This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Automotive Trends 1975-2010, Part I: More SUV's, More Power, & More MPG's!
This is from Stone Street Advisors
As gas prices continue to rise across the Country and we slowly,
possibly begin what could loosely be described as the
late-spring/early-summer driving season, I thought it high-time I
started running some car and gas numbers. Before we get into the price
of gas at the pump and how it is likely to affect driving/car-buying
behavior, I'd like to take a look at the composition of the U.S. vehicle
fleet and how it's changed over time.
Confirming the anecdotal
experience of everyone who's spent any time on the roads over the past
decade or two, SUV's are in fact slowly taking over. Additionally, as I
explained back in June, 2009, Americans simply are not fans of the small car, even when gas prices rise exponentially (I'll be re-visiting this sometime in the next few months). Allow me to share some additional facts in greater detail:
Per EPA data,
in 1975 cars and station wagons represented over 80% of all vehicles
produced, while trucks & SUV's accounted for less than 15%. Fast
forward three and a half decades, and cars (including wagons) only
represent less than 60%, while trucks (including SUV's) represent almost
40% of vehicles produced. The following chart shows the production
share of (in order from top to bottom) Cars, Wagons, Vans, SUV's, and
Pickups by size (small, medium, large) in years 1975, 1988, and 2010,
including their average fuel efficiency (by miles per gallon). The
chart also shows how these numbers have changed over time. Numbers in
red (on the right three columns) are decreases, while numbers in dark
green are mild (<10%) increases, and numbers in light green show more
drastic (<10%) increases.
What's
immediately clear is the shift away from cars of virtually all
sizes/type towards SUV's, as evidenced just by looking at the
distribution of red, dark green, light green in the columns to the
right. From 1975->2010, the production share of small cars dropped
by over 40%, while the share of large & small SUV's (combined; small
SUV's were the same in both years) jumped over 1,700%!
Many - if
not most - people assume that the shift towards SUV's and away from
small cars has severely reduced the overall fleet-wide fuel efficiency,
however such is not the case. Since 1975, fleet-wide average fuel
efficiency has increased 71.8%, and even the low-end fuel efficiency has
increased 33%. When we use weighted-averages (% share of each segment
times its average fuel efficiency), fuel efficiency has increased almost
77% over that time period, which indicates that preferences have
shifted towards types of vehicles that have experienced greater than
average fuel efficiency gains such as midsize cars and midsize/large
SUV's.
Tree-huggers can whine all they want, but the facts speak
for themselves: vehicles have gotten MUCH more fuel-efficient over the
past few decades, even though large SUV's account for significantly more
vehicles on the road today than ever before!
While
efficiency gains are certainly a good thing by every measure (except
oil company profits), the best part about advances in technology for
drivers - especially those with a bit of a lead foot - is that not only
are cars more efficient, but they are significantly faster and more
powerful, too! For cars & trucks combined, horsepower is up over
60% while power efficiency (hp/cid, or horsepower produced divided by
engine block size) is up over 120%!!!!!! Think about that: technology
has advanced so much, so fast, that not only are effectively all
vehicles significantly more efficient, but they're even MORE powerful,
too!
One thing that I'm only going to touch upon in this series
(at least that's the plan) is how government standards/classification
and changes thereof affect these numbers. Over the years, vehicles that
were once classified as small SUV's are now classified as midsized and
vice versa. Cars like the Toyota RAV4 (Lexus RX330) and the infinity FX
are based on car platforms instead of truck ones in-part because of how
the government measures Auto manufactures offerings. I've seen a
number of essays and studies, but for quick-reference, either hit up the
google machine, or pick up one of the major auto magazines (Car &
Driver, Motortrend, Autoweek, Road & Track, etc) there's likely to
be at least some discussion every month on the topic.
This is only part I in a series of at least 3 articles. Stay tuned later for more later this week!
- advertisements -
Diesel Vdubs man, got two...so should you.
2 here as well!
"Diesel Vdubs man, got two...so should you."
Where do you put the gooseneck hitch on one of those things?
Changing the timing belt on one of those will surely test your fortitude! What an engineering nightmare. Other than that, they are a solid little ride.
