Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

roadburner

Mr_Shiftright said:

stickguy said:

I always heard that they were selling them at a discount to build the brand.

Well they achieved their goal in the long term, so discounting heavily to build the brand seems like a good investment.

And as more than one person has mentioned, Cadillac should follow a similar strategy to get its foot in the door of the upmarket segments where it wants to compete.

Mr_Shiftright

May 2016 global Cadillac sales summary by model versus May 2015:

Cadillac ATS sales decreased 20.1 percent to 4,444 units
Cadillac CTS sales decreased 35.2 percent to 1,334 units
Cadillac ELR sales decreased 61 percent to 46 units
Cadillac XTS sales decreased 0.9 percent to 3,671 units
Cadillac CT6 sales totaled 1,119 units
Cadillac SRX sales decreased 53.4 percent to 3,914 units as remaining inventory sells out; the SRX is being replaced with the new XT5
Cadillac XT5 sales totaled 4,266 units
Cadillac Escalade sales increased 5.5 percent to 3,445 units



One of their best-sellers? The old Escalade. Go figure.

28firefighter

The Escalade thing does not surprise me. It has a pretty big following in the executive car services.

Mr_Shiftright

It's so ironic, though, that for all the hundreds of millions Cadillac has poured into developing new technology, that one of their best sellers is old technology.

driver100

fintail said:

Since 2003 it looks like. Edmunds has had times in the past where it was extremely busy - it's a bit more subdued today.

The white wheel looks cool, but I'd end up wearing clean gloves while driving, unless it is made of a material you can clean and not harm. I am sure it isn't hard plastic like in an old car.

Here's a shot of the wood in my car, it works well with the interior color, and is unusual - one of the factors that made up my mind. I like this more than shiny wood, the finish is closer to what one finds on a vintage car, or on old furniture:

Yep, the fintail is still alive and well. A quirk here and there, but pretty strong for an unrestored car of its age. I've actually been to the MB Museum in Stuttgart three times, and toured the factory at Sindelfingen twice. It really is a cool experience.

Here's the fintail posing with the new car:

The interior is beautiful.......I like the way they do the saddle brown but with black trim, and the wood contrast nicely. Both cars look great....always amazes me that a 30+ year old car can still look so good.....even today.

Yesterday we went on a trip with friends, so we used my wife's GLK. Our friends loved riding in it....thought it was really comfortable with the higher seating. It has the same engine as the E400 so it rides and handles beautifully, absolute pleasure to drive. And, I still like it's boxy styling.

fintail

Yep, Caddy should operate somewhat as a loss leader to get its foot back in the door. The product has really advanced, but the prices aren't going to lure people out of their default choices. There needs to be an enticement like what was offered with the original LS. Assuming the product meets expectations, prices can slowly rise over time - just like with the LS. Offering an equal or even mildly superior product at the same price as the competition won't be enough, they still need to overcome some stereotypes.

46 ELR sold in May, wacky.

driver100

graphicguy said:

houdini1 said:

graphicguy said:

driver100 said:

fintail said:

Nice, I approve of that. As an E400, I assume leather is standard. What color wood?

My prior E had the same light grey interior, but tex. The current one has the relatively rare brown leather with brown open pore wood, it is quite pretty.

driver100 said:

I went with light beige...the lighter the better for me. The last one was very light gray.

I got brown open pore wood as well. They have about 5 or 6 choices now, including some very shiny materials with pinstripes and some brushed aluminum looks to make a Mercedes seem more with it for younger people. I wonder how much longer MB will use wood, and what percentage use shiny metal look compared to wood?

Pinstripe Look:

Ooooooo.....I like that!

For me, the quilted two tone seats and pinstripes are a little over the top.

I'm Italian. I like that sort of look. I know I'm probably in the minority, though.

I don;t know if being Italian helps....reminds me of a bordello (which for the record I have never been in...only seen in movies).

fintail

It really won me over. It's probably the only E250 in this exact color combo and spec in the country. Blue on brown works, too - I like the lighter interiors too, but this has some warmth:





This basic design debuted in 2009, so it might not be as flashy as newer styles, or the posh new E-class.

houdini1 said:

I really like that interior.

