The Current State of the US Auto Market

ateixeira

Fitz most loaded Maxima costs $41,800, and $42,689 for an Avalon (both list prices).

Neither has 305hp.

I get the sticker shock, I feel it, too. But that's what a large car costs loaded up.

andre1969

Fitz also has a 2013 Impala LT for an MSRP of $29,945 (but an internet price of $24,083). It has a sunroof and aluminum wheels, but otherwise is nothing fancy. Just has cloth seats, no Nav.

So, if a fully-loaded 2014 Impala is "only" ~$40K MSRP, considering it's going to have leather, nav, a bigger back seat, and a whole host of other features and improvements, I'd say it's worth it!

And yeah, I get the sticker shock, too. Part of it is because I remember the $22,389 that my old 2000 Intrepid cost, out the door. Its MSRP was $20,950 with freight, but then there was tax, tags, an extended warranty I never used, etc. Simply adjusting for inflation, that Intrepid would be $29,195 today! And it was a bare-bones model. Only option it had was a 12-disc CD changer I had them throw into the deal.

The last Impala our family had was a 1972 that my grandparents paid about $5000 for. Adjusting backwards, $40K today would be like $7200 back then. I'm sure that if my grandparents had gotten a Caprice, ordered the biggest engine, power everything, an 8-track player, etc, it wouldn't have been too hard to fluff that $5K up to $7200 or so.

stever

And yeah, I get the sticker shock, too. Part of it is because I remember the $22,389 that my old 2000 Intrepid cost

I know the feeling. That was about what my '99 Quest cost - and that's about $2,000 higher than my first house cost back in '74.

boomchek

My dad had a GMC Safari for about 6 or so years. He used it mainly for work (construction) as it was quite spacious and we drove it from Vancouver to LA quite a few times.

I never enjoyed driving it as it felt really tipsy, and the steering wheel felt loose but it had a ton of space and could take a heavy load when the back seats were taken out. Fuel economy wasn't the greatest either but for what he used it for it did the job that a unibody minivan couldn't do, and it was smaller than a full size van which would be too big to work as family/material hauling vehicle.

I think there is a bit of a cult following for these vans, mostly tradesmen wanting them and the occasional family that wants a spacious van with decent towing ability.

circlew

So, if a fully-loaded 2014 Impala is "only" ~$40K MSRP, considering it's going to have leather, nav, a bigger back seat, and a whole host of other features and improvements, I'd say it's worth it!

Really? For a Chevy that's not a Corvette??

OK.... :confuse:

2012 'Vette w/4,192 miles

tlong

I think keeping the old Impala around as a fleet car makes sense, as the new one just has too much of a "premium" feel to be put into service as a police car, taxi, etc.

What I don't get is why with too many divisions and too many models, GM has to go and produce two non-identical models with THE SAME NAME? I mean, really. I guess their marketing experts know things that I don't.

ateixeira

Price the Corvette's competitors - they are all $70k plus. The new one will creep up in price.

nvbanker

I rarely saw Aerostar cargo vans in the numbers I saw Astro vans out there, over a 20-year period.

That's because the Astro was DESIGNED as a Cargo van, and then adapted to be a passenger van - which explains its miserable design and driving position - but its rugged construction and power.

The Aerostar was designed (on a truck frame) to be a passenger van, and was converted shortly to a Cargo model, just by pulling all the nice stuff out and putting a grate behind the driver. Of the two, and I've had lots of both, the Astro was hands down the most durable - but also the most uncomfortable, hottest and least efficient of the two.

Both of them are quite plentiful around the "lonely" side of town around here, but the Aerostar is quite easily the favorite of the 30 year old minivan club. Good thing it doesn't rain here - they started rusting in the showroom, I think.

stever

Funny thread. I lived in a "lonely" part of Boise and my neighbor the HP engineer's husband had one of those (can't even remember if it was the Ford or Chevy now - had barn doors and a lift gate - figures I'd mostly remember the hatch). Leather, 4WD and it was a tank. We'd always wind up taking my Outback up the hill to go snowboarding though.

