By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Boy, how happy I was to get back into my Subaru!
2018 430i Gran Coupe
What Edmunds.com Says
The Cobalt is a big improvement over its Cavalier predecessor, but it's still well behind the class leaders in handling dynamics, interior design, seat comfort and materials quality.
Pros
Strong acceleration with any drivetrain, smooth and quiet ride, solid brakes, good crash test scores.
Cons
Cheap interior plastics, cramped backseat, dire lack of interior storage, dull handling, mediocre fit and finish.
So they agree with our poster who rented it about the handling. In this class, Edmund's fave pick is the Mazda 3.
Rocky
Not really. It is a definitive example of what is wrong with GM and the Big 2.5, so it is worth mentioning. Besides, that was Edmunds' review, not mine.
Instead of blaming the "imports" (many of which are US-built), why won't the union demand that they build a better car and create more value for their customers? I'd be pleasantly surprised if the UAW included a requirement in its next contract that GM design and build a class-leading small sedan.
But we know that they never will, so in the meantime, customers out shopping for cars in this class would be better off buying the Honda, Toyota or Mazda rival. (I'd probably skip the Sentra, though.)
Rocky
I never claimed that they were omnipotent, but if the union was serious, it would include product quality demands in the labor contract. I would think that the slipshod engineering and design would be a bit embarrassing, and people who care about the company would want to do something about it.
(which probably wouldn't hurt) then they need to fire all the cowards in suits and put the bluecollar guy in Jeans in charge.
Rocky
Honda and Toyota retain their guide rankings as the top nonluxury brands. The guide projects Honda's residual value at 53.0 percent, unchanged from the 2005 prediction. Toyota's brand residual projection is 51.8 percent, one percentage point below its 2005 projection.
As a brand, Pontiac is expected to hold 42.1 percent of its sticker price after three years, up from a projection of 36.9 percent for 2005 models. Hopson attributes that improvement in part to Pontiac's strategy of curbing fleet sales.
Buick is at the bottom of the brand rankings. Its projected residual value for its 2006 vehicles is 37.9 percent.
Non-luxury marques, from best to worst:
-Honda
-Toyota
-VW
-Subaru
-Nissan
-Jeep
-Mazda
-Saturn
-GMC
-Chrysler
-Hyundai
-Pontiac
-Ford
-Chevrolet
-Mitsubishi
-Mercury
-Dodge
-Suzuki
-Kia
-Buick
Of these, only the first four have scores high enough to rank as "outstanding."
And speaking of fleet sales, note that the GM spokesman quoted above claimed that Pontiac's strategy of reducing fleet sales was expected to help it to improve residuals. Clearly, Detroit knows that fleet sales aren't helping used car values for their products.
My assumption is that it is calculated from MSRP. Since most domestics never sell at MSRP I think that would give an inaccurate residual; although you have to wait for the “big sale”.
I’ve never owned an American car (3 European, 6 Japanese), but co-workers have. Even though the sale price of their domestic was lower than a comparable Japanese car, they purchased it for thousands less.
Or not
That would be mine, too. Remember, this is the guide that is used to determine residual values for car leases, which means that it is most interested in calculating the percentage change that occurs between when the car is new and the end of the lease period.
That doesn't change the fact that in relative terms, the domestic cars take a bigger overall hit to value. They might be cheaper to buy, but they also lose their value more quickly.
Rocky
Rocky
I can support that by comments from workers at plants around Dayton area. The general management problem is too many MBAs and engineers with little to do and a need for power. Someone commented in a discussion that a rise in job level meant only a 20% increase in pay at Toyota so the prestige of a title wasn't so great is my interprettion; they also don't end up with highly paid Peter Principal folks with MBAs and engineering degrees with high egos. (It would also save money to put into the product rather than the gold and silver parachutes.)
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Management, who won't give anything to the Union without the Union giving something back. The Union making demands and threats for things that just do not make sense.
Imagine a meeting to discuss the temperature setting in the plant, that involves 3 execs and 4 representatives of the Union, that goes on for 2 days over about 3 degrees in temperature.
Its absolutley frightening and it is why I no longer hold stock in the Auto Industry.
I don't solely blame Management for the Auto Industries woes, to a large part the Unions are a contributing factor, as they will always look out for "thier" best interest which is not always in the best interest of the employess and often inhibits sound business principles.
