Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
by John McElroy on Jul 31st 2008 at 3:58PM 
TELL THE FEDS TO FREEZE THE REGS!
Every day Chrysler LLC builds Euro-spec versions of the Chrysler 300 at its assembly plant in Canada, bolts a V6 diesel engine into most of them, and ships them off to Europe. That diesel 300 gets better fuel economy, over 30 mpg, than all the other vehicles in Chrysler's U.S. showrooms. But it's against the law for Chrysler to sell that car in America.
Right now Ford and General Motors are trying to figure out how to bring many of their fuel-efficient European models to the U.S. and manufacture them here. They'd love to do it immediately, but it will take them several years to modify, test and validate those designs before they can meet U.S. regulations. Until they do, it's illegal to sell those cars in America.
Anybody else out there agree with me that this is crazy? Let's let automakers bring their fuel efficient European cars over here immediately. As long as a car meets the Euro 5 emission regulations and the latest European NCAP safety standards, we ought to let them build those vehicles in the U.S. with no other modifications.
John McElroy is host of the TV program "Autoline Detroit". Every week he brings his unique insights as an auto industry insider to Autoblog readers. Follow the jump to continue reading this week's editorial.
Those European standards are extremely stringent. It's not as if we'd be allowing smog-spewing death traps to show up on our shores. In fact, there would be virtually no increase in traffic fatalities, nor any measurable increase in air pollution.
But even though U.S. and European emissions and safety standards are awfully close, it takes a lot of time and effort to get a car to comply with either one. It's not as bad if a car were designed from scratch to meet both standards, but if you have to go back and modify an existing European design to meet U.S. standards, it takes a lot more effort than most people realize.
To make this politically palatable I'd make this a temporary freeze, where any automaker would be given a 5-year window to bring Euro-spec vehicles here. After that, those cars would have to meet whatever U.S. standards are on the books. And they would have to be built in North America-no fair importing them (not that they want to considering the dollar/euro exchange, but this would placate the unions).
And there's a precedent for this. Back in 1980 then-President Jimmy Carter froze certain emission and safety standards to give automakers some breathing room as they struggled to re-tool their line-ups to deal with the oil crisis of that day. Guess what? We all survived that temporary freeze.
Moreover, I'm told that Mexico will allow automakers to sell any vehicle there as long as they meet U.S. or European standards. So if we did a similar sort of thing maybe it would help push the industry towards the common international standard that it's been begging for, for years.
The beauty of this idea is that it would not involve any taxpayer money, no corporate welfare, or any complex scheme to regulate at all. It would instantly give consumers many more choices, immediately help the United States reduce its dependence on oil, and promptly provide the domestic industry with some of the assistance it desperately needs.
Autoline Detroit
Airs every Sunday at 10:30AM on Detroit Public Television.
Autoline Detroit Podcast
Click here to subscribe in iTunes
Last week's show: "Auto Oracles"
Every day Chrysler LLC builds Euro-spec versions of the Chrysler 300 at its assembly plant in Canada, bolts a V6 diesel engine into most of them, and ships them off to Europe. That diesel 300 gets better fuel economy, over 30 mpg, than all the other vehicles in Chrysler's U.S. showrooms. But it's against the law for Chrysler to sell that car in America.Right now Ford and General Motors are trying to figure out how to bring many of their fuel-efficient European models to the U.S. and manufacture them here. They'd love to do it immediately, but it will take them several years to modify, test and validate those designs before they can meet U.S. regulations. Until they do, it's illegal to sell those cars in America.
Anybody else out there agree with me that this is crazy? Let's let automakers bring their fuel efficient European cars over here immediately. As long as a car meets the Euro 5 emission regulations and the latest European NCAP safety standards, we ought to let them build those vehicles in the U.S. with no other modifications.
John McElroy is host of the TV program "Autoline Detroit". Every week he brings his unique insights as an auto industry insider to Autoblog readers. Follow the jump to continue reading this week's editorial.
Those European standards are extremely stringent. It's not as if we'd be allowing smog-spewing death traps to show up on our shores. In fact, there would be virtually no increase in traffic fatalities, nor any measurable increase in air pollution.
But even though U.S. and European emissions and safety standards are awfully close, it takes a lot of time and effort to get a car to comply with either one. It's not as bad if a car were designed from scratch to meet both standards, but if you have to go back and modify an existing European design to meet U.S. standards, it takes a lot more effort than most people realize.
To make this politically palatable I'd make this a temporary freeze, where any automaker would be given a 5-year window to bring Euro-spec vehicles here. After that, those cars would have to meet whatever U.S. standards are on the books. And they would have to be built in North America-no fair importing them (not that they want to considering the dollar/euro exchange, but this would placate the unions).
And there's a precedent for this. Back in 1980 then-President Jimmy Carter froze certain emission and safety standards to give automakers some breathing room as they struggled to re-tool their line-ups to deal with the oil crisis of that day. Guess what? We all survived that temporary freeze.
