Media | Articles
Never Stop Driving #133: Rules of the Road
A fight is brewing over California’s ability to set its own vehicle emissions rules. The Golden State long has had that power thanks to an EPA waiver, which was renewed last December by the Biden Administration. Not surprisingly, President Trump’s new EPA chief, Lee Zeldin, has different ideas.
Zeldin sent the California waivers to Congress, which means that California’s EV mandates are now in play. This could be the end of the U.S. having two sets of tailpipe emissions regulations—the federal rules and California’s—which have been adopted by about a dozen states. For decades, auto executives have complained about the extra costs, passed on to consumers, of having two sets of similar but different regulations.
I have mixed feelings about automotive regulations. I want as few rules as possible, because they have the potential to stifle engineering creativity and to add unnecessary costs to consumers, but it’s impossible to argue with the benefits that regulations historically have provided, like much cleaner air. Also, since the road is filled with idiots, I appreciate the safety equipment we all enjoy in modern cars. Ralph Nader’s noisemaking about the automotive industry’s lack of safety engineering, particularly as it applied to the Chevy Corvair, inspired regulations that made our cars less stupidly dangerous, a theme I explored in this short film. The industry also dragged its feet on mitigating tailpipe exhaust, but now cars spew so little carbon monoxide that it’s extremely difficult for someone to end their life by automotive exhaust.
Those achievements in emissions and crash safety are now decades old, though, and you have to wonder if we are now in the realm of diminishing regulatory returns. California’s waiver and subsequent rules mandate that 43 percent of new-car sales must be zero emission—electric—by 2027. That’s just two years away. In 2030, that percentage jumps to 68, which seems wildly optimistic.
Then again, I wonder how many believed we could put a man on the moon when President John F. Kennedy announced that mission in May 1961. On July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong stepped onto the lunar surface. Different times, different people, and a different mission, but still: Leaders set ambitious goals to inspire big thinking and send people down journeys of discovery and innovation.
Marketplace
Buy and sell classics with confidence
Last year, about 10 percent of new-car sales were EVs, although in California it was roughly double. Those numbers are forecasted to grow as more EV models are brought to market, so is 43 percent that far off? Probably. John Bozzella, president and CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an automotive lobbying group, said, “Achieving the sales mandates under current market realities will take a miracle.” I wasn’t around when new clean-air rules were announced some 50 years ago, but do we think the industry cheered them then?
In any case, the car industry remains in legislative turmoil, which makes it extraordinarily challenging for executives to make long-term investment decisions. Want another reason automotive CEOs lose sleep? Chinese car companies develop new cars in about half the time as Western peers thanks to employee work schedules—even those for white-collar engineers—called “996.” That’s shorthand for shifts that start at 9 a.m. and end at 9 p.m. and are six days a week.
As I’ve said repeatedly in this newsletter, the car business has never been easy, but sometimes the struggle makes for extraordinary cars. Consider the combined efforts of Fiat, Lancia, Alfa Romeo, and Saab that resulted in a shared platform called the “Tipo Quattro,” the subject of Jason Cammisa’s latest Revelations video. Allow me to brag about Cammisa for a moment. Like all great storytellers, he does extensive research, uncovering fascinating, largely unknown tidbits. Two stood out to me: To illustrate the efficiency of the Saab 9000 design, he pointed out that the 9000 had 50 percent more interior volume than the Saab 900 but was six inches shorter. Amazing! And while the platform was supposed to save costs by sharing parts among many factories, the engineers naturally couldn’t control themselves and offset the manufacturing efficiency benefits by specifying different engines. Cammisa pointed out that some 30 different engines, from a Ferrari V-8 to a turbo-four, were installed in Tipo Quattro models. Head to YouTube to watch the video and let me know what you think.
Before I bid you a fine weekend, a few comments on last weekend’s Daytona 500. The NASCAR community does a great job hyping the race as its Super Bowl and pours on nauseating layers of nostalgia. Fans tend to say things like, “Well, it just means something to be here,” because the first NASCAR race was held on Daytona Beach. The Superspeedway built there in 1959, however, is a dinosaur. It’s so long, 2.5 miles per lap, and with banked turns, that NASCAR regulations limit engine power to prevent modern cars from running dangerous speeds. So limited, all the drivers can easily circulate the track with throttles wide open, which means the race is one big pack of cars going ’round and ’round. One little bump kicks off huge pileups, the so called “Big One” everyone knows is coming.
At Daytona, the main variables that determine the winner—car setup and the driver—are replaced by the luck of not getting involved in the wreck. Basically, a lottery picks the winner, and I don’t understand why this situation persists. Maybe fans like the crashes. Last weekend, Ryan Preece took a scary tumble but was luckily okay. William Byron won, which undercuts my luck argument because he also won last year. Driver Denny Hamlin said, “It’s just such a f****** crapshoot now. I hate that what is supposed to be our most prestigious race, is luck.” Maybe I’m missing something about Daytona. If so, please let me know.
This newsletter takes a break next week when I’m on vacation, but I’ll be watching this 1961 Corvette being auctioned on Hagerty Marketplace. Maybe it’s time for a C1 …
Have a great weekend!
