The Current State of the US Auto Market

Mr_Shiftright

Of course not. But learn what those black and red circles actually stand for.

You could very easily become a slave to those red and black circles and end up dutifully and diligently buying a car you would absolutely hate.

andre1969

You could very easily become a slave to those red and black circles and end up dutifully and diligently buying a car you would absolutely hate.

Plus, those red and black circles do change over time. GM's mid- and full-sized RWD cars were especially famous for this back in the 1980's. Often in the early years they'd get lots of black dots, and pull in worse or much-worse than average ratings. But, once they were a few years old, the ratings would usually improve to average or a bit better.

I don't know if this was a factor of other cars becoming more problematic as they aged, or GM fixing the kinks in their cars after the first year or two, or a combination of both?

berri

Probably not true, but I remember some car guys telling me it was best with GM to avoid the first two years, then buy years 3-4 and then avoid again as GM value analysis would cheapen the car up too much before it was done.

circlew

J.D. Power has a separate ranking for mass-market brands, and this year Mini again tops the list with a score of 718, far outpacing second-place Buick with a score of 694 and making it the fourth time Mini has lead this list. After Buick, the next two ranked brands are both American and both from General Motors, with Chevrolet and GMC sharing third place with a score of 686.

Jaguar ousts Lexus from atop J.D. Power 2013 Sales Satisfaction Index

GM did too well for this survey to actually mean anything.

Just like CR must be insane to rave about the '14 Impala! :surprise:

circlew

It is interesting that, in our days of driving and discussions, it emerged that the Corvette's major rival for this award was the Cadillac CTS. Of all the new cars introduced this year -- from brands such as Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Lexus, Ford, Jaguar, Land Rover, and many others -- the top two contenders for Automobile of the Year were both from General Motors. General Motors, the bumbling giant, tied up in knots of bureaucracy and legacy costs, recipient of a much-vilified loan from Uncle Sam. Although many will never admit it, today's GM is putting out some excellent products.

We can't help but marvel at the fact that they were developed under the darkest possible skies. Given the circumstances, we might not have expected a great new Corvette, but that's exactly what we got. The Corvette has long been a tremendous performance value wrapped in an all-American package. Now, however, with newfound sophistication and user-friendliness, the C7 should melt the barriers that have kept away so many driving enthusiasts. This is not just a car for the Corvette faithful but instead spreads the gospel to a new, wider audience. The 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray is a world-class car with no apologies to make, an expression of greatness from a town and a car company that have been dismissed as losers. It is also the Automobile of the Year.

Automobile of the Year: 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray

"NO MORE CRAPPY CARS!"

circlew

It's the most capability that any manufacturer has ever delivered for this money, it's rewarding to drive for everyone from novice to seasoned racer, and it is, definitely and deservedly, the Road & Track Performance Car of the Year.

Road & Track's 2013 Performance Car of the Year

circlew

It's the most capability that any manufacturer has ever delivered for this money, it's rewarding to drive for everyone from novice to seasoned racer, and it is, definitely and deservedly, the Road & Track Performance Car of the Year.

Road & Track's 2013 Performance Car of the Year

andre1969

Probably not true, but I remember some car guys telling me it was best with GM to avoid the first two years, then buy years 3-4 and then avoid again as GM value analysis would cheapen the car up too much before it was done.

Dunno about at the end of the model cycle, but I've been hearing "don't buy the first year or so" of any domestic model since, oh, the Chevy Citation? I think they do still botch product launches every once in awhile, but not the way they used to back in the day. At least, nothing in the league of the 1980 Citation, 1976 Volare, 1971 Vega, 1957 Mopar lineup, etc.

I wonder if cheapening towards the end of the product cycle is a common thing? I know with the 1998-04 Intrepid, they decontented them a bit for 2002, at least in the base model. The window tint, rear sway bar, and carpeting on the door panels were deleted. The fabric on the upper door panels was replaced with vinyl. And the cupholder in the console was replaced with a cheaper design. And, as the Ford Panthers aged, Ford started cheapening them up here and there.

lemko

My 1994 Cadillac DeVille was the first of the 1994-99 generation of that car. I didn't have any significant problems with it.

anythngbutgm

No real surprises here except the Kia and the Audi. Actually, the Ridgeline might be a surprise since it is only expected to live out the 2013 model year before going on hiatus.

link title

fintail

I don't know how else to link a tweet, but it has been claimed that CLA sales are stealing from highline Camcords, and might be closer to 50K rather than 30K....home run

stever

Looks like you click on the time stamp on the tweet, and use the link that shows up in the browser address bar.

