MX5

I've never leased, but I would think you still need decent credit to lease a $35k car?

MX5

But you do see the Chrysler 200 on the New list, so we can presume those 200 buyers would go for a 300 instead, if they could get bought on one....

MX5

I recently helped my mom shop for a new car, it was between Accord/Camry/Altima (she was coming from a Camry) and they ALL were coming down thousands off MSRP. She ended up with a really sweet 2013 Accord Sport that listed for over 25k and I got them down to 22k. Hell there are lots of Darts that list over 22k.


In my experience Lexus is just as reliable as Toyota, and even if there's a problem they can be serviced at a Toyota dealer or neighborhood shop. If someone buys an old beater $2,500 Lexus they probably aren't planning to have it serviced at a Lexus dealer in the first place.

TangoRed

You can get an avenger/200 for 18k all day. These people aren't looking for fully optioned cars, hence why they eat into Dart sales.

I agree that Lexus is just as reliable as a Toyota, but these are people buying new cars. They aren't desperate enough for luxury that they'd buy a used a Lexus that will be more expensive to maintain, no matter what happens, than a brand new Dodge Avenger.

Outrage

You can get a Chrysler 200, with the V6 and all the goodies, for the same price as a stripped-down CamAltiCord. A Chrysler 200 Limited starts at $24,880. That gets you a 283 horsepower V6, leather seating, and a navigation system. A Honda Accord EX costs $24,605. It has a 185 horsepower I4, cloth seating, and no navigation system.

mrraider

Lots of hate for the 300? It;s actually a nice car IMHO. Not many v8 sedans left on the market. Even the 3.6 AWD 8 speed is a good car.

mmarshall

Although it (might) actually be a different thread-topic, this list also seems to discount the fact that a lot of people, if they can't actually afford to buy a new car, simply lease it instead....for a lower monthly payment. In my area (D.C/Baltimore. and suburbs), leasing, like it or not, keeps a number of the local upmarket-dealerships in buisness.

Sulu

If your definition of "value" is merely "feature per dollar" (and don't take into account quality -- reliability, dependability and number of trips to the repair shop), the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger will win in a comparison with the Toyota Camry every time. That is how Hyundai and Kia were able to climb the charts.

Many people, even well-educated people (people with more than 1 university degree) believe this, so is it surprising that the poorer people look for cars with high feature per dollar ratios?

My wife's boss, a family doctor, has always believed this and swore by GM's Saturn brand. Her reasons? She said that they offered good "value" and she believed that service costs for a domestic GM-made car are cheaper than for an "import", like my wife's old (Canadian built) Honda Civic or my old (American built) Toyota Camry.

When her old Saturn was on its last legs, she bought the Saturn Astra, either refusing to believe that it was imported from Belgium or believing that because it is a GM car, it would still be "cheap" to service. This was just before GM's stormtroopers blew up Saturn and ejected it from the GM solar system. She had problems with the car and found it very difficult to find service; her usual dealership refused (or could not) service the new Saturns and she had to go out of her way to find a dealership willing to service the imported Saturns.

It takes a certain level of enthusiasm in cars to pick the true high-value cars.

mmarshall

Hyundai and Kia, however, do more than just offer value and features-per-dollar. They now offer comparable quality to Toyota and Honda....in fact, IMO, better in some ways.

mmarshall

Saturn, in the 1990s, was a classic success-story. GM definitely got it right.....but the problem (and I have posted at length on this before) is that GM didn't keep it right. They inevitably tried to expand the brand when it didn't need expanding, got rid of the excellent cars that built it (the plastic-body S-series), rebadged other unreliable GM and Euro-designs as Saturns, and the rest is history.

The Saturn brand, IMO, after the 1990s, was criminally mismanaged. Years from now, books are going to be written about they should have stuck with they originally did best.

My0gr81

Compare a 3 years old Corolla with a 3 years old elantra in rattles, material wear and other issues and you will change your mind. Hyundai and Kia, like GM looks and drives good on the first year, but it is downhill with momentum after that. Resale value speaks for itself on those cars.

mmarshall

Thank You, but my brother has a 3-year-old Kia Soul. Virtually as solid as the day it was built.

That's also been the experience with most of the other people I know who have bought into Hyundai and Kia after the bad old days of the 1990s.

mrraider

Egads, I better run home and check the wife's car. It might disintegrate by dinner time!

My0gr81

Autotrader.ca, search for used cars in Montreal, QC


2009 Elantra starting @ $6500 to $8000
2009 Corolla starting @ $8500 to $10,000

This is for a car that sells for almost the same price brand new.

As I said resale value speaks for itself. Test drive a 3 years old used Huyndai/Kia from any dealer, and compare that ride, rattles, material wear and tear to an equivalent Toyota/Honda and you'll feel the difference.

Your own car may be different, but that is not the general consensus in the real world.

TangoRed

You should know better than to make that claim. Resale value almost never reflects recent changes in quality and durability. Hyundai/Kia have only just recently made a name for themselves via making truly competitive cars- it's going take a while before their resale matches Toyota's stellar reputation, no matter how good their cars are. This is why the relatively ancient and uncompetitive Corolla is still selling very well.

I would trust a 3 year old Hyundai/Kia product any day.