That's the strategy GM should have used - sold it at a probable loss until it caught on, then slowly increased the price. As you say, it worked for the Prius, and it was also the old Lexus strategy. Starting expensive will just turn people off.
Less than 1 in 20 people buy new cars each year, probably less than 1 in 25 if you consider business sales. So people certainly are looking at their budgets as to whether they can afford a new vehicle and what type.
Why, of course buyers look at their budgets before making a purchase. The point is, people generally purchase the car they want (within reason), not the car that covers the basic necessities, which is TRANSPORTATION.
Don't stop at luxury and performance cars....The Big 3 sell thousands upon thousands of SUV/SAV/trucks to people that have little to no need for such an expensive vehicle. Think "Soccer Moms"...
A lot of people just bite the bullet because it's part of some option package on the vehicle that is on the lot, and they wantr they car. Probably people wouldn't pay $750 extra for chrome wheels either. If people could take some of those items off I guess they would.
Options such as these sell because people are willing to pay for them, and because a large % WANT them.
You may personally see no value in, say, a moonroof, but there is far too much competition out there between manufacturers for them to continue to force buyers to spend $1000's for theings they simply don't want. Most people do keep economy in mind, as there is not a super high % of fully loaded vehicles sold - meaning not a majority of the people are leaving with the LTZ Limited. There is a small minority of people who do buy Corvettes and Cadillacs; I'm not going to look it up for you, but see if there was more than 5% -10% of all GM products. The people who are buying the Cadillacs and Corvettes are probably the few in the top 10% of income in the country, or single people with no house and family expenses.
I'd be willing to bet far more buyers purchase cars "optioned up" than those that buy cars in the base configuration. Check out any new car lot and see how many "base models" you find in comparason to "optioned up" cars. Dealers have no interest in keeping a lot full of slow moving product...
These cars are there because they are the ones that sell. Like the few who are always disappointed by how few manual transmission equipped cars they find on a new lot, its not that dealers are reluctant to sell manual equipped cars, but its the buyers who are reluctant to purchase them.
I did some major purchasing to lower my fuel costs. first I parked the 16 mpg truck and bought a $7800 car that got 27-28 mpg.
I'm going through a bit of a fuel economy conundrum right now, myself. I've been thinking about selling my 2000 Park Ave to my roommate, who doesn't have a car, but has been driving my '85 Silverado. And then, I was planning on getting a more economical 4-cyl intermediate, something like an Altima or Fusion (although I gotta admit, I saw a light blue Chevy Cruze today, and it caught my eye in that shade). I'll let him use the Park Ave on occasion, though. The Silverado usually gets about 8 mpg, and I think only 2-3 fillups broke the 10 mpg barrier in 2011. And to make matters worse, it has an appetite for premium, as it will clatter on 87. 89 octane is okay, but usually priced close enough to 93 that I just go for the 93!
The Park Ave, in local driving, is only going to get around 16-17 mpg, and also takes premium, but that's still cutting fuel consumption in half!
But then, I looked at the fuel records from last year. The Silverado went about 2,000 miles, and ended up costing a whopping $987 in fuel. Now, on a cost-per-mile basis that's horrible...about 50 cents per mile! But, it does show that even at horrible mileage like this, it might not be worth it to buy a more economical vehicle, just for the fuel savings.
Now, if my roommate drove that truck all the time, it would be more than 2000 miles per year. But in nice weather, if I drive one of my antique cars, I'll let him take the Park Ave to work. Or, on a weekend, if I don't need the car and he has to work, I'll let him drive it. Because it gets such crappy fuel economy, we try to drive the Silverado as little as possible. Which, in a vicious circle sort of way, probably makes it get even worse economy, since it never gets a chance to stretch its legs!
Now before buying a Cruze or some such thing, be sure you go to an auto show soon and go to the Dodge section.
Lemko and I were checking out the Philly car show yesterday (he's there again today) and there on one of those turntables that you stand by and slowly see the whole car as it goes around was a new Dodge Dart! The pictures do not do it justice. It is a VERY nice looking car! Now if they only put a push button transmission in it....
Since we are in a GM topic I'll mention a few - the new Malibu looks great! Better in every way. Makes the current one look out of date. Another one where the real thing impressed me much more than the pictures.
The Buicks were all quite impressive. I still think this is where GM is making the most sense in redefining itself.
Lemko is either going to end up in an XTS or his wife will end up in an ATS before long whether he likes it or not.... Since his wife is with him today I am betting on the latter. That said, she might well go for the new LaCrosse. The one on display in even in her correct color which is a dynamite shade of blue....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
>her correct color which is a dynamite shade of blue....
You should get into auto sales! You're sounding like a salesman. I'd always thought that was something I would do when I retired. But it didn't work out that way.
I could have sold lemko right there. He was ready. I should have started pre-qulaifiying him.... "By the way the ACTUAL name of that color is called lemko blue; clearly you are the man to buy it. I've seen you looking at the other cars. Wouldn't you really rather own a Buick?
