Small / economy car deathwatch: we've passed "peak econobox" again

[ME_Andy]

Tesla Model 2 "coming soon." Who knows where the price will actually start, though.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Isaac Zachary

The point is that the equivalent of the eco cars of yesteryear are dissapearing, with the excuse that everyone needs more space. Right now the Nissan Versa and Mitsubishi Mirage are close in price and size to what a Geo Metro would be, but actually cost more and get worse fuel mileage. And those cars are dissapearing. What replaces them? That's the question? What replaces the Geo Metro?

What replaces a Geo Metro? The Mitsubishi Mirage. More powerful, slightly larger, much safer, same MPG. (The only 1995 Metro that is rated higher than a 2024 Mirage is the manual 3 cylinder that made 55 hp and it only bests the Mirage automatic by 1 mpg.

A 1995 Geo Metro started at $9,500 MSRP. That is $19,536 in 2024 dollars. So not only is the Mirage better than a 1995 Metro - it is cheaper too at $16,695.

However, the Mirage is going away next year. Why? Not enough people buy them to make it worth while for Mitsubishi to make. 13,000 sold in the USA last year. Mitsubishi only managed to sell 27K in the best sales year every and that is a combination of sedans and hatchbacks. Maybe you want something like a Mirage but people that actually buy new cars do not.

Originally Posted by Isaac Zachary

All of this makes the Trax irrelevant because while it is a better deal than a 1980's GMC Jimmy, it's not a better deal than a Geo Metro, if all a person wants is a commuter.

Again with the apples to bananas. The 1980's Jimmy was an SUV. Body on Frame, 4x4, low range, locking hubs - a vehicle actually made to go off-road. (I had one as my first vehicle).

A Trax is comparable something like an 80's Cavalier Wagon. (My second car). I'd take a Trax any day over that old Cavalier with a 86 hp 2.0L four mated to a 3 speed auto and rated at 24 mpg. The Cavalier was slightly cheaper - 1985 Cavalier wagon MSRP was $6727 or $19,697 in 2024 dollars.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by ME_Andy

The EPA changed their method of fuel mileage calculation since the time of the Metro. (2007)

Yes - and again in 2017. The certification shown on Fuel Economy Gov are based on the new formula but you can click through to see the old numbers.

Originally Posted by ME_Andy

Tesla Model 2 "coming soon." Who knows where the price will actually start, though.

"Coming Soon" for Tesla seems to mean about 5 years.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by JSH

"Coming Soon" for Tesla seems to mean about 5 years.

Yeah but, there's more money in keeping "deposits" for years prior to the actual product.

That said, I'm kicking myself for not putting a $100 deposit down for the Cybertruck, because Tesla is giving people with existing deposits $1,000 off a different Tesla. There's no obligation to keep the reservation, and it's refundable.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by JSH

The Geo Metro was subcompact car with an internal volume of 97 cu ft. The Trax is classified as a station wagon but using sedan classes it would be a large car with the internal volume of 123 cu ft.

Where's your source of info for internal volume? When I search for such info, all I get is "cargo volume", which I find somewhat meaningless because one can move things around in a car of x total volume.

Another meaningless measurement to me is headroom. I'm 6'2" and sit extremely upright, and have never come anywhere near hitting the ceiling. I'm not trying to wear an Abe Lincoln hat while I drive. Useful info for those over 6'9" who don't drive like gansters, I suppose.

[Isaac Zachary]

Originally Posted by JSH

What replaces a Geo Metro? The Mitsubishi Mirage. More powerful, slightly larger, much safer, same MPG. (The only 1995 Metro that is rated higher than a 2024 Mirage is the manual 3 cylinder that made 55 hp and it only bests the Mirage automatic by 1 mpg.

A 1995 Geo Metro started at $9,500 MSRP. That is $19,536 in 2024 dollars. So not only is the Mirage better than a 1995 Metro - it is cheaper too at $16,695.

However, the Mirage is going away next year. Why? Not enough people buy them to make it worth while for Mitsubishi to make. 13,000 sold in the USA last year. Mitsubishi only managed to sell 27K in the best sales year every and that is a combination of sedans and hatchbacks.

True, true.

But you did miss the Geo Metro XFI that gets 43 city and 52 highway and 47mpg combined under the new EPA numbers (original was 58mpg highway).

Also, the Metro apparently went up in price in 1995. In 1994 a base model was $7,295, or $15,275 today.

However, the XFI that got 52 mpg highway cost $8,395 in 1994, or $17,579 today.

Originally Posted by JSH

Maybe you want something like a Mirage but people that actually buy new cars do not.

If only I could convince new car buyers to buy the kinds of cars I would like to buy used later on. How do I get RedPoint5 to stop vouching against Apteras?

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Isaac Zachary

How do I get RedPoint5 to stop vouching against Apteras?

I'm not against Aptera; the car is an efficiency marvel.

I'm just realistic... the point of a car isn't to be efficient. The point of a car is to move people and their things in comfort and safety. Whenever something is designed around x exclusively, it comes at the expense of y and z.

I would proudly build and unveil the Aptera as my college science experiment. I'd have no expectation of creating a successful business that manufactures them.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Where's your source of info for internal volume? When I search for such info, all I get is "cargo volume", which I find somewhat meaningless because one can move things around in a car of x total volume.

FuelEconomy.gov - on the "Specs" tab. Passenger and cargo volume are listed for passenger cars - but only cars. Light trucks are classified by GVWR and most manufacturers do not bother to send EPA info that is not legally required.

Originally Posted by Isaac

But you did miss the Geo Metro XFI that gets 43 city and 52 highway and 47mpg combined under the new EPA numbers (original was 58mpg highway).

Also, the Metro apparently went up in price in 1995. In 1994 a base model was $7,295, or $15,275 today.

However, the XFI that got 52 mpg highway cost $8,395 in 1994, or $17,579 today.

I'm not a connoisseur of Metros so I didn't know the XFI was first generation only and ended production in 1994. Seems it is even smaller than the 2nd gen Metro Hatch. (11% smaller)

I do know that a car that small would not sell today. Both Toyota and Mercedes tried selling small commuter cars in the 2010's with the Smart ForTwo and Scion iQ. Neither sold - both averaged well below 10,000 a year. (Europe bought 10x as many) The Smart ForTwo was even one of the cheapest car sold in 2008 at less than $12,000.

[redpoint5]

I thought about getting a Chevy Metro back around when I joined this forum. Then I sat in one and the seat didn't adjust far enough back for me to fit, so there went that idea. The only car so far I can remember that didn't accommodate a normal height person.

Originally Posted by JSH

FuelEconomy.gov - on the "Specs" tab. Passenger and cargo volume are listed for passenger cars - but only cars.

Ah, so it's as simple as adding the passenger and cargo volumes to get total volume?

[JSH]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Ah, so it's as simple as adding the passenger and cargo volumes to get total volume?

Yes. EPA vehicle classifications are based on the combined passenger and cargo volumes. There has been no vanity sizing creep over the years - the classifications are the same as when created 40 decades ago.



For example - the Honda Accord has grown from a subcompact to large car over the last 40 years: