I had written a long comment but it got deleted before I could post but Basically...the AP is sensationalizing the govt numbers. They use the term "swap" to say more swaps were for the F-150 than anything else, meaning straight up, model for model. Well duh. Per the program rules you couldn't trade a Camry for a Camry!
The fact is avg MPG went up 9.2 mpg per transaction.
8200 F-150 "swaps" vs 700,000+ transactions.
100,000 more cars bought than trucks (which included light CUVs like Escape).
The AP should print a retraction and apologize for sensationalizing something that was mentioned from the earliest reporting of the program. #cashforclunkers
@Rabbi Dave: Indeed, the story can't see the forest for a handful of truck swaps. Towards the end: The data show the average fuel economy was 15.8 mpg for the old vehicles and 24.9 for the new ones. Overall, the program worked extremely well as a stimulus measure and environmental benefit; anyone who think the economy didn't need stimulus is pretty divorced from reality.
And people's fake concern about the pollution from all that manufacturing is unwarranted. 11 tons CO2 to manufacture a car vs. avoiding 19 lbs CO2 for every gallon not burned saves tons of CO2 overall. To increase the fuel economy of the US fleet you have to swap old cars for new, unless you're proposing engine swaps, EV conversions, and adding lightness. #cashforclunkers
@skierpage: How exactly does one add lightness... helium or hydrogen in the tires?
Just because the average fuel economy went up doesn't mean that it's all good. I'm not just talking about saving the penguins and tree hugging. I'm talking about my money that went to other people and I got zero benefit because I own a car that wasn't "clunkery" enough.
We have no idea how these cars will be used. Daily drivers, secondary cars, bought it just to have? People could drag whatever they wanted in irregardless of whether they drove it. They could be driving a 30+MPG appliance (Corolla) daily, but traded in an old Cadillic Fleetwood that used to be their grandpa's for another 30+MPG appliance. The government just threw our money out the window.
In my father-in-law's case there is a net loss in CO2 emissions. He traded in a full size pickup that hadn't run in 2 years and was barely worth scrap metal cost. Now that he has a new shiny pickup, he drives it constantly and stopped driving his car, which gets 50% better MPG.
@torreys71004: None of what you say refutes what I said. This was a stimulus program that increased the fuel efficiency of the US auto fleet. Give us your better proposal. A gas tax would get people driving less (I support one phased in over a long period), but is probably not a good idea in an economic downturn. #cashforclunkers
Building a new, mid-sized car apparently uses up 6.9 tonnes of CO2 (Ford numbers) or up to 14 tonnes (Toyota's numbers). If one assumes the average 10.5 tonnes (presumably also averaging SUVs and compacts) we could expect some savings in about four years time. For now, the environment is decidedly worse off, but the median age of US cars is 8.9 years. The total remaining savings would be 9.5 million tons of CO2, equivalent to 12 hours and 45 minutes of total US CO2 emissions.
So that, and an unnatural blip in car sales, is what your $3 billion bought you. #cashforclunkers
If I had the energy, I would dig up all of my old posts filled with doubt and despair and say "told you so".
The article says that 1.87 million tons of CO2 will be saved yearly (sounds more impressive than it is). Could someone find out approximately how much CO2 is released by building the 677,081 new vehicles involved? Then we'll find out if any possible reduction was worth $3 billion, or if they could have been better spent elsewhere. #cashforclunkers
As I have outlined in previous posts before, most of the vehicles would have never received anywhere near the trade in value that they did during the C4C program.
I have worked with a lot of dealers, and most (if not all) of them usually offer around 60% of KBB trade in value. Sometimes it may look like they are offering more, but this involves some dealer cash given by the factory. Anyway, it is the dealers job to pay as little as possible for the trade, and that is why they use other books to determine trade values.
One book, not available to the public is Galves, a NJ based company that determines values on actual auction results across the country. Speaking of auction results, many of the auction companies that run these auction produce a booklet for the dealers use.