Not to be confused with the HP patent attorney across the street with the diesel VW pickup. :shades:

berri

I think the upcoming Impala is priced competitively with it's peers and I also think most typically equipped ones will actually go out the door in the mid 30's. But the question I have is why buy a totally loaded Impala, Taurus, Maxima, Avalon, etc. stickered in the low 40's when you can get a very nice (except for the grill) Lexus for around 10% more (of which you'll probably get the difference in price or more back at trade in)?

ateixeira

I'd go the other way, mid-size cars are nearly as roomy and cost 30% less to own. You can get more equipment for less.

berri

Maybe we both just have too much "finance" in our DNA!

andre1969

One thing I'll say for the Impala though...for perhaps the first time since the name got dusted off and put on a FWD platform, I'd say that it's more car than the Accord, and is worth a price premium. Honestly, I wasn't all that wowed by the new 2013 Accord, once I got to experience it close up. The seats felt a bit small, like they were really designed for a compact. And the front seat really didn't go back all that far. And, Japanese cars in general seem to be using more hard plastics than in the past, so I don't really see the big jump in interior quality anymore, over the imports.

Now, I wouldn't go for a fully-decked out, $40K Impala. But, I've seen V-6 Chargers and 300's MSRPed up to that, and I think you can get the Taurus up there with little strain. So, I still don't see it as being overpriced.

As for the Lexus ES? Honestly, not that impressed. At the DC auto show, I remember looking at some Acuras, seeing how plasticky they're getting inside, and thinking damn, they're a big step below Lexus these days. Until, that is, I sat in a Lexus! Seems like they're all cutting corners here and there, these days.

The ES is also a LOT smaller inside than an Impala. To get Impala-sized room out of a Lexus, you need to make the jump to an LS. Maybe even the extended wheelbase model. The new Impala really is that big inside. While it doesn't quite have the shoulder room, I'd say that in most other respects, it's as big inside, if not bigger, than the older, "real" full-sized RWD Impalas and Caprices of days gone by.

circlew

New design doesn't inspire, afaic, but the power train is now world class.

Turbo V6, 8-speed automatic for redone Cadillac CTS

hpmctorque

According to Automotive News a naturally aspirated 321 hp 3.6 will also continue to be offered in the 2014 CTS, as the next step up from the turbo 4. There's no word, though, about what changes it will feature compared with the 2013 3.6.

berri

I think the problem with the Impala and the rest of it's market segment is that if you want big, for just a bit more you can get a loaded crossover like Traverse or Explorer. Luckily, I think most of these large sedans are developed off other chassis, so their development costs aren't that high allowing a product offering for the relatively small big car segment. Personally, I saw the new Impala at an auto show and it seemed pretty nice, but if I was going to spend $40K I'd probably get a Traverse instead.

tlong

Personally, I saw the new Impala at an auto show and it seemed pretty nice, but if I was going to spend $40K I'd probably get a Traverse instead.

A lot of people don't want the size or ride of SUVs vs. sedans.

andre1969

A lot of people don't want the size or ride of SUVs vs. sedans.

And, I'm one of them. Although, I am finding that, the older I get, a high seating position is kind of nice. My '85 Silverado is just about perfect for me, while my '12 Ram seems a bit too high. But, after driving either of those two for any length of time, my 2000 Park Ave suddenly seems kinda small, and hard to get in and out of. And my older cars, even worse.

Something like a Traverse probably isn't any longer or wider than the new Impala. Or if it is, we're probably talking negligible numbers. But, there's just something about the styling of the that feels bulky and ponderous. And, the few times I've sat in a Lambda, I wasn't impressed with the seats. Kinda low...high seating position relative to the road, but low with respect to the floor. And I didn't find the second row to be very comfortable, whereas the 2014 Impala's back seat rated up there with some of the better full-sized cars of years gone by.

I think it's hard to make a really comfortable second or third row SUV or minivan seat, because they have to be versatile...either removeable or foldable, and that's going to sacrifice some comfort.

