- Thread starter Coo
- Start date
Porschemaniac
Member
- Messages
- 305
That really is very sad.
Not up on Beetle prices, but surely the owner could have sold it for more than (or nigh on) the 2 grand that they got trading it in for a bland Malaysian made roller skate!
Not up on Beetle prices, but surely the owner could have sold it for more than (or nigh on) the 2 grand that they got trading it in for a bland Malaysian made roller skate!
There was a T25 on ebay a while ago it said that it had been put in this scrappage scheme, but it was being sold without a V5/log book they hadn't broken it up, that would suggest to me that only the registration thats scrubbed off and the vehicle doesn't have to be cut up or pressed into a cube of scrap !!
steve202
ǝlʇıʇ ɹǝsn ɯoʇsnɔ
- Messages
- 422
There is an old Wolseley, mint condition that some money grabbing **** has decided to hock in for a cuboid commuting piece of cr@p up the road from me. The car has survived this long and i think a classic car like that deserves to be saved. Ok they weren't the best when they were plentyful but i think scrapping something of that age is vandalism to our motoring heritage.
Practical Classics recently told the story of a Riley RM which was saved from the scrappage scheme. I was horrified as I used to own one. Lovely old beast!
http://www.rileyrmclub.org.uk/ has the story. Seems a lot of our motoring heritage is going into the crusher.
http://www.rileyrmclub.org.uk/ has the story. Seems a lot of our motoring heritage is going into the crusher.
paulmowers
Member
- Messages
- 192
- Location
- Norfolk, uk
No No No,, I don't like this scrappage scheme at all, its just another way for our so called GREEN government to encourage yet more people to throw away perfectly useable items to buy (as has been said before) malaysian crap.
After all most motors under 10 year old are still in pretty good order, I know my truck is 1998 and worth more than they would give me for it, not that I'm even tempted by their wasteful pointless scheme.
Why wasteful, more scrap (not exceptional demand for it) so it will kill the price for everyone else. More pollution, they have to be moved, toxins removed, foam etc disposed of, etc, etc.
Pointless in that if they are that concerned with propping up the car industry which has been over producing for years then just chuck the money directly at them.
But they had better remember to throw some in everyone elses direction while they are at it.
Of course they can't do that because they are actually in debt!! so in fact don't have any money to do anything with. So why just the car industry because its the only big industry still going in this country and thats only because the foreign firms who bought them were bribed to stay here with incentives, otherwise we would have no car industry, problem solved.
And all those lovelly old classics would be safe from pointless scrapping.
AAAh thats better.
paul.
After all most motors under 10 year old are still in pretty good order, I know my truck is 1998 and worth more than they would give me for it, not that I'm even tempted by their wasteful pointless scheme.
Why wasteful, more scrap (not exceptional demand for it) so it will kill the price for everyone else. More pollution, they have to be moved, toxins removed, foam etc disposed of, etc, etc.
Pointless in that if they are that concerned with propping up the car industry which has been over producing for years then just chuck the money directly at them.
But they had better remember to throw some in everyone elses direction while they are at it.
Of course they can't do that because they are actually in debt!! so in fact don't have any money to do anything with. So why just the car industry because its the only big industry still going in this country and thats only because the foreign firms who bought them were bribed to stay here with incentives, otherwise we would have no car industry, problem solved.
And all those lovelly old classics would be safe from pointless scrapping.
AAAh thats better.
paul.
bill_gj
Tired and irritable
- Messages
- 1,423
- Location
- Essex, UK
Quite right - the 'Green' argument re so-called 'bangers' producing more emissions is at least 50% bo!!ox.
Sure, a 10 year old car emits more than the latest super-doopermobile, but if it's been anywhere near looked after, the energy originally used to make it is still providing value to the user.
My R-reg Fiesta diesel is still doing 52mpg, uses virtually no oil and gets me to work every day. OK, so it's not a Classic, but in usability terms, they're all in the same basket.
Classic old motors really ought to be protected from straight forward short term greed.
And another thing, with the exception of the JLR group, virtually no original design of mass-produced cars is now done in the UK - we assemble stuff that some other country did the design on. So, in 'stimulating' the car market in the UK by using the scrappage incentive, the government is encouraging us to bolster the profits of Toyota, Honda, Peugeot, Citroen and the rest.
It may be helping out in the short term with assembly worker jobs, but the Car Industry - forget it.
Sure, a 10 year old car emits more than the latest super-doopermobile, but if it's been anywhere near looked after, the energy originally used to make it is still providing value to the user.
My R-reg Fiesta diesel is still doing 52mpg, uses virtually no oil and gets me to work every day. OK, so it's not a Classic, but in usability terms, they're all in the same basket.
Classic old motors really ought to be protected from straight forward short term greed.
