I’ve been writing vehemently on this topic ever since it’s proposal on many forums, and have been speaking a great deal about it in my professional life. Generally speaking, I must (usually) stick to the facts and only the facts, offering up an un-biased objective take on the matter, which is still negative. It is only in the Blogosphere where one can truly pontificate and in this case weep at the true tragedy behind the Cars for Clunkers program…
You see, the program was initially conceived as a means to further stimulate the automotive economy by incenting folks to dump their less efficient autos for NEW fuel efficient machinery. I suppose the billions that the government has already thrown at the industry wasn’t enough. A couple billion more under the guise of economic reform, environmental reason, and well, more auto industry support couldn’t hurt, right? Well, to me, it does! It really hurts! Like stubbing your pinky toe on the dresser when finding your way to the loo at 3am, hurts!
The program, in its most basic form is fine. It’s the destruction of vehicles that have a great deal of life left in them that hurts not only me as a fellow car guy, but an entire industry. On a recent trip to one of the dealerships near my home, I walked the line of cars that have come in under the cash for clunkers program (C4C). I was astonished to see gleaming metal. Newish cars with PLENTY of life left in them, that have had their engines DESTROYED for the sake of a 4mpg increase!
Initially, dealers were instructed to pour a sodium compound into the engine oil which would, after a period of running the engine at high RPMs, basically weld all the internal moving components of the engine in-place, in turn rendering (basically) the entire engine, and all of its components utterly useless! Now that many a car have been brought in under the program, dealers have had an issue destroying cars and later finding out that they do not meet the qualifications for the program! Try explaining that to a customer! I wonder if any suits have been filed as a result of deals falling through, and the trade in being destroyed by the dealer/government?
Anyway… The problem starts at the used car lot. Many of you may be parent s of teenagers, teenagers close to driving age. Some of you may be like me, and are WELL aware of the poor financial sense buying a new car really makes, and some may, like me again, be lovers of older autos in general. A teen looking for a car isn’t going to have $30k to dump on a reasonable new car. At least not in my neighborhood… A bit further North, yes, but in my subdivision, no. Most work part time, and have saved up a few grand to pick up their first set of SWEET wheels at the local ma-and-pop used car lot. Usually, they spend between $3-6k on their first car. The C4C program is going to make that a whole lot harder…
Under C4C, people who would normally trade in their aged wheels, people like your grandma with her ’95 Mercury with 18,000 miles on it are taking their cars in to take advantage of the program, and the $4500 rebate. The ’95 Mercury, as stated above, is indeed a cheap car, only worth a couple thousand bucks. This isn’t because it’s a bad car, but rather, there’s LOTS of them. Ford built a ZILLION of these things every year they were in production for use as personal cars, taxis, police cars, government cars, etc. There’s lots, and the market is full of them. That is until the C4C program DEVOURED most of the viable cars. So, the little old lady to-from church car with its gleaming paint, carpets untouched by shoes, and plastic still covering the spare will have its engine destroyed, and will end up being sold for scrap! Obviously that car has load of life left in it. A great first car, etc.
An entire industry of sub $10k cars will be put out to pasture as a result of this program. The used cars that are left over, due to market demand, will themselves increase in value due to their relative scarcity, and a domino effect will be realized. The days of good cheap used cars will be over! Hell, the days of BAD cheap used cars will be over too!
On the other front, we have the auto parts recycling market. Many of the parts that I use to maintain both my “modern” and antique fleet of cars are used. The fact that the government is requiring the all out destruction of these car’s engines tells me that there is an ulterior agenda at work here. Auto recycling yards are having fits over this as well. 60% of a salvage vehicles value lies in the engine/transmission which under the C4C program, is required to be destroyed. It's almost as though the government is trying to get all older cars off the road, and make it impossible to service them as well. Perhaps they should take a look at Englands MoT, and even their Motor Heratige Trust to see a country that loves their cars, and has a system in place to ensure that cars are roadworthy and safe! 40/50 year old cars are a fairly common sight in the UK, and the governement takes pride in the fact that so many of their native vehicles are still running strong! They have a system of inspections wherein a car must meet certain standards to remain licensed...
As was quoted recently on Jalopnik.com, Bruce Luther of Rock and Roll Auto Recycling in Pleasanton, CA said “The CARs act is written… is horseshit beyond repair!” and goes further to indicate that the current scrap value is at about $140 per ton, which means a 2 ton car is only worth about $280 as scrap. Take out the estimated cost to remove all fluids and “detox” the car, which is about $200, as required by law, your once gleaming motorcar is not only worth $80, if nothing more can be sold off of it!
