Sad day for America

Page 2 of 16  


Mostly, it was a bailout program designed to hand money to the auto manufacturers...and most significantly to Ford since they made, by far, the most 'clunkers'.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Obveeus wrote:

The money went to the owners of clunkers, not the car makers. However, Ford makes cars people want to buy, so a lot of people bought Fords with their money.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The Cash for Clunkers program was designed to spur people to buy new vehicles when they would have otherwise NOT bought at all. The government 'cash' may have gone to the consumer (wink wink), but the purpose odf the program was to provide yet another form of bailout to the auto industry.

Ford makes the cars that people most wanted to get rid of. The fact that many of them went back to Ford and said 'thank you sir, may I have another', is a really sad commentary on American consumers.
Of course, if you wanted to get rid of an old Toyota you were likely out of luck since old Toyotas got such good gas mileage that you would have had to buy an electric/hybrid vehicle in order to see a 'clunkers' qualifying level of improvement.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What color is the sky in YOUR world? Most 25 year old Toyotas are in the junk yards as rusted hulks LOL
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Very few of the Cash For Clunkers cars were 25 year old models, though many of the newer Toyota models were not eligible simply because they already got good gas mileage. In the end, 5 of the top 10 most junked cars were FORD, 3 Mopar and 2 Chevy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 29/03/10 9:48 AM, Obveeus wrote:

Look at the most traded-in versus the most-purchased lists. This program was a boon for Toyota and Honda. At least most of the vehicles purchased were made in the U.S..
People used the program to get rid of their Ford, GM, and Chrysler vehicles, with five of the top ten vehicles traded in being Fords, three being Chrysler's, and two being GMs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Get real, the most traded vehicles were 1980 to 1987 Ford Explorers, dummy

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mike, at least go read the list of most traded in vehicles. None were 1980 to 1987 Explorers - which should be obvious since the Ford Explorer SUVs weren't intriduced until 1990 (for the 1991 Model Year). There were special models of full size pickups that were "Explorer" models but they aren't the SUVs and they aren't on the list.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
C. E. White wrote:

Will you please stop it? Mike doesn't care about facts. If it exists in Mike's mind, that's good enough for him. Reality be damned!
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But that is mostly becasue people were trading in old trucks and SUVs. Ford sold more of those in the 90's than anyone else, so it isn't surprising that they were popular models to trade in. Wouldn't you like $4500 for a 14 year old Explorer? Or a 14 year old 4Runner? There were just lots of old Explorers out there. If I had one, I'd have traded it in.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Obveeus wrote:

The reason why they wanted to get rid of Fords was that the trucks were bigger than what they wanted.

Not true for the trucks. However, I couldn't get rid of my Contour with the V6 that way. It was too efficient (20 MPG city/30 highway).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Most of the Fords that people got rid of were older SUVs. Since during the 90's Ford Explorers were by far the selling SUV is it any surpirse that they were one of the leading vehicles that were traded in? Six of the top ten vehicles traded in were old 12 to 16 year old Explorers. Maybe that is a clue that Fords are pretty reliable. The most pruchased clunker replacement car was a Ford Focus.....
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1036/top-cash-for-clunkers-trade-ins-and-new-cars /

If you are trying to claim that there was a set improvement that you had to achieve in order to qualify for the clash for clunkers program, then you are wrong. There wasn't a qualifying level of imporvement. You just had to trade in a vehicle on the list of qualifying clunkers and buy a vehicle on the list of qualifying replacements. The improvement in gas mileage between the two was irrelevant. So older Corollas wouldn't qulaify, but older 4Runners would. The same was true with regards to Focus' and Explorers. The only reason older Toyota trucks weren't on the list of most tradde clunkers is becasue they sold so few in the first place. If every 4Runner sold in 1996 had been traded in as a clunker, they still wouldn't have made the top ten. There jsut weren't enough of them left around to qualify. And of course, given the love some people have for Toyotas, they might have been considered to valuable to trade in as a clunker. A vehicle needed to be on the list AND be worth less than the rebate. I suspect that many owners of 1994 4Runners might believe their vehicles to be worth more than $4500. I doubt many 1994 Explorer owners were so foolish. (for the record, kbb lists a 1994 Explorer with a trade in value of around $700, a 1994 4Runner has a trade in value of a round $1200).
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 29/03/10 9:45 AM, C. E. White wrote:

