Trump Thinks Your Car's Gas Mileage Is... Your Business

Tyler Durden's picture

Via Eric Peters Autos,

The Clovers are aghast that Trump is threatening to do the unimaginable – and stop threatening the car companies with federal fuel economy fatwas (and add-on fatwas forbidding or restricting how much plant food – carbon dioxide – cars may emit).

He appears to be entertaining the horrible idea that the people who buy cars ought to be free to decide for themselves how much fuel economy matters to them – since they will be the ones paying for both the car and the gas. And – oh my god! – that this is really none of the business of the “concerned” scientists and other professional busybodies who regard their opinions and preferences as holy writ enforceable at gunpoint.

“We’re going to work on the CAFE standards so you can make cars in America again,” said Trump. He should have added the qualifier – affordable cars in America again.

Leaving aside the moral issue – who are these people to tell anyone whether their next car should get 10 MPG or 40 MPG? – the issue never addressed by the media, including the automotive media, is how much will all this cost us?

Obama’s mullahs uluated about the many billions (allegedly) which would be “saved” by force-marching every automaker to build cars that average 54.5 MPG. It is the sort of “savings” one realizes by emptying your bank account to buy something you don’t need that’s 5 percent off.

Only worse, because you’re not given the option to keep your money in the bank.

A week or so ago, executives from the major automakers came to the White House to explain to Donald – who probably already grokked it – that to get a single car to average 54.5 MPG requires more than merely ululating that it will be so. A new Prius hybrid almost manages it – and the hybrid Prius costs several thousand dollars more than an otherwise similar but not 54.5 MPG non-hybrid car.

And to get every car made to average 54.5 MPG – which is what Obama’s EPA ululated in the last weeks of his regime – won’t magically just happen, either – even if the entire regulatory Mecca ululates in unison for a week straight.

In the first place, it requires technology – and new designs. These generally involve work and resources, which cost money. New components don’t generally rain from Allah’s merciful bounty, upon ululation.

The executives pointed this out to Trump – who almost certainly grokked it beforehand, since he appears to be a man who probably knows where the dipstick is under the hood of a car and also what it’s for.

It is doubtful Obama knew – or did.

Or cared.

The current CAFE fatwa is 35.5 MPG and to achieve this without going hybrid across the board has required some very elaborate – some very expensive – technology. Two specific examples: Direct injection and transmissions with eight, nine and lately ten forward speeds.

These are coming online (the new Ford F-150 pick-up, reviewed here,  has a ten-speed automatic and probably two-thirds of all new vehicles are already direct-injected) because of the existing CAFE fatwa.

But they offer no particular advantage to the buyer, in terms of how the car drives or performs. Indeed, cars with these too-many-speeds automatics often have strange driving characteristics.  I can vouch for this; I test drive and review new cars each week.

For instance, the sensation that the car is surging forward (it is) when the transmission skips up three or four gears on a downhill because the computer is desperate to get the transmission into the top overdrive gear as quickly as possible in order to cut engine revs to the minimum in order to squeeze out a teensy uptick in MPGs, for the sake of CAFE.

Direct injection, meanwhile, has supplanted port fuel injection (PFI) with a two-stage system that operates at extreme pressure (3,000 psi vs. 35 or so psi) and which has created a carbon deposit problem inside the engine. In engines fed fuel via PFI or TBI or even a carburetor, the fuel washes over the backsides of the valves as it enters the combustion chamber – and because gas is a solvent, that action keeps the valves from crudding up. But in a DI system, the fuel is sprayed through a hole inside the combustion chamber and there is no solvent effect.

And so, crud forms.

To fix this problem the automakers are adding a separate, additional port-fuel circuit to keep the valves clean. So now you car will have two fuel injection systems – and multiple fuel pumps rather than just one.

It is not free.

What would it take to get all cars to average 54.5 MPG?