Also, determining trade in value for the car, the dealer uses the base trim level, not the upper trim level. You have an Accord ES? Too bad, because the dealer will use the Accord VP pricing level. You have a sunroof? Not counted. Alloy wheels? Good luck. Leather Interior? May as well be plastic.
Oh, but all that gets thrown out the window when they want to sell it, sometimes adding in equipment that doesn't exist to wring out the most money from the consumer. Anyway, this isn't my point.
My point is that the average everyday consumer, one that hates negotiating with the dealer, would have never received this moch on trade in as they did during the C4C program. #clunkpocalypse
@UDMan: What's sad to me is that they could easily have made that money via private sale - but that's not an attractive option due to the number of mouthbreathers on Craigslist who try to lowball you and jerk you around.
That's right, it's the legions of Craigslist fucktards who're truly responsible for the destruction of some of the nation's cleanest Toyota pickups. I hope they're happy. #clunkpocalypse
@postjosh: The engine had to be destroyed, but the car could be "recycled" for up to 90 days before they were crushed. That way, other parts could be sold like sheet metal, interior furnishings, and electronics. All of these items had to be stripped out before it was crushed anyway. #clunkpocalypse
Well, the crowding of SUV's Minivans and Trucks isn't all that much od a surprise. However, these twelve makes being traded in under the cash for clunkers program should be. Read all about the Dirty Dozen#clunkpocalypse
@UDMan: I saw an '05 Mustang GT in a similar position to that SUV in a garbage bin and I almost cried. Also, that $9,000 remark seems a little optimistic for that Ford Windstar minivan. #clunkpocalypse
@ssrock64: Not necessarily. Remember, Chrysler was offering $4,500 rebate at the same time the C4C program was going on. So, if the Windstar qualified for the C4C rebate of $4,500, and Chrysler had a $4,500 rebate, it was worth $9,000. #clunkpocalypse
I'd say ninety or so percent of the clunked cars deserved it and we're better off without them, but there's others where the residual values seem so large and obvious that it's surprising that people were willing to turn them in. #clunkpocalypse
@Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet: Agree with your percentage approximation, and it may even be higher-we have no idea how many of the pristine-looking rides had major engine/tranny/etc. issues that, coupled with the cost of repairs, made them underwater in the price vs. value wars. I'd guess that, for the most part, it all worked out for the best. #clunkpocalypse
@Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet: I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt that way. I mean, we had that CAFE-inspired SUV love in the '90s, so what better than another government initiative to help bring about equilibrium to our collective cG? #clunkpocalypse
I think perhpas I should paint the valve covers of all of my vehicles pink, sort of the clunker equvalent of wearing a pink ribbon. Perhaps I'll display a pink valve cover on my desk at work. Hey, we should start a movement- everyone who is/ was opposed to this nonsense should go to their nearest junkyard/ scrap pile/ garage and find a valve cover, any old unused valve cover, paint it pink, and display it prominently.
This could also be a LeMons punishment- welding a pink valve cover to your engine hood.
@Maymar: I don't think that could be a C4C trade-in, though. The Equinox, in addition to being an aggresively mediocre vehicle, also gets, as I understand it, fairly unspectacular fuel economy.
@mechimike: It wasn't - I'm Canadian (so no C4C), and this would've been about a year and a half ago, when I worked at a Chevy dealer. It's just the ignominy that something so spectacularly meh could replace something that was once standard of the world. It'd be like a fourth Godfather movie, with Ben Stiller playing Michael Corleone.
I took advantage and got so many parts for my '85 W126 300SD. My local junk yard let me take all I could carry for $100. I went back three times and he looked the other way while I carried crate after crate of parts I needed. Long Live the W126 300SD. If you've never driven one try it. Few modern cars have the same plush ride combined with excellent road feel. They true classics.
11/05/09
The fact is avg MPG went up 9.2 mpg per transaction.
8200 F-150 "swaps" vs 700,000+ transactions.
100,000 more cars bought than trucks (which included light CUVs like Escape).
