Letters to the Editors
Send a letter to the editors

Subject: "Confessions of a Car Salesman"
From: Johnny
I remember reading this same article some time ago and just wanted to let you know that I enjoyed it just as much as the first time. It's great information to have for future reference.

My brother compulsively bought himself a new car a couple of years ago but unfortunately I was not aware of this, and wasn't able to share this article with him.

Thanks for putting it back up. I'll share it with others when I hear of anyone I know wanting to buy a new or used car.

Keep up the good work.


Subject: "Top 10 Exasperating Driver Types in Southern California"
From: Mike
I'm an avid reader of Edmunds, and I loved the top 10 piece on exasperating drivers.

I grew up in upstate NY, so living in California — even Northern California, in my case — has been a bizarre experience in many ways, not the least of which is the driving. The mere concept of traffic jams happening at "regularly scheduled times" every weekday is outlandish enough. And while I don't think the behavior I highlighted in my post is unique to California, it does seem to be more prevalent here.

Thanks for an entertaining piece, and more broadly, one of the best car resources on the Internet.


Subject: "Top 10 Exasperating Driver Types in Southern California"
From: Steven
You all failed to recognize the precipitating factor in #1. In other parts of the country, most notably the Midwest, it is understood that the left lane is to remain open. In fact, law dictates that slower traffic must keep right and drivers are taught that the left lane is for passing only. Thus, more often than not, someone tailgated in a left lane will almost immediately signal to move to the right. California drivers aren't taught this principle and therefore dawdle at 55 mph in the left lane. It's ridiculously unsafe, can cause bottlenecks in traffic, and leads to people tailgating. I'm not trying to excuse tailgating, but I think there's another concept that's getting ignored.


Subject: "Diesel, Gas or Hybrid?"
From: Brian
I just read this article and found it very informative. One thing I think that should be mentioned is that diesels last a lot longer than gasoline cars. And with that said, diesels easily pay for themselves many times over a gasoline car.

It is probably true that diesel engines last longer than gasoline engines. This may have been more of a factor in the past when the diesel engine was simpler. Also, today's gasoline engines are lasting longer with less maintenance so the gap between gas and diesel engines has closed somewhat. Really, the most significant cost difference is that diesels use about 30-percent less fuel than gasoline engines. This will yield a real savings for the diesel owner. — Ed.


Subject: Safe Towing Speed?
From: Mary
My husband and I tow a 5,000-pound travel trailer with a 2003 Yukon Denali. What speed do you recommend traveling at while towing the trailer? My husband seems to think that driving 65 to 80 mph is an acceptable speed to travel while the trailer is in tow.

Safe? Or legal? Some states have a towing speed limit that isn't posted. As to what speed is safe, it really depends on a variety of factors. First of all, it depends on the kind of trailer you are towing and whether it has trailer brakes. It also has a lot to do with the way the trailer is loaded (it is important to get the weight over the axles). And, of course, it has to do with the weather conditions, particularly the crosswinds. So, it would be irresponsible for us, without knowing the answers to these questions, to say what a safe speed is for towing. We suggest you look into this more deeply with an expert who is familiar with your vehicle and your trailer. — Ed.


Subject: "2007 Editors' Most Wanted"
From: Brad
I just finished browsing your "Editors' Most Wanted" picks for the 2007 model year. I have to say that I agree with almost every single one of them, but one really bothers me. How in the world did the dated Audi A8 beat out the 2007 Mercedes-Benz S-Class for best luxury sedan over $60,000? It is not nearly as quick, doesn't offer nearly the level of comfort or quality, and has none of the cachet that a vehicle of this price-point should.

I have read nothing but stellar reviews of the S550 on your own Web site; you even stated that it was the new benchmark. There is a reason that the S-Class outsells the A8 handily; it is an all-around better car. I realize performance is of major concern to you and that is noble, but when someone is spending over $60,000 on a luxury sedan they are looking for the utmost comfort (not to mention they are typically over 60) and the rough-riding, low-tech A8 does nothing to entice them. I will admit that I am biased as I currently own a 2004 Mercedes-Benz S500, but regardless of this when it comes time to replace it there is no question in my mind which car company I will be writing the check to.


