Larry Hampton
Active Member
http://detnews.com/article/20100830/AUTO01/8300337/Used-vehicle-demand-up--supply-down--prices-soar
Interesting article about the price of used cars and Cash for Clunkers
- Thread starter Larry Hampton
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
linked
gary s
Well-Known Member
i love it :supercool::banana:
Kevin Palmer
Well-Known Member
The theory behind the program was good. That said, in reality it was a horrible thing.
Engines HAD to be destroyed, salvage yards were not allowed to sell ANY parts, cost of used vehicles went up, during the program new cars physically cost more or there was ZERO room to bargain...
It could have been MUCH better if the program was thought out full circle.
Engines HAD to be destroyed, salvage yards were not allowed to sell ANY parts, cost of used vehicles went up, during the program new cars physically cost more or there was ZERO room to bargain...
It could have been MUCH better if the program was thought out full circle.
That is not completely true. Pull-A-Part had a good number of C4C cars on the lot. Engines could not be sold, but everything else could be sold.
Tom
Bill Koonce
Active Member
Tom's right, some parts could be sold. But the limitations were not well thought out.
First of all, since the program was only for new-ish cars, cars which many other owners need replacement parts for, keeping the big ticket items out of the recycling chain was a major faux pas in this age of Green enlightenment. And it was stupid and arbitrary.
I remember seeing some scientist using roadside sniffers and cameras to get an idea of which cars pollute more. In general it was older, non-high performance clunkers that were too old for the Cash for Clunkers program. The results of this study led some pollution control districts to run their own incentive programs, offering a few hundred dollars for people who drive a gross polluter (each bad one put out thousands of times more pollution than a single new car) to sell their car. In those programs, the cars were parted-out for recycling; only the bodies were crushed.
Cash for Clunkers was a needed economic incentive, there's no doubt about that. But its execution could have been better. Especially so since the people who drafted it had lots of previous experience to draw upon. From an environmental point of view, it would have been better to give the owners of cars with early and/or failed pollution controls a chance to get in on the deal. Sure, it might have caused a stampede of people getting the worst cars off the road. In my book that's a Good Thing. If they had the cash or good credit to buy a new car, then why not?
First of all, since the program was only for new-ish cars, cars which many other owners need replacement parts for, keeping the big ticket items out of the recycling chain was a major faux pas in this age of Green enlightenment. And it was stupid and arbitrary.
I remember seeing some scientist using roadside sniffers and cameras to get an idea of which cars pollute more. In general it was older, non-high performance clunkers that were too old for the Cash for Clunkers program. The results of this study led some pollution control districts to run their own incentive programs, offering a few hundred dollars for people who drive a gross polluter (each bad one put out thousands of times more pollution than a single new car) to sell their car. In those programs, the cars were parted-out for recycling; only the bodies were crushed.
Cash for Clunkers was a needed economic incentive, there's no doubt about that. But its execution could have been better. Especially so since the people who drafted it had lots of previous experience to draw upon. From an environmental point of view, it would have been better to give the owners of cars with early and/or failed pollution controls a chance to get in on the deal. Sure, it might have caused a stampede of people getting the worst cars off the road. In my book that's a Good Thing. If they had the cash or good credit to buy a new car, then why not?
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
MG, Might be rumor. I heard that a few years back that, CA. Was offering some folks $1500 to get their collector cars of the road. Maybe someone from, CA will chime in
Larry Hampton
Active Member
The local Pull-A-Part didn't get any of the clunkers. I think they make the most money on engines and transmissions, both of which were to be destroyed under the CFC plan. Plus, they only had allowed 90 days on the lots before they were to be destroyed. that's what I understood.
Gavin Allan
Well-Known Member
Most of the cars that were destroyed would have been greatly appreciated in 3rd world countries where they don't have nice cars available. Even places like Cuba could have benefited. Destroying vehicles with utility was the ultimate in waste to me.
The best thing about the program is that it got a bunch of Obama bumperstickers off the road.
:banana:
The best thing about the program is that it got a bunch of Obama bumperstickers off the road.
:banana:
Last edited by a moderator:
