In last night’s State of the Union address, President Bush cooked-up a cute little saying: “20 by 10.” That’s a 20% reduction in American gas consumption over the next 10 years. In case you thought the Prez has decided to whack automakers with a 2 X 4, the fine print centers on renewable and alternative fuels: corn ethanol (E85), biodiesel, hydrogen and dilithium crystals. Bush also promised to change car fuel economy regs from current fleet averages to attribute-based (size) requirements. There’s a link to the plan below, and plenty of analysis online. So let’s talk about towing.
Before the State of the Union speech, the SUV Owners of America (SUVOA) sent out a press release blaring “99% of Car Towing Capacity Lost Since 1970s.” My first reaction: naw, c’mon, really? Other than bell bottoms, my 800 meter sprint time and the original Windows operating system, I can’t think of anything that’s declined so precipitously in the last thirty years. And yet it’s true: 70% of American cars could tow 2100 pounds then, just 1% now.
My second thought: who cares? It’s not as if a car’s ability to tow a bass boat is vital to our national security. Besides, today’s tow oriented buyers can buy any number of SUV’s (or decacab pickups) with enough towing capacity to haul most of Montana, and pay chump change for the privilege. Hell, they’re giving them away! Ah, the SUVOA asks, but for how long?
The SUVOA warns that federal regs threaten to emasculate America’s SUV’s towing capacity, just as they did for the automobile.
"Federal auto policy doesn't always consider the tradeoffs that exist among national goals,” claimed SUVOA President Barry W. McCahill. “One day the focus is on new safety requirements. The next, it's on tougher emissions controls. Today, it's on both those and improving fuel economy and they are often at odds with each other… The loss of car towing capacity and reductions in safety because of vehicle downsizing are unfortunate historical evidence of what can happen."
Call Mr. McCahill a reactionary Luddite whose Ostrich-like head posture is warming the planet to oblivion, but he has supporters. The SUVOA press release summons Derrick Crandall, President and CEO of the American Recreation Coalition.
"The only vehicles left that enable people to enjoy the great outdoors- SUVs and pickups- are under attack and could also lose towing capacity. Nobody intended to kill off the station wagon that was the mainstay for family transportation and recreation. But it happened."
Well, the minivan happened. But Crandall’s point is clear: Uncle Sam’s politically correct pursuit of high mileage vehicles ignores the bigger picture.
The U.S. is home to more than 11 million trailer boats and five million trailer RVs– and that doesn’t include trailers for motorcycles, ATV’s, snowmobiles, U-Hauled goods, farm equipment, etc. Mess with that and you’re messing with Americans’ ability to enjoy the great outdoors, move stuff around, grow crops and, um, fight obesity (Crandall’s idea).
While none of this is bound to impress people fully committed to an immediate and dramatic improvement in America’s vehicular efficiency– many of whom will claim it’s entirely possible to reconcile environmental goals with the recreational industry’s “needs”– it’s certainly true that lawmakers working in this area are unlikely to consider the unintended consequences of their legislative actions.
The UK offers us a glimpse of what can happen when government’s heavy hands wrap around the neck of the automotive free market in the name of environmentalism. Our British cousins now tax cars based on their CO2 emissions and location (“congestion charging” and coming soon “road pricing”). Despite being an oil-producing nation, they also sport some of the world’s highest gas prices (three times US prices). Oh, and everything car related is taxed at 17.5% (VAT or “Value Added Tax”). The result: the vast majority of Britain’s so-called working class can’t afford a car.
This lack of car ownership restricts their citizen’s mobility, which restricts economic migration, which exacerbates the country’s vast North – South, urban – rural economic divide. Even if lower income UK consumers CAN buy a car, the vehicle sucks-up a large percentage of their income, which prevents them from spending it on other things (obviously). In other words, the government’s anti-car policies– which depend on the same oil addiction and anti-pollution rhetoric we know and love– depress UK inhabitants’ living standards.
Could it happen here? The State of the Union speech doesn’t provide much indication where the U.S. federal government will draw the line. Depending on your point-of-view, the fact that the proposed automotive efficiency standards offer a new set of loopholes (e.g. automakers can now buy and sell CAFE credits) is either a blessing or a conspiracy in disguise. Meanwhile, the free market is speaking, as consumers decide how much mileage they need. The question is, is their government listening?