Where else do you see in a plant, a guy sitting on a forklift reading a paper? Why, because the contract states he is the only one who can operate "the" forklift, so if you dont need the forklift operator, oh well he is there. Too many workers?? Oh well, you 500 can go home but you still get full pay and benefits because we have to maintain a reserve labor pool.
Don't get me wrong, I am not giving management a free ride, IMO Unions are a major factor to the poor performance of the auto industry.
The good news for me, at least according to this list, is that being the owner of (1) Lexus, (2) Hondas and (1) Nissan, I should be doing okay in regards to resale value. Sure hope so anyway--just in case I decide to dump them all and replace each of them with a new Cobalt.
I’m not saying I’d buy a Cobalt, but then I wouldn’t buy a Camry either.
It is not enough to improve - you need to make an attempt of anticipating what competition is about to bring and AT LEAST match it, or better - beat it. Cobalt was an attempt of beating 2003 Corolla and I wouldn't be so sure if it really did it.
When one looks at a Japanese concept on auto show, it is likely that 90% of its content will land in the production car. GMs concept? Probably 40% or less. Just before the production starts, they will come with excellent ideas of putting old powertrain (we already have tooling and UAW will not agree to retrain their people), interiors will magically cheapen by 3 grades, seats will be uncomfortable again (our supplier just gave us 10% off provided we keep the old crappy seats), et caetera.
I mentioned it before, but never enough: when one looks at Civic/Corolla, it's a car that Senior Manager of the manufacturer would not be afraid/ashamed to put his daughter into. Same with Accord/Camry for his cousins and other relatives. There is no such feeling with Chevy. In fact - it is opposite ("I ride shauffer in that Caddy, so is my wife, my daugter has a new customized CTS, so screw you, average Joe - I don't care").
2018 430i Gran Coupe
I wouldn't claim that quality is the only correlating factor, just an important one. Among the non-luxury brands, most (but not all) of the better brands have high quality, most of the weakest brands have lower quality, and most of the mediocre brands have mediocre quality, so the correlation is still pretty strong.
Buick has other problems aside from quality, namely dull styling aimed toward a demographic that is largely aging and stodgy. The cars are simply boring for us aspirational yuppie types who demand near-luxury cars. The smaller cars from Lexus, Acura, BMW, Audi, Mercedes and more recently, Infiniti, better fit that bill.
GM has missed the mark by failing to develop designs to match the desired audience, while the overall quality problems with much of the rest of the GM line probably don't help with demand, either. The quality gap is falling, but is still too wide to be overcome by all but a few specific models. (As the lease guide noted, I'll bet the Solstice will prove to be quite the exception.)
You know, I think socala4 had a great suggestion. Regardless of whether my opinion or your opinion is correct, the fact is that the UAW has a big public relations problem. Much of the US public thinks the UAW is a bunch of underworking, overpaid people who are hurting the competitiveness of the American car makers.
I won't disagree on the role of management and their endless failures. But I do think the blame needs to be shared.
People, rightly or wrongly, think that one of the reasons companies like GM are uncompetitive is that they have to give in to the UAW. When they haven't given in, they've had extremely expensive strikes that can bring the company to its knees. So GM has given in and paid more, given higher benefits than it otherwise might have, to ensure that they don't lose billions in ongoing strikes. Those salaries and benefits (not to mention job banks) are a boat anchor on the competitiveness of the company.
So to socala4's point, one way that the UAW could earn some good PR would be to NOT JUST DEMAND MORE MONEY, but demand that the cars THEY make are of a decently high quality. The UAW could be an agent of change for the quality of the product.
I see the demands on salary and benes as being a very short sighted thing - after all, it is largely due to this that the UAW jobs are being outsourced to other countries by the big 2.5, while the non-unionized car makers are adding jobs in this country.
You might not like the fact that things are changing, but nobody will be able to keep their jobs forever if they can't make a good product. Whether that product is poor due to the workers, the designers, or the management is irrelevant. It's the UAW jobs that are going to continue to go away if they don't DEMAND that the quality improves.
If I knew that the best built cars, the most refined cars, the most pretty/handsome cars, the cars with the best technology and mileage, were made almost exclusively by the UAW, then I would be proud to be loyal to those cars. Yet currently, almost the opposite is true.
Does the UAW want to have short term wins to preserve the way it used to be, or do they want to set themselves up for success over the next 50 years?