Moreover, I'm told that Mexico will allow automakers to sell any vehicle there as long as they meet U.S. or European standards. So if we did a similar sort of thing maybe it would help push the industry towards the common international standard that it's been begging for, for years.
The beauty of this idea is that it would not involve any taxpayer money, no corporate welfare, or any complex scheme to regulate at all. It would instantly give consumers many more choices, immediately help the United States reduce its dependence on oil, and promptly provide the domestic industry with some of the assistance it desperately needs.
###
Autoline Detroit
Airs every Sunday at 10:30AM on Detroit Public Television.
Autoline Detroit Podcast
Click here to subscribe in iTunes
Last week's show: "Auto Oracles"
Get a WordPress.com Blog
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
MachinaDC5 4:05PM (7/31/2008)
John McElroy, if you do not understand why these companies are unable to sell these vehicles here then you probably should not complain that they can't. It's like the R32 GT-R, it could not be sold here because it can't pass crash tests. Would you want that on the road? I'll agree that there are many regulations I don't like that have been imposed on car companies, but some regulations are fairly important. Plus, the reason why some companies can't meet these regulations could be their own faults, like for instance perhaps Chrysler simply has to crash 5 of its Euro-spec 300s in order to sell them here but has chosen not to do so.
Again, please understand these regulations before complaining about them.
Reply
BigMcLargeHuge 4:20PM (7/31/2008)
Maybe you should try to understand these regs. John McElroy is way closer than you are.
And Japan never intended the R32 to be sold in the States, as it was never produced in a LHD version.
Stop guessing and get out of the way.
Sean Flanagan 4:18PM (7/31/2008)
Machina, you're off base here. The 300 is obviously already sold in America. It's the diesel that is not, due to emissions regs. The R32 obviously did not pass crash tests, but all cars sold in Europe go through the NCAP system, and are therefore already tested. That is John's entire point. these are vehicles that have already gone through a process to meet regulations, and have passed, and are sold somewhere in the world. But it costs the automakers too much in time and money to sell them in America because we have different regs. Not more stringent, or more lax, but just different.
Perry 4:22PM (7/31/2008)
My guess is, he talking emissions, not crash regs.
In any case I agree with the point he is trying to make.
Car regulations should be harmonized between N.A. and Europe.
We are leaving in a too-much-big-brother society...oh look our bumpers are bigger than your bumpers, so you cant bring this here, you have to spend millions modifying, crash testing etc.
And another thing...why do they have to crash 5 diesel 300s so they can get certification? I am sure they crashed plenty gas ones, no? Isnt it the same thing...or the diesel engine explodes on impact or something?
My 2 cents worth boys...!
thefultonhow 4:20PM (7/31/2008)
The R32 has never met European standards, and is a 15+ year old car. It's not even LHD. It's an apples-to-oranges comparison.
As John said, European crash tests and emissions standards are very stringent. I don't know all the details, but I seem to remember that Euro-NCAP actually tests more types of crash scenarios and at higher speeds than IIHS or NHTSA. Historically, European emissions standards have lagged behind the U.S. by a bit, but I am pretty sure gasoline engine standards are now on par, and Diesels are not that bad (worst-case, they could be 45-state legal instead of 50-state legal).
I would actually go much farther than this if I ran the world. The standards change would be permanent, and any car not produced for US consumption could be legally imported in the gray market with minimal red tape. Heck, you could even exclude RHD vehicles, but honestly, what's the point of excluding brand-new, safe, efficient, clean vehicles just because they don't meet our similarly stringent standards of safety and cleanliness?
Shipey 4:21PM (7/31/2008)
I think maybe you're missing his point. The domestically produced euro-spec cars are perfectly safe (there are still Europeans) and there's nothing blocking them from being sold here except our rules. We wouldn't be putting anyone at risk. Even better, why not just allow the Euro emissions standards, and keep the US spec safety, since it's just an engine swap?
jgp 4:24PM (7/31/2008)
If I want to buy something unsafe, that is my right. It is none of the government's business whatsoever.
The current state of affairs, where people have to pay the NHTSA out the nose in order to get a VIN for imports, is utterly repugnant and completely alien to the notion of personal freedom. For an American organziation, the NHTSA is thoroughly un-Americam.
Ligor 4:24PM (7/31/2008)
pleasssse. I call BS on your post.
the 300 is sold here, so adding the new engine will not change crash tests results by much.
The only thing is that the US does not want to let the diesel sell here as it does not meet emmisions regulations, but somehow the heavy duty trucks (F350+) and all the big rigs that shoot out all that smoke are ok to be driven in our roads all the time because they are not regulated the same.
In europe over 50% or cars run on diesel and somehow they manage to have less smog than we do here in some cities. For us to accept EU regulations for the next 3 years (till they can meet the US emmisions) I just can't see that causing that much of a change in our environment.
