interesting thought. If both buyer and seller are making rational decisions ( I know not always the case!) how can it be too much? Keep in mind it is a deal that both parties are agreeing to and by definition both must believe it is the best option they have; why else do the deal right?
We all do this every day with every product we buy. At some point we all reach a point where the search for a lower price exceeds the effort we are willing to pay for something. That is neither right or wrong, it just is. With cars I try to avoid new "hot" models as there will a higher chance that somebody will be willing to pay more than me. Dealers are for profit businesses - they would be foolish not to maximize what they get for a car. I try to avoid dogs (e.g. the Aztek) as at some point down the line I will need to unload it. :shades:
interesting thought. If both buyer and seller are making rational decisions ( I know not always the case!) how can it be too much?
Economic theory would suggest that it's not too much (given the assumptions made).
Others, though, would suggest that the auction process simply ensures that the least rational person wins. :P
As evidence, I submit Ebay auctions as Exhhibit A. I've literally seen this happen: an auction is being conducted by entity A. Entity A has a website that isn't all that hard to find (often embedeed in the Ebay auction itself). On said website, you can find item X (the auction item) for price Y. Yet many times, the bidder ends up paying MORE than Y to win the auction.
I cannot imagine that anyone is saying that. Transaction prices vary from well over MSRP for special models made in very limited numbers (where demand will exceed supply even over time) to tempoarily hot models where it is worth it to the buyer (not me!) to be "first" to MSRP-firm models like Saturns and Scions to negotiate-up-from-invoice models to less than invoice transactions for models near the end of their design cycle.
Everyone could save even more by buying slightly used vehicles...but of course that would not work if everyone started doing it, because then those would be in short supply and the prices would increase. Bottom line, I think we should be praising, not damning, those who pay MSRP. By doing so, they allow others to get better deals. Dealers more or less need to balance out a fire sale transaction with one in which some real profit is realized, i.e., no one will be able to negotiate a stupendous deal from an out-of-business dealer.
Can we have a moderator on aisle 13 please? I believe the discussion was hijacked.
I went to a Buick dealer this weekend and they stuck to MSRP for the Enclave. Can't blame them, there were no models on display and a couple of people were pre-ordering them without even seeing the car.
After doing the math and looking at it, the decision is made. The Enclave is cheaper and better looking than an Outlook, but I'll wait another 3 months until better deals start to come out.
My wife is not happy with the interior as she liked the CX-9 better, but the space and access to the 3rd row seating on the Lambdas convinced her otherwise.
The Sunday paper has Freebies for $19,999 WHILE THEY LAST.
Of course you read the fine print and that doesn't include freight or $1000 down or the processing fee.
Still, $22k or so is a far cry from the $38k as-tested price, even when you factor the extra equipment.
I guess $38k is par for the class nowadays. That sounds crazy to me, though. Automakers have managed to shift price expections up about $10 grand on us, just like that.
As for any resemblance to the Outlook, it's the other way around, the rear of the Outlook sort of looked like the Freestyle, which came out much earlier.
Even though the Freestyle and lambdas are sometimes show to be of about the same height, if you ever saw them in a parking lot right next to eachother, you'd see that the lamdas are a lot taller, more like a regular SUV.
I was on a road trip for the past 2 weeks and parked next to an Outlook, and especially in the front seat area, the Outlook was much taller. The Freestyle is much more of a car-CUV while the lambdas are more SUV. The rear of the Freestyle slopes up at the back, but overall it's more of a car with a lot of interior space. And when the guy opened the door of the Outlook, the step-in height was greater then in my Freestyle, and I was looking up at him when he was sitting, but he may of had his seat in a high position.
But it depends on what you're looking for. If you want a vehicle more like a traditional SUV, the lambdas would be a better choice. But if you want to drive something more like a regular car, then get a Freestyle. It has almost the same interior space for passengers and cargo (based on CuFt of cargo space, and based on legroom/headroom inches of passenger space. The Freestyle can't hold 8, but if you really need to hold 8 then get a minivan. The extra couple of inches of hiproom in the lambdas aren't really enough for 3 across in their 3rd row.
