Ok, I’m back after a nearly 2 week hiatus wherein I finished unpacking the rest of the house after our move. I’m to a state where I almost have my entire garage back! During my “time off” I’ve been keeping on top of all of my automotive reading and have been going mad with rage over all of this efficiency talk.

Our fine government thought it a good idea to further stimulate the economy, chiefly the automotive economy by creating the cash for clunkers program. A real nightmare for us Automotive Philosophers who appreciate “old metal” The program offers up a $4500 “rebate” type incentive if you trade in your “clunker” for a more efficient NEW vehicle… www.cars.gov Your clunker is then taken to meet its maker via the crusher, and reduced down to it’s raw materials to create more Aveos and Fits.  

Generally speaking, this is a good idea as it will most likely get some vehicles which are less than road worthy off the roads. You know the ones. The ’86 Chevy Celebrity that was t-boned in the early ‘90s, never repaired, and is now held together by duct tape and rust. Chances are this particular car has no brakes, leaks more oil than a greasy cheeseburger, and is generally a death trap on wheels. These cars are far beyond economical repair, and have well outlived their usefulness.

The thing I don’t like about the cash for clunkers program is that it is removing a vast quantity of good used cars from the used car market. Some consumers simply don’t know that their cars are worth more than the $4500, and feel as though they’re getting a great deal! For instance, a 1997 Mercedes E420 qualifies for the program. Now, a good E420 is worth significantly more on the street than the $4500 credit. It qualifies based on the simple fact that it meets the fuel economy requirements required to be included in the program. I would GLADLY pay someone $4500 to take their otherwise still useful, and quite loveable E420 off their hands… So what’s the deal then? 

It’s all a matter of efficiency as laid out by the fine folks at the EPA. You know, the guys that sponsor Formula 1 races, the Meadowbrook Concourse, and the NHRA. Wait a minute, they don’t sponsor any of those! Actually, they seem to take a rather poor view of cars in general. 

Many of us are aware of the EPA fuel economy ratings that can be found on every window sticker of every new car in North America. We all know, roughly, how many miles per gallon are cars achieve. The benchmark of “good economy” seems to float around 30mpg in the consumers mind.  A pinnacle of efficient motoring, the Toyota Prius is rated at somewhere around 50 miles per gallon (mpg). A stellar figure, right? Well, I tend to disagree, and here’s why… 

You see, the Prius has two engines, a 1.8 litre, 4 cylinder which puts out about 98 horsepower (HP). It also has an 80hp electric motor which receives it’s power from a battery pack, which in turn is charged via a complex process involving the alternator, regenerative braking, and Gnomes, lots and lots of Gnomes. Well not really, but you get the idea.

So, how much power can one expect, per MPG from the Prius? A true scale of efficiency takes into account the energy expended over a given time/distance, right? So, if we figure that the Prius puts out a Net 178 HP, and that’s being generous as the 80 HP from the electric motor is seldom available 100%, if ever, and divide that 178Hp by it’s claimed 50mpg fuel efficiency, we get a rating of 3.56 net HP/Gallon. Sounds OK, right???

Now, let’s take a look at the American dream in all its overcompensating glory. The Corvette! Putting out 420 horsepower from a 6.2 litre V8 (pushrod none-the-less) engine, is rated at about 26mpg. If we do the same math, and take 420 hp, and divide that by its claimed 26mpg, we get a rating of 16 net HP/Gallon. WHOA! Wait a minute! You’re telling these fine people that a Corvette is more efficient than a Prius? Well, sorta…

 It all boils down to total package engineering. Corvettes are designed with the intent of going fast, very fast. This means a shape that slices through the air, weight reduction measures to keep the chassis nimble, and an engine that uses every ounce of energy in the most efficient manner. The result, a 26-30mpg car that can go nearly 200mph. Now, imagine if that same technology were applied to say, a Honda Civic? The possibilities are endless! 

The simple fact of the matter is that people don’t know any better, and the automotive industry likes that. They like selling us thirsty cars with cushy seats, complex electronic toys, and more features than we generally know what to do with. The Cadillac Escalade is the grand-daddy of over-priced, under- engineered crap.

A heavily modified pick up chassis, with a simple beast of a truck engine, a ton of fake chrome/cheap fiberglass, comfy seats, and well, that’s about it. Really ,not much different from it’s Chevy Tahoe brother which sells for substantially less. There are indeed more features on the Escalade, but do we need them? No! 

My “vintage” ’93 400E Mercedes was considered when new to be the pinnacle of automotive excellence. It has digital nothing, no built in GPS, no fancy gadgets, no adjustable suspension, no heated pedals to keep your Alden Shoes warm, nothing! It has power windows, door locks, seats, AC, and a CD player in the trunk. That’s it! Simple! 

The Lilliputian Mazda Miata when parked next to most autos is laughable in terms of its petite road presence.  It’s small, VERY VERY small, when compared to other cars on the road. Now, park that Miata next to MG’s big (at the time) MG B series from any era, and that Miata looks like a yacht! The MG is SOOOO small in comparison. The same can be said for the original Mini Cooper from the 60s or 70s when compared to the current iteration as produced by BMW. 

All in all, with energy prices on the rise, and Joe Public stuck between a rock and a hard place, financially, something needs to change. A back to basics approach… Enough of these over complicated hybrids and gimmicky machines…. I want real efficiency!