What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

kyfdx

I don't get it, either...

'Splain it to me, Lucy.. :surprise:

qbrozen

really?

well, ok, just in case you are serious, and for juice's benefit, here is the 1 paragraph that explains it from the Help page:

The current price of a particular CSX stock represents the estimated U.S. unit sales for a particular vehicle during the first approximately six months after that vehicle's Release Date. Each CSX$1 of stock price translates into a prediction that 1,000 units will be sold. For example, if the stock price for a Honda Accord is CSX$22, then the stock price reflects that the market is estimating that 22,000 units of the Honda Accord will be sold in the U.S. during the first approximately six months after its Release Date.

And, just to keep it somewhat on topic, the SmartForTwo is in the game and is currently priced to where folks seem to think it will sell over 60k units in the first 6 months! SURPRISE!!

kyfdx

So... for now.. the price is totally dependent on "the market", which I assume are the other players in the game..

In the end, does "the market" have to correlate with reality? Sort of like pork belly futures? At some point, you have to actually deliver the pork bellies... But, with stocks, "the market" price can keep on going, forever...

So.. is it stocks? Or commodities?

qbrozen

In the end, does "the market" have to correlate with reality?

well, in 6 months, all the prices will be corrected to reality, and then retired.

And, yes, for now, the price is totally dependent on how everyone plays the game and has no basis in reality. So juice may very well do great having bought Forester stock, as long as other players buy it and drive up the price. However, it has absolutely no relation to how many he thinks Subaru will sell .... although that is SUPPOSED to be the idea behind the game ... it just ain't working out that way.

kyfdx

Gotcha.. then, I'm feeling better about being in 256th place...

british_rover

Yeah I found the CSX forum it is a little tricky to find though as sometimes when you hit community on CSX it doesn't take you to the forum.

I brought CSX up here because we had talked about how well/poor the SMART car would do so much I thought it would be interesting.

Uhh yeah I don't need to devote too many hours to this place thats for sure. I haven't been around much lately because I have been trying to cut back.

You sure?

Unit sales forecast is just 27k.

I'm betting it will do a lot better than that.

I thought that's how it was supposed to work?

I noticed all the stocks trend towards about $70-75 in price. Surely they don't expect the Cooper Clubman, for instance, to sell 70k per year?

Nah its just that there are sooooo many new millionaires every hour and most of them don't understand the rules of the game or how shorting works.

qbrozen

Here is a discussion about this very thing

bumpy

we had talked about how well/poor the SMART car would do

The reservation list is up near 40,000 by now and the delivery backlog is somewhere in the first half of 2009 for the last of those poor souls (including me ), so it's not going to crash and burn anytime soon.

british_rover

Ehhh reservations are not sales so we will see how things shake out.

Bigger is not Better

I like this trend hopefully it will make automakers understand that sometimes bigger is not a good idea to go with sub-compacts.

stever

Edmunds added one to the fleet a couple of weeks ago btw. Got it off eBay from a seller up in Santa Cruz. Edmunds was on the reservations list but didn't want to wait until the second half of 2008, especially since there was no guarantee that one would be available then. 37 mpg so far.

New Car Buying: A Smart Buy

kyfdx

Hey, thanks for the link..

It looks like shorting is the way to go, long term..

In the meantime, if you had the time... day-trading to build up a big stash, then switching to shorting would probably pay off the most... Those guys with $7-$8 million are going to be hard to catch, if they switch to shorting..

british_rover

37 MPG highway??????????????? How many miles are on this car total? I realize the Smart is not really a highway car but 37 mpg is pathetic. I could just about match that with my MINI Cooper S and I know a regular Cooper would beat that. Civics and Fits will beat that number for less money and offer a real sized car.

bumpy

It was a month old at best when they got it, and knowing the Edmunds staff it probably did 85 the whole way back.

qbrozen

I couldn't agree more. Hell, I pushed 31mpg in one particular tank in my Accord V6 6-speed (and get 29mpg regularly while racing around on-ramps, driving a consistent 85mph, and dropping 2 gears to pass people on a regular basis). Just think, more than 3 times the power, almost double the weight, and exponentially more spacious at just a 16% mileage penalty. Hmmmm... there's a tough math problem, huh?

stever

"I had a great drive down the 101 Freeway and averaged 37 mpg over about 1,200 miles. Not as impressive as we had hoped but the enthusiasm for this car is unabated. At every gas station I stopped at I made about five new best friends."

