Economy in fuel consumption is another great advantage of our “48″ six-cylinder car which results from the carbureter to a great extent. The Locomobile has frequently been driven 12 miles to the gallon on a full passenger load. Owners have without exception reported fine results in this direction. Some of the features of our “Six” carbureter that produce this economy and general satisfaction are as follows:

1 . Special design of the aspirating nozzle producing the power of a multiple jet with the simplicity and easy starting of a single jet.

2. These results are accomplished without the attention of the driver and without the use of any automatic device of any sort.

3. The use of both hot water and hot air enables low gravity fuel to be consumed with entire satisfaction.

4. The hot air pipe is fitted with an adjustable opening through which cool air may be drawn in summer.

5. The quality of the mixture is controlled by a lever and quadrant on the dashboard. This facilitates self starting and enables the operator to get the most out of the car by varying the richness of the mixture to meet varying conditions.

A new carbureter has been provided for the “30″ Locomobile. It has the same dashboard control of the mixture as the “48″ carbureter. The use of this carbureter makes the “30″ Locomobile easier to start, more powerful and more economical. It is a valuable improvement.

All Locomobile carbureters are of the constant level aspirating type. The body is bronze and the induction pipe is bronze composition. The float is spun copper. The Locomobile gasolene tank, like everything else about the car, is permanently substantial. It is constructed of 24 gauge sheet steel, the strongest metal available for the purpose, and is heavily galvanized to prevent corrosion. The tank is braced internally with baffle plates, every joint and connection is reinforced. Every tank is tested with gasolene, up side down and in every possible position. The opening is under the seat cushion at the left of the car, provided with a removable strainer. Gravity fuel feed is employed; superior to any pressure system on account of its greater simplicity, reliability and safety. The force of gravity always operates, whereas any pressure system is artificial, is more complicated and needs attention. An important advantage of the gravity system is that the tank is located under the front seat where it is completely concealed and protected. The fuel tank is located at a sufficient elevation above the carbureter to insure a steady flow of gasolene at all times. The discharge pipe is located at the right and extreme rear end of the tank, so that the entire contents are available for use and the car may be operated until the last drop is gone. Roadster models, that is, the “30″ Baby Tonneau and the “30″ and “48 ” Torpedo models, are provided with a hand air pump enabling the operator to pump up a little pressure in the tank in case of any emergency. A relief valve prevents the operator from pumping up excessive pressure.

A large cone shaped strainer is permanently placed over the outlet in the bottom of the tank to prevent impurities from passing to the carbureter.

Crank-Case.

One of the most interesting details of the Locomobile motor is the substantial bronze base on which the cylinders rest. Bronze makes an absolutely rigid structure, which greatly prolongs the life of the motor. Aluminum, which is commonly used for the purpose, has but one-third the strength. In a bronze base, such as is used on the Locomobile, there is no danger of fracture or of the bearings getting out of line. The bottom portion of the engine consists of an aluminum casting bolted underneath the bronze engine base and used to contain the oil for the lubrication of the motor. Inasmuch as this part of the engine is not subjected to stress, aluminum is used to save weight.

Crank-Shaft.

This very important part of the motor is notable for its strength and fine workmanship. The crank-shaft of the Locomobile is a solid bar of alloy steel, which is first pressed out in rough form on a hydraulic forge and then heat-treated. The crank-shaft is machine finished all over, from end to end, whereas in most crank-shafts the bearings only are machined. It is balanced on a testing device with knife blades prepared for the purpose. The crank-shaft is forged with a flange at the rear end to which the fly-wheel is substantially secured. The crank-shaft rests on main bearings of liberal dimensions, perfect alignment being established before the crank-shaft is assembled in its bearings. The bearings of the motor consist of the alloy steel surface of the crank-shaft rotating in bushings of white bronze, compressed to the proper density and highly polished by a special process of our own. The bearing caps are secured by four double lock nuts and cotter pins.

Cam-Shafts.

Locomobile forgings with cams integral. Cam-shafts are heat-treated to secure proper hardness and are ground all over. Cams are ground on a special machine with special fixtures and are absolutely accurate.

Connecting Rods.

Locomobile connecting rods are very strong, drop forged from special steel in our shops. The bearings of the connecting rod on the crank-shaft are similar in construction to the main bearings, and are made adjustable by thin copper shims. The connections are very strong, the bearing caps being secured to the connecting rods by four studs a nut, lock nut, and cotter pin for each stud.

Pistons.

Selected gray iron castings are used, each casting being subjected to a sand blast and a careful hand filing. This shows up defective material, also removes any partially loose metal and prevents it from working into the motor and cutting the bearings. The pistons are carefully turned on a lathe, and then ground to exact size, the finished piston having a slight taper at the top to allow for expansion caused by the greater heat of the piston at its upper end. Piston rings are four in number, cut from specially selected, springy stock. The rings are turned eccentric, cut at an angle of 45 degrees, then compressed to circular form, held in a fixture, and ground all over their entire circumference. Pistons with rings in place are lapped with an abrasive compound until they fit perfectly.

Wrist Pins.

Pistons are secured to the connecting rods by hardened steel wrist pins ground to size. The wrist pins are forced into the pistons with a very close fit preventing any up-and-down motion, and are secured to the pistons by steel studs, which keep them from turning or moving laterally. The studs are prevented from working loose by a steel wire, the ends of which pass through holes drilled in the ends of the studs, and are then bent around. The wrist pin bearing is a steel bushing, hardened and forced into the small end of the connecting rod. Special provision for thorough lubrication of all wrist pins is provided.