28firefighter

I love the brown/saddle interior - probably the only leather interior out there that I really like.

stickguy

that is a really nice color combo. If I get the chance, I want to go for an interior along those lines.

fintail

Thanks. Yeah, MBs tend to age gracefully. Even modern ones hold up really well, if they are maintained. An 80s S-class has more class than most new lux cars, and a 90s model says "get out of my way" more than most anything.

I find the ride to be in common with older cars. It is firm but plush, and the cars always feel heavy. That puts some people off, but for open road cruising, it works.

qbrozen

Mr_Shiftright said:

May 2016 global Cadillac sales summary by model versus May 2015:

Cadillac ATS sales decreased 20.1 percent to 4,444 units
Cadillac CTS sales decreased 35.2 percent to 1,334 units
Cadillac ELR sales decreased 61 percent to 46 units
Cadillac XTS sales decreased 0.9 percent to 3,671 units
Cadillac CT6 sales totaled 1,119 units
Cadillac SRX sales decreased 53.4 percent to 3,914 units as remaining inventory sells out; the SRX is being replaced with the new XT5
Cadillac XT5 sales totaled 4,266 units
Cadillac Escalade sales increased 5.5 percent to 3,445 units



One of their best-sellers? The old Escalade. Go figure.

Over 4k XT5s is kind of surprising. It is the hot market segment, but also full of competitors.

Interesting statistic: per truecar, I can already get $2500 off an XT5, yet the F-pace is $2k OVER sticker.

qbrozen

Hey, fin. Out of curiosity, what do you know about the 2007 E550 4matic? Good? Bad? Problem areas?

ab348

qbrozen said:

Over 4k XT5s is kind of surprising. It is the hot market segment, but also full of competitors.

Interesting statistic: per truecar, I can already get $2500 off an XT5, yet the F-pace is $2k OVER sticker.

I wonder if those XT5 numbers are driven by getting inventory of a new model onto dealer lots?

I can't ever see paying over sticker. I wonder if Jag thinks that having Stephen Hawking in their TV ads is actually helping them sell the F-Pace? It doesn't work for me.

graphicguy

driver100 said:

graphicguy said:

houdini1 said:

graphicguy said:

driver100 said:

fintail said:

Nice, I approve of that. As an E400, I assume leather is standard. What color wood?

My prior E had the same light grey interior, but tex. The current one has the relatively rare brown leather with brown open pore wood, it is quite pretty.

driver100 said:

I went with light beige...the lighter the better for me. The last one was very light gray.

I got brown open pore wood as well. They have about 5 or 6 choices now, including some very shiny materials with pinstripes and some brushed aluminum looks to make a Mercedes seem more with it for younger people. I wonder how much longer MB will use wood, and what percentage use shiny metal look compared to wood?

Pinstripe Look:

Ooooooo.....I like that!

For me, the quilted two tone seats and pinstripes are a little over the top.

I'm Italian. I like that sort of look. I know I'm probably in the minority, though.

I don;t know if being Italian helps....reminds me of a bordello (which for the record I have never been in...only seen in movies).

I knew I had seen that interior somewhere.....



About Caddy....I'm probably the wrong reference given my history with them, but I can honestly say I've talked to more people in Cadillac's service dept who thought something was wrong with their tires/shocks/springs because it didn't "ride like a Caddy".

Cadillac has some work to do to get over the previous stigma about their cars. They've got the styling and the quality materials down pat. I think before it's all over, you'll see another strategic shift in their marketing, too.

houdini1

fintail said:

Thanks. Yeah, MBs tend to age gracefully. Even modern ones hold up really well, if they are maintained. An 80s S-class has more class than most new lux cars, and a 90s model says "get out of my way" more than most anything.

I find the ride to be in common with older cars. It is firm but plush, and the cars always feel heavy. That puts some people off, but for open road cruising, it works.

Definitely agree on the "heavy ride". I've owned 2 MBs, a 240 D and a 190 E. The 240 D rode in a very heavy and stately manner, even though it was not a big car. The 190 E was even smaller, but you could not tell from driving it.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

But, you shouldn't have to keep the car for a longer period of time to recoup the value...you are the victim.

In my friends case, he shouldn't have to keep his MB SUV for 10 years to be made whole....they should fix the car ($13k damage) plus, whatever he has lost when he trades it in ($8k). He should not be out anything - it isn't right!