You may be thinking, what about the interior and body… Well, if you’ve ever been to an auto recycler, you’ll notice that the cars usually have their windows removed, that is, if they were not already destroyed in the process of moving them around the lot. So, the interiors are usually exposed to the elements, etc, and not really worthy of being transplanted. Some of the more “shielded” components, perhaps, but most are quickly destroyed by dust and moisture.
A great many classic and rare cars are finding the most devastating end in this manner. It brought a slight tear to my eye to watch one dealership take a very rare and beautiful ’94 Jaguar Majestic and give it a dose of silicon silicate in the oil to bring to a halt its glorious V12 engine. I sat in, and drove this car around the lot before it’s destruction. It showed 126k on the clock, and was PERFECT. Not a scratch on it! The interior was recently reupholstered too!
As they poured the poison into the engine, it sputtered a bit, as to say “Oy! What’s this shite you be passing off as oil, to me!” The porter then brought the revs up to about 3k and held them there. Soon, the cap on the coolant reservoir started steaming, and the glorious growl of the great beast was overshadowed by an ominous squeal. The squeal then grew louder, followed by the sound of metal on metal. A shrill grinding sound, not unlike what is heard by the slipping wheels of a steam locomotive. Then, all at once, there was silence. The grand machine’s days of stately motoring were over. The machine that was loveingly assembled by craftsman in the town of Coventry, was purchased by a discerning motorist, lived as a member of the family - took trips, is full of memories, had a story all its own, has been silenced, never to bring a grin to the face of those who had the pleasure of depressing it's "happy" pedal... This fine machine, the axiom of engineering and craftsmanship has officially been removed from cirrculation!
Please note: The engine on the above car, if it was as nice as it seemed during my brief drive and inspection would fetch SEVERAL thousand dollars as a spare/used engine. More than the $4500 rebate offered by the government, and the $80 in raw materials which will be realized by the scrapyard. Due to the rarity of the trim spec on the car, I honestly haven't a clue what its fair market/"classic" car price would be. I pomise, though, that to the right buyer, it would be a multiple of the $4500 the owner gave it up for!
I desperately wanted to remove a token of this glorious machine to act as a memorial that its motoring life was not taken in vain. A peice of evidence that this car did exist. A reminder of its story - the story of it's death. The leaping hood ornament, a masterpeice in chrome, perhaps? No, that would be blasphemy! One should not desecrate this fine vehicle, by plucking parts from it’s still “warm" body. A boot emblem? No, that won't do either. NO! It shall go to the great highway in the sky, its dignity intact! It will be whole when it goes to meet the great manufacturer!
To take a line from the manliest movie of all, Babe… No not the one about the guy who played baseball, the one about the little talking pig. In the movie, the duck character warns the other animals that Christmastime was near, and that one would have to die in order to supply the family’s Christmas feast. It is at this point in the movie that the duck proclaims in a panic duckish voice “Christmas means carnage!” By the way, the duck's girlfriend later became duck ala'orange for the farmer's feast...
So, it’s with that inspiration that I proclaim that Cash for Clunkers means CARNAGE! It is as such that the sound of the thousands of engines being put to such a needless, unglorious death will act as a requiem to cars around the world. To all who have gone before, I pour a quart on the curb…
(Note: I won’t actually be pouring a quart on the curb as oil is rather pricey, and I’m sure the EPA, another wise government entity, would surely frown upon this...)


Salon.com
Comments
Thanks and rated.
#1. They could have allowed the dealers to sell all parts except the engines to auto junk yards.
#2. I saw a report yesterday that 4 out of the top five cars purchased under this program were Toyota's or Hondas. The one American car was the Ford Focus.
Wasn't the idea to help the American car companies?
The government does NOTHING right.
Cash for clunkers only works if you plan to buy a brand new car. I used a GM credit card for a decade on the thought that it would be a form of savings for a new car one day. Then I realized, unless I win the lottery, I am never going to be a "new car" kind of woman.
So there will be a market for used cars, as long as the people getting rid of their used cars are getting "newer" used cars rather than brand new cars.
This very week, I put my own extremely aged Volvo 242 DL sedan on EBay, as it is now too old and mechanically unreliable for me to drive regularly, but there are some collectors who have been bidding on it all this week, and I will be happy to turn it over for the winning bid, knowing that my dear old Volvo will have a devoted slave to pamper and care for her, as I do not have the ability or the pocketbook to do.
And I bought a 90 Accura, low mileage and with one owner, in almost pristine condition, for a little under $3,000 ... and now I suspect that I have rescued a perfectly wonderful, well-kept car from the horrible fate of the Jaguar Majestic.
