-J-P-L-

I'll make a few general comments after reading a bunch of posts, rather than quote.

A lot of talk about where Hyundai and Kia stand from a perception standpoint. When it comes to brand perception, it's amazing how everyone has a different opinion. When you read thousands of posts on forums or comments on car reviews on YouTube, few people agree on anything. Many opinions aren't even based in anything close to reality. I always feel bad for companies after reading what people think and realizing how the perception of their brands are so off base. Selling cars is the hardest thing in the world. You have to fight brand stigmas that have been built up over decades and may have nothing to do with today.

One wonders what amount of Hyundai and Kia sales still come down to their warranties. This may be hard to quantify even if they took a poll of buyers because most car purchases come down to a number of reasons to buy. A majority of people are looking for the best whole package in their eyes. This package can be many different things. But when it comes to Hyundai and Kia, how many people first consider them and ultimately sign the papers because of that warranty? I bet it's significant even though the products are absolutely good enough to sell on every other factor minus the warranty.

There's no sense in comparing top end pricing of the Explorer with the top spec Palisade. The Explorer enters a new class at the top end with high performance engines and other upgrades.

As for brand loyalty, I'm on the side that buys what ever fits my wants and needs each purchase cycle. I was a Toyota/Lexus owner before, this time I'm in the Mazda camp because right now I think they make the best vehicles. Toyota has lost me for now on the styling front and I think Mazda's are gorgeous. I also prioritize driving feel and interior design and quality. If Honda's weren't borderline ugly, I'd consider them too. For me, I have to love how it looks first. Then the other things have to fit a certain criteria. As for reliability, it has to be at least average (which is good), so if I loved everything else about a car but it has Fiat's track record, no thanks.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

not only that most people's math is so bad they can't figure out pricing, payments, good deal vs. bad deal, etc., so they're gonna get suckered.

plus for um, half the population (females), who by the way are the dominant decision maker in couples' purchases, besides price, COLOR is extremely important. seriously?

great post, right there with ya!

tex2670

Correct.

Explorer Limited compares to Pilot, Highlander, Palisade, