I like clean air. I also like the smell if the race track. I prefer the smell of the racetrack stays there.
I like clean air. I also like the smell if the race track. I prefer the smell of the racetrack stays there.
Steve_Jones said:In reply to Keith Tanner :
Forcing someone to buy a plug in hybrid they can't plug in is somehow better than them buying that same vehicle without the weight and waste of the battery?
The entire purpose of it is so people plug them in. If it's ok for them to not plug them in (because it's not required) then why not let them buy a non e from the start?
Right now, nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything that *requires* plug in. BEV's require a plug in, PHEV's are better with it, HEVs don't, and MHEV's don't have a provision to plug in. All of them are part of the EV mandate.
The entire purpose is to increase the efficiency of the fleet.
Again, MHEV's right now are an ICE with an oversized alternator that can help move the car. And they are part of the EV mandate.
Unless you can point me to a regulation that says otherwise, that's what the EV mandate was when I left work.
Boost_Crazy said:In reply to alfadriver :
The regulation requires 150k emissions reliability. That's more than it ever has been, so what regulation decreased reliability?
If it's the SRC system, that's totally up to the OEM's to choose, not the regulation. And directed at the OEM's, as well, no it's not unreasonable to expect the system to work at all duty cycles. But be reminded that previous technology isn't good enough to meet the standards. It's partially one reason the new large gas engines exist- those can make the required power for pretty straight forward technology.
We were discussing diesels. The person I was discussing it with is apparently in that field and acknowledged the decrease in reliability, but attributed much of it to driving them wrong. My brother in law has been a diesel mechanic for decades for everything from large fleets to Peterbilt dealerships. Current emissions equipment is responsible for putting trucks out of service for extended periods of time. Inconvenient and expensive for large fleets, business destroying for independent truckers.
We ARE discussing diesels. There IS an emissions requirement that the hardware lasts for 150k miles. If what you say is happening as bad as you suggest, then whoever made them is responsible to recall them and repair the problem. If businesses are actually struggling with the systems, then they need to contact the EPA- as that's the path to fix the systems properly. The EPA has the power (or used to) force the OEM's to deal with the problem. You might be shocked that the EPA is required to factor in the consumers of the vehicles when they come up with requirements.
Since we don't hear massive recalls of SRC equipped diesel trucks, I really wonder how bad those claims really are. It takes a handful of failures to open an investigation and not many more to force a recall. Tell your BIL to use the system and get the OEMs to fix them.
The tech right now is the only thing that is capable of the vehicles meeting the requirements. If you can find an alternate way of doing it, you can be a billionaire.
It's funny when I come across YT videos claiming that tuning is capable of meeting the requirements. Which would save OEM's millions if that was true. Those guys must assume that the engineers working at OEM's are pretty stupid, let alone their managers.
alfadriver said:Steve_Jones said:In reply to Keith Tanner :
Forcing someone to buy a plug in hybrid they can't plug in is somehow better than them buying that same vehicle without the weight and waste of the battery?
The entire purpose of it is so people plug them in. If it's ok for them to not plug them in (because it's not required) then why not let them buy a non e from the start?
Right now, nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything that *requires* plug in. BEV's require a plug in, PHEV's are better with it, HEVs don't, and MHEV's don't have a provision to plug in. All of them are part of the EV mandate.
The entire purpose is to increase the efficiency of the fleet.
Again, MHEV's right now are an ICE with an oversized alternator that can help move the car. And they are part of the EV mandate.
Unless you can point me to a regulation that says otherwise, that's what the EV mandate was when I left work.
If you want to buy a new Wrangler in MD Today, your option is a 4xe only.
True, it does not "require" being plugged in, but it gets worse mileage than the ice only.
I'll rephrase. Forcing people to buy a vehicle that can be plugged in, knowing they can not, is foolish. I have nothing against electric vehicles, I installed a charger at my office so one of my employees could charge his 4xe, since he lives in a townhouse and can not install one there. I just think people should have a choice. Currently in MD, they don't.
