Sales Flops of 2005

andre1969

I had to look it up...the base Magnum is called SE. I forgot that Dodge started doing that. Once upon a time, the base model of car was just that car's name, with no trim level. For example, my 2000 Intrepid is just an Intrepid. In 2001 I think, they started calling the cheap one Intrepid SE. And I guess that's where it carried over from.

I'm not sure, but I think the 2.2 that was used in the S-10 pickups was the same one used in the Cavalier before they went to the Ecotech. I'm not sure where the 2.2 originally comes from though. The old Cavalier in the 80's used to have a 2.0 4-cyl, while there was a 2.5 that went in S-10's, Celebrities, etc, but it seemed that both engines got replaced by a 2.2 around the early 90's. I guess it was either an enlarged Cavalier engine or a debored/destroked Celebrity engine, but never knew for sure. One of life's great mysteries, I guess. :P

anythngbutgm

I was absolutely flabergasted to find a motor that small in a pickup. It was 2WD, so it might not have been THAT much of a dog...

And the domestic fans find much to rag on for a V6 hybrid truck like the Ridgline, well at least that thing has some guts behind it. But I digress...

ubbermotor

In the '70's Dodge used to have a "Custom" model below the base model. Perhaps the Custom badging was supposed to hide the fact it was a stripper.

andre1969

the "SE" badging throws me off sometimes is because back in the 70's, "SE" meant "Special Edition", and when applied to something like a Dart got you enough shag carpeting, crushed velour, and over-stuffed vinyl to almost put a Caddy or Lincoln to shame!

LOL, I had totally forgotten about those "Customs"!

bumpy

This stuff isn't hard to find. The 2.5 was the old Iron Puke, and the 1.8 was developed for the original Cavalier and eventually became the 2.2.

robertsmx

A flop to me would involve missing sales expectations by a considerable margin while considering overall market situation. If other vehicles are moving, and couple of similar ones are not... you've got a flop.

You can't go on comparing a roadster to a wagon and base your opinion on one being a flop or not. The other important measure is how long a vehicle sits at a dealership lot. At 120 days... that is more than twice the average (which is 57 days).

au1994

I had an 89 Chevy Beretta with the 2.0 4cyl. The thing was so slow it was dangerous to merge onto the interstate!

Did not help that it was an automatic and had been a rental car for the forst 10k of its life.

booyahcramer

Pretty lame sales numbers for a company that is supposed to have shed it's poor reputation with Johnny Lunchbucket.

prosa

Pretty lame sales numbers for a company that is supposed to have shed it's poor reputation with Johnny Lunchbucket.

Hyundai models are in a bit of flux right now. The Accent was just redesigned, the Elantra and Santa Fe are about to be redesigned, and the Tuscon and Azera are new to the market. Give the company a year or two and see how its sales are doing, before jumping to any conclusions.

guss

doing badly ? I see alot of them and the Kia version, the Sportage around.

I think they took a bite of the Santa Fe's sales because dealer are still advertising 2005's.

ubbermotor

Except according to Autonews, as of March 1st the Magnum has a 63 day supply and the the average was 91 days.

anythngbutgm

Cool! Dealers must be wheelin and dealin to move them then. I'm quite sure I read over 100 days back in the middle of Feb. The 300 remains steady with no signs of slowing down. Looks like Chrysler nailed the target audience with that one.

andre1969

I thought one reason the 300 was doing so well is because it was filling the shoes of not only the old 300M but also the Concorde/LHS AND the Intrepid! And from around March '04 or whenever the 300 was launched until May '05 when the Charger was launched, that seemed to be the case.

Now though, the Charger does seem to be picking up, but the 300 is still doing awfully well.

ateixeira

Americans prefer sedans, that's why the 300C has done better than the Magnum. Now that the Charger is here, Magnum has to share showroom space with that, and since the Charger is newer it'll get less attention.

Plus the only ad I've ever seen is the one where the guy races the Lotus and then points to all the cargo he's got inside.

