The Wall Street Journal reports that (suprise!) transaction prices on new vehicles have fallen over the last six months. The average transaction price for a new vehicle is now $27,941. Why so slumptastic? With American consumers perceived to be in value shopping mode and the automobile industry in disarray, incentives are starting to pile up on new cars. And it’s not just OEMs offering factory cash. Dealer incentives are up as well. The WSJ cites TrueCar data showing that a full quarter of all 2009-model vehicles are being sold below dealer cost. And those aren’t all coming from troubled Chrysler dealers.
Ford seems to be the only part of the big 3/2.5/1.8 that’s embracing technology as a way to win customers. Their SYNC system got massive airplay in the Blue Oval’s ads. Down at the dealer level, FoMoCo’s been pushing SYNC like crazy. Strange, then, that I’ve noticed a distinct lack of reviews on the SYNC. So I hopped into a Ford Fusion for a week to answer a simple question: it is any good?
The latest statistics from the Energy Information Administration show that diesel is actually .03 cents per gallon cheaper than gasoline on a national average. Whereas gas prices have risen considerably since their December low, the drop in diesel prices was slower, making the bounceback less extreme. According to CNN, the price parity can be traced to inventory levels. Gasoline inventory has been dropping bringing prices up more sharply. Meanwhile, diesel-making distillate supplies are increasing. Longer term, the Department of Energy expects diesel and gasoline prices to rise but not by as much as had been previously anticipated.
Auto industry supporters claim the EPA’s new dominion over CO2 regulations could be disastrous for the troubled industry. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) agrees. Well, they did. A freshly leaked Bush-era memo reveals the agency had a major beef or two with the EPA’s recent ruling that carbon dioxide is—and should be regulated as—a pollutant. According to John Broder of the NYT, the document concludes that the EPA’s CO2 ruling “was not based on a systematic analysis of costs and benefits and fell short of scientific rigor on a number of issues.” Complaints with the ruling range from insufficient proof of C02’s harmful environmental effects to the negative economic impacts of C02 regulation (there’s your auto angle again).
There’s a clever headline in there somewhere. Meanwhile, Automotive News [sub] reports that the Obama administration has abandoned plans to nominate the CEO of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) to head the National Highway Safety Transportation Administration (NHTSA). Although neither the White House nor Charles Hurley’s MADD men (and women) are saying Jack about the decision, it appears Hurley ran afoul of . . . environmentalists. “His potential nomination had been criticized by environmentalists such as Dan Becker, director of the Safe Climate Campaign. Becker cited Hurley’s work at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in the 1990s, when he said Hurley backed car companies that were fighting attempts to reduce vehicle size to improve fuel economy.” I guess they forget that TTAC took Hurley to task for his support of reintroducing the double-nickel speed limit, his close ties to the red light camera industry and his insistence that piloting a vehicle with a .04 BAC constitutes drunk driving. Still, the end result is what counts. Oh, and I nominate Bill Broadhead for the job.
The Daily Mail reports that the Gloucestershire police force has rolled out a new campaign urging citizens to turn in people they suspect of “living a lavish lifestyle from the proceeds of crime.” Chief Constable Timothy Brain explains, “in the current time of financial uncertainty, those who live a lavish lifestyle with no discernable, legitimate income become even more apparent. By flaunting their ill-gotten gains criminals signal contempt for everyone who works hard, and act as very poor role models for the younger members of society.” Based on this accompanying poster, it seems that Gloucesteshire MINI drivers should be prepared to prove that they can afford their gangsta whips at a moment’s notice.
Pop quiz: how many XL7s has Suzuki built at its CAMI plant this year? Answer: four. Seriously. Compare that with the 5,687 built in Q1 2008, and it’s pretty clear that there’s something rotten in the province of Ontario. Especially when you consider that GM is still using its CAMI capacity to pump out 2009-model Chevy Equinox and Pontiac Torrent CUVs. According to the Financial Post, Suzuki will not be be building any more vehicles in North America in 2009. Which means ’09-built XL7s are set to become one of the rarest vehicles in the world. But the firm is committed to its CAMI plant, with CEO Osamu Suzuki telling the FP that “the possibility that CAMI would be forced into closure or a production stop is 120% impossible. It is a central pillar in the reconstruction plan, so I am not worried about it.” Which means CAMI should survive any GM bankruptcy. Suzuki may be sitting out the NA market in 2009 (while nursing its Indian market profits) but when it brings its CAMI capacity back online, it will likely be in support of its ambitious Kizashi mid-sized effort. Too bad, then, that the fanboys are already calling BS on Suzuki’s pledge to bring the Concept 3’s bold styling to the streets with the Kizashi.