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
That Buick LaCrosse was in exactly the color combination she would choose. When she first spotted it, she exclaimed, "That's MY car!" Heck, that LaCrosse was so nice, who would need a Caddy? I should buy it for myself and make her drive my Grand Marquis! :P
Surprisingly, she didn't go for the ATS. She thought it was too small though she did like the design. She said she likes my DTS better than the XTS on display. Maybe, she's afraid I'll go out and get one? The guy on the platform was saying Cadillac was planning a direct S-Class/7-Series competitor. Maybe I should wait and see what that one looks like?
At about 200k miles with local gas prices on an Escalade Hybrid.
Other cars in that article break-even much sooner, though.
So you can, if you keep 'em long-term.
Yes... That is certainly the key.
However, practically all new car buyers have an existing car that they either trade or sell outright. In what I would certainly estimate to be the vast majority of cases, the "traded" car is, for all intents and purposes, still fully functional (at least, in an operating sense.... there may be minor non-critical issues).
From a purely economic perspective, its extremely difficult to justify buying a new car based upon the math alone (assuming the existing car has no loan attached to it and is owned outright), unless the car is kept 10+ years (even then you still may not reach the "tipping" point).
So, unless one is in a very rare situation, hybrids and cars like the Volt/Leaf only push that window out to a point more distant in the future.
Car makers understand this, so that is why they change the looks and styles of cars on a yearly basis. People need that extra "push" to incent them to trade up to a new model. And, of course, better FE helps in the equation, but unless there is a known functional issue with an existing car, its going to be hard to make a decision on new wheels based solely on the increased FE alone.
You often hear the phrase "driving a car till the wheels fall off", but in reality, that very seldom happens.
IMO, practically anyone buying a hybrid or a Volt isn't doing it for economy, but because it makes them feel good (or gives them a "status upgrade", maybe both). And, as FE continues to increase on non-hybrid vehicles, its just going to be that much more difficult to make a hybrid purchase "pay off".
The one factor that could turn that upside down is if there is a shortage of fuel, and every single MPG is critical. I just don't see that happening, though, at least in the near term...
IMO, practically anyone buying a hybrid or a Volt isn't doing it for economy, but because it makes them feel good (or gives them a "status upgrade", maybe both). And, as FE continues to increase on non-hybrid vehicles, its just going to be that much more difficult to make a hybrid purchase "pay off".
I think a lot of people DO buy their hybrids for the improved fuel economy, just not any financial benefit.
However, there is something to be said for not getting sticker shock every time you fill up. When you buy a hybrid or some other economical vehicle (ANY vehicle for that matter) you get the one time shock when you pay for it. But, when you drive a gas guzzler, you get the shock every time you fill it up.
Just today, I topped off my guzzling '85 Silverado. It had gone 91.4 miles since the last fillup, and cost a whopping $38.25 to fill up! It wolfed down 10.628 gallons of $3.599 89 octane, which comes out to a whopping 8.6 mpg.
But, don't cheer just yet, Arabs. Because the last time it was filled up was 17 days ago! So, at that rate, nobody's exactly getting rich off my truck! That $38.25 seemed painful, but as little as the truck gets driven, it's really inconsequential.
Actually, some old guy came up to me and asked me to sell it to him today! I told him, you don't want this thing, it's a piece of junk** Well, turns out he had an '84 that he did a $40,000 restoration on, so, maybe he would want it, after all! But, I'm not ready to part with it, just yet. I should've gotten his phone #, I guess.
I'd buy a hybrid for less pain at the pump. Even if the upfront cost was more. I can plan for and control the upfront cost. Going to the pump in 3 years is a gamble. One of those gambles where if you win, you lose, but still. :shades:
That's why the D3's current product lineup would scare me, if I lost all sense and bought some stock in one of them. They are still very heavy into PU's and SUV's that get at best 25mpg (Hwy), and other such vehicles.
There's no way I would buy a new PU, and expect to like the gas bill for the next 10 years.
But, don't cheer just yet, Arabs. Because the last time it was filled up was 17 days ago! So, at that rate, nobody's exactly getting rich off my truck! That $38.25 seemed painful, but as little as the truck gets driven, it's really inconsequential.
Yeah, a high cost per mile doesn't cost much when you have a paid off vehicle that you don't drive much.
I've done a bunch of driving since Friday. I've put two tanks in the Expedition since Saturday.
I think last year I spent about $4,500 in gas last year in the Expedition. Say a 3rd vehicle to drive around when I don't need the utility would cut my fuel bill in half. What can I buy for $2250 a year including fuel, insurance, plates, and the cost of the vehicle? Nothing. I have no desire to drive a cheap beater around.
The bang for buck has to be there too. I'm a wagon/minivan fan so the limited storage (relatively) in a Volt (and I assume a Leaf) is a negative. Plus I don't have a commute and my driving tends to be some errands and plenty of road trips.
My usual example is buying a laser printer instead of an inkjet because of lower consumable costs. When I got my last printer, I got a $50 Brother. Cheap capital cost (compared to the old HP II days) and cheap toner, and most likely cheaper to own and operate than any inkjet. Different story if I needed color or used the printer much.
Different story if I had a daily commute and was visiting the pump once every few days.
Not to mention that electricity up here isn't exactly cheap, and solar installations are few and far between. Maybe if I was in Taos, a plug in would have a bit more appeal than a Prius or other hybrid.
