Do new Gov't Fuel Mileage "fleet average standards" mean another end to MUSCLE?

[Qikbbstang]

I can't see how Detroit can continue with V8s with a need to meet this proposed mileage. This requires a bunch of hamster and solar powered shit boxes to make up/balance for a COBRA, Mustang GT, Boss etc:

"Rules already in place will boost the fleet average to 35.5 mpg by 2016, an increase of more than 40 percent over current requirements.   Environmental groups say a mix of gas-electric hybrids, electric vehicles and improvements to conventional vehicles could create a vastly more efficient fleet. A target of 60 mpg by 2025"

[jayb]

I think we will still see muscle cars available, because they are such a small percentage of car sales these days.  So despite their poor mileage, as long as there is a demand for the cars, and the car company receives a benefit (such as a "shine" on the other models because of the high performance version), I think we'll still see them.  JMO, of course...

[billballinger]

Our 2011 Mustang V6 is only 227 ci, makes 305 hp at 6500 rpms, and 285 lbs ft at 4250, N/A and still gets 30 mpg per tank on my wife's commute. I believe that the barriers between power , efficiency, and emissions are not mutually exclusive.  A V8 of 250 ci could easily do the same thing and and probably make 350 hp with the same degree of aplomb without forced induction.  The 6R80 is a combination Simpson/Ravigneaux transmission that is highly efficient, and the fuel and timing systems are becoming so sophisticated that they can achieve power and mileage combinations that only Ray Bradbury could have dreamed of in the 1950's.

I don't believe that the need for performance will ever die.