Detroit: Tow Ridiculous

Fuel-economy standards are a good idea because they prevent automobile manufacturers from gaming the system. If everybody is forced to make fuel-efficient cars, there's a level playing field; if it's left up to market forces, then everybody tends to wait for everybody else to move first, because there's good money to be made being the last manufacturer of cheap and inefficient autos.

Today, when it's clear that better fuel economy is the only way for the auto industry to survive, one would think that opposition to fuel-economy standards would have abated. But, of course, no. Detroit's latest bright idea is that fuel economy is all well and good, so long as you don't intend to tow anything:

Ford Motor Co. (F) and other auto makers are lobbying the Bush administration to scale back a proposal to boost automobile fuel-economy standards. The aim is for milder fuel-economy standards for vehicles with extra towing capacity.

This would actually be funny if it weren't so pathetic. Just like the "light truck" loophole gave rise to the SUV, if implemented this loophole will inevitably result in sportscars with a towing gadget at the back which never gets used. Come on, Detroit! Embrace the inevitable! Or do you like losing billions of dollars every quarter and watching the Japanese eat your lunch?

Comments

[UH2L:]

Your post shows that you aren't familiar with vehicle engineering and what it takes for a vehicle to tow heavy loads while still being driveable. Lots of power and torque are needed to tow. The vehicle's structure also needs to be stonger, hence heavier. Ford and GM aren't being unreasonable. People who tow have lower expectations for fuel economy and won't mind if it's relatively low. People who don't tow expect to get great fuel economy. Toyota basically points to the fact that GM and Ford will have to do better with the rest of their fleets if exemptions are made for tow vehicles.

The whole new CAFE system is somewhat "game-able" on an individual model basis since the requirements depend on the footprint of the car. Expect to see longer wider vehicles than before. In the end though, the net effect on the environment should be the same since the overall corporate average requirements count towards the penalty.

2008 Aug 07 04:06 PM

[squentna:]

Right on target. The 0.1% of people towing can go ahead and buy a truck with a large value added tax. Everyone I know with a hitch never tows anything, especially to work, around town... Tow-folks can always rent the package for far less than ownership. Downside the fleet, legislate maximum vehicle weight, remove the big trucks. People looking for excuses are ridiculous when they say "they can't make me sell my guzler! I have a right to drive my 55 chevy." Actually yes we can. The roadway is the most heavily regulated activity in America today. They even tell me which side of the road I must drive on, where to stop, turn, maximum speed, even 'intentions' are regulated such as "unsafe movement", everything about the roadway is regulated. It's time we got smart and quit playing the loophole game. It's killing us.

2008 Aug 07 05:40 PM

[User 169775:]

In the larger scheme of things, does CAFE even matter? The true character of the auto companies will out during the oil shocks, again and again (1970s and today)-- Those who have the prescience to offer fuel-efficient cars are surviving, those who don't are getting crushed.

I say leave Detroit to their devices and let market forces determine their fate.

2008 Aug 08 04:17 AM

[simplesimon:]

I have a 1951 Ford from back when they were still making cars as though needed on the field in combat duty-translate heavy-so heavy that going over a speed bump does not raise the car up! It gets about 14 to 16 miles per gallon. So...Detroit has had 57 years to improve fuel economy...how are they doing? The public, vis shareholders, are not going to be happy until virtually every executive at every auto maker in the U.S is let go-and I mean with no golden parachute. I mean fired!
And while we're in the house cleaning mode, how about something besides the power elite governing the nation? Why does it have to be a lawyer? Do they know anything at all about being foreclosed? reposessed? insurance canceled so they can no longer drive? How is it any of these people know what is best for the people? They don't, actually. But like any self respecting lawyer, they do know how to make a murderer look like the victim. They do know how to come on television 20 times a day encouraging you to sue somebody, anybody...let's sue the hell out of everything that moves, any corporation with a lot o' dough....that will really fix it all up, huh? Either that, or it will drive every entrepeneur offshore, don't you imagine? Choose your president, and your representatives carefully this time. I think a few working stiffs might be helpful, frankly.

2008 Aug 08 01:06 PM

[rhj123:]

Out West we can't afford to use only small vehicles. Yes, many folks do buy vehicles that have a towing arrangement and then only drive them to the grocery store and to work. But there are recreational uses for those vehicles several times per year, used to hook up to a travel trailer, boat or utility trailer. The little four cyclinder, 90 horsepower town car just won't do. My farm and ranch friends often have to handle crops such as 1500 pound bales of hay, several tons of corn, soybeans, cotten, etc. They need those heavy duty pickups and other trucks. They commonly hook up to big stock trailers to haul ten to twenty fat steers to market, loads that weigh just a bit more than a lap-top or breif case normally handled by city folks.

Lets stop simply watching out for ourselves as city dudes. Give the country folks a break...!

2008 Aug 08 07:34 PM

[User 169775:]

bobjou:

I don't see the point of your complaint. The current market conditions is awesome for you country folks who need to buy SUVs-- The carmakers are offering them with 0% financing or incentives up to $6000. It's a great time to buy an SUV if you actually need one.

Fact is 79% of the U.S. population lives in urban areas according to the 2000 U.S. Census. Most of those folks don't need to haul bushels of crop or tow trailers with livestock, and with fuel prices being what they are, it is only natural that they are migrating to 4-cylinder cars. U.S. carmakers have encountered this situation before in the 1970s, apparently they never studied history so now they are doomed to repeat it.

Market forces at work.

2008 Aug 09 06:48 PM