At that time cities were engulfed in clouds of auto-produced smog, and sharply rising fuel prices and fuel shortages resulted in a reshuffling of the auto industry. The Environmental Protection Agency ordered auto manufacturers to greatly reduce emissions from the engines they were producing, and the first series of federally-mandated fuel economy standards, called Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (CAFÉ), were implemented.

Up until then, American automobiles were large, and heavy vehicles, most with thirsty V8 engines and it was not uncommon to see such vehicles routinely pulling a trailers. I remember that my dad had a huge Lincoln Towncar that easily pulled a 28 foot Air Stream trailer.

But with the new EPA regulations and corporate fuel economy requirements, which applied primarily to automobiles, all the auto manufacturers eventually retooled and downsized cars and cut the power of their engines. Many going from V8’s to V6’s and four cylinder models.

To cut weight, the manufacturers went to unibody designs that eliminated the chassis on frame construction that is more suitable for attaching a trailer hitch and towing. The result was the elimination of cars as tow vehicles. They also became smaller, which didn’t really suit the American family and lifestyle.

UNEXPECTED CONSEQUENCE

Pickup trucks, and SUV’s of that day, were largely exempted from the tightening regulations. Congress determined that farmers and contractors, which were the primary customers of those types of vehicles, would be hurt, because they needed trucks and SUVs for business, which meant those vehicles could still be equipped with thirsty and powerful V8 engines.

But an unexpected consequence of the belt tightening on cars was that American consumers quickly found that pickup trucks and SUVs were needed for their big leisure-time toys, to pull their boats and travel trailers. Plus the bigger vehicles could also carry their families in greater comfort and safety than the smaller and, frankly, poorly designed cars they were offered during that day.

As a result, the popularity of light pickup trucks and SUVs exploded, and auto manufacturers, seeking sales, complied with an ever-growing number of bigger and more luxurious trucks and SUVs.

As of today, pickup trucks and SUVs are the most popular among vehicles sold. And largest of these vehicles, have powerful V8 engines that top the horsepower ratings of the most powerful muscle cars of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.

Obviously, the expected savings in fuel have tanked and actually the U.S. has had to import an ever growing amount of oil to help feed these big trucks.

But now, Congress and the president are looking for making some changes as the nation sees that a continuing upward spiral in fuel needs cannot be supported into the future. Indeed, worldwide demand for fuel is dramatically increasing as a result of the modernization of 3rd world countries, most notable that of China, which has become a 1st world economic power.

New standards that went into effect in April 2006 that are expected to boost fuel-economy standards for light trucks by an average of just less than 2 mpg over four years. The expected gas savings, an estimated 10.7 billion gallons of gas over the next two years.

But the really big vehicles, such as those weighing more than 8,500 pounds, aren’t covered by fuel-economy standards at all, although that is expected to end. During the '70s, lawmakers assumed anything that large would only have industrial users. They could not envision that an American family might actually cruise around in huge truck the size of a Ford Excursion or Hummer, which get very poor gas mileage. But these are not the only trucks that get lousy gas mileage.

Most V8 pickups I have tested, and that is almost all of them, routinely get gas mileage in the mid teens for unloaded driving, and down to 9 to 10 mpg when towing. Yes, diesels do better for fuel use, but there are problems there too.

NEW EPA MILEAGE TESTING

Starting with the 2008 vehicles, consumers are getting better EPA figures that represent the “real” world for fuel use. What you will see as a result on the window stickers of both cars and trucks, is a general reduction in gas mileage for the entire fleet of vehicles sold. That’s because the new testing method the EPA is using better follows real world use. The current testing methods, which have been used for years, miss the mark.

We had seen this with the figures the EPA reported for hybrid vehicles that indicated extremely high mileage for such vehicles. The Toyota Prius, for example, was EPA rated at 60 mpg for city use, but no real world testing could duplicate that figure. The Prius does get excellent mileage, but it is in the low to mid 40’s if driven normally.

As Congress turns up the pressure to get trucks and SUVs to get better mileage and reduce emissions, more in line with automobiles, vehicle manufacturers are going to be faced with technological hurdles that will be hard to achieve.

Pickup trucks and SUVs need to be heavily constructed to do the work they do. They need powerful engines with plenty of torque to pull loads. What has been happening is that the government has been giving credits to the manufacturers that help offset their more heavy and thirsty vehicles. But those programs are expected to end.

Among the credits the manufacturers are getting include the new flexible fuel vehicles you are seeing that can run on ethanol, or E-85 fuel, which is based on corn. The problem there is while E-85 is great for cutting oil imports, it is terrible on gas mileage. My testing on every vehicle that can run on E-85 is that it cuts mileage by 25 to 30 percent, when compared to normal gasoline.

This loss of mileage is NEVER mentioned by politicians and even the vehicle manufacturers. It is almost a ruse to convince the public that ethanol is a solution to imported oil and officials know this isn’t the case. (That is a whole other story)

There is also a plan to go to more diesel engines. The U.S. is currently in the process of switching to low sulfur diesel fuel, which allows diesel engine manufacturers to build much cleaner, though more expensive, engines. This new low sulfur fuel has been used in Europe for quite some time, but an infrastructure to make enough of it for widespread use in the U.S. is not in place. Refineries will have to redesigned, at great expense, to make more of it, especially if the U.S. automakers want to put diesel engines in more vehicles. And this note, there has not been a new refinery built in the U.S. in 30 years.

So, diesels, while a possible solution for better mileage for light trucks and SUVs, has a fuel availability problem that will take years to resolve.

CUV’s TO THE RESCUE

This leaves a dilemma for Congress and automakers regarding the future of trucks and SUVs. They will have to downsize them. And that is where towing ability begins to be affected.

We are already seeing this happening. The new Crossover Utility Vehicles that are becoming popular, are not trucks. Many look like SUVs, but they are more like cars and tow like them too, which means, most do not make good tow vehicles.

Most CUVs are rated to tow between 1,500 and 3,500 pounds. Only a few can tow up to 5,000 pounds, which is far below the 8,000 to 10,000 pounds towing ability of the biggest SUV’s and pickup trucks.

What could happen for the future big SUVs and pickups with big powerful engines, is that consumers will have to pay a form of a gas guzzler tax, similar to what is on some thirsty, expensive exotic cars.

But the trend today indicates that big power SUVs and pickup trucks will not be as available in the not too distant future, maybe as soon as within six to nine years.

Well, that’s one look into the future, and as I said at the top, it could be bit fuzzy. I probably will get a lot of letters and that is fine with me.

There is a lot riding on the future of tow vehicles. What is certain, it’s changing.

To read more GCN AutoMedia Vehicle Reviews visit the
GCN AUTOMEDIA VEHICLE ARCHIVE