'Clunkers' sales point to challenges
Jim_Higgins
area and have been to the Portland, OR area. The sales "war" was waged
and *lost big time* on the West coast long ago. My unscientific estimate
of parking lots and freeways is that Detroit (what remains of it) has
only approximately 30% or so of the West coast market. Detroit is not a
significant factor out here, a trivial presence.
'Clunkers' sales point to challenges
http://tinyurl.com/ye97hgk
Michigan's allegiance to domestic brands is not the national norm
Alisa Priddle / The Detroit News
Michigan car buyers tend to purchase what their neighbors make, but that
doesn't matter as much to the rest of the country, according to an
analysis of data from the "cash for clunkers" incentive program.
"We really are a whole different planet here in Michigan," said
Stephanie Brinley, product analyst for AutoPacific Inc. in Troy.
For example: 81.1 percent of Michiganians traded in domestic clunkers
and bought domestic replacements, but that number dropped to 42.8
percent in the rest of the nation, according to a breakdown of data from
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on the program,
officially known as the Car Allowance Rebate System, intended to boost
sales of fuel efficient vehicles.
Advertisement
In fact, many car buyers across the United States used the cash for
clunkers program to buy a foreign nameplate, showing again the challenge
General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler Group LLC have outside
of Rust Belt states.
The $3 billion clunker program ran from July 27 to Aug. 25 and
encouraged consumers to turn in gas-guzzling vehicles for cars that get
at least 22 miles per gallon and trucks capable of 15 mpg or 18 mpg,
depending on class. Eligible trade-ins were those that got no more than
18 mpg and were destroyed in exchange for rebates up to $4,500 toward
the purchase of a new vehicle.
Nearly 690,000 vehicles were sold while the program was in effect and
some automakers increased production in the aftermath to replenish their
vehicle stocks. The most common trade-ins across the country were the
Ford Explorer sport utility vehicle and the Ford F-150 full-size pickup,
according to the NHTSA data.
In car-crazy states like California, the most popular purchase was a
Honda Civic; many states also put a Toyota Corolla or Camry at the top
of the list.
By contrast, the Ford Focus topped the shopping list for buyers in
Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, Idaho, Kansas, Missouri, Wisconsin,
Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Wyoming, Arkansas, Montana, Vermont and Maine.
Some farm states: Oklahoma, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota
continued to make the Chevrolet Silverado pickup their first choice.
The data shows Michigan differs wildly from most of the country. More
than 57 percent of Americans traded in a vehicle from the Detroit Three
and bought a foreign make, but in Michigan less than 19 percent fell
into this category.
Conversely, while only 14.3 percent of the country bought a Big Three
vehicle after trading in their import, the number was more than triple
in Michigan where almost 47 percent went domestic with their new car or
truck after trading in their foreign nameplate.
And while the majority of states saw 85.7 percent of buyers trade in
their foreign car for another foreign make -- usually a Honda for a
Toyota and vice versa -- in Michigan this group represented only 53.2
percent.
The Michigan results "have to do with our relationship to the
automakers," Brinley said. "So many people rely on (the Detroit Three)
for their livelihood or have family or friends who do."
That influences purchasing decisions in a couple of ways. Employees use
their company discounts to buy what they make. And among nonemployees,
there is an overarching sense of responsibility or obligation to help
the hometown teams, especially in the last couple of years as it became
apparent the domestic automakers were struggling.
The travails of the local carmakers have "been polarizing. Some are
saying the Big Three got what they deserve, but others are trying harder
to do their small part in keeping them going," Brinley said.
When times are good, it is easier to not remain loyal to American
brands, she said.
"You don't worry about your purchase having any ramifications for a
company's fate. But when times are tough, there is a greater sense of
responsibility to pitch in."
Additionally, the United Auto Workers presence remains strong in
Michigan and the union has pushed the "buy American" sentiment, Brinley
said.
