Hammer Time: The Number One Killer

Steven Lang
by Steven Lang

“I wouldn’t buy a car at an auction. They’re all junk!”

Bad transmissions. Blown engines. Cars that smoke, drink and hang out with the bad boys thanks to all different types of leaks and spewage. This is the general stereotype that most uninformed consumers have of those cars at an auction.

Most folks look at auction cars as vehicles that are worth more dead than alive. Every malady and defect is assigned to these ‘red light’ vehicles that are sold as/is with no warranty.

But do you know what is the #1 issue of those auctioned off trade-ins here in the Atlanta area?

Emissions.

This is why I always look at the vehicle’s history. Every Carfax and Autocheck vehicle will list when a vehicle has gone through an emissions check.

The most common trade-in I see at the auctions will usually be driven anywhere from 10,000 to 20,000 miles a year for the last several years. Then, I see a few “Failed Emission Inspection” blips, followed either by a recently passed emissions or a final failed emission.

The car will get very little driving after that. In a few months you will see a few hundred miles. Or if it is kept for a few years, you may see a few thousand.

These cars will wind up at the auctions where 99.9% of the vehicle will still be perfectly fine. Dealers who either operate outside of an emission county, or are out of state, will bid most of these vehicles up to levels that I simply can’t compete at for now. Throw in the fact that some of these guys are simply filling in orders for a larger auto finance company that is financed via Wall Street, and I have to be real shrewd with my bidding tactics in order to get any good deal these days.

Do you want this type of deal? Sorry. There are also a ton of unintended consequences from these emission issues.

Public auctions used to be prolific within the metro-Atlanta area, and throughout the country. All businesses want to sell where the general public is and a well run public auto auction is no different.

Except now they are all outside of emission counties due to the auctions getting fined for selling cars that didn’t pass emissions to the general public. Here in Georgia, a lot of folks believe that a ‘no current emissions’ announcement should be enough of a warning for the general public.

But a lot of prospective buyers wander off from lane to lane and, even when slowly spoken to, they don’t quite understand the ramifications of no emissions.

“Oh we should be able to take care of it. Just replace the catalytic converter.” They go cheap on the catalytic converter and don’t realize that there is a lot more to these emission issues than just replacing the one part. The $200 quick fix turns into a $1000+ estimate that offers no guarantee of success.

They get upset and try to return that car to the auction. Is it the auctions fault that these people bought a car with no emissions? With a stamp in big bold letters on the bill of sale that says “No emissions!”?

Yes. The law is the law, and that law of selling a non-emission vehicle is set and stone. So now those businesses focus exclusively on the dealer side of the business. The public is no longer invited.

Small potatoes you say? Well consider your own car for a second. It probably came from a manufacturer that tries to sell their green credentials to the public. Priuses. Volts. LEAFs. Diesels. Hybrids. That magical 40 mpg hump. All of it sounds wonderful to a public that genuinely wants the air clean and the land vibrant.

But 90+% of the vehicles these manufacturers sell usually don’t reach these summits of green efficiency. As for their emission systems, they are only required to last 8 years or 80,000 miles. After that it becomes a revenue opportunity for the manufacturer and the aftermarket.

In my experiences at the auctions, this translates into an entirely faked version of planned obsolescence. The uninformed public often thinks that if the expensive emission system is malfunctioning, God only knows how long the engine or transmission will last.

It gives me a market. It gives the public a perpetual need for auto loans. It gives the manufacturers more money and it gives the banks a fruitful source to finance a public that simply doesn’t know any better… and likely never will.

Not too long ago I bought three vehicles at a public auction that cost me all of $700 each. They were perfectly fine. Unpopular, with failed emissions, but fine. No cosmetic issues. A 1998 Suzuki Esteem wagon with only 105k. A 1992 Toyota Tercel with 180k, and a 1990 Mercury Topaz with only 79k.

How much money would have been saved by John Q Public if they could have kept those rides? I am willing to bet that these emissions issues easily add over a half million units to the new car market. I could be wrong. But whenever I inspect a car with a check engine light and see a long list of emission related codes, I feel like the public is being suckered into a Ponzi scheme of substantial magnitude.

