► Why must cars keep getting heavier?
► A number of factors at play
► CAR analyses the situation
The finger of blame doesn’t hesitate to point at electric cars whenever the issue of increased vehicle weight comes up. There are good reasons for this. But look a little deeper, and there are plenty of other factors too, some of them rather uncomfortable, and some just absurd.
Reducing CO2 emissions is the defining challenge of the age, but when it comes to cars, the legislation is particularly poor. However noble the ambition, that does not make the implementation virtuous. For 2008, there was a voluntary CO2 target of 140g/km for vehicles in the European vehicle fleet, which the industry missed by 9.7 per cent. The EU, miffed that it had not made the target binding because it accepted the industry’s confident predictions that it would succeed, consequently rolled its sleeves up and made the new target of 130g/km in 2012 mandatory. The industry as a whole only slightly missed that, by 1.7 per cent.
Like this? Get more CAR delivered to your browser! Click here to add CAR Magazine as a preferred source on Google.
This was interpreted by bureaucrats as proof that legislation works: we can just legislate, and the industry will achieve it! But several things then swung into play which still affect us now.
Something you learn as an automotive engineer is to not expect logic in car buyers’ priorities. People will buy power (which they can rarely use much of) and better infotainment (which has nothing to do with a car’s primary function) and yet generally they won’t pay any extra for better fuel efficiency – they just expect that, gratis. Because of those illogical appetites, cars were already getting heavier before the rise of the SUV really got that ball rolling.
Buying a bigger car is a consumer choice, comparable to buying a bigger house. Many car buyers, of course, are convinced they don’t just want but actually need the space, and you don’t have to go far before protestations surface at the idea that they should pay more for the privilege. This is odd – if you buy a bigger house you get taxed more for it, and no one seriously thinks that’s unfair or unreasonable.
In the late 1950s there was a big study conducted in the US on vehicle axle loading and the damage it causes to roads: the AASHO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) Road Test. The outcome in the case of trucks was an increase in the average number of axles per vehicle to spread the load, which clearly isn’t going to happen with cars, but the basic physics hasn’t changed since that research was done, and the results are still valid now. And, in the context of modern vehicles, they are pretty shocking.
The road to hell may well be paved with good intentions, but it is also paved with poor political choices. Tailpipe CO2 targets are the problem; we needed legislation drawn up with technology neutrality built in – legislation demanding a specific outcome but not dictating the technology used to get there. That would probably bring quicker success. Instead, a winner was chosen – and we’re all losing as a result.
There is some hope, now that reality has kicked the door in and Brussels is delaying its combustion ban. Really, we need fact-based legislation, and/or financial inducements, such as taxes and parking charges, to change. And, somewhat awkwardly, we all should accept the idea that if you want something in excess of the norm, then paying for the privilege is inevitable and necessary.