Well that's the biggest problem that the UAW has is the American Public. People get all butt hurt when they have $80K in college debt and make $29K a yr. Instead of blaming themselves for their screw up and career choices they want to make everyone else suffer too. Instead of feeling and giving your blessings to your neighbor and his family we want to tear them apart for their good fortune. However their is a huge difference in SALARY between what a UAW worker makes and middle and upper management. Is Rick Wagoner and his corporate cronies worth 400 times what my UAW father makes ???? If you honestly believe so then you point of blaming the UAW for GM's finacial issues is absolutely absurd. No one is worth 400-800 times it's bottom worker in a corporation.
I won't disagree on the role of management and their endless failures. But I do think the blame needs to be shared.
Perhaps some of the blame needs to be shared, but a very minor share. It's not the UAW's role to make sure that GM spends a few extra bucks on a higher grade of material such as plastics, rubber, headliner material, etc. I know this first hand because I built some of the interior parts for the automobile company's and sometimes it came down to "american pocket change" per part.
People, rightly or wrongly, think that one of the reasons companies like GM are uncompetitive is that they have to give in to the UAW. When they haven't given in, they've had extremely expensive strikes that can bring the company to its knees. So GM has given in and paid more, given higher benefits than it otherwise might have, to ensure that they don't lose billions in ongoing strikes. Those salaries and benefits (not to mention job banks) are a boat anchor on the competitiveness of the company.
Well when the President and CEO of Delphi was making a 11 million Dollar Salary a few years ago and still making a profit it was ok. Rick Wagoner and the board of executives have been taking millions in revunue for salary's for years and I get from you guys the lame excuse this is what you got to do to hire the best management. Well they are far from the best management team and don't deserve multi-million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes if they fail. The media and public always wants to blame the "evil union" and really puts little blame on management. It's always what is the union going to give up to bail are asses out !!!!!! Well why doesn't these multi-millionaire mangement folks work for a $1 dollar to make up for their poor decisions ?????? They get paid the big bucks to run a company and when it fails because they don't want to spend that extra buck on better material, engineering, etc. they should take the blame and heat. Job Banks are no different that the white collar employees that know some one high up that gave them a job to push paper. They also are non-productive and are a boat anchor to GM. GM has by far more white collar workers than any other automobile company according to the UAW.
So to socala4's point, one way that the UAW could earn some good PR would be to NOT JUST DEMAND MORE MONEY, but demand that the cars THEY make are of a decently high quality. The UAW could be an agent of change for the quality of the product.
Perhaps that should be suggested pal, but then what the hell is the shareholders doing with allowing these management teams to have the power that they possess ????
If I made that kind of Salary and I failed year after year, I'd be fired at my position at most places. It's not the UAW's job to manage the company, even though it probably wouldn't hurt to have a few on the decision making process, so cars like the Aztek don't get introduced.
I see the demands on salary and benes as being a very short sighted thing - after all, it is largely due to this that the UAW jobs are being outsourced to other countries by the big 2.5, while the non-unionized car makers are adding jobs in this country.
We already had this discussion. I personally also blame a 30% Currency Manipulation by the Japanese. Free State, Federal, Local, Taxes. No Tariffs on imports. To a bigger degree the Japanese auto manufactors don't have pensions, healthcare, and pay as much in per hour wages for active and retired workers. If the Japanese were truely patriotic and wanted to protect their interest in this country and keep the U.S. economy strong and vibrant they would offer these benefits to it's workers. In a capatalistic society the company has to do more to secure the futures of it employees when they get old so not every american has to pick up the bill with social programs. It would be fine in a socialist country where the government picks up the tab and the working age have to pay more out of their check in taxes. It basically boils down to what evil do you want ??? It is a real issue that this country is going to face because we will have old folks working jobs just to pay for their prescriptions which is truely sad because of the greed of corporations both foreign and domestic unwillingness to pay benefits and I can't support those ethics personally. :mad: BTW- We are losing more jobs because of the Asian invasion than they are creating. Out sourcing also has destroyed the foundation that made this country so strong. :mad:
You might not like the fact that things are changing, but nobody will be able to keep their jobs forever if they can't make a good product. Whether that product is poor due to the workers, the designers, or the management is irrelevant. It's the UAW jobs that are going to continue to go away if they don't DEMAND that the quality improves.
They will continue to go away regardless. China is sucking them up like HAWGS and thus are stealing R&D and like blinde men we keep feeding the enemy. The UAW basically no it's a dead end road unless they can get a guy like John Edwards elected who will "fix" the policy's concerning trade.