BTW I just did a 6000 mile road trip out West and in the Rockies. My best MPG was 29.9 driving about 65mph and even with the cruise set on 80mph (in the 75mph states) I still got about 25mpg. Even in the mountains my mpg never went under 24mpg. And I had plenty of power going up the mountains and the CVT was great for going down the mountains without using brakes, although I wish it had an even lower "gear" when I went down Pike's Peak. Overall, we had a great 2 week vacation...much of it spent in the Freestyle!
The Lambdas are 2.5" taller than the Freestyle, mostly due to ground clearance.
Even with trunk space being virtually the same, In terms of interior space, Ford's own comparison tool lists the FS at 85.2 vs. 117 for the Outlook. I have not tested a Fresstyle, but I don't know where it could be giving up nearly 30% of interior space like that. Trunk space is virtually the same.
All legroom and headroom measures seem to be within inches of each other, which is a shame to the Lambda with its nearly 700lbs of extra weight compared to the Freestyle.
It seems a lot of that difference is made up in the width of the lambda vs. the FS. When you add up 3 or 4 inches difference over the length and height of the interior it seems to add up quickly to make that difference in volume.
Yikes! Didn't mean to start a riot. I look out for my best interests and assume that the dealer is sharp enough to look out for himself. I will accept wholesale for my trade, blue book or NADA, not black book, and I won't go more than $500 over invoice on the new rig. It works for me and most of the dealers that I've dealt with. There aren't many dealers where I live and I try to maintain a decent working relationship with as many as I can.
The Edge that I tested was a loaded SEL and was the only Edge on his lot. That was in May and he still has it.
The Edge that I tested was a loaded SEL and was the only Edge on his lot. That was in May and he still has it. "
Kinda supports the point I was making. He had one in May, and still has it. he will have a hard time selling it for sticker.
And I am like you - I am always willing to give the dealer fair profit over invoice - the haggling over the last few hundred isn't worth my time and is a blip on the radar of a very large purchase
The Lambdas are 2.5" taller than the Freestyle, mostly due to ground clearance.
Actually the height difference is even greater, as I pointed out in my previous post, the tall part of the Freestyle is the last few feet in the back because of the upward slope, while the front of the Freestyle is much lower...again, like a big station wagon, but that makes it a lot easier to climb in, rather than climb up, into the FS.
And I agree that the 30% difference is due to width and also to the sides of the FS being more angled, as well as the sloped up roof line. But 6 people in either the FS or Lambda would have plenty of space. 7 better off in the Lambda and 8 better off in a minivan!
"But 6 people in either the FS or Lambda would have plenty of space. 7 better off in the Lambda and 8 better off in a minivan!"
Good point! So what would folks here get if one wants excellent room for 4 TALL folks+gear, with the better visibility of a CUV (no 'buy a station wagon' - not an option per better half)?
speaking of jeep, the "commander" never gets spoken of around here with it's chiseled looks and hemi...suprising considering all those addicted to hp around here, heck it's even rwd for performance handling.
boy if you want to check out poor interior design for a 6/7 seater look at these numbers
A bit too retro for me - I had a Cherokee from '84 to '94, same look (better, IMHO). The Commander is not selling, either, haven't read much complimentary about it, and with $3 gas, a hemi's not a 'plus' to me.
Length is virtually the same for the Outlook, FS and Odissey minivans: 200"
The 2.5" in height comes from Ford's own comparison tool, but you may be right, in that the Outlook feels portlier than the difference would suggest.
But that is also nearly the difference in ground clearance, which suggests the interior height could be the same.
The only sizable difference is in width, at 3.3", but internally, shoulder room and hiproom are less than 2" apart in all rows, which would account for 5% less volume, at best. The other 25% would have to come from interior length (about the same considering legroom numbers) or interior height (again, about the same based on headroom numbers) .
