American-Muscle.net

Update – C4C ended last week and we are glad. I will leave the original post up though as I know some of you have your opinons on it and I would still like to hear them.

————————–

Ok, so this government program has been going on for a while now. I want to hear your opinions on it.

 

Here’s my thoughts..

 

It really makes no sense to me at all. You take a good running car, trade it in for a rebate, and get a new car. The new car, im sure has been marked up with add-on taxes and fee’s to make up for that rebate. So in reality, you’re just giving your old car away for free.

 

The car you trade in does not get sent to a junk yard to be sold for parts. You cannot buy parts off of the car. You cannot go to a junkyard and buy a perfectly good running engine from these cars. They are pouring in 2 quarts of sand and water, then flooring the car in neutral until the engine locks up. The car is then crushed.

Look:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXfaUjMttU0

 

They just made that car spew out more harmful emmissions into the environment in 1 minute than that car would have ever put out in its entire life on the road. How are they getting away with this crap? Why are we forced to pay $39.50 to pass an emmissions test when they just go and do the exact opposite of what the whole emmissions test is trying to prevent?

 

Ok, so that one single car smoked for what? A minute. That’s not that long. I agree there. Sometimes it takes 3 to 5 minutes. But think about this. This is happening to thousands of cars a day right now because of this program.

 

Lets lower the number for an example. Lets say they do this to 250 cars around the country in one day. Lets say that each engine takes exactly 1 minute to smoke and lock up. 250 minutes divided by 60 equals 4 hours of solid smoke and harmful emmissions being released into the atmosphere. My car hasn’t let out a puff of smoke a day in its life and yet we have to take a test that attempts to prove otherwise. Why aren’t all of the environmentalists speaking up? When an old Hotrod goes down the road, they accuse it of heating up the globe.

 

What about the people who cannot afford a new car payment?

 

What about those of us who cannot afford the payment, but are in need of those parts?

 

What about the people that are on the brink of losing their homes to the housing market and cannot afford to have a car payment at all?

 

That perfectly good running engine that just got destroyed could have easily been sold to someone like you and I for a couple hundred dollars so that we could get a couple more years out of our car. This could have been a big help towards making our house payments. So now when the car finally does quit on us, we have to make a choice. Get the car fixed and miss the house payment, risking forclosure. Or, make the house payment, dont fix the car, lose our jobs because we dont have a way to get to work, and then starve to death or lose the house. The scenarios could play on forever.

 

I’ve also read, but have yet to confirm, that once you sign the papers for the new car and drive off the lot in it, they destroy the engine in your old car right away so that it cannot be resold or put back on the road. You cannot take the new car back and get your old one. The pistons have been glass welded to the cylinder walls.

 

So, all of the time, energy, and resources that went into making these cars now goes to complete waste because the car didn’t even live out its full potential and life span. Now, this car gets crushed, which takes more energy and resources, and then even more energy and resources are spent to build a new car that you cannot afford.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but let me see if I got this straight. You trade in your old car, don’t get squat for it, and then stiff yourself with a monthly car payment that many americans cannot even afford right now?

 

At dictionary.com, the definition of clunker is this:
an old, worn-out vehicle or machine, esp. a car.
dictionary.reference.com/browse/clunker

Now the funny part. According to this program, the number of miles on the car isn’t what constitutes it as being a clunker. It’s the gas mileage. A worn out 14 year old 4cyl Ford Ranger with almost 300,000 miles is not a clunker, but a 2004 V6 Ford Ranger with less than 40,000 miles on is considered a clunker. Where does this logic come from??? Surely a car with 300k miles on it is to be more of a clunker than a car with 40,000 miles. It makes no sense what so ever to me at all.

Don’t believe me? Check for yourself:
www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/CarsSearchIntro.shtml

 

I own that tired old 300k mile Ford Ranger. I am at a point in time where I cannot afford to take on a car payment. I am working on getting a house. There is no way possible that I could afford both a new house and a new car. If my engine dies, I look towards the junk yards and used engines for repairs. I know my truck doesn’t qualify for the program, but other cars that carry my engine do qualify. This limits my options when it comes to finding another motor. This also causes the price of the used motors to jump significantly. Supply and Demand. I know there are more of us out there in this very exact situation. I do not know why more of us aren’t speaking up.

 

I want to hear your thoughts and opinions.