Vahe System.

The valve springs are of specially selected stock, the valves are carefully made and precisely set the entire system may be operated for long periods of time without need of attention. Cam rollers are hardened steel and have a long bearing in the bronze lifter guides, a form of construction which prevents wear and rattle. In case it is desired to check the timing of the valves, marks on the fly-wheel enable this to be done with promptness and certainty.

Pump.

The centrifugal water pump is located on the exhaust side of the motor. The pump shaft is driven by a gear meshing with the exhaust cam-shaft gear.

Cylinders.

Locomobile cylinders are cast in pairs with valve boxes and water jackets integral. The practice of casting cylinders in pairs is considered to be the best as it produces a compact motor and does not limit the size or arrangement of motor bearings. A bronze cover plate is used for each pair of cylinders and carries the fittings for the water connections and the pet cocks. This form of construction greatly facilitates the production of perfect cylinder castings, enables the water jackets to be made uniform, and thoroughly cleaned out before the motor is built. This insures perfect cooling circulation. All cylinder castings are subjected to a very careful inspection, to a sand blast, hand filing, and finally to a cold water test. The cylinders are bored three times, and ground to exact size with water flowing through the water jackets to keep the temperature uniform and prevent distortion. Each pair of cylinders is secured to the bronze crank-case by eight strong heavy studs, with double lock nuts and cotter pins. This absolutely prevents the cylinders from coming loose. The compression is about 65 to 70 pounds gauge pressure, and the compression spaces are calibrated so that the compression is uniform in all cylinders.

Timing Gears.

Placed at the front of the motor in a housing formed by an extension of the bronze engine bed, protected by an aluminum cover. The timing gears are of metal and cut in our shop, following our practice for the past eight years or more. Metal gears are unaffected by the action of oil; fibre gears or composition gears swell when immersed in oil and shrink when the car is not used; and do not wear as long as metal gears. There are five gears in the case: crank -shaft gear, admission cam-shaft gear, exhaust cam-shaft gear, pump gear, and magneto gear. The separate gears are cut, and the complete train of gears assembled, with the greatest possible care to produce silent running. Lubrication is continuous and thorough.

Testing.

We have tested under its own power every motor that we have ever built, and we have preserved a record of this test. This will indicate our endeavor to make every motor as perfect as possible. When the motor is completed it is flooded with oil

Building the Locomobile Motor.

Tenth View Complete with magneto, wiring and spark plugs and placed on a stand where it is driven by a belt for a considerable period. It is then placed on the test stand, and equipped with its own carbureter and magneto and ignition apparatus, and run under its own power, slowly at first. After it is broken in, its power is tested by engaging the fly-wheel with the armature shaft of a dynamo. As the motor drives the dynamo its mechanical power is transformed into electrical power, which is easily and exactly measured. Each motor is operated on the test stand until it fulfills the established requirements.

Oiling System “40″.

Oil contained in the pan under the motor is splashed about, lubricating pistons, cylinders, and wrist pins. A gear-driven oiler forces oil through leads in the crank-shaft, thence through all its bearings.

Oiling System “48″.

A gear-driven pump forces oil to the bearings in a constant stream. Connecting rods dip into troughs the height of which is such that complete lubrication is assured; this feature in combination with baffle plates prevents any excess of oil and consequent smoking at the exhaust. A strainer prevents any clogging of the circulating system and can be removed for cleaning. An oil by-pass combines the advantages of a gravity head with a circulating system and does away with any tank under the bonnet.

Offering everything from silent starts to high-torque speed boosts with ultra-low emissions, the powerful integrated starter-generator’s capabilities appear to be a technician’s dream.

But it also might be a supplier’s nightmare. Engines could shed a host of time-tested components, from the gear-toothed flywheel and starter motor to alternators and other belt-driven accessories.

Adoption of any integrated starter-generator system also will mean large cost increases for both power generation and battery storage over today’s conventional systems, says Gary Cameron, chief engineer of Delphi Automotive Systems Corp.’s Energenix working group.

“If you just look at integrated starter-generator systems as producing electricity, it’s probably a multiple of three to five times more expensive than what you have on the electrical system today, roughly. The key to making the value work on these things is what you enable with this system,” Cameron says.

That same factor of three to five times current costs applies to the battery systems needed to manage the power generated and used by integrated starter-generator systems, compared with today’s relatively modest 12-volt battery costs, he says.

ELECTRIFIED GOLF

Siemens Automotive Corp. engineer Jorg Lehmann has placed an integrated starter-generator in the 1.6-liter engine of a Volkswagen Golf, a relatively heavy car by European standards. His team also installed a technically advanced automatic-manual transmission in the package.

Siemens chose the Golf because it already provided the engine control unit for the car. But the prototype is meant as a technology demonstrator only. There are no plans at VW to build a Golf equipped with the system.

Even in the demonstrator, though, Lehmann says the ability of the system to stop an engine and restart it, rather than having it run at idle speed, already is good and continues to be refined.

“There is a problem for the driver to get his foot off the brake and to the accelerator pedal as fast as this engine starts,” he says, citing times of 0.3 seconds to spin an engine past 500 rpm. Conventional starter motors typically take about 1.2 seconds to crank an engine to life.

But fast – and silent – starts aren’t the only key to the system’s impending arrival in production cars.

It’s the ability to turn an internal combustion vehicle into what the industry has termed a mild hybrid, driving a 42-volt electrical system that excites automakers.