Hopefully this is a ways off, but the next time I'm in the market for a new car, I'm thinking about something Impala/Charger-sized. I'm not about to pay $40K for one though!

hpmctorque

I agree that the '14 Impala is nice. In fact, its styling is much nicer than the Avalon and Taurus, in my opinion. But, what's with that extra material on top of the dashboard? I just don't get that. To me, it cheapens the interior, but I'm sure some will love it.

ateixeira

It is the best looking of those 3.

I like the layered dash, it adds depth and texture to break up the usual monotony.

berri

Andre, I've driven several of these lambda's long distance as rentals. I think you are right on the money regarding it's second row seats. Maybe the biggest drawback besides rear visibility. I think the Asians generally do the second row seats better, but the D3 are better in sound insulation and smoothness. However, the handling is surprising good for their size, which I found out driving on some two lane mountain roads several times. I didn't notice a problem with the front seats regarding seating position or road feel. The power adjustments were pretty flexible on them. I used to be a sedan man, and still have one in my garage. But as I drive more of these crossovers, and own one, I'm finding I like the elevated driving position. Of the large crossovers I've driven, I like the lambda's best, except that they are a bit pricey compared to most of their competition. Of course, I do a lot of Interstate driving which may affect my preferences.

hpmctorque

That "layered" material looks like an after-market item to me. You know, the kind of thing that some people place on their dash to prevent the material from cracking from cold and heat. I can't think of any other car that includes the layering as a design element. There must be some that I haven't noticed. Of course, that feature differentiates the Impala, which may be positive. Maybe I'll learn to like it. I frequently change my mind when it comes to cars.

andre1969

I like the part at the base of the windshield, that gives the impression of an un-interrupted swoop from the doors to the dash. It makes me think of what Buick tried to do back in the 1990, but unfortunately back then, build quality was too sloppy, so all it would do was draw attention to misaligned doors and such!

But, the piece over the gauge cluster, and the piece over the Nav screen look a little tacked on.

ateixeira

I don't mind it. In person the two-tone looks nice, and like I said, it's less monotonous.

andre1969

I do remember liking it in person at the DC auto show. In googling some pics of the Impala dash, it does seem a bit busy. But, I think it looks better in person.

tlong

Andre, I've driven several of these lambda's long distance as rentals. I think you are right on the money regarding it's second row seats. Maybe the biggest drawback besides rear visibility. I think the Asians generally do the second row seats better, but the D3 are better in sound insulation and smoothness. However, the handling is surprising good for their size, which I found out driving on some two lane mountain roads several times. I didn't notice a problem with the front seats regarding seating position or road feel. The power adjustments were pretty flexible on them. I used to be a sedan man, and still have one in my garage. But as I drive more of these crossovers, and own one, I'm finding I like the elevated driving position. Of the large crossovers I've driven, I like the lambda's best, except that they are a bit pricey compared to most of their competition. Of course, I do a lot of Interstate driving which may affect my preferences.

I've also rented a Traverse a couple of times, and in my opinion the interior was very plastic/cheap (perhaps the rental grade ones are different?). I also thought that for it's size and bulk, it didn't have that much room inside. Perhaps I'm spoiled by our Odyssey, which feels a lot more car-like yet has more space and better mileage. Not a lot to actually recommend the SUV unless you want to tow, or have some image problem with the minivans.

I also think the vans like Sienna and Odyssey have really nice second row seats. Even the third row is not bad. In general I guess I'm just underwhelmed by the midsized SUVs on the market. If I were going to get an SUV at all, it would be a small one. I really like smaller vehicles, but can see the appeal of more storage space. A smaller vehicle with a lot of space puts you in the small-SUV or hatchback category.

ateixeira

I find it a bit strange but there are Sienna owners who don't have kids.

berri

A minivan is going to trump a crossover in room and seating, no doubt. If you want all that I guess you need to look at a Suburban. Honestly, all of the lambda's needed an interior facelift, Traverse the most. That has happened with the updated 2013's. The drawback to minivans is driver legroom if you're tall, but unfortunately that's true of the Explorer as well. Also, because the vans have more open interior space, they can be noisier on the highway. That is a bigger issue with the Honda, but the new Sienna I rented was also louder than the crossovers I've had, although I've heard that the Pilot is noisy.

berri

I think a lot of older drivers like minivans because they are easy to get into and out of, and the elevated view helps too.

stever

I've been liking them since I was 35 (not including the VW Bus I had access to for a year in '71 or so). No kiddos. :shades:

ateixeira

The power doors are handy. Power hatch as well.

