29 June 2013

Fuel Standards for Work Trucks?

Guys,

Barack Hussein Obama has decreed that work trucks of all sizes will have their first ever mileage standards imposed on them.  Work trucks can be anything from pickups to big rigs to anything in between.  I don't see how this is a workable standard, and here's why.

Trucks of all sizes, even the smallest ones, offer far more options for customizing than typical passenger vehicles do.  There are multiple transmission choices; there are multiple engine choices; and there are multiple cab configuration choices, which change the size of the vehicle.  I have a few problems and questions with this proposal.

One, unlike car companies, most truck companies allow the buyer to choose multiple engines from different manufacturers.  For example, if you were to buy a Freightliner, Peterbilt, Kenworth, or other heavy truck, you may choose a proprietary engine (if available), or you may choose a Detroit, Cummins, or Caterpillar engine.  That is to say that when one buys a heavy truck, one will choose the make, size, and horsepower of the engine to power the truck.  This depends on how the vehicle will be used, where, under what circumstances, etc.  For example, if a truck won't be traversing the mountains on a regular basis, the owner of the truck can outfit it with a smaller, more fuel efficient engine.  The same applies to transmissions, axles, differentials, and so on.  To get an idea of how much choice a customer has, here's the spec sheet to the Peterbilt 587.

As you can see, outfitting a work truck is far different than outfitting a passenger car.  Passenger cars are usually offered with two to four trim levels, which determines what optional equipment, engines, and transmissions will be offered with the vehicle.  For example, when buying a Toyota Corolla, there are three trim levels: base, LE, and S.  The trim level determines what engine and transmission you get.  While Ford offers more choice with their models, the options pale when compared to those faced by truck operators and manufacturers.  That is to say that work trucks do not offer the degree of standardization that is found in passenger cars.

All these choices will affect fuel economy.  Different transmissions and axles will affect the gear ratios.  Without getting complicated, the gear ratio determines how many engine revolutions are required for each wheel revolution.  The gear ratio determines the acceleration, speed, and fuel economy of any vehicle.  Since trucks have so many CHOICES with components that affect the overall gear ratio, does it not stand to reason that setting a fuel mileage standard is well nigh impossible?

I have a few more questions to ask.  Isn't the way the truck is used going to determine fuel mileage?  If a truck is used to haul light but bulky things like cardboard boxes, will it not get better fuel mileage than a truck hauling heavy, steel beams?  If a truck is often used in the mountains, will it not get worse mileage than a truck used on flat terrain?  If a truck is set up for traversing the Rocky Mountains, will it not have different engines, transmissions, axles, and differentials than one that isn't used in the mountains; even if that truck is used on flat ground, it'll get worse fuel economy than one set up for flat ground.  Ergo, how can one set any fuel economy standard for work trucks?

I have some more questions to ask.  Don't you think that truck owners and operators would want the most fuel efficient truck they can buy?  Since fuel represents a huge operating cost (a big rig, at today's fuel prices, costs MORE THAN $1,000 to refuel!), does it not stand to reason that truck owners and operators would want the most economical vehicle they could get?  Furthermore, does it not stand to reason that truck manufacturers would WANT to offer fuel efficient products?  Wouldn't the manufacturer of the most fuel efficient work trucks have a huge competitive advantage in the market place?  WTF is the gov't doing meddling in something they know nothing about?!

The proposed fuel economy standards for work trucks are unworkable.  Given the amount of choice truck owners and operators have when fitting out their vehicles; given the customizing choices a truck buyer has; given the variation in between two trucks of the same model; no two trucks will get the same mileage.  Ergo, a fuel standard cannot be set, let alone enforced, for work trucks.

This is yet another case of know-nothing, idiot government bureaucrats trying to regulate something that cannot be regulated!  Those proposing this (our notorious 'president' among them) have no clue; they know nothing about the real world; nor do they know anything about the real world in which most of us live.  I wish someone would bomb Washington, D.C. (aka the District of Criminals)!  Government officials don't know their asses from a hole in the ground!

I'm out of here.  Have a good day now.  Until next time...

MarkyMark

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

1. Mark Flowers is a true dedicated Christian but a non denominational and non church going Christian, a praying man upon his knees and he gives all credit to his survival to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as his savoir and protector of him and his loved ones. Mark has to continually break all curses in Jesus Christ’s name, sent by witch craft and the Satanic agenda.

2. Mark Flowers is a fighter, a man that will never bow to any evil corruption, to DEATH.

3. Mark Flowers has had the fatherhood of his children stolen by the masons / system / The Australian Government.

4. Mark Flowers is a survivor of more than a decade of intense murderous Freemasonry Gang Stalking {a term he coined} and raised in the Federal Magistrates Court Parramatter Sydney Australia in 2009 & 2010 whilst defending his rights to father his children.

5. Mark Flowers has had so many attempts on his life in the process of Freemasonry gangstalking that they are too numerous to list, most have been whilst driving in road traffic accident setups by gangstalkers . But all manner of threats have come against Mark Flowers, One time a sour mason wielding a hammer at Mark’s head got a lesson in respect and kicked off Mark’s property. The police always fail to follow such death threats against Mark Flowers.

6. Mark Flowers has self-represented in some 60 appearances in the Federal Magistrates Court, the District Court and the Supreme Court in Australia and all with nil formal education, in fact Mark left school at 14 years and first job was in a lumber yard.

7. Mark Flowers is a Father first, and a former children’s safety film producer, but the dogs of gangstalking were released on him for doing so. Mark has been fighting ever since and will never give in, as the eternity in spirit and fear of God through Christ Jesus motivates him to be fearless against evil.

If I fall in this good fight it will be into the arms of my saviour Jesus Christ.

Brother Mark

http://www.markflowers.org/

rmaxgenactivepua said...

@Markflowers

You should also try posting on youtube, you'll get alot more hits there

Youtube gets you huge amounts of traffic

Make a channel, upload some vids with news about men & put links & comments on video's with more then a million hits

Also get some men to help you post your message on different sites

You'll grow hundreds of times faster & get alot more views then you do now

rmaxgenactivepua said...

As for the trucks ...

You guys need to get rid of the government

Stop paying your taxes & tell the pricks to fuck off

Pay for your gas by cash, problem solved

They can go fuck themselves

Anonymous said...

The they'll need a standard for every engine and combination made and a min. MPG for each of them.

Anonymous said...

Also the electrical power plants must comply with higher clean air standards,just when the move to shale and coal burning has kept petrol use down.

Expect the cost of everything to skyrocket.

All part of the move to a carbon based monetary supply.

The money brokers want it all,all of it.

MarkyMark said...

Anon0119,

That's why the standards are unwieldy and difficult, if not impossible, to implement. It's not like cars where the engine/tranny combinations are fixed and limited. THAT was my whole point...

MarkyMark

Anonymous said...

The only way you could possibly make this work from an engineering perspective is if you required certification testing of every engine model offered, with verification that it met some minimum fuel consumed per kW/hour produced standard, with additional testing for every transmission and drive train option to certify that they did not exceed a certain energy loss ratio at rated power.

sth_txs said...

Just another example of how we can't buy what we want in the land of the free.

Go look up Eric Peters and auto. He has many an editorial how government fuel efficiency and safety standards have made cars more expensive.