RF interviews the SUVOA's Ron Defore below.
[Click here for the president's proposals.]
171 Comments on “President Bush’s State of The Union Address: Towing the Line?...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
File this one under necessity is the mother of invention: Europe has a number of manufacturers that build travel trailers that are both lightweight and can accommodate 4-6 people for weekend trips. They are made to be towed by small family cars (by US standards) and typically weigh under a metric tonne (2,200#) with 10% tongue weight. Here in the US, there are very few, if any, lightweight TT’s that meet that–and they definitely don’t accommodate four people.
We don’t have them here because we just haven’t had the need–there are so many trucks/SUVs and fuel is (still) relatively cheap. But it’s possible to create trailers and boats that can be towed by cars, there just has to be the demand. I would LOVE to be able to enjoy upscale camping without the massive investment in a tow vehicle and trailer, or worse, a full motorhome.
I wonder where all the station wagons went. Rather than Crossover vehicles or Cute SUV,s why not build wagons? The Sable taurus wagons were very popular and the caprice classic wagons are actually holding value. Honda, Toyot and Nissan all made wagon versions of their Accord, camry, and maxima at one time.
I would buy a stationwagon and dump my truck if I could find one that would haul a 4 x 8 foot object in the back
>>Our British cousins now tax cars based on their CO2 emissions and location (“congestion charging” and coming soon “road pricing”).
UK is far more crowded than the US. Regulation necessarily increases with population density. (We wouldn’t need pollution controls on cars if we still had 100 million people instead of 300 million.) If the US population keeps increasing at the current rate, the equivalent of about four New Jerseys a decade, look for congestion charging and road pricing to come to cities and highways near you.
>>I wonder where all the station wagons went. Rather than Crossover vehicles or Cute SUV,s why not build wagons? The Sable taurus wagons were very popular and the caprice classic wagons are actually holding value. Honda, Toyot and Nissan all made wagon versions of their Accord, camry, and maxima at one time.
The CAFE standards are not nearly as stringent for trucks as they are for cars. Hence, the car companies replaced station wagons with SUVs.
ash78, search out the Top Gear episode where they go caravaning ;)
The elite in Washington don’t like the choices the great unwashed masses make in the vehicles they purchase, so they want to force you to either buy something you don’t really want, or better yet, force you out of your vehicle one way or the other.
Who can say no, since it is for their Goddess, Mother Earth, or better yet, “for the children.”
The only way this will happen is if everyone is forced to drive little crackerbox cars – of course those in Washington will still be chauffered around in SUV’s and limos, but hey, the laws don’t apply to them.
i hate camping
I may not be typical example, but the increased cost of car ownership in the UK certainly doesn’t depress living standards. As a native New Yorker and a past inhabitant of London I can tell you that decreased car ownership dramatically increases one’s quality of life. In London I never had to deal with blaring horns, constant traffic noise, or near death experiences crossing 8 lanes of traffic.
On another point, as mentioned above, the UK is a completely different place, higher densities and a more urban environment necessitate the restrictions on car use. The NY Metro area would be about the only comparable place in the US.
In a prior life I had access to a vast amount of historical technical vehicle data. Phone calls regarding technical questions, including towing capacity, got funneled to me.
A guy had me look up the towing capacity on a 1977 Lincoln with a 460 motor. With god as my witness that thing was rated to tow 10,000 lbs by the manufacturer! We had an endless number of stories regarding questions from guys that subscribed to “Trailer Life” magazine.
To Ash’s comment: Travel trailers are just like cars here when it comes to weight. They could be made much lighter, but at a cost. They’re all cardboard and styrofoam as it is, but more expensive materials would be needed to significantly bring weight down for a given size. All anybody cares about is the cost. And besides, owning a 24 ft. travel trailer justifies the “need” for a Mega-SUV. My daughter and I get by fine with a tent.
nyc:
There are many ways to measure a country's "living standards," such as how many hours an average citizen must work to afford a loaf of bread or a refrigerator. (By contrast, the expression "quality of life" is almost entirely subjective.)