I can't remember which vehicles they were but when we were cruising the auto show there was was one big truck with a football sized chunk of chrome that must have weighed 8 pounds that said "hybrid." Then there was the (again not sure on the actual model something like an F-350 Eco....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Yeah, but in the lower numbers the percentage gain is bigger, right?
So a regular Silverado 1500 gets 15 city/20 highway mpg, while the hybrid Silverado 1500 gets 20 MPG city and 23 MPG highway.
Doesn't look like much but if you play with the percentage gain, you might be able to convince yourself that it's a better deal.
Well, maybe not $18,000 better, but I didn't drill down and compare features so maybe the prices aren't that different if you option them up similarily.
1. Buick Regal GS ($32,535) – It has been quite a long time since we could say "that isn't your Grandpa's Buick." Surprisingly, at a time when allegedly more sporting makes don't offer real three-pedal manual transmissions, Buick is doing it with the Regal GS.
...
7. Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 ($54,095) – Since 2005, the current generation of Shelby Mustangs has owned the king-of-the-hill position in the pony car segment. The new ZL1 Camaro with 580 horsepower brings Chevy back into the hunt and demonstrates that old-school muscle is alive and well.
Gas and electricity can increase, either in a spike or a permanent increase by some percentage without substantial effect on the economy. After that, having a car that gets 60 mpg or 25 mpg really doesn't matter much.
If gas prices increase by 50+% in a short period of time and stay there, with no expectation of relief, then the economy goes in the dumper, and we all wind up in hell.
So, I guess I plan for reasonable contingencies, but not disasters.
As an example, I keep a couple of fire extinguishers at my home, but I don't keep a fire truck there.
One can only plan for so much. Sometimes, things just get so large they get out of control, and we just go along for the ride...
A gasser or hybrid that burns gas gives me more options going along on that ride. For a plug in to work for me, it'd have to have lots of battery juice so I can go for a few days between charges. I haven't driven for a few days now, but I'm doing five hours the next two days with a couple of octogenarians. Can't be worrying about the range.
I believe that our Pres. Obama was driving a Chrysler "Hemi" as a senator..However upon being nominated for the presidential run, he quickily traded it in for a hybrid SUV..After all he is a "greenie" and our "oil guys" are evil, so now we have a agenda..There seems to be plenty of oil, and no politician is going to suffer if oil is $150/barrel, but we must have "green cars" to keep the planet from overheating or over cooling..
Our government wants the high priced gas so they can sell the program and the oil companies are falling in line to the higher prices with reduced volumes and will make more $$$s. If old pricing gets out of line at the consumer level then the Govt will try to nationalize the oil guys..
The early "green bean cars" are plagued with problems, however money will be thrown at these projects to forward the agenda..The V-8/6s will get the ax and the 4 bangers will spread across the spectrum with turbos and other hp enhancing tweaks. The hybrid and battery game will expand with our tax $$$$s..
I believe Spain spent $1billion on windmills, solar panels, and whatever was hyped as the final answer to "energy independence", finally running out of money, and bankrupt..Germany has realized the craze of "green" is madness..However we in the USA are moving in the same direction, but we will do it smarter!!!!!!!!!
After going through 53 cars, I have lived the freedom dream and the great automobiles of the past starting with the 35 V-8 Ford and the balance were a few straight-6s, many V-8s and V-6s with 2-4 cylinder Porsches in the count..No trucks, suvs, or vans..
A 138hp Cruze or Sonic really doesn't "Wet my Whistle." A 220hp Buick Regal at $33k isn't much to talk about, however I might give $14k for a used one with 3k miles..I bought a 92 Regal Grand Sport in 93 with 1,500 mi for 11.5, put a quick 90k on it and broomed it for 5k..
Cadillac 4-bangers are in the works, how thrilling!!!!!! 270hp, probably start around 40k and top out a 50 bills..
Zero to 60 just doesn't float my boat much; more interested in 45 to 60, and torque at the stop sign. And it it won't haul a canoe and some toys locked up inside, then ho-hum.
GM is missing the minivan segment right now; nothing like a Voyager or a Transit Connect. Just full size vans and SUVs.
All I will say is that there are several "inaccuracies" in your posting.
Visiting Germany once a year, I see a country moving towards energy independence (as much as is reasonably possible, anyway). You're correct on Spain, though, in that the country tried to move way too fast in the "Eco-energy" direction and is now paying the price for it.
4 cylinder turbo-charged engines are going to become much more prevelant, since technology allows them to provide adequate power at better FE.
I fail to see the benefit to the government for high fuel prices, and in any case, oil is a world traded fungible commodity over which the US can effect price only by demand and usage. Seems like every politician would love cheap gas for re-election purposes.
Nationalizing American oil companies wouldn't have much effect beyond the oil reserves they control domestically, and that isn't really that much overall.
I do agree that tax $$$ will be used to continue development on EVs and hybrids, but why not? A number of other industries are supported by tax $$$ intended for R&D. There's definitely a national interest at stake in moving the country towards less oil dependency, and transportation is a HUGE consumer of oil.
GM is missing the minivan segment right now; nothing like a Voyager or a Transit Connect. Just full size vans and SUVs.
I agree. While the lambdas certainly sell well, they are not a replacement for a minivan. Both Ford and GM have missed an opportunity with minivans. If Toyota, Honda, Nissan, can offer CUVs and a minivan, Ford and GM should be able to also.