33mpg from a 300C Diesel it's gotta be better than 17mpg out of of the 300C Hemi, or 12mpg Tundra/F150/Titan/Silverado
I'm no diesel fan and not likely to buy one once they do come here (i like my cars to be high reving), but sometimes how things are done just don't add up
Polly Prissy Pants 5:18PM (7/31/2008)
1. If a car meets Indian auto regulations then should we allow it to be sold here? What about Chinese? Why or why not? If some regs are good and others bad, where do you draw the line? In your head? Please define.
2. I've spent enough time in cities like London and Paris that are filthy with diesel particulate and I'll thank you very much to keep it there. You should be thankful you can buy those Diesels here - I know I am, fuel economy or not.
MM 5:21PM (7/31/2008)
The Euro Spec 300 cannot be sold here because the diesel engine doesn't meet EPA air quality specs. This is the same or close to the same engine as the CDI Jeep Liberty that was only available in the US for two years and then discontinued because it didn't meet the new EPA regs. Much like the all too many diesel engines that are in many European cars such as the 3,5, & 7 Series BMWs, Volvos, and Saabs, they meet or exceed the Federal crash standards but do not comply with air quality standards, even though they get a 50% better fuel economy with diesel over petrol.
Big Rocket 5:28PM (7/31/2008)
@jgp: Remember, your right and freedom to swing your arm ends at the start of someone else's nose. If your next-door neighbor was to buy something unsafe that could jeopardize you and your loved ones, you would be having a change of heart pretty quick.
MachinaDC5 6:15PM (7/31/2008)
To everybody who responded:
The R32 GT-R was clearly just an example of how some regulations are good. I know Japan did not intend on bringing it over, what I was saying is that meeting crash standards is a regulation, one that I consider good. So to say "Tear down all of these regulations to bail out corporations" could potentially get many people injured.
Again, there are reasons these regulations are in place. I don't want my country full of cars that are unsafe to have on the road, it's that simple. -Unsafe by their emissions, crash standards, stopping distance, et cetera.
Don 9:48AM (8/01/2008)
John McElroy has been kissing up to the Asian companies in LA for many weeks. The name of his show is "Autoline Detroit" but you'd never know it. He's just another Nero. Now, guilt has probably set in, so now he's putting a fake front. He has to know that lots of those European cars would not meet the USA crash tests.
catgirlshyla 8:10PM (7/31/2008)
And this sort of thinking is why alot of people die in the USA when lifesaving medical devices that could save them are used commonly in other countries with no incident.
AMGoff 11:40PM (8/03/2008)
MachinaDC5 - You missed the point, not once... but twice. No one, including McElroy is suggesting that we suspend, nor even lax our safety regulations... they're talking about the emissions regulations that are preventing numerous diesel vehicles from being sold here.
It has jack-squat to do with your safety... the difference between US and Euro emission regulations isn't all that big... it has more to do with how the tests are done and what results are emphasized. It's politics... plain and simple.
Does it make any logical sense that big, light-heavy duty pickups can run around with diesels which churn out more emissions than any regular passenger car would, yet their still able to all the while a Chrysler 300 - which meets US safety standards and meets Euro emission standards cannot be sold here?
It would be fantastic to be able to drive a big, premium, 2-ton, RWD sedan that returns 30+ mpg, but we can't have it. Why? It's politics... nothing more, nothing less.
Yes... useful, pertinent regulations that do no harm are good things. But some exist for purposes other than the general good.
McElroy has a valid point... I'm sorry you missed it - twice.
skabone 4:10PM (7/31/2008)
As much as I like the idea I don't think it will ever happen. Congress can't get anything done and they don't care about anyone but themselves and their special intrest.
Reply
mike 4:16PM (7/31/2008)
No one but themselves????????? So i guess 30 years of no increases in CAFE was in congresses interests and not Detroits?
BigMcLargeHuge 4:35PM (7/31/2008)
Actually skabone has a good point about that as well.
Detroit has political interest in Congress, and they were against CAFE increases. So in order to keep voters in every state that manufactures cars, Congress was indeed thinking of themselves by not raising the standard.
Until the entire constituency went 'green'. Then they had to change their tune.
Declan Moran 5:09PM (7/31/2008)
That is wrong. Cheap oil (and thousands of lobbyists) kept any efficiency regulation off the table. All the time that was happening, the auto companies were making huge profits on, essentially, ladder frame agricultural style vehicles, ie the trucks everyone drives and wastes so much energy in.
Go get yourself a truck, they said, and everyone said, 'Yeah! I'll look like the king of the road.'
I laugh myself to sleep regularly.
BigMcLargeHuge 4:19PM (7/31/2008)
"push the industry towards the common international standard that it's been begging for, for years."
^^^ Necessary and worthwhile, IMO.
Reply