No matter how you slice it, I don't think you can say that the average UK citizen has a high standard of living because Londoners don't have to deal with blaring car horns or constant traffic noise. In fact, traffic volume can actually be an indication of economic health.
I’m not worried about towing. Used Silverados and F-150’s are as plentiful as used muscle cars were in the 70’s. Besides, GM has a prototype of the dilithium crystal powered Silverado that will be a big hit once the Pakistani engineering firm they hired figures out what a dilithium crystal does.
Financial disincentives to buy a car do not lower living standards, they change lifestyles. If I wasn’t spending wads of cash on cars every year, I ‘d have more money for concerts, CDs, clothes, computers, dinner out…
I’ve been following the “debate” on global warming for a decades, now, and until this morning, I would have found Taxman100’s comments deeply offensive. No longer! The attitude of Taxman100 and others to environmentalists – as though we are nutcases – and the attitude of Ron Defore – that we must consider recreational needs above species survival – will no longer disturb me because I am fairly certain that their attitudes and my attitude no longer matter. It is too late to evade the serious consequences of global warming and therefore my belief that the science is right and Taxman100s belief that the science is irrelevant and Ron Defore’s belief that we can’t throw out the Bass Boat with the globally warming Bass Water are unimportant.
What changed? Today’s newspaper carries an aritlce that says, effectively, all the glaciers in the Alps will be gone in 50 years. There’s no responsible scientific dissent. Given the retreat in glacial and polar ice that has already been recorded, I think we’re well past the point of no return, so we might as well relax and enjoy it. I can simply amuse myself from here on out by checking to see how bad conditions get. As I’m currently in my 50’s, I don’t think I’ll live long enough to see Global Warming end Western Civilization but, then again, maybe I will.
I hope Taxman100 and Ron Defoe are young…
The north south divide is nothing to do with being able to buy a car or run it in the UK. You don’t need a car in London, just too impractical where the majority of the southern migration runs to. Its about socioeconomics, markets and company investments.
The rest is true about heavy handedness involving the various taxes regarding cars ownership. A necessity the government knows and will constantly plunder as there is no real option but to own your own transport for the big majority of your journey in the UK, (with exception to working in london) I can see congestion charging arriving here, but i bet it will be fought against tooth and nail. It makes sense but its application to other towns and cities i think is flawed and like with London the knock on effects with loss of business is horrendous.
My young holiday years were spent in a caravan, a decent sized one filled to the brim with all th egear a family needs for 2 weeks of heaven in Cornwall etc. This was pulled by a variety of vehicles from the Austin Princess, Ford Granada, Vauxhall Cavalier to a Rover 200. No problems, perception will change here, you will need some big vehicles for big jobs but you’d be surprised with the ability of smaller vehicles.
“Dilithium crystals”, boy we are a bunch of Trekkies here.
As you were.
BostonTeaParty hits it right on with the North South divide in the UK. Afterall, the US has great roads, cheap cars and cheaper gas but the Coasts/”Heartland” divide is arguably just as large.
(I have no figures to back this up, just observations).
KixStart: What changed? Today’s newspaper carries an aritlce that says, effectively, all the glaciers in the Alps will be gone in 50 years.
The November 7, 1937 edition of the Rocky Mountain News ran an article claiming that scientific measurement of glaciers in Rocky Mountain National Park showed that “within a few short decades, (the glaciers in the park) may be eternally gone.” They still exist, in 2007…
In 1895, The New York Times predicted widespread global cooling. In 1924, it reported signs of a “New Ice Age.”
But, covering all bases, in 1933, 1952, 1959 and 1969, the Times predicted global warming. In 1974 and 1975, however, it was back to another pending Ice Age. Now, of course, we are back to global warming.
Time magazine declared global warming was happening in 1930, switched to global cooling in 1974, and is now back to global warming.
As for the “end of Western Civilization” – religions, soothsayers and pundits have been predicting The End for centuries.
KixStart:
I’m certainly not gonna tell you what to think or what should or shouldn’t offend you, but try to remember that 30 years ago we were worried about a coming ice age, 20 years ago we were worried about acid rain, 10 years ago it was the rainforests, and now it’s global warming (or global “climate change” when it snows .
