Clean Texas Title on 2040-cars

Auto blog

At meeting with automakers, Trump launches new attack on NAFTA

WASHINGTON — Ten American and foreign automakers went to the White House on Friday to push for a weakening of U.S. fuel efficiency standards through 2025, while President Donald Trump used the occasion to launch a fresh attack on the North American Free Trade Agreement that has benefited the companies. A draft proposal circulated by the U.S. Transportation Department would freeze fuel efficiency requirements at 2020 levels through 2026, rather than allowing them to increase as previously planned. Trump's administration is expected to formally unveil the proposal later this month or in June. "We're working on CAFE standards, environmental controls," Trump told reporters at the top of the meeting, referring to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for cars and light trucks in the United States. Trump said he wants automakers to build more vehicles in the United States and export more vehicles. But much of the hour-long meeting focused on NAFTA. Trump blasted the pact involving the United States, Canada and Mexico as "terrible" and noted that negotiations to make changes sought by his administration were ongoing. "NAFTA has been a horrible, horrible disaster for this country and we'll see if we can make it reasonable," Trump said. Automakers have called NAFTA a success, allowing them to integrate production throughout North America and make production competitive with Asia and Europe, and have noted the increase in auto production over the past two decades with the deal in place. They have warned that changing NAFTA too much could prompt some companies to move production out of the United States. The chief executives of General Motors Co, Ford Motor Co, Fiat Chrysler, along with senior U.S. executives from Toyota Motor Corp, Volkswagen AG, Hyundai Motor Co, Nissan Motor Co, Honda Motor Co , BMW AG and Daimler AG met with Trump, as did the chief executives of two auto trade groups. Major automakers reiterated this week they do not support freezing fuel efficiency requirements but said they want new flexibility and rule changes to address lower gasoline prices and the shift in U.S. consumer preferences to bigger, less fuel-efficient vehicles.

Who sold the most small/midsize pickups in 2012? PickupTrucks.com investigates that, too

PickupTrucks.com has taken another look at the sales of its favorite vehicle bodystyle as part of an ongoing series. According to registration data from R.L. Polk, the Toyota Tacoma easily took the crown as America's best-selling mid-sized pickup, with 133,477 units rolling into new homes in 2012. For comparison, the second-place Nissan Frontier only saw 50,566 registrations.
We feel compelled to point out that before Ford pulled the plug on its ancient Ranger, the company was moving some 75,000 units per year. That number had shriveled to 15,662 by 2012, which was still enough to surpass the Honda Ridgeline. Interestingly enough, one person brought home a brand-new Hummer H3T as well. But mid-sized trucks represent only a fraction of total pickup sales. Dealers sold a total of 241,471 midsizers last year compared to 988,326 half-tons.
That segment was dominated by General Motors with 533,814 sales followed by Ford at 478,204. Ram Trucks trailed behind in third with 241,204 units with Toyota close behind at 229,769. Nissan, meanwhile, remains a distant fifth. Head over to PickupTrucks.com for a closer look at the breakdown in each segment.

The ugly economics of green vehicles

It's fair to say that most consumers would prefer a green vehicle, one that has a lower impact on the environment and goes easy on costly fuel (in all senses of the term). The problem is that most people can't – or won't – pay the price premium or put up with the compromises today's green cars demand. We're not all "cashed-up greenies." In 2013, the average selling price of a new vehicle was $32,086. The truth is that most Americans can't afford a new car, green or not. In 2013, the average selling price of a new vehicle was $32,086. According to a recent Federal Reserve study, the median income for American families was $46,700 in 2013, a five-percent decline from $49,000 in 2010. While $32,000 for a car may not sound like a lot to some, it's about $630 a month financing for 48 months, assuming the buyer can come up with a $6,400 down payment. And that doesn't include gas, insurance, taxes, maintenance and all the rest. It's no wonder that a recent study showed that the average family could afford a new car in only one of 25 major US cities. AutoTrader conducted a recent survey of 1,900 millennials (those born between 1980 and 2000) about their new and used car buying habits. Isabelle Helms, AutoTrader's vice president of research, said millennials are "big on small" vehicles, which tend to be more affordable. Millennials also yearn for alternative-powered vehicles, but "they generally can't afford them." When it comes to the actual behavior of consumers, the operative word is "affordable," not "green." In 2012, US new car sales rose to 14.5 million. But according to Manheim Research, at 40.5 million units, used car sales were almost three times as great. While the days of the smoke-belching beater are mostly gone, it's a safe bet that the used cars are far less green in terms of gas mileage, emissions, new technology, etc., than new ones. Who Pays the Freight? Green cars, particularly alternative-fuel green cars, cost more than their conventional gas-powered siblings. A previous article discussed how escalating costs and limited utility drove me away from leasing a hydrogen fuel cell-powered Hyundai Tucson, which at $50,000, was nearly twice the cost of the equivalent gas-powered version. In Hyundai's defense, it's fair to ask who should pay the costs of developing and implementing new technology vehicles and the infrastructure to support them.