Quest for the Perfect Car

Five Step Process for Car Shopping

William Sundwick

We buy a car approximately every five-to-seven years. In a two-car family, that means cars generally sit in our driveway for a minimum of 11 years. Maybe as many as 15 years.

So, car shopping is a big deal. It happens rarely and amounts to a major life event. Typically, it is attenuated over two or three years.

In my family, I play the role of car buff and market analyst. My wife takes the role of sensible consumer making a sizable investment in our future. Thus, we are now involved in year two of our quest for the perfect replacement for our 2007 Toyota Highlander Hybrid.

The old car still has some miles left in it (~86,000 now), so this quest could continue longer. But we both feel it is time to start thinking of a successor. We have visions of ever higher repair costs, and many small, unsightly dings and scrapes are now marring a body we no longer think deserves body shop treatment. The fabric interior is stained with accumulated grime and wear. We replaced a windshield at Safelite a few years ago with an inferior-spec non-polarized version.

Any new car we buy will have an updated audio system, with infotainment, more active safety measures, and heated leather seating. All constituting a significant upgrade – not to mention that it WILL BE NEW!

But, will we lose anything? To ensure that we don’t, I have created a spreadsheet (2019 is its third model year tab) detailing specs and review notes from the automotive press on all possible replacement candidates in the hottest segment of the auto market – compact two-row crossover/SUVs. This is the segment inhabited back in 2007 by our Highlander, and it is even more popular now, with more competitors.

There are 15 possible choices for the 2019 model year (down from 2018 and 2017 because of more stringent filtering). The threshold filters this year are measures of fuel economy, cargo volume, and price for the lowest acceptable level of equipment, based on manufacturers’ online “build-and-price” sites. Fuel economy must reach a minimum of 27 mpg highway by EPA estimate. Cargo volume with rear seat folded must exceed 63 cu. ft. And, pricing for what I’ve defined as “level 1” trim must be less than $40,000. Level 1 (as opposed to “level 2,” which is fully-equipped top-end trim) includes power driver’s seat, touch screen infotainment system, some active safety features (e.g., front collision warning, lane-change warning, active cruise control), and a rear cargo cover and storage net. These things make the car equivalent or superior to my 2007 Highlander.

The filtering has been refined over the last two years. We’re older now, more spoiled by amenities (preferring something closer to “level 2” trim), and our cargo carrying requirements may have diminished somewhat. Now we look at things like easy-to-find LATCH anchors for child car seats (grandchildren!), competitive price, and the newest active safety features unknown in the days of our ’07 Highlander.

Step One of our five step shopping process was to assess our current needs. It’s looking like we’ll go for a fancier, smaller, more economical vehicle with comfortable accommodation for growing families. But a big tax bill this year and Trump’s threatened tariffs on imported cars make us wary of purchase price, too. We have completed Step One.

Step Two was the follow-up. We looked at the market. What were the choices? This is where my “crossover shopping” spreadsheet became the tool. The 15 vehicles this year from Ford, GM, Honda, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Subaru, Toyota, and Volkswagen all meet my threshold requirements (which have changed each year). Each contender has certain strengths and weaknesses; the best in class fuel economy goes to the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, next best is the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid. Roomiest is also the Outlander (PHEV version), next roomiest is the new Subaru Forester. Lowest price for comparably equipped models, Ford Escape (unfortunately, made in Mexico, may be subject to those tariffs); next lowest, Honda CR-V (more domestic content than Ford!). Active safety features like blind spot monitoring, active cruise control, and automatic emergency braking are options on many entrants in this segment, but standard across the line on Honda CR-V, Nissan Rogue, and both Subarus, Forester and Outback. We are now poised to begin Step Three.

