[CaptainMarvel]

Don’t forget there have been massive loopholes in vehicle emission regulations which favour larger SUVs and pick-up trucks.

If regulations actually focused on MPG, these vehicles would not be the size and weight that they are.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/cafe-lo...

Right target. Bad implementation.

Going forwards, with widespread electric vehicles, focusing directly on size and weight makes a lot of sense, in addition to MPG (or more generally, energy efficiency).

[raverbashing]

Blaming regulation removes agency from people.

Or maybe yeah, most consumers just mimic other people and cost be darned. Then when gas eventually becomes pricier they complain because they had the foresight of a goldfish.

(And theoretically no efficiency laws need to be passed. Increase taxes on fuel and there you have it)

[ascagnel_]

I disagree -- I'd love if my last car was a station wagon, but there were eight station wagons on the market in the US at the time, made by five manufacturers. And of those eight, four have an MSRP under USD$50,000, and only two have an MSRP under USD$30,000. And the market hasn't substantively changed (Jaguar and Buick have dropped out of the market, but Mini entered the market and Porsche added a second model) since 2020, when I got my car.

I'm calling this out specifically because, in another era, the station wagon would have been the preferred option for a "family vehicle" that needed more space than a sedan. But since it's "easier" for an automaker to get an SUV on the road, the regulatory environment dictated how the market went.

[raverbashing]

I agree, I certainly think manufacturers are to blame as well

[stouset]

Individuals have agency. Populations behave statistically in line with the structural incentives of the systems they operate within.

[_cenw]

If people exercised this level of agency, no economic incentive would ever work.

[Tanoc]

No, not necessarily. Starting in 1996 there was an update to CAFE regulations (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) that set tighter restrictions to start 2005 which only got tighter year over year from there. Conveniently thanks to the Jeep Cherokee XJ, the Chevrolet/GMC S-10 Blazer/S-15 Jimmy, and the Ford Explorer moving into a more luxury oriented direction, SUVs became the fastest growing segment starting in 1994. So how did the companies targeting the U.S. market react? They started pumping out SUVs, and later, crossovers, also called CUVs.

The CUVs started as cheaper ways to make SUVs using sedan platforms and showed up with the Toyota RAV4 and the Honda CR-V first. The third major crossover, and the first made to exercise a loophole in CAFE was the Chrysler PT Cruiser, which was a mid-size hatchback built on the second generation Dodge Neon's platform that was classified as a compact due to them purposely engineering the interior to be smaller, since vehicle sizes are partially determined based on interior dimensions in the U.S. for some odd reason. Chrysler then got it shadily certified as a "light truck" with the EPA for emissions thanks to how the unibody was designed and the rear hatch. At the same time other companies also started exploiting this loophole, such as Ford with the Escape, which was based on the then brand new Focus.

As the 2000s wore on the loophole was closed slightly, but still left open with the so-called "footprint" rule. The footprint rule dictated that light trucks with longer and wider wheelbases were subject to lessened emissions and CAFE regulations, meaning they could pollute more and get worse fuel economy with fewer or even no penalties. As a result smaller more efficient sedans and hatchbacks became less and less profitable and thus manufactured less because they were subject to stricter and thus more expensive regulations, the exact inverse of what was intended to happen with CAFE. This caused a growth in vehicle wheelbases and thus overall sizes to try and lower costs, and the eventual death of several models and even market segments outright. Three door hatchbacks ceased to be in the U.S. market sometime around 2007, as did nearly all hatchbacks. Minivans also suffered because they couldn't always be reclassified as light trucks due to some shenanigans Chrysler had pulled in the 1980s to try and lock out Ford's Aerostar and Chevrolet's Astro, and so prices went up, creating another reason minivans pushed further upmarket in the late 2000s.

The Cobalt was replaced with the larger Cruze in 2008, the Neon replaced with the larger "light truck" classified Caliber in 2007, and the long-in-the-tooth first generation Focus was given a half-hearted exterior styling change and neglected for the updated Escape and Taurus X/Freestyle come 2007. Suzuki replaced the Aerio with the SX4 in 2007, Nissan tried supplanting both the Versa and Altima with the Rogue in 2006 but failed, Mitsubishi shifted all their focus to the Outlander and Endeavor in 2008, and Honda doubled down on the CR-V with it's third generation in 2006. The 2008 financial crisis shuffled things up a bit and thus Ford finally brought over the Fiesta and the fourth generation Focus from Europe in 2011 while Nissan gave us the new Versa and the brand new Leaf that same year, but GM doubled down on CUVs and Chrysler just gave up and put all their money into Jeep in order to make the new Compass and Patriot they'd introduced in 2007 because it was the only thing they could afford. European brands meanwhile jumped on the same bandwagon of bigger CUVs because they realized they could jack up the prices just by jacking up the ride height, and thus developed the MINI Countryman in 2010, FIAT 500X in 2014, and the Opel Mokka which was brought over as the Buick Encore in 2012.