I am not saying that you should keep the car for a longer period of time to recoup the diminished value, I was just using that as an example that diminished value is hard to determine and can change depending on the circumstances.

Now suppose that your friend got the $8K for diminished value but did keep the car for another year and traded it in with a $6K loss over book. Would your friend give back the extra $1K?

Or supposed that that dealer was just using the accident to lowball the trade in and another dealer gave more for the trade in?

There are so many variables that it is difficult to accurately determine the diminished value.

Again, what if a replacement part last longer than the original OEM one would have; do you have to pay for that replacement part since you benefited from longer life? Everyone low balls trade-ins. How hard do you need to try to sell the car in order to determine you aren't getting low-balled?

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

DV is realized immediately and instantaneously once the car is wrecked. It can be determined without selling the car, just EXACTLY the same as a totaled car has a value and it is not what you can sell the totaled car for. Again, this is a VERY weak argument that are making.

While diminished value occurs at the time of the accident it is not realized until the car is disposed of. Say the diminished value is $5K, do you have to pay that $5K to get the car back? Is $5K somehow deducted from a bank account of yours? No it isn't. When you get your car back you get it back fixed with no out of pocket expense hence you did not realize a loss at that time. Only when you dispose of the vehicle do you realize the loss.

I have been doing this diminished value and realized vs unrealized losses in my profession for ages, I know what I am talking about.

andres3 said:

DV never goes down to zero no matter how old the car. It might flat line really low, but it is always greater than zero on a car in good condition.

Actually once a car reaches a certain point and it isn't a collectors car a previous accident will not affect the value of the car. It usually is high mileage cars that are at this point. I will bet that a 2001 Accent with 250K miles will get the same amount regardless of if it had an accident or not.

snakeweasel

oldfarmer50 said:

henryn said:

So this is saying you get the Truecar price, AND an additional $1,000 off if you go through Sam's Club? Sounds a little too good to be true.

I was ready to complain to the hosts about the size of the ads until I saw your moniker.

Sounds interesting. I guess it all comes down to whether the TrueCar price is good. An extra $1000 off would be the gravy.

EDIT: I went to Sam's and punched in a 2017 Mustang just like mine. TrueCar price was $2 k off sticker which is what I got in July. So that part is good. Another $1000 would be sweet.

However, I got about $2000 more for my trade for a total of $4k off vs $3k for the Sam's offer. Not really a direct comparison as I got my car at the end of the year (July) and the 2017 are just in.

My understanding is that Truecar prices are good but there are a a certain number of people that do get lower prices on the car so it's not the lowest price paid but close.

snakeweasel

qbrozen said:

henryn said:

driver100 said:

All cars depreciate by that much at least...as soon as you drive them off the lot.

Uhh … no, definitely not true. If you get a good deal when you buy it (end of model year), and pick a model with low depreciation, you can come out smelling like a rose.

I owned a 2011 Silverado, purchased new, kept for 2 years, it only depreciated $3k over the 2 years I owned it.

Another regular here, @qbrozen. He had a Mustang GT, purchased new, kept around 2 years, and it depreciated less than your $7k. Now the car he traded the Mustang in for, the Cadillac, that one depreciated, what, $17k ? over the course of about 2 years.

Lesson here is, if you don’t want massive depreciation, don’t buy a new luxury car.

Depends on how you calculate depreciation. From my purchase price to my trade price, the Mustang lost only about $3k in 18 mos, while the Caddy lost, yes, $17k in about the same amount of time. From MSRP, it looks much worse on both counts. I think something like $10k on the pony and nearly 30 large on the caddy.

You would always calculate depreciation on the cost, at least in financial reports and taxes.

explorerx4

A few new 2016 Escapes showed up at the dealer I was in contact last week for the 2 that didn't work out.
Left the salesman a voice mail.
Unless he's on vacation, he will call me tomorrow morning.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

Funny enough way back in 2002 my '03 Honda came with a flyer from Honda that said make sure your insurer only uses GENUINE Honda OEM parts for replacement during an accident claim. They said you could and should insist only OEM parts are used to keep your warranty valid and your car running right.

At first I thought they might just be trying to make money selling OEM replacement parts, but I actually think the flyer was issued for the mutual best interests of everyone.

