I just showed this thread to the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) consideration in my household. She told me that she doesn't appreciate some of the comments because they don't agree with her opinions.
.
What is with that independent thinking thing anyway?
As if there is not an endless supply of automobiles for sale on a given....oh second of every day. I must be getting older and more mellow because in years past I normally wouldn't let snarky remarks from a salesperson trying to build a sense of urgency about the program going away without at least a modest small rebuttal. I just don't let it rattle me like it used to. For a person to talk to me about "losing out" is just laughable. I still have my principle and a car that get's me from A to B. If we can't come to agreement usually the person I work with say's we can't get the car for less or that it is worth more, I just casually state the car is only worth x amount to me which usually puts a pretty substantial ending to the negotiation.
I've told several people I have talked to on lots if they find something they like to not fall for the increase in sales price baloney. Start at invoice less2 % and go from there. The new "market price" stickers they are attaching is really abhorrent. I'm very tempted to individually call out the dealers pulling this garbage to unsuspecting consumers. I've gone to a lot of dealers over the last two weeks: Chevrolet, Ford, Subaru, VW, Mazda, Hyundai, & Kia.
I totally agree that the sales spike with new cars right now is short term. Like you imply, it's due to the "I better get it before it's all gone" mentality that is being stoked by dealers. It's remarkably similar to the "I better buy a house before I get priced out" mentality at the height of the real estate bubble.
.
Sales will crash after CARS Program stops being funded and hype dies down. About four years ago, I actually had a car salesman GET DOWN ON HIS KNEES asking me to buy a car. I expect similar come this fall / winter.
...The F-series has been the number 1 seller for roughly 25 years, continuous, Chevy/GMC's equivalent has been #2. Work trucks, ranch/farm trucks, tow vehicles, etc account for a lot of the volume of vehicles sold. Many are leased (tax advantage for a business) and many are worked very hard (i.e. they're basically junk after 5 or 6 years)....
.
I've read somewhere that Ford has never lost money with their truck division.
.
I don't disagree that alot of the sales volume for full sized pick-ups are for work trucks. However, I also see an alot of shiney, never-been-off- the-pavement, F-350 crew cab duallies, with massive chain-link fence type brush-guards, parked at Fred Meyer. Just the vehicle you need for one person to go pick up a loaf of bread.
.
...The F-series has been the number 1 seller for roughly 25 years, continuous, Chevy/GMC's equivalent has been #2. Work trucks, ranch/farm trucks, tow vehicles, etc account for a lot of the volume of vehicles sold. Many are leased (tax advantage for a business) and many are worked very hard (i.e. they're basically junk after 5 or 6 years)....
.
I've read somewhere that Ford has never lost money with their truck division.
.
I don't disagree that alot of the sales volume for full sized pick-ups are for work trucks. However, I also see an alot of shiney, never-been-off- the-pavement, F-350 crew cab duallies, with massive chain-link fence type brush-guards, parked at Fred Meyer. Just the vehicle you need for one person to go pick up a loaf of bread.
.
So in addition to $50K monster truck, a person should own a tiny little Smart-car for picking up bread. Better yet a scooter to satisfy you.
......So in addition to $50K monster truck, a person should own a tiny little Smart-car for picking up bread. Better yet a scooter to satisfy you.....
The only choices are monster truck, Smart-Car, or a scooter? Hmmmm.
There used to be additional options, but as anyone who has followed this thread knows, all other automobiles have been totally sold out. Forever. That's how successful CARS has been. Even bicycles and shoes are entirely sold out. I hope you like your only three transportation options.
I totally agree that the sales spike with new cars right now is short term. Like you imply, it's due to the "I better get it before it's all gone" mentality that is being stoked by dealers. It's remarkably similar to the "I better buy a house before I get priced out" mentality at the height of the real estate bubble.
So, the bubble which is going to bailout the housing bubble is the auto-bubble? Fleckstein, before he got all wimpy lately, used to harp on just this point; that it takes an even larger bubble to mitigate the deflation of any given bubble. It does seem like the government and press are seizing on CARS as the solution to all economic bad news. It just seems like it's going to run out of gas (pardon the pun) incredibly soon.
Wow! The new car inventory at the local (Bremerton) Toyota, Nissan, and Honda dealerships has been decimated. Down maybe 70% to 80%. Three weeks ago their lots were maxed out. Now there are empty expanses of asphalt where new cars used to be parked. GM, Lincoln-Mercury, Kia, and Volkswagen look to be about normal.
Wow! The new car inventory at the local (Bremerton) Toyota, Nissan, and Honda dealerships has been decimated. Down maybe 70% to 80%. Three weeks ago their lots were maxed out. Now there are empty expanses of asphalt where new cars used to be parked. GM, Lincoln-Mercury, Kia, and Volkswagen look to be about normal.
Good to see we're helping out american manufacturers with this program. Japan is a US territory, right?
.
KIRO 7 News report linked below:
. Local Car Dealerships Struggling To Keep Up With Demand
. SEATTLE -- Roland Toyota in Everett had more than 50 new Toyota Corollas just a few weeks ago before the "cash for clunkers" program began July 24, now they are down to only seven.