At any rate, if the Outlook has 40% more interior space than the FS, that means the FS is not in the same category. I think Ford is looking into the new Flex to fit that bill.
The Flex would also take the top honor of ugliest car in recent history from the deceased Pontiac Aztec.
I saw the Commander. I felt bad for the salesperson. I just walked around the car, keys in hand, when I noticed the 3rd row headrest almost touching the rear window. The test-drive was aborted right there.
"The Flex would also take the top honor of ugliest car in recent history from the deceased Pontiac Aztec."
Couldn't disagree more on that note... all done up like the press pics, I think the lambdas are going to have more competition than they think. The legroom alone in the second row if it comes to market as shown on the web will crush the numbers of the rest of the competition. I really wonder where the mpg is going to slot in at. A turbo-diesel option would be a nice boost to set it apart as well. Ford may be rebounding with this one if they don't screw it up.
Think about all those mini owners out there who need more space to carry more than 2 or a dog larger than a teacup poodle, I'd say they make a nice set in the garage...
Well, maybe I exaggerated on the Aztec comparison, but you cleared up my distaste for it: it looks like a cartoonish version of the Mini, stretched on all dimensions.
As for the pictures in the website, the only things being crushed during the photoshoot were the knees of the passengers in 1st and 3rd row.
If that thing is any heavier than a Ford Edge, than a turbo-diesel may be the only engine with torque enough to pull it from idle.
Not only that, but also the chair itself sits on the floor. There is zero leg room. You sit with your knees in the chest. Commander may have the worst 3rd row seat I can think of...
Any how, it's all truck, not really a crossover. I think people seek these to get something car-like and more efficient than a Hemi-powered truck.
Yes, my thought too. The thing is just too long and distorts the cool funky look of the Fairlane. If they would just cut a few inches off that elongated snout, the rest of the lengthening would be more palatable. But some doofus already approved it with that LOOONG front overhang that just cruds up the Fairlane shape.
If you wish to demean the vehicle, then go on calling it a t-rex. Otherwise, why not just call it the Taurus X. Simpleton's, like myself, are less confused that way.
speaking of jeep, the "commander" never gets spoken of around here with it's chiseled looks and hemi...suprising considering all those addicted to hp around here, heck it's even rwd for performance handling. ""
Hmmm... I don't figure how T-Rex is any more demeaning to Ford than "Bimmer" is to BMW. Both are terms of affection in my book.
For MY simpleton self, the real confuser is why Ford chose to resurrect a dead, nondescript (although admittedly familiar) passenger car name for what aspires to be a crossover family hauler. Makes about as much sense as Toyota calling the Highlander the "Cressida Extreme" :P
"If you wish to demean the vehicle, then go on calling it a t-rex. Otherwise, why not just call it the Taurus X. Simpleton's, like myself, are less confused that way."
wasn't intended one way or the other...
does this mean we need to clear up lambda's now as well???
Comments
Maybe Toyota dealers like to count on that . . . :P
We all do this every day with every product we buy. At some point we all reach a point where the search for a lower price exceeds the effort we are willing to pay for something. That is neither right or wrong, it just is. With cars I try to avoid new "hot" models as there will a higher chance that somebody will be willing to pay more than me. Dealers are for profit businesses - they would be foolish not to maximize what they get for a car. I try to avoid dogs (e.g. the Aztek) as at some point down the line I will need to unload it. :shades:
Economic theory would suggest that it's not too much (given the assumptions made).
Others, though, would suggest that the auction process simply ensures that the least rational person wins. :P
As evidence, I submit Ebay auctions as Exhhibit A. I've literally seen this happen: an auction is being conducted by entity A. Entity A has a website that isn't all that hard to find (often embedeed in the Ebay auction itself). On said website, you can find item X (the auction item) for price Y. Yet many times, the bidder ends up paying MORE than Y to win the auction.
QED
Case in point, the 2001-2005 Ford Thunderbird. People paid $5,000 (and more) over MSRP for that vehicle . . at least for part of the first year.