Mike Hunter
Ford was still number two and Toyota was the closest import brand, in it was
still in third place.
The reason the imports did well was the fact they had far more of the left
over 2009 in stock than did the domestics and were therefore thousands of
dollars for less expensive to buy, than the 2010 models the domestics were
selling.
The reason so many were Explorers and F150s is they were by far the best
sellers, of each type, during the years from which the trades had to come.
"Jim_Higgins" <gordi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hd9b8g$grk$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Canuck57
You are right about F150's, a good truck. Something our Toyota and
Honda haven't mastered. But around where I live, Ford is #1, followed
by Toyota, toss up between Chrysler and Honda follwoed by GM. In fact I
don't see too many new GMs at all.
GM is a dying. Will not be long before they are #1, then #3 and perish.
hls
"Canuck57" <Canu...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:H14Km.10019$W77....@newsfe11.iad...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>
> You are right about F150's, a good truck. Something our Toyota and Honda
> haven't mastered.
Depends upon who you ask. I went to lunch the other day with a friend
in his Tundra. It has 150,000 miles and has never caused one instance
of trouble. This rusting must be geographical....in the rust belt.
This guy ran fleets of trucks in the Colorada area. He claimed the
Chevrolets
or GMs were the worst, Dodge was better, and Fords held up best.
His company Chevrolet ate three differentials before 60,000 miles.
Dealership
and GM told him tough shit, he was working them too hard.. The Dodges
lasted 80-100K before serious problems set in, in general, and the Fords
over 120K.
Anecdotal, but better than a wild guess.
Mike Hunter
Ridgeline. In reality it is build on an AWD Accord car chassis. Seems
they should be marketing it as a crossover. LOL
"Canuck57" <Canu...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:H14Km.10019$W77....@newsfe11.iad...
Mike Hunter
average. I formally owned a fleet service company that consisted of
twenty-six facilities, in six eastern states. We serviced hundred of the
major and minor commercial, as well as federal and state government, fleets.
Ford vehicles and Ford truck are by far the preferred brand, GM is second.
Commercial fleets, because of federal corporate tax depreciation laws,
generally keep the "tools" used in their business for five years.
In the case of one of their tools, cars and trucks, it is five years or
300,000 miles WOF federal tax requirement. As a result they are provided
the best preventive maintenance. We serviced hundreds of thousands of them
over the ten years I owned my business.
Fleets required us keep meticulous maintenance records. As a result they
buy mostly Fords because those records proved that Fords are the most cost
effective to own, in terms of the cost to acquire, insure, maintain, repair
and replace then any other brand, period.
Look around for yourself at what brand you see being used by the utility
companies, mini buses, vans, box trucks, ambulances, and any of the other
corporations.
"hls" <h...@nospam.nix> wrote in message
news:6d6dnag_vfv_imTX...@giganews.com...
C. E. White
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
news:4af99d74$0$25951$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
> Honda does not make a truck, what Honda refers to as a "Truck," is
> the Ridgeline. In reality it is build on an AWD Accord car
> chassis. Seems they should be marketing it as a crossover. LOL
Mike,
I think it is not correct to refer to the Ridgeline as being built on
"an AWD Accord car chassis." I think it is more related to the Odyssey
and Pilot components. Of course, like all manufacturers, Honda shares
components between the car and truck lines (engines, transmissions,
electronic bits, etc.).
Would you claim a Ranger is a crossover becasue it uses the same basic
automatic transmission as the 2005 Ford Thunderbird, or becasue some
versions use car engines? Is an F150 a Crossover becasue the standard
V8 and automatic are a version of the drivetrain used in a Grand
Marquis?
Don't get me wrong, I think the Ridgeline is a poor excuse for a
"truck," if you are defining a truck as something like an F150. On the
other hand, it might be the perfect vehicle for people who need
whatever sort of vehicle it is. VW sold the Rabbit based "truck," and
I know plenty of people who loved that. I know plenty of people who
like the Avalanche sort of "truck" also. I guess a truck is what the
buyer defines it to be, or I guess more importantly what the EPA
allows you to call it.