Could be both but mostly they want to make more money by selling replacement parts. There are many aftermarket manufacturers that can and do make parts as good and often better than the original manufacturer. Just don't go for the cheap parts. Edmonds has a decent article somewhere comparing OEM and aftermarket parts that discusses this.

snakeweasel

fordfool said:

andres3 said:

Someone here said buy the safest car you can afford; that should go for rentals too; you never know when you'll need those safety systems.

I wonder what the accident rate of rental cars is, what with drivers inexperienced with the car frequently driving on unfamiliar roads.

Well most accidents happen within 25 miles of your home and in a car that the driver is familiar with.

Just kidding but a good example how you can twist facts to fit what you want.

Now both being on unfamiliar roads and in an unfamiliar car would increase the risk of an accident. However I do think a good driver can become familiar with a car pretty quickly reducing that as a risk. As for being on unfamiliar roads I always drive with the attitude that I can always go around the block. Meaning that if I find myself in the wrong lane at the last minute I don't panic, I just keep going and turn around when it's safe to.

snakeweasel

jmonroe said:

snakeweasel said:

jmonroe said:

The Cub's are a lock to win their division. I can't say that about the disappointing performance the Pirates are displaying this year.

Yep the Cubs will take their division and I am really glad about that, if it was close I would have to have been rooting to the Mets and I really couldn't do that. Now just be glad you're not a Giants fan (you're not a Giants fan are you?).

jmonroe said:

To keep your hair blower from going back to the shop, don't make anymore left turns at multi point stop sign intersections.

jmonroe

Hair? What's that?

Nope, I'm not a Giants fan. I live too far east for that to happen.

About the hair thing, I have lots of it even now. Like I've said before, not all of it is the original color but there is plenty of it and I'm bragging not complaining.

jmonroe

Well I do have the same amount of hair as when I was in high school, it's just in different places.

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

I don't think insurance companies should avoid paying diminished value (DM) because it isn't easy to calculate. I do know it isn't right that the victim in an accident should be out of pocket.

OK now I will sound like an insurance industry spokesman. Insurance companies avoid paying diminished value because you don't insure against it. Your policy basically states that they will give you the value of the car if totaled or fix it if not totaled.

Now if you want to be insured for diminished value then you would pay more in insurance premiums.

ab348

snakeweasel said:

Well I do have the same amount of hair as when I was in high school, it's just in different places.

Not me. I was a speaker at an event on Wednesday evening and later, some pics were posted on Twitter by a few people in attendance. I was shocked by the lack of hair - partly due to a very close-cropped haircut I now have but at a glance I would appear to be virtually hairless these days. I first started losing hair on my head at age 16.

snakeweasel

jmonroe said:

houdini1 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

andres3 said:

houdini1 said:

I've been reading a lot of good things about the upcoming Genesis G80 and G90. I will probably give them a try when they are available. Biggest downside according to reviewers is not having any "brand cache and heritage" which doesn't bother me a bit if I like the cars.

It might bother you if you are forced to resell early and take the massive depreciation hit (sometimes forced by others negligent driving). Other then that, it would be nice if more makers made world-class cars.

"They" said the same thing about the Lexus LS400 when it first came out. The trick is, you have to produce a luxury car that offers the same level of luxury as the brands with "cache", but at a better price. That's what Lexus did and it worked.

According to Hyundai (Genesis?) the new G90's body is 80% more rigid than the Equus it replaces, and the Equus wasn't a slouch. Supposedly, it is also more rigid that the Merc S 550. If true, that is a very good sign of a well built car. Got my attention anyway.

Dammit, you are getting serious about this aren't you !! :@

jmonroe

I have been in an Equus and that is one mighty nice car and it seemed to be well built. If Hyundai can improve on it they will have a very good car.

snakeweasel

fintail said:

Thanks. Yeah, MBs tend to age gracefully. Even modern ones hold up really well, if they are maintained. An 80s S-class has more class than most new lux cars, and a 90s model says "get out of my way" more than most anything.

I find the ride to be in common with older cars. It is firm but plush, and the cars always feel heavy. That puts some people off, but for open road cruising, it works.