COLD-START CURE

The systems have many different names, including start/stop generator; integrated starter alternator; and Integrated Starter Alternator Damper, which was trade named by ContiTech and shown in a prototype in 1998.

The device will allow automakers to use smaller, less gas-hungry engines because its electric torque helps speed off from a stop and uses an electric motor turbo boost when speed increases are needed on the road.

That lets a light-displacement gasoline engine work efficiently, maintaining speeds and charging batteries for the next boost.

Integrated starter-generator systems also are expected to reduce emissions during cold start and initial low-speed driving, the time when the heaviest tailpipe emissions occur.

While moving the car with its internal electric motor, the internal combustion engine’s output is used to heat the catalytic converter. When emissions system conditions are ideal, the engine begins to share more of the driving load. This feature requires some advanced battery technology.

Finally, the integrated starter generator may turn the harshest engine into a purring kitten. The device can pulse to cancel torque peaks in the driveshaft, smoothing the output of otherwise unacceptable powerplants. That capability could speed the introduction of new, clean-burning small diesel engines in cars.

“You have hit upon a key interest,” says Franz Wressnigg, president of Siemens Automotive Systems Group.

Wressnigg and Siemens engineers say that using a starter-generator makes it possible to reduce the compression ratio in light diesels while creating the kind of steady-state operating environment that is the engine’s strength.

Other companies also have tied the devices to diesel.

DaimlerChrysler’s Dodge ESX3 concept, the result of the company’s Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles work, uses a three-cylinder 1.5-liter diesel equipped with permanent-magnet integrated starter alternator supplied by Delphi.

Wressnigg says Siemens already has worked with one small-car manufacturer that believes a starter-generator type system makes it possible to offer a low-cost car by equipping the vehicles with a smaller, cheaper gasoline engine. He would not identify the vehicle or its maker but indicated it was not a North American manufacturer.

“You should not only take into consideration the electrical architecture but that you can reduce the engine size,” Wressnigg said.

KEY TO REDUCED EMISSIONS

Francois Castaing, former Chrysler executive vice president in charge of vehicle engineering, says the starter devices are crucial for getting improvements in fuel economy without a tailpipe emissions tradeoff.

“The cornerstone is a starter alternator integrated with the flywheel, something like that, and a new battery system. Maybe the first step will be a beltless engine with electronically controlled water pump, and electric steering and air conditioning,” Castaing said during a panel discussion at the Convergence 2000 meeting in October in Detroit.

Norio Omori, Denso Corp. senior managing director of engineering r&d, says that to reach fuel economy and carbon dioxide emissions targets already set to be introduced in Europe, small to medium-sized cars will need a motor-generator system driven by 42-volt power.

“A hybrid vehicle including the 42-volt stop and start, minor or major (electrical) regeneration and electric vehicle driving at low speed will be necessary to meet that requirement,” Omori says.

COST MAJOR FACTOR

Harry Husted, senior systems engineer for Delphi Automotive Systems, warned that cost is a major factor in discussions of mild hybrids and starter systems. Delphi has named its system Energen 10 and believes it offers promise in fuel economy gains over its investment price.

“The value of a hybrid powertrain has to be greater than its cost. That’s very simple but also very profound,” Husted said.

That means that the move to starter-generator systems may begin with an interim solution – essentially a heftier belt-driven alternator that can act as a starter motor.

The system abandons some of the benefits of a true starter generator, particularly torque pulse damping, but does not require the total engineering change of a starter generator.

“Most of our competitors are offering induction machines on the crankcase housing; we’re offering it here and implementing many of the same functions,” said Daryl Wilson, Visteon Corp.’s technical representative for Energy Transformation Systems.

Visteon showed a water-cooled start/stop alternator designed in partnership with Gates Rubber, which supplies a toughened serpentine belt as part of the system, during Convergence 2000.

Wilson says that such systems offer an affordable, evolutionary way to move to a start/stop engine system.

“Delphi also has developed a start/stop belt-driven alternator, the Energen 5, and recently demonstrated an air-cooled version during the Paris auto show.

“We think it could be well suited for applications in small cars in Europe.

“There’s not that much lateral space in the engine compartment for the system, where this belt drive off to one side can fit,” Cameron says.

He believes a mix of technologies – air-cooled start/stop alternators, liquid cooled alternators and starter-generators – will come to automobiles in the era of 42-volt systems. But Cameron also believes voltages in cars will inevitably increase, demanding further refinements to meet fuel and environmental challenges.

Other engineers view the alternator as a low-cost but potentially time-consuming diversion on the path to true integrated starter systems.

But with 42-volt systems virtually assured for power-hungry cars of the next decade, all agree some form of integrated start/stop system is coming. Today ’s rasping, squealing starter motors will go to join the hand crank in the halls of automotive nostalgia.

There are engineering meetings taking place at major corporations where the “D” word is no longer permissible. These days the diesel engine can only be referred to as a CIDI (compression ignition direct injection) engine or CIDI technology. And while this does appear to be a U.S. only phenomenon, it is gathering momentum and popularity quickly. The mayor of Tokyo firmly renounced the diesel last October.

This comes at a time when diesels are about to become much more prominent an large pickups and also are beginning to test the waters in smaller pickups and SUVs. The diesel also looms large as a handy doomsday machine if CAFE requirements come to crowd out truck and SUV futures.