It's about 285 miles from Santa Cruz to Santa Monica. I'm not sure where the other 900 miles came from over the four day period from when he picked the car up and then wrote the blog - so much fun to drive I guess Phil went all over the place. :shades:

alltorque

Guess you must be right about the poor little thing having "pedal to the metal" the whole time. Just filled up my car and it's giving 35+mpg, (US Gallon equiv), over mainly motorway cruising, (70ish mph), with some city + urban driving thrown into the mix.

Bear in mind this is a Volvo S60 D5, (185bhp), with a Geartronic 'box and the Smart looks pathetic. The Volvo has 10k miles on it so only just "loosened up".

Think I'll be staying with the big Swede and all the comforts of home............despite diesel being around the equiv of $8.40 per US Gallon here in U.K. Unleaded petrol is a mere $8 per USG. Oh yippee.

There are lots of small Euro/Japanese/Korean diesels that will make those Smart numbers look like a real gas guzzler.........and they have 4 seats. :shades:

Not too hard to see why U.K. roads are not exactly crowded with Smarts.

nippononly

Actually, if you are making 29 mpg in the Accord and the Smart is making 37, then you are using 37/29 as much gas, for about a 28% mileage penalty.

And again, there are advantages to small cars (including great handling, although not necessarily in the Smart's case, given the inflexible stability control system it apparently has) besides fuel economy.

qbrozen

I was referring to the 31mpg number. Yeah, not a great comparison since they probably flogged the Smart to get 37 and my 31 was my best ever ... but still.

And the percentage can change depending on how you calculate it. At 37, the Smart achieved 19% better mileage than the Accord at 31 (37/31=1.193); however, at 31, the Accord suffered 16% worse mileage than the Smart at 37 (31/37=.838).

So, for effect, I chose the number that best supported my case. :b

british_rover

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics.

bumpy

There are lots of small Euro/Japanese/Korean diesels that will make those Smart numbers look like a real gas guzzler

True, but none of those can be purchased in the US (mostly because California effectively outlawed them). A bird in the hand, and all that. However, there was a reported sighting of a Bluetec smart testing in CA a few weeks ago.

qbrozen

LOL!

You should see the statistics I have to sift through everyday in my line of work.

british_rover

I hate STATS that was one of the two classes that ended my engineering career.

qbrozen

By the way, BR, good to see you around here again. I thought we lost you.

british_rover

I had a horrible Jan so I spent all my time trying to get anything going with little success then I turned around and had a good Feb so I spent all my time trying to make up for Jan.

Now we are kind of in a lull and I am bored out of my skull.

bumpy

Ha. I'm taking it now, and I actually like it. :surprise: Selling LR's in the current economy must be vicious; maybe you could ask for a transfer to the smart dealership? :P

nippononly

I just noticed this weekend that a local used car place (I am in California) had two VW TDIs, a Jetta and a Golf, both '06s, both advertised at $24K (and neither was 0 miles or anything, both had typical miles for the year). Best I can figure is they were asking about $2-4K more than full sticker when those cars were brand new.

I guess there truly is a sucker born every minute....

ateixeira

Used TDI prices can be ridiculous, especially in Cali since new ones aren't available.

I guess that's good for resale.

boaz47

37 MPG isn't as impressive as the Smart was supposed to be. Back in 96 my SC1 got 33 average and close to 40 on the highway. It was a coupe but at least it had a back seat. So if Edmunds can be trusted in its reporting then there are plenty of choices that are better than the Smart.