I never mentioned an EV mandate. You did.
In reply to Steve_Jones :
You can still buy an ICE only Jeep in MD. You just have to ask the dealer to bring it in. Jeep has decided - as a corporate strategy - to only put the 4xe on the lot in certain states in order to help them meet emissions targets. It's easier than making the truck cleaner.
Mileage and emissions are not the same thing, it's not about meeting CAFE.
It's not really a thing to get wound up about. You have the same choice as always, unless you absolutely have to go buy a new car TODAY. Nobody is preventing you from buying an ICE-only Jeep.
In reply to alfadriver :
One of the maintenance items for my 2010 diesel is to remove the EGR system to chisel out the accumulated carbon every 67,500 miles. That strikes me as being a fairly intrusive procedure for a 150k emission system. Happily, mine doesn't require SCR. I think the diesel manufacturers are still struggling a bit.
In reply to alfadriver :
I'm not seeing your 150k mile warranty number anywhere. I'm seeing 100k, which is not as much as it sounds like on a commercial vehicle. You are also missing the point that the vehicle is out of action while it is being repaired, warranty or not, costing the operator money. Warranty doesn't cover that. A large portion of the downtime is caused by emissions equipment. If the technology does not exist to meet emissions standards without compromising the reliability of the vehicle, then it could be argued that the requirements are too strict.
Boost_Crazy said:If the technology does not exist to meet emissions standards without compromising the reliability of the vehicle, then it could be argued that the requirements are too strict.
In the case of diesel trucks (up to a certain size anyway), isn't that technology a gas engine?
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
The rule details requires 150k. It's not a warranty thing, that's generally 80-100k miles. But the emissions requirement is that the system is clean at 150k miles. So if the system is breaking prior to that, the EPA/CARB WILL force a recall to get it fixed. So if enough systems are failing prior to that, use the system to get the OEM to fix it.
And if you are certain about the reliability thing, take it up with the EPA and CARB. And I mean actually contact them with a real email and tell them how you feel. Although real data to demonstrate the problem is what they really would use. The system exists as it does to communicate all of that up and down the proper ladder. I suggest using it. Better than complaining about what someone is telling you as an anecdote on a web forum.
Edit- here are the current rules from California- https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I42B3EB107B9E11EDA8A9DEC7E923577F?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)
You'll note that every single section is a 150k mile fleet durability requirement. The MDV up to 14,000k lb is near the end of teh document.
BTW, the PHEV section early on is just phasing OUT PHEVs in the fleet calculation, so in 2029, PHEV's are not included as part of the normal emissions fleet.
In reply to Steve_Jones :
You are complaining that consumers are being forced to plug in their vehicle. That is the EV mandate.
Even if your claim is totally wrong.
There isn't a rule to make people plug in their cars, there IS a rule that includes electrification. There are 4 degrees of that electrification, one requires plugging in, the other 3 do not. In fact, two don't even have that as part of the system.
Whatever Jeep is doing does not represent the requirements, that's how Stelantis is dealing with it. Don't extrapolate what they are doing to every other OEM nor the rule.
alfadriver said:In reply to Steve_Jones :
You are complaining that consumers are being forced to plug in their vehicle. That is the EV mandate.
Even if your claim is totally wrong.
There isn't a rule to make people plug in their cars, there IS a rule that includes electrification. There are 4 degrees of that electrification, one requires plugging in, the other 3 do not. In fact, two don't even have that as part of the system.
Whatever Jeep is doing does not represent the requirements, that's how Stelantis is dealing with it. Don't extrapolate what they are doing to every other OEM nor the rule.
No, I am claiming consumers are being forced to buy plug in vehicles even if they have no way to plug them in. If someone goes to buy a Jeep Wrangler Today in MD and wants a non plug in model, they can not buy one off the lot and take it home Today.
Show me where I've said anything different. I've never mentioned the EV Mandate, I've never said people are " forced to plug in their vehicle". I've never mentioned any other OEM. You are saying those things and attributing them to me. I agree, the claim you made up, is "totally wrong" and a stupid one. That's why I would never say it.
