Maybe new cars are getting more aerodynamic?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by theunchosen

Seriously. . .I will say this again. Every major newspaper has ahd an article within the last 6 months that regardless of gas price trends people still buy mostly SUVs. virtually every other car here is an SUV and I know its worse in other areas.

And you really think those newspaper articles weren't written & paid for by the US auto industry? Check the actual sales figures, or think about which automakers are running to the government for handouts, and which are doing ok despite the sales downturn.

For the sake of argument, I'll concede that Tennessee (I think that must be what you mean by "TN", no?) may have a different auto-buying demographic than Northern Nevada does, but around here roughly 1/4 to 1/3 of the cars on the roads would qualify as SUVs or "full-size" pickups. You do see quite a few of the smaller 4WDs - Subarus, the older Toyota small pickups - because the winter snow can get deep in the mountains. Priuses are common, as are most other smaller cars.

[theunchosen]

alright I was unable to find anything from edmunds or something that you might consider unbiased. A quick search through google(suv sales 2008) turns up that most SUV sales were up for the YEAR of 08. They started high dropped to virtually 0 for high gas and then went back up to just above normal rates to finish out the year above average.

I know just because a million people say it doesn't mean its true but if you can supply better evidence(from several respectable sources or a plethora of somewhat reasonable sources) I'll shutup. The Mariner and the Lincoln Navigator both sold more units in 2008 than they ever have before. The Yukon was also up.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by theunchosen

I know just because a million people say it doesn't mean its true but if you can supply better evidence(from several respectable sources or a plethora of somewhat reasonable sources) I'll shutup.

Well, those "better sources" are surprisingly hard to find. Wouldn't you expect that if you typed something like "US auto sales by model 2008" into Google, it'd find a nice table somewhere? But no, just hundreds of news articles bemoaning slow sales and spinning it one way or another. The best I could find is this link to the top 20 sellers for the first half of 2008. Top 20 Us Car sale ranking July 2008 by model — AUTOinCAR

Now I admit I'm not that familiar with current car models, but I think only 5 of those - the pickups plus the Chevy Impala - qualify as "big", the rest are small to mid-size. So I get a total of 3,146,373 vehicles, of which 976,372, or 31%, are "big cars".

The Mariner and the Lincoln Navigator both sold more units in 2008 than they ever have before. The Yukon was also up.

Their sales may be up, but up from what? Again, Google wasn't much help, but I found a sales figure of about 35,000 units for the Mariner last year. Sales could have gone up 50% or more, yet they'd still be only a small fraction of the total.

[theunchosen]

Yeah I know I was pretty disappointed that a sales figure table was not anywhere near the top. . .disappointing google. . .shame. . .

But the table runs apparently through July YTD with a total of 3893373 units sold of which 1029804 units were strictly trucks or SUVs(Rav, CRV) So 26.4% of the vehicles were a truck or SUV from that figure and it doesn't include suburbans escalades, and yukons(the biggest sellers in the SUV category). Given it also does not include alot of cars. Another issue with that particular table is the data only run through July at which point hybrid sales started to drop and SUV/truck sales began to climb again(depending on what newspaper you go with SUVs and trucks made more money than they have before or they broke even while hybrids lost out or broke even for the year).

My overall opinion is the google results disappointed me. . .but also that Trucks/SUVs are nowhere near as "out-of-demand" as everyone is clamoring(July was still 4 dollars a gallon, its sub 2 now).

[Playslikepage71]

Well, now that they're selling trucks for bags of potatoes everyone is buying them. I can agree with the people that said the US automakers are getting shafted with labor contract issues. They also got in trouble when toyota was retooling their flexible factories while GM and co. was stuck with their junk in the wind making gigantor trucks and such.

I just find it amazing how behind the times it seems the US automakers are. It's like why does it take an 8.3L V10 to make 525HP? The Nissan GT-R does it with a 3.8L V6 with 2 turbos. If you dispute that because of the factory claimed number of 480HP, take a look at the motor trend article about the dyno tests. The Ferarri F430 makes 485 ponies with a "meager" 4.3L V8. The Corvette with it's futuristic fiberglass body rides on friggin leafsprings!! Detroit is finally catching up with the rest of the world when it comes to hybrid, diesel, and performance technologies. It may be too late though.