.
"I've worked here for over four years and this is the busiest we've ever seen it," sales manager Jim O'Neal said. "It's been nonstop, we can't close down after 9 and I've been here till midnight a few nights."
.
O'Neal said Roland Toyota has sold over 200 cars since the CARS program began, the most popular car being the Toyota Corolla.
.
According to KIRO 7 Eyewitness Reporter Graham Johnson, the lack of cars available at many dealerships is an increasing problem in Western Washington and across the U.S......
BERLIN -- For months, European car buyers have been junking clunkers for cash, boosting automakers sales -- but making experts fear that once the government handouts stop, the struggling car industry will return to a slump no pile of cash can conquer.
.
The various programs have surged in popularity since France introduced the idea in December 2008.
.
Germany, Italy, Britain, Romania, Austria, the Netherlands, Spain and Serbia have introduced their own versions aimed at shoring up local automakers, from Germany's Daimler AG to Romania's Dacia.
.
While critics contend the billions of euros in handouts only benefit auto makers at the expense of other industries and have just delayed a slump in car sales, proponents point out that it has kept large companies operating and helped reduce layoffs and temporary shutdowns.
.
But only for a time, some fear. The question is, what happens when the money runs out -- will the industry ease off the ramp or drive off a cliff.
. "It is a question of somewhat forestalling the inevitable," Paul Newton, an auto analyst for IHS Global Insight, told The Associated Press on Friday. "The reality is that without it, the chances are you'll see a lot of businesses going to the wall."......................
.
.
US News link:
. Top Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins and New Cars
.
The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars:
1. Ford Focus
2. Honda Civic
3. Toyota Corolla
4. Toyota Prius
5. Ford Escape
6. Toyota Camry
7. Dodge Caliber
8. Hyundai Elantra
9. Honda Fit
10. Chevy Cobalt
.
The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:
1. 1998 Ford Explorer
2. 1997 Ford Explorer
3. 1996 Ford Explorer
4. 1999 Ford Explorer
5. Jeep Grand Cherokee
6. Jeep Cherokee
7. 1995 Ford Explorer
8. 1994 Ford Explorer
9. 1997 Ford Windstar
10. 1999 Dodge Caravan
.
I think '90's vintage Explorers are going to become an endangered species
============================.
Apparently Edmunds.com questions the goverments ability to count things, which should be a legitmate concern for us all :-)
. Trucks win in Cash for Clunkers game
Because of distorted sales figures, Ford's Escape cross-over SUV, not the Focus small car, tops the list for most popular 'clunker' buy.
.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- What are people trading their clunkers in for? It depends on who you ask.
.
The government's results showed small cars as the top choice for shoppers looking for Cash for Clunker deals. But an independent analysis by Edmunds.com disputed those results, and showed that two full-size trucks and a small crossover SUV were actually among the top-ten buys.....
.
Edmunds.com: Top Clunker Buys
The most purchased vehicles under Cash for Clunkers if 2WD and 4WD versions are included.
Rank - Vehicle
1 - Ford Escape
2 - Ford Focus
3 - Jeep Patriot
4 - Dodge Caliber
5 - Ford F-150
6 - Honda Civic
7 - Chevrolet Silverado
8 - Chevrolet Cobalt
9 - Toyota Corolla
10 - Ford Fusion
.
=================================
.
And this Seattle PI article published a slightly different list. I'm so confused.
. Top 10 'cash for clunkers' choices
.
Top 10 vehicles purchased
1. Toyota Corolla
2. Ford Focus FWD
3. Honda Civic
4. Toyota Prius
5. Toyota Camry
6. Hyundai Elantra
7. Ford Escape FWD
8. Dodge Caliber
9. Honda Fit
10. Chevy Cobalt
.
Top 10 trade-ins
1. Ford Explorer 4WD
2. Ford F-150 pickup
3. Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD
4. Jeep Cherokee 4WD
5. Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan
6. Ford Explorer 2WD
7. Chevrolet Blazer
8. Ford F-150 pickup 4WD
9. Chevrolet C1500 pickup 2WD
10. Ford Windstar FWD
.
Avg fuel economy
Avg new vehicle mileage: 25.3 mpg
Avg trade-in mileage: 15.8 mpg
Avg increase: 9.6 mpg
.
.
You know the occupants did not walk away from this one. What would you rather have in this type collision, the latest generation airbags or good old-fashioned vehicle mass?
. Do you still want a Smart Car?
.
Actually, whomever posted this photo isn't being accurate. The car in the crash scene has what looks to be a 5 bolt pattern on the one wheel that is visible. The Smart Car has a three bolt pattern. I'm thinking maybe it used to be a VW Golf or something similar.
.
.
You know the occupants did not walk away from this one. What would you rather have in this type collision, the latest generation airbags or good old-fashioned vehicle mass?
Fortunately, for us all, that kind of collision is exceedingly rare. On average, I'll still take the latest airbags and crumple zones over a massive hunk of metal due to the improved performance in the most likely situations.