At this point in 2023 nearly all new vehicles sold in the U.S. are either SUVs, CUVs, or full size pickup trucks. Ford infamously axed everything not in those categories except the Mustang, Chevrolet only has one sedan left in the Malibu, Buick has nothing but CUVs after killing off the Opel-filched Insignia sedan and it's Crosstour X branded station wagon version, and Dodge and Nissan are the only ones left in their respective market segments as non-luxury full size sedans with with Charger and Maxima. Even the mighty Honda Accord and Toyota Camry in the venerable mid-size category are falling, with the Camry selling 408,000 units in 2013 and only 120,000 sold so far this year with a projected sales number of only 250,000 by the end of the year. And that's in a ravenous market desperate for new cars.

In short, yes. Fuel economy regulations in the U.S. are to blame because they backfired when it comes to vehicles. And since the U.S. and China essentially dictate world trends for vehicles, the U.S. has set in motion the death of the small car.

[raverbashing]

> the U.S. has set in motion the death of the small car.

Small cars sell fine everywhere else in the world

[Tanoc]

Not for very much longer outside of insulated markets like Japan and central Italy where big cars physically will not fit the streets. In the UK for example nearly half of all cars on the road now are SUVs or CUVs which are inherently larger than their hatchback counterparts regardless of what size and tax class they're weaseled into. Two of the best selling cars there in 2022 were the Kia Sportage and Nissan Qashqai, both compact CUVs with Nissan having completely dropped hatchback offering in that size class. In the EU and U.S. crash regulations have dictated cars be wider to accommodate side-impact airbags and side-sill reinforcement bars on doors, while hoods grow taller to adhere to pedestrian impact regulations. In China it's starting to be seen as unsightly or lower class to still be clinging to an A or B-class city or subcompact car, and so the market has trended towards mid-sizers. Combine this with the small car profit problem, and cars like the Ford Fiesta and Kia Picanto won't be around for very much longer. Ford's already discontinuing the Fiesta this year with no announced replacement.

[SV_BubbleTime]

Hang on!

I was there in 2008 during carpocalypse.

I’ve typed this before in detail, but this is NOT A LOOPHOLE!

In 2008 Obama came in and made changes to CAFE and CARB with Californias very willing help.

The news headline you might have seen, and just saw again this year with Biden Admin pushing it was “All vehicles to be XX MPG by 20YY”. To which people who know absolutely nothing about vehicles clap for. People who understand vehicles or politics know it’s something else.

What happened was Obama Admin came in and wanted to push towards an economic future that wasn’t technically possible for stoichiometric reasons.

The end result was in meetings with MFGs, the admin knowingly compromised and said “We’ll just judge a vehicle based on its size”. A single vehicle’s emissions could be 1.3 or so if it was 1.3 the footprint of a vehicle at the time.

The MFGs replied and said ”If you are going to grade us on size, we are going to give you size”. And they/we have.

Look at vehicle bodies from 2008 on. Larger every single revision.

You can’t actually legislate technological advances. What you can do is knowingly change the game so “your people” have an advantage.

There is a WHOLE lot of bullshit with CAFE and CARB (which is not just California when you understand the market), and even NHTSA anymore.

But… Do not call an intentional “gift” a loophole. Everyone involved knew exactly what was going to happen.

[dragonwriter]

CAFE has had an exception or lower standard for light trucks and an exception for heavy trucks since 1978, and vehicles used as passenger vehicles but meeting either of the truck categories have been incentivized since then; its not something that started 30 years later.

The rise of SUVs and Minivans was a product of this — in the 1980s, not the late 00s.

[gfdsgfsdgfs]

Not true. CAFE was amended in the late 2000s to provide more fuel restrictions for smaller cars while keeping the same fuel restrictions for bigger cars. The result is bigger cars being made.

[dragonwriter]

> Not true.

What isn't true? Nothing you said, even if it was true (it's not) contradicts anything in the grandparent post.

> CAFE was amended in the late 2000s to provide more fuel restrictions for smaller cars while keeping the same fuel restrictions for bigger cars.

No, it wasn’t. The footprint model within the passenger car class did differentiate by size, but it didn’t provide more restrictions for smaller cars while keeping larger cars the same.

[QuarterReptile]

Do minivans meet the definitions? Mine has a pretty low ground clearance, and I don't think it meets the attack angle requirement, either (which is typically the cheapest.)

Edit: I guess I'm a trucker! The 2013 Odyssey is 19lb. over the minimum GVWR!

[gfdsgfsdgfs]

You're right. A University of Michigan study predicted 12 years ago that cars would be bigger to "comply" with CAFE fuel standards.

https://me.engin.umich.edu/news-events/news/cafe-standards-c...