I remember reading somewhere that GM considered building a minivan off the lambda platform but decided against it.
"GM's January sales fell 6%, reflecting deep discounts and new models that fueled sales gains a year ago. It has since cut back on incentives. GM's profitable big pickups lost ground last month. Sales of the Chevy Silverado—GM's top-selling vehicle—fell 4.7% and the GMC Sierra dropped 10.4%. Cadillac brand sales fell 29% from a year ago, with every model in the brand posting declines."
I helped my mom yesterday buy a 2008 GMC Envoy Denali w/ 24 rounds on it. It's mint!!! She traded her Pontiac 09' G6 GXP "Street Edition" on Autotrader since last summer and got only a few hits on it. I was quite stunned it did not sell since it was such a flawless car. She takes care of her cars like lemko and she was priced under market value. I guess people fear about parts and service when a brand goes out of business is my only conclusion.
My step dad purchased a new 2011 GMC Sierra SLE Z-71 4x4 about a month ago. That puppy is nice but so is mom's new Envoy!
I still have the 2000 Grand Prix GTP which just turned 50 rounds. I'll probably sell it next year and buy a Chevy Cruze Diesel :shades:
Not surprising...the "Candyman of Incentives" have programmed potential customers to wait for the sale. No Sale, No Buy.
Chevy only down 1%. Gas prices are now on the gain so GM might have an inventory problem in Q1-2012. Not good for Obama.
General Motors posted declines all around, but the automaker correctly admits that last January was especially strong. Many of its mainstream models saw modest declines last month, but there are some statistics worth pointing out. For one, the Chevrolet Sonic (5,712 units) is skyrocketing past its Aveo predecessor (2,739 last January) and the 603 Volts delivered nearly double last year’s 321 cars.
Cadillac saw the biggest declines at GM, although its lineup is two cars smaller (STS and DTS) than it was this time last year.
We'll soon see but they finally have a decent small car. Jeep sales are up as well.
TrueCar estimated that GM’s incentives were down 16 percent to $3,095 per vehicle.
Chrysler's were estimated down 5.3% from last year to $3,233.
Looks like trucks were hit hardest as well as Caddy, Buick and GMC (all trucks).
Still, GM's car sales rose 13 percent, led by the new subcompact Chevrolet Sonic and the Chevrolet Cruze.
At Chrysler, models such as the 200 sedan, its top-selling car last year, and the Dodge Durango SUV first arrived at dealerships a year ago. Deliveries of the 200 surged to 7,007 in January from 788 a year ago and Durango more than doubled to 3,021 from 1,199. Jeep brand sales climbed 37 percent to 31,710 led by the Grand Cherokee and Wrangler SUVs. Ram sales rose 47 percent to 17,909.
I'd say the incentives are working at Chrysler for everything and at GM for their CARS at Chevy.
Buyers paid about $30,400 per GM vehicle in January, up about $1,000 from a year earlier, Jim Cain, a company spokesman, said in an e-mail. Incentive spending slid by about $700 per vehicle, he said. GM outspent the industry average by 42 percent in January 2011, according to Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey-based Autodata Corp.
February will be no better for GM for comps...
GM also compared unfavorably to last January when its sales were inflated by rebates and other deals. TrueCar estimated that GM's incentives were down 16 percent to $3,095 per vehicle this year. Don Johnson, GM's vice president of U.S. sales, said the company's sales also will likely be down in February because of the incentives it offered last year.
I think GM over prices some of their vehicles. For example, the lambda CUV's (Acadia, etc.) are nice vehicles, but they carry a sizeable price premium over competitors like Explorer, Highlander and Pilot. This leads me to believe that they won't be able to lay off the higher incentives longer term this year.
You know, reading Circlew's response was surprising to me... Especially the average price for GM products being $30,400.
I would have guessed it would have been much lower. I wonder if that was net pricing or before rebate/discount.
In any case, assuming the figure is true, then a Volt (even with no tax advantages included) doesn't seem so overpriced. Assuming again that one could get the full $7500 back in a tax credit, then t he Volt would qualify as an average priced GM vehicle...
Of course, I've done a lot of assuming there, haven't I?
At $80 a month for gas, my mid sized IC car is a good balance for me.
Yeah, if you're only spending $80/mo on gas, it really doesn't matter if your vehicle yields 40mpg or 10. It's not worth chasing efficiency when your only spending that much on a monthly basis.
You know, reading Circlew's response was surprising to me... Especially the average price for GM products being $30,400.
I would have guessed it would have been much lower. I wonder if that was net pricing or before rebate/discount.
Well, GM is still top-heavy in full-sized trucks and SUVs, so that probably skews the numbers. And, on the low end, they really don't have anything that's bargain-basement cheap anymore, with the Cobalt and Aveo gone (at least I think the Aveo's finally cleared out completely). The Cruze really isn't *that* cheap, and the Sonic hasn't been out long enough to sell a huge amount.
But yeah, initially that $30K number does seem high from my perspective. Most I ever spent for a car was $22,389 out the door, for my old 2000 Intrepid back in November 1999. But that was tax, tags, an extended warranty that I never ended up having to use, etc. I'd guess most of that stuff would have been subtracted out, and put the transaction price at around $19,500.
