|
|
|
|
|
|
by boogerbear
3914 days ago
|
|
|
Diesel is a factor here, too. The EU strategically switched to diesel in the 90's (I think) in order to meet carbon emissions standards. Diesels are more efficient. Drivers in Germany like diesels because diesel is also cheaper than gasoline, which is not true in the US. Diesel has a problematic history in the US, though, and US emissions standards are tough on diesel by-products like NOx. I would like to know how much of that is anti-competitive and how much is genuine concern for the environment. VW (and the EU in general) bet heavily on diesel. VW in particular had to cheat to meet the US emissions standards because they were under pressure to compete with other automakers to gain entry into the US market. Whether others did the same remains to be seen. US makers don't really product diesel cars, that is why they did not have this problem. |
|
|
Genuine concern. US cars were virtually crippled in the 70s due to NOx standards (power-robbing EGR valves being the main culprit, IIRC). For example, the high-end version of the Chevrolet Camaro in 1976 was getting 165bhp out of a 350ci V8 small block (for comparison, I think the plain Jane 2015 Corvette my parents just bought puts out 450bhp from the modern version of that engine). The straight six cylinder version put out less power than my 1.4L four cylinder Scion.
All that smog in the LA valley back in the 70s? That was NOx, so at least in the case of California, those standards were there for a reason. Besides, small diesels were just a gleam in VW's eye when those standards were put in place, so there was nothing to anti-competitive about.