Yes, I wish Ford had done more with hybrids. I would have been happy to stick with Ford if they had something comparable to the Prius or Civic. They should make a hybrid version of the Ford Focus line.

It's the unions/treehuggers/nannystaters/pensioners fault, natch.

Here's a new hobby for you, SKB.

An example that answers are found in the marketplace, not in the halls of Congress. Consumers obviously want high mileage hybrids. Manufacturers will make what sells, particularly that which sells at a higher profit. Tax credits may have also played a part role. Anyone know when those tax credits were approved by Congress and which President signed them into law?

Anyone know when those tax credits were approved by Congress and which President signed them into law?

The same administration that proposed an increase in the tax credit for buying a Hummer in 2003.

In 2003, the Bush administration proposed increasing the tax deduction to $75,000. Lawmakers responded by expanding it to a whopping $100,000 as part of the $350 million tax cut package. Yet Congress did not change the weight-based classification of the vehicles, creating a huge benefit for the largest, least efficient vehicles.

The Hill Online

So, President Clinton approved the initial heavy vehicle tax break ($25,000) and the Republican Congress and Bush expanded it ($100,000) to cover more service vehicles. Bush also helped hybrid car buyers (likely to be consumers, not businesses). The Republican Congress later closed the 'loophole' back to the Clinton approved tax credit.

"I don't know if hybrids are the answer (we're happy with ours, and with our Ford Freestyle crossover that is more fuel efficient than the SUV it replaced)..."

Question for you... what kind of horsepower do you get with the hybrid relative to what you got with the previous SUV?

" Consumers obviously want high mileage hybrids. Manufacturers will make what sells, particularly that which sells at a higher profit"

There's the dilemma. Often buyers who are frugal about MPG are also frugal about price as well. Not a good target market.

_______________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs

Would it not be a reasonable interpretation of your comment that you in no way believe that congress or the rest of government can be considered leaders? It would also appear that you would consider it wrong for the corporations to take a moral leadership position and use their marketing departments to push products that are environmentally responsible.

Tell me, what childhood trauma did you suffer that caused your aberrant belief structure?

CAFKIA

----------------------------------------------------------- 

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument.
  - William G. McAdoo

So, President Clinton....

Is there anything wingnuts cannot try and blame on Clinton....

The technology is there for US made hybrids. It is getting better. GM killed its electric car and refused to let the people who had leased them buy them at the end of the lease. US automakers are just committing slow suicide by making huge, gas guzzling vehicles. Let them. No government bailouts. Let the free market decide. Maybe, one of the companies will figure it out. Probably not, however.

Hey, it sounds like you saw "Who Killed the Electric Car?" I found the part about how GM made its ads for the EV-1 intentionally dark, dismal and creepy particularly interesting.

They're pretty darn good at trashing alternatives to the good ol' motor car.

I was going to ask you whether you missed the power, skb. Every car I've ever owned has been slow, except maybe the one I drive now. I also have a light foot. Pretty much the same goes for my wife. Yet we were both concerned about the acceleration of the Prius meeting our needs, mostly in terms of safety. But I still kinda want one.

Yes, I wish Ford had done more with hybrids. I would have been happy to stick with Ford if they had something comparable to the Prius or Civic. They should make a hybrid version of the Ford Focus line.

Reading this post earlier, it reminded me that I would be interested in the Ford Escape, with its Toyota licensed Synergy system, if it only had stability control, or at least traction control. Wouldn't want an SUV without it. So I check the Ford site hoping they might have a new Escape in the works. Lo and behold, there's a new '08 Escape and it's out right now! But still no stability control!!

Are these bozos in control of the American Big 2 (or 2-1/2 or 3) just totally tone deaf to the market?

An example that answers are found in the marketplace, not in the halls of Congress. Consumers obviously want high mileage hybrids. Manufacturers will make what sells, particularly that which sells at a higher profit.

So, whom can we can thank $3/gal gas and rapacious quarterly earnings on the part of oil companies?

____________________________

People getting rich. Some people saying "Markets!" More death. Neil Young. Death.

"It would also appear that you would consider it wrong for the corporations to take a moral leadership position and use their marketing departments to push products that are environmentally responsible."

Steve, most companies need to be concerned with making a buck. It's obvious with hybrids they can make a buck and puch a positive product. A win-win. My point was companies don't have to wait or depend on the government to set the policy.

And no, I wasn't 'blaming' anything on Clinton. Liberals too often blame Bush for every conceivable problem. The tax credits for Hummers 'loophole' (it was aimed at small businesses, not Hummers) was thrown out there. I simply pointed out that was a law passed under Clinton (good for him).