What really changes was where the money is and where it goes.
All the money that’s worth making has already been made installing scrubbers on coal factory smokestacks–no sense lobbying for acid rain reduction any more. If the problem is solved, then why does the rain eat the paint off cars in coal-fired West Virginia?
Now it’s just more economical to go after CO2 and “greenhouse” gases. Why? Because the gov’t can tax you on it, that’s why.
In another 5 years, we’ll be back to worrying about the landfills we talked about in 1992. The gov’t will have a preemptive disposal tax on everything plastic you buy.
Don’t panic–after all, global warming is what got rid of the glaciers and gave us beautiful Colorado.
Isn’t the SUVOA just an industry astroturf entity?
Sourcewatch.org entry
Who can say no, since it is for their Goddess, Mother Earth, or better yet, “for the children.”
I’ve watched and read enough nature and prehistory to conclude that global warming may or may not be human-caused vs. stuff that just happens as part of the course of nature. Very Bad Stuff does happens – supervolcanoes, catastrophic earthquakes, big asteroids from outer space. The earth will be here long after we are, just like it as shrugged off well over 99% of species that came before us.
It’s not the earth we’re trying to protect, it’s ourselves.
Will the next generation resent us for having a worse lifestyle because our current generation sucked up all the expendable resources? Does our members of our species give a hoot if we’re still around in the next few hundred, thousand, million years? How selfish our your genes? mine look quite selfish so far, my 3 little kids deserve a heatlhy future, right?
Just look at the costs of CO2 reduction as insurance.
Maybe the earth will stay the same, maybe get a little bit hotter, maybe a lot hotter, maybe even colder. Weather is very difficult to predict. However, the costs could potentially be enormous.
Why not take out a relatively cheap (compared to the potential costs of climate change) insurance policy by reducing CO2 now?
Heh, camping; I think the last time I was “camping” everybody got poison oak/ivy and we ended up eating chilli out of plastic bags with pierced corners, a really awkward way to eat such cuisine with as much caspin as your average habanero. OH and some idiot broke the sweetwater device to remove contaminants and bacteria from the river water… awesome, it was a memorable but not repeatable experience.
Somebody needs to post a link to Top Gear’s camping adventure. I am that somebody.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBr12b5DOv4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHtqawWz65Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viRKiLPCElM
Towing… isn’t that Sajeev’s realm of expertise? I’ve never towed a damn thing…. but I have been towed in an XJ on public roads by a Navigator using tow straps ~25mph… it was slightly illegal and servo steering sucked almost as bad as servo brakes. I’m giving consideration to adding a hitch to my track car so I can tow a set of racing tires to the track.
When I lived in the UK, I got tired of buying used K R A P mobiles so looked around to see what new cars were affordable. It was 1987.
Holy wow, how about a new Buick Roadmaster price (in the USA) for a Ford Escort estate car (stationwagon) in the UK?
I ended up buying a new Lada Riva (still in production new, in Ukraine). Yep, a brand new updated (?!) 1967 Fiat with hot rolled steel so thick, it added 400 pounds to the weight compared to the original Fiat. It cost me the equivalent of $5000 new, about 1/3 the price of the Escort, and functionally did a similar job. Talk about a cost of living adjustment! You can look online and get the price of any British market vehicle “out the door” and compare it to the US. You’ll get a shock. Taxation? You have no idea. When I lived there, they taxed you 17.5% VAT, plus 10% car tax, and the 10% car tax was taxed again at 17.5% VAT!!!! EVERYTHING along the supply line is taxed at 17.5%, not just the end-product.
This is why a new Brit spec Prius costs 17,000 pounds new (about $33,000) and why a US spec Prius costs $22,000 new.
The Lada was an exercise machine as well as family transport. I had great biceps. It steered heavier than the Duece and a Half Dodge I sometimes drove in the USAF (also in the UK, in the late 1970’s).
The idiots in Washington are entirely clueless, virtually all of them, and the longer we leave everything in their incompetent hands, the worse off we’ll all be.
Honest to God, we need to fire them all and start over. The US Constitution and Constitution Party would be great starting points, IMHO.
