More pictures of my past work can be viewed in the Photo Gallery and on my Website. Links are in the navigation bar at the top 
What Kills?
Wed, May 13, 2009 
What killed the fuel efficient auto in America? The Nanny State, government regulations regarding vehicle safety.
Government decided at some point that too many people were dying or being injured in automobile crashes. Instead of looking at the abysmal state of driver education, they decided the problem was the vehicles.
They brought in legislation to force the Motor Industry to include passive restraint systems, as many as six airbags, and revised crumple zones. All these items add something else besides safety, and that is weight. Weight of course, not only affects fuel economy, it affects performance.
The American consumer always demanding performance forced the auto manufactures to increase the size of the engine, meaning still more weight and even less fuel economy.
Now we have arrived at the point where the majority of motorists drive what I view as obscenely large vehicles that give the driver a false sense of security, which in turn leads to even worse driving habits. Bigger vehicles increase congestion on our freeways and city streets, and congestion doesn’t help the safety issue either.
Whether cars have become safer for the occupants is debatable, they have certainly become increasingly dangerous for other more vulnerable road users, like the people who choose to ride motorcycles, drive smaller more fuel efficient cars, cyclists, and pedestrians.
Couple this with deteriorating driving standards, like the increase in cell phone use, and we may see the situation get worse before it gets better. Around 42,000 people die on US roads each year; people should be outraged at this kind of carnage.
Has the government failed miserably with its “Nanny” safety regulations? The answer is not a simple one, the government can place as many regulations as it wishes on the auto industry, but the problem is clearly not with the vehicles we drive, it is with the people driving them. Placing restrictions on people is not so easy.
The American culture is one of freedom for the individual and government has a harder time passing legislation that would restrict the individual’s driving habits. For example many countries mandate that a new driver have 100 hours driving experience before being granted a driving license. In the US it is something like 6 hours.
Washington wants no part of traffic laws and regulations; this is left to the individual states. Half the states do not allow police to stop drivers solely for not using a seat belt. And I have just learned that New Hampshire still does not have a seat belt law. I find it interesting that their state slogan is, “Live free or die.”
The problem with a “Live Free or Die” attitude is this. It is not those given the freedom to drive in any manner they wish, that are necessarily the ones who are dying. The loss of one’s life as I see it is the ultimate loss of freedom.
More on fuel efficient cars, and The New York Times on the safety issue
Reader Comments (8)
We're on a similar path here. The UK government trumpets the low death rate on our roads, whilst ignoring the butchery of cyclists and pedestrians, who make up a far higher proportion of our road deaths than in other European countries.
The result of this, and road safety education that emphasises staying out of the way of cars (as opposed to drivers slowing down around pedestrians etc) we're well on the way to surrendering our roads utterly to the occupants of "safe" cars.
Related, but not quite the same topic, the Rise of the SUV (the ultimate big, fuel guzzling car) and how this rise was aided by legislation, is covered very well in Keith Bradsher's "High and Mighty" - an excellent read.
This is so true. I used to drive an incredibly efficient Citroen 2CV powered by a 600cc 2 cylinder engine (a motorbike engine, pretty much), which did about 50MPG. It had nothing in the way of crash protection - the bodyshell did little more than keep the wind and rain off, but it could carry a family of four, even off-road. It was designed in the 1940's and produced for more than 40 years. There's no way such a simple and useful vehicle would be designated safe for the roads these days!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citroën_2CV
The fuel efficient imported cars have all of the safety features you mention.
You are absolutely right in your analysis, Dave! The North American driver always wanted "big" cars and after their demise, was only too glad to embrace the SUVs and luxury pickups, rationalizing that they were "safe" and "practical". They also became a status symbol and the manufacturers were only too happy to play along because they were making obscene margins on those things. As we all know, the spike in gas prices and the recession cut auto sales to a mere trickle, but I don't think the domestic manufacturers have learned their lesson. If you watch a lot of movies and TV, you still see SUVs as the vehicles of choice through product placement. Maybe the only way to stem this excess is killer motor fuel taxes like in Europe.
"It is not those given the freedom to drive in any manner they wish, that are necessarily the ones who are dying."
As I've always said, every time you get in a car, you're placing your life in the hands of everyone else out there on the road. It's the ultimate gesture of ill-placed trust.
What killed the fuel efficient auto in the US? In reality the fuel efficient vehicle was never born into the US. During my career of over 40 years in the US automotive industry, I have observed a deadly Bermuda triangle. Rather than energize the US passenger makers to greatness in the world, that industry has been driven to its current sad state bit by bit. That triangle consists of Big Three management, Labor Unions and Government. Each shares the blame. Not one had the knowledge, insight or courage to step back and break the triangle. Until the late 50’s the nation was wealthy, fuel was cheap, cars were big and heavy with large (relatively) engines. More importantly competition from outside the US was nil. Beginning in the late 50’s as the foreign makers began to seriously enter the market the litany began from the Triangle, nobody wants those cars, bad quality, not safe, can’t get them fixed and on and on.
Jump to today and all of a sudden recognition by the big three that they are no longer assured of the lion’s share of the US market. The triangle has made many deals with each other that indirectly and unknowingly have forced small, fuel efficient cars out of US market strategy for the Big Three. They are in a downward spiral. Recovery will be a long difficult process. The small fuel efficient car market in the US is owned by imports. The Big Three are near death except perhaps for Ford. Ford may survive and prosper if they can separate themselves from the triangle.
Is the fuel efficient auto in the US dead? It is not dead, it is thriving. But, it is owned by imports (not a bad thing for the consumer). Will the even smaller and more fuel efficient cars (Fiat 500 class, more diesels, etc.) come to the US? Yes they will in time, mostly as imports, also from Ford perhaps. GM and Chrysler may force some small fuel efficient cars into the market. But, as long as the government is dominating them, they will not succeed.
By the way Dave, I enjoy your Blog. Thanks!
We just had an incident here in Omaha where a mother in a minivan with three young children was t-boned by a driver with a revoked license. The driver who t-boned the minivan ran a red light, and witnesses say he was driving recklessly. Her 4 year old was killed, the two younger children and the mother were hospitalized. The driver of the truck (an illegal alien) got away without a scratch, and is going to be charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter.
Two questions:
- How is this a 'misdemeanor'? A child was killed!
- How does an illegal alien obtain a drivers license in the first place, then have it revoked and still avoid deportation?
This is why we need airbags, crash zones, and big heavy cars. Since our vehicle laws are generally ineffective, it's easier to build and buy 'road warrior' vehicles that we percieve to be safe rather than enforce laws and educate people. Sad.
Hye Dave,
Did you see the documentary 'Who Killed the electric car?"
I believe its on youtube, broken down into 10 or so segments. Here's the first : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FDmmJm9vSA