Motor Trend says 2013 will have the 6.4 V8

steve911 said:

Some times I wonder if the National Enquirer prints more accurate news than Motor Trend... News like that is why I cancelled my subscription to MT

Steve A.

Click to expand...

I never paid for mine. I think it was given to me for free when I went to a local auto show. Free advice, and worth every penny of it

shooter_t1 said:

^^^^^^LOL^^^^^^

Click to expand...

PLUS 1000!

the National Enquirer prints more accurate news than Motor Trend... News like that is why I cancelled my subscription to MT

browse at grocery store... maybe.

Ralph showed us the Gen V and told us at VOI. V10 !

The new mileage requirement is cafe standards I'm sure. There is no way, that all the cars in anyone's fleet will get 50+ MPG. Unless you're selling motorcycles.

Phun70 said:

The new mileage requirement is cafe standards I'm sure. There is no way, that all the cars in anyone's fleet will get 50+ MPG. Unless you're selling motorcycles.

Click to expand...

http://autos.yahoo.com/news/obama-reveals-new-mileage-standards--garners-broad-support.html?page=2

Time to get Obama out and de-fund the EPA.

Obama Reveals New Mileage Standards; Garners Broad Support
Industry, consumer, environmentalist groups largely heap praise on 54.5 mpg compromise.
The Detroit BureauBy Paul A. Eisenstein | The Detroit Bureau – Fri, Jul 29, 2011 6:41 PM EDT

tweet6
Email
Print

With many of the nation’s automotive leaders surrounding him at the White House, President Obama revealed details of the unexpected compromise that will set the nation on a course of drastically improved automotive fuel economy over the next decade-and-a-half – something he dubbed “the single most important step we’ve ever taken as a nation to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.”

The new Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard demands that manufacturers deliver a fleet average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, roughly twice the fuel economy of the typical vehicle being sold in the U.S. when the current administration came to power in January 2009.
MORE AT THEDETROITBUREAU.COM

» Click Here To Subscribe to The Detroit Bureau
» BMW's New Electric Concept Cars
» GM Partnering With Solar Power Provider



While some environmentalists had hoped to push the figure to 56.2 or even 62 mpg, the final number is significantly higher than what industry lobbyists had been campaigning for – in fact, barely a week ago, an automotive lobbying group was preparing an advertising campaign designed to thwart the White House push for a new CAFE standard.

Instead, as demonstrated by the presence of top executives — including General Motors’ Dan Akerson, Jim Lentz of Toyota Motor Sales USA, Ford’s Alan Mulally and Hyundai Motor America’s John Krafcik – the industry came onboard with very public support, triggering praise from the president, who declared that while the new 54.5 mpg number is “an aggressive target…the companies here are stepping up to the plate.”

Shortly after taking office, the president achieved an earlier compromise, boosting the mileage standard to 37.5 mpg by 2016. But that was generally seen as an interim step – and, especially in the light of this year’s drastic surge in fuel prices, the push was on to set a longer-term target. But the sharp rebuke the Democratic Party suffered in last year’s Congressional election short-circuited a push by the Environmental Protection Agency to mandate 62 mpg.

And opponents seemed to be gaining the upper hand when various studies came out, this year, suggesting that such a number would cost the typical motorist perhaps $10,000 a vehicle – slashing anticipated auto sales by millions and potentially threatening 100s of thousands of jobs.

A lower, 56.2 mpg figure was floated last month, but a senior Toyota official, asking not to be identified, admitted that even a matter of days ago it seemed “unlikely we’d get an agreement any time soon.”

Sources in Washington suggest that the ongoing stalemate over increasing the federal deficit cap helped motivate White House negotiators to reach a settlement that could demonstrate the administration’s ability to drive a hard bargain but still reach compromise. Whether accurate may never be known but all questioned agree that the final agreement came together quickly – and has generated more positive and broad support than skeptics anticipated.

Indeed, opponents clearly couldn’t ignore the strong support of American motorists slammed by this year’s sharp rise in fuel prices. A survey conducted for the Pew Charitable Trust by a bipartisan polling team, earlier this month, found 91% of American’s agreeing that dependene upon foreign oil is a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” threat to U.S. security. The study, which cut across demographic and political lines, also found 82% of those polled in favor of a 56 mpg standard.

In the end, few in the industry seemed willing to resist that mood.

“This proposed rule presents a path forward that greatly improves fuel economy while preserving customer choice and future industry growth,” a statement from General Motors declared.

There had been some concerns, meanwhile, that proponents of the higher CAFE target first sought by the EPA would turn on any proposed watering down of the 2025 mandate. With rare exception, however, environmentalists also are voicing support.