Cummins has re-engineered the B series for Dodge. The Isuzu Duramax will debut with GMC and Chevy heavy pickups for 2001. The Navistar V-6 is on the way and Detroit Diesel expects to soon announce a European SUV customer for its new 3 L, VR3024 engine. While set to apply diesels in record numbers on the moneymaking side of the house, the auto companies are trying to distance themselves from negative diesel perceptions when rooting for the all-singing, all-dancing green team Olympics. Would you please just drop the bogus spin and say it plain, boys? The modern diesel is a green machine.

CIDI is not new at all, although the latest versions with common rail fuel systems and pilot injection are light years ahead of pre-electronic diesels. With ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel and aftertreatment devices, this will be the power plant that will take us into the fuel cell era. Why do we have to call it something else?

From one perspective it is very ironic that all the major hybrid entries in the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) feature diesel engines, although they are referred to as heat engines or CIDI engines and you won’t find the word “diesel” in any of the current collateral material or press releases. The DaimlerChrysler PNGV display did make reference to the diesel in its hybrid, but I expect CIDI terminology to take over there when Chrysler introduces the latest version of its NGV later this spring.

The PNGV program began back in 1993. It created a partnership between the federal government (including seven agencies and 19 federal laboratories) and the Big Three. At the time, that meant Chrysler, Ford and General Motors. The end point is 2004, when production prototypes are supposed to be fielded that are basically family sedans good for 80 mpg and zero to 62 mph acceleration in 12 seconds. At the Detroit Auto Show, Ford unveiled its Prodigy PNGV and GM unveiled the Precept and both contain an army of marvelous technology in addition to the propulsion systems. A diesel prime mover, or CDI heat engine, is used by both PNGV models.

There are electric concept cars coming. Ford is launching the “Think” family of vehicles. GM has a fuel cell version of the Precept. Honda announced the fuel cell-powered FCX vehicle at the Tokyo Motor Show last fall and said it will be on the road by 2003. It remains for Honda to define “on the road.” All this is well and good. But I believe electric golf carts will still be outselling electric cars four to one in 2020.

The real story is the diminishing role of the gasoline engine, which I suppose people in the “not know” will call SIFI (spark ignition fuel injected) technology. Let’s try the big picture. At one end of the spectrum, look at the PNGV effort as the most serious attempt yet to bring forward family sedans that catapult the auto industry to new levels of fuel efficiency. This program has substance and is harnessing some space age technology — and not for space shuttle prices. And the diesel is the prime mover for these vehicles.

In the middle ground, look at how prevalent the diesel passenger car has become in Europe. Gasoline engines have lost significant market share. And then at the other end of the auto spectrum, we have the heavy pickups and the bruteutes, and the diesel segment is growing fast and could take over with higher fuel prices or a more aggressive CAFE landscape. The SUV marker in Europe is only evolving, but diesel is again expected to be a prime power source.

I fail to see where this charade with CIDI terminology here in the U.S. serves any purpose. It is a shallow attempt to sweep the proud history of the diesel engine into the dustbin, while the new engineering whiz kids lay claim to the advances. They simply stand on the shoulders of those that came before.

This battle of semantics is also a sop to authorities like CARB and SCAQMD to have them reconsider their anti-diesel bias. Fine. Go ahead. Score yet another point for the politically correct.

But the diesel by any other name is still the one to beat. The prospects have never been better.

Choosing the wrong colour when you order your shiny new 53 registered car could end up costing you dear.
And according to motor trade experts,if you opt for a trendy,bright colour, you could end up seeing red when you eventually come to trade it in a few years down the line.
Experts at Parker’s Car Price reckon you can save money in the long term by choosing the right colour for your car now.

Parker’s editor, Steve Rose, says: “The British are still a conservative bunch when it comes to car colour and, despite manufacturers spicing up their colour range with hot reds, vivid yellows and lively greens, most buyers prefer their cars in a safer shade.”
Silver is the current in-colour and, although it’s not long since experts were predicting that a glut of silver cars on the market would bring values down,Parkers experts now reckon that they could fetch hundreds of pounds more than cars painted in trendy or dull colours.

“Even the police are at it, “adds Rose, “the traditional jam-sandwich look has been replaced by silver with day-glo transfers.”
And he explains: “The motor industry loves safe colours. They’re easier to resell and therefore worth more than in your – facehues. Everyone wants an Audi in silver: it says I’m businesslike, self confident and a success. But an A4 in yellow or light blue is too look-at- me for the traditional Audi buyer and fetches less than the same car in silver.”

Silver isn’t just the smart choice for Audi,BMW, Mercedes and newer Jaguars like the S-Type; it also lends prestige to mundane mid- market motors such as Astra/Vectra and Focus/ Mondeo; it’s cool on sportsters, too, from MGF and MX-5 right up to the Porsche 911. And the curvaceous lines of mini models such as the Toyota Yaris and Deawoo Matiz seem to wear silver better than solid colours.

Traders will bid up to pounds 400 more for a silver car in the pounds 7000-pounds 10,000 bracket, and sticker prices increase accordingly.
It’s not just that silver looks classy; it doesn’t show the dirt as much as other colours. Sober dark metallic shades of red, grey, green and blue are close behind,but tend to fetch around pounds 150250 less than silver.
Monochrome cars look tired without a weekly car wash and a good polish.

Black and white cars do have a following among buyers of sportier hatch backs and coupes,but they are not liked on medium or executive cars.
White knocks pounds 200 or so off the value of a Mondeo or Vectra. On a prestige car, it’s very bad news, no-one wants a expensive white saloon. The few that are around tend to fetch far less than dark blues and silvers.