Not to sure about that, nearly every MB I see that predates this century seems dated and tired.

fintail

A 240D definitely rides in what I would call a "stately" manner, maybe even more than the fintail, as it won't have all of that swing axle fun. Slower than a fintail, too. I've only ever ridden in a W201 (190), but I would expect it to ride more solid than virtually any car of the same size. MB had their own ride style down, before everything had to be "sporty".

houdini1 said:

Definitely agree on the "heavy ride". I've owned 2 MBs, a 240 D and a 190 E. The 240 D rode in a very heavy and stately manner, even though it was not a big car. The 190 E was even smaller, but you could not tell from driving it.

fintail

I've never had a W211, so I might not be an authority. I do know 2007 was a facelift year, and I think the first year that engine was sold here. No engine issues come to mind, but I think some older 4Matic cars can have transfer case issues, and all of those cars had Airmatic, that's always something to keep in mind. For any MB of that age, a good PPI is the best bet.

qbrozen said:

Hey, fin. Out of curiosity, what do you know about the 2007 E550 4matic? Good? Bad? Problem areas?

houdini1

snakeweasel said:

qbrozen said:

henryn said:

driver100 said:

All cars depreciate by that much at least...as soon as you drive them off the lot.

Uhh … no, definitely not true. If you get a good deal when you buy it (end of model year), and pick a model with low depreciation, you can come out smelling like a rose.

I owned a 2011 Silverado, purchased new, kept for 2 years, it only depreciated $3k over the 2 years I owned it.

Another regular here, @qbrozen. He had a Mustang GT, purchased new, kept around 2 years, and it depreciated less than your $7k. Now the car he traded the Mustang in for, the Cadillac, that one depreciated, what, $17k ? over the course of about 2 years.

Lesson here is, if you don’t want massive depreciation, don’t buy a new luxury car.

Depends on how you calculate depreciation. From my purchase price to my trade price, the Mustang lost only about $3k in 18 mos, while the Caddy lost, yes, $17k in about the same amount of time. From MSRP, it looks much worse on both counts. I think something like $10k on the pony and nearly 30 large on the caddy.

You would always calculate depreciation on the cost, at least in financial reports and taxes.

I agree 100%, however the people who predict depreciation do not have the actual cost to work with, so they use the only figure they have, which is MSRP. Hyundai, for instance, has always discounted their cars heavily from MSRP, thus their depreciation seems much more than cars sold at or close to MSRP.

houdini1

snakeweasel said:

fordfool said:

andres3 said:

Someone here said buy the safest car you can afford; that should go for rentals too; you never know when you'll need those safety systems.

I wonder what the accident rate of rental cars is, what with drivers inexperienced with the car frequently driving on unfamiliar roads.

Well most accidents happen within 25 miles of your home and in a car that the driver is familiar with.

Just kidding but a good example how you can twist facts to fit what you want.

Now both being on unfamiliar roads and in an unfamiliar car would increase the risk of an accident. However I do think a good driver can become familiar with a car pretty quickly reducing that as a risk. As for being on unfamiliar roads I always drive with the attitude that I can always go around the block. Meaning that if I find myself in the wrong lane at the last minute I don't panic, I just keep going and turn around when it's safe to.

Years ago I remember telling my then 5 year old to buckle his seat belt, and that most accidents occur within a couple of miles of where you live. His response was, "Let's move".

berri

I think it is hard for a car dealer to give you an estimate of diminished value since most have a body shop as well. Kind of conflicting interests.

oldfarmer50

snakeweasel said:

oldfarmer50 said:

henryn said:

So this is saying you get the Truecar price, AND an additional $1,000 off if you go through Sam's Club? Sounds a little too good to be true.

I was ready to complain to the hosts about the size of the ads until I saw your moniker.

Sounds interesting. I guess it all comes down to whether the TrueCar price is good. An extra $1000 off would be the gravy.

EDIT: I went to Sam's and punched in a 2017 Mustang just like mine. TrueCar price was $2 k off sticker which is what I got in July. So that part is good. Another $1000 would be sweet.

However, I got about $2000 more for my trade for a total of $4k off vs $3k for the Sam's offer. Not really a direct comparison as I got my car at the end of the year (July) and the 2017 are just in.

My understanding is that Truecar prices are good but there are a a certain number of people that do get lower prices on the car so it's not the lowest price paid but close.

Funny, I used TrueCar and Edmunds figures when calculating my offer on the last car. The dealer initially rejected it but later came around. I wonder if I had gotten an acceptance right off the bat because I had a coupon if I would have felt less satisfied. Maybe you need to work for the deal to feel like you "won". Wouldn't suprise me if salespeople plan it that way.

fintail

Maybe it's the environment.