Actually it was a Corolla. The Focus was 4th.
"http://jalopnik.com/5346040/its-over-ten-most-traded+in-purchased-cash-for-clunkers-cars/gallery /"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"http://jalopnik.com/5346040/its-over-ten-most-traded+in-purchased-cash-for-clunkers-cars/gallery /"
I guess this was a case of dueling references:
* http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/autos/0908/gallery.clunker_top_10/index.html - Focus #1 * http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/ariel-schwartz/sustainability/most-popular-cash-clunkers-vehicles - Focus #1
I should have paid more attention to the dates. Sorry for the confusion.
The definitive refence matches yours. See http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2009/dot13309.htm . The following data is from that reference:
Dealer Transactions Number Submitted: 690,114 Dollar Value: $2,877.9M Top 10 New Vehicles Purchased
Toyota Corolla Honda Civic Toyota Camry Ford Focus FWD Hyundai Elantra Nissan Versa Toyota Prius Honda Accord Honda Fit Ford Escape FWD
New Vehicles Manufacturers
Toyota - 19.4% General Motors - 17.6% Ford - 14.4% Honda - 13.0% Nissan - 8.7% Hyundai - 7.2% Chrysler - 6.6% Kia - 4.3% Subaru - 2.5% Mazda - 2.4% Volkswagen - 2.0% Suzuki - 0.6% Mitsubishi - 0.5% MINI - 0.4% Smart - 0.2% Volvo - 0.1% All Other - <0.1%
Top 10 Trade-in Vehicles
Ford Explorer 4WD Ford F150 Pickup 2WD Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD Ford Explorer 2WD Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD Jeep Cherokee 4WD Chevrolet Blazer 4WD Chevrolet C1500 Pickup 2WD Ford F150 Pickup 4WD Ford Windstar FWD Van
Vehicles Purchased by Category
Passenger Cars: 404,046 Category 1 Truck: 231,651 Category 2 Truck: 46,836 Category 3 Truck: 2,408
Vehicle Trade-in by Category
Passenger Cars: 109,380 Category 1 Truck: 450,778 Category 2 Truck: 116,909 Category 3 Truck: 8,134
84% of trade-ins under the program are trucks, and 59% of new vehicles purchased are cars. The program worked far better than anyone anticipated at moving consumers out of old, dirty trucks and SUVs and into new more fuel-efficient cars.
Average Fuel Economy New vehicles Mileage: 24.9 MPG Trade-in Mileage: 15.8 MPG Overall increase: 9.2 MPG, or a 58% improvement
Cars purchased under the program are, on average, 19% above the average fuel economy of all new cars currently available, and 59% above the average fuel economy of cars that were traded in. This means the program raised the average fuel economy of the fleet, while getting the dirtiest and most polluting vehicles off the road.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes...12 to 16 year old cars is a far cry from the claim that they were 25 year old cars. Really, isn't it a bit sad that 12 year old cars are headed for the junk yard already becasu ethey owners are ready to chuck them on the scrap heap? The vehicles being junked most (Ford Explorers) had lost almost all resale value in just over a decade.

Why? All cars should last a decade...most do it without being in such piss poor shape that they have no resale value and their owners want to dump them in the trash for a few bucks discount on a newer car.

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1036/top-cash-for-clunkers-trade-ins-and-new-cars /
Out of date data covering only thr first week or so of the program. Only a couple of Ford even made the Top10 for purchased vehicles while half of the top 10 for junked vehicles came from Ford.

If you car got over 18MPG, then it wasn't eligible as a clunker. That limit alone took many of the Toyota/Honda/Nissan/etc... models out of contention for this financial welfare. Ford Explorwers, on the other hand, moved to the top of the list because of their lousy gas mileage.

That is not true. The amount of the rebate was tied to the amount of gas mileage improvement.

We agree: If a vehicle still runs well, owners are less likely to deem it a clunker worthy of the scrap heap.

Yep. Vehicles with any significant resale value coulnd't be cashed in as clunkers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What makes you think a 1984 Explorer, that actually came to market in July of 1983, is not a 25 year old model? Even if one only drove 15,000 mileage it would have nearly 400,000 miles on the odometer. Even a 1989 would have almost 325,000 miles.
wrote in message

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 30/03/10 7:59 AM, C. E. White wrote:

Stop confusing him with facts. He's a Republican.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SMS wrote:

There are many bright Republicans (all of whom are outside this newsgroup).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 30/03/10 4:40 PM, dr_jeff wrote:

I met one once, but he became an independent because he didn't like being associated with tea-baggers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.