This step will determine which trade-offs are worthwhile. We may sacrifice less important things, like power passenger seat, or faster 0-60 mph acceleration (measured in tenths of a second). But things like accessibility of LATCH anchors may be more important – or the angle of opening for rear doors (there is variability here). Much of this detail information can be found in reviews, such as Car & Driver blog, or Edmunds, and are reflected in my spreadsheet. We will then visit dealerships (and the annual Washington Auto Show). Look and feel of the contenders will become the most important factor, things like dash layout, interior materials quality and finish, styling. 

Step Four will narrow the field to test-drive candidates. We will not test drive all 15 entries in the spreadsheet. We may not even visit dealerships representing all the manufacturers. Hyundai has relatively poor EPA ratings, whereas Mitsubishi and Toyota are at the top there, but lack other features -- reliability for Mitsubishi, rear seat passenger accessibility for Toyota RAV4.

The final decision constitutes Step Five. It will be made from a combination of impressions garnered in the first four steps. And, it may well be that the clincher is the personal touch from the salesperson at a specific dealership. Our last car purchase – a Chevy Volt – was ultimately decided based on the incredible knowledge of PHEV Voltec engineering, combined with personal charm, of the salesman we dealt with at Koons GM Corner Tysons (one Mark Gomez).

Other decisive factors include a business assessment of the manufacturer -- how long will Mitsubishi survive in U.S. market? How about ethics at VW or GM? (Scandals have affected both companies recently). The design of the manufacturer’s cars also conveys how badly they want me as a customer. In GM’s favor, they have three vehicles that meet all the requirements to be included in my spreadsheet, no other manufacturer has more than two. My wife has a much stronger aesthetic/social appreciation for what she wants in our driveway. That, more than strategic financial concerns, is why we have eliminated all the “luxury” brands from our potential candidates. Similarly, brand images might narrow the GM entrants to one – Chevy Equinox (eliminating both Buick and GMC). But that would mean two Chevrolets in our driveway. (What is this? Flint, Michigan, ca. 1965?)

Not a trivial matter, this final decision. It’s a car we may keep until we cease driving. The last car we own? What a weighty thought!

Drive Better Electrically

EVs, Past, Present, Future

William Sundwick 

Electricity as a means of propulsion for self-contained road vehicles is as old, or older, than the internal combustion engine (ICE). But EV market share declined to zero for a large chunk of motor vehicle history.

There were a variety of reasons for the demise. They were expensive, while the Model T was bringing motoring to the masses. Battery technology was limited. Baker Electrics and Detroit Electrics, “popular” in the first two decades of the 20^th century featured luxurious closed bodies, but had a range of less than 40 miles, and top speed of less than 20 mph. But when ICE-powered cars needed to be cranked to start, electrics could be started with a button. They were thought to be aimed at urban women, especially. Henry Ford bought a Detroit Electric for his wife, Clara. And, Baker Electric manufactured 800 cars in 1906 alone. Peak sales occurred in the second decade of the century. Altogether, by the end of the electric era in the early 1920s, there had been 33,842 electrics registered in the United States. No other country had as many EVs, although there were manufacturers in Europe, too. The explosion of demand for the Model T, and associated massive improvements in the national road network, tended to leave those early EVs to an affluent urban niche market.

Shortages of gasoline during World War II did cause some renewed interest in electric vehicles in Europe, especially Britain, which invented its famous commercial “milk floats,” and the Wehrmacht experimented with, but was unable to produce, hybrid electric armored vehicles, under the direction of Ferdinand Porsche.

Further experiments were carried out around the world during the fuel scarce 1970s and 1980s, but not enough market incentives existed to attempt series production of any electric. By 1997, Toyota took the gamble with its hybrid electric Prius, based on regenerative braking technology, manufacturing it in limited numbers for the domestic Japanese market. Plug-in hybrid design was pioneered in France, where Renault introduced the Elect’Road version of the Kangoo minivan in 2003. It used “blended” technology, where despite an AC charger, the battery electric drive and gasoline engine worked in tandem much of the time – much like the hybrid electric Prius.

