German Clunker Scheme Reduces Safety Equipment

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

The predominant critique of the cash-for-clunkers programs that have proven so popular in the US and Europe is that they cause unsustainable demand bubbles which cause sales to collapse after they expire. Sure enough, a look at the German market’s Q1 performance shows that the OEMs who most benefited from the program (primarily firms who focus on low-cost cars) are seeing far more significant declines than US-market firms have seen. In the first three months of this year, firms like Hyundai (-40%), Fiat (-58%), Suzuki (-54.6%) and Kia (-49.4%) have been suffering mightily from a hangover caused by the world’s most generous cash-for-clunker program. But the big news isn’t this small-car bust: it’s the fact that these firms’ success last year have caused the percentage of cars on German roads with electronic stability programs (ESP/ESC) to fall.

The April print edition of Auto Motor und Sport reveals that the percentage of ESP-equipped new car sales in Germany fell three percent in 2009 compared to 2008. Based on national insurance data, the magazine figures 78 percent of all vehicles sold last year had ESP equipped, but that 190k vehicles were sold without the safety equipment. This goes against long-standing trends that were driving German-market ESP-equipped percentages inexorably upwards: in 2006 only 58 percent of all nameplates on the German market had ESP as standard equipment, while last year a full 74 percent offered ESP as standard. The difference is that, by stimulating demand for the most stripped versions of the cheapest cars on the market, Germany’s C4C program incentivized consumers to buy non-ESP-equipped vehicles.

Granted, a three percent decline will hardly have the most dramatic effect on national highway safety in Germany. What this unintended consequence does bear on, however, is an EU-wide effort to make ESP standard on all vehicles. By 2012, the EU will require all new vehicle lines and commercial vehicles to come equipped with ESP, and by 2014 it will require that every vehicle sold in Europe be equipped with ESP. In the US, standard ESP will be mandatory for all new vehicles sold starting in 2012. The European Union has regularly bemoaned the fact that Europe lags behind NAFTA on ESP adoption rates, arguing that the deficit costs thousands of lives and millions of dollars.

With Germany’s cash-for-clunkers program now expired (after spending about $7b), it’s safe to assume that consumer safety concerns and government regulation will more than make up for the slide in ESP adoption caused by the program. Still, it’s likely that the EU will remember this decline in safety, and discourage any future clunker programs until mandatory ESP fitting becomes law in 2014. But then, if the German market hasn’t stabilized by then and needs additional assistance, the clunker hangover will have been far greater than even the most jaded skeptics had predicted.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 11 comments
  • CyCarConsulting CyCarConsulting on May 06, 2010

    I'm sorry, how did everyone get along without ESP for the last 80 years? I guess people will die too if you take their cell phones away.

  • HerrKaLeun HerrKaLeun on May 06, 2010

    I don't understand hwo the number of VSC vehicles went down assuming almost all cars that were traded in didn't have VSC. unless the majority of people traded in their 10 year old volvo V 70 to buy a Kia Rio without VSC. there always will be the argument that people could drive without ABS, VSC. but there were more accidents (despite less traffic than now). the same way I also could take your AC away and say 80 years ago people could live without AC. Same with seat belts. etc. Sometimes mandates are necessary. Especially as long as people spend a $ 2000 on alloy wheels, but want to save $ 50 on ABS. For general society it is better when those people survive or avoid an accident. VSC is not that expensive. R&D expenses are paid for. It uses the existing ABS sensors. Of course, as an option they take you to the cleaners. but if it is standard it should even get cheaper.

    • FromBrazil FromBrazil on May 07, 2010

      Good point! However, down here ABS doesn't cost 50USD. Try something like 2000USD. For that kind of money I prefer AC and alaarm. Much more useful here. And yes I'm a 3rd world brat (tongue in cheeck!) So I don't need no stinkin' airbags.

  • TCowner Need to have 77-79 Lincoln Town Car sideways thermometer speedo!
  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I'd rather they have the old sweep gauges, the hhuuggee left to right speedometer from the 40's and 50's where the needle went from lefty to right like in my 1969 Nova
  • Buickman I like it!
  • JMII Hyundai Santa Cruz, which doesn't do "truck" things as well as the Maverick does.How so? I see this repeated often with no reference to exactly what it does better.As a Santa Cruz owner the only things the Mav does better is price on lower trims and fuel economy with the hybrid. The Mav's bed is a bit bigger but only when the SC has the roll-top bed cover, without this they are the same size. The Mav has an off road package and a towing package the SC lacks but these are just some parts differences. And even with the tow package the Hyundai is rated to tow 1,000lbs more then the Ford. The SC now has XRT trim that beefs up the looks if your into the off-roader vibe. As both vehicles are soft-roaders neither are rock crawling just because of some extra bits Ford tacked on.I'm still loving my SC (at 9k in mileage). I don't see any advantages to the Ford when you are looking at the medium to top end trims of both vehicles. If you want to save money and gas then the Ford becomes the right choice. You will get a cheaper interior but many are fine with this, especially if don't like the all touch controls on the SC. However this has been changed in the '25 models in which buttons and knobs have returned.
  • Analoggrotto I'd feel proper silly staring at an LCD pretending to be real gauges.
Next