Comments on: Can Cash for Clunkers Fuel Economy Data Be Trusted?

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 18:21:01 +0000

I bookmarked this guestbook. Thank you for good job!
, , , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:49:55 +0000

Perfect site, i like it!
, , , cheap , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:35:23 +0000

Beautiful site!
, , , buy , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:20:41 +0000

Perfect work!
, , , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:05:27 +0000

Great site. Good info
buy , online, , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:50:32 +0000

Beautiful site!
online, online, , buy , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:35:39 +0000

Great work,webmaster,nice design!
online, cheap , , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:21:20 +0000

Great work,webmaster,nice design!
, , buy , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:06:01 +0000

Incredible site!
, buy , , buy , cheap ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:50:30 +0000

Great .Now i can say thank you!
, , , online, ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:35:20 +0000

Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
, , , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:20:02 +0000

Perfect work!
buy , , , buy , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:04:39 +0000

Nice site! Thank you!
, , buy , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:49:36 +0000

Great site. Good info
, buy , , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:34:41 +0000

Perfect site, i like it!
, , , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:19:16 +0000

Beautiful site!
, , , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:03:16 +0000

It is the coolest site,keep so!
, , , , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:47:29 +0000

Nice site! Thank you!
, , , buy , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:32:34 +0000

If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
online, , buy , buy , ,

By: John1269

John1269 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:17:12 +0000

Beautiful site!
, , , , cheap ,

By: John1178

John1178 — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 06:09:06 +0000

Very nice site!

By: John1178

John1178 — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 06:09:03 +0000

Very nice site! [url=http://oieapxy.com/tyrrat/2.html]cheap cialis[/url]

By: John1178

John1178 — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 06:09:01 +0000

Very nice site! cheap viagra

By: J.Wilson

J.Wilson — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 12:13:47 +0000

My car gets about 17 MPG combined (I checked it dozens of times). It’s no longer a new car, hence a clunker. The gas mileage (of course) was better (22) when it was new in 1988.
If the point is to get these gas inefficient vehicles off the road why are we using gas mileage statistics that no longer apply?
The only vehicles that had MPGs that poor were big SUVs, trucks and vans.
Also the reason I’m still driving this old thing is because I don’t have a lot of money for a new car, even with the rebate. Why not extend it to include used cars that have a decent MPG score?
As it is, it’s a crappy program for the (probably thousands of) clunker drivers like myself but good for big business, right?
It might be said that the program itself is a clunker.

By: wally

wally — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 00:47:15 +0000

My 1996 Bonneville regular engine no supercharger qualified for 18 MPG and $4500 and now it shows 21 MPG and I just lost trading it in $4500 after all weekend shopping for a new car. Is this Government Corruption? WHY?

By: C. Steinberg

C. Steinberg — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:31:32 +0000

I turned in my 1997 Ford F150 for a Nissan Versa Hatchback on Tuesday. Everything went very smooth and the truck was crushed on Wednesday. I couldn’t be more happy that I got in on time. It helps if you follow the rules and you are working with a honest dealer who knows what he is doing.

By: valmoro

valmoro — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:44:28 +0000

i have a 1987 ford country squire station wagon until yesterday it was rated at 18 mpg which would have qualified for the clunker program yesterday it was rated at 19 mpg which DISqualified it for the program i see the older it gets the better milage it gets so in 2018 it will be rated at 28 mpg orwell lives

By: Stephen Hendrix

Stephen Hendrix — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:44:15 +0000

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32228179/ns/business-autos/
2 BILLION MORE FOR CASH FOR CLUNKERS

By: luis

luis — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:05:33 +0000

after the 1st Honda dealer told me that they could not wait for their money, Honda dealer #2 gave me the government rebate. the hardest part was trying to get the insurance company allstate to send the letter of continuous insurance coverage. allstate was giving all their costumers a hell of a time with these letter. I feel that even with the combine mpg they should have taken any 8 cly car that was of a certain year. this program was made to get cars of the road that are pigs on gas, remember those ratings where for these cars when they where new. any old 8 cly car does not get those ratings.

By: Joseph deAlmeida

Joseph deAlmeida — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:46:11 +0000

1992 Dodge Caravan 3.3 L engine was listed at a combined 17MPG last week. Yesterday I learned that it had been changed to 18! Very shifty and shady action by our government.

By: Janet Kominek

Janet Kominek — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:40:42 +0000

I had a ’96 Mercury Villager. My mileage was listed at 17 one week. By the time I traded it in mine had went to 18. That changed my rebate from $4,500 to $3,500.

