U.S. Auto Sales, September 2018: An Athletic Fiat Chrysler Leapfrogs Ford

Matthew Guy
by Matthew Guy

Dealerships across America were awash in red last month, both from the ink spilling across financial ledgers and the anger emitting from corner offices. Just about every marque was off in September and not by insignificant amounts. This can be blamed on a number of factors, not the least of which was last year’s pent up demand after a devastating Hurricane Harvey and this year’s Hurricane Florence having the opposite effect.

One ray of sunshine? Fiat Chrysler, which finally got its Ram production in gear and started delivering snazzy new pickup to eager customers in a big way. Of course, having the perpetually strong-selling Jeep brand on the books didn’t hurt, either.

A close look at the numbers in this chart reveal a stat the market hasn’t seen since 2015: the whole of FCA outsold the whole of Ford, this time by about 4,000 units. FCA was fuelled by a 14 percent jump at Jeep and a 9 percent leap at Ram. While those two numbers are but snapshots in time, it is worth pointing out that sales for three quarters of this year — a much larger sample size and a better yardstick with which to measure success — sees Jeep jump an astonishing 19.9 percent to 746,194 units. That’s fewer than 200,000 machines than the rest of the company combined.

At General Motors, which sees fit to grace us with actual numbers only on a quarterly basis, dealers delivered 694,638 vehicles in the third quarter of 2018. Down slightly (1.2 percent) when compared to the same time last year, the company boasted of average transaction prices rising about $700 per unit, year over year, to a new third quarter corporate record of $35,974.

September sales at The General did decline 11 percent, year over year, with the impact of hurricanes sharply increasing both industry and GM sales this time in 2017 and depressing them somewhat this year. Note: GM’s fleet deliveries, up 5 percent year over year, were about 21 percent of total sales during the quarter.

Year to date at the Blue Oval, cars are off an unsurprising 17.4 percent, which is what happens when a company announces the death of all of its product except the Mustang. Wide swaths of customers tend to avoid vehicles whose date is already carved on a tombstone. The gain in trucks and SUVs, 1.1 and 3.2 percent respectively, is so far not enough to make up for the Glass House’s flatlining car division.

Trucks trucks trucks narrative aside, Honda pointed out that its electrified offerings — comprised of the Accord Hybrid, Insight, and Clarity Plug-in Hybrid — combined for nearly 6,000 September deliveries. Honda noted fuel prices topping $4.00/gal in some parts of the country, an observation standing in stark contrast to the strong performance of trucks.

If one needs any further proof of the value of trucks and SUVs (we’re pretty sure no one does, but this month’s numbers makes the point abundantly clear) check out the September results for Genesis and Subaru. One is laden with crossovers and all-wheel drive units. The other isn’t.

The third quarter light vehicle SAAR was 17.2 million units in 2017 and 16.9 million in 2018. If the market does indeed crest 17 million units this year, it’ll be due to an unexpected late-year surge.

Anyone in your cadre of pals pull the trigger on a new machine last month? Chime in below.

Matthew Guy
Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments
Join the conversation
9 of 56 comments
  • Vulpine Vulpine on Oct 03, 2018

    Why place the blame on Hackett when he inherited the problem from his predecessor? Do you really believe a new CEO can fix an ailing system in just a few months when it typically takes YEARS to revamp a product line like cars?

    • See 6 previous
    • Vulpine Vulpine on Oct 03, 2018

      @JimZ Observation is key. After watching the automotive industry for several decades, you can usually see what's going to happen BEFORE it happens.

  • BklynPete BklynPete on Oct 03, 2018

    Ford tried the tech/Internet future approach with Jac Nasser. Then came the burst tech bubble, clashes with Billy Ford, the Explorer/Firestone fiasco and falling profits. Nasser got canned, Billy took over for 4 years and things got even worse. I really do think of the Ford Family as charter members of the Lucky Sperm Club. They chase after every bright shiny object and never learn.

  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
  • FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
Next