Hitting the news feeds these days is some pick-up of a new, disturbing trend in the automobile sector.
The Vancouver Star reports the major car manufacturers are now cutting down the variety of motor vehicle models available to the consumer.
As reporter Michael Lewis points out, ten years ago sedans were almost 40 per cent of the American market; SUVs sat in the number two position at 29 per cent, with pick-up trucks at 13 per cent.
That’s all changed.
Sport utility vehicles now command 43 per cent of the market, with sedans at less than 28 per cent. The Ford Company has decided to stop all their North American vehicle production except for the Mustang and a Focus ‘crossover hatchback’.
Ultimately, sedans are disappearing, and ‘buyer preference’ is for ‘bigger ride drives’ like light trucks and SUV’s; it appears to be yet another sign of a major cultural shift.
Imagine the implications — the idea of a utilitarian family car that carries kids, dogs, and groceries is kind of last century. Other automakers are also reducing production of sedan-like automobiles.
Perhaps the most telling statement, however, is made by auto historian John Wolkonowicz: “This is going to be disappointing to a lot of people, but most of those people are over 50. This is about making money. This is what Wall Street demanded.”
The “go big” trend in motor vehicles was helped along by the current American president’s promise to roll back the fuel efficiency standards. And so now it’s no surprise that, even with higher fuel prices in the last sixty days, people are still buying SUVs.
And don’t think we are more ecologically aware in Canada, where light trucks were 71 per cent of sales in March 2018. Sedan car sales fell over 12 per cent in the same month. Better fuel efficiency and more efficient engines have assisted in sales of the larger sized vehicles. There is still almost a 30 per cent differential in fuel use between small and large vehicles, but consumers are embracing the shift up into bigger, heavier vehicles.
The car companies are looking at hybrid fuel systems or plug-ins. Ford plans to release a hybrid Escape, Explorer and Bronco in 2020.
Perhaps, just perhaps, it tells us that most people don’t care about GHGs and/or CO2 and/or alleged man made global warming, but prefer a comfortable, safe car that protects them in a crash.
Car companies build what consumers demand.
If they all wanted tiny little fuel efficient (or electric) cars they’d build more of that. But only a small % of buyers like that type of vehicle. Comfort matters. Safety matters. Price and fuel efficiency matters less, and to fewer people.
What does that tell us ?
I drive to the Sunshine Coast frequently. Many SUVs and pickup trucks. In an NDP riding. We shall see how the “congestion charges” / road tolls rollout will progress in Metrovan …
Talked to a W Van friend of mine yesterday. Even he suggested “tax the crap out of road use and bridges so we get less vehicles on the road and better flow”. We shall see ..
People love their cars ..
Every time you use the phrase “alleged man made global warming” or a variation of it, you encourage large numbers of readers to discount the rest of your comment. The ones who understand the current state of the science.
This may in fact be your goal, but it seems counterproductive to posting in the first place.
Facts are facts.
Man plays a role, but how much ?
deleted as per editorial policy
And we think we can control the weather 100 years from now by adding $20 to $100 (or more?) per ton of CO2? Yeah right …
“May plays a role, but how much?”
See the research. More than 100%, which is to say that with our measured reduction in energy from the sun, we should be in a cooling phase, but we are currently warming. Estimates put it around 110%.
“We think we can control the weather 100 years from now…”
No, weather isn’t synonymous with climate. That is a basic fact. And as you pointed out, facts are facts.
“alleged”………it is just a comment designed to bait you into an argument the point of which is to grab all the attention, consume all the space, and usurp this public platform for the purpose of spewing extremist political ideologies, it is a technique adopted from the disruptors of civil discourse, “alleged”…………. is not about the topic at hand, it is about silencing your voice through the repetition of inane comments, a bully tactic at the very least, followed by plausible denial, I opine, it is my right but it strikes me that commenting on PT is a privilege to be earned through thoughtfulness and the pursuit of the truth ……….and not a right by holding the record for thumbs down and comment deleted……..
I note your opinion. Please respect mine.
deleted as per editorial policy
Nothing is more ‘p.c.’ and snowflakey than asking for respect for an opinion. Opinions generate respect for themselves by being logical, believable, in line with reality.