The trade’s current ‘doom’ colours are solid dark blue and brown – worth up to pounds 500 less than acceptable solid colours such as red. Buy them only if you’re hard-up, colour-blind or just want to fade into the scenery.

And be careful about ‘lifestyle’ colours. Buyers are happy enough with Kiwi or Mango or Citrine Yellow on cheeky superminis – for the moment, at least. But try to sell a family car in a fruity flavour,and you’ll have to drop the price to shift it. And remember that ‘lifestyle’ changes as fast as haircuts or hemlines.

Steve Rose adds: “When the police force and ambulance service start to buy cars in more expensive metallic colours, you’ve got to believe it’s important. But for the canny second hand buyer not interested in colour, there’s big savings to be had on solid and less fashionable shades”.

But under the “corporate average fuel efficiency” rules – the standards mandating fuel-efficiency forcars and trucks sold in the United States, called the CAFE rules – General Motors Corp. counts its Geo Prizm as a “domestic” car, while Toyota Motor Corp. lists its Corolla as “foreign.”

The opposite designations, both possible under the complex CAFE regulations, are crucial to the grand strategies of the two auto companies. The cars made in Fremont are highly economical, getting 29 miles per gallon of gasoline, well above the 27.5 mpg standard set by the government.

Under CAFE, the domestic designation allows GM to use the high-mileage Prizms as a credit against the less fuel-efficient – but much more profitable – big cars that it makes in the United States. Toyota’s “foreign” Corollas made in California permit the Japanese automaker to maintain its own large bank of CAFE credits so that it can export more large – and profitable – cars to the United States from its manufacturing base in Japan.

Welcome to the Byzantine world of “CAFE gaming,” a practice that many industry observers say undermines the effectiveness of a law that is supposed to reduce America’s consumption of gasoline and the country’s dependence on foreign oil. This summer, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are considering several bills to toughen federal fuel-economy standards. The most controversial one, offered by Sen. Richard H. Bryan (D-Nev.), would force automakers to improve the fuel economy of cars by 40 percent by the year 2001, regardless of where those companies are today in meeting fuel-efficiency requirements. The Bryan proposal could require U.S. auto companies to average 39 miles to the gallon in their fleets and could require Japanese companies to reach 45 miles to the gallon. But some say that the whole concept of CAFE – and not just the fuel efficiency levels themselves – is flawed and in need of rethinking. Statistics show that the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act, which laid the groundwork for the first CAFE standards, has made American cars and trucks more economical to drive. CAFE has pushed the fuel economy of the average new car sold in the United States to 28 mpg, up from 14 mpg in 1975. Without CAFE, U.S. gasoline consumption undoubtedly would be much higher than it is today, what with a big increase in the number of vehicles on the road.