-juice

PS My wife actually likes the styling, she calls it the BatMobile.

robertsmx

With "91 average days to turn", I would be questioning autonews and its source of information. That number has traditionally been close to 60. This, before we could even talk about Magnum or anything that autonews has to report.

ubbermotor

To clarify, the "average" per model is 91, the total industry "average" is 70. Looking per model, specialty models like the Viper have equal standing to high volume cars. The industry "average" is more of a look at volume products (of which I would say the Magnum is one).

robertsmx

Industry average was 59 at month ago. Is autonews reporting it went up by 11! That would be a huge jump in the wrong direction.

ubbermotor

Actually the same spreadsheet says it was 73 as of the 1st of Feb. So it appears they are saying its down by 3.

robertsmx

That is wrong. The worst I remember seeing was 61 a few years ago. I doubt car market suddenly got in a huge slump (11 days up from 59 is HUGE).

ubbermotor

And where are you pulling your data?

robertsmx

How many sources do you want? Google it up if you want to (including a search on Edmunds... look for "average days to turn").

How about your source that appears to be the lone warrior against others?

210delray

in their 3/13/06 issue also listed the days supply of the Magnum at 63. I'm writing this away from home, so I don't have the other figures in front of me.

But I remember the Magnum because of this discussion.

ubbermotor

Here is my source, in pdf or Excel;

link title

ateixeira

Great source, but too bad they don't always break it down by individual model.

-juice

robertsmx

Thanks. That is a great link. I do see a "gap" in our argument now.

Days to turn for cars: 57
Days to turn for trucks: 82

Overall days to turn: 70

nwng

Yikes, how does L/M and buick dealers/salespeople survive?

anythngbutgm

Are those inventory numbers accurate for Saab? Especially the 9-2x. Sounds like they could just halt production for the rest of the year and have enough to sell! :surprise:

210delray

Well the "Saabaru" 9-2X has been a loser from Day One. In calendar year 2005, only 5940 were sold.

I guess you can't always fool everyone.

ateixeira

They had only planned on 8000, so while volumes are tiny, they're not far off that goal.

-juice

xwesx

That is ~25% short! How far off constitutes "not far?" Is 10% off a 250,000 goal more significant than 25% off a 10,000 goal? I guess if you have all that sheet metal sitting in a parking lot somewhere it might be.... :surprise:

gagrice

There are still dealers all over the country that have hundreds of new 2005-2006 Camry's for sale. 2007 models are out already. Does that make the 2005-2006 Camry a flop?

anythngbutgm

Being that it is the number one car sold even in its final model year, no. The Saab has been on the market for only two years and can't manage to sell 2% of the camrys numbers. Kind of a humorous way of looking at it though. Got a chuckle out of it.

ateixeira

Well, put it this way. They tried to sell almost nothing and they succeeded. LOL



-juice

nippononly

for real? My local dealers haven't had 2005 Camrys in ages - are you sure those weren't '06s you saw?

As for the '06, let's give Toyota a chance to fill up the pipeline with the '07s before we start talking about leftover '06s. They have only had the '07s for, like, ten days. My nearest dealer still only has 3 '07s. And about a half dozen '06s. Supplies are low with the model turnover.

I was reading the Magnum discussion with some interest. There aren't many in these parts, that's for sure. I think the looks might be a bit too bold for the "wagon crowd". And the windows are so narrow it can be hard to drive, especially for moms, who would tend to be shorter on average, I would think. The Magnum is a car you disappear down into once you sit down and close the door.

xwesx

I agree. The Magnum has visual appeal from the outside, but I can imagine that it might not be the most driver-friendly of the wagons. At least, not on a daily basis. Open highway driving might be a blast, but parking lot navigation could be much more of a chore day after day after day. I've never been in one, so just guessing here, but the looks alone are not enough to pique my curiosity.

gagrice

I was going by the dealers listing new 2005 Camrys on AutoTrader. It just seemed strange that Toyota would dump the 2007 so early with so many of the older style still in dealer inventory. Although two posters here were not that impressed with the new Camry so it may get the old ones sold quicker.