RCC - Isn't it a personal choice of acceptable risk? In a collision between a big vehicle and a little one, the little one is going to come out second best, always. Some people are okay with the fact that a collision like the one pictured is rare and accept that risk factor, others want an armored half-track to transport their children to school.
.
Personally, I think bikers are half nuts when they ride high traffic city streets because of the possibility of a collision with a mobile something that weighs twenty times more than they do, but that's their choice.
.
.
You know the occupants did not walk away from this one. What would you rather have in this type collision, the latest generation airbags or good old-fashioned vehicle mass?
. Do you still want a Smart Car?.
Do you really think a 2 ton 70s behemoth will fare much better when it's sandwiched between a pair of 30 ton dump trucks?
Yeah seriously. My dad sent me that pic in an email a few days ago. My response:
Well, if that's your primary criterion (that your vehicle not be smooshed into a pancake when smashed between two large semis), then this is really your only logical vehicle choice:
I'm pretty sure even my dad's Chevy Blazer would come out of a collision like the one in the link posted by TJ_98370 above looking not much different from the photo in said link.
Just different ways of counting the tally. The Jalopnik list is a bit confusing because they separate the years of the Explorer (which was a top 5 seller for most of its duration), but lump all years of the Cherokee and Grand Cherokee.
The government separates models by engine/drivetrain, so there are 3 different Ford Escapes (FWD, AWD, Hybrid) but only one Focus. The FWD escape isn't quite as popular as the Focus, but when you add the AWD and Hybrid is is.
The PI list doesn't separate years, but does separate 2WD from 4WD/AWD models.
I wouldn't worry about a shortage of Explorers any time soon - there are still a LOT of them, and they were relatively unchanged for the first 5 or 6 years and parts compatibility is high.
Bit of an aside, but did you notice the comment on the PI site?
The Gov't gives you the incentive to ditch that gas guzzler - BUT - when you see your kid wrapped around a tree in one of those 'pieces of cardboard', you would give ANYTHING to go back and install them in a steel cage of durability. Look at the profiles of safety from the few car examples shown - now ask WHAT vehicle that 10-year-old Princess Sally would feel safe in. I drive heavy steel Mopars - old Mopars - you hit me - you die.
20MPG/117MPH TUNED MONTHLY.
The actual cost to refurbish an older car IS cheaper than an emission-controlled, false-sense-of-security air-bagged, accordion-impact-controlled roller-skate.
The US won't be satisfied until everyone is on a bicycle, scooter, or Jeep-Nee 55MPG, like I have seen in the Phillies, Tokyo, Taiwan, Okinawa, Hawaii.......
I have 8 registered impacts, ALL from trucks hitting my '97 Mercury Tracer Wagon over a 5-year period. Farmers paid out $9,322......
Fuggitaboutit.
DRIVE SMART
.
According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), the evidence indicates that small cars are less safe than larger cars. According to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, small cars are among the safest vehicles out there on the road. I guess you get to pick your own reality.........
Study: Small Cars at Greater Risk in Accidents
. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has released a new report stating that very small cars face significantly greater risk in crashes with midsize cars. IIHS crash-tested three subcompact or microcars – the Honda Fit, Smart ForTwo and Toyota Yaris – versus their respective brand's midsize sedans in frontal offset tests, similar to how the agency conducts all of its frontal tests.
.
The results? Physics wins. This is something we mention here on KickingTires and on Cars.com whenever crash-test results like this come out. Crash tests can generally only predict how well a car or SUV does within its class or competitive makeup, not against other types of vehicles. The exception is IIHS' side-impact tests, which simulate impacts with SUVs for every vehicle.
.
What these fresh results from IIHS spell out is that in a frontal collision, physics dictate that the larger vehicle in the test will fare better than the smaller one. Force is distributed unevenly, making the small car lose out in any matchup versus a larger car.
.
Crash statistics prove this to some degree. In 2007, small-car crashes resulted in a 17% higher fatality rate than midsize-car crashes......]
A recent report on auto safety finds that the average sport utility vehicle or pickup truck is more dangerous than most cars on the road, when the risk posed to other drivers is taken into account. The report also shows that, contrary to conventional wisdom, many small cars have lower fatality rates among their own drivers than SUVs or pickups. SUVs are the fastest growing segment of new vehicles, today comprising 21 percent of that market, up from 6 percent just 13 years ago.
.
The study, "An Analysis of Traffic Deaths by Vehicle Type and Model" (available at http://www.aceee.org/pubs/T021full.pdf), finds small and mid-size car models, such as the Jetta, Accord, and Camry, have driver fatality rates as low or lower than those of any of the major SUV or pickup models. Essentially all popular car models score better than any popular SUV or truck model on deaths to drivers in other vehicles. "Driving a big vehicle and driving a safe vehicle are two different things," said Therese Langer of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, which released the analysis. "This report clearly illustrates the importance of design in determining a vehicle's safety."
.
The report was researched and written by physicist Marc Ross at the University of Michigan and Tom Wenzel, a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Their analysis is based on "driver death rates," a measure of risk developed by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) comparing driver fatalities to the number of vehicles on the road. The fatality data come from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.......
=========================
. Are Smaller Cars as Safe as Large Cars?
