Ford getting out of the car business...

WARRIORWELDING said:
this reflects my statement.......must be my income bracket.

Absolutely no way I could swing a house payment for anything near that cost. Let alone live or even own a car payment at that price point.

So in the same line of thinking is everybody around me and the income they make far exceeding 40k a year????? Or are fewer people buying houses? I see plenty of folk in debt to their arse, renting, and buying the latest auto have to have (read diesel smoke wagon or SUV for a family of two).
Click to expand...

If you look at it this way- minimum wage now for anyone doing work with a gov entity is $10.10/hr.
On a 40 hour week that is $21,000/year. So at $40k you are a 2 income family both at min wage.

That probably isnt a home owner, or at the very least is "first home" owner. A far cry from the $335k stated above. And if you get outside the metros there are still plenty of housing opportunities available in the 150k and under range. Now they arent in the most popular neighborhoods or on the golf course, but you can still get a nice safe home.

If you want more home, then income has to rise from there.

Put another way, green techs with zero experience start around $20/hr at my company and get a company vehicle. (which saves on expenses) Last year our average technician worked 49 hours per week aggregate average. At a $20 per base that's ~$55k/yr.

So in the above example the diff between $40k ad $55k is ~$1k/month. If its possible to cover bills at $40k than thats an extra $1k/month in theory to go towards more expensive housing.

However as a small business owner- you get double screwed, so if you arent shuffling dollars all over the place you are taking a beating.
 
Im pretty sure the Roxor (jeep copy) would never pass safety standards , ABS , Air bags , Side impact protection , forward looking radar , back up camera , line departure warning . You know all that fun stuff that is mandatory , it has to ad a significant amount to the price tag
 
broncosbybart said:
The only reason the truck sales dove in 08' was the gas price hikes and shortages.

I'd contest that the housing crash was unrelated- just happened at the same time and one fed the other from a fear basis.
Click to expand...
I think it had much to do with credit availability and market positivity which is what drove the parallels.
 
WARRIORWELDING said:
On another note the only thing saving all the truck manufactures, Nissan and Toyota now included is one fact. Not one single manufacturer makes a compact or small pick up. Not one. If Kia made a older Ranger, S10, or even smaller variant I think the market wouldn't' shift but a lot of people would be tickled to death to own one for a daily run around. Especially if they hit a market of useful very efficient vehicles that didn't become entirely feminized to a Prius Carryall.
Click to expand...
I'd be in for something like that. Something like older crew cab minitrucks or Subaru baja, that got 30+ mpg.

I ride a wagon now, but a small bed on the back would be sweet.
 
There is the Canyorado diesel, but it starts at about $35k and is the size of a 10 year old half ton.
 
WARRIORWELDING said:
On another note the only thing saving all the truck manufactures, Nissan and Toyota now included is one fact. Not one single manufacturer makes a compact or small pick up. Not one. If Kia made a older Ranger, S10, or even smaller variant I think the market wouldn't' shift but a lot of people would be tickled to death to own one for a daily run around. Especially if they hit a market of useful very efficient vehicles that didn't become entirely feminized to a Prius Carryall.
Click to expand...

If Subaru brought back the brat I would buy one no questions asked. A cheap little pickup, with 2wd, 4wd high and low, pop up t-tops, and even the cool seats in the back. Doubt safety regulations would alow the seats, but it would be cool.
 
Ron said:
If you look at it this way- minimum wage now for anyone doing work with a gov entity is $10.10/hr.
On a 40 hour week that is $21,000/year. So at $40k you are a 2 income family both at min wage.

That probably isnt a home owner, or at the very least is "first home" owner. A far cry from the $335k stated above. And if you get outside the metros there are still plenty of housing opportunities available in the 150k and under range. Now they arent in the most popular neighborhoods or on the golf course, but you can still get a nice safe home.

If you want more home, then income has to rise from there.

Put another way, green techs with zero experience start around $20/hr at my company and get a company vehicle. (which saves on expenses) Last year our average technician worked 49 hours per week aggregate average. At a $20 per base that's ~$55k/yr.

So in the above example the diff between $40k ad $55k is ~$1k/month. If its possible to cover bills at $40k than thats an extra $1k/month in theory to go towards more expensive housing.