And another thing, with the exception of the JLR group, virtually no original design of mass-produced cars is now done in the UK - we assemble stuff that some other country did the design on. So, in 'stimulating' the car market in the UK by using the scrappage incentive, the government is encouraging us to bolster the profits of Toyota, Honda, Peugeot, Citroen and the rest.
It may be helping out in the short term with assembly worker jobs, but the Car Industry - forget it.
The "green" side to it is sadly a load of b***s too, there was a now very difficult to find study by heidleburg uni, which followed a german car (think one of them was a golf from memory) from design to final production, through its working life then to the scrapyard for recycling.
There was more waste and toxins produced making it than it would ever emit.
So, great idea, scrap it cause all the polution from having to EOL it, and having to make a replacement.
So, raise a glass to the clueless "greens", who've helped to get a scheme implemented which causes more pollution than it eliminates.
There was more waste and toxins produced making it than it would ever emit.
So, great idea, scrap it cause all the polution from having to EOL it, and having to make a replacement.
So, raise a glass to the clueless "greens", who've helped to get a scheme implemented which causes more pollution than it eliminates.
Angusdog
Well-meaning amateur
- Messages
- 724
- Location
- Wellington, NZ
I've seen this video and it's a crying shame. The Volvo S80 they're disabling (killing in a inhuman manner...) was a luxury car and unless there's something seriously wrong with its engine or transmission (a weak spot on these cars), then it's an outright crime.
The US scheme seems to be based around propping up an ailing and misguided industry that need government intervention to get it back on course. They also need to repurpose a lot of their production facilities (perhaps manufacture solar panels?) so they're not making so many cars - cars last a long time and don't need to be replaced every five years. This attitude is becoming so prevalent that ruining a perfectly good car seems reasonable to a lot of people, yet they recycle plastic bottles - senseless.
The US scheme seems to be based around propping up an ailing and misguided industry that need government intervention to get it back on course. They also need to repurpose a lot of their production facilities (perhaps manufacture solar panels?) so they're not making so many cars - cars last a long time and don't need to be replaced every five years. This attitude is becoming so prevalent that ruining a perfectly good car seems reasonable to a lot of people, yet they recycle plastic bottles - senseless.
Angusdog
Well-meaning amateur
- Messages
- 724
- Location
- Wellington, NZ
Well, I'm not convinced it was about donations. It's more about jobs I imagine. Do you keep these guys building **** cars no-one wants or lay them off? I would have subsidised the building of hyper-efficient diesels by a surcharge of less fuel efficient vehicles - force automakers to build and sell more efficient vehicles. The problem facing Obama and others is changing the course of a juggernaut. It has to be done; it's just a case of doing it by angering as few people as possible. What he's done is a start, but it's principally misguided and half-hearted, but it's probably as far as he could push it.
There's some debate in terms of how much carbon is emitted in the construction of a vehicle versus how much it produces over its lifetime. I believe very strongly though that getting more life from existing vehicles is better than reinforcing the view of cars as disposable limited-lifetime consumer items. When my dad was young, it was difficult to buy a car, even if you had the full whack in your pocket - you had to know someone who would sell you a car. How times have changed.
It appears though that the house of cards is crumbling. This Time article indicates bleak times ahead for California which, if it were a country in its own right, would be in the G20 and is the eighth biggest economy in the world.
There's some debate in terms of how much carbon is emitted in the construction of a vehicle versus how much it produces over its lifetime. I believe very strongly though that getting more life from existing vehicles is better than reinforcing the view of cars as disposable limited-lifetime consumer items. When my dad was young, it was difficult to buy a car, even if you had the full whack in your pocket - you had to know someone who would sell you a car. How times have changed.
It appears though that the house of cards is crumbling. This Time article indicates bleak times ahead for California which, if it were a country in its own right, would be in the G20 and is the eighth biggest economy in the world.
Porschemaniac
Member
- Messages
- 305
Absolutely agree. There have been a couple of studies on this and they all draw the same conclusion; it's actually greener to keep a car running for as long as possible, rather than simply scrap it.
In environmental terms, scrappage is looking no further than the end of your nose.
And it seems ironic that, in the UK at least, one of the upshots of the scheme is to pump money into far eastern car manufacturers at the expense of a home-grown aftermarket parts market.
Angusdog
Well-meaning amateur
- Messages
- 724
- Location
- Wellington, NZ
Well, when you think of that statement, people imagine old minis vs. new SUVs. It could easily be a V12 jag vs. a diesel Mini and the formula works the other way. The issue is that society now relies incredibly on private ownership of transport, especially in the US. That can't be changed in a hurry, if at all.
I'm lucky in that our kids can walk to school and we don't have to go far afield for supplies. In the US, minor chores require a 10km round trip. If oil ran out tomorrow, it would be incredibly inconvenient but I would survive. Los Angeles would become a Mad Max type war zone. And that's why you invade Iraq...