The second thing that is interesting is fuel usage has gone down and yet fuel prices have gone up. It seems as if Houses and economics have had a far bigger effect on what we drive than cars ever have. Cars like the Smart don't seem to be the answer. It wasn't the answer in Europe and if Edmunds has any credibility it doesn't look like it is anything but a cute car that doesn't deliver as promised here. Sure the Smart may deliver better fuel mileage than an Accord but it isn't as comfortable. It more than likely isn't as practical as a Civic or a Corolla either. I am not sure it would be worth 2 or 3k to lose a back seat.

We finally saw a Smart heading up the mountain last Wednesday. I almost turned around to see how well it took the grade. I know it isn't designed for mountain roads it is just where I happened to see one. But if it only gets 37MPG with one person in it after a long drive down the coast I have to wonder how bad it would do with two people and the air on in the summer. I wouldn't be surprised if AC sucks 4 MPG out of that little thing.

bumpy

Is 49 mpg better?

boaz47

Or should I say worse I could see getting a small diesel as my only car. But as it stands now most of these cars we have been discussing are second cars and sometimes third cars. The Smart may be the worst of the bunch. If you are married or do anything but commuter you have to have another car other than the Smart to survive. I know being from California we see cars as more important than some big cities back east. I was thinking of selling our mountain home and moving to a Small community in the desert. I already have a compact car as a daily driver and a Tahoe for weekends so maybe something like a GEM would be a better Idea. It is not uglier than a Smart and it runs on jell cells that I can replace when I need new ones. At 7k with a $1300.00 california rebate I could run errands in town and be green at the same time. I know some retirement communities that will even allow people to charge their vehicles while shopping.

Truthfully I have no idea what I might do in the future but it doesn't look like many of the new small cars are enough of an improvement over cars I could have bought before they entered the market. Even the Fit isn't a gas mileage champion and the Scions revolution looks to be over. Just look at BR link. I don't know what the future may bring but the new sub compacts aren't what I for one was looking for.

british_rover

Yeah but the diesel E-Class got less then 9 mph less then the gas smart. I can see the diesel Smart being worth it but I just don't think the gas model is.

nippononly

Of course, that was a long highway journey, a type of use contoured to cater to the strengths of the big diesel in the E-Class, but not to those of the little gas engine in the Smart.

Do 1000 miles in each in urban driving, errands and commute and the like, and THEN compare. Might make a very different comparison! ;-)

nippononly

In fact, they are among the few bright spots in a dismal market and so-so performance otherwise for their manufacturers in February:

"Nissan Motor Co. said its sales rose 1 percent because of a strong showing by its Versa subcompact."

"The subcompact Honda Fit saw sales jump 62 percent."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/04/BUKAVCTRN.DTL&hw=GM+- Ford+sales+declines&sn=001&sc=1000

For Honda, there's nothing like actually having a SUPPLY of your product to boost its sales. Versa sales have been strong all along, and just keep getting better I guess.

On the flip side, sales of large sedans in the U.S. continue to decline. Five Hundred never made it big even after it was renamed the more familiar Taurus, Lucerne and Avalon sales are way off according to this article. And of course, after the initial sales rush some years ago, 300 sales dropped way down, and for a while now Chrysler has been practically begging people to buy those.

ateixeira

300C was never updated. You can't come out with a successful product and then just sit and watch it age for half a decade. It should have been updated by now - significantly.

Ford should hurry that Fiesta up! They're late for the party.

andre1969

300C was never updated. You can't come out with a successful product and then just sit and watch it age for half a decade. It should have been updated by now - significantly.

Well, the 300C came out as a 2005 model, so assuming a 5-year cycle, which is pretty much the norm these days, it should show up again for 2009, more or less as-is, and then be redesigned for 2010. I don't think the problem is that the car is out of date, but moreso that the market has shifted dramatically in a short time. The 300 came out around March 2004, when fuel prices were still pretty cheap, and that summer prices started going up. Not exactly a good time to spring a new, full-sized, relatively thirsty car on the market. The 300 actually had a pretty good run initially, considering how quickly fuel prices ran up.

ateixeira

05, really? It seems like eons ago.

