And you're dead right about MPG != less fun. In the early 80s (stop me if you've heard this before), a typical four-banger made between 70 and 90 HP. You could boost this with turbos, but the better way is through improving the engine itself. 16-valve DOHC engines immediately resulted in big gains in power that were almost free in terms of efficiency.

So now twenty years later, the same size four-banger makes between 130 and 180 HP. This means you could either go, "hmm, we could just put a smaller engine under the hood, which means the frame can be even lighter, which means we need even less displacement and a smaller gas tank, which means less weight," and save a bunch of fuel, or you could go, "yippee! Free horsepower FTW!" like we've been doing.

Myself, I'd like to see tax incentives in favor of the latter. If you had an early 90s Honda Civic-class vehicle with, oh, 950cc displacement (my guestimate would be 85 HP - our 1500cc '91 Civic made just 90), you could get 50 MPG even before resorting to a whole bunch of heroic measures like hybrid engines. Seems kind of silly to want 140 HP in your subcompact shitbox if you're just going to sit in traffic anyway.

 Reply

Also, I like that CAFE actually encourages R&D progress in powertrains. Like HCCI.

 Reply

I know my position is very unpopular here, but I like being the hole in the echo chamber anyway. Besides, I give credit to clever workarounds. Then again, I can imagine the general public, after paying $4 a gallon for gas, frothing at the mouth at the idea of a gas tax too, as it certainly would be a welcome revenue generator.

 Reply

Many older vehicles, because they're lighter, tend to do OK in fuel economy.

 Reply