Not all cars made by the UAW are the best in their segments. However it's people like my father and uncles that do the best job they can with the machinery and material given to them. My father on many occassions doesn't get to take a lunch because the line is down, or they need "X" amount of parts shipped by a certain time. He as a UAW member understands he has to work twice as hard to be competitive with his Asian compeititors.
However some cars are arguably the best built. The Buick Lucerne plant in Hammatrack, Mi. got a J.D. award for Quality, along with the Cadillac Plant in Lansing, Mi.
Does the UAW want to have short term wins to preserve the way it used to be, or do they want to set themselves up for success over the next 50 years?
The UAW wants success by the Big 3 to continue. They don't hate the company they represent and times because of globalization have changed the way the workers work. The UAW has allowed management to be more flexible in it's use of personel and in many cases the company has certain UAW workers do up to 3 jobs. Yes this wasn't the case in the 80's but has changed since the middle 90's. The bottom line is this: The UAW and Big 3 are on a road of destruction because of globalization. The Big 3 like most manufactoring in this country will be exported to cheap foreign labor markets where their is no EPA, No Osha, No Ergonomics, etc and they can get away with using child labor, no safety guards on machinery, and can work people like slaves, welcome to globalization. The sad thing is some of you think cars built by GM in China will be better made and will be significant cheaper. Is the cars currently built in non-union sweat shops in foreign country's cheaper ?????- I think you already know the answer to that QUESTION !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That's my 3 cents !!!!!
Rocky
Probably a 07' CTS-V.
But the Buick Enclave sure is a looker :surprise: Whoa !
Rocky
Probably a 07' CTS-V.
But the Buick Enclave sure is a looker :surprise: Whoa !
Rocky
I'll agree with you on nearly everything about the overall market scheme of the Big 3 and their interaction with the UAW and the like. However, the words "Buick" and "looker" do not belong together in any sense.
Oh, and as much as globalization is destroying American jobs, GM, Ford, and DaimlerBenz would be fine if they produced the best cars in the world. Period. They're doing so in the performance categories (ex. the American Exotics comparison test Edmunds just performed, as well as the revived Pony cars), but they continually miss the market in the profitable industries of small and mid-size cars. Even their dominance of pickup trucks is beginning to diminish, and GM's new full-size SUV's are receiving somewhat lukewarm reviews. If you produce a great product, your company will take care of itself, so long as there is decent management. Unions, materials costs, etc, would not be such a factor if they quite simply had the income. You can argue the finer points of that, but inevitably the Big 3 began to dwindle as soon as the imports arrived, and it's not because of trade barriers, union/health care problems, or anything - it's because the American cars just plain aren't as good at fulfilling the buying public's wants and needs. If the Big 3 were still dominating the market, demanding premiums on all their vehicles, and leading the industry in all facets, their current economic situation would not be a problem. When they first signed on with the unions, they had a business model of something near a 40-30-30 market share split between the three of them. No one would have ever thought that Daimler would almost fall off the face of the map, or that there would be a ton of new players. If they had continued to produce the best vehicles, those new players would not have affected them, and GM would not be bleeding funds too quickly to count.
Sorry, that was far too long of a rant. The answer to the Big 3's problem is simple, create a product. GM is obviously incapable of doing this, Ford may not last long enough to capitalize on the good products they do have/have in the works, and Daimler isn't even American anymore. Go figure...
The million dollar question would be will the public buy SS RWD 300 hp. Chevy's at $30K stickers with no base model ??????
Rocky
P.S. The Buick Enclave is a looker :shades:
Pal perhaps you need to look closer at that elegant, sex-ay Velite concept styling
That's exactly the mindset that caused the problems that GM has today.
Successful automakers such as Toyota and Honda have made a specific point to avoid such a strategy. You need to build a good-quality small and medium size sedan in order to establish a reputation with younger buyers, and to create a relationship that can be used to keep them as they get older and their needs change.
If I like my Civic or Corolla when I'm 25, chances are much better than I'll buy an Accord or Camry, or Odyssey or Sienna, as I get older and my needs change. At that point, what reason would there be for a customer to switch?
How is GM going to compete in the entry level cars like the Civic and built it as good, but price it similar ????
Sad to say it probably ain't going to happen. Zietche (Chrysler CEO) in an interview has this approach of excepting the fact that Chrysler can build the best cheap Subcompact car, but it could build cars in slightly higher segments.
If you have the answer to HOW GM is going to compete in the "cheap" market I'd like to hear it ????? I guess you could say your going to import it from China ????
