Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
The Current State of the US Auto Market
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The '13 Malibu wasn't even rated by CR and yet sales suffered.
Could it be other midsized cars are that much better regardless of CR's rating? I ask because I really don't know!
I don't long to jump on any popularity bandwagon--as lemko said, then McDonald's hamburgers must be the best out there.
But what do I know? If I could go back, I'd buy a new '64 Studebaker.
Hey, those Angus 1/3 pound burgers they used to sell were pretty good, I thought! But, like GM with the Northstar Allante, and the final year Fiero, as soon as they get it right, they discontinue it...
I have to say, between Chick-Fil-A and Five Guys, I could probably live without every other fast food joint, but as I said, Five Guys is too expensive.
I'll admit that out of convenience more than anything, and price, I too-often will eat a BK $1.00 burger, $1.00 fries, and senior drink. Total price? $2.76!
Could it be other midsized cars are that much better regardless of CR's rating? I ask because I really don't know!"
We have a niece whose husband travels a lot for his job. Both congested city and long highway trips, as well as piling mileage on. His past several company cars were Camry's which he said were comfortable and worked out well for him. He changes cars about every 18 months because of mileage build up. A little over a year ago he got a new Malibu instead. He says it actually is a more comfortable cruiser and he prefers it. Hopes to get another one in a few months. Absolutely no issues so far, just like his previous Toyota's. I know consumers have different preferences, but I doubt he'd have this experience and preference if all Malibu's were crap. Personally, I had the previous gen Malibu as a vacation rental and found it a decent driver with very comfortable seats. My experience and opinion on that Malibu and talking to him about the current one is that we both agreed that the Toyota four banger is a little smoother, but the Malibu is quieter and more comfortable on long highway drives. I don't think there are many "bad" standard sedans on the market these days, which is good news for consumers.
That's because by the time they get it right, they've trashed the name so much that no amount of improvements would save the perceptions.
See how much better getting it right to start with would be?;)
Guess I can still knock Kias built fifteen years after those GM examples then, correct?
It also seemed like there were a lot of 2012 models left over, at firesale prices, and that probably stole a lot of sales.
I have yet to actually drive a 2013 Maiibu; so far I've only sat in them at auto shows, and in a showroom. Other than my issue with the back seat legroom, I found them to be fairly decent cars. The seats did seem pretty comfortable, and well-padded. And even though rear legroom is tight, I found the back seat itself to be comfortable. Provided the front-seat occupants are short enough, that is!
Not bad anymore, just some preferred a lot more than others.
Putting only the Eco out first, in hindsight, was a dumb idea. And it is true there were outstanding prices on new '12 Malibus.
I do find it perplexing that Hyundai reports the lamest rear-seat legroom in its class. Wouldn't they use the same way to measure as everybody else, knowing that published dimensions get used to compare with?
I've said it before, but I was the first person I ever heard or saw comment on the '13 Malibu's rear-seat legroom. I noticed it immediately, compared to our '11, the very first time I looked inside one.
Again, big sales are nice, but to use that to justify why someone should want one, is like high-school stuff to me. I tend to like stuff that not everybody else has or wants.
I saw new '13 Malibu LS's advertised in the paper for $18,430 last week. Seems like a good value to me. Engine made in U.S., trans made in U.S., car assembled in U.S., great warranty, decent style.
Then, the top auto manufacturers are in high school and companies like BMW, Mercedes have PhD's! Chevy didn't get out of grade school with the '13 'Bu.
They are playing the same strategy with the Impala which is why sales of those things have fallen yet the price has gone up considerably.
Guess I can still knock Kias built fifteen years after those GM examples then, correct?
I suspect the reason people feel this way about GM is not the age of the incidents, but the pattern. They did it in the 70s, 80s, and 90's. The good news is that in the 00's they seem to have put out mediocre more than bad. That's progress, but have they extracted it from their DNA? A few years don't show full eradication, but it looks promising.
OTOH, Kia has much shorter history and pattern, even though their cars were bad early on, also.
Chrysler had a few lousy launches themselves back in those days, for varying reasons. I think the first was in 1974 when they redesigned their big cars, which hit the showroom at the same time as the first oil embargo. Big car sales in general tanked that year, but they must have lost a ton investing that much money on a new design, only to have it tank.
The '76 Aspen/Volare was a bad launch as well. They were fairly popular, but not as popular as Chrysler had hoped. I think initially, the problem was that they had too many fully-optioned models on the lots, and not enough strippers. It was also competing with the Dart and Valiant on the sales lots that first year.
The 1979 R-body (Newport, St. Regis, New Yorker) also wasn't a very good launch. Chrysler, like Ford, was two years behind GM in downsizing their big cars. Rather than come up with an all-new design, Chrysler just took the old midsized cars and gave them a heavy restyle. The midsize design was low-slung compared to the new GM B/C bodies and the Ford Panthers, so to still pack some big car room in there, they stretched out the wheelbase a bit. The cars also had a fairly heavy look about them, which probably didn't fly too well in fuel conscious times. And, by that time everybody knew about Chrysler's financial problems.
