At $3.00 per gallon gasoline is still not the highest price ever. If
you adjust for inflation it is still about 10% cheaper than the
highest reached in the mid-late 1970s. Not trying to make a political
statement but shouldn't we educate the public about this?
I understand it seems high because all younger people have to compare
the price to is what they saw 5-10 years ago.
Another thing that isn't considered, it seems, is that today's cars
get a LOT better gas milage meaning that $3 Gallon of gas takes you a
lot farther than it would have 5-10 years ago. And if we go back to
the 1980s we're talking about a near 25% improvement on MPG.
If bottled water prices increased like gas prices have, then we would
have reason for concern since we humans generally consume the same
amount of water and our bodies aren't more efficient in a measurable
way at least in an average lifetime.
I think the price for gasoline would need to reach or exceed about
$4.50-$4.75 per gallon for regular unleaded before we could truly say
it is now the "highest price ever" Also, we didn't have cell phones,
internet access and a host of other things to pay for back in the late
1970s-early 1980s. So this might also make the gasoline price seem
higher since we all have less disposable income.
If one cancelled the cell phones, cable tv/internet and a host of
other things we now pay for, wouldn't the $3 gas price seem
unimportant to the average person.?
Am I wrong about the price or the perception problem? If so, please
elaborate. I am willing to admit I am wrong on this.
The reason why the price of gasoline is so high is that the price of oil is
high. And oil is used for heating houses. And gasoline and deisel are uesd
for delivering goods and food to stores. So the price of oil going up tends
to drive up prices. And there are a lot of people who can't afford to pay
more for gasoline or food. Like people who are living on a fixed income or
have a lot of kids.
So the price of gasoline going up has psychological effects, like when it
passes $2 or $3 as well as effects on the greater economy.
One will know when the cost of a gallon of gasoline is too high, they will
use less of it and the pump price will go down. As long as demand continues
to go up as it has along with the cost per gallon, the commodities buyers
will still by more crude futures at higher prices and the price will not go
down. Economics 101 ;)
i don't know where you get your gas mileage factors from, but up until 2
years ago, my 65 falcon with it's V8 engine got 25 mpg. now , with the "new
and improved" garbage they are trying to pawn off on us as supposedly being
gas, it only gets 20 mpg. if they would dump all the additives and
oxygenators and ethanol's that are supposed to be better for us, maybe my
mileage will go back up the 20% i lost, and the car will run cleaner. but
that ain't ever gonna happen.
"Bob Brown" <.> wrote in message
But aren't those forced by law additives done because of pressure from
environmental groups? Since that is the case, shouldn't some of our
anger go toward those environmental groups that increased the price to
refine the oil and also tacked on certain taxes?
Also, no two cities have the same blend. Environmentalists lobbyed
congress hard and go these things passed.
So aren't the to blame for some of this??
That's not true. The auto companies were already researching the idea of using
unleaded gas in the late 60's and early '70's to prolong engine life, long
before federal investigations and the federal mandate.
Close but no cigar. If one does a search of the Congressional Record they
will discover Henry Ford II testified before the US Senate that Ford was in
favor of the proposed laws and that Ford had been developing safer vehicles
since 1952. However he suggest that the automobile companies be given time
to properly engineer replacement vehicles, to bring cars on line with the
new safety and emission standards, rather then be forced into adding yet
undeveloped technology into the current vehicles.
He testified that if we are required to piecemeal the engineering, the cost
of a car like its new Pinto was likely to nearly double the current $1,890
base price, in the five to seven years it takes to develop a totally new
vehicle. They basically
laughed at his price assertion. He was wrong, by 1974 when the '75 came to
market, the base price of the Pinto was $4,500.
By setting dates certain into the law, rather than goals to be met, the
replacement for the Pinto did not come to market until ten years later as a
result Had we at Ford been allowed to engineer new technology into a
totally new RWD vehicle, with the much better and more comprehensive safety
and emission standards, the replacement would have sold at around $3,500 and
been available in around five or six years
I bought the '71 Pinto, that I still own, in August of 1970 when they were
first introduced. Last year, at nearly 300K, was the first the engine had
work, I had to refinish the head ;)
|i don't know where you get your gas mileage factors from, but up until 2
|years ago, my 65 falcon with it's V8 engine got 25 mpg. now , with the "new
|and improved" garbage they are trying to pawn off on us as supposedly being
|gas, it only gets 20 mpg.
I doubt if many people today drive 1965 car models.
I'd be more interested to hear how the current fuel mix affects cars
made within the past 6 years.
Good point Tom. I was listening to some tape recordings of an AM radio
station from the summer of '75. A commercial for the Ford Pinto station wagon
stated that the EPA mileage was 32 mpg highway. I remember those cars and
they were pretty decent and had good pep, though not as much as the Focus.
Yet, it still got good mileage from a carbed, 4 cylinder engine. Not bad for
70's technology and it goes to show that a Focus of today doesn't do all that
Yes, you would think that the sky is falling.
If you want to place blame, start with the ecos that won't let the oil
companies build any new refineries, then blame the ecos that won't
let us drill for our own oil, then blame the ecos that wouldn't let us
build a new nuclear plant since 1986. So you see who to blame now???
PS: I like it when gas is $3, not so much traffic. I kind of wish
it was more.
How about Bush and Clinton, who did not do enough to encourage conservation?
When you recycle aluminum, you save a bunch of energy. When you insulate a
house, you save a lot of energy. When you increase full efficency of cars,
you save energy.
The US uses about 1/3 more to twice as much energy per capita than Europeans
(depending on European country). Japan uses a lot less energy per capita
than the US.
And the Europeans don't have a lower quality of life.
And how about the people in Asia and Eastern Europe? The nerve of them.
Wanting to have a higher quality of life. They are using more energy than
ever before (but not as much as in the US).
You'll notice that the more socialist countries tend to have high
inflation and unemployment while the more capitalist nations how low
rates of each.
Compare the USA to France for example.
Energy conservation is great as long as it is voluntary and not
mandated by some law.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.