Rocky
Absolutely no comparison. BMW is a premium marque that operates within a narrow niche and serves a specific few affluent or aspirational customer bases. It is not a mass market automaker by any means.
GM, Ford and Toyota are all mass-market bread-and-butter operators, the Proctor & Gamble's of the auto industry. They each need to be all things to all people if they are going to succeed in retaining customers. That's why Toyota is gaining, while the other two are not.
Rocky
No, they really don't. During 2005, Toyota's US sales of Camrys alone were twice BMW's total US sales (and that figure includes the Mini.) BMW is a niche producer in the luxury and near-luxury segment, really no comparison at all to the other full-service automakers.
BMW sells alot of vehicles in Europe and other parts of the world.
Rocky
BMW is simply not that big of a player, and probably never will be.
(Especially GM), I will probably buy a BMW someday.
Rocky
P.S. that still is alot of darn cars
If anything, the Civic's interior makes me think of an early 80's interpretation of futuristic. We first saw these styles in the spaceship interior sets from "Star Wars", "Battlestar Galactica", "Buck Rodgers", and "V", and then they started showing up in cars like Subarus and such in the early 80's. And from that shot, it looks like they took one of those Glen Larson/John Dykstra/Kenneth Johnson designs and slipped it into the cabin of an '85 Aerostar.
The amazing thing about introducing a car as mundane as the Cobalt is that GM offers this to the European market: Opel/ Vauxhall Astra
Not only is it an attractive car for its class, but it even performs well enough to get good reviews in the UK auto press, which can be a brutal crowd to please. The writers at Top Gear even compared it favorably to the Golf, which is the ultimate compliment to a hatch in the GTI class such as the VXR performance version of the Astra.
Even adjusted for taxation and exchange rate effect, cars in Europe are horribly expensive (for what you get). We demand cheap here, which is good in a sense (it keep manufacturers on their toes), but it sometimes bites us back with limited choices and inferior designs. WalMart effect.
Surely European Opels, Fords are nicer, but if you factor in their cost, they are not worth their price tags, either (GM Europe is even deeper in hole than GM America).
2018 430i Gran Coupe
A lot of that inflated amount is tax, while another component is that the dollar is currently relatively weak, which makes prices higher than they would be here if converted to US dollars. The VAT (sales tax) on cars in the UK is 15%, and unlike the US or Canada, is included in the MSRP.
Remember, we tend to pay less for just about everything in the US as compared to the UK. BMW's, Audis and Mercedes cars all cost more in Europe than they do here, so you can assume that GM could afford to price Astras for the US market at a lower price than would be charged in Europe. And in any case, GM could have simply built slightly modified Astras on the same assembly lines where they build Cobalts today, saving whatever money was obviously squandered on its R&D.
What I know is this - I want a consistently excellent and well performing vehicle. Period. I will purchase from what ever manufacturer can demonstrate this.
It is likely not the domestics. Our family fleet of GM products (Pontiac Montanna, Buick Rendevous, Century) have had lots of issues (manifold gasket failures, wheel bearing failures with corresponding tire blow outs, electrical system malfunctions..) all in the first 4 years of each vehicle. This is NOT acceptable.
I am stuck though because the Honda, Toyota, Infinity, etc make the most bland, dull, boring vehicles that I simply could not stand to own one - even though they are probably well built and reliable.
What I do know is this regarding GM - I live in Toronto, next to the big GM plant in Oshawa. Here is why GM has a cost problem....
The guy that drives the finished car to the outer parking lot makes $ 71,000 Cdn (say $56,000 US$). Get that. Give me a break.
This cost structure IS NOT COMPETITIVE IN THE NEW WORLD ORDER.
What GM needs to do is to eliminate their pension business (distribute all funds to pensioners) and get out of health care.
This is a brutal world and the Union is in la la land.
Take Care
NascarQueen24
Another problem are specs themselves. Certain safety and emission standards are far off each other, making necessary different engine specs. Europeans like high-rev, low torque cars, as they tend to drive in cities and their rural areas are nothing like ours (60-100 miles is considered already long trip there because of traffic and road quality). They drive manuals, Americans drive autos. How do you think those 1.4 l (standard on base Astra-alikes) will take a 4-speed auto?
Why do you thinkk VW bring here their top of the line trims only? Not because they like that, it is the only area they have a chance of survival, when trying to market those machines with "Euro mystique"
It all sounds great: just take the Astra and bring it here. But it is unrealistic. There are probably things they could do to take advantage of their overseas designs - no doubt.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
The difference between these two cars is negligible: personal preference rather than any single attribute would tip the scale for most buyers.