So we're skipping CFC. We're selling the truck to a young guy at our auto mechanic's shop who has wanted it for years. It would have made me sad to see it scrapped.
All the other useful bits are being harvested, at least according to that broadcast, before the Clunker meets the Crusher.
Personally, I'd like to see another version of C4C after we've ramped up a decent light rail system in this country: Give up your car and ride for free for two years.
Blackflon, it would be extremely difficult for dealers to pull a con on thr government, reselling the C4C cars. The cars MUST be registered into the program before they get their rebates. Once registered, the cars can not be titled. I simply don't see why the engines must be destroyed? let the salvage yards do their jobs, and let the consumers benefit from the influx of cheap used parts. The EPA will be pleased, as rather than consuming energy in a destructive process, of which only a small percentage actually does make it into new cars, be productive with it... I'm going through enough tissue overe here to take out a small forrest! 8^)
David, indeed, they want those cars... However, do they actually get them? It's been my experience as a former car dealer that they come in looking at those vehicles, and leave with a far more "humble" set of wheels. The cars DO qualify for the programs, if they meet the mileage requirements. If you can find a car that gets more than 4mpg better than your cherry '97 civic, like VW TDI, or a hybrid, your good as gold!
In speaking with some of my used car lot buddies, they're already seeing the impact of this. A local auction house is also realising a decrease in vehicles being placed on the block. It's all begning to stink like yesterday's garbage.
With the credit situation in the US being as bad as it is, wouldn't it make more sense to re-write credit reporting laws and standards, perhaps socializing the reporting system, and allow even more people to move into a shiny new, or newer used car based purely on their budget - at the same time, supporting market demand and an entire industry centered around used cars/parts? It just seems such a waste...
I'm going to go in my garage and cuddle with my clunkers, and reassure them of their saftey!
Thanks again, everyone!
As for why the engine has to be destroyed, it doesn't seem necessary to me, but I think that provision was probably necessary to get the environmentalists on board (and thus win the bill sufficient support to pass).
By the way, the 3 most popular cars traded in under the program are the 96, 97 and 98 Ford Explorer. Nobody should be shedding tears over these miserable mass produced garbage.
You are also wrong that these cars are being destroyed for a measly 4mpg improvement (which is rather significant when you're talking about
KBB value for Jag with those numbers = $3,900 if excellent.
Not a great bargain for the seller but much easier than waiting for the right buyer.
Just guessing but the average fuel efficiency for trade-ins is going to be significantly higher than the minimum 4mpg
The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:
1. 1998 Ford Explorer 2. 1997 Ford Explorer 3. 1996 Ford Explorer
4. 1999 Ford Explorer 5. Jeep Grand Cherokee 6. Jeep Cherokee
7. 1995 Ford Explorer 8. 1994 Ford Explorer 9. 1997 Ford Windstar
10. 1999 Dodge Caravan
The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars:
1. Ford Focus 2. Honda Civic 3. Toyota Corolla 4. Toyota Prius
5. Ford Escape 6. Toyota Camry 7. Dodge Caliber
8. Hyundai Elantra 9. Honda Fit 10. Chevy Cobalt
I'm guessing closer to 10-12 mpg better on average.
Given average driving this is enough mpg difference to offset the resources it takes to manufacture a new car in under two years (it takes about 73 gigajoules to produce the average car, which converts to 554 gal of gas).
At most, there will be 1 million clunkers traded in. Given the 260 +/- million registerd vehicles in the U.S. I don't believe we will see a dramatic increase in prices for used cars. There are still millions of inexpensive used cars that don't qualify because mpg is too high and millions of owners that can't afford to trade up to a new car.
That said I appreciate your passion.
I'm also curious to know what the environmental impact would be of retrofitting old cars with better engines/internals, rather than scrapping them. Clearly most of the frame/upholstery etc. can last ages, and it ain't cheap to completely re-fabricate this stuff. Of course, this would do little to help GM, but, uh, whatever.
Last, I wouldn't be too worried about expensive Jaguars being junked. The fact is, if a car is worth more than 4,500, MOST people will sell it for more. Economics does kinda work.
You write as if the car were a person, and you had just left the funeral, and were talking of the times you shared. I totally agree. My first cars were all used, and I put hundreds of thousands of miles on them. I never wanted a new car. Cheap? No. I love "old" cars. I've have at least five 65-68 mustangs, which i treasured. And all my kids had good "used" first cars. You have to be rich or and idiot, which is the same thing, to buy a new car for a 16 year old. This was well worth an Editors Pick!!
Check my post from Monday on the "efficacy" of cash for clunkers from the buyer and dealer benefit side of things.
I really liked your writing style. You know dealers, manufacturers and cars and bring an interesting and compelling perspective.