You're right about the nightmare - tdi forum, look for borla.guy or something like that, dudes got the info to do it right (that and a chiltons manual....).
I really miss mine [friend overheated the engine]. Great cars - better mpg than a Prius for less than a 10th the price [so much for technology]. Diesels rule.
Diesel hybrids.....sign me up. (as long as its not a GM product)
You mean CAFE standards and penalities have nothing to do with increase in efficiency?
Big3 will be content to sell SUVs to America's conspicuous consumers who can't calculate total cost of ownership but base their purchase decisions on what's popular in music videos and reality shows because dealers told them they could afford it using HELO. Only when gas prices skyrocket do they feel any pain to make better long term decisions.
You obviously know nothing about gov't fleet purchases as they relate to CAFE standards. And while state worshipping morons always think that words written on peices of paper by the lobbyists who buy the votes of the rigged popularity contest winners solve problems, the engineering impetus from day one is to increase efficiency. See, if you offer more (of what people want) whilst lowering costs of production, you sell and earn more.
Government is corrupt due to lobbying, but it is not retarded. Half of population did not even make it past college and has IQ < 100 by definition and I consider that pretty much retarded. You can't expect these people (majority) to put fuel efficiency (long term logical thinking) above what appeals to their emotional desires (short term "thinking") that is pounded day to day on TV.
Government should not dictate for all, but for the stupid, government must guide. Otherwise a car company that prioritizes marketing over engineering will win until one day oil prices sky rocket. Then it is almost too late.
Government is always the long term innovator through war technology. War give good excuse for government to spend tax revenue on new technology. No business will take such a high risk.
What a brave new world you envision!
"Government should not dictate for all, but for the stupid, government must guide. "
What The Fornicate (WTF)? So, you in your obvious wisdom think that maybe every new car purchaser should pass some standardized IQ test to be able to determine what vehicle best suits their needs? Otherwise a governmanet agent will be appointed to select the most appropriate vehicle on their behalf?
Even if you are the top dawg at MENSA, I think that you are either a socialist or an idiot. Sorry, I can't think of any more polite terminology since I am a stupid American.
James May (of Top Gear fame) said it best about SUV's in his book, May on Motors. He describes them as
"...being engineered and built to be driven off-road by banker's wives and gay interior designers."
Cadillac Escalade gets same fuel economy as a 40 year old VW Combi - not sure where the e technology achievement is...
US has the lowest gas prices in the OECD - its a crack-up when the economists declare $4/gal gas as the end of civilization.
If the US auto industry has issues with $4 gas it had better look international - where gas prices are more than $8/gal (UK) - and the solution is not more SUVs.
The difference in gas prices is taxes. When the US implements a European mass transit system, then higher gas taxes make sense. Until then GFY.
Yeah, because Americans can drive across the USA just as easily as the Brits can drive across the UK.
Wanker.
more computers and alloy engine blocks mean more effecient fuel conrtol and less weight. this means more repair cost (expensive computers and less owner repair) and less life for the block ( 150,000 vs 300,000 miles).
All those American cars made in the 1970's and 80's were lucky to make it to 30,000 miles
Tell that to my 1990 Cummins powered Dodge 3/4 ton PU or my 1989 3/4 ton 4x4 6.2L diesel powered Suburban. They are both in fine shape and running well - with their original engines.
FWIW - small cars are great for one thing: Commuting cheaply. If you actually want to accomplish work i.e. move large amounts of stuff or people - the bigger vehicle is much more efficient. My Dodge will drag a house and gets 19mpg all day long. The 'Burb will haul 9 people wherever you want to go in comfort and get similar milage. A Prius or diesel Rabbit would need to take multiple trips for larger loads (assuming the cargo is divisable) and the actual fuel used could easily be more.
+2001 cummins. 460,000 miles of hell and still purrs like a kitty. Also got a 99 cummins with 170k. Between the two of them I will have enough miles to last the rest of my lifetime or until you can no longer afford fuel to use in a vehicle which ever comes first.
"2001 cummins" "99 cummins"
Just curious, but how are those VP44's holding out? Have 196K on my '01 and still on the original (knock on wood), but have replaced the lift pump.