“This is a strong step toward reducing America’s dependence on oil, curbing climate change and protecting our health,” said Peter Lehner, Executive Director of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Even veterans groups weighed in, Operation Free, a coalition of veteran and national security organizations stating that, “Making our cars more fuel efficient isn’t just going to save Americans hundreds of billions of dollars at the gas pump—it’s going to make us safer, too.”

To underscore the challenge of pulling together the deal announced today, there was still no final consensus on the CAFE proposal, even when an administration spokesman announced today’s White House session, earlier in the week. A number of issues, large and small, needed to be massaged. Among other things, it initially appeared the revised fuel economy standard would go with a 56.2 mpg figure for cars and the lower 54.5 mpg number for trucks.

According to David Strickland, head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, key parties didn’t sign off on the final language until nearly midnight last night.

While the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers pulled its attack ad campaign, industry officials continued to make it clear they were concerned about the challenges facing them as the nation calls for the biggest and fastest increase in automotive fuel economy since the CAFE standards were first enacted in the wake of the original oil shock of the mid-1970s.

Paul Hawker said:

My prediction...no matter what the engine.

10 Cyls.
Faster.
Better handling.
Better braking.
Better fuel econony.
Higher top speed.
Better aero.
Faster shifting.
Better stereo & Nav.
Better throttle response.

Bet my predictions are accurate.

Bet some people still complain about the car.

Click to expand...

VERY well said in all accounts. IF it had a V8 it would be lighter though and at least sound better......

To the poster that said high horse power cars will be a thing of the past hasn't looked at recent trends.

A lot of cars are actually going up in Horse Power. It seems like if the auto has tons of HP and low gearing that it can get better MPG. Think of a 700HP Viper going 65 on the highway in something like 8th gear, it would be almost idling and getting great MPG. Not that it would get 50MPG. But the technology for electric engines is getting better and they are getting smaller, faster cheaper to add to the cars. If there was a way to get around the weight a small electric engine in a 2022 900HP V10 Viper would bump up its MPG, and could be used for the occasional parade. (more likely for the occasional sneaking into the garage late at night after having too much fun at the *******/Tilted-Kilt and not wanting to wake the Mrs. with the extra loud Corsa exhaust. )

And the only color offered will be yellow, so they'll be even slower. LoL


Bascially, if MT writes it, it's wrong. (IMHO)

In the future, cars will be built with carbon nanotube frames that will serve as capacitors for their electric engines... or something like that

Lawrenzo said:

Bill,

You crack me up! I know that MT is not known for getting all their facts correct, but as we all know sometimes rumors are actually based on facts floated out here for their reaction. I hope they are waaay off base on this one though!

Click to expand...

MT has become a shell of its' former automotive enthusiast self. For the record, the August 2011 issue devoted considerable time/effort to enthusiast 'rocket ships' like: (1) the New Bug (4 pages); (2) the Chevy Sonic; (3) a comparison of the Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf and Toyota Prius (my toes are tingling!, 10 pages) and; (4) Pixar's Cars 2 movie. I won't be renewing my subscription...

That was the CHANGE he was campaining about last elections !!! CHANGE FOR THE WORST ON ALL FRONTS!!

v10enomous said:

Time to get Obama out and de-fund the EPA.

Click to expand...

De-fund? How about eliminate? They started in 1970 and that was because many industries were already sued or being sued and/or shut down and laws already being put in place. In other words, the system worked. So the government (politicians) saw this societal trend, knew they would have support to create a department, give some buddies jobs, and come across to the public as a wonderful representative for a clean America resulting in more votes...even though the system worked without an EPA.

And we've been stuck with an EPA ever since because people think the EPA was the reason things got cleaned up.

Wanna talk about the dept of Education? HUD? NHTSA?

I don't entirely discount the possibility of a V8 being offered for the Viper in the future. A V8 Viper could be produced with high HP numbers wile offering a more cost efficient package.
Don't believe it? Have a look at the Ferrari line up or look no farther than the success of the ZR1 Corvette. If the Viper was offered with a V8 it might be a decent marketing strategy Chrysler could employ because it would bring new customers into the fold and would cut into the sales of competitors. A V8 Viper with comfort options should sell and insure the survival of the V10 performance Viper that we all love and want to survive. I know that to the Viper purist this idea won't sit well, but it is submitted as a thought to consider

STILL GOTTA GO WITH THAT RALPH GILLES GUY. HE SAID AT "VOI" IT WOULD BE A V-10, I'M KINDA THINKING HE MAY KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, AS OPPOSED TO MOTOR TREND

If each car gets twice the mileage, but cost $10K more per car it would take the average driver almost 10 years to pay for it in gas savings. I know that is not the overall intent of the MPG strategy, but that's what it will cost us to do it...

I'm out on that since I hardly ever keep a car that long.

It is going to be a V-10 with 700+HP , with Fiat's multi air technology , higher RPM also............

I heard it'll hover.