If they aren’t any of those things, the holder deserves to be informed of same. How one uses that information is up to the opinion-holder. But one thing that is anti-thetical to good decision making is letting people with opinions that don’t match reality, have input on policy. Ask ‘Murica how that’s working out for them with an Idiot-in-Chief.
Whinging about it is for children. Grown-ups look at the information and adjust their thinking.
‘Privileged Guy Convinced of His Rectitude’ is not a stop the presses headline. Excess respect for same is probably one big reason why we are in this state.
I agree that car companies build what consumers buy. I think that rather then blame consumers for buying SUVs, we should apply pressure to our governments to bring them under the same fuel economy and emissions guidelines that apply to other vehicles. At least for the short term, until battery prices come down to the point where electric vehicles are competitive on a “total cost of ownership” basis. They’re getting closer every year.
If total cost of ownership (TCO) were the main metric why do so many people drive large cars / SUVs / pickup trucks with 8 cyl engines or buy luxury cars for $100,000+ ?
Because TCO is NOT the main metric for most. As such, pretending that EVs will fly off the shelves due to lower op costs is just as false a belief. Many attributes matter: space, luxury, A/C, range, price to buy, monthly lease payments, fuel costs, reliability, image, # of cup holders, space for 5 or even 7 people, towing capacity, room for “stuff” etc .. and with 80M cars sold annually there are 80M nuances here ..
In other news: Meanwhile, VW which makes as many cars as Tesla does in a year in 4 days, plans to make 3M electric cars per year by 2025 .. https://electrek.co/2018/05/04/vw-doubles-electric-vehicle-battery-contracts-billion/
Das ist gut, ja ?
Maybe the answer is competitive electric SUVs?
Sure once a basic electric SUV costs $30,000 with a 300-500 km range it’ll fly off the shelf but not a $100,000+ Tesla X which is a very small subset of SUV buyers. How many of the 80M vehicles sold annually are over $100,000 ? 1%? 2%? 5%? https://www.statista.com/statistics/670397/global-car-market-segmentation
We will see more urban EVs, for sure, but just like the small % of two seaters the majority of folks occasionally drive outside the city to visit granny, see the in-laws or go to the far away beach or provincial park and don’t want to be stuck in the forest with an empty battery. That’s why not cars are not two seaters ( although 90%+ of rides are 1 or 2 people only ) and that’s why range or easy fast charging matters.
EU now is working on faster, higher capacity chargers at 350 kW .. about twice that of Tesla’s network https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/03/ford-bmw-vw-daimler-building-electric-charging-network-twice-the-power-of-teslas.html
So a 80 kw Tesla can charge in 15 min
Society is moving into more gated communities. Many successful people like to live in gated communities, for obvious reasons. There’s a sector in downtown Vancouver that also like the concept but do it with speed bumps, streets that don’t go through anymore and other closing-in traffic devices.
Just outside the city is a different world. Earlier today I was speaking with an 19 year old contractor that drives a new Ford F150. He said as a matter of fact that all his family have F150s, although his dad’s newer model has Eco-Boost and is less thirsty.
Change will come slowly.
There seems to be a cultural thing in places with some people that in order to be a real man you must destroy. Not that long ago hybrids were considered effeminate and not something a real man would drive.
The young man is actually more practical. He works in construction. Having a pick-up truck means he doesn’t need a trailer for his tools, etc.
Many drivers don’t like the idea of hybrids because the corn used to produce the ethanol is diverted from the food market. Causing a rise in food prices. Another drawback is the extensive energy used to grow and process the corn.
Hybrid vehicles only run on ethanol? Must be a new kind of hybrid.
It’s a new concept being promoted from the Land Of Drive-By Commenters.
Having a trailer for his tools could actually be pretty practical. It would allow him to leave his tools where he is working, and commute more economically. It is more secure. An alternate vehicle could be smaller and lighter, as it would just need a trailer hitch.
Our strata recently installed bike racks for visitors. First users turned out to be tradespeople working in the complex. Turns out the famous white van just needs to come at the start and end of the job, not every day.
I know a contractor who rents a van for two days of a project. The start day and the end day. He leaves his tools at the site for the duration. He bikes or takes the bus to get there each day. Saves him lots of time and stress. He doesn’t have to worry about getting a parking spot on the site. He doesn’t have an ecological reason for doing this. It just makes the most sense.