There's a seat option that basically comes all the way out and picks up a person with a disability.

andres3

I still choose to not financially support a company that is not based in the U.S. Your results may vary.

For the price you got your last Cobalt for, I'm not sure your choosing to support the finances of US companies either! :P

andres3

Generally, the new models are doing much better, particularly after the first year out.

Agreed, but that's score wise, reliability wise Ford and Buick have done poorly with their new models, even in 2nd years out. Jury's still out on the ATS but if it isn't reliable... ditto.

In my 20's I didn't care about seat comfort, but as I get older, I suppose that will become more and more important. I never really paid any attention to it, unless the seat was unusually Uncomfortable, which has never happened in a test drive. I did notice the Volvo's had some comfy seats in 2006.

I still put reliability at the top of my buying list for consideration, because I'd much rather visit shops to do parts upgrades (go faster upgrades) by choice, not visit shops because I have to in order to keep it running.

andres3

What evidence is there that the two Malibu strategy didn't work well?

In case you've been living on Mars since 2007, GM went bankrupt, was bailed out against tax payers' wishes, and is still struggling and the tax payer is virtually guaranteed to lose 11 digits of money!

that's well over $10,000,000,000 (nearly double by most estimates) in losses thanks to the insane idea of bailing out GM.

andres3

I might add, if Honda extended the warranty on A/C compressors, it should be no secret that they have experienced problems with them. Some here had said that those were made up stories.

Not made up, but exaggerated. For instance, we will never know for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if Honda extended the warranties on any part with a 2% or larger failure rate. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if Chrysler required a 51% failure rate in order to admit a problem.

andres3

I leased the vehicle so I "didn't care about reliability"

Having read that, I immediately thought, without having read the rest of your post "Do they give you a free loaner every time you go to the dealer to have it fixed (or towed to the dealer)? That would be something to care about in regards to reliability, even under a lease. I'd imagine maybe the luxury car makers have a lease loaner clause?

Still, even with that you have lots of wasted time.... the best warranty is one you never have to use.

dieselone

A lot of people don't want the size or ride of SUVs vs. sedans.

And, I'm one of them. Although, I am finding that, the older I get, a high seating position is kind of nice. My '85 Silverado is just about perfect for me, while my '12 Ram seems a bit too high. But, after driving either of those two for any length of time, my 2000 Park Ave suddenly seems kinda small, and hard to get in and out of. And my older cars, even worse.

I never thought I'd say this but I prefer an SUV over a sedan. Or I should say, I prefer my Expedition over the sedans my wife gets for company cars. Her current Taurus does nothing for me.

The Expe is only a few inches longer and a has a similar turning radius. I find it much easier to park too, because I can see out of it. Plus the Expedition is far more comfortable. I don't sit in the back seats, but both of my kids prefer riding in the 2nd row of the Expe vs. the rear seats in the Taurus. I think it's mainly due to having more room. The seats maybe firmer in the 2nd row of the Expe, but everyone feels claustrophobic in the Taurus. Plus I find it much easier to get in and out of the Expedition too. I don't have to bend my stiff back as much;)

Also, the Expedition rides better under most conditions and is far easier to get and in and out of. My wife has been off all week and the Taurus hasn't moved since Friday. Anywhere we need to go, we take the Expedition.

dieselone

But, the piece over the gauge cluster, and the piece over the Nav screen look a little tacked on.

I agree. I don't like that at all. Overall though, I think the Impala looks pretty good. I'm not sold on the rear styling, but I can say that about a lot of cars.
To bad GM didn't have offered a turbo 4 like Ford did with the Taurus. No way would I want a N/A 4cyl in a car of that size and weight.

