<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>WLTP on Automobilist.org</title>
    <link>https://automobilist.org/tags/wltp/</link>
    <description>Recent content in WLTP on Automobilist.org</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://automobilist.org/tags/wltp/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Ten Production Cars That Were Discontinued Because of Emissions Rules, Not Sales</title>
      <link>https://automobilist.org/ten-production-cars-that-were-discontinued-because-of-emissions-rules-not-sales/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://automobilist.org/ten-production-cars-that-were-discontinued-because-of-emissions-rules-not-sales/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Cars usually die because nobody buys them. A smaller category dies while still selling, because the cost of making the engine comply with the next regulatory step exceeded what the volume could justify. The distinction matters, because these are the cars that were killed by arithmetic rather than by the market, and the arithmetic is usually documented.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A caveat before the list. Manufacturers rarely say outright that regulation killed a model, because it invites awkward questions about the rest of the range. In most of these cases the proximate cause is well established and the company statement is diplomatic.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