In the U.S., General Motors was forced to offer electric driving. It’s novel EV-1 was leased, not sold, in California, in 1999 -- an answer to the CARB (California Air Resources Board) mandate for more fuel-efficient vehicles. GM famously de-activated and destroyed all examples except for a few survivors in museums. The film, “Who Killed the Electric Car?” offers a better, if more sinister, explanation for GM’s decision.

The CARB mandate was reversed when that happened, at the end of the non-renewable lease period. GM’s official explanation was that there was insufficient consumer demand for the relatively short-range EV (~80 mi.) – but, by 2011, Nissan began successfully selling its Leaf, with only a 90-mile range. 

Tesla’s emergence in 2008 marked a serious benchmark for EVs worldwide. Tesla’s market-changing invention was the Lithium-ion battery. Storage capacity, thus range, could now be far greater than any previous attempts at electric propulsion. As battery technology continues to improve, the need for hybrid gasoline engines will decrease. An all-electric future may eventually come. But, will it come fast enough? And, what about continued reliance on an electric grid mainly fed by coal and natural gas?

While California leads the nation in the adoption of EVs (and plug-in hybrids), other nations lead the U.S. By the end of 2018, 49% of all cars sold in Norway were electric. China has marshaled massive state intervention to manufacture EVs for its growing motoring population, with some projections as high as 46% of the domestic market by 2020. However, thanks mostly to California, the U.S. still has more registered electric and hybrid vehicles than any other country, despite a lowly 1% market share for EVs.

How do electric vehicles work? There are three different kinds of electric propulsion available in the marketplace today:

1) Battery-electric vehicles (BEV) like Tesla, Chevrolet Bolt, and Nissan Leaf. These cars have no ICE at all. They rely entirely on their electric motors and battery storage, which can be replenished externally (i.e., “plug-in”) in three modes: 120-volt household circuit, 240-volt “level 2” charger, or 480-volt “level 3” fast DC charging.

2) For the more range-anxious consumer, there are plug-in hybrids (PHEV), which rely on battery storage until it’s depleted, then seamlessly switch to a “range extending” gasoline engine. All-electric range for PHEVs varies from about 10 miles up to more than

50. Total range depends on the size of the gas tank. My Chevy Volt has a small 9.5-gallon tank which gives it a total range in excess of 200 miles. I’ve filled the tank only about five or six times in the 4 ½ years I’ve owned the car – and, several of those times was because of the automatic “fuel maintenance cycle” that burns old, stale gasoline.

3)  Gasoline-electric hybrids (HEV) like the Prius, which continue to be popular, especially in the United States, where gas is relatively cheap and plentiful. Many consumers think the 50-60 mpg that they can get with their Prius is sensational. But it doesn’t compare to 100-120 mpg-e (equivalent) for a PHEV or a Leaf.

Teslas are fast, too! Indeed, one performance characteristic of electric motors is they produce a great deal of torque at lower speeds, hence your 0-60 mph acceleration is likely to be quite good. Currently, there is a preponderance of luxury brands in the list of BEV and PHEV vehicles available in the U.S. That is mostly attributable to the phenomenal success of Tesla. While concept-to-production cycle times are longer than Tesla’s recent dominance of luxury-segment sales, many of the world’s luxury brands had been working on electric propulsion for some time. Tesla’s success moved competitors into crash programs.

How green are EVs, really? It is true that the connection to the nationwide electric grid is a limiting factor on how much CO2 and other greenhouse gases (GHG) can be saved with plug-in electric vehicles. However, it has now finally come to pass that everywhere in the United States, the net carbon footprint of driving an electric or hybrid vehicle is positive. It will be better in places that have higher renewable infrastructure. But nowhere is the impact negative. This has been true only for the last year. All-electric BEVs are best, PHEVs next best, HEVs third.