By 2005, you could get them for about $8,000 *under* MSRP.
Not to mention that buyer protections are often better at the web store.
So, did anyone buy this weekend? What and why?
btw, we (that is, any of you that want to) are blogging.
So you're saying that and Edge, a decent entry in a crowded field where "invoice +" deals for almost every competitor are commonplace, is worth MSRP?
Everyone could save even more by buying slightly used vehicles...but of course that would not work if everyone started doing it, because then those would be in short supply and the prices would increase. Bottom line, I think we should be praising, not damning, those who pay MSRP. By doing so, they allow others to get better deals. Dealers more or less need to balance out a fire sale transaction with one in which some real profit is realized, i.e., no one will be able to negotiate a stupendous deal from an out-of-business dealer.
I went to a Buick dealer this weekend and they stuck to MSRP for the Enclave. Can't blame them, there were no models on display and a couple of people were pre-ordering them without even seeing the car.
After doing the math and looking at it, the decision is made. The Enclave is cheaper and better looking than an Outlook, but I'll wait another 3 months until better deals start to come out.
My wife is not happy with the interior as she liked the CX-9 better, but the space and access to the 3rd row seating on the Lambdas convinced her otherwise.
Interestingly the CVT option is gone, wonder why they didn't continue to develop that? :confuse:
Also, I guess $38 grand is par for this class, but it no longer seems like the bargain of the bunch.
Because it was far less expensive to just drop-in the new 6-speed.
Styling is improved, the front has more character now, and some family resemblance. It's a little less generic.
But high prices are a GOOD thing for Ford.
Who says they aren't?
Of course you read the fine print and that doesn't include freight or $1000 down or the processing fee.
Still, $22k or so is a far cry from the $38k as-tested price, even when you factor the extra equipment.
I guess $38k is par for the class nowadays. That sounds crazy to me, though. Automakers have managed to shift price expections up about $10 grand on us, just like that.
As for any resemblance to the Outlook, it's the other way around, the rear of the Outlook sort of looked like the Freestyle, which came out much earlier.
Anyone here see that the 2008 CX-9 will be a 3.7L with 273hp and 270 lb ft of torque? (If this was already discussed, I apologize)
However, the CX-9 needs a bigger interior to go with a bigger engine
I was on a road trip for the past 2 weeks and parked next to an Outlook, and especially in the front seat area, the Outlook was much taller. The Freestyle is much more of a car-CUV while the lambdas are more SUV. The rear of the Freestyle slopes up at the back, but overall it's more of a car with a lot of interior space. And when the guy opened the door of the Outlook, the step-in height was greater then in my Freestyle, and I was looking up at him when he was sitting, but he may of had his seat in a high position.
But it depends on what you're looking for. If you want a vehicle more like a traditional SUV, the lambdas would be a better choice. But if you want to drive something more like a regular car, then get a Freestyle. It has almost the same interior space for passengers and cargo (based on CuFt of cargo space, and based on legroom/headroom inches of passenger space. The Freestyle can't hold 8, but if you really need to hold 8 then get a minivan. The extra couple of inches of hiproom in the lambdas aren't really enough for 3 across in their 3rd row.
BTW I just did a 6000 mile road trip out West and in the Rockies. My best MPG was 29.9 driving about 65mph and even with the cruise set on 80mph (in the 75mph states) I still got about 25mpg. Even in the mountains my mpg never went under 24mpg. And I had plenty of power going up the mountains and the CVT was great for going down the mountains without using brakes, although I wish it had an even lower "gear" when I went down Pike's Peak. Overall, we had a great 2 week vacation...much of it spent in the Freestyle!
Even with trunk space being virtually the same, In terms of interior space, Ford's own comparison tool lists the FS at 85.2 vs. 117 for the Outlook. I have not tested a Fresstyle, but I don't know where it could be giving up nearly 30% of interior space like that. Trunk space is virtually the same.