Like so.

Yeah, huge home run I'd say. BMW and Lexus will have a kink in their necks from watching the CLA numbers pad MB's numbers. Apologies to Mr. Hofmeister.

fintail

Thanks.

They are all going to put a stylish entry level competitor on the market within a year or so. Just as the CLS opened up a new niche, the CLA is going to do it too. Staid old MB hasn't stopped influencing the market yet.

50K units of a 30K++ car is pretty significant. Hope it is reliable.

Mr_Shiftright

reliability can be an iffy thing with Benz first year models.

circlew

...where it counts!

Tesla Motors may have its share of public-relations issues right now, but the electric car maker has owners solidly in its corner, Consumer Reports finds.

Owners of the long-range electric Tesla Model S give it the highest satisfaction scores of any car in the magazine's annual survey. In fact, CR says they are the highest marks it has seen in years: 99 out of 100.

The results come from 600 responses in the survey and CR says owners' findings match its own high test scores for the Model S. Earlier this year, CR said it was one of the best cars it ever tested. It scored 99 out of 100, the same score that owners gave it in the survey.

CR's findings come as Tesla deals with a federal safety investigation into two incidents in which Model S sedans caught on fire after they ran over road debris. In both cases, owners were able to pull over and safely exit the vehicle before the fires in the battery packs began. Tesla CEO Elon Musk says the Model S presents far less fire risk than gasoline-powered cars and that the fire issue is overblown.

Mr_Shiftright

Ah well, everybody loved their Tucker, too. It's not pleasing the pleased that keeps you in business, it's finding new buyers.

tlong

Ah well, everybody loved their Tucker, too. It's not pleasing the pleased that keeps you in business, it's finding new buyers.

I find it refreshing that a totally upstart car company (from the US) is injecting some excitement into the old stodgy auto market. I hope they continue to be successful and broaden their offerings. Just watch the old companies have to scramble. This is good for the market.

fintail

I hope they can succeed without being reliant on giving 1%ers even more tax breaks.

tlong

I hope they can succeed without being reliant on giving 1%ers even more tax breaks.

You should talk to your legislators about that. They are the ones making the laws, and taking the bribes/"donations" to do so.

odi14

Look in your owners manual, timing belt for '08 is 110,000 miles.

odi14

Had to replace the battery in my car after four years(bought new)....mechanic at work said "you got four years out of a battery that came with the car? you got lucky" Well replaced it and guess what? The warranty is for three years, at the three year mark I will get a new battery.

andre1969

I was one start away from possibly being stranded at a rest area. What away to start a vacation.

That was what prompted me to replace the battery in my 2000 Intrepid, around the 5 1/2 year mark. I had a vacation to Florida planned, and even though the battery still seemed fine, it would be just my luck that it would die and leave me stranded in the middle of nowhere.

And, it took me about two hours to replace that battery. It's buried down in the front right fender, ahead of the wheel well. Supposedly you can get to it from under the hood, but I'll be damned if I could figure out how. I started wrestling around with the air intake and some other plastic stuff that was just begging to break, so I gave up, jacked it up, took the wheel off, and went in through an access panel in the wheel well.

A pro who knew what he was doing would have been able to do it in much less time, but after what I went through with simply replacing that battery in my driveway, I can imagine what a nightmare it would have been trying to do it in the middle of the night, in strange territory. I probably would have given up and had the thing towed to a mechanic, and been subsequently raked over the coals.

I also swore that the next time that Intrepid was due for a battery change, I'd spoil myself, splurge, and just pay the mechanic to do it. But, at the 10 year mark (4.5 years for that battery), the car got hit-and-runned in a parking lot, and was totaled out.

I guess if nothing else, that hit-and-run saved me on the replacement cost of a battery, since that one was getting on in years a bit. And when I bought the Trep's replacement, the 2000 Park Ave, the dealer put a brand new battery in it for me.

BTW, has anyone else noticed how expensive batteries have gotten, lately? Seems like not all that long ago, they were only $50-60. But I had to replace the Park Ave's battery back in May, after one of the tensioners failed and sent shrapnel throughout the engine bay, and ripped out the side of the battery...although it took about two weeks before the battery got weak enough that it couldn't start the car. I called the dealer, out of curiosity, and I think they wanted something like $156! I ended up getting one at BJ's Wholesale club for around $133.

