Paul E. Schoen wrote:

> I can't understand why Detroit can't make new cars, trucks, and
> SUVs that do even better,

Oh, they can. The problem goes back a long way and is complicated, but it boils
down to this.

Improvements in efficiency have been made over the years, but the manufacturers
have a vested interest in continuing to make the same engines they've been
making. So, to go back a long way, instead of replacing the 302 CID V-8 with a
more efficient engine, Ford elected to modify the 302 to make it more efficient.
That gave you a V-8 which produced more power and burned about as much gas.

So, marketing was tasked with the job of making Amercans want more power, not
better economy. That has worked so well that you won't see a commercial that
brags about fuel economy, but most brag about power (can you say "zoom-zoom"?).
And you've got an SUV used primarily to carry kids to school that has more
horsepower than the most powerful '66 Mustang had.

Couple that with the fact that it has become uneconomical to offer customers
much in the way of engine options, and the fact that American manufacturers
dropped the lower powered engine options in this reduction, and you're stuck.

The result is that, anytime the subject comes up, the spokespeople for American
manufacturers start talking about the "next generation engines", which will do
much better in 5 years or so. In fact, though, all they have to do is start
pulling engines off the Escort line and sticking them in Econoline vans. Anyone
who thinks that's silly should ponder the fact that the original E-100 came
stock with 65 horsepower. And the owners liked that. (I owned one of these and
wish I still had it.)

But that's not going to happen. Ford, Chevy, and (especially) Dodge are locked
into the paradigm of "more power." We can only hope that Toyota and their ilk go
back to their roots.

George Patterson
Decisions are made by people who have time, not by people who have talent.
Talented people are too busy fixing problems created by people who make
decisions.