But if the goal of CAFE was to reduce overall gas use, that hasn’t happened, statistics show. U.S. gasoline consumption is slightly higher than it was in 1975, and U.S. dependence on foreign oil has risen steadily in the last five years. Despite CAFE, the average fuel efficiency of the entire U.S. fleet of cars and trucks has leveled out since the mid-1980s, as American consumers switched to higher-horsepower cars and trucks and as the fuel-efficiency of the foreign vehicle fleet declined. A Paradoxical Impact CAFE, some experts assert, has had a paradoxical impact on the driving public: It has encouraged motorists to use their vehicles more because they are more efficient. As fuel efficiency of domestic autos improved in the mid-1980s, owners put more miles on them. What has had a major impact on fuel consumption, the statistical record shows, are sporadic increases in gasoline prices. According to a survey by Arthur D. Little Inc., it cost an average 12 cents in gasoline to travel a mile in 1981; in 1990, it was 5 cents. “A market-based approach to energy conservation is superior in effectiveness to regulation of the corporate average fuel economy of new vehicles,” according to a report on CAFE effectiveness published last year by Boston University. The report, “Conserving Energy: Is There a Better Way?,” said that the imposition of CAFE rules in an era of consistently low gasoline prices has encouraged consumers to engage in “gaming” of their own. “To the limited extent that CAFE regulation results in vehicles getting better fuel economy, it actually encourages more fuel use,” said the report, authored by Robert A. Leone, a business professor at Boston University, and Thomas W. Parkinson, a principal in the Boston-based business and economic consulting firm of Putnam, Hayes & Bartlett Inc. Fuel-efficiency in the absence of higher fuel prices means that “people drive farther, keep old vehicles longer, drive at higher speeds and so on,” Leone and Parkinson wrote in their report, which has circulated widely among foreign and domestic car companies. James F. Mulhall Jr., spokesman for Bryan, said the arguments in the Boston University report are seriously flawed. “Absolutely, CAFE works,” said Mulhall. “Does it work better with increasing gasoline prices? No one here would argue otherwise. But is there any stomach anywhere within the federal government for a hefty gasoline tax? I think the answer is no.” He cited the extreme difficulty that Congress had last year in passing a 5-cent-a-gallon gas tax as part of the federal budget agreement. That lack of political will leaves the nation relying on CAFE standards that distort markets, affect trade flows, influence the investment decisions of the auto companies, encourage gaming and often achieve the opposite of what was intended, according to many congressional, federal regulatory and auto industry sources who are intimately familiar with the real-life, daily implementation of present CAFE rules. “Establishing different standards for different companies creates inherent incentives for manufacturers to `game’ the system and, thereby, frustrate the desired energy conservation goals,” said James R. Olson, vice president for external and governmental affairs for Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Toyota’s sales arm in the United States. Compliance with CAFE is measured by the average fuel economy of all the new cars that an automobile company sells in the United States in a calendar year. Currently, a fleet of new cars sold in this country must average 27.5 miles per gallon. This means that General Motors can use Prizms, which get 29 miles to the gallon, to offset its U.S.-made Chevrolet Caprice, which averages 21 mpg. A lower CAFE standard of 20.5 mpg applies to light trucks – vans, minivans, pickups and “sport utility vehicles” such as Chrysler Corp.’s Jeep. Automakers cannot mix cars and trucks in their calculations of CAFE compliance. Automakers must also keep their “foreign” and “domestic” fleets in the United States separate for the purposes of CAFE. A foreign car is considered one in which less than 75 percent of the value of the components comes from North America, regardless of whether the whole vehicle is made at a plant in the United States or abroad. But under one of the wrinkles of CAFE regulations, even a car that has more than three-quarters American-made parts can be counted as foreign if the automaker is exporting an identical car to the United States with mostly foreign parts. Thus, the Toyota Corollas made in California are averaged in with the Corollas imported from Japan and are considered “foreign.” Unions Feared Imports The domestic-foreign distinction was put in the CAFE law at the insistence of the United Auto Workers union, which feared that, lacking such a provision, American car manufacturers would try to meet federal fuel economy standards by importing small cars from abroad. U.S. automakers wound up bringing in large numbers of foreign small cars anyway – including the Ford Festiva from South Korea and the Geo Metro from Japan. U.S. automakers sold such models as “foreign” cars. This has allowed one company to do something that the drafters of the CAFE law did not foresee. To take advantage of the CAFE credits it built up in its foreign fleet, Ford Motor Co. now produces its full-size Crown Victoria and Grand Marquis passenger cars in Ontario, Canada, using 73 percent U.S. content and going to suppliers in Japan, Mexico, England, Spain and Germany for the rest. These popular models, with their 190-horsepower V-8 engines, get only 21 miles per gallon. But because they are classified as foreign cars, they cannot be used to degrade the gas mileage of Ford’s domestic car fleet under CAFE. Hypothetically, U.S. automakers note, they could switch the foreign or domestic designation of cars in their factories just by altering the mix of parts arriving at the assembly line. In the case of New United Motor Manufacturing Inc. – the Toyota-GM joint venture in California – the content of the hybrid Prizm-Corollas had been less than 75 percent domestic until this year. Increasing the content above that figure required drawn-out negotiations between the two partners because of the potential impact it could have on their CAFE standing. Companies that fall below the standards are assessed a CAFE penalty of $5 for each one-tenth of a mile per gallon by which the standard is missed. But CAFE, as illustrated by the Ford and GM cases, allows plenty of escape routes. In the case of some major European car companies, the CAFE penalties have posed no apparent incentive to comply with the law. European automakers such as Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Volvo offer what are reputedly some of the safest cars in the world. But the safety accoutrements – air bags, anti-lock braking systems and heavy door and roof construction – add weight and increase fuel consumption. In addition, the high-performance engines on those makes also reduce economy. The result is that they routinely fall below annual CAFE standards. Lacking CAFE credits to cushion the blow, they pay the penalties anyway – and keep selling the cars here. Mercedes-Benz’s fines under CAFE last year amounted to $17.5 million. “They see it as part of their normal cost of doing business in the United States,” said Diane Steed, a former head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which administers CAFE laws. “The alternative is for them not to sell cars here,” said Steed, who now directs a Washington coalition opposed to toughening of CAFE rules. Britain’s Jaguar PLC had paid similar penalties since 1985. But last year it was bought by Ford and its name was changed to Jaguar Cars Inc. Now, because Jaguar’s poor CAFE performance is mixed in with the rest of the Ford foreign fleet – which averages some 32 mpg, according to analysts – Jaguar will no longer pay penalties. Rolls-Royce cars sold in the United States seldom do better than 12 miles per gallon. But the British automaker, which has no U.S. partner, appears nowhere on CAFE penalty lists. Under CAFE, Rolls-Royce is considered a “low-volume” manufacturer, which sells less than 10,000 cars here yearly and is exempt from CAFE standards. CAFE’s effect on the composition of cars built in the United States can be seen in the case of the Japanese automakers producing vehicles here. As now structured, the CAFE standards appear to provide a disincentive to these companies to “buy American” when they shop for key components and parts. As long as they stay under the 75 percent domestic content ceiling, they can keep their products in their “foreign fleet,” which is still rich in CAFE credits because of the predominance of small, fuel-efficient cars. Thus, not one of the eight Japanese automakers building cars in the United States makes a car under its own name that is considered “domestic” for the purposes of CAFE. Without domestic credits, Japanese automakers run the risk of incurring CAFE fines on any under-27.5 mpg, 75 percent domestic-content car they sell in America. Under such circumstances, the Ohio-built Honda Accord, which averages 25 mpg, could become liable for CAFE fines if it became a “domestic” car. Representative of Japanese automakers resent the pressure that comes from not using enough U.S. parts and components. “You have the Department of Commerce pressuring us to make our cars `American’ to protect American jobs,” said one Japanese auto official who asked that neither he nor his company be named. “But as soon as we get one of our best-selling cars up 75 percent, it’s whammo! Another federal agency hits us with a CAFE penalty for trying to be `American.’ Where’s the fairness in that?” Analysts say that actually some of the most astute “CAFE gaming” goes on in new-car showrooms, where consumers looking for roomy, powerful, multipurpose vehicles are buying more light trucks, the category that includes vans and minivans. The reason, according to experts, is that gasoline cost per mile generally has drifted down, encouraging consumers to buy bigger, more fuel-hungry vehicles. Light truck sales – led by minivans – have grown dramatically over the past decade, rising to 30 percent of U.S. vehicle sales in 1990 from a 17 percent share in 1980. This trend toward trucks has been good for the auto companies, which make bigger profit margins on trucks than cars. At the same time, by opting for a minivan instead of a big car, the consumer helps the CAFE standing of the manufacturer. A big-car sale would give a CAFE demerit; but the minivan purchase gives the same manufacturer a CAFE credit in the separate, truck category.