The Magnum is already being dropped. Plus they came out with the Charger, which is too much of a clone (same drivetrain for instance). Now the Challenger.

Seems like they bet the farm on the Hemi and with oil over $100/barrel they lost that bet.

Where's that Dodge Hornet?

Caliber is too big to be their smallest car IMO.

nippononly

"I don't think the problem is that the car is out of date, but moreso that the market has shifted dramatically in a short time"

That was my point with that post: the market has shifted to SMALLER. Smaller SUVs and crossovers, and smaller cars too. Subcompacts are reaping the benefits of that shift, even as large sedans take it on the chin.

juice: you have my agreement all the way around - Caliber is much too big to be Dodge's smallest car, and I can't wait for the Fiesta to hit either! :-)

boaz47

Not just large cars but didn't the Scions take a hit as well? At least BRs post indicates it dropped. What will be interesting will be to see what happens when Toyota builds a Yaris sized hybrid. Unless the Toyota news release is wrong Toyota said it will make a Prius A, Prius B and Prius C in three different sizes the Yaris sized being the smallest. The apples to apples test will be to see if the Yaris sized A outsells the Prius B or C. If not then tastes haven't changed only the wallet has.

nippononly

Yeah, the new Scions are sucky, it's no wonder their sales have dropped, but I was referring to whole market segments, not just one brand.

"If not then tastes haven't changed only the wallet has."

Hey, Yaris doesn't outsell Corolla or Camry now, it just sells a heck of a lot better than Toyota's smallest model has sold in the past. But here's a good one for you: for the first time ever, Yaris outsold Avalon last year. How about that?

Tastes changing is a TREND, not just an overnight flip-flop.

From BusinessWeek in late October:"Large sedans are being hit especially hard, outside of the luxury category where models such as the Mercedes S550 and Lexus LS460 continue to sell well. Pipas cites third-party market research, which shows that in 2002, someone who traded in or otherwise disposed of a large car like the Toyota Avalon or Lincoln Town Car bought or leased another large car 65% of the time. In 2006, that figure fell to 57%. Segment definitions vary from company to company, but AutoData reported that sales for what it defines as the Large Car segment were down 15% year to date through September.

"People are more likely to purchase a vehicle that's at least one size smaller," Pipas says."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21379353/page/2/

boaz47

I can see one size smaller. All I am saying is this isn't a case where people shown a desire for smaller cars as much as they are being forced into it by fuel prices and the economy. It is no different than the 70s when we got a flood of small cars because of fuel lines. The true test is what happens over time and I still doubt that the standard for consumer preference will ever be smaller is better. If we ever pull out of this depression or recession and things level off I predict that the first company that offers a bigger vehicle than what they are forced into now and provide better fuel mileage will take back any market share lost to sub compacts.

The question is not if sub compacts have a place. Bachelor apartments have a place but they will not do for a family or even a couple. The question is what is wrong with sub compacts and the answer is they are too single minded. Basic transportation and Commuting yes they have a place. The only car however has to be more useful. I believe that is why small sub compacts have to be about the size of a Focus or better and that is why over time all sub compacts tend to get bigger. The Versa you mentioned may be as successful for Nissan for the very reason that it falls in the common size range people seem to be willing to accept as they have Civics and Corollas.

You said, "Tastes changing is a TREND, not just an overnight flip-flop." And I agree. It is the same thing I have said in the transmission forum. Many have not seen that trend as indicative of where things are going and there is more long term evidence of consumer preferences than we have with sub compacts.

ateixeira

Scions grew at the wrong time - the market is going in the opposite direciton.

Both the xB and xD also have far less visibility than the cars they replaced.

The 1.8l is still relatively fuel efficient, but the 2.4l in the xB uses a lot more fuel than the old engine. Edmunds got 22.8mpg in their tests. I'm too lazy to search but I'd guess the old xB did a whole lot better than that.