Even today, 12 years later, the type of car I'm leaning towards (4-cyl intermediate with a sunroof and alloys, maybe leather) would probably come out to around $20-22K, plus tax etc.
But yeah, initially that $30K number does seem high from my perspective.
No doubt trucks and SUVs push the number up. Ford's numbers are similar too. Heck it's hard to find a HD pickup under $40k and many are well over $50k.
I've been shopping pickups for a while. With the options and configuration I want, the MSRP is $45k.
Chrysler has to be the "Most Improved Player" of late. They had a lot of room to improve, but the Pentastar/6 speed in that car is soooooo much better than the coarse V6 they had before.
Keep us posted occasionally on you're experience with the 200. My wife is going to be in the market for a new ride in12-18 months, and it's a possible selection for her.
I want to see what you think of the car again in 6 and 12 months, please.
Anyone who saw the new one at NAIAS probably put their purchase on hold until it arrives - it's gorgeous.
My concern is that the Malibu is new yet it only sold about half as many as the Camry. GM has to start swinging for the fences like Ford is doing, no more bunts (eAssist).
Comments
Why, of course buyers look at their budgets before making a purchase. The point is, people generally purchase the car they want (within reason), not the car that covers the basic necessities, which is TRANSPORTATION.
Don't stop at luxury and performance cars....The Big 3 sell thousands upon thousands of SUV/SAV/trucks to people that have little to no need for such an expensive vehicle. Think "Soccer Moms"...
A lot of people just bite the bullet because it's part of some option package on the vehicle that is on the lot, and they wantr they car. Probably people wouldn't pay $750 extra for chrome wheels either. If people could take some of those items off I guess they would.
Options such as these sell because people are willing to pay for them, and because a large % WANT them.
You may personally see no value in, say, a moonroof, but there is far too much competition out there between manufacturers for them to continue to force buyers to spend $1000's for theings they simply don't want.
Most people do keep economy in mind, as there is not a super high % of fully loaded vehicles sold - meaning not a majority of the people are leaving with the LTZ Limited. There is a small minority of people who do buy Corvettes and Cadillacs; I'm not going to look it up for you, but see if there was more than 5% -10% of all GM products. The people who are buying the Cadillacs and Corvettes are probably the few in the top 10% of income in the country, or single people with no house and family expenses.
I'd be willing to bet far more buyers purchase cars "optioned up" than those that buy cars in the base configuration. Check out any new car lot and see how many "base models" you find in comparason to "optioned up" cars. Dealers have no interest in keeping a lot full of slow moving product...
These cars are there because they are the ones that sell. Like the few who are always disappointed by how few manual transmission equipped cars they find on a new lot, its not that dealers are reluctant to sell manual equipped cars, but its the buyers who are reluctant to purchase them.
I'm going through a bit of a fuel economy conundrum right now, myself. I've been thinking about selling my 2000 Park Ave to my roommate, who doesn't have a car, but has been driving my '85 Silverado. And then, I was planning on getting a more economical 4-cyl intermediate, something like an Altima or Fusion (although I gotta admit, I saw a light blue Chevy Cruze today, and it caught my eye in that shade). I'll let him use the Park Ave on occasion, though. The Silverado usually gets about 8 mpg, and I think only 2-3 fillups broke the 10 mpg barrier in 2011. And to make matters worse, it has an appetite for premium, as it will clatter on 87. 89 octane is okay, but usually priced close enough to 93 that I just go for the 93!
The Park Ave, in local driving, is only going to get around 16-17 mpg, and also takes premium, but that's still cutting fuel consumption in half!
But then, I looked at the fuel records from last year. The Silverado went about 2,000 miles, and ended up costing a whopping $987 in fuel. Now, on a cost-per-mile basis that's horrible...about 50 cents per mile! But, it does show that even at horrible mileage like this, it might not be worth it to buy a more economical vehicle, just for the fuel savings.
Now, if my roommate drove that truck all the time, it would be more than 2000 miles per year. But in nice weather, if I drive one of my antique cars, I'll let him take the Park Ave to work. Or, on a weekend, if I don't need the car and he has to work, I'll let him drive it. Because it gets such crappy fuel economy, we try to drive the Silverado as little as possible. Which, in a vicious circle sort of way, probably makes it get even worse economy, since it never gets a chance to stretch its legs!
Lemko and I were checking out the Philly car show yesterday (he's there again today) and there on one of those turntables that you stand by and slowly see the whole car as it goes around was a new Dodge Dart! The pictures do not do it justice. It is a VERY nice looking car! Now if they only put a push button transmission in it....
Since we are in a GM topic I'll mention a few - the new Malibu looks great! Better in every way. Makes the current one look out of date. Another one where the real thing impressed me much more than the pictures.
The Buicks were all quite impressive. I still think this is where GM is making the most sense in redefining itself.
Lemko is either going to end up in an XTS or his wife will end up in an ATS before long whether he likes it or not.... Since his wife is with him today I am betting on the latter. That said, she might well go for the new LaCrosse. The one on display in even in her correct color which is a dynamite shade of blue....