A new battery is still cheap insurance against getting stranded, but I guess inflation is creeping in, everywhere...

stever

Exide is in bankruptcy leaving Johnson Controls as the big player. The other competitors are lots smaller outfits I think. So maybe it's not inflation so much as it is lack of choices?

robr2

BTW, has anyone else noticed how expensive batteries have gotten, lately?

The price of lead has doubled over the past few years, cost to recycle batteries has gone up and the cost of fuel needed to transports those batteries has risen.

xrunner2

>>>>>And, it took me about two hours to replace that battery. It's buried down in the front right fender, ahead of the wheel well.>>>>>>

Are the designers/engineers who came up with that battery placement still at Chrysler?

andre1969

Are the designers/engineers who came up with that battery placement still at Chrysler?

I dunno, but maybe in the overall scheme of things, it's not *that* big of a deal. Sure, it's a hassle to replace the battery, but that's something that, in theory, you should only have to do once every 4-5 years or more. Unless you're DieselOne! As for jump starting, the car did still have access points under the hood that were easy to get to.

I wonder if there might have even been some advantage to putting the battery in the lower fender? For one thing, it was out of the engine bay, so that might have helped a bit with keeping the battery from getting so hot, and perhaps prolonging battery life? Nowadays, it's common to put them in the trunk. I think sometimes they end up under the back seat, as well?

dieselone

"BTW, has anyone else noticed how expensive batteries have gotten, lately? Seems like not all that long ago, they were only $50-60. But I had to replace the Park Ave's battery back in May, after one of the tensioners failed and sent shrapnel throughout the engine bay, and ripped out the side of the battery."

That's crazy that a belt tensioner could fail in a way that throws shrapnel.

But yeah, batteries aren't cheap. The last car battery a bought was about 2 years ago and I spent over $100 at NAPPA.

The battery in my Suburban was kind of a pain to replace as it had a bracket that connected from the top radiator support over to the fender, which was above the battery. So it had to come off to remove the battery. Not a huge deal, but a PITA none the less.

andre1969

I had taken a pic of the battery after I had it pulled out of the car. Here it is...



The way the battery was positioned in the car, it wasn't noticeable until after I had taken it out. In fact, the mechanic never even noticed it, when he replaced the bad tensioner, which was for the supercharger belt. He also replaced the tensioner for the main belt, just to be safe, since it was OEM.

One day, the car just happened to start acting up. It would even jump start just fine, and even hold a charge for a bit. So I decided to pull the battery out and put one in from another car, to see if that would solve the problem, and once I pulled it out I saw the damage.

The battery was about 3 1/2 years old at that point, so I guess it was far enough along in its life cycle that I shouldn't fret about it too much.

hpmctorque

Thanks. The '07 manual doesn't state a mileage, only that the timing belt should be inspected. That seems like loose advise, since belt wear is sometimes undetectable by inspection.

As far as I know, the '07 and '08 2.0T engines are the same, so 110k should apply to the '07 too.

fintail

Or maybe set up an inquisition for the 1%ers who are offering the bribes. If I pay you to kill someone for me, I am not absolved of criminality just because I didn't pull the trigger. But I know, accountability exists in an inverse relationship with wealth in this oligocracy.

Who is really "making the laws"? Get real.

tlong

Or maybe set up an inquisition for the 1%ers who are offering the bribes. If I pay you to kill someone for me, I am not absolved of criminality just because I didn't pull the trigger. But I know, accountability exists in an inverse relationship with wealth in this oligocracy.

The "bribes" I'm talking about are the legal donations used to buy influence. So I don't think those would require inquiries. The government shows no desire to assess the bigger picture of the economic realities and laws that cause the overall financial and corporate systems to be the way they are. Most companies operate lawfully within those rules. To change the behavior, the rules need to be changed at the governmental level. Clearly the government isn't ready to stomach that.

busiris

Add in the costs of meeting stringent EPA standards on pollution and lead contaminants, which I'm sure have added to the costs of auto batteries over the last decade or so...

fintail

Maybe if the corporations and slimy souls behind them had the ethics not to offer bribes, the problem wouldn't exist. It's definitely a 50/50 problem, asking government to reform without those who have taken so much over the past couple generations also reforming won't get us anywhere. There needs to be draconian penalties for both sides.

Does government control money , or does money control government? Something being legal is irrelevant, when laws are bought and paid for.

tlong

Maybe if the corporations and slimy souls behind them had the ethics not to offer bribes, the problem wouldn't exist.

