Personally, I think Company’s like Mazda have a good idea in selling cars like the Mazdaspeed3 that have standard features out the tail pipe. As gas prices continue to rise, a well appointed car that gets fair to good gas mileage will be the hot selling comodity for the middle class buyer that used to buy an SUV or full size sedan. There will also be a big market for the “penalty box” compact for kids just out of college, lower middle income folks, or people who like to own a basic daily driver and a toy for weekend fun.

The sad thing is that they seem to think that most of these engines are to “too small” for the US. The Rabbit and Jetta aren’t very desireable in terms of economy. 30 MPG is pretty crappy compared to what they could be getting. The 1.6 litre FSI engine listed on vw.co.uk gets 42.2 MPG combined. I don’t see why they continue to put a 2.5 litre engine in those cars. Maybe they’ll catch on eventually though.

I bought my Jetta TDI in 2003 because I knew at some point, fuel prices would go up. The only time I need a truck is to get stuff from Lowe’s or Home Depot. For those occasions, I rent a truck for $20. It baffles me that so many people bought a pickup when they need to use its full capacity a few times per year. But as I mentioned above, a lot of people are pretty dull, so I guess I answered my own question.

VW is very well positioned to take advantage of this trend if they can get their act together.

QOTD material right there. Quoted for Truth.

Luxury doesn’t have to mean LARGE; it’s quite possible to have a very, very nice car that’s smaller and is more economical because of it.

The profit margin wouldn’t be as high on these vehicles – but the rewards would be great for the manufacturer who hits the mark. If any of the auto companies would stop with the market research that asks “which of these current vehicles do you prefer” and start asking “what kind of vehicle do you want” they’d have a good starting point. Those aren’t the same question and you’d think they’d understand the difference by now…

tac: “back in ‘03, ‘04 you could find dealer’s September ads for “focus hatchbacks $7,800, 23 at this price” (similarly for rangers). a big reason was they sold a lot of gas guzzler trucks (especially the 100k tax write off 6000lb loophole deals) and had to offset them with efficient models…”

I wondered what happened to all those incredibly cheap small car deals and why they never came back. The cheapest ‘08 Focus I’ve seen advertised is $10k. Of course, the ’08s now come standard with A/C (the previous generation base models didn’t) which is some compensation. At least there’s still stripped (no A/C) 4-door Aveos for $8500.

Of course they know their customers well. Alot of the diehard GM and Ford customers I know automatically label small vehicles as “shitboxes” b/c these people don’t like small cars. More power to them and their 18 mpg mid-sized car. Maybe they haven’t spent any time in a GOOD compact.

I’ll take my compact and pocket the $20K lower operating costs over 200K miles, thanks…

Hoping the Astra is still around when I need to buy my next car. Am not going into debt prematurely to “save” GM thanks.

I don’t the issue is so much that it is difficult to make a profit on smaller cars. I think the issue is that it is difficult to make a PROFIT.

In other words, the margin on full-farkled pickups and SUVs was likely over $10,000 per UNIT. The per unit margin for a $15,000 car is nowhere near.

Which only means that the makers routinely bloated their profits with the bloated prices of bloated vehicle.

Now that heyday is gone, hence their lamenting. Now they need to return to solid business practices to still do well on narrower margins. I guess that actually working hard to sell product is not so macho.

When I bought my Acura I used the same criteria that the big 2.8 claim to use. Total cost. Total cost over 5 years including depreciation makes Honda and Toyota big winners.

Isn’t it amazing that the average transaction price for a Civic and Corolla are much higher than a Focus and Cobalt. I beleive it is becasue the big 2.8 have a done a great job of confirming that they can’t build nice small cars.

I always see 29+ around town during the week and 34-35 mpg on the highway no matter how full the car is.

Yes, I might sacrifice a FEW mpg (3-4) for a larger Chevy on the highway but I still will live with the smaller high city mpg for day to day use b/c that is where 90% of my car’s lifetime will be used.

