Exerpted from the New York times today, May 5th, 2004.-

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/05/bu.../05weight.html

DETROIT, May 4 - Detroit was recently ranked as the nation's most obese city by Men's Fitness magazine. Perhaps it is no surprise, then, that the Motor City's chief product is also losing the battle of the bulge.

The average new car or light-duty truck sold in the 2003 model year tipped the scales at 4,021 pounds, breaking the two-ton barrier for the first time since the mid-1970's, according to a report released by the Environmental Protection Agency last week.

The fattening of the nation's automobiles is a principal reason that average fuel economy has stopped improving and the nation's consumption of crude oil has been swelling: all else being equal, moving more weight takes more energy. Add in the additional pollutants and greenhouse gases released by burning more fuel, and it is not surprising that the upsizing trend is condemned by environmental groups.

But ranged against them in an increasingly bitter debate are industry lobbyists and conservative groups who argue that girth is good, for crashworthiness and because people want more space and power, though Honda is a notable dissenter in the industry.

At the center of the debate is the Bush administration's proposed rewriting of national fuel economy regulations. Though work on the plan is still in its early stages, one important aspect of it could lead automakers to make their vehicles even heavier on average. Environmentalists are distressed by the plan, but it has not been embraced by the auto industry, either.

In recent months, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has been flooded with nearly 50,000 letters and detailed comments about the plan. Many have come from organizations with an interest in the outcome - automakers, lobbyists, environmental and consumer groups - but the majority have been from individuals, some of them angered by increasingly tanklike vehicles and others by the claims of industry lobbying groups that S.U.V.'s will somehow be regulated out of existence.

And there are other motivations. "One of the things that triggers asthma is air pollution, and vehicular emissions are a significant source," said Dr. Ronald Saff, an asthma specialist in Tallahassee, Fla., concerned about rising asthma rates. Dr. Saff, 45, wrote a letter asking the agency "to make S.U.V.'s safer for families and the environment."

But Carroll Boyle, a 65-year-old retired educator from Manchester, N.H., wrote that tougher regulations "may force people into vehicles that are smaller, less powerful, and not as safe as our current options." She added, "In New Hampshire we have weather that requires an S.U.V. many days a year."

The E.P.A.'s weight statistics show that the average weight of a 2003 car or light-duty truck, like a pickup, sport utility, van or minivan, was heavier than in any model year since 1976, when the average peaked at 4,079 pounds. Just five years later, after the oil shocks of the 1970's, the average had fallen by more than 20 percent, to 3,202 pounds. The figures take into account the sales volumes of different models.

Average fuel economy peaked at 22.1 miles to the gallon in the late 1980's, according to the agency, but has eroded since then to 20.7 miles for the 2003 model year.

The agency expects the 2004 model year to finish with an average weight of 4,066 pounds.

New noncommercial vehicles are actually even heavier than the statistics show, because the largest vehicles sold to consumers, including Hummers and Ford Excursions, are not classed as light-duty, so they are not covered by fuel economy rules or counted in average weight calculations. They are also exempt from many safety standards and crash-test requirements.

Government studies say these giant vehicles are increasing the overall number of deaths in accidents, mainly because of the threat they pose to people in cars they hit in collisions. The administration's plan does suggest that manufacturers be pressed to slim down the heaviest of the heavyweights, like the Hummer.

Though new vehicles are back to weighing what they did in the 1970's, they are obviously very different in shape, in part because of the fuel economy rules introduced then. Automakers must meet average mileage targets, now set at 20.7 miles to the gallon for light-duty trucks and 27.5 for passenger cars. By scrapping station wagons and large sedans in favor of minivans and S.U.V.'s, manufacturers have greatly increased the share of their total sales subject to the lower truck standard, and they have fought to preserve the two-tier system.

Federal regulators say safety has suffered as a result, both because S.U.V.'s and larger pickup trucks are more prone to roll over than cars are, and because they do more serious damage to vehicles they hit.

Traffic deaths in the United States rose to 43,220 last year, the most since 1990. Before the S.U.V. boom, the country had the world's lowest highway death rate, taking miles driven into account, but it now ranks behind at least eight other developed nations, including Canada, Australia, Britain and Sweden. Lower rates of seat belt use and other factors play a part, but much of the difference stems from the composition of the national vehicle fleet, researchers say.

The Bush administration contends that most sport utilities should be given room to grow in any new fuel economy system, citing a government study that said lightening any but the largest vehicles would do more harm than good. Thus, one of the administration's leading proposals is to divide the light-duty truck category into classes, with more stringent requirements for heavyweights.