Memo to senior executives at GMAC reading TTAC. Perhaps you can answer a few simple questions. Why do you require all lease returns to be taken back to the auction? Why not let your dealers buy inventory at wholesale prices if they want when the car grounds at their stores? Don’t you realize that this policy only forces more supply into the sale and depresses prices? Better yet, why don’t you negotiate with me a more realistic buy-out price of my 2007 Saab 9-3 lease return? Instead, your firm insists that I pay the stated residual price which is currently approximately $9,000 more than the wholesale value. (I’d be a moron to do that. Maybe some people are. But I think most aren’t.) So you’ll take back another unit to the sale—and there won’t be any miracle on pricing there. So here’s an idea . . .
The moment the Chrysler – Fiat hookup was announced, savvy pistonheads nasally ejected their coffee. Chrysler and FIAT? That’s like throwing a drowning man an anvil. Ignoring the brands’ history of complete crapitude, the mainstream media took the idea seriously. Their complicity/complacency has done wonders for the executives and elected officials in charge of this epic non-starter, but it does nothing to serve the public interest. After all, we’ve got to pay for this turkey. Now that Chrysler is about to axe dealers, permanently shutter plants, fire union workers and ditch a big ass chunk of their pensions and benefits, the MSM is beginning to consider the possibility that the deal sucks. Or, as the ever-faithful Detroit News puts it, “After bankruptcy, Chrysler still faces uncertain future.” Ya think?
I recently received an email from former Saab blog owner, current Saab blogger and past TTAC contributor, Steven Wade. Mr. Wade wants to know who TTAC’s Best and Brightest would like to see taking over Saab in the future. He also asked me to ask you who you think WILL take over Saab in the future. [Answers below please.] As part of our exchange, I teased Mr. Wade into admitting he was wrong to disparage me for disparaging GM’s pre-C11 turnaround plans. But don’t get to thinking Wade is ready for his Cassandra Watch. Oh no, far from it. In his most recent entry on Saabs United, Wade put his imprimatur on a wild ass rumor of Olympian proportions. Swedish newspaper Expressen suggests that GM CEO Fritz Henderson is reluctant to sell Saab to, uh, anyone because the new 9-5 is so good he’s afraid it will compete with post-C11 GM’s offerings. Apparently.
I have a ’99 Nissan Maxima purchased new with 124,000 miles which runs like new. I have had to recently replace the starter/battery and it has had several electrical issues in the past such as starter coils. Engine oil is changed at 5,000 miles with synthetic and book is used on all other fluid changes.
The total repair costs have been averaging app. $1,000 per year for at least 2-3 years now. Since major parts are original such as transmission, water pump/radiator, etc., I feel it is only a matter of time that a big item will require a major repair bill.
At what dollar price point is it reasonable to keep spending money on repairs for a 10 yr old car, per year? I am not mechanically handy.
Currently, there are numerous bills in Congress that relate to cars. So many, in fact, that it’s near impossible to keep track of them all. The fine folks at govtrack.us have developed some tools that are enabling TTAC to stay informed on just what’s happening on the Hill. We thought you’d want to know, too. We’re mainly concerned with the scrappage schemes proffered by our representatives, but we’re tracking any bill that has to do with cars or driving.
The list is long. Really long. And growing. But, just because a bill has been introduced doesn’t mean that it will become law. Most bills never make it out of committee and die at the end of session. As we reported earlier, regarding the cash-for-clunkers bill, “Assistant to the Speaker Van Hollen suggested a vote might not take place this year.”
Wired Autopia has a video of Better Place’s prototype $500,000 quick battery swap station. Think of a Jiffy Lube station but much slicker and no scruffy guys in the basement. Driver pulls up, automated lift unscrews discharged battery from beneath and slides it down a conveyor belt, and then another battery is bolted in. Total time is a few minutes, similar to a gas tank fillup. The conventional-looking Nissan EV’s battery goes in where the gas tank was and has a similar shape. Tesla is to have their own battery swap setup that’s not compatible with that of Better Place. Let the hypothetical swappable battery wars begin!
Audi is pitching its late-to-the-party Q5 against Lexus’ recently refreshed RX350. Audi’s ad men would have you believe that the Q5 buyer is making a forceful statement of individuality and taste—in contrast to the RX buyer’s safe, boring, follow-the-herd mentality. It’s a strange play during these times of economic certainty, but understandable. The Q5 is preaching to the choir. The majority of the Q5’s buyers will come from within the brand’s established audience, who consider Audi’s products the automotive equivalent of an Armani suit. Which makes the Q5 yet another fine young cannibal, preying on whatever sales the Q7 may have generated and stealing business from the gotta-have-an-A4-on-stilts crowd. Hang on. Whose product line is this anyway?
Recent Comments