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
Get over it, full-sized SUV's are not 'the car of the future' as some thought in 1998. :P
Since T. Boone is involved, we may see a solar roof, wind turbines in the fins and the ICE fueled by natural gas.
Miata Designer Matano, T. Boone Pickens Part of Start-up Car Company (AutoObserver)
I think that probably means, among other things, that there's more Camaros than Insights available for sale, for one thing. Without a lot more auxiliary data, making a claim based solely on raw sales is pretty useless. It might also outsell Mazda3, but that might only be because Mazda can't make any more of them, for instance.
But manufacturers base the number and size of their factories (and shifts) on what the market for similar vehicles has been, and data collected from prospective buyers. So they have a pretty good idea of whether a vehicle will sell 25,000 or 100,000. There are probably a handful of (specialty) vehicles right now that can't be built to market-demand; every other factory would love to make and sell more vehicles.
Uhh, we're talking about GM here. They base their manufacturing on having to keep from idling UAW workers. :shades:
I remember when the mazda3 was selling out. Huge success, despite not outselling Civic. Why? They didn't have the capacity to make more.
Probably a better measure is percentage of sales, amount of time they're spending on dealer lots, etc. I'd like to see that data before deciding "Americans hate hybrids and want RWD muscle-cars." Especially since we could have determined that the whole time the Mustang was around.
The truth is that a lot of guys are buying them because they believe that this is the Last Hurrah for the Camaro.
They can't be sure that there will be a 2010 Camaro. If you want one and can at all afford it, better to get one now.
If there's a next generation Camaro in, say. 2015 or so, it'll be smaller and lighter, but such a car may not qualify as a real Camaro for some pony car fans. Personally , I wish the new Camaro had the dimensions of the original (1967?), but the designers were limited by having to use the Holden platform. For me, the new one's excessive size is a deal breaker, but I think I'm in the minority.
"The Environmental Protection Agency said Monday that it would probably increase the amount of ethanol that gasoline retailers could blend into ordinary fuel, to 15 percent, if tests established that the blend would not damage cars.
The maximum ethanol blend is now 10 percent, except for cars specially equipped to handle higher blends. The agency said it was likely to approve the increase to 15 percent next summer, perhaps for use only in cars of the 2001 model year and later."
If this happens, who wins, who loses and why? Well, the obvious winners are the farmers and the companies involved in ethanol production and marketing, but how about motorists? Would you choose the 15% ethanol blend over the 10% or 0%, even if the price were the same? What if the 15% blend was 5 cents cheaper per gallon than the 10%?
It contains less energy than gasoline and, without taxpayer subsidies, is more expensive than gas.
There's a good chance that fuel containing 15% ethanol would corrode gaskets and seals on today's automobiles creating serious problems in today's cars (excepting those few configured to run "Flex Fuels".
No, I am not interested in running E 15 in my car.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Every auto I own now gets at least 10% lower milage.
My 27mpg has dropped to 25 (2007 Corvette).
My 19mpg has dropped to 17 (2005 Honda Ridgeline truck).
My 25mpg has dropped to 23 (2005 Deville).
There should be a national stink being made about the drop in milage effecting millions of cars across the USA.
Our best hope is the possibility that cheaper raw materials than corn will eventually be used, such as saw grass (whatever the heck that is).
However, if you want to lower oil costs right now, the most effective tool would be to reduce the Wall Street speculating and excess leverage. Make investors liable to either sell, or take delivery of all the oil they are speculating (same goes for gold, copper, etc.). Oops - that's the northeast lobby!
I agree, I don't want that 15% crap in my vehicles and don't trust that the testing will be fair or unbiased either. Money and special interests talk unfortunately!
The 90's Ford products seem to handle the 10% crap O K, but the mileage is down.
So who do we thank and bow to for having more Ethanal to muck around with? :sick:
From what I understand - and I've read a lot about this - speculation, for all the talk about it, has relatively little impact on energy prices, except maybe in the very short term. It has virtually no impact long term. Supply and demand are the big drivers of price per barrel. Of course, taxes have a major impact at the pump.
As for sugar cane, considering the number and types of vehicles that we have, compared with Brazil, and the fact that we don't grow as much sugar as they do, sugar cane isn't the answer for us. It could be a small part of the answer, but not a significant part.
How about maintenace wise hows ur jetta holding up?
thanks
Welcome to the forum
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)