All legroom and headroom measures seem to be within inches of each other, which is a shame to the Lambda with its nearly 700lbs of extra weight compared to the Freestyle.
I'd go even further and say the Freestyle is really a large/tall wagon, and the Lamdas are the Crossovers. A true SUV would be a Tahoe.
Either way, it's getting hard to categorize them because the lines have blurred so much.
The Edge that I tested was a loaded SEL and was the only Edge on his lot. That was in May and he still has it.
Kinda supports the point I was making. He had one in May, and still has it. he will have a hard time selling it for sticker.
And I am like you - I am always willing to give the dealer fair profit over invoice - the haggling over the last few hundred isn't worth my time and is a blip on the radar of a very large purchase
Actually the height difference is even greater, as I pointed out in my previous post, the tall part of the Freestyle is the last few feet in the back because of the upward slope, while the front of the Freestyle is much lower...again, like a big station wagon, but that makes it a lot easier to climb in, rather than climb up, into the FS.
And I agree that the 30% difference is due to width and also to the sides of the FS being more angled, as well as the sloped up roof line. But 6 people in either the FS or Lambda would have plenty of space. 7 better off in the Lambda and 8 better off in a minivan!
Good point! So what would folks here get if one wants excellent room for 4 TALL folks+gear, with the better visibility of a CUV (no 'buy a station wagon' - not an option per better half)?
boy if you want to check out poor interior design for a 6/7 seater look at these numbers
http://www-5.jeep.com/vehsuite/VehicleCompare.jsp
yikes, no wonder they have sold about 3 of them...
The 2.5" in height comes from Ford's own comparison tool, but you may be right, in that the Outlook feels portlier than the difference would suggest.
But that is also nearly the difference in ground clearance, which suggests the interior height could be the same.
The only sizable difference is in width, at 3.3", but internally, shoulder room and hiproom are less than 2" apart in all rows, which would account for 5% less volume, at best. The other 25% would have to come from interior length (about the same considering legroom numbers) or interior height (again, about the same based on headroom numbers) .
At any rate, if the Outlook has 40% more interior space than the FS, that means the FS is not in the same category. I think Ford is looking into the new Flex to fit that bill.
The Flex would also take the top honor of ugliest car in recent history from the deceased Pontiac Aztec.
Couldn't disagree more on that note... all done up like the press pics, I think the lambdas are going to have more competition than they think. The legroom alone in the second row if it comes to market as shown on the web will crush the numbers of the rest of the competition. I really wonder where the mpg is going to slot in at. A turbo-diesel option would be a nice boost to set it apart as well. Ford may be rebounding with this one if they don't screw it up.
Think about all those mini owners out there who need more space to carry more than 2 or a dog larger than a teacup poodle, I'd say they make a nice set in the garage...
As for the pictures in the website, the only things being crushed during the photoshoot were the knees of the passengers in 1st and 3rd row.
If that thing is any heavier than a Ford Edge, than a turbo-diesel may be the only engine with torque enough to pull it from idle.
Any how, it's all truck, not really a crossover. I think people seek these to get something car-like and more efficient than a Hemi-powered truck.
I loved the Fairlane concept. Sure, it looks like a Mini on steroids, but that's exactly what made it cool.
The Flex came out looooooong, boy is that profile drab. The sheetmetal just goes on and on and on. It looks like a limo version of the concept.
The interior is sweet, though, and that's what will sell them.
Probably because people don't consider it a CUV
GM Sprinkles Crossovers and Fewer Minivans Into its Future Line
Revealed: Official Pics of 2007 GMC Acadia Crossover
The average prices are much higher for the crossovers.
For MY simpleton self, the real confuser is why Ford chose to resurrect a dead, nondescript (although admittedly familiar) passenger car name for what aspires to be a crossover family hauler. Makes about as much sense as Toyota calling the Highlander the "Cressida Extreme" :P
wasn't intended one way or the other...
does this mean we need to clear up lambda's now as well???