Ed
Ed
Mike Hunter
built. The Accord, Ridgeline, Odyssey and the Pilot are all built upon the
same chassis.
The drive components have nothing to do with the chassis. Remember Keiser
and Frazer? They never made ANYTHING BUT the chassis. Every other
component, from the brakes to the engine, was made by others such as
Continental, GM, Chrysler, Willy's etc..
"C. E. White" <cewh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:hdc9nd$3or$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Steve W.
One of my all time favorite vehicles was the El Camino. Of course I also
spent 5 years driving a 59 Caddy Hearse as my daily driver....
Those style vehicles are great for applications where you have large
items but not a lot of weight. For instance the average ATV isn't very
heavy but they are bulky. You don't really need a 3/4 ton vehicle to
haul them.
On the other hand you don't really want one if you're planning on
hitting the lumber yard for 30 sheets of plywood and 10 bags of concrete
mix. However most deliver!
--
Steve W.
Canuck57
I was considering a Tundra too, but at the time Canadians were getting
screwed on exchange rates, making the Tundra stupid priced.
I went for a Ford as much more than 50% of the ranchers in the area had
them. I suspect ranchers can be hard on them and will buy what simply
stands up. Ford was the predominant, followed by diesel version of the
RAM, then followed by GMC or Chev. Ranchers didn't seem to go for Tundra
and Ridgeline. While I liked the Ridgline, the seat was not right with
the stearing wheel. The Tundra was tinny on the ride. GM, knowing they
were sliding into bankruptcy and their pricing was wonkers, never did
take the plain feeling Sierra for a test drive. Besides, after the
Regal tranny issues, I wasn't stuck on GM for this round. No regrets
either.
Canuck57
miles is pretty darned good.
If it sits in a heated garage and babied (as opposed to abused), 250,000
and up is very common. Even see some F100's around here.
Canuck57
have bought it except for 2 reasons.
First, needed more leg/head room and when all the way back it was weird
for drivers wheel fit. No proportionally the same or something. Second
reason was towing capacity. Pretty small next to a Lariat with all the
options for a few bucks less. I would class it as a light truck SUV
want to be.
Give Honda a few years to revise and refine it, they could find
themselves in the truck game.
C. E. White
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
> My reference is to the basic chassis upon which a particular vehicle
> is built. The Accord, Ridgeline, Odyssey and the Pilot are all
> built upon the same chassis.
None of those vehicles even has a chassis like the sort of chassis an
old Kaiser Frazier had. They are all unit body vehicles. The Accord
has a different wheelbase, different track widths and doesn't share
any suspension components with the Ridgeline. So how exactly do they
share the same chassis?
Accord (4 door)
Wheelbase 110.2"
Front tread 62.2"
Rear tread 62.2"
Ridgeline
Wheelbase 122.0"
Front tread 67.1"
Rear tread 66.9"
Ed
Mike Hunter
different types of vehicles, all bolt off of the same basic chassis can have
those differences, what makes you think you will understand if I explain it
to you once again? ;)
"C. E. White" <cewh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:hdguqk$ck9$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
C. E. White
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
> You did not understand the last time I tried to explain to you why
> several different types of vehicles, all bolt off of the same basic
> chassis can have those differences, what makes you think you will
> understand if I explain it to you once again? ;)
If you are harking back to your ridiculous claim that the 2005 Mustang
and Lincoln LS shared chassis, then that was about the must ignorant
claim anyone could make. Well, at least unitl this claim.
The bottom line seems to be, that you think vehicles that share no
basic dimensions, no suspension comoponents, no sheet metal parts, no
suspension mounting points, and use completely differnt suspension
styles, still share "chassis."
This make no sense.
Ed
Mike Hunter
"C. E. White" <cewh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:hdhdbv$6n2$1...@news.eternal-september.org...