Congress considers ‘cash for clunkers’ proposal
01-21-2009, 12:19 PM
#1
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congress considers ‘cash for clunkers’ proposal
Congress considers ‘cash for clunkers’ proposal - Autos- msnbc.com
As much as I love the torque, comfiness, and improbable highway mpg of my bonneville, I would trade her in in a second if Uncle Sam offered me 2 stacks.
The question is, will any of this apply to Bonnevilles? There'* a stipulation that the vehicle must get under 18 mpg. Is that going to mean COMBINED mpg less than 18, or will it be enough for CITY mpg to be less than 18? None of the articles on this give any more detail than the portion I underlined, so we can only guess, unless some of you have been watching C-SPAN in your spare time.
If it'* combined MPG under 18, nothing is going to qualify except old full-size trucks, with some anomalies like Fords with the 4.9 six possibly not qualifying. That would accomplish very little other than making it harder for contractors to get a cheap truck to do work with. Also, with a number of Northern salt states, i.e. Ohio, with no yearly inspections, the government should concern themselves with the safety of old unibodies that are hiding rotted frames, not old trucks where it'* more cut-and-dry if the vehicle is safe or not to drive. But this is all about emissions and $$$$$, not public safety (as usual), so I digress.
WASHINGTON - Congress is mulling a proposal to pay people to get rid of those old gas guzzlers sitting in their driveways.
Under legislation introduced Wednesday in both the House and Senate and called the "Cash for Clunkers" program, drivers could get vouchers of up to $4,500 when they turn in their old fuel-inefficient vehicles for scrapping and buy vehicles that get good gas mileage.
People could also turn in their old cars for vouchers that could be used to ride public buses and trains.
The bill, said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., "would be an important part of helping getting America'* struggling automobile industry back on its feet, and help consumers who are concerned about covering the cost of buying a more fuel-efficient vehicle."
Taking gas guzzlers off the road, added Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a co-sponsor, "would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, decrease greenhouse gas emissions and stimulate the economy."
The bill envisions the program operating for four years and encouraging the retirement of up to one million vehicles a year, saving between 40,000 and 80,000 barrels of motor fuel a day by the end of the fourth year.
Drivers would be eligible for reimbursement for purchase of a new or used vehicle with a fuel economy rating that exceeds federal targets for that class of vehicle by at least 25 percent. The vehicle must have a manufacturer suggested retail price of less than $45,000 and be a model year 2004 or later.
The vehicles turned in must be drivable, registered in the United States and have a when-new fuel economy rating of less than 18 miles per gallon.
In the first year of the program, a person trading in a vehicle that is model year 2002 and later would be eligible to receive $4,500 for purchase of a new vehicle, $3,000 for purchase of a used vehicle or $3,000 for transit fare credit. For model year vehicles 1999 to 2001, drivers would get $3,000 for the purchase of a new vehicle. Those who trade in vehicles that came out in 1998 or before could get a credit of $2,000 for a new vehicle.
"This is an even better trade-in offer than they could get from any car dealership," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., also a co-sponsor.
A person could obtain no more than one voucher in any three-year period. Dealers and scrap recycling companies could also get payments of $50 per vehicle. Initial estimates set the cost of the program between $1 billion and $2 billion a year.
Under legislation introduced Wednesday in both the House and Senate and called the "Cash for Clunkers" program, drivers could get vouchers of up to $4,500 when they turn in their old fuel-inefficient vehicles for scrapping and buy vehicles that get good gas mileage.
People could also turn in their old cars for vouchers that could be used to ride public buses and trains.
The bill, said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., "would be an important part of helping getting America'* struggling automobile industry back on its feet, and help consumers who are concerned about covering the cost of buying a more fuel-efficient vehicle."
Taking gas guzzlers off the road, added Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a co-sponsor, "would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, decrease greenhouse gas emissions and stimulate the economy."
The bill envisions the program operating for four years and encouraging the retirement of up to one million vehicles a year, saving between 40,000 and 80,000 barrels of motor fuel a day by the end of the fourth year.
Drivers would be eligible for reimbursement for purchase of a new or used vehicle with a fuel economy rating that exceeds federal targets for that class of vehicle by at least 25 percent. The vehicle must have a manufacturer suggested retail price of less than $45,000 and be a model year 2004 or later.
The vehicles turned in must be drivable, registered in the United States and have a when-new fuel economy rating of less than 18 miles per gallon.
In the first year of the program, a person trading in a vehicle that is model year 2002 and later would be eligible to receive $4,500 for purchase of a new vehicle, $3,000 for purchase of a used vehicle or $3,000 for transit fare credit. For model year vehicles 1999 to 2001, drivers would get $3,000 for the purchase of a new vehicle. Those who trade in vehicles that came out in 1998 or before could get a credit of $2,000 for a new vehicle.
"This is an even better trade-in offer than they could get from any car dealership," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., also a co-sponsor.
