The car I’ve been driving to work in every day this past week is a 1925 Ford
Model T. It just got me thinking about how much we like our hybrids these
days. But isn’t it more environmentally friendly to take an old car,
something like a Model T or a Fiat Topolino or a Mini, clean it up a bit and
drive it around? Is that not a smaller carbon footprint than building a
Prius in Japan, putting it on a freighter and shipping it all the way across
the ocean? It seems that this is the ultimate in recycling.
They built 16m Model Ts and there are still 1m of them out there. I’ve been
commuting with one every day and it’s hilarious. First of all, the roads in
LA are terrible but I just skip over potholes the way they did in 1925. I
don’t go on the motorway with it but I take side streets and my top speed is
about 45mph. People wave and are very friendly. They look at you as if you
are doing something to help the environment. “Oh, he’s not buying some big
shiny new car that weighs three tons.”
I think driving an old car for your entire life, or a long part of your life,
is probably more environmentally friendly than getting a new hybrid every
three or four years. Obviously this is not practical for everybody, but I
have to say, driving a Model T around Los Angeles, with the exception of
getting broadsided by a three-ton SUV, is actually quite enjoyable. The
weather is pleasant, it gets at least 25 miles to the gallon, it’s literally
bulletproof and you can go over any type of road surface.
When commuting in the morning, especially in Los Angeles, the traffic is
bumper to bumper anyway. Nobody is going much over 30 or 40mph. I’m in my
83-year-old car that was built once. The paint that’s on it has been on it
for almost 55 years, it looks presentable, it gets good mileage and I’m not
constantly depleting the earth’s resources. It was built once and has a
shelf life of . . . for ever.
I think you can offset any higher carbon emission from an old car. For
example, my commute is about 15 miles each way, and those big container
ships pulling into the port of Los Angeles put out about 360,000
automobiles’ worth of pollution hour for hour. So think of all these cars
that are made in Korea and Japan and shipped across the ocean. Yes, the
emissions are higher, but the Model T has a pretty small engine and it’s not
belching out pollutants. Don’t forget, there’s no lead in the gas any more.
So it’s not as bad as all that. I mean, this is not a ’59 Cadillac with a
huge engine. It’s a little 177 cubic inch (3 litre) motor. This one’s got an
exhaust pipe about half an inch wide and it just sort of putts down the
road, if you keep it reasonably well tuned.
Obviously I know there are tremendous flaws in this argument, but I’m just
saying it’s something to think about. How many cars do we dispose of merely
because they are no longer fashionable and we don’t like them any more?
Sometimes we people in the car hobby get beat up over these things because we
are probably the worst for the manufacturers because we’re not buying new
cars. We’re constantly looking for old cars that we can recycle and use
again.
Imagine if every time you moved they crushed the house you lived in and had to
build a new one. People have no problem living in a house that someone else
lived in. They just fix it up. We’ve certainly built enough cars. Why not
just fix up the ones we have and continue to use them?
Let me know what you think.
You can write to Jay Leno at ingear@sunday-times.co.uk
. See Jay’s garage online at www.jaylenosgarage.com
I would just like to add that one of the larger insurance CO. here in Canada that insures collecter cars did a survey in Canada and the average mileage per year is 600 miles. Not much emissions here. Jack Stanley, Kingston Ontario, Canada.
Jack Stanley, Kingston, Canada
I've been saying that for years, obviously my GTO doesn't get as good a mileage and pollutes a little more but I read somwhere that you can drive a car you're entire life and not do as much damage to the enviroment as building a new car, especially if it is an Asian model as they have factories belching pollutants into the air that were banned from US factories in the seventies, and then to ship them too. A fun way to look at things from a little different perspective.
I have several older cars I've "recycled" and my newest model is a 1998 Chevy pick up. I refuse to apologize for driving them, I have converted the GTO and 78 TA to e85 in the past and may again this summer, my wife has a 63 renault caravelle that gets great mileage when driven.
But really the automotive market has been a leader in recycling ever since the 3rd car was crashed
Tombo, Nevada,
Just wondering why some people think that a Catalyst would help with C02 emissions? It helps bring down other emissions that are in small quantiy's such as Nox but actually creates more Co2 as it restricts engine performance. A lot of cars get 2-3mpg more de catted and yes they might produce more emissions that are harmful to us but the overall C02 emissions is reduced. So less people and less global warming....
Even better why not fit a modern engine into an old car? Faster and cleaner!
Phil Griffiths, Cumbria, UK
So Jay thinks that he is not producing much pollution with his Model T? Engine technology has come a long long way in hte last 82 years. I have difficulty believing that if it were possible to meet the current emissions with 1925 technology, that all of the car makers would do that instead of the catalytic converters, electronic engine controls, platinum spark plugs, distributor-less ignitions, etc.
It would only cost him about $50 to find out. They have yearly testing for emissions in California (although a car as old as his Model T is exempt).