Within that category, minivans, getting as much as 23 mpg – well above the 20.5 mpg truck standard – produce a CAFE credit.

In that sense, the customer has become a CAFE hero for the hard-pressed automakers.

The war in the Persian Gulf has heightened the urgency of finding alternatives to gasoline

Operation Desert Storm has underscored in the most dramatic way possible America’s continued dependence on imported oil. But one fact that remains poorly appreciated is that the only crucial energy-supply problem facing the country today is the fueling of Americans’ favorite personal technology, the automobile. And that crisis, too, is likely to begin diminishing before the end of the century, as clean-air policies force the development of alternative motor fuels and motor cars that use them. In fact, America could enter the next millennium well on the way toward reducing the twin plagues of automobile pollution and energy insecurity.

Virtually all the energy used to make electricity, heat homes and drive factories comes from secure, low-cost and plentiful domestic sources, principally coal, natural gas, nuclear and hydro. But America’s mobile society requires liquid fuels that pack enormous energy into small portable tanks. Nearly two thirds of the 17 million barrels of Petroleum consumed by Americans every day is used by 185 million cars, trucks and buses as well as aircraft and locomotives. During the seven months before Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, over half the oil burned in the United States was imported, the highest level ever. Worse, imports are projected to rise in the future as old U.S. oil fields run dry. If nothing were done, the bulk of the nation’s future transportation fuel would have to come from politically unstable countries around the Persian Gulf, where two thirds of the world’s known oil is located and war now rages.

Fortunately, steps are being taken on the environmental front that guarantee the availability of cars, vans and pickup trucks powered by electricity, natural gas and reformulated gasoline within the decade. Alcohol fuels such as methanol and ethanol may also be on the way. For one thing, the 1990 Clean Air Act mandates that gasoline be “re-engineered” to reduce harmful pollutants and requires that certain commercial fleets use clean” fuels such as domestically produced natural gas. Perhaps more important, California, long the leader in auto pollution reductions, decreed last fall that, starting in 1998, all car builders doing business in the state must offer zero-emission electric vehicles for sale. Since Californians buy 1 of every 10 cars made in the United States, this will have the effect of forcing all manufacturers to offer electric vehicles.

Both the federal law and the California action are meant to cut filth of gasoline engines, which contributes significantly to urban smog. Alternative fuels could help reduce these harmful emissions.

Compressed natural gas. This fuel, known by the initials CNG, is the first alternative likely to make a dent in gasoline sales. With a cost comparable to about 70 cents a gallon, CNG is cheaper than gasoline, causes less tail-pipe pollution and comes from relatively abundant U.S. and Canadian sources. CNG’s low cost has already won over many fleet operators. About 30,000 cars and trucks in the United States and 700,000 worldwide burn CNG, including 300,000 in Italy, where it has been used since the 1930s. The Clean Air Act requires that, starting in 1998, large-city operators of centrally fueled fleets of 10 or more vehicles begin to use “clean” fuels. According to the American Gas Association, 8 to 10 million vehicles could be powered with less than 6 percent of current U.S. natural gas consumption. CNG is reportedly so clean that crankcase oil lasts 50,000 miles and spark plugs rarely need replacing.

Burning natural gas in cars is not without problems. The gas must be pressurized to 3,000 pounds per square inch and stored in bulky cylinders similar to those used by scuba divers. Even under high pressure the gas contains only about one fourth as much energy as the same volume of gasoline. As a result, a tank of CNG must be four times as big as a tank of unleaded to give the same driving range. The entire trunk of a small car, for example, would be required just for fuel storage.

Because of the bulky tanks and lack of public filling stations, most CNG is now used in commercial fleets that return to the same parking lot each night to be refueled. Washington Gas, which serves homes in the District of Columbia area, operates 220 service vans that can switch between gasoline and natural gas. With two CNG tanks that together hold the equivalent of 9 gallons of gasoline, the vans almost never use gasoline while traveling an average of 60 miles a day. Refueling can take up to six hours with less-expensive “slow-fill” compression systems. At “quick-fill” facilities with big compressors, filling up takes little longer than for gasoline.

So far, most CNG vehicles have been converted from gasoline with simple add-on kits that cost between $2,000 and $3,000. Next month, the first factory-warranted natural-gas vehicles, GMC Sierra pickups, will go on sale in Texas and California. Three slender fiber glass wrapped tanks over 5 feet long, tucked along the pickup’s frame, hold enough CNG for 150 to 200 miles; the truck carries no gasoline. Equipped with a catalytic converter and computerized engine controls, the GM truck promises better performance and lower emissions than retrofitted gasoline models. General Motors will build 1,000 new pickups under a cost-sharing agreement with gas utility companies but, says Richard Pennell, GMC’s product-line manager, we’re looking at this as the start of a new business.” Initially, the cost and inconvenience of CNG-powered cars will probably deter consumers, but manufacturers believe sales will grow as fuel storage, delivery and marketing develop.