A person could obtain no more than one voucher in any three-year period. Dealers and scrap recycling companies could also get payments of $50 per vehicle. Initial estimates set the cost of the program between $1 billion and $2 billion a year.
As much as I love the torque, comfiness, and improbable highway mpg of my bonneville, I would trade her in in a second if Uncle Sam offered me 2 stacks.
The question is, will any of this apply to Bonnevilles? There'* a stipulation that the vehicle must get under 18 mpg. Is that going to mean COMBINED mpg less than 18, or will it be enough for CITY mpg to be less than 18? None of the articles on this give any more detail than the portion I underlined, so we can only guess, unless some of you have been watching C-SPAN in your spare time.
If it'* combined MPG under 18, nothing is going to qualify except old full-size trucks, with some anomalies like Fords with the 4.9 six possibly not qualifying. That would accomplish very little other than making it harder for contractors to get a cheap truck to do work with. Also, with a number of Northern salt states, i.e. Ohio, with no yearly inspections, the government should concern themselves with the safety of old unibodies that are hiding rotted frames, not old trucks where it'* more cut-and-dry if the vehicle is safe or not to drive. But this is all about emissions and $$$$$, not public safety (as usual), so I digress.
01-21-2009, 12:51 PM
#3
Senior Member
Posts like a Corvette
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if they go by city MPG the Bonneville will not be under that, when new they were stated to get 19 city, 29 highway
Except maybe the GXP but if anyone will trade that in for $4500 I will come straight to you and hand you that in cash on the spot lol
Except maybe the GXP but if anyone will trade that in for $4500 I will come straight to you and hand you that in cash on the spot lol
01-21-2009, 01:10 PM
#5
Okie Hokie
Posts like a Camaro
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Durant, Ok 74701
Posts: 1,107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I avg 23 driving around... assuming some punk kid doesnt pull up next to me at a red light with a lil rice burner car thinking hes all hot *beep* lol 
but I wouldnt get rid of mine for anything that will fall into the category... and what i want wont get much better anyways...
Porsche 911 hehe
*zones off into dream car heaven*
besides ive put in too much work to get mine up and running right to just let her go for 4500 and a $300 a month car payment lol
but I wouldnt get rid of mine for anything that will fall into the category... and what i want wont get much better anyways...
Porsche 911 hehe
*zones off into dream car heaven*
besides ive put in too much work to get mine up and running right to just let her go for 4500 and a $300 a month car payment lol
01-21-2009, 01:36 PM
#6
Administratus Emeritus
Certified Car Nut
The ever increasing list of how to spend money we cant afford to pay with new taxes go on...... But HEY!, for $2000 I will drag an old junker out of the north 40 and put plates on it.
It would have to be an older "tuna boat" Bonneville to qualify for "under 18mpg" What would count would be the stated mileage on the window sticker new and I'm sure it would be the "average" of the 2 figures. At 17/24. even the GXP wouldnt even make it. But a 88 Ford Pickup would. I think I can get it to fire........
It would have to be an older "tuna boat" Bonneville to qualify for "under 18mpg" What would count would be the stated mileage on the window sticker new and I'm sure it would be the "average" of the 2 figures. At 17/24. even the GXP wouldnt even make it. But a 88 Ford Pickup would. I think I can get it to fire........
01-21-2009, 03:25 PM
#8
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would have to be an older "tuna boat" Bonneville to qualify for "under 18mpg" What would count would be the stated mileage on the window sticker new and I'm sure it would be the "average" of the 2 figures. At 17/24. even the GXP wouldnt even make it. But a 88 Ford Pickup would. I think I can get it to fire........
Compare Old and New MPG Estimates
The articles are saying that they're going by the "when-new" mpg, which I'm not sure if it'* referring to the original EPA estimates or if it'* just a stipulation to keep people from bringing in their Geo Metros with holes drilled into the gas tank and two out of three spark plugs unplugged. Journalists suck really bad at writing about cars so it'* anybody'* guess.
01-21-2009, 04:32 PM
#9
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bill itself isn't any more specific:
That makes me think they're using the old EPA numbers. If they are, NOTHING is going to qualify unless they're going just by city mpg.
Even with the new EPA numbers, the Roadmaster doesn't qualify unless they go by city mpg.
Basically, if the Bonneville doesn't qualify, the only cars that are eligible for this are going to be 20 or more years old, V8, RWD, and 4000 pounds. Because you just see cars like that everywhere. What a joke.
HIGH FUEL CONSUMPTION AUTOMOBILE.--The term ``high fuel consumption automobile'' means an automobile manufactured for any model year before 2008 for which the originally certified measured fuel economy level is less than 18 miles per gallon.
Even with the new EPA numbers, the Roadmaster doesn't qualify unless they go by city mpg.
Basically, if the Bonneville doesn't qualify, the only cars that are eligible for this are going to be 20 or more years old, V8, RWD, and 4000 pounds. Because you just see cars like that everywhere. What a joke.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