The only remaining question: will the market move fast enough without massive state intervention like China’s? Rural areas in the U.S. will, of course, be the last to convert. Electric long-distance trucks are under development. And BEV or PHEV pickups are coming within the next year or so. But It may ultimately depend on political will, on getting behind a Green New Deal.

In the 1950s, General Electric and Westinghouse collaborated on a massive media campaign called “Live Better Electrically” (LBE). It had the support of utilities, the U.S. government, and state and local governments. Its sole purpose was to pump up profits for all the participants, selling appliances as costs of the grid were dropping dramatically.

Now, however, it may be time to think of your grandchildren more than your commuting convenience. Is America up to the challenge? 

Van Slyke Assembly, 1967

Music for the Shop Rat

William Sundwick

It was a lark. Something to do during college term break. I had just returned from a “career-service” internship experience in Washington, D.C. And, frankly, I was curious about what an auto assembly line was like. It was the defining social construct of my hometown -- Flint, Michigan -- but I had never seen one in action.

So, I signed up for a tour of the plant located directly across the street from the new townhouse my parents had just bought. It was their last address before leaving Flint forever, for Florida retirement. Odd, you may think, that this new townhouse development was built across the street from one of Flint’s premier General Motors manufacturing facilities, but there was a tall board-on-board fence separating it from the traffic noise of Van Slyke Road, blocking the view of the acres of factory occupying the equivalent of 20 adjacent city blocks.

In 1967 Flint was reaching peak “civilization,” still proud of its GM connections (indeed, General Motors was founded there in 1908). To see the lifeblood of my city close-up seemed an obligation, since I had already been talking up Flint with college friends in Kalamazoo.

I found myself overwhelmed by what I saw – and heard – inside, during the two-hour tour. It was a choreographed musical!

I had not been brought up with popular music. All music heard in my parents’ house was classical, especially violin and string orchestra. That was my father’s requirement. He was a failed violinist in his youth. Now he was an engineer, the head of process engineering at another GM plant in town.

It was perhaps that violinist’s artistic sensibility, combined with the process engineer’s dedication to efficient production methods, that led me to my profound aesthetic awakening after visiting that mammoth industrial facility.

I attribute my lifelong love of hard blues/rock music to the experience. Truly, this is the only style of music that fits the gritty, monotonous, obsessive life of the shop rat. I do not mean to imply that all assembly line workers loved that music – but, to me, the genre perfectly captures the spirit of the line. And, when done well, provides the seeds of an uplifting release from the grim drudgery of any job.

Those brightly colored Chevrolet Impalas marched down the assembly line in precisely timed formation, randomly distributed body styles and trims, based on an unseen production manifest. The shop rats’ responsibility was to put those cars together, unceasingly over an eight-hour shift, five days a week, each having a strictly defined small piece of the job.

And with the crashing noise of the stamping presses precisely timed, there was an unmistakable rhythm to the spectacle. Watching hundreds of workers below us, from an observation deck, all doing their repetitive ballet – it was real artistry. And, incredibly taxing, physically and mentally. When their shift was over, the urge to escape would be overpowering. At home, or at a local bar, as Ben Hamper relates in his seminal memoir of life on the assembly line, Rivethead. (Hamper worked in the same Van Slyke assembly plant in the ‘70s and ‘80s, then part of GM’s Truck and Bus Division). To a shop rat, music was likely an important part of that escape. As it was for me – but, the release I sought was from a different sort of stress.

Hamper had a dysfunctional psychological sense of destiny – he was a third generation Flint (and GM) shop rat, literally following in his father’s and grandfather’s footsteps. I was first generation Flint and would never rely on an hourly rate factory job for income. I think I knew this, rationally, even in 1967. Yet, that tour of the Van Slyke plant showed me a world that I must have felt inside me. At each job station along the line, the task was to rivet, weld, or lift, one part of the overall vehicle, and only that one part. I feared It was the same as most jobs in life.