[Blue07CivicEX]

Anybody else see the 2009 best/worst list on consumer reports? I was browsing it today at the bookstore, 6 out of the 10 worst were GM, 2 Hummers, 2 Jeeps and 2 chevy's. Sad times for GM, I understand they make so many models some are bound to be on the list but 5 out of 6 of the worst rated cars?

Oh, and they only had 1 on the best 10 the corvette Z06.

[theunchosen]

Originally Posted by Blue07CivicEX

Anybody else see the 2009 best/worst list on consumer reports? I was browsing it today at the bookstore, 6 out of the 10 worst were GM, 2 Hummers, 2 Jeeps and 2 chevy's. Sad times for GM, I understand they make so many models some are bound to be on the list but 5 out of 6 of the worst rated cars?

Oh, and they only had 1 on the best 10 the corvette Z06.

Jeeps are POS's from my experience. Three. Mom had a Grand Cherokee and I know of 2 Wranglers(that don't go offroading just standard road use) that tossed transmissions at 100K. Grand Cherokee was auto trans the other two were stick. I have ridden with both of the wrangler owners and neither shifts poorly. Needless to say all three have vowed never to own another US car(and none do). If they were cheaper I'm sure people would still get them despite serious issues, but expensive and unreliable is a death sentence for any line.

Was it H2 and H3? on the list or was it the civy H1?

[theunchosen]

Originally Posted by Playslikepage71

Well, now that they're selling trucks for bags of potatoes everyone is buying them. I can agree with the people that said the US automakers are getting shafted with labor contract issues. They also got in trouble when toyota was retooling their flexible factories while GM and co. was stuck with their junk in the wind making gigantor trucks and such.

I just find it amazing how behind the times it seems the US automakers are. It's like why does it take an 8.3L V10 to make 525HP? The Nissan GT-R does it with a 3.8L V6 with 2 turbos. If you dispute that because of the factory claimed number of 480HP, take a look at the motor trend article about the dyno tests. The Ferarri F430 makes 485 ponies with a "meager" 4.3L V8. The Corvette with it's futuristic fiberglass body rides on friggin leafsprings!! Detroit is finally catching up with the rest of the world when it comes to hybrid, diesel, and performance technologies. It may be too late though.

Those are the smart dealers that actually own their stock opposed to most that are retailers. In my region I know two auto-lots that buy off the cars and then resell them instead of holding and paying the rest to the factory once the car is sold. They both slashed prices to what it cost him to get them and closed up shop(one was GM strictly the other had a substantial bit of GM stock). It probably has something to do with the fact that there is a slight flood in the local market for SUVs and trucks, but my earlier comments were from highway driving from Cookeville to JC(about number of SUVs or trucks).

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by theunchosen

But the table runs apparently through July YTD with a total of 3893373 units sold of which 1029804 units were strictly trucks or SUVs(Rav, CRV) So 26.4% of the vehicles were a truck or SUV from that figure and it doesn't include suburbans escalades, and yukons(the biggest sellers in the SUV category). Given it also does not include alot of cars.

Sure - I just said it was the best I could find, not that it was good. But it's supposed to be the 20 best selling models, so if e.g. the Suburban or Escalade isn't in there, then they're not selling as many units as the Civic or Prius. We can likewise argue about whether the CRV & RAV-4 qualify as "big" or not. I don't think so - like my old '80s Subarus, or my '88 Toyota pickup, they have 4WD in a smaller package.

Also, maybe I haven't made it clear that I've been talking about sales over the long term, not any effects from the high gas prices of last year. So maybe 2007 sales info would be better, or registration info, to count what's actually being driven. I mean, just counting Honda sales figures vs some Detroit SUV doesn't account for the fact that the Honda's likely to be running strong when the Detroit iron takes its last trip to the junkyard :-)

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Playslikepage71

It's like why does it take an 8.3L V10 to make 525HP? The Nissan GT-R does it with a 3.8L V6 with 2 turbos. If you dispute that because of the factory claimed number of 480HP, take a look at the motor trend article about the dyno tests. The Ferarri F430 makes 485 ponies with a "meager" 4.3L V8. The Corvette with it's futuristic fiberglass body rides on friggin leafsprings!!

Or indeed, why a performance car needs 525 HP in the first place. Look at Lotus, which manages pretty serious sports car performance on about half the horsepower, AND always manages to be close to the top of the annual CAFE ratings - when they're not actually #1.