Glenn A
There’s also quite a bit of purchasing power disparity between the dollar and pound (especially now at £1=$1.99), but still most of the price differential is real. Cars over there are just expensive all around–buying, fueling, owning.
I’m not opposed to reducing CO2 as insurance, but I am opposed to current methods.
Taking my money and “disappearing” it into the blackhole of gov’t coffers does nothing to help and just makes me poorer.
Focus on truly unnecessary crap (i.e. 100% of what’s sold in radio shack and 90% of what’s in walmart).
no more stupid gadgets.
I don’t watch TV, and I know how to operate windows and blinds. When my two housemates in college went away for the summer, our electric bill dropped by 70%–i was still using the stove and the refrigerator, mind you.
I’ll stop driving when everyone else stops watching football and using the air conditioning with the blinds open at noon.
Also there are other options. No matter how much people complain about public transport in the UK it’s way more exetensive than it is here (again, the NY area is the obvious exception).
What is extremely interesting is that European models often have a tow rating that is 2-3x greater than the same car here in the US.
Take the Honda CR-V for example. It has a 1,500lb tow rating for a US model. The UK model has a 1,500kg (3300lb) tow rating.
Why? More lawyers here? Car makers trying to protect their bigger vehicles?
Fred
I suppose it is due to the lack of towing packages on most non-truck American offerings (oil cooler, brake controller, etc), but it could definitely be litigious in nature.
European members of a couple of car forums I frequent find it odd that Americans almost always associate towing with trucks exclusively. My old college roommate had a 1.6 Sentra with a hitch, which was able to take a waverunner on 400-mi trips with relative ease. Somebody moving? Forget your buddy with a truck, just stick a basic trailer on the Sentra!
I think it’s a horse race between the US and China: who is going to regulate last. There is no way in heck we’re going to pick cleaner air over economic growth until we absolutely have to. For proof, review the entire history of our nation. We’re about one thing, and one thing only: unrestricted business. The remaining civic innovations are ancillary to that cause.
I’m with KixStart above … you either accept the conclusions of the vast majority of the world’s independent climate scientists, or you choose not to.
If you do, there isn’t really any room for debate about whether we need to change our lifestyles, the only question is how and how much. For me, it has meant buying a more efficient furnace for my house and taking public transportation to work. I hope my next vehicle is substantially more efficient than the one it replaces. For someone else, it may mean downsizing to a smaller travel trailer that can be pulled behind a normal car (by the way, I think Subaru wagons tow 3,000 pounds).
Of course, if you choose to believe climate change and peak oil are some sort of liberal-environmental elitist communist conspiracy to take your Hemi Durango away, you can just put on your headphones and listen to Rush et. al. while the seas rise, the forests die, and we get involved in more brutal, pointless wars. If you don’t see it now, I’m not sure what will convince you.
On a related note, anyone else notice that vintage VW Vanagon campers now sell for more than they cost new, despite having unreliable drivetrains and offering less-than-great driving dynamics (to put it kindly)? I keep waiting for someone to see the market potential for a small van-based camper that doesn’t cost a fortune and gets over 25 mpg.
Let’s see… there’s 6.5 billion of us. Is there any other animal on the planet that numbers in the billions and weighs 100lbs or so, average? And starts fires and digs up dead dinosaurs and burns them?
Could we be having an impact? Nah. I’m going to worry about more important things… like my tow capacity because I’m going to get a big-ass boat. Make that a big-ass bass boat.
Those greenies and elites in DC and LA and wherever, it just kills them that people might have fun. That’s all that’s going on here. Don’t worry about it. It’s just a conspiracy to kill your fun.
By the way, the global ice age predictions of a couple of decades ago came from using then-new space instrumentation. The papers got hold of the story before the researchers had a chance to figure out what may or may not be going on. Turned out they needed to make adjustements to how they measured things from space. The ice-age story was big but the “Scientists Figure Out What They’re Doing Wrong” story got ignored.
Anyway, not to worry… It no longer matters…
TTAC was prescient in posting an Amphicar review last summer:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1947
I love the smell of Astroturf in a press release! Ugh.
What a complete load of crap-o-la. I see plenty of small-boat sized hitches on Jettas, Accords, etc around here (Washington state, where boats outnumber people.)