Larry
P.S.: Your feedback and comments are welcome.
Please share this newsletter with your car-obsessed friends and encourage them to sign up for the free weekly email. The easy-to-complete form is here. And if you’d like to support the efforts of Hagerty Media and receive the award-winning Hagerty Drivers Club magazine, please consider joining the Hagerty Drivers Club.
Find more values
Search for prices of other cars, trucks, vans and motorcycles
Your article on the Corvair was excellent. Why didn’t GM install a $10 anti-roll bar in the rear as it would have made handling so much better. I never forgave Ralph Nader for killing the Corvair.
Nader didn’t kill the Corvair. GM did. Or, more pointedly, the GM bean counters did. Corvair died because it had its own assembly line and shared no parts with any other GM cars. That made it expensive to produce in a business where margins are small — and even smaller when we’re talking economy cars. So, we got the Vega and GM continued its tradition of launching cars that weren’t quite ready for prime time, making improvements over the next few years and then killing them off. A $10 anti roll bar in a Corvair, a $3 coolant overflow bottle in a Vega, $5 for braided fuel line hoses in Fieros.
Regulations increase costs and reduce the lineup in Canada. 2 sets of American rules worsens this. The fact that Japan and Europe are different again (and then you have the countries with few rules that sell vehicles more like a 65 Beetle than modern vehicle).
What would actually help the car companies in the above markets compete with China is a single agreed upon standard. I think that is a pie-in-the-sky notion in normal times, we don’t appear to be living in normal times so this seems even less likely…
As to NASCAR, it has become a family operated dictatorship. The race finishes are determined after the fact based on their whims. There is no excuse for these decisions after the checkered flag. Hendrick and Penske usually gets the benefits.
I agree with the need for a consistent set of regulations for emissions, as well as an end to electric car subsidies. Eventually electrics will make more sense as the technology improves, but in the interim, let’s hold off on the phase in dates. But I’m all in favor of the safety features mandated for today’s cars.
Daytona is a snoozer every year. By contrast, I find Indycar to be the best racing put there, and the speeds and hazards of open-wheel racing tend to make the drivers less prone to bashing in to each other. I’m delighted that Indycar has signed with Fox and is being cross-marketed with NASCAR.
Well Larry, let me disagree with you on one point you made and agree on most others: I disagree that regulations stifle engineering. I believe that those very regulations created cleaner running engines, with smaller displacements, with twice or even three times to power of their heaving double displacement forebears. I do agree with about China though. They are currently winning the battle for next generation vehicles.
Unfairly, many may say, but that’s the game and you can either play it and decide that you’re going to win, or sit it out on the sidelines. The latter really isn’t an option.
We need a new, true stock car series. Determine what maximum speed is safe for today’s cars with a proper cage installed, crash test each model for entry qualification in the series, then let ‘er rip. Standard manufacturer’s car parts only. Would be far cheaper to run than today’s NASCAR and be much more exciting. I don’t believe slower speeds would be a big downside. In addition to race trophies. Award annual driver and manufacturer trophies.
You’re dead right on Daytona and NASCAR in general – I’ve probably watched my last race. On your EV topic the only way there’s a ZEV is if it’s in a museum and never started or driven.. Tire “emissions” are actually becoming an issue and they are especially problematic on the much heavier EV’s.. https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2024-2-summer/material-world/evs-pollution-tailpipe-tires
Add electric power generation to the equation and there’s no free lunch..
It was a 1963 Corvair 2dr with 4 on the floor I had just taken on a test drive to Harris Hill outside Watkins Glen. The sporty Monza model was a new purchase belonging to my brother-in-law Harry who was a dentist in Elmira. Knowing I was in town for the US Grand Prix, he tossed me the keys and said “tell me what you think of my new car?”
The Harris Hill road leading up to the airport soaring center at the crest had all the appropriate turns and twists a young driving enthusiast might ask for. I was thoroughly enjoying the Monza until it unexpectedly snapped sideways with all the sounds of the screaming tires found in your video introduction!
Thankfully, I remained on the road. If the nearly new rear tires had any nubs on them when I started out, I suspect they were gone by the time I returned the vehicle to its owner!
As I look back, it was that snap oversteer moment which may have tamed my youthful driving. If so, then the Corvair had a hand in my long time survival both as a driver and eventual club racer!
Today, it’s not unusual to see a Corvair on the grid at vintage races. Fitch and Yenko made it the American Porsche of the time! Too bad GM had to put it to death just when they made it ready to live! Isn’t it a story they were doomed to repeat?
Ralph’s spotlight on the Corvair definitely made for safer cars but not without unintended consequences. When the bench racing turns to the Corvair, invariably so does it to Nader and his tome of lasting condemnation!
Those heated conversations always seems to end when someone substitutes a Ford Pinto (AKA a fire ball) for the Corvair and asks if the whole ball of wax would have ever happened if another vehicle had replaced the Corvair?
It certainly begs the question, no?
So Larry, what do you think?
NASCAR racing is a four hour long commercial, interrupted by commercials