Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 11:05:48 -0500 From: "Walt Kienzle" <wkienzlenopsam.net> Subject: Re: GM to increase SAAB lineup
"B&D" <NO_SPAMnopsamCOM> wrote in message news:BAC2C26C.335E6%NO_SPAMnopsamCOM... > On 4/16/03 7:04 AM, in article b7jnsr05u6nopsams4.newsguy.com, "Walt Kienzle" > <wkienzlenopsam.net> wrote: > If the loopholes were closed, or all vehicles used primarily for commercial > purposes would be tax deductible, it might be surprising to see that the > real estate agents, and other self employed people that drive a lot for > their job, might end up with fewer giant SUV's and more sedans (though > leases are all deductible, the giant SUV's have a special class that is even > more so). The fact that not everyone in this class is driving an SUV means > that there are a lot of people that are aware of the tax implications of a > sedan v. SUV and still choose the sedan. The problem with trying to close all the loopholes is that it can't be done. People always find new loopholes that cause unexpected results. > > >I see this as > > a place where CAFE standards caused the problem by exterminating full sized > > station wagons that were economical compared to SUV's and good for hauling > > people. > > Yes. I agree. But the 1976 station wagon that was my first car was about > SUV level of mileage, quite frankly. The reason SUV's revived is that they > were not covered by the same CAFE standards. And we see that in the case of > Saab, Volvo and Mercedes - this ind of vehicle didn't have to be > exterminated, it is just that the auto makers retreated behind loopholes > rather than innovate. You can't compare a 1976 station wagon, from the era of the largest, least fuel efficient tanks made, to a SUV from today. With the advances in technology, I expect that even the least fuel efficient current model SUV gets better gas mileage than the 27 year old station wagon (depending on which model it was). I agree that SUV's survived because they weren't covered by CAFE. They were given the time to adopt all the fuel saving technology that has appeared over the past 25 years (like fuel injection, which a 1976 car probably didn't have). Some of technology couldn't have been added in the 5 years that CAFE standards allowed manufacturers to make their cars fuel efficient and still be able to sell them at a price people would want to pay. Even if they didn't add in the more expensive technology, the CAFE fines would have made the cars more expensive than most people would have wanted to pay, particularly when compared to an SUV. The station wagons you site here and in the paragraph below aren't the ones I am talking about. The mid-sized models you mention survived and the really big ones didn't. Even the sedans are mostly gone (except from Cadillac, Ford, and Mercury). And because CAFE standards have impacted those large sedans, standard passenger car engines larger than 5L are gone. You can't haul a family of 6, their luggage, and tow a 15,000lb. boat with a car. When I was teenager, lots of people I knew did this with the big family station wagon. If you need the power of a 6L or 7L engine and the capability to haul that much now, you are forced into using a truck. That is my point. True, not everyone that has an SUV has those requirements, and some people are more wasteful than others. You shouldn't punish everyone just because some people live to excess. > >An earlier posting pointed out that the Volvo wagon (and other > > European estate models) cost about the same as a SUV. Big Volvos, wagon or > > sedan, have always cost quite a bit more, maybe double the cost of a > > stripped Chevy Caprice or Ford Crown Victoria, so that reasoning doesn't > > apply in the US. > > Um, I said that, and I just bought a Saab 9-5 Sport Wagon over and SUV - the > SUV prices were about the same as the Wagon - at least the ones I was > considering. And if you think Saab and Volvo are too expensive, there are > always the Subaru Outback and Ford Taurus wagons to choose. Camry and > Accord had wagons as well that were about the same price as their sedans - > but got obliterated by SUV-itis. You forgot Saturn who has two models of wagons, but none of those aren't the big vehicles that would take the place of an SUV. The Camry wagon was just ugly and overpriced. I don't think its disappearance had anything to do with competition from SUV's.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