By: Shawn

Shawn — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:41:32 +0000

I attempted to purchase a 2010 Prius for my 1997 Ford f-150. The dealer had no clue how Clunker program worked but I qualified for $4,500 and had me back every day for more Government requirements. Got a call today to pick up new car–only to have dealer say program is stopped and no more clunkers can be entered. After I drove the 45 minutes to get there and waited at the dealership over an hour waiting to sign final docs? Government gave dealers great opportunity to say what they want and blame government if better deals come along. BAD FOR BUSINESS!!!!! BAD PROGRAM!!!! As I spent more than 12 hours in the dealership this week finalizing what should have been a simple process–I realized this is an absolute artificial demand—This contradicts the law of supply & demand–artificial demand is going to sky rocket new car prices—– Leave it to the Germans for a lesson on Inflation!

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:59:28 +0000

I already had a down payment on a new Suzuki, but my car now comes up as unknown. These dealers and consumers are getting screwed.

By: Frank

Frank — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:39:01 +0000

And we think they will run healthcare better?

I’ll keep my 1997 Explorer thank you very much. After reading these horror stories, I have enough going on in my life and will not be taking advantage of this wonderful government program. Then again, I guess I have to pay for it anyway because I’m one of those people who pay taxes. This government is a runaway train and gaining speed.

By: Francine

Francine — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 01:58:38 +0000

I have a 1997 Chrysler Concorde that qualified for the Cash for Clunkers so went and purchased a new Hyundai last week. Made my deal,used the $4500 as a down payment, paid the difference in cash, left with the new car. Today, a week later, the dealer calls and tells me I have to return the new car! I had printed the report from fueleconomy.gov and gave it to the dealer. I checked the sight today and, guess what, the fuel economy rating was changed from 18 mpg to 19 mpg. Don’t you think the feds should grandfather in those of us who made our deals in good faith? Can you believe a car dealer is asking for their car back…?? Of course they want to make me a new “deal”, I think I’ll pass.

By: Kurt Komarnitsky

Kurt Komarnitsky — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:51:24 +0000

Monday I qualified with my 1986 oldsmobile Delta Royale for the cash for clunkers. Negotiated a deal to buy a high mileage VW diesel and I go to sign my paperwork today and the government goes and changes the mileage on my car from 18 to 20 yesterday which takes me out of the program.

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:31:49 +0000

I had the exact same issue with my 1991 Lexus ES250. Two days ago it said it was a combined 18mpg. I went to the dealer yesterday, spent almost two hours there, only to find out that my clunker no longer qualifies. Crazy.

By: Brett

Brett — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 05:36:44 +0000

I purchased a 2010 Prius Sunday, only to find my 1991 Lexus ES250 V6 automatic no longer qualified (was 18, now 19 MPG).
http://www.fueleconomy.gov cost me $4,500 because my Lexus no longer qualified, and it cost me the chance to sell the car because I held onto it expecting to get the $4,500, when I could have sold the Lexus for $1,500.
Very disappointing in how this program was handled. Government bureaucracy at work… like usual.

By: Bob

Bob — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 02:36:53 +0000

They changed 1995 Caddy Elderado from 17 to 18 miles combined….

I read that our government was starting this program to help our auto industry because it was done in Germany and really stimulated auto sales there….Our Gov is upsetting more customers than even the worst used car salesperson could.

By: mike

mike — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 23:44:26 +0000

Even some of the new truck data at fueleconomy.gov website is wrong. A 2009 Toyota Tacoma 4X2 truck with an access cab, 2.7 litre 4 cylinder engine, with a 5 speed manual transmission has a fuel economy rating of 20 mpg city and 26 mpg highway (combined 23 mpg). This is not only stated on the Monroney price sticker, but also at Toyota’s own website, and it’s found listed in the official EPA fuel economy guide drafted by the EPA and Department of Energy). But the fueleconomy.gov website trade-in calculator only rates this new truck at a combined 22mpg. Based on trading in an 18 mpg category 1 truck, you’re sitting at a 4 mpg difference (should be 5 mpg difference), which only gets you the $3,500 rebate. I’ve called the EPA, CARS.gov hotline, and emailed the fueleconomy.gov website for the last 3 days with no responses yet. The Toyota dealers that I have spoken with won’t work the trade-in for $4500 (this Tacoma category 1 truck actually gets 5 mpg over my trade in 1990 truck, which should qualify for $4500 rebate) because they base all rebates on the fueleconomy.gov website data. I could make the deal for the $3500 rebate, but shouldn’t I be entitled to the $4500 rebate based on the actual mpg rating?