I'm not surprised at the common hybrid demographic. The average joe is starting to hear about hybrids, but most probably still think they are 'experimental'. That's changing. Plus, hybrids are no longer tiny cars with tiny power. We have mid-size cars and small SUV's. That will generate appeal to folks who might never have considered a hybrid.

My point was companies don't have to wait or depend on the government to set the policy.

They do all the time. Look at the subsidies to the oil & gas and nuclear power industry just to start with. Got any problem with that?

"They do..."

Nuclear Power v. cars...apples and oranges. Depending on the specific subsidy, yes I might have a problem with it.

Slight correction...one point of my earlier post was that the Republican congress and Bush were the ones who did pass the hybrid tax credits. One response was it 'was the same one who passed the "Hummer" loophole'. That is only a half-truth. That loophole was actually passed under Clinton.

I was going to ask you whether you missed the power, skb. Every car I've ever owned has been slow, except maybe the one I drive now.

Except for the roominess of the Explorers, I think our preference has always been handling, not necessarily power. The Datsun 510s were great fun as were the Z cars. The BMW handled pretty awesome as well. The Explorer (and Central Florida) teaches you to slow down. The Prius doesn't handle like a 510, Z car, or BMW, but since we already know how to drive something that doesn't grip the road like a sports car, so what. Nascar is okay, IMSA racing is great!

What was wrong with Gerald Ford of Michigan in his support of CAFE improvements? If we'd continued along that trend, we'd be a lot better off in many respects and so would Ford and GM. We would be a lot less dependent on foreign oil (maybe independent by now!) and would have sent billions less to unstable regimes that profit off oil. And tensions could be less, like the type that led to 9/11. We'd have cleaner air too.

our preference has always been handling, not necessarily power.

Mine too. Over 16 yrs. I owned just a Fiat and later an Alfa. I had a second Fiat for a little while, a '73 124 Spider, as a pleasure car. I did this for a little while in my X1/9, albeit poorly. Even my 5 series I have now is rated at under 200hp. But it's fast to me.

Nuclear Power v. cars...apples and oranges.

I can't resist. Should nuclear power be subsidized? The technology is not new, like solar and wind, which could use a boost to help establish their economies of scale.

Can't the power source that was once said to be too cheap to meter compete in the free market, even after 50 years?

CBT: That loophole was actually passed under Clinton.

C'mon, you can work that into a 4h post! You know you can. Then blame Clinton for Jesus dying. It is Easter, after all.

Reagarding the price of hybrids, if the manufacturers had been making them since the 1973 gas shortages, the price would be very low right now. Remember this is new technology and the R&D is what is driving costs up. If the US had decided during the 70's that we were going to get off the Mid East oil tit,and become energy self sufficient, we would be. Other countries did. But the GOP, which appears to be run by the oil companies, decided not to, and we didn't. Electric cars could be very cheap now if the technology had been pursued, and perhaps could be built with solar cells on the body surfaces to help recharge whenever the sun is out.

...makes you wonder about the 26/1 power ratio. It's probably how it is distributed throughout the power curve.

I think that's exactly right. Though with the Prius, you'd think the power off the line (w/ motors at full torque) would be great. That may actually be true up to about 10mph or so.

My X1/9 was one of the quicker ones, because it was fuel injected. But at 75hp and about 2400lbs (guessing from memory) its wt./pwr ratio was 32! It was heavy for safety and rigidity (for handling) reasons. 0-60 was about 12 sec.

...a vehicle that can run E85. Fortunately, here in TX, E85 stations are starting to pop up. Anyway, the jury's still out on this one for me.

I actually agree with the kook in the N-S yesterday who wrote about how bad corn ethanol is. I think it's a pig in a poke too. Except that he just generalized and called it ethanol, while only describing corn ethanol. Then he went on to argue that there's plenty of oil in North America, if we could only extract is "using environmentally sensitive methods [from] hydrogen, nuclear, electric and wind."

(Dang. Maybe we need use some of this "electric" power to generate some of the electricity we use. Heh.)

E85 compatibility is nice, but only to be cellulosic ethanol ready. Then your car could use ethanol that could eventually become cheaper, more plentiful, and close to carbon neutral.

I buy or lease a new car every year. The last 10 have been MB or BMW. I looked at Cadillac last fall and the dealer add-ons to the sticker price were around $1200-1800 per car (pin stripes, etc). I emailed GM and said as bad as you need to move cars why is the dealer is doing this? (he did the same with his Buicks). GM said they were sorry but their dealers were independent and they had no control over pricing. Part two:

Why would you take your franchise mark (Camero) and put it on the sidelines for 4 or 5 years? Why would you drop the mark that a few years earlier had been the best selling car in the US (Taurus)? Part three:

GM and Ford are like large animals that have a dozen arrows in them - just a matter of time. Ten years from now - Toyota America (formerly GM) and Nissen America (fomerly Ford) are doing well.