Keep in mind that not a single non-hybrid/non-electric new car comes close to that. Obama’s fatwa was in a way an ululation demanding that most if not all cars be hybrids or electric cars – because that is probably the only way to get to a “fleet average” (CAFE terminology) of 54.5 MPG absent the discovery of miracle technologies such as Roswell Crash-style ultra-light metal that is also ultra strong (so that other fatwas regarding “safety” can also be complied with).

This brings us back to the moral issue: Why is how much or little fuel our cars use anyone else’s business, since we pay for the car and the fuel? If gas “costs too much,” we can buy a different car that uses less.

And there is another issue, very obvious, but – like the cost of the fatwas – never asked or discussed:

If the market is so “concerned” about fuel economy – as the various scientists, “public citizens” and other such self-appointed voxxers of the populi claim, why not allow the market to apply the pressure?

Can’t have that. Pressure must come from above.

It doesn’t matter that there are already cars available that were designed to deliver much higher-than-average mileage – the Prius, for instance – which people are free to pay for if that is their priority. What the various “concerned” and the mullahs within the EPA and federal apparat are really concerned about is that people can choose not to buy such. That they are free to buy something else.

For the ululators, everyone must buy the same thing – the thing the uluators insist they buy. Or else.

Always, collectivism and coercion.

Never free choice, liberty – the market.

It’s worth recalling that the literal translation of laissez-faire is… leave us alone.


Good on Donald.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
PacOps's picture

Woah! Lovin it!

Jubal Early's picture

They are planning on taking your car away in agenda 2030.  They would force you into self driving cars that are plugged into the global brain computing system based in Jerusalem.  If you want be transported in comfort you will have to take the chip.  Otherwise you better learn to walk, stupid goyim.

MagicHandPuppet's picture

I have mixed emotions about this entire thing.  Let me clarify:

Should I be doing jumping jacks from all of the new found freedom we're getting?

Or, should I be rejoicing in the glory of all the lib-tard crybaby snowflake tears this will cause?  Please help me decide!

greenskeeper carl's picture

If true, this would make ALL cars cheaper, especially the ones everyone wants, like full size SUVs and trucks. Higher margin vehicles like that have prices jacked up to make up for the low, zero, or negative margin vehicles the auto makers are forced to sell to bring their fleet average up. These hybrid and battery powered vehicles are STILL not worth the money saved in gas, though, unless you drive a lot more miles than most people do. Thats with heavy taxpayer subsidies, too.


For part two, Donald, lets end the subsidies for bullshit cars like Tesla, too. This is a great start, but your only halfway there.


Another bullet we barely dodged is the obama regimes 11th hour plans to impose a fleet wide 65 mph speed limit on all class 8 tractors in the US, which would mean every semi you see would be governed down to 65, which would clog up highways to nightmarish porportions. I only heard about it because of a friend who is high up in a large shipping company.

Stuck on Zero's picture

Methane is contributing to global warming therefore the Progressives should require that everyone wear a fart-o-meter ... with large penalties for excessive outgassing.

NoDecaf's picture

Way too technical for the snowflakes.

Must. Scream. Racism. and Russia.

jcaz's picture

But... but... but... If I don't have the Government telling me what car I need,  then what next?  That token college diploma that they tell me is required, financed by this debt they tell me I should be grateful for,  because I have to get to my Government job in order to keep my credit rating up so I can re-finance my shitbox, 3X overvalued house for the 12th time......

Yeah, let's focus on 54.5 MPG, cause that's the magic sparkly thing- pay no attention to the man behind the curtain because 54.5 will save us all,  and we're all too stupid to rationalize basic things.....

chumbawamba's picture

Is this guy fucking serious?

The executives pointed this out to Trump – who almost certainly grokked it beforehand, since he appears to be a man who probably knows where the dipstick is under the hood of a car and also what it’s for.

Trumpenfuhrer inherited $40 million from his dad, I'm guessing the fucker barely even knows that cars have oil in them.