All the guys I know who tow serious weight (read: really expensive boats, hobby cars, livestock, etc) all have 3/4 ton pickups with Diesel engines.
The VAST space in between those two towing extremes is more than adequately served by the Big 2.5’s fully redundant array of SUVs. Not to mention every other SUV by every other manufacturer. Hell who DOESN’T sell an SUV anymore? Aston-Martin, Jaguar and um… Rolls/Bentley. My gawd, are the Brits the only sensible civilization left? We’re doomed. But I digress.
Besides… must I recall the tale of my frequent towing of my spouse’s 1 BHP mount (yes, a British made, all wheel drive hay-burning off roader!) all over England in a Volvo 440TD (roughly the equivalent of a VW Jetta TDI)? I’d create a link back to my comment telling the tale but this site’s search feature obviously does not query the comment database. The image of the MG & the boat I will take as homage to my previous screed! Oh well. Suffice to say, the myth that you MUST have a giant V8 and a ladder frame to tow stuff with a hitch is just that, a myth.
I suspect the veracity of the SUVOA is equally mythical, because those grass roots smell a tad like plastic to me. The Big 2.5 played a shell game with CAFE and truck-based platforms for a decade too long and now are paying the piper. Any competent automotive engineer should be able to build a chassis that is by every definition a “car” (NOT a “truck”) that will tow whatever your average Joe Sixpack wants to play with in the woods, lakes, mountains, whatever. Just drop a Diesel in there and quitcherbitchin!
–chuck
The SUVOA’s news release also completely ignores the fact that car construction seems to have changed to reflect the fact that most people don’t CARE about towing anything. As I noted above, a Subaru Outback can tow 3,000 lbs; interestingly, so can a Hyundai Elantra, at least according to Edmund’s.
When I inquired about having a trailer hitch put on a Honda Civic wagon I owned years ago, the UHaul guy showed me that it wasn’t really possible for the car to tow — not because of power or braking limitations, but because there was no structural steel behind the rear axle to attach a hitch to. How much weight could that engineering decision have saved? 50 lbs?
I suspect that if more people wanted to tow with cars, more cars would be made to tow, with only modest design changes.
Financial disincentives to buy a car do not lower living standards, they change lifestyles. If I wasn’t spending wads of cash on cars every year, I ‘d have more money for concerts, CDs, clothes, computers, dinner out…
A restriction on mobility does alter your living standards. Outside of a few select cities, you do need a car to get to the concert, or to the mall to buy CD’s clothes, and computers, or to get to the restaruant. The smaller cities that I have lived in simply do not have the mass transit budget needed to have an adequate system, or at least one that will operate the routes you want it to. Folks who like to stay at home and do nothing will not be affected by this, but for others who like to venture beyond the end of their street, more can be accomplished when you’re not having to wait 30-45 minutes for a bus/train to arrive.
With that said, I think a better idea would be to allow a kei-class of cars, like what Japan has been using since the end of WWII. This class of car was instrumental in Japan’s postwar recovery as it provided transportation for citizens who needed a car, but only had enough money to buy a motorcycle. Of course perceptions would have to be dealt with, but depending on the success of the Smart vehicles, I think this would be a more attractive alternative than to just let the government suck your money down into a black hole with no return on investment.
Good article, Robert!
starlightmica:
Nice find; “What is clear is that SUVOA is a front for SUV manufacturers…”
My $0.02:
This article is (more) about a 20% reduction in American gas consumption over 10 years, not global warming per se.
While I would feel for those who truly need heavy-duty haulin’ machines to make a living (contractors and such), imagine if you will that gas prices go to $5 (or more) a gallon.
That’s not outside the realm of reality over the next 10 years.
Wonder how many folks would suddenly decide, “ya know, I guess I don’t really *need* that recreational boat (or camping trailer) after all.” Might be a need for a Chris-Craft (or Airstream) Death Watch then. Used 19′ boat, anyone?
Another take could be: If the Big 2.5 do go under, who’d be left standing to sell you a truck with enough haulin’ capacity to bring the 19′ boat (that you got a spectacular deal on) down to the lake? Oh yea, Toyota: New Tundra anyone?