Subject: Mileage Ratings
From: Jacob
I have a beef about this mileage rating issue that might give you food for thought.

We bought a used Mercedes 300E a couple of years or so ago. I don't know what the official rating is, but I talked to another guy who had one who says he got 14 mpg. I get closer to 20. A big reason for that is an analog gauge that shows me what kind of mileage I'm getting, below the speedometer. Since the POS only drinks premium, I was highly motivated to pay attention to this. It wasn't long before I was driving like a blue-haired old lady (most of the time).

Our 2004 Honda Civic Hybrid has a much jazzier display, of course. It has a real-time mileage indicator, like the Mercedes, but numbers are displayed with it, so that I have a really good idea that (for example) "OK, this is what 60 mpg feels like." I also have it set to show me the cumulative mpg for that particular tank of gas. This is my favorite video game. We're very competitive about it. I try to bring the mileage up a notch (0.3 or 0.4 mpg on the numerical readout) every time I take the car out, no matter how short the errand or how many miles have gone into that tank's average already. I usually succeed.

I guess the idea of the new ratings is that everyone says "I can't get that kind of mileage!" Our Honda is rated for 49 mpg in town, as I recall, and 48 on the highway. So what do we actually get? Not 35, or 38, or 40; we can often get 44 or 45 mpg on a tank. Recently we got 48.

My point is this: Our mileage is almost up to the EPA rating. True, this is not a fair comparison, because our driving is different. The reason our driving has evolved so much is the informative dashboard display, which gives us immediate feedback, and the raw material for competing with ourselves and others. "I can't get that kind of mileage" really means "I can't get that kind of mileage as while insisting on doing everything exactly the way I do now."

The EPA rating argument makes an "all else being equal" kind of assumption. From a logical point of view, that makes perfect sense. It's comparing apples to apples. I get that.

From a public policy point of view, and from an individual budget point of view, this is lame. Why should everything else be equal? Why should we just drop the issue of modifying driving behavior? I'll bet that just having a dashboard mileage display is about half as good as swapping out a station wagon for a Prius. I'll bet that if more informative mileage displays were actually mandated, you'd see a very substantial decrease in overall fuel consumption. I have to think most people just don't know what it costs them when they stomp on the gas in their heavy vehicles. They don't know how the gas consumption spikes when they do that. If they had to turn a crank to pump gas to the engine, they'd know, but they don't, and nobody sees it by the time it's all averaged out in filling the tank. It's a black box. I have some idea what difference it makes, because I've done a lot of bicycling, and I stand on the pedals and strain to accelerate from a dead stop. Also, I was good at physics. But most people don't have this background, and even I was shocked by the response of the instantaneous mileage gauge to my behavior.

If I'm ready to make car-buying decisions on the basis of saving energy, I'm probably willing to change other behavior, too. Having the mileage display gives me what I need, in real time, to re-educate myself. I could imagine that there are people — a lot of them — who can't afford a new hybrid to haul four or five people, but need to save money on gas — even more than I do. I could imagine that some people really, really need to have an SUV for some reason. That doesn't mean they want to burn gas gratuitously. Give them a little feedback, and they might change their behavior just a bit.

A more Zen or martial arts approach to reducing fuel consumption would not use direct intervention like stickers to let people drive expensive hybrids in carpool lanes, or CAFE standards (not that those aren't attractive ideas). It would simply mandate or encourage instantaneous and cumulative mileage displays in dashboard instrument panels, e.g. new vehicles must have them, tax benefits or some kind of kickback for retrofitting them (if that's possible).

Another thing that would make a difference is if people had to know algebra to get a driver license, but that's another topic.