[V8] Pickup trucks, etc

[Roger M. Woodbury]

Mike:  I don't disagree with anything you said.  The thrust of my comments
was primarily directed at not the reasoning behind the status quo, but why
something else hasn't been developed.
 
The argument that only doing the way "we've always done it" can't be allowed
to stand in the face of different economic necessities, different political
necessities and different demographis.  That the Big Three are stuck in the
1930's for pickup truck design is only a reflection on the moribund auto
design business.  The idea that four cylinders cannot service the needs of
light duty pickups, for example, is foolish. That NO four cylinder enginer
being built and sold today can meet the perceived needs of a pickup truck is
merely a statement that no one is doing it now.  
 
That the engine needs to be in front of the driver to "balance" the payload
is foolish: the vast majority of pickup trucks do not run around at
max/gross day in day out. 
 
I am not advocating merely changing the architecture of motorvehicles such
as the pickup truck, to relocate the engine.  I believe that what the motor
industry needs to do is develop entirely new platforms using entirely new
engineering and design criteria.  In the case of the pickup truck, how would
the design change if light to medium trucks be mandated to deliver an
overall average of 25 miles per gallon without exception?  Were that the
case, the four cylinder engine would receive new attention to development,
mated to a seven or eight speed automatic transmission.
 
As far a service ability is concerned, if a light/medium duty pickup truck
was designed around a totally new architecture, relfecting only the new
demands in operational efficiency, then why couldn't such a vehicle be built
using a cab-over configuration.  Yes, simple popping of the hood would be
gone, and servicing of the engine itself would have to change...perhaps the
engine and transmission would be designed to be dropped down for servicing.
Yes, dealers would need to have different servicing equipment and all that,
but IF the end game was to meaningfullly increase the efficiency and fuel
consumption of the vehicles, would this be impossible to achieve?
 
We as a nation have just bailed out two of the big three so that they could
continue to build the sameold-sameold, with the vehicles that really are not
all that different in performance parameters than they were ten years ago.  
 
Is this the nation that sent a man to walk on the moon, or not.  Of is the
sun finally setting on our ability to lead in design and manufacturing
excellence in the one industry in which we have always touted that we lead
the world?  
 
The ultimate point of all of this seems to be that unless we innovate and
modernize, we will merely be followers, and that makes us some sort of third
world nation.  It is a shame that only by legislating higher tax penalties
can we develop truly new products, particularly in our number one
manufacturing industry.  
 
Roger