Korean Job Discussion Forums

[some waygug-in]

http://en.autos.sympatico.msn.ca/guides_and_advice/article.aspx?cp-documentid=5526210

Reality after fifteen years of fuel economy futility

By Evan Griffey
Technologies have advanced in the past 15 years but that doesn't mean our fuel-efficiency has. A flashback to 1992 shows that fuel mileage has remained stagnant and even regressed in some cases.
There is little doubt that technology has come a long way in the last 15 years. Think of the size of your cell phone, speed of your computer, the kind of camera you had; now realize that each of these items can be had in a single, credit card-sized device. We have 102-inch plasma TVs and the old Walkman has been ousted by tiny, thumb-sized MP3 players.


Today�s Honda Civics are not in the same league as the 1992 Civic VX: At 102 horsepower, the VX was rated at 4.9 / 4.3 L/100 km (city/highway) or 57 / 66 mpg.Yep, gadgetry has become smaller, faster and more versatile, but has the technological juggernaut had that much impact on the cars we drive?

One has to surmise that the advancement of computer-chipped electronics has made its mark on automotive ECUs. And it has. Today's engines are making more power from less displacement than ever before and doing so while generating minute traces of emissions.

Extrapolating that tuning success to fuel economy seems like a logical progression. But don't go all-in with this bet. Looking back 15 years reveals that the fuel mileage evolution has stagnated, even regressed to Neanderthal standards in some cases.

The data doesn�t lie
The fuel mileage saga is spelled out in the MPG Super Stars chart. Five 1992-vintage cars outperform the best gasoline-powered offerings from 2007 while a sixth equals them in highway mileage.

(click the link to read the entire article)

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

What is Ron Paul's position on minimum millage standards?

Is he correct or wrong?

[some waygug-in]

I have no idea about his positions on various things. I am not American, as you well know, but I do like some of the things he says about American foreign policy.

Do I think there should be minimum mileage standards set by government?

I don't know that this would be a good idea just yet.

I think the currently rising fuel costs will make fuel economy a major consideration for new car buyers, so I think the problem will be getting manufacturers to make enough high-mileage cars to meet the demand.

Car makers still want to sell all the low mileage cars that are already made, so I doubt that any laws will be brought in soon.

The ultimate power is in the hands of the consumer. Just don't buy low mileage cars anymore and car makers will have to adjust accordingly.

[sojourner1]

I think American auto and engine manufacturers can make a come back if they innovate an efficient engine design while protecting their interests by protecting the knowledge it is based on and really keep a secret. Of course, some one would sell them out to make money on the side. Of course, many Asians would reverse engineer the design in imitating it as to provide a cheaper product to the global markets that does the same thing. This is why no one in America makes investments today in manufacturing and technological advancements. Science is severely lacking outside of the medical fields. Americans with money are not willing to make risky investments in new technologies, but those with money are just resting on their laurels while they sit and get fat on dividends based off the performance of global stocks. Uncle Sam provides money to keep the old people going as long as possible since they do have money from the previous successes of American innovations and manufacturing that shaped the world we live in today. I believe there is nothing you could invent or design today that is not reverser engineer proof unlike in the good ol' days where if was your invention, it's only yours to produce and sell.

This is a huge problem for the economic interests of America and Europe today for you have to actually produce a product that meets or exceeds consumers needs to maintain profitability and long term stabilit while actually being innovative and impossible to reverse engineer or to block imports of it's type. This is one big problem to solve. The Koreans solve it by imitating American ideas and design plans, but not allowing American imports. This is how the world is getting over on America and profiting on it's ideas and innovations where now where now she is losing and no one cares while the educated and capable grand children of these inventions and ideas are going broke with little opportunities.

There are many good ideas out there for more efficient gas engines and even engines that funtion through separating water, but only the person with a bright idea and the big investment money can actually make something positive happen. No one in America seems to be innovating or investing in innovative ideas as the rich are all too afraid they will be beat out to the Asians and Indians. The rich are too caught up in living the good life of luxury and knowing they can flee any place should it become inhospitable to the rich.

The Indians are looking to follow through with an engine running on water product that separates the water into hydrogen and oxygen, both combustible fuels. An engine that is the holy grail, an engine that is almost free to operate and does not produce pollution. That is what will save the world for generations to come. Too bad the Americans are not leading the pack for if they were since this is the stuff of science fiction, it is a very American and European idea since antiquity. Good jobs would be the creation and it would be one exciting time just as it was 100 years ago when gas combustion engines were state of the art in Detroit and Paris. The global economy has to equalize out to where a Korea, A Japanes, an Indian, a German; all have the same shot at opportunity depending on their abilities, skills, knowledge, and qualifications, but this just isn't so. Having money to buy hardware and the good life is the only thing that counts in the 21st century.