Jim, damascus, Maryland, USA
I agree totally, I have a 10 year old toyota with 98,000 miles, I expect to see 200,000 miles plus on this engine. I have is serviced and maintained by my local dealer. I love this car, only my wife and myself have driven it, its had a couple of accidents etc. I just know that although it may not be quite a fuel efficient as a 2008 model that the cost of building a replacement must be infinitely more than the incremental costs of running an older vehicle. one more thing is that the depreciation curve has bottomed our. for those who wish to drown the planet etc. keep on buying a new car. I guess the same argument can be used for the old Dakota aeroplanes that had a 40 year service life.
derek t, peterborough, cambs
Don't forget, Jay, that there' s no catalytic converter on a T, and with the manual timing, you're probably not getting as complete a burn as you would with a modern car.
But anyway, I drive an '11. I just wish I had more California weather to do it in.
Bob, Chicago, IL, USA
This is awesome - not quite in the same league - but i drive a 17yr old 1.1 fiesta - runs absolutely fine, and in london, there's no point rushing!!
Leon, London, UK
I totally agree with Jay. I'm driving a 1925 Ford Touring that I have just about finished restoring (with original and used parts) and am having a blast. It would be nice to see a picture of Jay's Ford.
Don Gay, Virginia Beach, USA / Virginia
perhaps a balance would of environmentalism and capitalism would be to enforce laws say making car manufacturer's recycle 99% of their old cars. It would force them to make cars with parts that can be reused, which would in turn promote efficiency in the long run lower their costs.
Not only this but it has the potential to create jobs in car dismateling.
Chris, Leeds, U.K
i agree. i "recycled" a 1995 Jaguar XJSport 2 1/2 years ago. Full leather, all the toys, a 4 Litre engine wityh 250 BHP.
fuel consumption in UK gallons is 25 Urban and 32 per gallon on motorway/freeway.
runs on ordinary unleaded with twin cats fitted. original price £39,000 Ten year old price £2000.
do the maths! ps does @ 135 mph alledgedly and gets to 60 in @ 7 seconds.
david phillips, northampton, UK
To Richards point you have to balanace the jobs lost from perhaps say manufacturing new kit against jobs created for people who maintain\repair old kit.
I agree with Jay, if you imagine the amount of energy taken to extract the raw mateirals and then build\ship a new car keeping an old but properly maintained one on the road (despite it being less efficient) may make more sense....I'm saying may as I don't know if anyone has calculated how much energy it takes to make a new car against running it over 5, 10 & years
andy, Limerick, Ireland
Extend the concept through our entire throw-away society & you have a an envirinmentally freindly world - where unemployment reigns........
Richard, Bucharest,
I have two Model T Fords and I could not agree more with what Jay has to say. While they may not be flashy, they are indeed very reliable and built to last. Long live the Model T.
Mark Chaffin, Canyon Lake, United States / California
Jay's right. Overall impact on the environment needs to include the longevity of the vehicle as well as the ability to recycle its components. There was recently some research that concluded the Jeep Wrangler contributed the least in terms of overall impact on the environment, taking into account manufacturing as well as use, largely because it was such an unsophisticated design. The Prius was by far the worst, for the very reasons Jay suggests.
But driving around in the same simple, basic car for perhaps 30 years is not what we have come to expect, and would certainly upset the shareholders of the big car companies.
Don't get me wrong - I love fast cars as much as Jay seems to. But there must be some middle ground.
As The Police sang in 1980, "When the world is running down, you make the best of what's still around".
Pastaman, Luxembourg,
Exactly! Although coming from someone who has a garage full of big cars you are a tad slow on the uptake. Still if you can influence the rest of the dimwits it may have been worthwhile.
Simion Tulbure, Wirral, England
I have yet to find anyone who can let me know the true environmental impact of a hybrid.
Building a new car is one part but how can it be good to make all those lead and acid batteries which have to be replaced every few years?
How about taking out the electric motor and heavy batteries and working out how much more fuel efficient that car becomes?
It is about time that the Americans stopped with their political and business opposition to diesel engines, which get much better mileage - especially in urban driving.
Green motoring issues are not based on logic or good science.
Manufacturers should change products so that TV's, computers and phone chargers do not use any electricity when not in use.
Retailers should be forced to turn off all but basic lighting in stores after they close. Green hypocricy is to drive by a garage who sells hybrids but who leave all their showroom lights on the whole night.
These two things would save more than driving a hybrid vs a small gas car
Adrian Wilson, New York, NY
"It’s a little 177 cubic inch (3 litre) motor" well that means it's £25 per day to drive into London from october!
jonny bhard, uxbridge, uk
While I cannot claim any expertise on the Model T, Mr Leno has a point. Certainly in California and the antipodes, where salt is not placed on roads and car bodies have a good chance of lasting longer, there is little need to have the newest. Of course, I overlook safety concerns: fear and paranoia must drive some sales of Suburbans in protecting the family in a country that stresses the role of government in protecting the homeland.
In the United States, 1950s-style marketing is still the order of the day, probably because it is effective in driving sales for some of the newest models. I see few problems driving an older vehicle and one only needs to look to some members of the rich for inspiration: Mr Leno during this past week, and, if readers may recall, H. Ross Perot and his 1985 model year Oldsmobile, which he was still driving during the 1992 presidential election.
Provided you can find one, there are still few that beat a nicely maintained pre-war car for style.
Jack Yan, Wellington, New Zealand