[raydev]

Hang on, the F-150 and Silverado started ballooning in the late 90s. The Hummer came, Nissan introduced their Titan truck in 2004, the Toyota Tundra got massive. All years before 2008.

Regulations may have well prevented reversal, but the buying public was clearly already making its preferences loud and clear.

[SV_BubbleTime]

Airbags, crash testing, NHTSA, fuel injection / data bussing, small changes to CAFE, comfort options, and emissions equipment all made vehicles get slightly larger, that’s true. But not “ballooning”.

The 2004 Nissan Titan you mentioned was smaller in every single dimension and aspect over its comparative 2004 Dodge Ram. That was Nissan trying to play big boy, but was nothing unusual.

I’m talking about everything. Take an entire line from a MFG and look at its model over model changes.

Find a vehicle that decreased in wheelbase. I wish you luck in your search.

[raydev]

> I’m talking about everything. Take an entire line from a MFG and look at its model over model changes.

Yes, I agree that every car was getting bigger well before 2008.

[gfdsgfsdgfs]

There were more fuel restrictions for smaller cars after the CAFE amendment of the late aughts. Automakers were incentivized to build bigger cars to get around the restrictions.

[inferiorhuman]

  I’ve typed this before in detail, but this is NOT A LOOPHOLE!

Sure it is. Going back to whenever, heavier vehicles classed as light trucks (or worse) have been subject to less stringent emissions and safety requirements. That's generally what folks are referring to when they mention regulations favoring trucks.

  Look at vehicle bodies from 2008 on. Larger every single revision.

That's been generally true since the fuel crisis subsided in the 70s.

[gnramires]

Interesting. So you're saying small trucks aren't technically viable under current US legislation? That seems like a glaring emission indeed. Why not just create a light truck category with more lax emission standards? (I suppose it's not too difficult to disallow normal cars from qualifying as light trucks to get higher emissions?)

[SV_BubbleTime]

So, fun stuff!

There are light trucks. The ranger, Tacoma, Colorado, gladiator, etc. They make money, but not like the bigger trucks.

They’re also larger than 1/4 ton trucks of decades ago.

There is a side game with CAFE. Things like the 2DR Wrangler exist - so Jeep could sell more 4DR wranglers and Gladiators. You balance what you have to make with what makes money.

A LOT of Tesla’s financial history is wrapped up in them selling California “carbon credits” (not sure the actual process) to GM, Stellanis, Ford so they then are allowed to sell more trucks in California.

All the mfgs take a small to medium loss on their small cars so they can average their line out. Dodge small cars haven’t made money so long as I have been working in automotive.

If you want an example of nonsense, find a new Tacoma and look between the grill and the front of the radiator. There is more than a FOOT of empty internal space in there.

Being in this industry taught me a lot out government regulation and how it’s almost never what it seems. Regulations exist entirely to be worked-around and not built to. If we built cars to regulations they would all look identical and be pretty poor at everything.

In other countries, vehicles are organzied and taxed by class. Where light trucks can emit more than SUVs the idea being they are needed for work instead of for comfort. This system is gamed too. For example, let’s say Indonesia, it’s far cheaper to get a 4DR Jeep Gladiator than a smaller 2DR Jeep Wrangler. The tax on the latter is high. Both are premium vehicles there.

Regulations exist to be worked around or to be expensive for anyone but your friends to manage. Once you accept that, it makes a lot of decisions make more sense.

[PeterCorless]

Glaring *omission. But apropos typo ftw!

[jackmott42]

Sounds like a loophoole to me. You just wanted to get in a swipe at Obama, which is fine, he screwed up here.

[SV_BubbleTime]

No, I voted for Obama.

I was working a Chrysler when this went down. I was in the room for some of these meetings.

But, you believe whatever you want. Everyone involved knew exactly what was happening. There was no “oops, we didn’t know that would happen loophole”.

[silisili]

I think it's just people defining loophole differently. In our minds, it sure sounds like some unintended trickery to get around a rule. I think OP is saying that it was known and intentional. Is it still a loophole? By definition, I think it is, but not how it's usually used.

[malfist]

That's right, thanks obama for big trucks.

Seriously though, this law wasn't passed in 2008. It was passed in 2012, after democrats lost control of the house. This "gift" as you call it, was an appeasement to republicans to get them to vote increase MPG in general.

[SV_BubbleTime]

You do realize things don’t happen overnight right?

The new Obama admin came in and said “you are going to do this” in 2008. Everyone knew it was happening. Things take a little bit of time from the backend to the front end.

Remember what was happening at the time. TARP, carapocalypse (bailout of GM and Chrysler, massive re-org at Ford).

Today, I’m working products on 2032 vehicles. Spoiler alert, they’re still gas and won’t get 55mpg.