Pricing seems on par to me. With the variety of options available $40k is easy in that market. I'd think if you chose options and packages wisely an adequately equipped Impala could be had in the $32-35k range.

hpmctorque

I also liked Buick's wraparound dashboards of the '91-?? era. I also think that two-tone motifs can look tasteful. The thing I object to on the new Impala is the tacked on, layered material on the top of the dash. Tacked on, the way Chevy did it = tacky, in my view.

lemko

Ugh! I hate SUVs, crossovers, minivans, etc. In my book they are still trucks. You can dress up a barn, but it's still a barn and not a parlor. I'm glad they still build a proper large sedan like the Impala.

circlew

DETROIT (AP) -- General Motors is recalling nearly 34,000 Buicks and Cadillacs in the U.S., Canada and elsewhere to fix a problem with the automatic transmissions.

The recall affects Buick LaCrosse full-size cars and Cadillac SRX crossover SUVs from the 2013 model year.

The company says a software problem can cause transmissions to unexpectedly shift into sport mode. That can override any slowing effect from the transmission, increasing the risk of a crash.

General Motors recalls about 34,000 Cadillacs, Buicks to fix problem with transmissions

jpp75

They had some policy about when/if I got a loaner. The first time it was towed and in the shop for 9 days I was given a rental, some cookie monster blue Charger that absolutely sucked. I came to appreciate the Charger when I was given a Compass a few months later. My experience with the Compass removed any doubts that buying a Jeep was a bad idea.

After that it depended on how long they thought it would take to fix it, sometimes I got a loaner, others I didn't. The dealership tried but they were beholden to Chrysler corporate on a lot of things. One day when it was over 100 degrees the whole center stack decided to stop working, no HVAC, no radio, etc. The dealership was very proud that within a couple of hours they had diagnosed the issue as a loose wire in the console. I appreciated them fixing it the same day, but a wire coming lose in 2012? That convinced me that my Jeep was built by one of the workers who was drunk on the assembly line.

jpp75

Exactly, these were trucks. My junk comment primarily referred to cars, although my aunt had a 1993 Astro and now drives a Camry and says her next car will also be a Toyota.

jpp75

Definitely not, but my JGC was in the shop 9 times in a year with less than 12,000 miles on it. Honda still wins that comparison by a mile.

berri

I wasn't putting down the big car segment, just pointing out it's gotten fairly small, but the automakers have been able to keep it by using other chassis. I always liked land yachts and barges, but give yourself another 10 years or so and the body may become more open to a crossover. You might actually like driving an Enclave!

andres3

I wish you would have heeded my warnings about Chrysler and never purchased that JGC. Unfortunately there's a lot of people like you out there willing to give Chrysler a chance to show they are no longer completely incompetent in engineering, design, and assembly/build quality. You don't end up in the shop 9 times in a year unless all of those things are faulty to a high degree.

Between bailouts every few years, and people like you, they manage to stay in business, I don't get it. :mad:

andre1969

but give yourself another 10 years or so and the body may become more open to a crossover. You might actually like driving an Enclave!

I'll confess that I rather like the latest iteration of the Dodge Durango. Part of it though, is that it seems a bit less "trucky" to me, and more like a jacked up station wagon.

andres3

I bought an American car as my first vehicle, so it was not that the Japanese and Germans won my business, it was that the US based companies lost it.

So far, the Japanese and German based car companies have nothing to worry about, as they simply don't make anything nearly as troublesome as my domestic experience. I don't see them ever losing my business in this lifetime.

I'd wager a lemon from Honda is more reliable than the "show car" made for auto reviewer/writers/testers from Chrysler.

andres3

Definitely not, but my JGC was in the shop 9 times in a year with less than 12,000 miles on it. Honda still wins that comparison by a mile.

Exactly, you could own a 90 year old Honda before you are in the shop 9 times for repairs. What is Chrysler doing to refund burned customers? Nothing is the answer. They just keep looking for new suckers that are born every minute.

andre1969

Between bailouts every few years, and people like you, they manage to stay in business, I don't get it.

Hey now, I helped Chrysler out too, about 6 months ago when I bought this new lawn ornament from them...


So far, so good, although it only has about 2,000 miles on it. So, I'm not exactly one to use as a benchmark for reliability.