up to a point; but if you go past it you're fucked.This is a misunderstanding, the problem with old cars is that they use body on frame construction, the frames were solidly built tubular sections while the bodies were flimsy sheet metal just there for looks. If you hit the frame like in a rear ending then there would barely be any damage, but hit the body like in a sideswipe or impact at an angle and you might as well be sitting in a car made of cardboard.
>>28749871EVs are the only ones even trying these days.
so should i not buy a new (used) car yet
>>28747465Picrel but with dorito
>>28749240Merci Twingo
>>28749168I'm actually impressed by how delusional and retarded you are. Congratulations.
>>28747297Won't lead to shit because he's going to be the last Republican ever elected president and the car corps know it. No point in shifting your entire production chain for something you'll have to roll back in three years.
>>28748004Midwest shithole I assume?
>>28750108instead of lashing out at people comfier than you, tell everyone: how much is gas in your cartel-run state?
>>28750090>Won't lead to shit because he's going to be the last Republican ever elected presidentI'm sorry AOC, but your presidential dreams will remain that.
>>28749537they have better, stronger steel alloys now so car bodies don't crumple as much
>>28749496>go look at photos of 50s car accidents and tell me you want to go back to having no safety stuff at allI ride a motorcycle
remove Federal level safety or emissions regulations and it just means manufacturers follow California's instead which are probably more extreme and retarded
>>28750421maybe
it would be kind of cool if Mercedes or Ineos would sell rolling chassis' that could be built here in the states with a chebby or ford v8. i kind of like the Grenadier, but i don't want a BMW engine.
>>28747297our god is an awesome god
So basically the US admitted they can't compete with Chinese EVs and are regressing to using obsolete decades old tech?
So is this actually going to result in non-gay single cab trucks hitting the market?
>>28751746No. Nothing has fundamentally changed.
>>28747308Nope. It'll make the cars more profitable but we won't see any financial benefit.
>>28751763>>28751795tds
Troonbros... we got btfo
>>28747308>companies will willingly pass the savings on to you instead of further enriching their management and shareholdersLMFAO
>>28747297If Trump actually removes a bunch of CAFE and chicken tax-tier regulations permanently, he deserves another term.>People won't buy them anywaysOkay retards? Then there's no hurt in removing these regulations affecting the cars being discussed. Why are libshits always crying about regulation that has no effect anymore? Dead weight like their whole existence?
I6 RWD Dodge Demon when?