I don't agree. What you are calling "bribes" are in fact legal rules the government has set out. All larger corporations have lobbyists to influence the government and Congress. I'm sure GM and Ford are two such companies taking full advantage of the rules provided by the government. GM has also taken huge advantages of government rules, some of them created *just for GM*. Is that unethical? To me it is, but I blame the government, not GM. GM is just maximizing its benefits within a framework of what is legally allowed.

By the logic that any entity shouldn't maximize their financial benefit within the law (that it is "slimy" or "should be hanged", any taxpayer who takes tax deductions is in fact being "unethical" because they take all financial advantages possible within the rules. And certainly any 10%-er takes more advantages of deductions than those of lesser means, so why not put them in the same category?

Something being legal is irrelevant, when laws are bought and paid for.

I suggest you could send in a few more thousand to show your good efforts at being better than the tax laws, and that you are doing your part to be 50/50. That would set a good example that companies should do the same thing. And I certainly should do the same thing - heck, I even get a mortgage tax deduction! Voluntarily giving that up would reduce the slime I feel all over myself...

fintail

We'll agree to disagree then. Like I said, the way I see it, if I pay you to kill someone, and you do it, we both still have responsibility. I know in modern America, putting responsibility on people with wealth is an unpopular idea. Individual taxpayers gain much less from any lobbying than corporations.

Mortgage deduction, don't get me started - huge bought and paid for subsidy for the FIRE cabal, masquerading as something benevolent and making people feel entitled. I don't know if it exists nearly as strongly in any other developed nation.

xrunner2

>>>>>I wonder if there might have even been some advantage to putting the battery in the lower fender?>>>>>>

Was there any space visible under the hood of that "Cab-forward" Dodge Intrepid to put a battery? If not, looks like the designers of the cab-forward look got a nod over the engineers responsible for placement of the engine and its accessories. The picture of the battery shows water fill caps. How does one regularly check the water level in the battery if it is so difficult to reach? Apparently it was a very poor design by Chrysler/Dodge.

Interesting how Chrysler/Dodge touted the cab-forward design of their cars UNTIL the current "300" series Chrysler came along. "Cab-forward" then became not so smart.

dieselone

"Interesting how Chrysler/Dodge touted the cab-forward design of their cars UNTIL the current "300" series Chrysler came along. "Cab-forward" then became not so smart."

Just marketing hype. No different than when Pontiac promoted the benefits of the "wide track" GrandPrix and the track wasn't any wider than an Accord of the time IIRC.

Also, I don't know how well a so called "cab forward" design works with a front engine, rear drive layout since the engine isn't mounted transversely.

andre1969

Also, I don't know how well a so called "cab forward" design works with a front engine, rear drive layout since the engine isn't mounted transversely.

Both generations of LH car (1993-97 and 1998-04) had longitudinally-mounted engines, even though they were FWD. My '00 Intrepid even had a slight suggestion of a transmission hump, although the center console hid most of it.

I've heard that these cars were originally designed to be offered in FWD or AWD, and that's why they did the engine that way. However, I've also heard that they were somewhat patterned after the old Eagle Premier and Dodge Monaco, which were also FWD but had a longitudinal engine.

The marketing hype behind "Cab Forward" was that it was supposed to give you more interior room, but in reality, all it did was bring the base of the windshield too far forward, and made the dashboard hard to wipe down. If the cars were any bigger than their competition, IMO it was because they were on longer wheelbases.

For instance, I thought the Neon felt really roomy inside, compared to other small cars of the time. However, its wheelbase was also something like 104", and the 2nd-gen was a bit longer at 105". So when you consider the fact that some midsized cars had wheelbases in that range (A Chevy Celebrity was 104.9", the first Taurus was ~106"), while a lot of compacts were still around 100", it's no surprise the Neon felt so roomy to me.

dieselone

I forgot the LH cars used longitudinally-mounted engines, but could they have accommodated a v8 with a traditional transmission layout.

Plus, isn't the 300 platform at least partially derived from MB?

Having had a Neon, they were roomy with a lot of head room too. Thankfully my neon wasn't a bad car in the 70k miles i had it.

robr2

According the wiki, the LX platform is a mishmash of components from Daimler:

W220 S class front suspension
W211 E class rear suspension, firewall and floorplan
Mercedes parts bin transmission, differential and ESP system.

And is it just me or is the 300 getting a little long in the tooth? It's had the same basic styling since 2004.

tlong

Mortgage deduction, don't get me started - huge bought and paid for subsidy for the FIRE cabal, masquerading as something benevolent and making people feel entitled. I don't know if it exists nearly as strongly in any other developed nation.

Help me understand what you mean by the FIRE cabal - I don't know what that acronym is referring to.