I had resolved at this point in my college career to be a history major, with English minor. Teaching was my chosen field – but I was uncertain whether I could advance directly to grad school. Draft deferments did not extend to graduate work. It was 1967.

Would I ever be able to do more? How much responsibility could I really handle?

So, I felt a great deal of stress about my future. It was something I could not control. But I had music. Not the classical music of my childhood, but angry, revolutionary music. The music of marginalized people who had no control over their futures. People like Ben Hamper, the “Rivethead.”

I had already collected some LPs since I had been at Kalamazoo College. Mostly Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, and the like. My favorite album at the time was Aftermath by the Stones. It seemed dark to me. Paint It Black was perhaps my favorite song. But, on the album, not featured as a single, no air play, was another: Going Home. This song may have captured the beat of the assembly line better than any I knew then.

The cars are no longer made in Flint. Music was never made there. Detroit, on the other hand, did produce music! As far back as the 1940s, long before Motown, John Lee Hooker landed in that city during the Great Migration from Mississippi. He personified “Detroit Blues,” invented while he worked in a Ford plant. Music never left Detroit. Iggy Pop came from nearby Ann Arbor in the 1960s, same era as MC5.  Even as late as the 1990s, Detroit was still producing artists like Jack White. I didn’t know these musicians in 1967, but there were the Stones (and other early “British Blues”), seemingly representing a similar industrial culture.

Throughout my life, I’ve been compelled to return to the anxiety, and bitterness, of the 19-year-old on that plant tour. It was important. More music, along the same lines as the styles I liked then, has come into my life since, but with modifications and improvements, much like cars have changed and improved over a similar time span.

Those Chevy Impalas, and the trucks that Ben Hamper assembled, were for the people. The music was as well. Workers were drawn to the assembly line because of good pay and benefits. Rock musicians were drawn to their calling because of its demand pricing. Fewer opportunities were available to either than to the privileged who could get an education and move away from places like Flint. Here there were majestic and powerful machines, like those rock drum riffs. The leitmotiv of amplified lead guitar was like the “dumpster hockey” Hamper and his colleagues wasted time playing when the line slowed or stopped. The angry lyrics of the front man were the profanity-laced banter of the shop rats.

The psychic need to escape, without the means. Hamper ultimately departed the shop only due to disability – he went directly from the rivet line at Van Slyke to a mental outpatient facility, permanently laid off, found shooting hoops in a cameo in Michael Moore’s film, “Roger and Me.”

I never experienced that sort of release with music, but in some ways, when listening to my iTunes playlists while working out at my gym, I feel like the Rivethead at that mental health clinic. Perhaps there never was an escape from Flint?

First Six Weeks

Has the 116^th Congress Inspired Yet?

William Sundwick

Legislation is a slow process. On January 3, 2019 a new Congress was sworn in. The once and future queen, Nancy Pelosi, became the nearly uncontested House Speaker. And Democrats, for the first time since the 111^th Congress of 2009-10, became the House majority. It was an impressive mid-term election romp – best flipping record in over forty years, exceeding even the Republican sweep of 1994 and Newt Gingrich.

The Senate, not so much. Indeed, Democrats lost a net two seats in the august senior body. Granted, the founding fathers intended the upper house to be essentially “anti-democratic” in its design. As if the non-proportional makeup of the Senate were not enough, minorities use the filibuster to further their status quo goals. No clear signs that either side in the Senate wants to dilute their privileges there. Perhaps the 2020 presidential campaign now cranking up will force the issue, perhaps not.

But, what of that mercurial lower chamber? Many of us had great expectations for the new Democratic controlled House of Representatives. There would now be hearings, subpoenas, radical legislative proposals. Morning had arrived in America.

Or, had it?