There were some dull designs at the turn of the century/DCX years, but a well kept old (80s era or older) MB is more attractive than many new cars.

snakeweasel said:

Not to sure about that, nearly every MB I see that predates this century seems dated and tired.

oldfarmer50

snakeweasel said:

fintail said:

Thanks. Yeah, MBs tend to age gracefully. Even modern ones hold up really well, if they are maintained. An 80s S-class has more class than most new lux cars, and a 90s model says "get out of my way" more than most anything.

I find the ride to be in common with older cars. It is firm but plush, and the cars always feel heavy. That puts some people off, but for open road cruising, it works.

Not to sure about that, nearly every MB I see that predates this century seems dated and tired.

Maybe because back then all the domestics were trying to make their cars look like a MB. Remember the Ford Granada ad where people couldn't tell the two apart?

driver100

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

I don't think insurance companies should avoid paying diminished value (DM) because it isn't easy to calculate. I do know it isn't right that the victim in an accident should be out of pocket.

OK now I will sound like an insurance industry spokesman. Insurance companies avoid paying diminished value because you don't insure against it. Your policy basically states that they will give you the value of the car if totaled or fix it if not totaled.

Now if you want to be insured for diminished value then you would pay more in insurance premiums.

It is a loophole for the insurance company. I think I am buying insurance so if something happens I will be made whole again. Now the insurance company says, your car was hit by another car, we will just patch it up a bit so that you can still drive it........unfortunately, since it was hit and isn't in top shape any more it is worth 25% less as a trade in.......all we are responsible for is to make sure it is still running.

I am sure they are covered by all their 10 pages of fine print, but, that is not what I thought I was paying for.

Like I say, there should be a formula. If your car loses value if you trade it in in year one, you get back 100% of diminished value, 20% less per year for diminished value after that. I see no reason why the victim should be out anything.

driver100

CBS News....Traffic deaths increasing - up 18% over the last 2 years:

The report states that traffic death have increased 18 percent over the last two years. More than 19,000 people were estimated killed in the first half of 2016 alone.

“Our complacency when it comes to highway fatalities is killing us,” said Deborah Hersman, the National Safety Council’s CEO.

Hersman, who is also the former chair of the NTSB, said that there are three major causes of traffic fatalities.

“One third of all our deaths on our roads are due to alcohol impaired drivers,” she said. “We’ve seen speed limits going up across the nation -- we know that’s adding to the death toll. And then finally distraction. All you have to do is walk out near a roadway, you can see distracted pedestrians, distracted drivers.”

The surge in traffic deaths comes as more Americans are driving due to lower gas prices and an improving economy.

Federal regulators are still trying to understand what’s behind the sudden change in fatalities. A U.S. Department of Transportation report found a 13 percent increase in deaths among cyclists and a 10 percent increase for both pedestrians and young drivers in 2015.

“We are absolutely going in the wrong direction when it comes to highway fatalities. We’ve got to figure out what’s going on and put a stop to it,” Hersman said.

driver100

snakeweasel said:

fintail said:

Thanks. Yeah, MBs tend to age gracefully. Even modern ones hold up really well, if they are maintained. An 80s S-class has more class than most new lux cars, and a 90s model says "get out of my way" more than most anything.

I find the ride to be in common with older cars. It is firm but plush, and the cars always feel heavy. That puts some people off, but for open road cruising, it works.

Not to sure about that, nearly every MB I see that predates this century seems dated and tired.

looks better than almost every new car you could buy today:

oldfarmer50

Interesting ad.

Could these be vehicles that the manufacturer forced the dealer into using as service loaners to pump up reported sales figures?

https://www.depaula.com/better-buy-specials/

I looked at one they offered and was not impressed with the price. $3k off on a 2016 at this point after being bounced around by a bunch of strangers for a year doesn't seem like a bargain. The lease seem to be better. A $0 down $164/month deal looks attractive since you'd be giving the car back.

I know some of you folks have purchased dealer loaners. What's been your experience?

oldfarmer50

driver100 said:

CBS News....Traffic deaths increasing - up 18% over the last 2 years:

The report states that traffic death have increased 18 percent over the last two years. More than 19,000 people were estimated killed in the first half of 2016 alone.

