NewsThis really is the 2018 Wrangler “JL” • Red vs black keys: Real-world Hellcat performance • Windsor loses Transport

Hello, Allpar Forums member or visitor! If you were a member, you would not see this ad!

Register or log in at the top right of the page...

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Trump coming to Michigan tomorrow to talk with Automotive Execs...

Discussion in 'Mopar News and Rumors' started by redriderbob, Mar 14, 2017.

  1. redriderbob

    redriderbob Mopar Guru! Supporter

    Likes:
    6,131
    President Donald Trump coming to Michigan Wednesday, reports say (at http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/03/donald_trump_michigan.html )

    He will be visiting the site of the old GM Willow Run factory which is due to be developed to be turned into a world leading autonomous vehicle testing facility for automakers. The property was originally used as a retreat by Henry Ford and then housed a factory for General Motors. Chrysler would play a factor in the future of the property too and use it as a testing site for its future autonomous vehicles. The big news is what is rumored to happen...

    Trump to announce review of vehicle emissions rules: sources (at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-autos-idUSKBN16K1L5 )

    According to Reuters, he will talk about the review his administration has done looking into the regulations put forth on the automakers for the near future and laying out a plan to dial them back. Insiders say the administration feels that they will cost too much to implement, cost many American jobs and are out of step with the vehicles that consumers want to purchase (ala Trucks, CUVs and SUVs). This will be YUGE for FCA US who announced the end of production of their Dart and 200 sedans and announced a switch over to focus on Trucks and SUVs.
     
  2. Mike V.

    Mike V. Moderator

    Likes:
    15,129
    Good info and good post, let's keep the discussion light and non-political.

    Mike
     
    Christopher, James A and TTO_XODJ like this.
  3. Illegal Machine

    Illegal Machine Member

    Likes:
    322
    Wondering what Elon Musk's play is here. He's buddying up to the Trump Admin; at first it seems counterproductive for him to want Trump to push off/relax emission targets.....but also, the longer auto companies are producing high emission vehicles the longer he continues to sell them renewable energy credits. It'll be fascinating to see how this plays out.
     
  4. GasAxe

    GasAxe Active Member

    Likes:
    3,048
    From the article:
    In July, the EPA estimated the fleet would average only 50.8 mpg to 52.6 mpg in 2025 under the rules because Americans were buying more sport utility vehicles and trucks and fewer cars.

    This is where I think the automakers get the proverbial shaft on corporate MPG's. The buying trends of consumers are driving the corporate average, not the technology or products available. I want more fuel efficiency and cleaner air and less dependence on undesirable oil producing markets. I just don't want automakers to fail because they are giving us what we are willing to pay for.
     
    guyverfanboy, somber, suzq044 and 3 others like this.
  5. EVOL

    EVOL Member

    Likes:
    516
    I can guarantee Trump won't be happy that FCA and others have been subsidizing Tesla in form of buying carbon credits from them. How much help does that company need already??? And its all of us paying for it.
     
  6. Mallard

    Mallard Member

    Likes:
    308
    Musk has been clear that he opposes much of Trump's policies, but feels it's important to have an opposing view be part of the conversation. He also has multiple interests, including SpaceX getting NASA contracts and leasing NASA infrastructure. Also, his request all along is that oil and clean energy should play by the same rules. The oil industry is heavily subsidized, while others do not get the same treatment.

    Say what you want about Tesla, but they have played a major role in the industry. Bob Lutz only believed in the Volt because of Tesla. They have proven the viability of selling long-range electric cars, not just cheap compliance-mobiles. Other automakers have followed suit. They have revolutionized connectivity and everyone is scrambling to catch up. Autopilot poses the limits of driver assist technology, and this has single-handedly accelerated semi-autonomous development within the entire industry. Again, everyone is scrambling to catch up.

    They may not post a profit, but there is a big difference between a failing tech company and Tesla, and that's in assets. Musk has continued to reinvest capital into technology, factories, and infrastructure. These are all things that will not not disappear. My impression is that Elon is content if Tesla goes bankrupt building a nationwide network of fast chargers, a massive battery factory, and a state of the art assembly plant, because he has changed the industry and the viability of electric cars in a way that no one else ever would have attempted, and again, these things will continue to support the industry even if a bankruptcy occurs.
     
    guyverfanboy, djDaemon, JKU12 and 3 others like this.
  7. cygnus

    cygnus Member Supporter

    Likes:
    84
    Details matter. I want to hear details on the CAFE targets for 2025; if or how they're changing. Otherwise this is a non-event.
     
    BEEAH and Zagnut27 like this.
  8. dakrt99

    dakrt99 Active Member

    Likes:
    812
    I want cool cars with V8s for the distant future. That's all I care about. Keep this party train going.
     