The interiors of both are the 'hard plastic w/fuzzy cloth' that is seen in most less expensive cars today. Fuel economy was great with both cars.
It will take some time for the Malibu to catch up on resale value.
I agree that you couldn't simply sell the identical cars here. As do the other automakers bringing imported designs, only the larger engine choices would be offered, the very smallest cars would not be sold here and the engine choices must be compatible with American preferences for low-end torque and automatic transmissions.
But I would think that a car such as this, equipped for American tastes, would be a far more appealing design to would-be Corolla and Civic buyers than would be the Cobalt. Honda has been clever to encourage the tuners and ricers to play with its cars, making them the pony cars of kids today -- surely, something similar could be done here, while allowing GM to allocate the Cobalt R&D money somewhere more productive.
However, my point is it is not likely to happen because in this competitive market people are not willing to pay as much as $28K+ for a Focus or Astra/Cobalt, regardless of their equipment
I seriously doubt that they would need to. As I pointed out above, we don't pay nearly as much for cars as do the Europeans, including cars that are built in Europe.
One example: 2006 Audi A4 (2.0 turbo, 6-speed manual, S-line package with sport suspension)
-US price (MSRP, including delivery, excluding tax): $32,210
-UK price (MSRP, including VAT): L23,360 ($40,756 including tax/ $35,440 excluding tax)
US savings:
-European including VAT vs. US excluding tax: $8,546 (21%)
-European (before VAT) vs. US excluding tax: $3,230 (9.1%)
In any case, GM could build its version of the Astra in the US, thus avoiding exchange rate risk and reducing its transport and (most likely, its) labor costs. Why go to the trouble of designing a Cobalt when you have something better already in your arsenal?
I am! There are four of them parked at my house right now: my 1989 Cadillac Brougham, my 2002 Cadillac Seville STS, my 1988 Buick Park Avenue, and my girlfriend's 2005 Buick LaCrosse CXL.
Somebody said something about Buicks being the type of cars yuppies wouldn't aspire to own. God God! If that isn't the ULTIMATE reason to buy a Buick! I can't wait to get my 1958 Buick Limited and move to some pretentious gated suburban development to offend all those pretentious poseurs!
The newer Buicks aren't offensive, just dull. The cars scream out, "Old before my time."
And come on, don't try to lump the '58 with the current offerings! The only thing they have in common with the new cars is the nameplate.
Truth is, just about EVERYBODY'S cars are dull compared to those of the 1950s and 1960s. If I had a choice between ANY new car or a mint example of a 1956 Buick Special - a rather ordinary car for its time - I'd take the '56 Buick.
Yeah, you're right - I lived in Kentwood from '00 through '04, so we always drove by the GM plant on the way to the theater. Guess it seemed closer than it was!
-So you are a resident of my home city. Cool. I miss G.R. and Western Michigan.
Yep! I was born in Chicago, but grew up in Allendale. I'm currently living in Caledonia, which is nice. It's far enough out of the city, although urban sprawl will undoubtedly catch up sooner or later.
Actually, it is still the Taurus. Ford is doing what GM did; instead of putting their shiny new vehicles into rental fleets, they sold their "old gen" cars as renters. Remember the "Chevy Classic"? Ford's sales aren't rip-roaring on their new cars, because they are consciously not selling their new stuff to rental agencies (in large quantities).
Also, not all domestics have lousy resale. We got top dollar for my wife's '01 Escape - I would daresay it held its value better than my Maxima is. Considering I was "right side up" in the Nissan only 2 years into a 5 year loan, that was quite good for a Ford. My gut tells me the Fusion will have good resale, assuming Ford has the cojones to not dump thousands of them in the rental market. The Five Hundred already has good resale, and I was astonished how many people were checking it out at the auto show. It was mostly the baby boomer+ crowd, but hey.
Now that my daily commute is under 10 miles a day, I can fathom the idea of an SUV. I would like your thoughts/recommendations on an SUV with a 3rd row of seats. This will not be our primary family car, but every now and then, I need to able to get all 4 kids in the car.
My criteria, AWD and a purchase price below 35K and room eneough for the kids to get in and out.
With 4 car seats, you want something with sliding doors (minivan, Mazda 5), or a full sized van (E-150, conversion van). The door mechanics of an SUV require that whoever is getting into the back seat do so under their own power. I sure as heck wouldn't want to squeeze back there to buckle my kids in!