. Consumers shopping for a fuel-efficient vehicle will probably gravitate toward smaller cars. But by doing so, will they put themselves at risk in the event of an accident?
.
The cold hard facts show that smaller, lighter cars are generally less safe than larger, heavier cars.......
.
Driver deaths per million registered passenger vehicles 1-3 years old, 2007. Source: IIHS:
.
Vehicle -- Size -- Rate
Car — Small -- 96
Car — Midsize -- 62
Car — Large -- 64
Car — Very Large -- 35
Pickup — Small -- 104
Pickup — Large -- 90
Pickup — Very Large -- 86
SUV — Small -- 48
SUV — Midsize -- 41
SUV — Large -- 43
SUV — Very Large -- 47
.
You don't need an industry-funded study to tell you what cars are "safer." It's basic physics, as I explained last Friday.
If a little car gets into a wreck with an SUV or large pickup, yeah the occupants of the larger vehicle have a better chance of walking away. If two large vehicles collide, the occupants of both vehicles are at greater risk than if two small vehicles collide.
The ideal situation, safety-speaking, would be for everyone to be driving around much smaller vehicles with roll cages, air bags, and the like. Obviously that's not realistic of course, since the only way you'll be able to take away many Americans' SUVs is by prying the steering wheel out of their cold, dead hands.
But does that mean we should therefore all drive around the largest vehicles possible in some sort of arms race to control the largest mass flying down the freeway at 70+MPH? I don't personally think so.
I personally believe that we'll slowly move toward a fully-automated roadway (similar to what was featured in the movie Minority Report). Obviously we won't get there in one step, but I can see things headed in that direction already with the smart cruise control and auto-park features that have come out in recent years. Once we take inattentive / lazy / stupid humans out of the picture and all cars are computer-controlled on a redundant peer-to-peer network of sorts, safety will go way up.
RCC - Isn't it a personal choice of acceptable risk? In a collision between a big vehicle and a little one, the little one is going to come out second best, always. Some people are okay with the fact that a collision like the one pictured is rare and accept that risk factor, others want an armored half-track to transport their children to school.
.
Personally, I think bikers are half nuts when they ride high traffic city streets because of the possibility of a collision with a mobile something that weighs twenty times more than they do, but that's their choice.
.
First, I only stated my own preference. Second, the safest vehicles on the street today are not necessarily the largest, nor are they the smallest. Generally speaking, you are as safe in a modern midsized sedan (Accord) as you are in a large car (Expedition for instance), and you are much safer in either than in a 1975 Cadillac (even if it's built of solid steel). Obviously a Smart Car is not as safe (on today's roads) as those other options, but if most cars grew smaller (say midsized sedans were the BIG cars on the road) then the Smart Car becomes very safe.
but if most cars grew smaller (say midsized sedans were the BIG cars on the road) then the Smart Car becomes very safe.
The trick is, how do you get to that point without governmental seizure of legal personal property?
Should the government be able to seize a person's personal property because it is "too big and dangerous", compared to the newer, smaller cars on the road, in the interests of "road safety"? What if the reason is because the mileage is too low? Should the government be allowed to mandate mileage ratings on used cars, as well as new? If you own a car that the government deems is not economical enough mileage-wise, should you be forced to scrap it? Should the government be forced to pay you fair market value to scrap it or should they be able to seize it without compensation?
FWIW, I wasn't the one commenting on the PI site about old Mopars, but I guess I am not alone in my thinking, am I?
Honestly, I don't want a new car because I don't like new cars, no matter whether they are smaller, safer, more efficient or otherwise. I think they all blow. It would also take a heck of a lot more than $4500 and a cutoff of more than 25 years old to get me out of my current daily driver. Give me no payments and collision insurance paid by the government and I "might" consider it, if the amount was for what, in today's adjusted dollars, my car sold for back in 1974. Until then, I'm not interested.
but if most cars grew smaller (say midsized sedans were the BIG cars on the road) then the Smart Car becomes very safe.
The trick is, how do you get to that point without governmental seizure of legal personal property?
Oh, buzz off troll. Nobody suggested the government specifically seize PublicEnemy's cars. Car size will obviously do exactly what it has for the last 50 years, which is follow the incentives. If gas becomes too costly and small cars use less gas, sizes will get smaller. If not, they will always get bigger (Americans show a consistent historical preference for larger cars). The only business the government might have in this is providing extra financial incentive for smaller cars. For instance, a $4/gal federal tax on gasoline would change the tune of most people.
Oh, buzz off troll. Nobody suggested the government specifically seize PublicEnemy's cars. Car size will obviously do exactly what it has for the last 50 years, which is follow the incentives.
Hahahah... At least I haven't spent enough time writing on this website to rack up almost 2000 posts. Ever heard of a job? Or do you do this on your employer's time? You have singlehandedly posted almost 10% of all the posts in the forum, almost 2 1/2 posts per day. Ever heard of stepping AWAY from the computer? You probably spend as much time here as on DU. Even if you are in business for yourself, imagine what you could have done to make yourself more money in all that time.