The 1981 K-cars were initially a botched launch, as well. In this case, much of the problem, like the '76 Volare, was that they had too many well-equipped models on the lot, and not enough basic models, which is what a lot of people wanted during that time.
I think that's what botched GM's launch of the J-car (Cavalier etc) and A-body (Celebrity et al), as well...too many optioned up models, not enough strippers. In the case of the Celebrity, it probably didn't help that GM was still selling the Malibu alongside. And, those first two years, the A-body wasn't a full lineup, offering only a sedan and coupe. If you wanted a midsize wagon, you had to go with the Malibu, Bonneville, Regal Estate, or Cutlass Cruiser, which were re-labled as the G-body.
And then GM started botching other things because of poor timing. For instance, downsizing their full-sized cars a second time, as sales of big cars were beginning to take off again. The 1985 Grand Am, Calais, and Somerset Regal were original supposed to replace the Grand Prix, Cutlass Supreme, and Regal (dunno if there would have been a Monte Carlo version), but as those cars kept on selling fairly well, GM decided instead to market them as some sort of upscale Euro fighter, going so far as to pit the Grand Am against BMW!
GM really got caught with their pants down when Ford launched the Taurus, and I don't know if they ever truly caught up in the midsized market. Even though Ford still sells a Taurus, and they try to pass it off as "full-size", I think today's Fusion and Malibu better represent the class of car that the likes of the 1986 Celebrity and Taurus have evolved into.
In '83, GM reduced the prices of both lines of cars, and sales took off. They also made a 2.0 in the Cavalier which was an improvement.
Celebrity 4-door, 2.5 4-cyl: $8463
Celebrity 4-door, 2.8 V-6: $8588 (72701 total Celebrity 4-doors sold)
Malibu 4-door, 3.8 V-6: $8137
Malibu 4-door, 4.4 V-8: $8207 (70793 total Malibu 4-door sold)
Impala 4-door, 3.8 V-6: $7918
Impala 4-door, 4.4 V-8: $7988 (47780 total Impala 4-doors sold)
Caprice Classic 4-door, 3.8 V-6: $8367
Caprice Classic 4-door, 4.4 V-8: $8437 (86126 total Caprice 4-doors sold)
No wonder the Celebrity was such a poor seller, initially! A 4-cyl Celebrity started off slightly more expensive than a V-8 Caprice!
I think it's also interesting what a small jump in price it was to go from the 3.8 (229, 231 in CA) V-6 to the 4.4 (267) V-8. I wish my book broke out V-6 versus V-8 production, but it doesn't.
For 1983, there was a bigger jump in price to go from the V-6 to the V-8, but that year, the V-8 was a 305-4bbl, rather than the 267-2bbl. They're the same basic engine, so I wouldn't think a 305 should cost much, if anything more than a 267 to produce. But, I guess the 4-bbl carb would add cost, versus the 2-bbl.
My grandparents had a 1982 Malibu Classic Estate wagon (technically, all Malibus were "Classics" in 1982), and I think it ended up costing around $11,000 out the door. Base price, according to my book, was only $8265. I sometimes wonder if my grandparents got ripped off with that car. It was a good looking car, but not all that well equipped. 229 V-6, crank windows, manual locks, nonpower seat. I'm pretty sure the automatic, power steering, and brakes were standard by then. I think it had cruise, tilt wheel, am/fm, but can't remember if it was stereo. definitely no 8-track or tape player. It had fake woodgrain, but just the regular hubcaps.
When Grandmom discovered that the back windows didn't roll down, replaced with flip out vents, she was pretty mad. They bought the car in February of '82, and nobody even thought about rolling down a window until one hot day in April when I went to church with them and she sat in back for the first time. She occasionally referred to that thing as "The most expensive cheap car we've ever owned"
Sonics sold here are made here, but I believe they also make then in Korea, and it was designed by the old Daewoo folks (now GMDAT).
It is ugly. Reliably ugly. You can always count on it remaining ugly.
Without a doubt.
I've seen new Sonata for $19k as well, probably cost the same as the 'bu once we add freight to the paper's ad price.
But....both are now competing in the basement of their class. $19k is compact money, not mid-size. Can they make a profit with those sales? I wonder.
A bargain for buyers, but bad for the manufacturer.
Honda is selling Accord starting over $20 grand. They included standard alloys and backup cam, but they probably get 10% more money, and likely some actual profit.
Meanwhile customers have a better ownership experience with the added content, probably better resale down the road, and those folks will likely be back for another Honda (if the CVT holds up).
Everyone has a different strategy, I guess, but it would be nice to see the next Malibu aim a little higher, like the Impala did.
Sonata is due for a redesign, while the 'bu has to soldier on for several years. You just don't want to rely on rebates all the time.
Hopefully the success of the Impala encourages them.
