Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
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
But who the heck would compare a Civic with a Camry ??? (happening in multitude of posts here)
The body roll in my EX is pretty well-controlled and the car doesn't have a wallowy feel at all during fast directional changes. That's the weight-efficient manual four for you. The car's biggest handling weakness is the stock tires...no surprise there. I'm not too happy about the gross understeer and sliding during higher-speed turning. Sometimes it's fun to engage in a mild 4-wheel slide, aggravated by throttle input, but one of these days I'm going to slide into the next county. This obviously won't do but I'm optimistic that a real pair of tires will make the Accord a very competent handler, perhaps even sport-like.
Altima is a poor design & sells mostly due to its low price. Poor crash test result & odd styling. It is also smaller than both Accord and Camry.
1 Honda Accord 33,781 24,241
2 Toyota Camry 24,674 40,285
Prob'ly it has to do with the availability.
Main reason is probably because Honda is doing a special low interest financing on their 2001 Accord 4 cylinders. That's kind of unusual since it's still too early in the model year. Toyota is suprising not matching it, and has no promotion on going.
It's strange, since Honda profit was hit hard (down over 25%, worse than the 14.1% predicted at the begining of the year), this promotion would only further errode their profit margin and hence profitability. It's odd.
http://www.theautochannel.com/articles/2001/02/15/014777.html
Maybe they are trying to shore up some defences for the up coming redesigned Camry.
As for Camry sales, I expect it to remain unchanged this year. The first 6 months will probably see a slight decrease overall from last year.
Some dealers have reported that they are only receive half as many Camry alotment for the first and second quarter as they use to last year. I don't understand the full logistical reasoning behind it. But it's my guess that (1) Toyota is rotating the assembly line off to retool them for the new Camry, resulting in lower supply than normal. (2) Less alotment means less left over when the new Camry arrives which means less costly promotions to get rid of them. (3) since the well known effects of dropping sales old models as we approach new model/redesign date means as more people are holding off to wait for the new model, there is less demand for the soon to expire existing models.
But the sales should increase significantly with the new and improved Camry release late this summer. The early drop will off set the later increase, resulting in a relatively neutral year in term of sales (maybe just a slight increase).
I noticed that the Accord and Camry sales are both down from a month before (Decemeber 2000), same thing for Taurus. Not only that, sales of the Civic, Focus, Corolla, ect are all down from a year ago. Another sure sign that the economy is slowing down.
Sobers: are those figures sales or production? If Toyota is slowing the Camry production - subsequently lowering Camry sales - they are basically handing Honda a free lunch.
Yup, the economy is slowing down, and the automotive sector are usually pretty quick to feel the affects as buying a new car isn't a nessesity. In times like this, trying to hold on to the original buyers are not enough to boost the company performance. To increase profit and sales, you need to have new products that reach new buyers that you didn't have access before.
Since the discounts are geared towards the i4, it would seem that Honda may have produced more i4's than they needed, or the public is only willing to purchase v6's this year.
Honda will be in trouble if they start giving out rebates. All the domestics are doing the fire sale strategy, and some models are getting thousands in rebates...even in February. Honda made a big stink a few weeks ago about breaking 1,000,000 in annual sales in 2000. I suppose they want 2001 to at least beat that figure, and the easy way to help sales in a weak selling market is incentives. In the interest of brand preservation, incentives come in form of APR reductions, not cash.
I'm sure they have hired hundreds of accountants to figure that out. But rebates are not always more costly to do than low APR fianancing. But I would agree with who ever said that low APR financing might have less impact on the car's resale (ones older than couple of years) than a rebate.
Toyota had a better year (2000) than was I thought.
http://www.globaltoyota.com/globaltoyota/corp_info/pr/2001/0125.html
The company grew by 9% to make 5.888 million cars last year (the original plan was to grow to 5.7 million last year). Now dominates 43.25% of Japan's market, up from 42% last year.
Daihatsu was not in a great shape before being bought by Toyota. Now it seems like Toyota's capable management has turned them around. I personally think the stategic skill is Toyota's greatest asset. Maybe instead of spending money on costly rebates, GM should use that money to hire Toyota managment advisors.
When I purchased my 2k Accord the Honda rep. resourced quite a few financial institutions for me and none of them was Honda. So I doubt the low APR really plays any major role here. I think it's supply and demand i.e. too many i4's and not enough buyers. The low APR is just used as an incentive to the buyer.