  9. Mallard

    Mallard Member

    Likes:
    308
    I don't think we can count on that, no matter what Trump says tomorrow. The market has changed. You're not going to see major reversals of product plans over something that can change again in few years.
     
  10. Nell_Z

    Nell_Z New Member

    Likes:
    16
    As far as CAFE rules go, its most likely in Musk's favor that Trump does either extend or put an end to the EPA's control. This way, individual states get more control over how emissions are handled. I always wondered how CAFE would play out in states that aren't as wealthy/tech laden like the Dakota's or even Alaska. Those people/businesses may not be able to afford hybrid and EV vehicles and even if they could, saving every penny possible means the most to the smaller business. So, if California and New York would like to push their states into the emissions free zone, they have individual power to do so, and Tesla can reign as king still. Plus, if the whole entire country were to be forced into BEV vehicles that soon, a battery catastrophe could happen, as not every automaker can be as efficient or take as many risks as Tesla.

    Tesla will get more business overseas, so it's also to Musk's favor that he doesn't have to necessarily focus so much on the American market.

    Plus, Tesla has become much more than just an automaker. If Tesla ends up swallowing SpaceX, The Boring Company and Hyperloop the way it absorbed SolarCity, it'll be a positive that his engineers can spend more time focusing on perfecting other avenues and not cutting corners just to increase volume.

    All the more positive, Ram and Jeep won't have to worry so much if the emissions target is relaxed/removed. If Jeep ever wants a future in places like east Asia where electric vehicles will inevitably prevail, they'll have to get their money some where. Bring on the Scrambler!
     
  11. voiceofstl

    voiceofstl Member

    Likes:
    153
    Yes I like V8s but what I realy like is speed and money!
    Its mostly about saving money in your pocket. If I can get a 13 second Charger(same size) that gets 200 mile a charge and can recharge in 20m min. Sign me up.
    Oh yes......that battery better be good for at least 200,000 miles and it better be under 30 grand with no tax deals!
     
    Andy4.7 likes this.
  12. EVOL

    EVOL Member

    Likes:
    516
    If they could make money selling them, they already would be.
     
  13. pt006

    pt006 Member

    Likes:
    353
    States do NOT have a right to set their own standards when it affects other states. That's why we have a federal government. In the Northeastern states, the lakes and rivers have been polluted by the Midwestern coal burning plants. Acid rain for one. Mercury in fish is another. There is a printed warning in fishing guides about pregnant women eating locally caught fish. Never thought I'd live to see that.

    And there's more. The Japanese Nuclear plant is still leaking radioactive waste water into the Pacific Ocean.

    As far as trump talking about lessening the emission rules, this may have to be ok'd by Congress? And what would happen if a different administration changed the rules 4 years from now?
     
    Mallard likes this.
  14. Nell_Z

    Nell_Z New Member

    Likes:
    16
    So, the thought process here is, within the course of 10 years we can fix, or do right by, centuries of wrong doing? Yeah, and what if the plan backfires? Are the cons be considered with the pros? I understand that our ecosystem, as a whole, needs to be corrected, but at what cost? So, say we did stick with the CAFE laws being set out, and other laws (or bills) that have come through the EPA. How many jobs will be lost? How many companies will endure bankruptcy? How many families ruined by the increased cost of living? Do we have the necessary tools/resources to make dramatic changes? Are they surefire/will they cause some form of economic or natural disaster? Are these proven methods? The last time we invested heavily in 'green' companies, a mass majority of those went bankrupt. Not everyone can stick to their word the way Elon Musk has. So then what? More debt, more money thrown away?

    And with those short sets of cons, the bigger picture appears. Say, we do go through with everything set in place right now. How long will it take for our wrongs to be righted? Even if we speak in decades, that's still a very long time, considering all of the people we just screwed over/all of the businesses we either just destroyed or wasted money on. There are bigger solutions at hand in the workings. Instead of attacking/blaming, there are tech companies/researchers out there looking for more efficient ways to clean water, clean air, in real time, as opposed to just expecting things to get better because we've cut pollution down. Those companies that we could put out of business are also helping us become multi-planetary so that maybe we can expand on different moons/planets.

    Yes, things look bad now, but as a whole, we can get a lot worse if we continue to let politicians do what scientists/researchers do best. So, I'm with Trump on this one, but only if instead of giving money to EPA, he makes it easier for technologists to do what they do best.
     
  15. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Well-Known Member Level III Supporter

    Likes:
    7,671
    You will not get details today.

    This is a meeting to discuss what does the industry want.

    Regulatory changes and legislation will come later.