You should get into auto sales! You're sounding like a salesman. I'd always thought that was something I would do when I retired. But it didn't work out that way.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Surprisingly, she didn't go for the ATS. She thought it was too small though she did like the design. She said she likes my DTS better than the XTS on display. Maybe, she's afraid I'll go out and get one? The guy on the platform was saying Cadillac was planning a direct S-Class/7-Series competitor. Maybe I should wait and see what that one looks like?
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/will-a-hybrid-save-me-money-in-the-lo- ng-run15.htm
At about 200k miles with local gas prices on an Escalade Hybrid.
Other cars in that article break-even much sooner, though.
So you can, if you keep 'em long-term.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/01/27/chevrolet-introduces-new-ecologic-window-stic- ker-coming-first-t/
At about 200k miles with local gas prices on an Escalade Hybrid.
Other cars in that article break-even much sooner, though.
So you can, if you keep 'em long-term.
Yes... That is certainly the key.
However, practically all new car buyers have an existing car that they either trade or sell outright. In what I would certainly estimate to be the vast majority of cases, the "traded" car is, for all intents and purposes, still fully functional (at least, in an operating sense.... there may be minor non-critical issues).
From a purely economic perspective, its extremely difficult to justify buying a new car based upon the math alone (assuming the existing car has no loan attached to it and is owned outright), unless the car is kept 10+ years (even then you still may not reach the "tipping" point).
So, unless one is in a very rare situation, hybrids and cars like the Volt/Leaf only push that window out to a point more distant in the future.
Car makers understand this, so that is why they change the looks and styles of cars on a yearly basis. People need that extra "push" to incent them to trade up to a new model. And, of course, better FE helps in the equation, but unless there is a known functional issue with an existing car, its going to be hard to make a decision on new wheels based solely on the increased FE alone.
You often hear the phrase "driving a car till the wheels fall off", but in reality, that very seldom happens.
IMO, practically anyone buying a hybrid or a Volt isn't doing it for economy, but because it makes them feel good (or gives them a "status upgrade", maybe both). And, as FE continues to increase on non-hybrid vehicles, its just going to be that much more difficult to make a hybrid purchase "pay off".
The one factor that could turn that upside down is if there is a shortage of fuel, and every single MPG is critical. I just don't see that happening, though, at least in the near term...
I think a lot of people DO buy their hybrids for the improved fuel economy, just not any financial benefit.
However, there is something to be said for not getting sticker shock every time you fill up. When you buy a hybrid or some other economical vehicle (ANY vehicle for that matter) you get the one time shock when you pay for it. But, when you drive a gas guzzler, you get the shock every time you fill it up.
Just today, I topped off my guzzling '85 Silverado. It had gone 91.4 miles since the last fillup, and cost a whopping $38.25 to fill up! It wolfed down 10.628 gallons of $3.599 89 octane, which comes out to a whopping 8.6 mpg.
But, don't cheer just yet, Arabs. Because the last time it was filled up was 17 days ago! So, at that rate, nobody's exactly getting rich off my truck! That $38.25 seemed painful, but as little as the truck gets driven, it's really inconsequential.
Actually, some old guy came up to me and asked me to sell it to him today! I told him, you don't want this thing, it's a piece of junk** Well, turns out he had an '84 that he did a $40,000 restoration on, so, maybe he would want it, after all! But, I'm not ready to part with it, just yet. I should've gotten his phone #, I guess.
**not the actual word I used. :shades:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yiah1fJ1MwM
It's just easier for some to pay a higher fixed payment so that they can feel good at the pump when filling up.
Gimme the range of a ... Passat TDI with 51mpg highway (real world CR) and an 18 plus gallon tank. Now you're talking.
Low fuel light goes on at around 800 miles or so. :shades:
There's no way I would buy a new PU, and expect to like the gas bill for the next 10 years.
After all, doesn't the idea of the Volt give one the maximum control over future fuel costs... At least, as much control as one could reasonably get?
Buy a v8 powered boat and you'll never have sticker shock from filling a car or truck up again;)
Yeah, a high cost per mile doesn't cost much when you have a paid off vehicle that you don't drive much.
I've done a bunch of driving since Friday. I've put two tanks in the Expedition since Saturday.
I think last year I spent about $4,500 in gas last year in the Expedition. Say a 3rd vehicle to drive around when I don't need the utility would cut my fuel bill in half. What can I buy for $2250 a year including fuel, insurance, plates, and the cost of the vehicle? Nothing. I have no desire to drive a cheap beater around.
My usual example is buying a laser printer instead of an inkjet because of lower consumable costs. When I got my last printer, I got a $50 Brother. Cheap capital cost (compared to the old HP II days) and cheap toner, and most likely cheaper to own and operate than any inkjet. Different story if I needed color or used the printer much.
Different story if I had a daily commute and was visiting the pump once every few days.
Not to mention that electricity up here isn't exactly cheap, and solar installations are few and far between. Maybe if I was in Taos, a plug in would have a bit more appeal than a Prius or other hybrid.
So a regular Silverado 1500 gets 15 city/20 highway mpg, while the hybrid Silverado 1500 gets 20 MPG city and 23 MPG highway.
Doesn't look like much but if you play with the percentage gain, you might be able to convince yourself that it's a better deal.