In the beginning of in 1950's, Toyota was just a little nobody in the bombed out post war Japan. Sold a grand total of 250 cars (no joke) for the first post war car model, the SA. Nissan (Datsun) and Mitsubishi dominated what's left of the Japanese automobile marke. Toyota was near bankrupcy by 1952, was a major take over target (kind of like Honda in the early 1990's, but Toyota was in deeper).
By some miracle, it survived. I think it was the Crown model sedan that saved the company. (Interestingly, "Camry", in Japanese means Crown). Anyway, after that close call, Toyota was determined never to be on the take over list again, and has ever since kept a large chunk of liquid fund read to fight out any possible take over.
1 or 2 billion dollars for that is fine. But even with the purchase of Daihatsu, Hino Motor and a chunk of Yamaha, $800 million for production increase in 1999, the cash reserve kept on growing in size. Now at over $20 billion, I can joke that maybe Toyota doesn't know how to spend it.
What is exact plan Toyota has for that money, I don't really know. But I can see some possibility and the effects it has.
(1) Initiative: By have enough money for a take over against any automaker means all of the competitors must divert resources to plan against a take over, and react to Toyota's moves.
(2) Acqusition: Toyota rencently have made major efforts towards a hipper image. Toyota maybe wishing it had bought BMW earlier, and may do so next time it is offered. It maybe other companies, but that's all guessing.
(3) New brand: recent news say that Toyota might establish a third brand. Centered around the Genesis group, it will comprise the new cars such as the Matrix, possibly RSC and the upcoming Supra successor (4000GT with 400 hp). Toyota has denied it, but I wouldn't put it past them.
(4) Non-automotive expansion: Toyota group now comprise of 425 subsidaries. In part to prepare the future "digital cars", Toyota is backing Japan's 2nd largest telecom company. Being the largest investor, BusinessWeek say Toyota may put invest over $1 billion a year into it. Other expansion maybe into other market sectors, as recent alliance between Toyota and SONY. Online expansion, creating Japan's Yahoo/Amazon equivalent (called Gazoo). Who knows? I can't possibly track all the things Toyota has in Japan. Looking at the 425 subsidiaries and 130+ affiliates, it feels almost like Toyota is Japan.
Anyone interested in Gazoo, feel free to go to http://gazoo.com/
Have fun.
Personally I think that over the long run the Honda is going to hold up better than a VW, but If all looks well with the Passat and you prefer it over the Honda then go for it and enjoy.
The most important point about 2000 Passat is that it should be considered 20-30% depreciated. Which makes me nervous. The same dealer would offer you what you paid minus 30% NEXT day of your purchase. So in this case I would like you to get it atleast 20-25% below INVOICE. I would also suggest that if you HAVE to get passat get the 2001 model year. The same engine now has 170HP and the same mileage. Everybody on this forum knows my 'bias' towards Honda but still I think 2001 Accord would be better buy than the 2000 Passat any day if you are not getting a HEAVY discount on the passat.
In short I would suggest that STAY away from 2000 Passat which is a demo having some crude-miles on it and get the new 2001 Passat or Accord.
Hope this helps.
For Honda canada is a VERY SERIOUS market I saw a very large amount of Honda/Acuras in Canada than any other make in my short period there. They are doing many things right there I guess. Last 3 years I saw a handfull of RLs in USA. In 3 days in Toronta/Niagara I saw a bunch of RLs.... Don;t know why is so.
few car that the dealer usually has the advantage since the supply and demand
are pretty even out (lots of demand for it).
If I'm not mistaken, didn't VW has a 10yr factory warranty of some kind? Or is
it that for their Audi brethren?
In other words, if you have a not-so-impressive credit history, you almost definitely WILL NOT QUALIFY for the Low APR financing. If you need the car, and your credit rating is not tops, you either walk or get financing at a higher/lower rate from a different source. In case of cash back/Cash rebates, regardless of your credit rating, YOU WILL DEFINITELY/MANDATORILY get the "Cash back"/"Rebate" from the manufacturer.