Will reducing gas consumption by 20% over 10 years be painful? Probably. Will politicians buckle to public pressure to ease their pain? ‘Nuff said. Fear not America, our addiction to gasoline is assured–for now.
Alternatives? As for ethanol, I recently heard a radio ad from FordMoCo (on NPR I think) touting how many E85-ready cars they sell. Yea, but: I dont care how many Ford cars are able to use E85–try and find an E85 pump here in New England…
But we have “10 years” to get more E85 pumps built. Never mind that, as the guy from the SUV-owners group said: “Do the math” but this time on ethanol. Thought the “new math” of the ’70s was difficult to grasp? This newer math is magical.
If I were a betting man, I’d look to companies like Honda that “get it” now, and will be there when alternative fuels become truly essential. But we’re not quite there yet.
It’s a free market, so SUV on all–if you can afford the gas.
Bring us up to warp speed, Scotty!
Captian Glenn in CT
There used to be palm trees in Antarctica. I think the planet’s been there before.
GW is just being politically correct since he no longer has to satisfy his base constituency. I hope I can bet against “20 in 10″. It looks like easy money.
BTW, using that definition of “losing 99% of towing capacity” is total hyperbole. I hate BS from any source.
Besides, GM has a prototype of the dilithium crystal powered Silverado that will be a big hit once the Pakistani engineering firm they hired figures out what a dilithium crystal does.
You cracked me up cheezeweggie… I am still chuckling…
at the rate we are going, we are all gonna need boats, cause if the polar ice caps melt, there will be no more land to tow them over. there – problem solved!
Back to the important stuff…
How did the minivan kill towing? My minivan will tow 3500 lbs. Without the tow package, it will pull 2000 lbs. The tow package came with the car because that’s what was on the lot in red and otherwise accessorized the way I wanted.
I have to wonder about the assertion that just 1% of the vehicles can tow 2100lbs. Statistics with an agenda are often picked creatively. OK if only 1% of America’s fleet can tow 2100 lbs, how much of America’s fleet can tow 2000 lbs? Like, suppose 2000lbs is the standard tow capacity for a minivan without tow package? Is that 100lbs really unimportant in terms of capacity but very important in terms of how alarming the statistic looks?
My 4-cylinder cars are rated to tow 1500lbs. If you move the bar a bit further – like down to 1499lbs, what’s the percentage of the fleet that can make those numbers?
I’ve got a news bulletin for Ron Defore… if only 1% of America’s fleet can tow 2100lbs, that’s because only 1% of America’s fleet ever is needed to tow 2100lbs or more.
Oh, and I got a laugh out of McCahill’s statement, “The only vehicles left that enable people to enjoy the great outdoors- SUVs and pickups…” All along, I’ve managed to enjoy the great outdoors without an SUV or pickup. Am I not enjoying it correctly?
I recollect there was one time that 11 other people and I were going to go enjoy the great outdoors all together. We needed special equipment for that… a 15-passenger van rental and a 1000lb trailer. Was that OK? Was I still enjoying the outdoors incorrectly?
I’m with quasimondo on the kei cars. They’re suitable for 90% of the driving Americans do, and they’re available NOW. Many families could do with one of those and one larger vehicle. Does Dad really need that 5,000 lb towing capacity to commute to the office alone?
“The only vehicles left that enable people to enjoy the great outdoors” also include bikes, skis, horses, canoes, and feet. It always cracks me up when people “enjoy the great outdoors” from inside their climate-controlled vehicles with the windows rolled up. Excuse me, exactly what are you enjoying?
Depending on your point-of-view, the fact that the proposed automotive efficiency standards offer a new set of loopholes (e.g. automakers can now buy and sell CAFE credits) is either a blessing or conspiracy in disguise.
I don’t see whats wrong with this. It’s been effective in other industries (coal) and it should lead to the most efficient level of cost/mileage reduced.
I sure do feel sorry for all those poor, poor people who won’t be able to tow their boats.
I’m convinced about the low towing capacity of US spec cars being for legal reasons. 1%!! A Corrolla in the 1970’s could tow 2000#! I just had my son tow my ‘66 Ford pickup with our Forester. Enough chickenshit. Europeans have been towing Caravans for decades. And in Germany, at least, the regs. on towing are very regulated.