Seems that the current market conditions are getting pretty good and most makers are doing well. We're entering the heyday of a good economy from an auto manufacturer perspective. Plus there is quite a backlog of deferred purchases from the recession. So I expect the US market to be pretty good for at least a couple of years. The real test of the market will occur at the next downturn - which makers have low enough fixed costs to successfully weather a downturn, and which do not? It will probably take five years to find out. Most of us will probably still be on these boards then, so will be interesting to find out.

tlong

Kelley Blue Book has published its annual Best Resale Value Awards for 2014 vehicles. When we buy a car, we think of the price as the true cost, along with the expense of insurance, gas, and maintenance. But the real cost of a car is depreciation -- how much in value it loses during the initial years of ownership.

Among mainstream non-luxury brands, the following nameplates will best hold their value over the next 5 years:

Honda
Toyota
Subaru
Hyundai

And among the luxury nameplates:

Mercedes
Acura
Audi

And finally, the cars that do the *worst* job at holding their resale value:

Lincoln
Volvo
Buick
Ford

fintail

The FIRE economy has become a hot issue since the recent dumbed down new economy. Finance, Insurance, Real Estate. Perhaps the least accountable segment outside of of the Praetorian industries, even worse than telecoms and public sector manager types, IMNSHO.

I wonder if any group of oversalaried suits are even beginning to plan for the next downturn. Historically, the American executive class does a very poor job at thinking about the future. I doubt the cereal box MBA trend will change that.

As long as credit remains cheap and employment doesn't tank, the US market should be pretty decent. The Germans are mining everything possible from it right now.

tlong

The FIRE economy has become a hot issue since the recent dumbed down new economy. Finance, Insurance, Real Estate.

Thanks for that explanation of the acronym.

crkyolfrt

However, I've also heard that they were somewhat patterned after the old Eagle Premier and Dodge Monaco, which were also FWD but had a longitudinal engine.

It's a real fuel waster having an engine longitudinally in a FWD layout. Having to get the torque to do a right-angle turn is the culprit. At least if it's going to be an AWD'r they gotta bite the bullet and turn torque 90º with one of the ends, so works out in the wash. This is (just one of many many) reasons I think electric-motored drive at individual wheels on the odd ball out axle will be welcomed and the absolute most efficient way to have AWD as we know it today.

Another negative for a longitudinal engine placement, especially if it's FWD fulltime, is they're going to be a bit front heavy unless wheelbases are stretched way out (which they won't do on any mainstream car) and doesn't provide for very good fr to rr weight balance, affecting handling. VW Foxes, Toyota Tercels (cars with fairly short wheelbases back in the day when longitudinal placement was more common in FWD) were pretty tailhappy when cornering and braking. Of course...compounding the problem, the blocks were cast iron back then too. Boy, could they ever hill climb though in the snow for FWDrs.

Longitudinals are a lot easier to access though if you have to work on them. Plus...to my eye..just 'look' better when you pop the hood. Somehow..lateral placement gives off a bit of excavatorness to a car...if ya know what I mean..lol

stever

My '82 Tercel did pretty good in Anchorage. After a decade, I quit buying studs for it. Just made sure to carry chains. Occasionally I couldn't get up to one ski area (but hitching was always easy). It definitely was easy to parallel park with the hand brake. :shades:

xrunner2

>>>>>>After a decade, I quit buying studs for it.>>>>>>

Studs were the way to go many years ago when legal. Outstanding performance in ice and snow. But, tore up the roads. And, the car was very squirrly on dry pavement. Remember seeing grooves in the roads here in northern Illinois. Are studs legal anywhere in the U.S. today?

stever

They're still legal in Alaska. They really were best for tooling around town - made it easier to start and stop at the red lights and stop signs where the black ice tended to occur.

They are hard on pavement although there's plenty of rutted roads around that have never seen studs.

xrunner2

Drove cars in winter with studded snows at 4 corners. Remember the grip on ice and snow packed roads whether in city, suburbs or rural. An alternative, not as good, are some of the tires offered by Michelin and Bridgestone or Dunlop. Used all 3 and Michelin and Dunlop current technology that I use are very good alternatives. I know you will say this belongs in the tire thread.

robr2

It's a real fuel waster having an engine longitudinally in a FWD layout. Having to get the torque to do a right-angle turn is the culprit.

My understanding is that a FWD with a longitudinal engine allows for equal length half shafts reducing torque steer. Also, transverse mounts limits 90 degree V-8's - not enough room.