210delray

hundreds of new 2005-2006 Camry's for sale

I don't know if you can go by Auto Trader. My local dealer as of March 7 said he had one 2005 left and 4 2006 models. (Of course that's only one dealer in a relatively small town.)

Considering that the 2006 model was on a short cycle (only about 7 months), I'd say that's not bad.

I don't have the issue in front of me, but as I recall, the US days supply of the Camry was about 34, according to Ward's Automotive Reports (3/13/06 issue).

Dump the 2007 so early? More like getting a jump on the competition by offering the redesign 6 months early.

gagrice

More like getting a jump on the competition by offering the redesign 6 months early.

My complaint with that practice and it is not just Toyota. From a resale standpoint. I buy a used 2007 in March of 2008. It is a 2 year old car not a one year old car. It is deceptive in my opinion. What happened to releasing the new models in September? I liked going around looking at all the new models. Now you never know. Oh that is a 2005 and 3/4 model. Just more of the demise of the whole industry.

chuck1959

They depend on the old geezer's (like my Grandmother) who will not even consider anything else but a Buick!!!

210delray

The days of new car intros occurring in the fall are gone forever. To stay competitive, you have to introduce new models as soon as they are ready.

It's actually less confusing to call a model introduced in the late winter or spring of 2006, for example, as a 2007 model. VINs and motor vehicle departments aren't set up to handle 2006.5 models, so it can be very confusing in future years when there are two very different variations of the same nameplate. Example: the old 2005 Jetta (same as the 1999-2004 models) and the redesigned, larger 2005 Jetta.

When buying used, you can always check the build date on the door jamb if you're concerned with buying a car built early in the production run.

boaz47

Didn't exactly impress the buying public.

ubbermotor

Packard never used the model year, it was whatever year it was made and introductions were made when they were ready. This creates some interested conflict/confusion for would be collectors.

210delray

That can't be done now, as NHTSA has regulations on this. If a car is introduced on or after 1/2 of a given calendar year (say 2006), it can be given as the subsequent year's model (in this example, 2007).

Also, you can't carry forward an older model year past a certain point to get around safety or emissions standards. So for example, you can't be producing new 2005 models now (the cutoff was likely 1/1/06).

ateixeira

Baja was a certified flop, but Tribeca sold 15k units the first year, and their goal was 17k. That's pretty close, I wouldn't call that a flop.

Baja has modest goals and didn't even come close, they sold less than half the amount they wanted.

-juice

rsholland

Funny thing about the Baja: Owners love 'em. It's a shame Subaru couldn't get more people in the driver's seat for a test drive. I bet if they had, we'd be seeing a new Baja next year...

Bob

bumpy

That can't be done now, as NHTSA has regulations on this. If a car is introduced on or after 1/2 of a given calendar year (say 2006), it can be given as the subsequent year's model (in this example, 2007).

Hmmm. February is rather early in the year for 2007 Tahoes.

Also, you can't carry forward an older model year past a certain point to get around safety or emissions standards. So for example, you can't be producing new 2005 models now (the cutoff was likely 1/1/06).

Hyundai held the 2001 Tiburon over into 2002, then introduced the 2003 Tibby pretty early in the year.

andre1969

the earliest you can introduce a new model year is January 1 of the calendar year before. So in the case of an '07 model, you could introduce it on January 1, 2006.

As for the '07 Tahoe, they were out as of Martin Luther King Day of this year. I know, because I was out looking with a friend who's thinking about getting a new car, and the Chevy dealer had two of them.

Still, this is getting kinda silly. It used to be that April was the earliest a new model would come out, and even then it was usually pretty rare. That's the month the 1965 Mustang, 1970 Maverick, 1980 Citation, and 2000 Neon came out.

xwesx

Oh, you mean the '64 & 1/2 Mustang? (My uncle had one until his death in '93 and insisted it was NOT a '65) :P

rockylee

I personally think it's a ugly auto. :shades: <-blinders

Rocky

guss

So, would the latest a model could come out is December of that model year ? In other word you could not have an '05 made in Jan. '06.

Has anyone ever extended a model past August of it's model year ? Maybe if they were discontinuing it.