Which automaker still doesn't like the new CAFE rules? Volkswagen, that's who. After claiming the proposed 2025 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards were biased back in August, VW is again saying, hey, wait a minute, let's not be so dismissive of diesel engines.
When the original 54.5 mpg CAFE proposal was announced (which will actually be around 40 mpg in the real world), Volkswagen did not sign on to the agreement. The reason is that VW says the current plan helps U.S. automakers by being lenient on big pickups but doesn't have much love for modern diesel vehicles. Make that "enough love," since the EPA says the rule does give, "credits for technologies with potential to achieve real-world CO2 reductions and fuel economy improvements that are not captured by the standards test procedures." According to Reuters, since August, Volkswagen America's general counsel and VW representatives have met with the White House and "transportation and environmental regulators" to express the company's concerns. We haven't heard that VW's efforts are bearing any fruit, but that doesn't mean we won't hear more about them in the future.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 11 Comments
      PR
      • 3 Years Ago
      What is VW afraid of? That they might actually have to sell the same cars in the US that they already sell in Europe and the rest of the world that will ALREADY meet or exceed the 2025 CAFE standards? Although to be fair to VW, I don't think they are fighting the actual 54.5 MPG CAFE standard itself, as much as they are fighting how those requirements are calculated between trucks and passenger vehicles. VW just doesn't like that trucks are only being pushed at a 3.5% rate of MPG improvement, and cars are at 5%. It sounds like a bunch of excuse making and whining on behalf of VW. But as any greenie knows, improvements to the worst MPG vehicles actually reduces the most total amount of gas being burned. So this could be a case of VW's whining aligning itself with the best interest of those of us who want to reduce the amount of gas burned by as much as possible. Take for example, a Ford F150 Pickup 4WD 8 cyl, 6.2 L, Automatic (S6), Regular. EPA estimates it will burn through 26.3 barrels/year. The EPA is asking for just a 3.5% improvement in mpg, which would save 0.92 barrels/year, while VW wants the same 5% increase in MPG for trucks and cars, which would save 1.315 barrels/year for this Ford truck. Compare that to a Volkswagen Jetta 4 cyl, 2.0 L, Manual 5-spd, Regular, that the EPA estimates will burn through 12.2 barrels/year. A 5% increase in MPG would save 0.61 barrels/year. The better savings come with what VW is whining and demanding.
        EZEE
        • 3 Years Ago
        @PR
        It amazes me what gets voted down... Your post is littered with facts, with a smidgeon of opinion (hey, that rhymes), and it is voted down? The F-150 example is interesting - although the buyer needs some responsibility as well. I am curious on how many people, for their towing or hauling purposes, need the 6.2L AWD model, when there is the Eco-Boost model that does much better? I don't have the math at my finger tips, but I will bet the 3.5% improvement is literally right there. I guess if they want to complain, they can. However, why not deal with what 'is what is' and go from there? People on my side (the right) can bitch about the Volt and subsidies and whatnot, which is fine, however the car is here, it is being sold, so deal with it, and realize, that it is actually a pretty cool car, and a marvel of technology. And...Volkswagen doesn't even sell that many trucks in the USA...so what is their main beef? A hybrid system in a Toureg or Tiguan (who comes up with those names) should pretty much fix those two...
      Spec
      • 3 Years Ago
      Just shut up already and build an electric that will your CAFE numbers way up. It is not that hard. If you wanna be lazy about it, just have Magne do it for you . . . but prepare to be mocked for doing a crappy job.
        EZEE
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Spec
        ROFL...is that a reference to the Focus? :D
        Ryan
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Spec
        http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/18/volkswagen-et-electric-delivery-van-is-out-of-this-world/ Not sure why this isn't on Autoblog Green... Why doesn't Volkswagon just make a Jetta with this technology? It isn't that hard people. Stop complaining and just do it. (Yes, big pick-ups shouldn't be exempt, but that is a different battle.)
      Rotation
      • 3 Years Ago
      I agree. The rules are too lenient on trucks. Companies like Subaru are making tons of crossovers that class as trucks and so can get reduced mpg. They announced a new one today even. But hey, it's not like VW isn't pulling the same junk. A Tiguan is a truck in class only. A good wagon is a better choice, it's just that wagons aren't trucks under CAFE so it hurts companies to offer wagons instead of crossovers.
      2 Wheeled Menace
      • 3 Years Ago
      Friggin' VW. They have no room to talk. Just look at their USA engines versus what they're selling in Europe. We get these 20+ year old leftover motors in almost every model. Also, their cars are generally super overweight. This company has let themselves go. The worst example in my opinion is the beetle. 2930lbs, cast iron DOHC 2.5L motor, 31mpg highway. And in the Jetta, you get to chose from a 1980's era 2.0L motor with 115HP or the 1990's era 2.5L DOHC.. Even the 2.0L TSI is a sad state of affairs. Ford and Hyundai's turbo motors absolutely put it to shame in the fuel economy and performance segment. Pull out of the market or shut your yap!
        EZEE
        • 3 Years Ago
        @2 Wheeled Menace
        Hey 2wheel! I remember back in the 90's. I looked at the mileage on the Buick Century, a really miserable car, and the Volkswagen golf. They either were the same, or the Buick was slightly better. The Buick was a fairly large car based on an 80's platform. Made me ask, 'wtf, volkswagen?'.
          2 Wheeled Menace
          • 3 Years Ago
          @EZEE
          Woah. They've been this bad for that long?
          EZEE
          • 3 Years Ago
          @EZEE
          Either they are that bad, or GM has been that good. GM, if you look on some of their cars, has always been pretty good. Even the Corvette (maybe because it is lightweight and aero?) has always gotten at or near 30mpg highway. Right winger than I am (well, cheap right winger) - I always wondered why people were willing to abandon MPG's in the 80's and 90's. So gas is $2 a gallon. Why do I want a Golf (or Civic or Escort or Corolla) that is going to get in the low 20's for MPG and maybe hit 30mpg highway if I am lucky? If a Mustang does 0 - 60 in 9 or 10 seconds, well that is pretty crappy. But if the Civic or Accord takes that long - well, I did not buy either for the speed... I would rather have gas mileage. But, that's just me.
        icharlie
        • 3 Years Ago
        @2 Wheeled Menace
        Actually, that Vw 5cyl came out in 2005 (2005.5 jetta) as a new engine. It really isn't that old. The 2.0L 8v IS an old motor and it needs to be retired.... again.
    Share This Photo X