AAA survey says fuel mileage paramount in consumers minds
In a sign that the high cost of gasoline has finally struck a central nerve, car shoppers today are reportedly more concerned about fuel economy than they are about the brand of vehicle when shopping for a new car. In addition, consumers want more government control over fuel economy. This startling news, and a reversal of consumer trends two years ago, is the result of a new AAA survey which studied consumers' attitudes towards fuel prices.
It appears that consumers were getting used to the cyclic fluctuations of gas prices. Prices shot up based on market conditions, supply and demand, and season increases. However, they always seemed to drop back to more palatable levels... at least they used to. Today, according to leading economists, consumers are finally catching-on to the idea that $4 a gallon gas might be the norm. This reality-check of fuel costs will lead to downsizing, and a focus on vehicle efficiency. Have we finally found the Achilles heel of the SUV?
[Source: The Detroit News, photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Adam Marcello 7:18PM (3/24/2008)
How about instead of the government controlling gas mileage they control the amount of profit oil companies generate.
I know the idea has been used with electric companies to stop gouging in the past.
Reply
Dan 7:42PM (3/24/2008)
If you want to go down that road, there are other monopolistic industries gouging us a lot worse than the oil companies are.
The largest and most expensive monopoly of all is government.
Yar 7:46PM (3/24/2008)
All they have to do is raise there "operating costs" to keep their profit margin within the limit. They would make no less money and ultimately we would still pay the same at the pump, potentially much, much more.
Gas prices should start to decline by this time next year, we're just in a high cycle right now. If you adjust for inflation and find the real fuel price (not the nominal price, which is what we pay for today) you'll find that gas prices really aren't all that bad.
mike 7:47PM (3/24/2008)
I agree with Dan,
The government "privatizing" Everything is a Huge New tax increase in nearly every area.
Thieves Capitalism is going to break this country and make the US a 3rd world nation, behind China, way behind.
L.Wood 11:04AM (3/25/2008)
Every time our elite government personnel look into gouging by oil companies they come up empty. That means that oil companies are not gouging, or oil companies are buying off government personnel. Having government involved in gas mileage regulation will do for private transportation what government involvement in health care has done for health care costs - screw it up.
JunkStory 7:20PM (3/24/2008)
Gas = money
Why wouldn't it be on our minds?
Reply
meshies 7:32PM (3/24/2008)
seriously. without the tests and the surveys its easy to come up with that assumption.
TriShield 7:26PM (3/24/2008)
Maybe this will soften the market for the endless amount of trucks, SUVs and crossovers flooding our roads.
Reply
Dan 7:36PM (3/24/2008)
These are the mouthbreathers who think automakers are just sitting on technologies - like the 100mpg carb - to make the cars we have now get 30% better mileage for free and if only the government would force them to start making them.
Government control over fuel economy isn't the answer to anything except statist control freaks. Personal control by buying a vehicle reasonable to your needs is.
Reply
jsjs 7:49PM (3/24/2008)
Yeah, "personal control" really works - as evidenced by the dot.com bubble/crash, the real estate bubble/crash, the ever expanding waistlines of Americans, etc.
Otoh, Govt. can certainly nudge "personal control" w/ incentives/disincentives thru tax credits/taxes.
mike 7:49PM (3/24/2008)
Meanwhile, BMW won't sell the 60mpg 118d in the US.
paul 7:49PM (3/24/2008)
Judging from the large number of SUV's & Big Pickups that fly by me on the Interstate there aren't a lot of them that are concerned with saving money.
Dan 2:05AM (3/25/2008)
It's all in the phrasing.
"Do you want to buy and drive a tiny compact car?" A resounding no.
"Should the government force higher fuel economy?" Yes!
Same question, different answers.
boss hog 7:56PM (3/24/2008)
We have a limited resource and too many obese vehicles out there.
If I was in the market for a new vehicle, I would be influenced by the cost of gas and obligation to conserve.
I'm not sure that many buyers think that way with all the giant dinosaurs rumbling all over the place.
Reply
MemphisNET 8:01PM (3/24/2008)
Slowing down will help ease the sting of filling up all the time. I'm getting 30mpg (hwy) in my previously-enjoyed Dodge Magnum R/T... and thats with cold cold weather. Granted, I'm only going 105kph... but I hit the cruise, turn on the Sirus and just leave 10-15mins earlier.
Not great, but a far cry from the 20-some-odd they rate those Hemi cars at.
Reply
Disgruntled Goat 12:18PM (3/25/2008)
Wow, so you're getting 30% better mileage than even the 23MPG EPA highway rating while going 65mph? You might want to check your math on that. Having been a previous owner of one of those, the only way you'd ever get 30mpg is by letting it idle while you dropped it off a cliff. The revised 15mpg city and 23mpg hwy rating is fairly accurate. If you average 30mpg doing 65 on the highway in a 4 banger Camry you're doing pretty well.
Mark Oland 8:30PM (3/24/2008)
Because in America, the answer to solving your current problem is to buy something new! It'd really be nice if the whole focus-on-the-environment campaign focused on using existing vehicles more efficiently. Instead of CAFE, why not make carpooling more attractive or raise the speed limit for multiple passengers? SUV's are perfectly efficient vehicles when used properly- not that everyone should drive one, but simply being told you're wasting gas because you buy a vehicle with far more functionality than a coupe or sedan is rubbish.
Reply
DesiAuto 8:43PM (3/24/2008)
Any change like that can only come with a shocker.
If gas prices cross $6 a gallon, carpooling will be automatically more attractive and demand for mass transportation will also see new backers.
I would just wait for such shocker, cos nothing else is going to change the public habit.
gforce 9:15PM (3/24/2008)
I couldn't agree more, Mark. ANY vehicle that is currently owned can likely be driven more efficiently than it typically is. Car pooling, public transit, planning your errands to make one trip do, and driving slower can all significantly reduce transportation costs IMMEDIATELY.
Problem is, people in general don't want to take personal responsibility for saving that money or for environmental protection. They're all for it - as long is it inconveniences someone else.
Disgruntled Goat 12:35PM (3/25/2008)
You can always buy a used car that will get 2-3 times the mileage of your average fullsize SUV or Pickup. And how exactly do you make carpooling more attractive? Just like public transportation, if it was easy and convenient it would be used, unfortunately it's not and to make it so costs lots of tax money no one wants to pay.
RE: "SUV's are perfectly efficient vehicles when used properly...simply being told you're wasting gas because you buy a vehicle with far more functionality than a coupe or sedan is rubbish."
Unfortunately almost no one uses their SUV "properly" more than once or twice a year because almost no one really needs that extra capacity. Yea, I know, all SUV owners think they do (I did) and an extrememly small minority do need an SUV but when push comes to shove there's almost always an alternative.
So following your previous train of thought, would you be in favor of ticketing SUV drivers if they have less than 4 people in the car? If they're not towing a trailer?
To discourage commuting in an F-150 crew cab or Suburban would you be in favor of implementing an annual SUV fee of $1 for every mile driven over 5000/year?
There are plenty of ways to put the true burden of these vehicles back onto the owners but no matter what the solution there will always be a large group crying about how unfair it is.