Re: CARB

[Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Bruce Hevner wrote:

> > changing. We'd still be driving 4000 lb. carbureted drum-brake
> > cars, choking to death at 55 if it was left up to Detroit. Detroit
> > can't "self regulate"
>
> I think that's only partially true. Although the Feds did mandate changes,
> competition also made them change.
> Remember back in the early 70's the Feds told the Mfgs they had to reduce
> emissions and they cried they couldn't do it, no way. Then along comes
> little (at that time) HONDA with it's CVCC engine. Met the standards WITHOUT
> a converter! Made the US Mfgs look stupid.

I have to agree with you here, though the Japanese were also
looking for a way into the American market; the 74 gas crisis and
tightening Federal standards gave them that edge. That little CVCC
was (and still is) a nifty thing (though that tiny 3-barrel carb
was a nightmare to tune).


> It's a shame but (IMHO) Detroit has been playing "catch up" for a long time
> now. Competition will initiate changes faster than Gov regulations any day.
> So let the Feds give em guidance but let the market dictate changes.

Since 1980 when you-know-who got in office, there's been a lot of
-- let's use their euphemism -- 'profit taking', fat cats taking
money out that was typically R&D, infrastructure, and that
annoying thing called "the future".


Right now big oil is claiming environmentalist opposition were why
they did not build additional capacity. They were certainly
opposed by 'em, sometimes rationally sometimes maybe not, but they
most definitely engaged in wanton profit-taking in the last 20+
years.

It might also be that they saw the writing on the wall; the age of
cheap oil might actually be over now. If so, it was a very wise
(for their investors) move to make, to not build.

All good things come to an end! Who could imagine people wouldn't
keep horses?! Think of all that cultural tradition and
infrastructure!