As far as the technology, I've heard stories about suppressed technologies that could easily have cars doing 100mpg if it wasn't for Big Oil™.

I am Chumbawamba.

peippe's picture

actually, Trump would be MORE fuel efficient if he ran his 767 personal jet instead of that kerosene-hog 747 jumbo.

but laws are laws. : )

& now he doesn't have to buy his own fuel anymore.

Save_America1st's picture

diesel all the way for the win.  Maybe Mr. T. outta bring some competition to America again and get the central planning enviro-nazis and gov-scum outta the way so the free market can take over:

2008 -

2013 -

2008 -

2014 -


not dead yet's picture

Fuck diesel. Filthy pieces of shit. Google Europe going to ban diesels, because they are so filthy they are causing huge smog. Most of the real pollution from vehicles in the US, C02 is not a pollutant, is from diesels. Diesels cannot meet the standards that gas vehicles do but since their mileage is so much greater, especially in the big rigs, they cut them some slack. Diesels aren't so bad when it's warm out but when it gets cold they are gag wagons. All you need to do is follow one, and you do not need to be very close either, and you'll know. Especially pickup trucks, even the new ones.

Most of that crap about inventors being bought out or the oil companies sitting on the patents is more bullshit as we hear about it from a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy. Are you saying that the USSR under Stalin and China under Mao who swore to bury the US was in bed with the western oil companies to the detriment of their own countries? Can we get a huge increase in MPG today? Of course with the technology we now have but it's emission standards that hold it back. Relaxing, but not eliminating, the emission standards would allow those large increases with less consumption which would lead to less pollution. Base it on pollution per gallon. There were actual cars back in the eighties that over got over 60 mpg hwy like the Honda CRX or the small Chryslers which could do around 50 mpg hwy all with inefficient carbs. Big problem is the current vehicles are so squeaky clean pollution wise but the enviros won't let up and continue to raise the standards that cost big bucks to meet because we are down to the last few percent.

Read some of that junk you have links too. Pie in the sky junk written by people making things up. I love the one the idiot wrote about how Tesla is going to run all the car companies out of business because they don't need repairs. They my not need oil changes but Tesla's horrible quality means lots of repairs. Even quality cars will eventually need repairs as their parts are subject to terrible conditions and abuse. Tesla has quite a few repair shops of their own and are opening more. They are also opening their own dealerships too as they will have to when they deal mass market. Tesla is having a problem in some states as they do not allow the manufacturers to own dealerships.

greenskeeper carl's picture

Ya, I had a similar thought. I highly doubt he knows his way around cars, at all. Which, as far as this article is concerned, is fine. Tell me the last time anyone held high elected office in this country who did. Its a problem, electing nothing but elitists, but it didn't begin with trump.


As to your other comment, I've heard similar things. A boat mechanic friend of mine was at a trade school a couple years back and was told something similar by a couple of the instructors. They said the technology exists to be getting 50+ mpgs with acceleration/power we expect in midsized SUVs like a Ford Explorer, but the oil companies keep a lid on the patents. No idea if its true, but it came from industry people. It is hard to believe that in 20 years we have gone from cell phones as big and heavy as bricks with terrible battery life and range to phones that have computing power greater than computers just a decade ago along with cameras better than the digital one I bought just a few years ago, yet we still largely use the same shit in cars. Apples and oranges to be sure, but curious none the less.

hope_talk's picture
hope_talk (not verified) greenskeeper carl Mar 19, 2017 5:50 AM

I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do...

The Gun Is Good's picture

Tom Ogle was doing some really interesting things (100+ mpg) with carbs down in TX in the late 1970s... until he was mysteriously killed. (Don't fuck around with gas mileage if you live in Oil Country....)