The fuel economy numbers for the new xB pretty much put it out of contention if that's a priority for the shopper, and in this price class it usually is.

Toyota should consider offering a 1.8l xB.

andre1969

Toyota should consider offering a 1.8l xB.

I wonder if a 1.8 might be too stressed in something that big, though? I just looked up some specs, and the xB is now about 3100 pounds, whereas the old xB was only about 2450. I guess I'm just getting this mental image of something that you're going to have to rev the snot out of to get any performance from something that size, and as a result, you really won't see much gain in fuel economy.

Wow, in just one redesign, Toyota just put as much weight on this model as what GM chopped off of most of their big cars, back in their radical 1977 downsizing! :surprise:

I wonder if Toyota could just play around with the gearing on the xB, offering the option of a less aggressive setup, and that might help economy a bit? I mean, if this thing's only getting 22/28, whereas a Camry with the same setup gets around 22/31, something's not right here. And sure, the Camry's probably more aerodynamic, but I think there's more at play here than just aerodynamics.

ateixeira

Good point, that kind of weight gain is just absurd.

It went from a roomy compact to an overweight mid-sizer.

andre1969

It went from a roomy compact to an overweight mid-sizer.

I haven't had a chance to sit in the new xB yet. Does it have any gain in useable interior room than the old one? My only complaint about the old xB was the cramped driving position. It just felt tight up front to me, legroom-wise, but about par for the course in small cars.

But for chauffeuring people around in the back seat, or for hauling bulky items, it seemed like a great little car.

ateixeira

Not really. The front seat may be roomier, but the back seat atually felt smaller for some reason.

I do think you get more cargo room with the seats in place.

It just feels smaller and more claustrophobic, probably due to the small windows.

The old one seems airy and had a bigger back seat, though.

boaz47

The only difference between what Toyota did to Scion and every other manufacturer has done over the years to sub compacts is they took a bigger first jump. Mini had a lot of years for us to forget how small the origional was. But the new one is bigger and heavier.

Looking at the forum responses posted in BRs link it is easy to see what people feel happened. One poster said they made the mistake of listening to the customers rather that trying to just be a niche car as they were designed. If that is true maybe my whole outlook at the sub compact market my be slanted in the wrong direction. Rather than numbers maybe it should be solidifying a position in the over all market. I may have to let that sink in a bit. I guess the traditional market ing goal of being number one can be re focused.

nippononly

"Mini had a lot of years for us to forget how small the origional was. But the new one is bigger and heavier."

You keep whipping out the new Mini to make this point, when in fact the Mini is almost the worst example for your purposes: it gained like 20 pounds, and 2 inches at the front to meet the new pedestrian crash standards in Europe.

As for Scion, what the buyers of the old model wanted was a factory turbo option and a couple more optional features, not a pork-mobile with boring looks. Toyota, as it so often does, applied its tried and true "vanilla-ization" formula to "fix" what it perceived the customer complaints to be. The difference in the case of the new Scions, though, is that here "vanilla-ization" led to a vehicle that a lot less people want, whereas Toyota's steps towards "vanilla" usually result in even more "vanilla" buyers coming out of the wood work to buy a Toyota.

I mean, I thought the whole point of the Scion brand was to be the ANTIDOTE to vanilla.

bumpy

Scion's original mission was to serve as a hip US sales channel for the wacky JDM Toyotas that we otherwise didn't get. Bring in something weird for a year or two, then once the buzz faded replace it with the next goofball ride in the line. The tC kinda screwed that up, being a dedicated US model, then they decided to milk the xB name with what amounts to a tC wagon. Oops.

kyfdx

It's funny how all the cars that are supposed to be marketed to the young and hip, end up in the hands of the old and formerly hip...

I went to the MINI Clubman debut party, and I might have been the hippest one there, save for the sales staff.. and... I am decidedly old and unhip.. :surprise:

british_rover

I was 24 when I bought my MINI but I don't think I was very hip.