Later...AH
Sorry that I couldn't check the forumn yesterday and today (and throw in a few cents in your debate at the news and views confrence), got struck down by the flu.... Thanks. The day doesn't look so miserable now.
probably gives a moral victory to anyone who've been
taking a friendly jab at Toyota and its product. :-)
VW has 2-24 compr and 10 year powertrain. Eventhough supply wasn't good for 99, it was ok for 2000 and 2000 swa some subsidized APR/Lease for end year Passat. 2001 supply will be even more
First just a bit of background so you know where I'm coming from: I have been a Toy. owner and admirer since I got my first license over 15 years ago. I haven't owned them exclusively, but have a had a few in that time including a Celica, 4-runner, Supra and a 1/2 ton Pick-up.
The point is, I knew that Toyotas have a bullet proof, nuclear war-proof engine, and it always offered a strong "piece-of-mind factor" when considering the purchase of what was already a wonderful, well-designed car.
However, now, especially with the Camry, I feel that the bulletproof engine is not "one of its many strong features, but instead one of its "only" strong features. While I would say that Toy has been successful in creating a 3-tiered strategy of Sedans (Camry, Avalon and Lexus), the result, in the Camrys case, is a strong, efficient, relatively affordable, yet plain vanilla, no frills, boring car. It has become your father's Oldsmobile, only without the retractable antenna and curb feelers.
So yes, the Camry, like the Accord is becoming even more competitively priced, however, it doesn't deny the adage, "You get what you pay for."
Personally it was a big shift for me to move away from Toyota. There is nothing wrong with the car. It's a safe, conservative purchase (in terms of reliability and depreciation). But I'm at the point where I still can't afford a $30-40k car, but would like to enjoy the experience for the next 3-5 years, not simply tolerate it. So I passed on the Camry...
In case you are interested, I passed on the Accord as well for similar reasons, although I think it has slightly better styling than the Camry. But, my sis-in-law has a '96 Accord and is experiencing tranny problems, which I have heard echoed on these boards as well.
Oh, a final word (from me, anyway) on the Camry. One of the reasons I considered it to be a "safe" purchase was the limited downside risk of depreciation. That said, a body style change is just around the corner, which made me more leary of purchasing a Camry new at this point. So many have expressed disappointment about the "boring" Camry that the next body style is bound to be in higher demand, effectively putting greater downward pressure on depreciation of the current model Camry.
Does any of this ring true with anyone else?
take care.
I agree with you, and it usually holds true for almost any automobile.
The new spec usually has more power, better fuel efficiency, greater room, quieter, better looking.... ect. All of this tend to makes the older product looks less appealing. And tend to direct the demand towards the newer design.
97 and 98 Accord is a prime example. The 97 is classified is much smallers, and has a less powerful engine. Basicly can't not compete with the 98 in the ability to perform as a family car. The price between the 4-cylinder EX model between the 2 years (cross generation) are $2000. The difference between the same model 99 and 98 EX (same generation) is $1400.
97 and 96 Camry is the same way. 1 year difference, 2 different generation. Value differ by $1400 right now. But 97 and 98 Camry LE (same generation) differ by only $1100 right now.
I guess it's not hard to understand why each redesign (if it's an improvement) tend to cause a more significant price difference.
Besides, the new model should offers more advantage over the old one, just like Wenyue stated. As long as Toyota keep their
"decontenting" to a minimum.
The suggestion to "sell your Camry now" for the newly redesign model isn't exactly suttle. And I know he said it jokingly.
But I can see where it's coming from. The new Camry will represents a 5 year advancement in technology, and will be totally up to date. And most people will have a hard time telling whether you are driving a 97 or a 2001 model Camry, but they WILL be able to that you are driving a new 2002 Camry. This will result in a greater depreciation gap between the new and old model.
Buying an 2001 isn't totally without virtue. Since it's a proven model, it won't experience any teething trouble like those associated with first model year (even Toyota can run into one or two in the first year). Also, dealer tend to charge a lot more for the brand new model. This coupled with the incentives to move the older model could very well translate into $2000-$3000 differ in price.
My strategy is: wait until the new Camry comes out, and see if Toyota kept up it's usual quality job. If not, you can take advantage of the incentive to buy a 2001 model cheaply. Or Toyota has done a good job (most likely case), then wait couple of months for the first wave of rush buying to subside and buy the car closer to the winter for a more reasonable deal.
This way, you have the option to pick and choose between the cheap and the new.
After seeing what happen to the Focus, I'm convinced this is the way to go for me, as long as my self discipline holds up