I'm a "car guy" too--having been in sales and training for a couple of OEMs and currently looking for a new gig.
Thanks.
I do believe that this administration is trying to solve the problems they've inherited in the best way possible, but they got stuck with a big, hot mess of crap. You just can't please everyone and something needed to be done. Thanks for pointing out an overlooked negative effect. Perhaps another round will alleviate some of these problems, while achieving the original goals of stimulating automotive purchases.
You missed a few things. Old car for kids. News a few new parts. Parts supply out of business.
Body could use a little help. Lay off a bodyman.
Great MPG, lay off a gas station person.
I sure that if I sat here I could think of a few more problems that are created while trying to fix one that I don't think should be fixed. I don't see where the Feds have the right to take my money to help you buy a car. You are not going to lend it to me for a hot date tonight are you? Now if you use my money to build a road, that is something we will both use.
Also am I the only one who is upset because Congress is picking winners and losers? 8% of my profession came off the road last year. You don't see anything for truck drivers do you? Why can't we win.
Beside I get 6.8 MPG from my truck. With about $20k in upgrades I can get it to 11+ MPG. I drive 140,000 miles per year. I alone would save 7861 gallons of fuel EACH year. The ROI on that investment would be less than one year. How long is it going to take a car owner to save that much fuel and how long is the ROI on that investment?
I would love to see a program to promote the development of car share programs like I-Go or Zipcar in more markets. While this may not be a practical option for everyone, it makes a lot more sense for many of us who don't need to drive every day. It's a very liberating feeling not to worry about maintenance schedules and some of the more expensive and frustrating details of owning a car.
Car sharing has really taken off in Chicago since it was introduced several years ago. Outside of major cities, college towns are the biggest market for this kind of service in the U.S.
Also, thank your for all of your great feedback and insight! I could have provided several hundred pages on the considerations of the program, but was more interested in the not so common negative aspects that seem to have been overlooked by a great many.
I reveived an e-mail last night from my Mothers Cousin who read my post, and owns an auto body/hotrod shop. She is really concerned as to how this is going to affect her supply chain. As we all know, insurance companies love to use used parts to fix cracked up autos...
I'm with just about everyone who has indicated that they won't be missing the Ford Explorers that have been taken off the road as a result of the program. Indeed, there are cars that the program is appropriate for, but based on my driving around, and talking to my dealer-buddies, about 25% of the cars are honestly good, useable machines, being put out to pasture before their prime!
All in all, only time will tell what impact this program really has, be it environmental, or economic.
As you all have probably noticed by reading this, and my other posts, I truly have a passion for cars, and the industry in general. I tend to stray away from matters of politics, focusing more (rather) on the history, design, and cultural aspects of automobiles and the industry. However, I felt that this topic was indeed of enough importance to bring up a few concerns, and now see that I'm not the only one!
Thanks again for all the great feedback and ratings! I'll look forward to your comments on my past and future writing!
Happy motoring,
Aaron
I just checked Craigslist in my area and there are still tons of crappy cars to go around! In fact my search for vehicles for less than $4,000 in the Seattle area turned up hundreds of clunkers!
I just came to another interesting realization on the numbers being quoted... How is it that these numbers are coming back so quickly? I called around (again) to the boys, and so far, none of them have reported anything back, and most are still sitting on the paperwork that needs to be filed, etc. I'm wondering if they're somehow taking a snapshot of data, by region, and calculating out the numbers... Not sure on this one.
Also, the fact that the dealers, after the program was underway, were notified that "by the way, these $4500 rebates we're giving you count as taxible income" by the government, post fact! What's it with the governmnet always wanting to tax government money? It's like the taxes on SSI and Unemployment... Why not simply budget accordingly, and or pay out a reduced amount. It's still "taxed" but I'll feel more warm and fuzzy thinking it's not, when not seeing it beig deducted! 8^)
Many countries do this. A buddy of mine who lived in Japan for a long time said that they purposely made it really expensive to own a car simply because they don't want their roads clogged up. The well off can own a car and others take public transportation or ride a bike. I suspect Sweden is similar because when I was there last month I saw almost ZERO clunkers on the road - and lots of bikes.
But when I was in Mexico city about 15 years ago the streets were totally clogged with cars that wouldn't sell for $500 here, including many that were no longer running and people lived in, instead.
So, call me an elitist, but if we as a nation want to consumer less gas, pollute less, and get more people to use public transportation, well .......
One of the problems with your argument is the size of this country. While public transportation may be fine for those in bigger cities that's not most of this country.
With the vast amounts of rural country and low density population areas public transportation is not an option. You have to own a car to get anything done.
used toyota
bilstein