Electric. After years of promise, it is nearly certain thai electric vehicles finally will be sold generally in the United States, perhaps as soon as 1995. The California Air Resources Board is trying to force the development of a market with a new rule requiring any manufacturer selling cars in the state to offer zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs). In practice, this means “electrics.” Starting in 1998, 2 percent of a manufacturer’s car and light-truck sales must be ZEV; by 2003, 10 percent. This translates into a market of about 200,000 a year. The edict applies to all makers, foreign and domestic, and proponents argue that once electrics are marketed sales will go higher still.

Electric vehicles promise enormous environmental and energy-security advantages. The vehicles themselves don’t pollute at all and, even when the emissions from power plants used to charge batteries are considered, an electric car adds less than 5 percent of the pollution of a typical gasoline-powered car. Furthermore, about 95 percent of powerplant fuels are domestic. Because electric cars would be recharged at night when there is a large surplus of generating capacity, tens of millions of electric cars would have to be on the road before there would be a need for new power plants to support them.

The Big Three U.S. auto manufacturers all have clear plans to meet California’s requirement. Ford and Chrysler expect to offer electric versions of their popular minivans. GM will sell a small, sporty, two-passenger electric commuter similar to the Impact show car it demonstrated last year. The U.S. companies all say they will offer these vehicles in other states with acute smog problems and probably in Europe, too.

First, however, car builders must overcome psychological as well as technological hurdles. “How do you sell a vehicle that doesn’t quite measure up in driving range and performance at a premium price?” asks Robert Davis, executive engineer for Chrysler’s electric-van project. First-generation electric vehicles will go only about 100 miles before they must be plugged in for several hours to be recharged, and they will cost several thousand dollars more than equivalent gasoline cars. Because of their higher price, electrics over their lifetime will cost the consumer somewhat more than gasoline cars, even though the cost of electric power for recharging will run only two to three cents a mile. Heating and cooling electrics is also a major technical problem, since using the battery power for passenger comfort cuts a car’s driving range. Electrics will be heavily insulated to minimize the energy needed for air conditioning and heating.

Public concern about air quality may help spur sales. In fact, after GM showed the Impact last year at the Los Angeles Auto Show, the company was deluged with requests for information. But consumer good will won’t be enough to make electrics succeed; federal and state governments will need to offer potential buyers incentives such as tax advantages, special access to car-pool lanes and preferential parking with electric outlets for recharging, contends GM President Lloyd Reuss.

Even with government incentives, motorists will have to like the cars’ performance if they are to be a success in the long run, and manufacturers are banking on the electric cars’ unique qualities: Electrics make almost no noise, for example and, since they lack complex engines “they have the potential to be very reliable – in essence, no-maintenance vehicles,” argues Bradford Bates, Ford’s manager for electric power.

Batteries remain a crucial weakness. At present, Chrysler and Ford plan to use advanced nickel-iron or sodium-sulfur batteries costing $5,000 to $10,000 a set that last the life of the vehicle; maintenance will be largely limited to replacing worn tires, brakes and windshield wipers. The $1,500 lead-acid battery pack in GM’s Impact is expected to last about 20,000 miles.

Lack of range may not be the problem many fear, given the way most people actually use cars. The average American driver goes only 15 to 35 miles a day, well within an electric’s range, says Donald Runkle, GM vice president for advanced technology. For longer trips, motorists will have to take a gasoline car-or perhaps an unusual hybrid vehicle. Around town, a hybrid like the new GM van demonstrated last month operates on batteries. On long trips, a small gasoline-driven generator kicks in automatically to recharge the batteries.

Reformulated gasoline. For the foreseeable future, analysts believe that gasoline will remain the dominant fuel. But gasoline will be changed to produce less pollution, even in older cars. Beginning in 1995, the Clean Air Act requires that reformulated gasoline be sold in the nine cities with the worst ozone pollution; reformulation means an adjustment in gasoline’s chemical components to reduce harmful emissions. Compliance with the new law will account for over one fifth of U.S. gasoline sales. As much as one half of all gasoline will have to be re-engineered by refiners if other urban areas that do not meet ozone standards decide to join the program voluntarily. The cost to modify refineries could reach $40 billion.

Research on how to make the changes has already begun. Fourteen oil companies and the three major U.S. auto companies have joined forces to figure out the best ways to modify both gasoline and the cars that burn it. Oil and auto companies, which in the past rarely spoke to one another, are for the first time working together on the pollution problem.

Alcohol fuels. Although alcohol fuels got a lot of early hype as sound alternatives to gasoline, experts say now that they have failed to live up to their early promise. Both methanol, made from natural gas or coal, and ethanol, derived from corn and other crops, have proved too costly to serve as clean substitutes. In addition, methanol would have to come from the Soviet Union and countries around the Persian Gulf that have large surpluses. Importing from these regions would not contribute much to energy security. Both compounds, however, may prove useful as blends in reformulating gasoline to comply with emissions requirements.

Stricter emissions rules alone will raise the future cost of motoring. But Operation Desert Storm may raise the ante higher and more quickly. Congress may decide to raise gasoline taxes to promote conservation, spur adoption of alternative fuels and pay for the war. The country is learning that assuring supplies of inexpensive petroleum can have a very high price. As energy analyst Adam Sieminski of Washington Analysis Corp. observes, “The public’s appetite for cheap gasoline might be curbed by the sight of blood.”