SixIsNinE's picture

i'm way ahead of that scam - been biking for 9 years now - no filling up at stinky gas stations or paying shitty insurance fees...

that said - my test run of my first Electric bike was great - except that it snapped my front fork dropouts  - as i was off to return home... fortunately from a standing start - otherwise could be messy.,

got a new Surly front steel fork - should be golden.   Colorado is the Real Sunshine State ;)   

yeah, I miss Miami -  Music Week is starting NOW !!!!

Ultra Stage !!!


Hedgeless - you better book me now for Marfa or the Zeros will be forever cursing your lack of musical appreciation



TruthHunter's picture

Trump i's mostly right. Very few things should be prohibited. A moderate " gas hog" tax would accomplish conservation goals with minimal pain.  Even if you completely global warming importing too much energy is a security risk.

Puerto Rico put a tag premiun of about $150 a year on bigger vehicles. If $150 is important to you, drive something else. In 2 or 3 years SUV's disappeared. 

Ms. Erable's picture

I see no reason you can't do both at the same time, performing jumping jacks as you shower in their tears.

MagicHandPuppet's picture

I like the way you think, Ms. Erable!

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) Jubal Early Mar 18, 2017 6:56 PM

California caved to Uber, DMV now allowing fucking driverless cars without a driver standing by.

What are all those middle eastern guys going to do for a living?

Who would get in a driverless car?

Not Goldman Sachs's picture

FFFreeddom. So stop using my taxes to subsidize all aspects of transportation. Oil companies, roadways, Tesla, etc. Pay to play. You drive, you pay per mile. Tax the gas is the best way. Whatever.

not dead yet's picture

How do you tax the electric cars? They get a huge tax rebate from the gov and then don't have to pay their share to drive on the roads. Currently roads are built with your tax money and you get to drive them. So in your opinion we make all roads toll roads which employ toll takers or computers to track your driving, after you spent hundreds on a transponder for your car, while supporting layers of management and boards of directors to oversee those roads and employ billing oufits to send out bills and process payments. Or in the real old days a toll taker on every corner. Even your effing bicycle would have to pay. In Detroit the city only plows the main drags and the rest of the residents have to contract for their streets to be plowed. They contract private outifts and pay a set amount and if there is little snow they get fucked. Lots of snow and only the lucky few get decent service with some waiting days to get plowed. Huge fiasco.

You're one of those who probably rants about government does no good and should get out of the way of everything. Got a GPS? Only the government could afford to create the technology and put up the satellites but look at the private sector jobs it created. If the government was smart they would take a cut to pay for their efforts, like the private sector would if they developed it, but ignornat people would whine "it's a tax." The internet has changed our lives, most cannot live without it today, and has allowed the private sector to create all kinds of new technologies and millions of jobs but without the government funding the initial research and backbone there would be little internet today as no company would have the kind of cash and clout to get it off the ground. Instead of what we have now we would be still be in the early innings with pieces here and there. Back in the 30's the government electrified the rural areas, the local utilties did not because of little if any return on their investment and could not be blamed, and opened the whole area to electrifying farms and created markets and technology for milk coolers, milking parlors, etc. If it was up to private enterprise there would be no paved roads to the farms and country dwellers as no one could pay what the companies would need to justify the expense of a road. In the early 20th century there were no paved roads outside of the cities until the government built the US highways. Then later the interstate system. Hoover dam opened up the west to irrigation and electrified cities and growth, jobs, but only the government could afford to build it. Same with all the other dams that brought water, electricity, and prosperity to the west.

yogibear's picture

The government control leftest/Marxist  are going to go mad.

They can't take it anymore. Leaping from bridges.Mass suicide.

FX223's picture

Oh I love it!  The lib snowflakes are gonna flip the fuck out.

QuantumEasing's picture

The lib snowflakes lost any credibility of being for high milage.

Otherwise, they would have been expending their stampy-foot antic energy on getting the Volkswagen VL-1 with 300mpg imported:

But people should be free to drive anything from a 2 mpg Deuce and a Half to a tricycle. End the EPA.

N0TME's picture

I'd love me a bobbed duece and a half. 

LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD's picture
LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD (not verified) N0TME Mar 18, 2017 6:44 PM

1969 convertible Firebird.  No emission controls, easy to work on, and terrible mileage.  Perfect.

Big Corked Boots's picture

I don't get the bobbing part.

Four wheels good. Six wheels better.

QuantumEasing's picture

Runs on just about any non-water liquid. What's not to love?

N0TME's picture

Yeah, flip the fuck out right over a cliff.

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) FX223 Mar 18, 2017 6:56 PM

The liberal crybullies are going to start terror attacks here.

Umh's picture

Common sense is quite often more efficient than the government and always less expensive.

junction's picture

On the basis of consumption of energy measured in joules, the Tesla is the most inefficient, high energy using passenger car on the road.  First, a Model S Tesla weighs some 4,600 pounds.  The Tesla Model S P85D can go from 0-60 in 3.2 seconds, faster than a Dodge Charger Hellcat.  The Hellcat weighs 4,535 pounds and gets 13/22 mpg using premium unleaded gasoline.  The main difference between the cars is that the Tesla gets a fill-up using electricity sent to its lithium battery pack.  If the electricity comes from a fossil fuel power plant, the pollution remains at the power plant site. So the Tesla provides clean transportation at a high environmental cost.

greenskeeper carl's picture

You also have to remember the environmental costs of those batteries, both making them and desposing of them. Im no environmentalist, I just like pointing little things like that out to remind people that these things aren't very 'green' once you get past the "it doesn't use internal conbustion" thing.

NidStyles's picture

Most people do not actually understand the conservation of mass/energy.

TwelveOhOne's picture

No kidding.  I worked at a nuclear plant years ago and the guys there used to joke that most people, when asked "where does electricity come from?", would point at the outlet in the wall.

jmack's picture

Whats that smell, do you smell that?

 smells like....

smells like   FREEDOM.


    this is a perfect example of the difference in makers and takers.  These evil progressives and green party types want to tell you how to live, to command you to do x, y, and z, and congratulate themselves on saving the planet while they sit atop a pyramid of misery.


    Makers go out and create the technologies that make hydrocarbon use obsolete or uneconomical or the bridge technologies that reduce the usage of hydrocarbons.



A Nanny Moose's picture

Oh....I thought it was napalm

highwaytoserfdom's picture

LOL fatwas from czars     can't make this stuff up...


Proud Nox jetta diesel owner and proud did not stoop to electric subsidies and credits.

N0TME's picture

can't make this stuff up...


Being made up EVERY DAY!

Sokhmate's picture

They're really Faswas not Fatwas. One of them is smelly.

SixIsNinE's picture

yeah - well the Cupertino HQ buildup is looking good !

there are longer ones available, but that is a quick 4 minute drone view of the Apple Spaceship Earth Plane  nearing completion.


North Carolina North American FE2017   November 9-11



CJgipper's picture

What garbage.


I like higher mpg.  Direct injection is how we have 450hp 3.5L twin turbo v6''s now (ford truck svu).  Carbon buildup was eliminated by a single low pressure injector in the intake.  It gives just enough gas to prevent buildup.  I'm ALWAYS going to consider gas mileage withing the segment I'm shopping.  It makes a huge difference in cost of ownership


Now if you want to do some good, look at diesels.  Dpf, def, catylitic, etc took modern turbo ditself from 20+ mpg to 12.  Now I ask you, how efficient is it if it takes 2x fuel?

Umh's picture

I really think you miss the main point that being you get to make rational decisions about important things in your life.

Nekoti's picture

Lovers of .gov are too scared to think for themselves.

MD's picture

Fossil fuel consumption does affect other people, though. Even if you don't believe in global warming, fossil fuels are a finite resource. At some point in history, the human race will eventually run out of cheap oil to extract.

What do we explain to future generations? Sorry guys, we really wanted those extra few horsepower, so we burnt up all this precious energy that you can't have?