The reality is, despite all the "incentives" over the last 50 years there are still a heck of a lot of large passenger vehicles being driven on the roads so your theory fails, as usual.
You just don't like getting caught, yet again, in your "government knows what's best for us" proposals.
The reality is, despite all the "incentives" over the last 50 years there are still a heck of a lot of large passenger vehicles being driven on the roads so your theory fails, as usual.
You just don't like getting caught, yet again, in your "government knows what's best for us" proposals.
The US government has spent an immense amount of time, money, and soldiers' lives to ensure fuel was cheap, creating a (perverse) incentive to buy large vehicles regardless of need. The only times in modern history when smaller was perceived as better was after the 1973 oil embargo and after the 2006-2008 spike in oil prices.
If you wanted to rewrite history, significantly raising gas taxes in the late 60s, when it was obvious that OPEC wielded a pretty significant noose around our necks, would be an interesting exercise.
Okay, I don't particularly like this car (maybe the hatchback) and I am definitely NOT going to buy one, (I already own two Nissan's that I am I very happy with), but you have to admit that $5,490 for a new car would be extremely tempting for anyone looking for basic transport. It even has six airbags! What's not to like?
.
Is this the car that finally motivates you to trundle in that '89 Plymouth Voyager to trade in? Come on people, the "free money" won't last forever!
. Nissan Versa
You don't need an industry-funded study to tell you what cars are "safer." It's basic physics, as I explained last Friday.
If a little car gets into a wreck with an SUV or large pickup, yeah the occupants of the larger vehicle have a better chance of walking away. If two large vehicles collide, the occupants of both vehicles are at greater risk than if two small vehicles collide.
The ideal situation, safety-speaking, would be for everyone to be driving around much smaller vehicles with roll cages, air bags, and the like. Obviously that's not realistic of course, since the only way you'll be able to take away many Americans' SUVs is by prying the steering wheel out of their cold, dead hands.
But does that mean we should therefore all drive around the largest vehicles possible in some sort of arms race to control the largest mass flying down the freeway at 70+MPH? I don't personally think so.
I personally believe that we'll slowly move toward a fully-automated roadway (similar to what was featured in the movie Minority Report). Obviously we won't get there in one step, but I can see things headed in that direction already with the smart cruise control and auto-park features that have come out in recent years. Once we take inattentive / lazy / stupid humans out of the picture and all cars are computer-controlled on a redundant peer-to-peer network of sorts, safety will go way up.
.
Tim, I read the analysis when you posted it last Friday and I mostly agree. I also agree that Americans won't give up their SUV's willingly. It's going to take some major economic incentive, like maybe $5 a gallon gas prices or maybe some government sponsored program. .
.
I read an article awhile back that the reason that cars with automated control systems are not progressing very rapidly is because of public resistance. What it boils down to is that the public can accept a human error rate alot larger than a machine's error rate if it threatens their safety. In other words, automated systems will have to be nearly perfect before the public will accept computer controlled cars. However, as technology improves, I am convinced we will get there some day.
.
Comments
.
What is with that independent thinking thing anyway?
As if there is not an endless supply of automobiles for sale on a given....oh second of every day. I must be getting older and more mellow because in years past I normally wouldn't let snarky remarks from a salesperson trying to build a sense of urgency about the program going away without at least a modest small rebuttal. I just don't let it rattle me like it used to. For a person to talk to me about "losing out" is just laughable. I still have my principle and a car that get's me from A to B. If we can't come to agreement usually the person I work with say's we can't get the car for less or that it is worth more, I just casually state the car is only worth x amount to me which usually puts a pretty substantial ending to the negotiation.
I've told several people I have talked to on lots if they find something they like to not fall for the increase in sales price baloney. Start at invoice less2 % and go from there. The new "market price" stickers they are attaching is really abhorrent. I'm very tempted to individually call out the dealers pulling this garbage to unsuspecting consumers. I've gone to a lot of dealers over the last two weeks: Chevrolet, Ford, Subaru, VW, Mazda, Hyundai, & Kia.
You're not the only one seeing this type of dealer behavior:
Dealer Tricks Have Begun on Cash for Clunkers Trade-ins
I wish the national media would report on this. maybe it would shame these guys into behaving better.
I totally agree that the sales spike with new cars right now is short term. Like you imply, it's due to the "I better get it before it's all gone" mentality that is being stoked by dealers. It's remarkably similar to the "I better buy a house before I get priced out" mentality at the height of the real estate bubble.
.
Sales will crash after CARS Program stops being funded and hype dies down. About four years ago, I actually had a car salesman GET DOWN ON HIS KNEES asking me to buy a car. I expect similar come this fall / winter.
I've read somewhere that Ford has never lost money with their truck division.
.
I don't disagree that alot of the sales volume for full sized pick-ups are for work trucks. However, I also see an alot of shiney, never-been-off- the-pavement, F-350 crew cab duallies, with massive chain-link fence type brush-guards, parked at Fred Meyer. Just the vehicle you need for one person to go pick up a loaf of bread.
.
The Killer App for Clunkers Breathes Fresh Life Into 'Liquid Glass'
So in addition to $50K monster truck, a person should own a tiny little Smart-car for picking up bread. Better yet a scooter to satisfy you.