After six weeks in session, we can see things brewing, but legislation is a slow process. We’ve already seen exciting media circus hearings with Michael Cohen, but regarding the business of crafting real legislative proposals, it seems a bit frustrating. There are bright lights, however. Elijah Cummings, as chair of the House Oversight and Reform Committee has captured the spotlight, so far, with that Cohen testimony on February 27. Jerry Nadler at Judiciary is ramping up, and we’ve seen his first work – H.R.8, the “Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019” pass the House. H.R. 8 and its companion H.R. 1112, “Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019,” constitute the first meaningful gun control legislation in nearly ten years (since before Sandy Hook). No small accomplishment.

Eliot Engel, chair of House Foreign Affairs, has held interesting hearings on Middle East policy, and the situation in Venezuela, envoy Elliott Abrams testifying. And the Subcommittee on Elections of the House Homeland Security Committee has recently visited Atlanta for “field hearings” on the 2016 elections in that state.

The most important bill yet to be introduced in the new Congress is H.R.1 “For the People.” The omnibus legislation is aimed at many ills in our current political environment, from corruption to voting rights to election interference. It is very ambitious and has captured the attention of several House committees.

But the most spectacular proposal thus far is the “Green New Deal.” It was introduced as a resolution by freshman Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (and Ed Markey in the Senate), but yet to go on the official calendar for any House committee or subcommittee. We may see it brought up soon, but judging from the initial reaction of the Speaker, it is not clear when. Since it has become such a high profile, sexy proposal, all announced Democratic presidential contenders are forced to take a position on it – one to the left of the Speaker or other “old guard” Democrats, like Sen. Diane Feinstein.

Michael Cohen also testified before Adam Schiff’s Intel Committee twice, in closed session. Criminal conduct of the president was plainly revealed during the open hearings. And, Richard Neal, chair of Ways and Means, is now prepared to subpoena the President’s tax returns, thanks mostly to an adroit question posed to Cohen by Ocasio-Cortez.

Other significant actions include the new Medicare For All Act of 2019, to replace last Congress’ H.R. 676, introduced by Rep. Pramila Jayapal on February 27. And, It may be interesting to see what happens when President Trump vetoes the resolution to invalidate his border “national emergency,” expected to pass both House and Senate as I write.

The bigger issues surrounding the 116^th Congress may be the large number of judicial confirmations sailing through the Senate, or the strange case of S.1, introduced by Marco Rubio on Jan. 3 (first day of new session) – it essentially endorses state laws barring support for anti-Israel “BDS” (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions). Legal scholars feel this is endorsing unconstitutional restrictions on the First Amendment. It passed the Senate easily – but has not yet been brought to House floor. While the House gets all the media attention, the Senate continues to quietly undermine democracy.

Since legislation (the “sausage making” of government) is such a slow process, it is perhaps understandable that mass media tends to focus more on colorful personalities in politics. The circus atmosphere around the process comes from certain personalities who are adept at demanding attention. These people often rise to the top in politics, just as they do in entertainment; people like our President, or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or Bernie Sanders, or Steve King. They are all stars. This is not necessarily a bad thing. They contribute to greater public awareness and sensitivity toward real issues. That, in turn, leads to pressure – both during election campaigns and while in office.

The greatest danger during a presidential primary campaign is that the sausage making in Congress is easily ignored. Once the election occurs, too much animosity has spilled over from top-of-the-ticket battles. Arguably, Congress has been less than fully functional over the last decade because of these battles -- from 2008, to the reaction of 2010, then 2016. The 2018 mid-terms showed some cleavages between certain freshmen (Ocasio-Cortez, and others) and House leadership. Senate Democrats have been largely saved from this by the disappearance of most of the “blue dogs” in the past few Congresses (Joe Manchin survives). A strong presidential candidate for 2020 can bring the Senate with them, and we should see a cooperative arrangement between executive and legislative branches commensurate to the mounting emergencies we face with climate, inequality, and democracy itself.

As it stands now, however, the “unity” mantra needs some pumping up in the Democratic Party. Let’s see some division among Republicans for a change! To answer the question in the title, yes – it is inspiring, within reason.