Wife has an '03 with the CP3. What a beast! We both have the NV5600 6 speeds since we pull real loads at times.
My '90 has the VE Rotory pump. No problems so far.
Yeah, no sh*t. Anyone who says cars don't last as long as they used or that J6Pack...also known in mechanics' circles as Mr. Goodpliers...can't work on them thus making them more expensive is either under 30 or an idiot.
The cars are also much more affordable.
Are there links to make the charts full size?
The Jeep Wagoneer was an SUV. Most "SUV"s today are minivan or car-based station wagons with big wheels, marketed as a status symbol that must be shown off while picking up your kids in front of the school.
this article is a mfin joke, right?
I take it you didn't read to the bottom, where I said this is part 1 in a series, and that I'll be discussing more later in the week...patience my friend, patience.
I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought the article was so absurd that I didn't know where to start a response.
I'm going back to work on my garden and my passive solar heating systems. Oh, and horse back riding lessons are in my future; seriously. If you remove fossil fuels horses are much more efficient than cars; now and forever.
Why are we talking about this? Who cares?
My thought was that I don't recall the last time I saw anyone driving an old vw bus. Most of the vehicles I see on the road are no more than 7-10 years old.
Lots of people still riding horses, camels, trains, sailboats...
I thought that too and also that what if that bus was converted to run on alternative fuels?
All that new excellent speed and power is great when sitting in traffic for hours everyday.
Awesome! Nice job America. I've opted out. Thanks.
Same here. It's been almost 7 years since I last commuted to a job. I don't do much daily driving at all anymore. When I do go out for a drive (in the U.S.) I am amazed at the congested streets and the slow traffic. People put up with this shit five days a week? Insanity.
In economics, the Jevons paradox, sometimes called the Jevons effect, is the proposition that technological progress that increases the efficiency with which a resource is used tends to increase (rather than decrease) the rate of consumption of that resource.
You can get better consumption numbers from any vehicle by not driving as much, and by not driving like an arsehole.
Also, regardless of the technology under the hood, all vehicles get 0 mpg in the drive thru.
If they simply made the drive through lanes with a small slope the people waiting could shut off their engines and coast up to the window.
is a major factor; most all people buy Priuses and drive more mile/day. Some people who used to carpool in their Tahoes now each have a Civic (true story).
While gas is taxed per gallon, it would be more efficient to tax (mostly) per road mile, as truckers pay. Taxes should not be penalties (excises) but rather a driver's contribution toward the cost of roads (CHP, repairs etc) and gas (military interventions, externalities, research). Various studies have shown the true $/mile on US highways is $2-$4.50, depending on who's data you like. By the same token, without federal subsidies for roads (Eisenhower) many/most would not be built by private concerns. The trans-con rail was an example in its day.
FWIW, I have always found it more economical to own one vehicle (Dodge's biggest van) than a truck and a Civic (I used to). Fuel economy is a minor % of TCO, and, if your concern is the environment, infinite mpg will not make up for the true costs of building and paying for a new car, relative to maintaining a decent older one.
BTW, the thing for VW bus fanactics now is re-engine them with Jetta TDIs.
precisely,.....if you look at pmp passenger miles per person.....they have gone up ALOT. people are living every farther from everything they need on an everyday basis, and travelling more and more to get those things.
More evidence that silver is disappearing quicker than anyone every imagined.
"arsehole"
A perfect example of restraint.
Restraint that has a myriad of applications in our troubled world.
Naw... it just tags him as a moderately polite Canuck...
Very true. Later in the week (/next week) I'll talk about miles driven, gas prices, and how all this stuff is related.
Afraid the article is very slanted, pro-automotive and misses very important issues.
Like the fact that MPG claims by aut companies are based on an "Ideal"ized test environment that can never be seen in reality. CAFE and it's associated lies are precisely that.
In addition, the whole concept of Embedded energy in older vehicles is lost in a shallow discussion such as this.
More MPG, seriously? People believe crap like this and leave their SUV's running in the heat while they shop.
Car's are America's and the world's curse as they are today. Aspirationalist dreams and accidental nightmares.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/my-take-on-cars/
+1 well-played