Get off my lawn!
The only choices are monster truck, Smart-Car, or a scooter? Hmmmm.
There used to be additional options, but as anyone who has followed this thread knows, all other automobiles have been totally sold out. Forever. That's how successful CARS has been. Even bicycles and shoes are entirely sold out. I hope you like your only three transportation options.
So, the bubble which is going to bailout the housing bubble is the auto-bubble? Fleckstein, before he got all wimpy lately, used to harp on just this point; that it takes an even larger bubble to mitigate the deflation of any given bubble. It does seem like the government and press are seizing on CARS as the solution to all economic bad news. It just seems like it's going to run out of gas (pardon the pun) incredibly soon.
Good to see we're helping out american manufacturers with this program. Japan is a US territory, right?
KIRO 7 News report linked below:
.
Local Car Dealerships Struggling To Keep Up With Demand
.
SEATTLE -- Roland Toyota in Everett had more than 50 new Toyota Corollas just a few weeks ago before the "cash for clunkers" program began July 24, now they are down to only seven.
.
"I've worked here for over four years and this is the busiest we've ever seen it," sales manager Jim O'Neal said. "It's been nonstop, we can't close down after 9 and I've been here till midnight a few nights."
.
O'Neal said Roland Toyota has sold over 200 cars since the CARS program began, the most popular car being the Toyota Corolla.
.
According to KIRO 7 Eyewitness Reporter Graham Johnson, the lack of cars available at many dealerships is an increasing problem in Western Washington and across the U.S......
In Europe, 'Cash For Clunkers' Drives Sales for now.
BERLIN -- For months, European car buyers have been junking clunkers for cash, boosting automakers sales -- but making experts fear that once the government handouts stop, the struggling car industry will return to a slump no pile of cash can conquer.
.
The various programs have surged in popularity since France introduced the idea in December 2008.
.
Germany, Italy, Britain, Romania, Austria, the Netherlands, Spain and Serbia have introduced their own versions aimed at shoring up local automakers, from Germany's Daimler AG to Romania's Dacia.
.
While critics contend the billions of euros in handouts only benefit auto makers at the expense of other industries and have just delayed a slump in car sales, proponents point out that it has kept large companies operating and helped reduce layoffs and temporary shutdowns.
.
But only for a time, some fear. The question is, what happens when the money runs out -- will the industry ease off the ramp or drive off a cliff.
.
"It is a question of somewhat forestalling the inevitable," Paul Newton, an auto analyst for IHS Global Insight, told The Associated Press on Friday. "The reality is that without it, the chances are you'll see a lot of businesses going to the wall."......................
.
US News link:
.
Top Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins and New Cars
.
The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars:
1. Ford Focus
2. Honda Civic
3. Toyota Corolla
4. Toyota Prius
5. Ford Escape
6. Toyota Camry
7. Dodge Caliber
8. Hyundai Elantra
9. Honda Fit
10. Chevy Cobalt
.
The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:
1. 1998 Ford Explorer
2. 1997 Ford Explorer
3. 1996 Ford Explorer
4. 1999 Ford Explorer
5. Jeep Grand Cherokee
6. Jeep Cherokee
7. 1995 Ford Explorer
8. 1994 Ford Explorer
9. 1997 Ford Windstar
10. 1999 Dodge Caravan
.
I think '90's vintage Explorers are going to become an endangered species
============================.
Apparently Edmunds.com questions the goverments ability to count things, which should be a legitmate concern for us all :-)
.
Trucks win in Cash for Clunkers game
Because of distorted sales figures, Ford's Escape cross-over SUV, not the Focus small car, tops the list for most popular 'clunker' buy.
.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- What are people trading their clunkers in for? It depends on who you ask.
.
The government's results showed small cars as the top choice for shoppers looking for Cash for Clunker deals. But an independent analysis by Edmunds.com disputed those results, and showed that two full-size trucks and a small crossover SUV were actually among the top-ten buys.....
.
Edmunds.com: Top Clunker Buys
The most purchased vehicles under Cash for Clunkers if 2WD and 4WD versions are included.
Rank - Vehicle
1 - Ford Escape
2 - Ford Focus
3 - Jeep Patriot
4 - Dodge Caliber
5 - Ford F-150
6 - Honda Civic
7 - Chevrolet Silverado
8 - Chevrolet Cobalt
9 - Toyota Corolla
10 - Ford Fusion
.
=================================
.
And this Seattle PI article published a slightly different list. I'm so confused.
.
Top 10 'cash for clunkers' choices
.
Top 10 vehicles purchased
1. Toyota Corolla
2. Ford Focus FWD
3. Honda Civic
4. Toyota Prius
5. Toyota Camry
6. Hyundai Elantra
7. Ford Escape FWD
8. Dodge Caliber
9. Honda Fit
10. Chevy Cobalt
.
Top 10 trade-ins
1. Ford Explorer 4WD
2. Ford F-150 pickup
3. Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD
4. Jeep Cherokee 4WD
5. Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan
6. Ford Explorer 2WD
7. Chevrolet Blazer
8. Ford F-150 pickup 4WD
9. Chevrolet C1500 pickup 2WD
10. Ford Windstar FWD
.