Most major automakers have reacted cautiously, especially to the idea of broadening the system to cover the largest S.U.V.'s.

"Studies show that making vehicles lighter has an adverse effect on safety," said Eron Shosteck, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which lobbies on behalf of General Motors, Ford Motor, DaimlerChrysler, Toyota and others. "If all vehicles were made heavier, it would have a positive impact on safety," Mr. Shosteck said.

But Honda, which makes some of the most fuel-efficient vehicles, said its own research found that dimensions, design and materials often made more difference than weight. Honda cited government statistics showing that midsize cars have lower death rates than sport utilities, and that smaller S.U.V.'s do better than midsize S.U.V.'s.

 

...and to add fuel to Honda's fire here's some further information about the safety of lighter more nimble cars a long with some of the econimc reasoning for auto companies to build larger vehicles: http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html

 

That is probably just to keep up with the fact that the average US citizen probably weighs in at over 200 pounds.......

 

Honda's vehicles have blimped up just like all the others. The Civic now is larger than the Accord used to be. The Accord is now very big, Buick big, but it's still a cleaner vehicle than the MINI emissions-wise.

 

it only makes sense Detroit has all the fat people, there is very minimal accomidations for physical activity, and almost NO walking/biking around town. This is probably due to the spread-out "organization" of the city, everything's too far away to walk/bike to. Add to that typical midwestern "friendliness" (not!), and the typical MINI owner seems like they're from a different planet :evil:

 

I go to the WDC in August partially to see the cool cars, partially to see the fatsos wadling around drinking beer. And the tube-topped women going "light em up"... Best reaction I saw to that was when some lady said that to a guy in a WRX (modded). He had rally lights on it, he stopped for a second, turned his car to face her (albeit a bit up on the curb) and hit his Hella's

 

>>Quite the cluster f@#$ if I must say so myself...

I spent four years in the Detroit area and found it to be the best kept secret in all of America.....Lived on a lake side home at Wolverine Lake and I never made so many friends in a four year stint as there. I absolutely adored the place (OK, downtown ain't too hot) loved the myriad lakes, the winter wonderland atmosphere in the winter, fishing on the Detroit river and, of course, the strip joints acroos the Water in Windsor.....Michigan, IMHO is ALSO the best kept secret there is as far as tourism.....which I think is great...let them furriners go to Florida, California and New York.....I'll take a summer in Traverse City over most places on earth...never mind the Straights.....

 

pocketrocketowner: You do make some great points, Michigan does have some awesome charm and hidden tourist secrets. MI does have some very beautiful natural topography and scenery. Mackinaw Island, the Sleeping Bear sand Dunes, just about anywhere in the UP is beautiful (ignore da yoopers though, LOL). Our Michigan MINI has an annual Thumb Tour where we do a circle tour of the thumb; very pretty fields and awesome coastline, cute towns with quaint shops - all very attractive.

anyway, back to the topic. Overweight cars: yea. Soccer mom buys an Excursion and boy-racer next door goes and gets an Elise. Guess who's having TONS of fun AND getting kickin' fuel economy?! Big cars that aren't classics don't make any sense to me. if you've got a 1961 Chrysler New Yorker Imperial with an in-dash turntable and a big Hemi underhood, that's cool cuz it's a freaking jazz club on wheels. Escalade on 28's? Stay in the MTV studios parking lot, thank you.

 

I do think Michigan has some very beautiful parts, I went to school in Houghton (not Houghton Lake- proper Houghton in the U.P.). If your into electronic music, Detroit is rather a mecca for that, the Traverse City area is beautiful, as is the Mackinaw area.

Detroit city, tho, is a disaster (rebuilding- what it will end up as in 20 years remains to be seem). Poor managment, poor urban planning. The suburbs/roads seem to be the biggest problem, once things went past about 12MI, the roads were just built as needed- no master plan :- The quality of our roads, tho, is pretty poor. Better than in the 1990's, but they still have a way's to go... Trundle down I-96 in Detroit, the Southfield/Lodge Junction, I-696, etc... Sure Chicago, Boston, NYC, San Fran and other major cities are sprawled out. But they also have public transit and things like express lanes. I think maybe one of our highways has express lanes (I-96?). As much as I enjoy driving, I don't enjoy driving in heavy traffic- I'd rather take public transit for that. Oh wait we have the (Homeless) People mover and the (no so) Smart bus...

 

That's some crazy stuff.


_________________
03MCS IB/B: 123, Aero, R90, Milltek, Pilo Intake, UNIchip, H-Sport, Alta Swaybar, 6CDMP3, etc.