By: Gloria Garner

Gloria Garner — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 22:50:30 +0000

I really think this program is shameful, There is really a lot of hanky panky going on with this, either by the Government or the Dealers. I spent all day monday going from car dealer waiting in line for a answer as to if my car qualifies. The first dealer I stopped by (Chrysler) because that is really what I wanted told me that my car did not qualify, when he ran it through the computer, it stated that it gets 20 mpg. well I was quiet angry due to the fact I buy the gas and I know for a fact it doe not get near that. It is a 1997 Ford Taraus with 3.0 6 cyl. Then I go to the Nissian dealer 3 miles from the chrysler dealer and their computer came up with 21 mpg for the same car. Now I go to the Toyota dealer which is about 61/2 miles from the Nissan dealer and their computer comes up with 22-23 mpg. same car.So You know what? This is a bunch of bull.Now whos stealing the money? It should be looked into it is not a fair program.

By: Don

Don — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 22:24:31 +0000

“Sergio Guasch says:
July 28, 2009 at 6:00 pm
I have a 1997 Ford Explorer Sport 2WD can you tell me what cash for clunkers has my MPG rated at. Thank you!”

Sergio: You’ll find your answer here:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/Feg/findacar.htm

By: Sergio Guasch

Sergio Guasch — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 22:00:56 +0000

I have a 1997 Ford Explorer Sport 2WD can you tell me what cash for clunkers has my MPG rated at. Thank you!

By: Elizabeth Douglas

Elizabeth Douglas — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:59:56 +0000

My 2001 Mercury Sable Wagon was rated at 17 mpg last week, is 19 mpg this week – a deal breaker for me. I’m embarassed that I wasted my time and my dealer’s time in ordering a new Toyota Prius – an improvemenet of 30 mpg.
Is there any recourse. Why did the numbers change?

By: Adam

Adam — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:26:01 +0000

I also planned to turn in my 1991 Lexus ES250 V6 automatic. I spent all the time picking a dealer and putting a deposit on the vehicle I wanted which was in-transit to the dealer. Went to fill out paperwork Monday, July 27th, and was shocked to see I no longer qualified (was 18 combined last week, 19 mpg combined now). Wish I had printed out the version from last week. What should I expect, I guess!?

By: Karl

Karl — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 19:20:48 +0000

Last week combined fuel for all 1993 Isuzu Troopers was 15. This week they are all 15 mpg except for the SOHC, which is now listed as 16 mpg. Now I’ll only qualify for $3,500 because the car I’m buying is only 9 mpg better. On top of that, the dealer we were buying from decided not to participate because of the paperwork.

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:20:54 +0000

Picked up my car Friday but signed a paper that said I would return it if denied for any reason. I found out today online that the 97 3.5 liter Intrepid may not qualify depending on which tramsmission it has. The dealer has my car and I am not sure which automatic transmission my clunker has. I am waiting to hear back from the dealer. They must be having problems getting the papework in because I called 3 hours ago. I can’t believe they would change the MPG ratings this late in the game!!!

By: shiles

shiles — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:35:51 +0000

I am one of the people that got locked out of the CARS program at the last minute due to a change in my vehicle combined MPG. I did all of my homework and had all of the paperwork needed. I picked out the car I wanted and put down a deposit. During this time I presented the dealer with a printout of the 18 MPG combined. They also verified the MPG. Then on Monday July 27th they called me to say I no longer qualified as the combined MPG had changed.

The NHTSA had changed the MPG on Monday July 27th 2009. It even states that on the fueleconomy.gov website it was updated on July 27th, 2009. Talk about another cheap shot by our wonderful government. And don’t let the NHTSA fool you in to believing they are only carrying out their requirements under the bill as they are the agency responsible for changing the MPG ratings.

I believe this is just another way to cheat the American people out of government incentives. Just wait and see if all of the money goes to the CARS program or to their pockets for “operating costs associated with administering the program”.

By: mariannahl

mariannahl — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:12:53 +0000

My 1993 volvo wagon has a manufacture date of 1992 which would qualify, but the model year will not, although it is exactly the same car. Trying to call the NTHSA customer service number only gets you disconnected. Has anybody had this experience yet and when in doubt (about eligibility), which number will ultimately hold for qualification review? The door sticker or the title?

By: Chi

Chi — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:52:15 +0000

What the EPA have done with the mileage ratings is just wrong. The ratings should be based on what they were when the program “officially” started, July 1st. It’s like telling someone they can ride the roller coaster, but last minute change their minds and say you’re too short.