RF: No matter how you slice it, I don’t think you can say that the average UK citizen has a high standard of living because Londoners don’t have to deal with blaring car horns or constant traffic noise. In fact, traffic volume can actually be an indication of economic health.
Traffic volume may be such an indicator according to conventional measurements of GNP, but I don’t think the question is asked of people living in noisy environments, “how much would you pay to get rid of the noise?” If I lived in a noisy environment, I would pay quite a bit.
“Noise costs the European Union (EU) ¤¤10-40 billion annually, by various estimates, with roughly half of this due to road noise. Contributing factors include medical costs, reduced worker productivity, and de facto condemnation of noise-exposed land. Due mostly to the demands of
greater population density, European noise mitigation efforts are far ahead of those of the United States, and U.S. officials are paying attention: this spring, officials and researchers toured the best European projects.”
you can read the rest of this here: http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2004/112-11/forum.html
“The only vehicles left that enable people to enjoy the great outdoors- SUVs and pickups- are under attack and could also lose towing capacity. Nobody intended to kill off the station wagon that was the mainstay for family transportation and recreation. But it happened.”
Dunno, my feet are a great vehicle for getting me to the great outdoors.
This bit of logic didn’t work for me:
“Even if lower income UK consumers CAN buy a car, the vehicle sucks-up a large percentage of their income, which prevents them from spending it on other things (obviously). In other words, the government’s anti-car policies– which depend on the same oil addiction and anti-pollution rhetoric as we hear here– depress UK inhabitants’ living standards.”
From a purely economic sense:
Wouldn’t it follow then if they couldn’t afford a car then they would have that large percentage of their income to spend on other things? And that it would increase their living standards as long as the measurement didn’t include car ownership?
I’m not endorsing anything the brits are doing, I’m just not sure that part of your argument works.
…at the rate we are going, we are all gonna need boats, cause if the polar ice caps melt, there will be no more land to tow them over. there – problem solved!
Good one, jerseydevil
(That brought on an ear-to-ear smile.)
The ad campaign could be interesting:
“Bummed out about your favorite back road being under water? Chris-Craft has the answer! Imagine the fun you’ll have navigating the newly-created waterways between flooded treetops in a new Chris-Craft ‘Z5′ speed boat!”
Row to your Chris-Craft dealer and take a test drive today!
;-)
May I be the first to say “20 by 10″ will not happen? That would mean decreasing gas usage by 2.3% per year for 10 years. Will we do that in 2007? No. Will we do that in 2008? No. And that pretty much puts us fatally behind schedule doesn’t it?
As for the great UK debate, I work for an English company so let me point out that the vast majority of Brits do not live in London and cannot get to work by tube or train. They actually have to commute in cars on crowded roads just like us evil ‘mericans do.
And yes they pay far more for their cars, fuel, and virtually everything else (partly) because government-mandated fuel economy reduces economic productivity, period. Most people are worse off — if not, the government would not need to force their behavior, QED. Whether that is good or bad depends on your own individual values.
Also there are other options. No matter how much people complain about public transport in the UK it’s way more exetensive than it is here (again, the NY area is the obvious exception).
I’ve found that those who say we don’t need cars either have never gone without a car, or lived in the two cities in the U.S. that allow you to go without one. If you can tell me a reasonable option outside of the shoddy public transportation that most small cities have, I’m all ears.
Big 2.5 played a shell game with CAFE and truck-based platforms for a decade too long and now are paying the piper.
2.5 isn’t the only one who played this shell game, or did we forget that a one-inch lift on the Subaru Outback allowed them to tell the EPA to designate it as a light truck for the very same CAFE loopholes you single out the 2.5 for?
Kevin:
January 24th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
May I be the first to say “20 by 10″ will not happen?
Well, maybe the second.
And all politics aside, I’d love to see a tally of what % of SOTU promises/statements/whatever they are – actually come to pass. Clinton wanted to end all human pain and suffering (or was it just American pain and suffering). Last I checked there was still lots of that too.
The point is, the SOTU promises are probably even behind campaign promises in “% fullfilled”.
If any history nerds are interested, here’s an archive of all the SOTU addresses from previous presidents:
SOTU