The AP should print a retraction and apologize for sensationalizing something that was mentioned from the earliest reporting of the program. #cashforclunkers
11/05/09
And people's fake concern about the pollution from all that manufacturing is unwarranted. 11 tons CO2 to manufacture a car vs. avoiding 19 lbs CO2 for every gallon not burned saves tons of CO2 overall. To increase the fuel economy of the US fleet you have to swap old cars for new, unless you're proposing engine swaps, EV conversions, and adding lightness. #cashforclunkers
11/06/09
Just because the average fuel economy went up doesn't mean that it's all good. I'm not just talking about saving the penguins and tree hugging. I'm talking about my money that went to other people and I got zero benefit because I own a car that wasn't "clunkery" enough.
We have no idea how these cars will be used. Daily drivers, secondary cars, bought it just to have? People could drag whatever they wanted in irregardless of whether they drove it. They could be driving a 30+MPG appliance (Corolla) daily, but traded in an old Cadillic Fleetwood that used to be their grandpa's for another 30+MPG appliance. The government just threw our money out the window.
In my father-in-law's case there is a net loss in CO2 emissions. He traded in a full size pickup that hadn't run in 2 years and was barely worth scrap metal cost. Now that he has a new shiny pickup, he drives it constantly and stopped driving his car, which gets 50% better MPG.
11/06/09
11/05/09
Largesse! Praise be to the Emperor for our slightly more fuel efficient vehicles! #cashforclunkers
11/05/09
So that, and an unnatural blip in car sales, is what your $3 billion bought you. #cashforclunkers
11/05/09
11/05/09
The Elantra is perfect for NYC. Don't care about the car, don't care about the dings. Still don't want. #cashforclunkers
11/05/09
The article says that 1.87 million tons of CO2 will be saved yearly (sounds more impressive than it is). Could someone find out approximately how much CO2 is released by building the 677,081 new vehicles involved? Then we'll find out if any possible reduction was worth $3 billion, or if they could have been better spent elsewhere. #cashforclunkers
11/05/09
10/24/09
I have worked with a lot of dealers, and most (if not all) of them usually offer around 60% of KBB trade in value. Sometimes it may look like they are offering more, but this involves some dealer cash given by the factory. Anyway, it is the dealers job to pay as little as possible for the trade, and that is why they use other books to determine trade values.
One book, not available to the public is Galves, a NJ based company that determines values on actual auction results across the country. Speaking of auction results, many of the auction companies that run these auction produce a booklet for the dealers use.
Also, determining trade in value for the car, the dealer uses the base trim level, not the upper trim level. You have an Accord ES? Too bad, because the dealer will use the Accord VP pricing level. You have a sunroof? Not counted. Alloy wheels? Good luck. Leather Interior? May as well be plastic.
Oh, but all that gets thrown out the window when they want to sell it, sometimes adding in equipment that doesn't exist to wring out the most money from the consumer. Anyway, this isn't my point.
My point is that the average everyday consumer, one that hates negotiating with the dealer, would have never received this moch on trade in as they did during the C4C program. #clunkpocalypse
10/24/09
That's right, it's the legions of Craigslist fucktards who're truly responsible for the destruction of some of the nation's cleanest Toyota pickups. I hope they're happy. #clunkpocalypse
10/24/09
10/24/09
10/24/09
10/24/09
Well, the crowding of SUV's Minivans and Trucks isn't all that much od a surprise. However, these twelve makes being traded in under the cash for clunkers program should be. Read all about the Dirty Dozen #clunkpocalypse
10/24/09
10/24/09
10/24/09
10/24/09
I'd say ninety or so percent of the clunked cars deserved it and we're better off without them, but there's others where the residual values seem so large and obvious that it's surprising that people were willing to turn them in. #clunkpocalypse
10/24/09
10/24/09
10/11/09
This could also be a LeMons punishment- welding a pink valve cover to your engine hood.
10/11/09
I know Matt did this list once before, but here is my analysis of the 12 cars that should have never been traded. Read all about the Dirty Dozen.
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/12/09
10/10/09