Avg fuel economy
Avg new vehicle mileage: 25.3 mpg
Avg trade-in mileage: 15.8 mpg
Avg increase: 9.6 mpg
.
You know the occupants did not walk away from this one. What would you rather have in this type collision, the latest generation airbags or good old-fashioned vehicle mass?
.
Do you still want a Smart Car?
.
Actually, whomever posted this photo isn't being accurate. The car in the crash scene has what looks to be a 5 bolt pattern on the one wheel that is visible. The Smart Car has a three bolt pattern. I'm thinking maybe it used to be a VW Golf or something similar.
.
.
Fortunately, for us all, that kind of collision is exceedingly rare. On average, I'll still take the latest airbags and crumple zones over a massive hunk of metal due to the improved performance in the most likely situations.
.
Personally, I think bikers are half nuts when they ride high traffic city streets because of the possibility of a collision with a mobile something that weighs twenty times more than they do, but that's their choice.
.
Do you really think a 2 ton 70s behemoth will fare much better when it's sandwiched between a pair of 30 ton dump trucks?
Well, if that's your primary criterion (that your vehicle not be smooshed into a pancake when smashed between two large semis), then this is really your only logical vehicle choice:
I'm pretty sure even my dad's Chevy Blazer would come out of a collision like the one in the link posted by TJ_98370 above looking not much different from the photo in said link.
Just different ways of counting the tally. The Jalopnik list is a bit confusing because they separate the years of the Explorer (which was a top 5 seller for most of its duration), but lump all years of the Cherokee and Grand Cherokee.
The government separates models by engine/drivetrain, so there are 3 different Ford Escapes (FWD, AWD, Hybrid) but only one Focus. The FWD escape isn't quite as popular as the Focus, but when you add the AWD and Hybrid is is.
The PI list doesn't separate years, but does separate 2WD from 4WD/AWD models.
I wouldn't worry about a shortage of Explorers any time soon - there are still a LOT of them, and they were relatively unchanged for the first 5 or 6 years and parts compatibility is high.
Bit of an aside, but did you notice the comment on the PI site?
Deja Vu?
According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), the evidence indicates that small cars are less safe than larger cars. According to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, small cars are among the safest vehicles out there on the road. I guess you get to pick your own reality.........
Study: Small Cars at Greater Risk in Accidents
.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has released a new report stating that very small cars face significantly greater risk in crashes with midsize cars. IIHS crash-tested three subcompact or microcars – the Honda Fit, Smart ForTwo and Toyota Yaris – versus their respective brand's midsize sedans in frontal offset tests, similar to how the agency conducts all of its frontal tests.
.
The results? Physics wins. This is something we mention here on KickingTires and on Cars.com whenever crash-test results like this come out. Crash tests can generally only predict how well a car or SUV does within its class or competitive makeup, not against other types of vehicles. The exception is IIHS' side-impact tests, which simulate impacts with SUVs for every vehicle.
.
What these fresh results from IIHS spell out is that in a frontal collision, physics dictate that the larger vehicle in the test will fare better than the smaller one. Force is distributed unevenly, making the small car lose out in any matchup versus a larger car.
.
Crash statistics prove this to some degree. In 2007, small-car crashes resulted in a 17% higher fatality rate than midsize-car crashes......]
=====================.
Small car models rank among safest vehicles provided by The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy
A recent report on auto safety finds that the average sport utility vehicle or pickup truck is more dangerous than most cars on the road, when the risk posed to other drivers is taken into account. The report also shows that, contrary to conventional wisdom, many small cars have lower fatality rates among their own drivers than SUVs or pickups. SUVs are the fastest growing segment of new vehicles, today comprising 21 percent of that market, up from 6 percent just 13 years ago.
.
The study, "An Analysis of Traffic Deaths by Vehicle Type and Model" (available at http://www.aceee.org/pubs/T021full.pdf), finds small and mid-size car models, such as the Jetta, Accord, and Camry, have driver fatality rates as low or lower than those of any of the major SUV or pickup models. Essentially all popular car models score better than any popular SUV or truck model on deaths to drivers in other vehicles. "Driving a big vehicle and driving a safe vehicle are two different things," said Therese Langer of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, which released the analysis. "This report clearly illustrates the importance of design in determining a vehicle's safety."
.
The report was researched and written by physicist Marc Ross at the University of Michigan and Tom Wenzel, a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Their analysis is based on "driver death rates," a measure of risk developed by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) comparing driver fatalities to the number of vehicles on the road. The fatality data come from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.......
=========================
.
Are Smaller Cars as Safe as Large Cars?
.
Consumers shopping for a fuel-efficient vehicle will probably gravitate toward smaller cars. But by doing so, will they put themselves at risk in the event of an accident?
.
The cold hard facts show that smaller, lighter cars are generally less safe than larger, heavier cars.......
.
Driver deaths per million registered passenger vehicles 1-3 years old, 2007. Source: IIHS:
.