If your having trouble getting to sleep, some bedtime reading 
These figures are based on a medium-sized car, three-way catalytic converter, driven 130,000 km over 10 years, averaging 10 litres/100 km of unleaded fuel.
The figures are :-
Extracting raw materials:
26.5 tonnes of waste
922 million cubic metres of polluted air.
Transporting raw materials:
12 litres of crude oil in ocean
425 million cubic metres of polluted air.
Producing the car:
1.5 tonnes of waste
74 million cubic metres of polluted air.
Driving the car:
18.4 kilos of abrasive waste
1,016 million cubic metres of polluted air
Disposing of the Car:
102 million cubic metres of polluted air.
Total for manufacture and disposal ? + use = lifetime
Source - Cradle to the Grave study, Umwelt-und Prognose-Institut Heidelberg (Handschuhscheimer Landstr. 118a, 69121 Heidelberg, Germany; tel./fax: +(49) 6221-47-35-00).
SO, even if it was a v12 jag and did a horrendous mpg and you replaced it with a diesel mini, it would have to be driven another 2,000 million cubic metres of air before anything like parity would be achieved on scrapping it, and offset that against the (less but not zero) pollution caused by the mini over the same period. As you have to dispose of it AND make a replacement. Im betting that v12 jag wouldnt be a daily driver, so thats probably a lot of years worth of weekend posing. And all the manufacturing and waste handling etc is judged to have taken place under German environmental standards which is one of the stiffest regimes on the planet. Not in malaysia or the car shipped to eastern europe where it can be recycled by a bloke burning off all the plastic bits he doesnt want...
Scrappage scheme green credentials? it doesnt have any green credentials...
On another note, hyper efficient diesels aren't actually legal in the states sadly which is why whenever a international debate about diesels kicks off, the americans never seem to have drove one except years ago and compare them to a ancient diesel golf (rabbit in the states).
The EPA has some particulate tests that have kept them out traditionally, some say in a protectionist move for its manufacturers who have no real experience in that market.
These figures are based on a medium-sized car, three-way catalytic converter, driven 130,000 km over 10 years, averaging 10 litres/100 km of unleaded fuel.
The figures are :-
Extracting raw materials:
26.5 tonnes of waste
922 million cubic metres of polluted air.
Transporting raw materials:
12 litres of crude oil in ocean
425 million cubic metres of polluted air.
Producing the car:
1.5 tonnes of waste
74 million cubic metres of polluted air.
Driving the car:
18.4 kilos of abrasive waste
1,016 million cubic metres of polluted air
Disposing of the Car:
102 million cubic metres of polluted air.
Total for manufacture and disposal ? + use = lifetime
Source - Cradle to the Grave study, Umwelt-und Prognose-Institut Heidelberg (Handschuhscheimer Landstr. 118a, 69121 Heidelberg, Germany; tel./fax: +(49) 6221-47-35-00).
SO, even if it was a v12 jag and did a horrendous mpg and you replaced it with a diesel mini, it would have to be driven another 2,000 million cubic metres of air before anything like parity would be achieved on scrapping it, and offset that against the (less but not zero) pollution caused by the mini over the same period. As you have to dispose of it AND make a replacement. Im betting that v12 jag wouldnt be a daily driver, so thats probably a lot of years worth of weekend posing. And all the manufacturing and waste handling etc is judged to have taken place under German environmental standards which is one of the stiffest regimes on the planet. Not in malaysia or the car shipped to eastern europe where it can be recycled by a bloke burning off all the plastic bits he doesnt want...
Scrappage scheme green credentials? it doesnt have any green credentials...
On another note, hyper efficient diesels aren't actually legal in the states sadly which is why whenever a international debate about diesels kicks off, the americans never seem to have drove one except years ago and compare them to a ancient diesel golf (rabbit in the states).
The EPA has some particulate tests that have kept them out traditionally, some say in a protectionist move for its manufacturers who have no real experience in that market.
droopsnoot
Member
- Messages
- 1,319
- Location
- South Cheshire, UK
There's a couple of pictures in one of the mags this month, forget which, I was reading it in WHS. What I don't get, and they didn't explain, is if these cars have come in on the scrappage scheme (so they have to be scrapped), why does it say £375 in the window? The article showed a couple of cars with similar price tags, could even have been the same yard.
But don't get me started on the scheme as a whole, it's just silly. The first thing they missed out was that the trade-in price should only be offered against a car manufactured in the UK, not imported from anywhere else.
But don't get me started on the scheme as a whole, it's just silly. The first thing they missed out was that the trade-in price should only be offered against a car manufactured in the UK, not imported from anywhere else.
droopsnoot
Member
- Messages
- 1,319
- Location
- South Cheshire, UK
So you can't just get a load of old bits, strap them together and get £2000 for them. The idea is that it has to be an actual car you drive but would like to replace, not some old shed that hasn't been on the road for decades.