Well, maybe not $18,000 better, but I didn't drill down and compare features so maybe the prices aren't that different if you option them up similarily.
1. Buick Regal GS ($32,535) – It has been quite a long time since we could say "that isn't your Grandpa's Buick." Surprisingly, at a time when allegedly more sporting makes don't offer real three-pedal manual transmissions, Buick is doing it with the Regal GS.
...
7. Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 ($54,095) – Since 2005, the current generation of Shelby Mustangs has owned the king-of-the-hill position in the pony car segment. The new ZL1 Camaro with 580 horsepower brings Chevy back into the hunt and demonstrates that old-school muscle is alive and well.
Doesn't look like much but if you play with the percentage gain, you might be able to convince yourself that it's a better deal.
Considering a 4wd Silverado Hybrid has a tow rating of only 5,900lbs, it's not much of an option for those with heavy trailers to tow.
Guy doesn't pull any punches. Go Bob!
Gas and electricity can increase, either in a spike or a permanent increase by some percentage without substantial effect on the economy. After that, having a car that gets 60 mpg or 25 mpg really doesn't matter much.
If gas prices increase by 50+% in a short period of time and stay there, with no expectation of relief, then the economy goes in the dumper, and we all wind up in hell.
So, I guess I plan for reasonable contingencies, but not disasters.
As an example, I keep a couple of fire extinguishers at my home, but I don't keep a fire truck there.
One can only plan for so much. Sometimes, things just get so large they get out of control, and we just go along for the ride...
Our government wants the high priced gas so they can sell the program and the oil companies are falling in line to the higher prices with reduced volumes and will make more $$$s. If old pricing gets out of line at the consumer level then the Govt will try to nationalize the oil guys..
The early "green bean cars" are plagued with problems, however money will be thrown at these projects to forward the agenda..The V-8/6s will get the ax and the 4 bangers will spread across the spectrum with turbos and other hp enhancing tweaks. The hybrid and battery game will expand with our tax $$$$s..
I believe Spain spent $1billion on windmills, solar panels, and whatever was hyped as the final answer to "energy independence", finally running out of money, and bankrupt..Germany has realized the craze of "green" is madness..However we in the USA are moving in the same direction, but we will do it smarter!!!!!!!!!
After going through 53 cars, I have lived the freedom dream and the great automobiles of the past starting with the 35 V-8 Ford and the balance were a few straight-6s, many V-8s and V-6s with 2-4 cylinder Porsches in the count..No trucks, suvs, or vans..
A 138hp Cruze or Sonic really doesn't "Wet my Whistle." A 220hp Buick Regal at $33k isn't much to talk about, however I might give $14k for a used one with 3k miles..I bought a 92 Regal Grand Sport in 93 with 1,500 mi for 11.5, put a quick 90k on it and broomed it for 5k..
Cadillac 4-bangers are in the works, how thrilling!!!!!! 270hp, probably start around 40k and top out a 50 bills..
Enjoy the "'Green Movement."
No idea if the reactors were made by GM.
Or GE for that matter.
Zero to 60 just doesn't float my boat much; more interested in 45 to 60, and torque at the stop sign. And it it won't haul a canoe and some toys locked up inside, then ho-hum.
GM is missing the minivan segment right now; nothing like a Voyager or a Transit Connect. Just full size vans and SUVs.
Visiting Germany once a year, I see a country moving towards energy independence (as much as is reasonably possible, anyway). You're correct on Spain, though, in that the country tried to move way too fast in the "Eco-energy" direction and is now paying the price for it.
4 cylinder turbo-charged engines are going to become much more prevelant, since technology allows them to provide adequate power at better FE.
I fail to see the benefit to the government for high fuel prices, and in any case, oil is a world traded fungible commodity over which the US can effect price only by demand and usage. Seems like every politician would love cheap gas for re-election purposes.
Nationalizing American oil companies wouldn't have much effect beyond the oil reserves they control domestically, and that isn't really that much overall.
I do agree that tax $$$ will be used to continue development on EVs and hybrids, but why not? A number of other industries are supported by tax $$$ intended for R&D. There's definitely a national interest at stake in moving the country towards less oil dependency, and transportation is a HUGE consumer of oil.
I agree. While the lambdas certainly sell well, they are not a replacement for a minivan. Both Ford and GM have missed an opportunity with minivans. If Toyota, Honda, Nissan, can offer CUVs and a minivan, Ford and GM should be able to also.
I remember reading somewhere that GM considered building a minivan off the lambda platform but decided against it.
January U.S. Auto Sales Jump (WSJ)
My step dad purchased a new 2011 GMC Sierra SLE Z-71 4x4 about a month ago. That puppy is nice but so is mom's new Envoy!
I still have the 2000 Grand Prix GTP which just turned 50 rounds. I'll probably sell it next year and buy a Chevy Cruze Diesel :shades:
-Rocky
Chevy only down 1%. Gas prices are now on the gain so GM might have an inventory problem in Q1-2012. Not good for Obama.
General Motors posted declines all around, but the automaker correctly admits that last January was especially strong. Many of its mainstream models saw modest declines last month, but there are some statistics worth pointing out. For one, the Chevrolet Sonic (5,712 units) is skyrocketing past its Aveo predecessor (2,739 last January) and the 603 Volts delivered nearly double last year’s 321 cars.