“Our complacency when it comes to highway fatalities is killing us,” said Deborah Hersman, the National Safety Council’s CEO.

Hersman, who is also the former chair of the NTSB, said that there are three major causes of traffic fatalities.

“One third of all our deaths on our roads are due to alcohol impaired drivers,” she said. “We’ve seen speed limits going up across the nation -- we know that’s adding to the death toll. And then finally distraction. All you have to do is walk out near a roadway, you can see distracted pedestrians, distracted drivers.”

The surge in traffic deaths comes as more Americans are driving due to lower gas prices and an improving economy.

Federal regulators are still trying to understand what’s behind the sudden change in fatalities. A U.S. Department of Transportation report found a 13 percent increase in deaths among cyclists and a 10 percent increase for both pedestrians and young drivers in 2015.

“We are absolutely going in the wrong direction when it comes to highway fatalities. We’ve got to figure out what’s going on and put a stop to it,” Hersman said.

1/3 of deaths are due to drunk drivers? Sounds fishy to me. Sounds like the prelude for some draconian infringements on our rights in the name of "safety".

driver100

oldfarmer50 said:

Interesting ad.

Could these be vehicles that the manufacturer forced the dealer into using as service loaners to pump up reported sales figures?

https://www.depaula.com/better-buy-specials/

I looked at one they offered and was not impressed with the price. $3k off on a 2016 at this point after being bounced around by a bunch of strangers for a year doesn't seem like a bargain. The lease seem to be better. A $0 down $164/month deal looks attractive since you'd be giving the car back.

I know some of you folks have purchased dealer loaners. What's been your experience?

$3k off on a 2016 isn't a big deal at this time of year....if you buy a 2017 you will get a few $thousand off anyway, and this car is one year older....so is worth $3k less a year from now.

Maybe someone can explain....it says it is for a closed end lease, then it gives a buy back of $12000 +. I thought closed end meant you had no option, you had to turn the car in. It can't mean you have to keep the car, because they want to charge you for anything not normal wear.

Lease prices look pretty good, I'd have to see fine print though.

driver100

oldfarmer50 said:

driver100 said:

CBS News....Traffic deaths increasing - up 18% over the last 2 years:

The report states that traffic death have increased 18 percent over the last two years. More than 19,000 people were estimated killed in the first half of 2016 alone.

“Our complacency when it comes to highway fatalities is killing us,” said Deborah Hersman, the National Safety Council’s CEO.

Hersman, who is also the former chair of the NTSB, said that there are three major causes of traffic fatalities.

“One third of all our deaths on our roads are due to alcohol impaired drivers,” she said. “We’ve seen speed limits going up across the nation -- we know that’s adding to the death toll. And then finally distraction. All you have to do is walk out near a roadway, you can see distracted pedestrians, distracted drivers.”

The surge in traffic deaths comes as more Americans are driving due to lower gas prices and an improving economy.

Federal regulators are still trying to understand what’s behind the sudden change in fatalities. A U.S. Department of Transportation report found a 13 percent increase in deaths among cyclists and a 10 percent increase for both pedestrians and young drivers in 2015.

“We are absolutely going in the wrong direction when it comes to highway fatalities. We’ve got to figure out what’s going on and put a stop to it,” Hersman said.

1/3 of deaths are due to drunk drivers? Sounds fishy to me. Sounds like the prelude for some draconian infringements on our rights in the name of "safety".

I am surprised drunk drivers aren't higher than 1/3. Another headline I saw was accidents way up where there is legal marijuana being sold!

snakeweasel

oldfarmer50 said:

snakeweasel said:

fintail said:

Thanks. Yeah, MBs tend to age gracefully. Even modern ones hold up really well, if they are maintained. An 80s S-class has more class than most new lux cars, and a 90s model says "get out of my way" more than most anything.

I find the ride to be in common with older cars. It is firm but plush, and the cars always feel heavy. That puts some people off, but for open road cruising, it works.

Not to sure about that, nearly every MB I see that predates this century seems dated and tired.

Maybe because back then all the domestics were trying to make their cars look like a MB. Remember the Ford Granada ad where people couldn't tell the two apart?

I don't recall the ad and I don't think that the domestics were really trying to make their cars look like MB's and that still wouldn't explain things.