Steven Lang
Steven Lang

More by Steven Lang

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 197 comments
  • Gearhead77 Gearhead77 on Apr 10, 2013

    Ugh, this debate again. Emissions and state inspections are mandatory in my state and county. It's a once a year pain in the butt for both cars we have. Once a year. $60-70 depending on where you go for both stickers. It's one day of having the car out of service. For many, it's an inconvenience, not a hardship. I don't know about you, I like have clean air to breathe. During the supposed "Golden Age" of horsepower and the automobile, cars were powerful and simple. Period. It's taken 40 years to get back to that level and all that. They also polluted a ton, had terrible fuel mileage, NEEDED an oil change every 3k(another topic for debate among petrol heads), plus all the other stuff, including points, condenser,plugs, chassis lube,etc. They had awful brakes, terrible suspensions and were capable of messing you up in even minor accident(because no seatbelts and pointy interiors). They were polluting, fuel guzzling, maintenance pigs IF you took care of them. Maybe they'd last 100k, maybe not. Probably not. Even if you took care of them. Granted, there's always the person "I had a 1968 blah blah that went 300k on just oil changes". Maybe 1 of 100 cars would do this, even today? But do an Auto Trader or Ebay search. The amount of 10 year old cars with over 100k is amazing if we compare it to back then. I'm not against old cars for fun or show. I appreciate these cars, but I'm glad they are hobbies now. Would they still be hobbies without government intervention? Hard to say. Cars are faster, more powerful, more efficient and safer than they've ever been. The cheapest cars on the road are capable of 100+ mph and 30 mpg average. They pollute so little compared to even 15 years ago, let alone 30 or 40. Today's cars are finely tuned to run with emissions controls in place. Look at the Mustang. A 300hp V6 Mustang? That, when the stars align, will give you 30mpg? A Mustang that is capable of blowing away all but a few of its early ancestors? And you can do it with the ability to stop, turn and survive a crash? Granted, that base Mustang in 1970 was about $2800 or about $16000 in today's money. But a base Mustang is only 22,500 (with no options checked and they do exist, one dealer near me has two) Is the extra comfort, safety,lower emissions and fuel mileage worth the extra cost and "gummint" meddling? Cars aren't necessarily more expensive, adjusted for inflation, we just don't make as much money as we used. These are my dime store economic observations, those with real insight can probably blow them apart. Picking up any buff mag from from 87(?) to 93, your choices in Mustang power was the 2.3 90 hp Four or the 225hp "5.0" V-8. From 94-2003 it was the boat anchor 3.8 at a wheezing 140 hp or the still 225hp-240hp 5.0 or 4.6 V8. Neither would give you anywhere near 30 mpg. Maintaining a car is expensive, especially for the poor. And poor is fixed income, elderly, students or single parents. Well, any parents, unless you make really good money and keep within your means. Keeping any car running on a limited budget is no fun. A failed emissions check may not poison the air immediately and kill all the bunnies, but it will decrease fuel mileage, make more pollution and more than likely lead to more emissions or engine trouble down the line. This means more expensive repairs, more repairs in general and possibly trading in one crappy car for another. But even though car ownership isn't a right, it's a necessity for people where mass transit is non existent or poorly laid out. But owning a car means you should have to maintain it, just like the other people on the road. All government bureaucracy is inefficient and possibly corrupt on some level. But I don't doubt for one minute that government regulation has given us much better vehicles and other products then we would have asked for as people.

    • Danio3834 Danio3834 on Apr 10, 2013

      "Is the extra comfort, safety,lower emissions and fuel mileage worth the extra cost and “gummint” meddling? Cars aren’t necessarily more expensive, adjusted for inflation, we just don’t make as much money as we used. These are my dime store economic observations, those with real insight can probably blow them apart." The last time the Government implemented policy that effectively told the automakers to double the fuel economy of the avearge vehicle, in 1975 when CAFE was enacted, the average cost of a new car increased from $4,250 in 1975 to $7,210.00 in 1980. This rise was 11% more than the inflation rate between those years and significantly more (34%) than the average income rose in that time. We can likely expect comparable increases in cost as the new requirements are phased in.

  • Cargogh Cargogh on Apr 10, 2013

    Louisville, KY (Jefferson County) got rid of emissions testing a few years back. Possibly not related, we now have the number one men's college basketball team, and usually rate in the top 10 of the nation's worst air quality.

  • MaintenanceCosts It's not a Benz or a Jag / it's a 5-0 with a rag /And I don't wanna brag / but I could never be stag
  • 3-On-The-Tree Son has a 2016 Mustang GT 5.0 and I have a 2009 C6 Corvette LS3 6spd. And on paper they are pretty close.
  • 3-On-The-Tree Same as the Land Cruiser, emissions. I have a 1985 FJ60 Land Cruiser and it’s a beast off-roading.
  • CanadaCraig I would like for this anniversary special to be a bare-bones Plain-Jane model offered in Dynasty Green and Vintage Burgundy.
  • ToolGuy Ford is good at drifting all right... 😉
Next