SUV and small truck sales are booming again, and Detroit automakers have returned to their bad old ways. But when prices surpass the $4/gallon mark again, what plan do they have for the next gas crisis?
One simple answer: re-brand fuel-efficient cars they already sell in Europe. Believe it or not, both Ford and GM do quite well selling gas-sipping cars in Europe, where the price per gallon can easily double US prices.
But alas, it is not so simple. Under Federal “safety” regulations, it is illegal to sell European automobiles in the US market.
Back in 2008, an AP article went into all the difficulties:
But introducing the cars to the U.S. market isn’t as simple as changing the speedometer from kilometers to miles. Ford has to reconcile American and European safety regulations — everything from the color of rear turn signals to the positioning of crash test dummies — that will keep the cars from hitting U.S. highways anytime soon. Competing interests among automakers, governments and the insurance industry are hampering efforts to standardize safety requirements worldwide. That means extra engineering to make different versions of vehicles for different markets.
As noted in the article, there are dozens of minor differences in safety regulations. And those differences don’t necessary make vehicles any safer for the American consumer:
Medford said NHTSA’s test to make sure cars are safe for unbelted occupants is important in the U.S. market, where people who weren’t wearing seat belts make up 45 percent of all traffic fatalities. “The data that we have really drives the direction and the nature of the standards we develop,” he said. But car makers grumble that NHTSA’s requirement makes cars less safe for belted occupants, since protecting people without seat belts requires more powerful air bags and other changes.
Another major shortcoming in the American regulatory framework is in the design of bumpers. American bumpers only have to protect the car; whereas Europe bumper tests simulate crashes against pedestrians.
[…] blog Systemic Failure is highlighting how safety rules for American motor vehicles are not only preventing car companies […]
[…] blog Systemic Failure is highlighting how safety rules for American motor vehicles are not only preventing car companies […]
[…] blog Systemic Failure is highlighting how safety rules for American motor vehicles are not only preventing car companies […]
I once read an article about this in a german car magazine and they described a host of obscure regulations governing things like the relationship between bumper mounts and firewall, location of reflectors on the bumper, height of headlight etc. all of which forced companies to design a car’s front around US regulations. There are small differences in the end, but the difficult to change parts, like sheet metal and headlight location are based on US regulations. This means that a BMW can be sold here with a different bumper and US reg. headlights (in the same location) that focus less light on the ground and throw more light into the eyes of oncoming drivers. The mounting points for these components don’t have to change because the car was design to be sold here from the beginning.
A Ford Mondeo or Opel MPV (not originally designed for the US) would need to have the entire front end re-skinned to be sold here. This is what happened with the Fiat 500. Journalists in this country always report on the changes as “bringing it up to US standards” but what they are really doing is making it compatible with trade barriers masquerading safety regulations.
If a cars gets 5 star NCAP crash test results and has superior active safetly (better brakes, traction control standard etc.) you ought to be able to buy it here. I can’t have a Ford Mondeo wagon but I can buy a Ford Fusion with a horrible side impact crash test, rear drum brakes and without side airbags or ABS? I guess the Fusion’s bumper mounted reflectors have a special USA number one! power that protects me from other cars?
Anyone familiar with European crash tests, safety equipment levels on Europeans cars or accident statistics should know that mainstream European cars don’t need to be made safer for the US. The US has the problem not Europe. It is in the US where cars are still sold without even ABS and where traffic engineering is stuck in the 1960s with it’s idiotic devotion to the modernist autopia. We drive cars that don’t have better crash test results, are less capable of avoiding an accident on roads designed to encourage unsafe speeds, reduce ambiguity and make drivers less attentive.
It is interesting that while mainstream European cars are safe and do quite well in crash tests (which may be more severe than the US fed. tests) airbags aren’t a requirement. Neither is ABS or stability control etc. It is possible to buy an unsafe and poorly equipped car like a Maruti or Lada, but in general europeans don’t. Ford could sell the Focus with drum brakes and no airbags but they don’t. European consumers appear to take automotive design a lot more seriously and choose to buy safer, well equipped cars. The preference for hatchbacks and wagons over sedans is another sign of a higher degree of design literacy. The consumer seems to play are more active role in driving safety improvements over there.
The first car I drove in Germany (totally unnecessary) was a 2001 Skodia Fabia 1.4 base model. It was better equipped than a US market midsize 4 cylinder sold today. It had a 5 star EU crash test ,”alphabet brakes,” stability control and every possible airbag as well as fog lights. I just bought a used 2008 Mazda 3 2.0 for my mom and had to search for one that even had ABS in 2010! In the US, bumper mounted reflectors are more important than good brakes, apprently.
We also have or had a minimum wheelbase standard that made the original BMC Mini illegal in the late 60’s. It was supposed to have been a safety regulation but may have been a pre-emptive attack on small Japanese cars.
If this minimum wheelbase regulation is still around it must not apply to rear engined cars like the Smart? Perhaps VW successfully lobbied for a rear engine exemption in the 60’s?
James, the scion models and the nissan cube have small tires…maybe they managed to get rid of that regulation?