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20131010/OEM04/131019989/toyota-lays-out-future-- powertrain-plans-in-catch-up-bid#ixzz2hQj3iT5X
I think it's 2 things -
* Lexus limits what they can do with Toyotas, they have to be less than Lexus
* They focus on hybrid powertrains, so mainstream engines still lack DI
Discuss...
Toyota is a conservative company by and large.
No doubt Malibus, Sonatas, and Altimas can be had even cheaper.
Here's some Malibu news: GM is using the eraser!
"After an extremely brief 2014 model year run, Chevrolet is discontinuing the eAssist mild hybrid variant of its Malibu midsize sedan."
"Badged as the Malibu Eco, the car was the first iteration of the current Malibu to launch last year. That decision was seen a strategic misstep by some commentators, as the model’s mileage wasn’t much better – and in some cases, was actually worse – than less expensive, conventionally-powered competitors."
Speaking of using the eraser, Toyota is discontinuing the Matrix.
I always felt you should set a high standard and not chase the cheap skates by cutting out a few bucks here and there.
Accords will have lower insurance rates, eventually, since people aren't backing in to stuff, watch....
You don't get really seem to get a lot of great styling anymore. I wonder if part of that is because decades back the strong styling needed frequent updates to keep looking current. For example, the current Sonata looked fresh when it first came out, but it already is getting long in the tooth. I wonder if Hyundai will be as aggressive with it's next redo. I also wonder how long the current Ford Euro craze will be exciting.
That is a true fact. Honda will probably have a greater value at trade in time than a "BU". Chevrolet still has to prove it has greater long term value than a Honda. Perhaps this might happen with their 2014 model Impala which is getting rave reviews.
I keep my cars a long time anyway, so I'd never choose on resale value as a high item on my purchase list.
Long-term value? You be the judge, but a four-year-old Accord is rated the same reliability by CR (I know many here hang on their opinions) as a four-year-old Cobalt.
Resale Value at 36 months: 58.4% at 60 months: 46.1%
Here is the 2013 Honda Civic resale value
Resale Value at 36 months: 62.3% at 60 months: 46.9%
Both are category winners by KBB.
Just a note....
"We've kept our brand-building discipline on Cruze," McNeil said. "This is going to pay long-term dividends with Cruze resale prices."
He added that the Cruze sells for about $2,000 more than its competitors. The Chevy Cobalt that preceded it, sold for about $2,000 less than other cars in its class, mainly because of the constant steep discounting.
Diligently guarding resale values is a strategy that Honda has used successfully for decades. Honda almost never offers discounts on its Civic compact, and sales to rental fleets are nearly nonexistent. The result: some of the highest resale values in the industry and loyal customers who know that their cars won't lose most of their value the second they drive off the lot. "
And then you retire and get too old to enjoy spending it. Invest in experiences early - that's the ticket.
Don't wait until 60 and your hair thins to buy that Vette.
I know there are Corvette owner stereotypes, but I have some stereotypical thoughts of BMW and upper-end Benz owners too (and one of my best friends is among the latter! LOL).
Our 'Vette can't be red or yellow or white or black.
I'm liking the dark green you guys got very much. I'd be perfectly happy with the base car, to keep the cost down. I would need the glass top though. I'd be OK with that as the only option.
Trouble is, it gets harder to fold yourself into one by the time the kids take off.
May as well place your bets for NA car of the year.
"All six of the new vehicles GM has introduced so far in 2013 made the short list of contenders for the 2014 North American Car and Truck/Utility Awards.
The Buick Encore, Cadillac CTS, Chevrolet Corvette, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra will all compete for the awards, which will be announced Jan. 13 at the 2014 North American International Auto Show at Cobo Center in Detroit."
GM's new vehicles dominate short list of award contenders (Detroit Free Press)
9 of 12 cars on the list are foreign brands
8 of 12 trucks on the list are foreign brands
Of course with current interest rates, there's not much time value of money anymore!
If you keep a car long enough, the resale value becomes less important. For those who hold cars shorter times (2-5 years), it makes a bigger difference. And of course the rate of depreciation has a major effect on lease costs for those who are leasing.
Mostly true.
As an example, about 5 years ago, one poster on this forum was bragging about GM's hybrid strategy. There was the two-mode hybrid, there was the "mild" hybrids, and there was the Volt.
Fast forward - The two mode hybrid - do they even sell these any more? The "mild" hybrid - they've just discontinued the Malibu Eco. The Volt - well it's a technical success, although not a market success.
Meanwhile, Toyota is selling hundreds of thousands of hybrids a year.
I'd say that's an example of what people mean by "following".
As the article states, no other manufacturer even came close to the number of GM vehicles on the list.
I ask because I really don't know!
For balance I should add that the problems I mentioned occurred as Packard was struggling to survive, but I don't see where these features were really innovative. Also, wasn't the OHV V8 that Packard introduced in the mid-1950s plagued with problems? It seems to me that Packard had ample opportunity to study competing OHV, short-stroke V8s that were introduced earlier.