Like one of the other commenters said, the clever little details really make some of the imports desirable for all purpose use. Alot different from a low spec Hyundai from 15 years ago that I owned whose only “extra” was a sunroof. I can certainly live with a low spec car for short distance use though.

Actually, 2006 Impala is rated at 31 highway(22 city). It is a daily driver that mixes city and highway use and consistently averages 23-26 mpg with 40,000 miles on the odometer. Since I never purchased the Acura, I don’t know what mileage it gets. But I doubt that a federal EPA label is biased toward Chevy. Oh, and I doubt the BS story of the auto trans TSX going up mountains with thousands of pounds of cargo averaging 30+ mpg.

It kills me that because of pissing contests between regional operations, the US automakers claim not to have viable small cars when they are making them across the pond.

That is correct, my statement did not mention party as there is plenty of blame to go around. It would be easy to comment on the state of the economy during the last two administrations and who, on the surface, did a “better” job but when push comes to shove, energy and its related issues were ignored equally by both parties.

Skooter: I used to agree with that position and bought a Lincoln LS that I still have because it has no resale value, just like the Impala. The LS had a V8, rear wheel drive, great handling and was good looking. The BMW had a inline six, less horsepower, less interior space and cost more money, I should have bought the BMW, just like you should have bought the TSX when you go to get another car and find out that the Impala has no resale value.…

The TSX would be the choice for purchasing new, especially if you like to trade. Used? That Lincoln is a great deal, and a pretty good car, too. I actually thought that the LS, following on the LSC era indicated that Lincoln was going somewhere. I was wrong, big time on that. The Navigator era killed any hope of that. And Improvement_Needed, you are absolutely correct, there is nothing wrong with keeping a car until it is toast. I really laugh when I hear people talk about how reliable their (insert your favorite car here) is. They then follow up with how they trade every three years. Even the much maligned GM product can do that, even if it includes two warranty stops. Reliability and durability, while related, are NOT the same thing.

I recently made a Banzai! trip from California to Texas and back in my auto trany (yes I’m ashamed!) TSX with two adults and a full load of luggage. There are serious mountain ranges between here and there and most of the highways had 75-80 MPH speed limits. Much of the time I was doing 80 or higher. Total round trip fuel economy was 31.4 MPG.

nothing wrong with keeping a vehicle until you run it into the ground…

The Impala may be rated at 28 on the highway, but the TSX actually gets it.

especially the small touches.
my base vw jetta was purchased for 18k 3 years ago with:
electronic stability control
4 wheel disc brakes with abs
6 airbags
3 12 volt outlets
cruise control
10 speaker stereo
auto down on ALL 4 windows!!
power / heated outside mirrors
side blinkers
tilt/telescopic steering wheel
rear-HVAC vents (floor and upper)
Full Size spare
Overhead sunglasses holder
center armrest: extend-able and tilt-able
small AC vent in center console and glovebox
footwell lighting
alarm system
remote door locks and trunk
etc…

It’s about the little touches (side blinkers – a great safety feature ignored in NA; hidden mufflers; wheels that fill the arches properly; front and rear IRS; a manual transmission; supportive seats; steering feel, excellent brakes; toys – auto lights, wipers, Xenons, sunroof, Bluetooth, auto climate ctrl, the carpet in the trunk and how carefully it’s made to cover all gaps; steering wheel audio controls, etc).

And, buying a small car isn’t all fuel economy. Ease of parking and good handling are major factors as well. In some ways, it’s safer than a bigger vehicle, in the fact that you take up less of the lane and can get out of the way easier, so situations that would be accidents in a bigger vehicle are merely near-misses in mine.

Wow- Now I really feel like a genius since I purchased a 2006 Chevy Impala LT instead of a TSX- for a biiger vehicle and $6,000 less! Oh yes, I get the same mileage with 2 more cylinders and 6 more horsepower! Hooray for me!

While very true, the opinion of a poorly educated public, especially as regards history, is easily manipulated given a compliant corporate-driven media (and I include the NPR farce). Witness the drumbeat for attacking Iran so soon after the wildly successful Iraq foray.