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

I don't think insurance companies should avoid paying diminished value (DM) because it isn't easy to calculate. I do know it isn't right that the victim in an accident should be out of pocket.

OK now I will sound like an insurance industry spokesman. Insurance companies avoid paying diminished value because you don't insure against it. Your policy basically states that they will give you the value of the car if totaled or fix it if not totaled.

Now if you want to be insured for diminished value then you would pay more in insurance premiums.

It is a loophole for the insurance company. I think I am buying insurance so if something happens I will be made whole again. Now the insurance company says, your car was hit by another car, we will just patch it up a bit so that you can still drive it........unfortunately, since it was hit and isn't in top shape any more it is worth 25% less as a trade in.......all we are responsible for is to make sure it is still running.

I am sure they are covered by all their 10 pages of fine print, but, that is not what I thought I was paying for.

Like I say, there should be a formula. If your car loses value if you trade it in in year one, you get back 100% of diminished value, 20% less per year for diminished value after that. I see no reason why the victim should be out anything.

It's not really a loophole as you are not getting something you didn't pay for. Insurance typically pays to repair your car not make you "whole" 9which is an intangible concept).

snakeweasel

oldfarmer50 said:

Interesting ad.

Could these be vehicles that the manufacturer forced the dealer into using as service loaners to pump up reported sales figures?

https://www.depaula.com/better-buy-specials/

I looked at one they offered and was not impressed with the price. $3k off on a 2016 at this point after being bounced around by a bunch of strangers for a year doesn't seem like a bargain. The lease seem to be better. A $0 down $164/month deal looks attractive since you'd be giving the car back.

I know some of you folks have purchased dealer loaners. What's been your experience?

Our experience has been pretty positive, can't say that we would have had a better one if we bought brand new. No issues and the car drives pretty well.

This goes for both cars, one a dealer demo and the other a rental car. Cost savings on the demo was decent, not great but decent and the cost savings on the rental was absolutely fantastic.

explorerx4

'Snake,
Here one of the Granada commercials.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2NGPnyqTOk

nyccarguy

This diminished value discussion is interesting. Both sides have been providing good information. I like the point you say that we don't pay to insure against diminished value. Very true. When most people make diminished value claims, don't they usually go after the other party's insurance company (if the other party was deemed to be at fault)?

roadburner

driver100 said:

CBS News....Traffic deaths increasing - up 18% over the last 2 years:

The report states that traffic death have increased 18 percent over the last two years. More than 19,000 people were estimated killed in the first half of 2016 alone.

“Our complacency when it comes to highway fatalities is killing us,” said Deborah Hersman, the National Safety Council’s CEO.

Hersman, who is also the former chair of the NTSB, said that there are three major causes of traffic fatalities.

“One third of all our deaths on our roads are due to alcohol impaired drivers,” she said. “We’ve seen speed limits going up across the nation -- we know that’s adding to the death toll. And then finally distraction. All you have to do is walk out near a roadway, you can see distracted pedestrians, distracted drivers.”

The surge in traffic deaths comes as more Americans are driving due to lower gas prices and an improving economy.

Federal regulators are still trying to understand what’s behind the sudden change in fatalities. A U.S. Department of Transportation report found a 13 percent increase in deaths among cyclists and a 10 percent increase for both pedestrians and young drivers in 2015.

“We are absolutely going in the wrong direction when it comes to highway fatalities. We’ve got to figure out what’s going on and put a stop to it,” Hersman said.

Yes, the Safety [non-permissible content removed] always have to justify their existence. A few comments;
Fatality numbers are meaningless unless they are adjusted for the miles traveled.
"Speeding related" deaths don't distinguish between accidents where a vehicle is traveling in excess of the speed limit and deaths where the vehicle was traveling at or below the speed limit but was traveling too fast for the road conditions. It recalls how some DUI stats will label an accident as "alcohol related" because a passenger was intoxicated.

ab348

driver100 said:

I am surprised drunk drivers aren't higher than 1/3. Another headline I saw was accidents way up where there is legal marijuana being sold!

Hardly a surprise. The advocates for that substance say it does not affect driving ability except perhaps to slow one down, which is total BS IMO. One result of that is that people, especially young people, think it is OK to drive afterwards. Our PM up here is on track to legalize it next year and I dread the outcome of that.