If someone has no way to install a charger, shouldn't they have a choice of a non plug in car without driving to a different State to buy it?
Why does it always have to be the extremes?
Are there only 2 choices?...
"OMG think of the children and regulate everything to death" VS "Burn the rivers!"
Good grief. There is a lot of territory between those 2 extremes!
In reply to Steve_Jones :
So blame jeep. What does that have to do with the EPA or CARB?
alfadriver said:In reply to Steve_Jones :
So blame jeep. What does that have to do with the EPA or CARB?
Well, it's Jeep trying to meet CARB requirements....
Again, for the 3rd time. I did not mention any EV mandate. All I said is MD is going the direction of EV only vehicles, and I think that's wrong. I'll paste it here again
I have no issues with wanting cleaner vehicles on the road, I do have an issue with regulating electric only. Maryland is going that direction, and the infrastructure is not there. At the moment Jeep dealers can only stock 4xe models, if you want a ICE only, you have to order it, or buy out of State. That's a bit much.
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. Nothing in that Statement mentions an EV mandate, other OEMs, the EPA, or CARB. If you feel the need to make E36 M3 up, to argue about, have fun.
In reply to Steve_Jones :
Maryland is not going that way, Jeep/Stellantis made the decision on how to respond to the regulations.
Maryland mandated it, but only Jeep is affected? Doesn't make sense.
In reply to Floating Doc (Forum Supporter) :
Maryland is a CARB State, so yes, Maryland set the regulations (as did the other CARB States).
I never said only Jeep is affected. I simply said:
Jeep dealers in Maryland can only stock 4xe models. I stand by that statement, as it's a fact
I did not mention EV Mandates, other Manufacturers, EPA or CARB. Other people did.
Manufacturers aren't going to make changes because of Trump. I've spoken to several insiders at manufacturers and they won't do anything because they have no clue what Trump might do next. They look at the world and see which way things are going and that is towards hybrid and electric. That is where their R&D is being spent. They know Trump can't change the trajectory of future vehicles, no matter what he does. Vehicle development cycles don't give a damn about who is President.
maj75 (Forum Supporter) said:Manufacturers aren't going to make changes because of Trump. I've spoken to several insiders at manufacturers and they won't do anything because they have no clue what Trump might do next. They look at the world and see which way things are going and that is towards hybrid and electric. That is where their R&D is being spent. They know Trump can't change the trajectory of future vehicles, no matter what he does. Vehicle development cycles don't give a damn about who is President.
Engineering or even re-engineering vehicles takes massive amounts of money. Nobody is going to spend that on a subset of the US market (or even the entire US market if the Feds were to override the CARB-style emissions at the state level) without some kind of assurance that this state of affairs would last well into the future. Anything the current administration can do with an executive order the next one can undo with a similar order, and that's not stability. Now, were Congress to pass laws rolling back various emissions regulations then you might see some manufacturers design new vehicles to take advantage of it, but not until then.
TravisTheHuman said:Boost_Crazy said:If the technology does not exist to meet emissions standards without compromising the reliability of the vehicle, then it could be argued that the requirements are too strict.
In the case of diesel trucks (up to a certain size anyway), isn't that technology a gas engine?
Cummins sure thinks so.
Steve_Jones said:In reply to Floating Doc (Forum Supporter) :
Maryland is a CARB State, so yes, Maryland set the regulations (as did the other CARB States).
I never said only Jeep is affected. I simply said:
Jeep dealers in Maryland can only stock 4xe models. I stand by that statement, as it's a fact
I did not mention EV Mandates, other Manufacturers, EPA or CARB. Other people did.
Oh, to be so rich that I can buy a new Wrangler any time I want, to the point where having to drive only 100 miles away or wait a few days for a dealer stock shuffle is a major inconvenience for my Jeeping whims.
Guess one would just have to buy a G-wagen for this week's new truck and do without.
You'll need to log in to post.