However as a small business owner- you get double screwed, so if you arent shuffling dollars all over the place you are taking a beating.
Click to expand...
That is pretty cut and dry......ARE YOU HIRING?
 
Ron said:
shrug...shows what I know.
Click to expand...
giphy-downsized-large.gif
 
So, no ability to buy a badass Focus RS or Taurus SHO but, we'll still be able to buy some Focus based crossover POS? Yay. : ( Our vehicle market just keeps sucking more and more. Am I the only one that doesn't understand the HUGE popularity of crossover SUVs??? They are pointless to me, if I want a car, I buy a car, if I want an SUV I'll buy a truck based SUV (I did, we've got a Yukon XL Denali), that way I'm actually buying a Sport Utility Vehicle and not some tarted up lifted car! If I want something that gives me all weather driving capability, a cavernous interior, but a car like ride and fuel economy, I'll buy an AWD station wagon! (which I did, a VW Golf Sportwagen S TSI 4motion DSG (if buying just for me, it would have been a manual trans but had to buy auto so wife can drive it too)) But, even then, because the US market loves dang crossovers so much, my VW sits 1.5" higher than the same model in other markets since it's an American market one. (I plan on finding European spec springs to lower it to the proper ride height) To me, crossover SUVs combine every negative attribute of a true SUV and every negative attribute of a car into one single ugly, poor driving, compromised POS. I think I'd rather drive a minivan as a daily than some "rugged" looking jacked up car platform crossover SUV!!!!
 
87GMCJimmy said:
To me, crossover SUVs combine every negative attribute of a true SUV and every negative attribute of a car into one single ugly, poor driving, compromised POS.
Click to expand...
Quoted for truth!
 
I guess the point I was trying to make in my first post on the subject wasn't taking into acount my definition of a suv and a car.
I consider a suv a truck based vehicle, and car based "cross overs" still cars.
I do have to laugh, as the first suv I owned (1986 Isuzu trooper) was classified as a station wagon on the title.
How things have changed.......
 
CasterTroy said:
X2
Everything Morgan said!
Click to expand...
Case in point my wife's Pacifica. She bought it as a single mom of one.
Big. Heavy. Kills light truck tires. Handles like a pig. Its been very reliable and zero fun to drive. Its only shinning moment.....when we treat it like a cargo van or such and haul crap so packed the seats should be removed.
The reason it sells.....females. They like the full mom truck look, shinny rims and leather interior. I just call it the space shuttle and duck.
 
Last edited:
Working for a rather large dodge dealership...

As far as "Dodge" vehicles go. Outside of Challengers and Chargers... we dont even keep stuff on the lot.
We have tons of jeeps from wrangler to "cherokees", a few of the gayer ones but not many, a small selection of Chrysler vehicles, and several thousand rams.
The rams are our breadwinner no doubt. I would say we sell 15:1 trucks vs cars as far as new inventory
 
ncpartsguy said:
New Cherokees? The Oughtnotta catagory. Ought notta been built in the first place.

*not referring to XJs
Click to expand...
I call it the Fiat Abomination
 
It doesn't seem like many or any real (Caprice, Grand Marquis etc) full size cars are made anymore. What they call a full size car today can't really hold much stuff. A big screen TV or grill from Costco probably won't fit in the trunk. I think that leads a lot of people to the crossover category. I'm guessing a fair number of people don't want a full size SUV for a variety of reasons (hard to park, intimidated to drive something so large, gas mileage etc). Those same people won't drive a minivan either, so they end up in a crossover.
 
drkelly said:
It doesn't seem like many or any real (Caprice, Grand Marquis etc) full size cars are made anymore. What they call a full size car today can't really hold much stuff. A big screen TV or grill from Costco probably won't fit in the trunk. I think that leads a lot of people to the crossover category. I'm guessing a fair number of people don't want a full size SUV for a variety of reasons (hard to park, intimidated to drive something so large, gas mileage etc). Those same people won't drive a minivan either, so they end up in a crossover.
Click to expand...
And the fact a full size SUV (Tahoe, Yukon, expedition) cost about $50,000 or more new. I had a loaded Tahoe rental once for about a month during a work trip. Fell in love with it and considered getting the wife one until I realized it was about $65,000. I’ll keep my crappy used cars before I go in that kind of debt.
 
Back
Top