Cadillac saw the biggest declines at GM, although its lineup is two cars smaller (STS and DTS) than it was this time last year.
Caddy is down 2 months in a row.
Regards,
OW
I wonder why...
TrueCar estimated that GM’s incentives were down 16 percent to $3,095 per vehicle.
Chrysler's were estimated down 5.3% from last year to $3,233.
Looks like trucks were hit hardest as well as Caddy, Buick and GMC (all trucks).
Still, GM's car sales rose 13 percent, led by the new subcompact Chevrolet Sonic and the Chevrolet Cruze.
At Chrysler, models such as the 200 sedan, its top-selling car last year, and the Dodge Durango SUV first arrived at dealerships a year ago. Deliveries of the 200 surged to 7,007 in January from 788 a year ago and Durango more than doubled to 3,021 from 1,199. Jeep brand sales climbed 37 percent to 31,710 led by the Grand Cherokee and Wrangler SUVs. Ram sales rose 47 percent to 17,909.
I'd say the incentives are working at Chrysler for everything and at GM for their CARS at Chevy.
Buyers paid about $30,400 per GM vehicle in January, up about $1,000 from a year earlier, Jim Cain, a company spokesman, said in an e-mail. Incentive spending slid by about $700 per vehicle, he said. GM outspent the industry average by 42 percent in January 2011, according to Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey-based Autodata Corp.
February will be no better for GM for comps...
GM also compared unfavorably to last January when its sales were inflated by rebates and other deals. TrueCar estimated that GM's incentives were down 16 percent to $3,095 per vehicle this year. Don Johnson, GM's vice president of U.S. sales, said the company's sales also will likely be down in February because of the incentives it offered last year.
Regards,
OW
Going in the opposite direction are my neighbors. They just got their second hybrid since August.
At $80 a month for gas, my mid sized IC car is a good balance for me.
I would have guessed it would have been much lower. I wonder if that was net pricing or before rebate/discount.
In any case, assuming the figure is true, then a Volt (even with no tax advantages included) doesn't seem so overpriced. Assuming again that one could get the full $7500 back in a tax credit, then t he Volt would qualify as an average priced GM vehicle...
Of course, I've done a lot of assuming there, haven't I?
Yeah, if you're only spending $80/mo on gas, it really doesn't matter if your vehicle yields 40mpg or 10. It's not worth chasing efficiency when your only spending that much on a monthly basis.
I would have guessed it would have been much lower. I wonder if that was net pricing or before rebate/discount.
Well, GM is still top-heavy in full-sized trucks and SUVs, so that probably skews the numbers. And, on the low end, they really don't have anything that's bargain-basement cheap anymore, with the Cobalt and Aveo gone (at least I think the Aveo's finally cleared out completely). The Cruze really isn't *that* cheap, and the Sonic hasn't been out long enough to sell a huge amount.
But yeah, initially that $30K number does seem high from my perspective. Most I ever spent for a car was $22,389 out the door, for my old 2000 Intrepid back in November 1999. But that was tax, tags, an extended warranty that I never ended up having to use, etc. I'd guess most of that stuff would have been subtracted out, and put the transaction price at around $19,500.
Even today, 12 years later, the type of car I'm leaning towards (4-cyl intermediate with a sunroof and alloys, maybe leather) would probably come out to around $20-22K, plus tax etc.
No doubt trucks and SUVs push the number up. Ford's numbers are similar too. Heck it's hard to find a HD pickup under $40k and many are well over $50k.
I've been shopping pickups for a while. With the options and configuration I want, the MSRP is $45k.
#2 was the Camry with 28k units sold, a 55% increase vs '11. More than the Silverado's 26.8k.
Impala was GM's best selling sedan with 16k sold.
F150 is still moving forward with a 7.5% increase adn 38.4k sold. The Ram had a good month too. 17.9k sold which represents a 46.8% increase vs '11.
Civic sold 21.8k, Corolla/Matrix 17.9k, Cruze 15k, Focus 14.4k and Elantra 10.9k.
Fusion was down 5% to 13.6k . The CRV is back to owning the compact CUV space with 18.9k sold. Escape sold 17.2 and the 'Nox sold 13.6k.
We helped - dad just picked up a 200 convertible.
Chrysler has to be the "Most Improved Player" of late. They had a lot of room to improve, but the Pentastar/6 speed in that car is soooooo much better than the coarse V6 they had before.
I want to see what you think of the car again in 6 and 12 months, please.
I rarey see any around where I live... Maybe they are so plain I just never notice them...
Most definitely. The data I have is a bit old, but during MY 2010 the Impala had a fleet percent of 67%. It's likely higher than that now.
Anyone who saw the new one at NAIAS probably put their purchase on hold until it arrives - it's gorgeous.
My concern is that the Malibu is new yet it only sold about half as many as the Camry. GM has to start swinging for the fences like Ford is doing, no more bunts (eAssist).
Dad got a fully loaded S model, folding hard top and all. I helped him program addresses in to the Navi, very very user friendly, big thumbs up.
The top takes a while, but I'm used to an 11 second MX-5 top, which is much smaller.
The stereo could sound better, too.
The seats are comfy, roomy, heated leather. Nice touring car, basically.