Vehicle -- Size -- Rate
Car — Small -- 96
Car — Midsize -- 62
Car — Large -- 64
Car — Very Large -- 35
Pickup — Small -- 104
Pickup — Large -- 90
Pickup — Very Large -- 86
SUV — Small -- 48
SUV — Midsize -- 41
SUV — Large -- 43
SUV — Very Large -- 47
.
If a little car gets into a wreck with an SUV or large pickup, yeah the occupants of the larger vehicle have a better chance of walking away. If two large vehicles collide, the occupants of both vehicles are at greater risk than if two small vehicles collide.
The ideal situation, safety-speaking, would be for everyone to be driving around much smaller vehicles with roll cages, air bags, and the like. Obviously that's not realistic of course, since the only way you'll be able to take away many Americans' SUVs is by prying the steering wheel out of their cold, dead hands.
But does that mean we should therefore all drive around the largest vehicles possible in some sort of arms race to control the largest mass flying down the freeway at 70+MPH? I don't personally think so.
I personally believe that we'll slowly move toward a fully-automated roadway (similar to what was featured in the movie Minority Report). Obviously we won't get there in one step, but I can see things headed in that direction already with the smart cruise control and auto-park features that have come out in recent years. Once we take inattentive / lazy / stupid humans out of the picture and all cars are computer-controlled on a redundant peer-to-peer network of sorts, safety will go way up.
First, I only stated my own preference. Second, the safest vehicles on the street today are not necessarily the largest, nor are they the smallest. Generally speaking, you are as safe in a modern midsized sedan (Accord) as you are in a large car (Expedition for instance), and you are much safer in either than in a 1975 Cadillac (even if it's built of solid steel). Obviously a Smart Car is not as safe (on today's roads) as those other options, but if most cars grew smaller (say midsized sedans were the BIG cars on the road) then the Smart Car becomes very safe.
The trick is, how do you get to that point without governmental seizure of legal personal property?
Should the government be able to seize a person's personal property because it is "too big and dangerous", compared to the newer, smaller cars on the road, in the interests of "road safety"? What if the reason is because the mileage is too low? Should the government be allowed to mandate mileage ratings on used cars, as well as new? If you own a car that the government deems is not economical enough mileage-wise, should you be forced to scrap it? Should the government be forced to pay you fair market value to scrap it or should they be able to seize it without compensation?
FWIW, I wasn't the one commenting on the PI site about old Mopars, but I guess I am not alone in my thinking, am I?
Honestly, I don't want a new car because I don't like new cars, no matter whether they are smaller, safer, more efficient or otherwise. I think they all blow. It would also take a heck of a lot more than $4500 and a cutoff of more than 25 years old to get me out of my current daily driver. Give me no payments and collision insurance paid by the government and I "might" consider it, if the amount was for what, in today's adjusted dollars, my car sold for back in 1974. Until then, I'm not interested.
Oh, buzz off troll. Nobody suggested the government specifically seize PublicEnemy's cars. Car size will obviously do exactly what it has for the last 50 years, which is follow the incentives. If gas becomes too costly and small cars use less gas, sizes will get smaller. If not, they will always get bigger (Americans show a consistent historical preference for larger cars). The only business the government might have in this is providing extra financial incentive for smaller cars. For instance, a $4/gal federal tax on gasoline would change the tune of most people.
Hahahah... At least I haven't spent enough time writing on this website to rack up almost 2000 posts. Ever heard of a job? Or do you do this on your employer's time? You have singlehandedly posted almost 10% of all the posts in the forum, almost 2 1/2 posts per day. Ever heard of stepping AWAY from the computer? You probably spend as much time here as on DU. Even if you are in business for yourself, imagine what you could have done to make yourself more money in all that time.
The reality is, despite all the "incentives" over the last 50 years there are still a heck of a lot of large passenger vehicles being driven on the roads so your theory fails, as usual.
You just don't like getting caught, yet again, in your "government knows what's best for us" proposals.
The US government has spent an immense amount of time, money, and soldiers' lives to ensure fuel was cheap, creating a (perverse) incentive to buy large vehicles regardless of need. The only times in modern history when smaller was perceived as better was after the 1973 oil embargo and after the 2006-2008 spike in oil prices.
If you wanted to rewrite history, significantly raising gas taxes in the late 60s, when it was obvious that OPEC wielded a pretty significant noose around our necks, would be an interesting exercise.
.
Is this the car that finally motivates you to trundle in that '89 Plymouth Voyager to trade in? Come on people, the "free money" won't last forever!
.
Nissan Versa
Tim, I read the analysis when you posted it last Friday and I mostly agree. I also agree that Americans won't give up their SUV's willingly. It's going to take some major economic incentive, like maybe $5 a gallon gas prices or maybe some government sponsored program.
.
I read an article awhile back that the reason that cars with automated control systems are not progressing very rapidly is because of public resistance. What it boils down to is that the public can accept a human error rate alot larger than a machine's error rate if it threatens their safety. In other words, automated systems will have to be nearly perfect before the public will accept computer controlled cars. However, as technology improves, I am convinced we will get there some day.
.
Ford Focus, baby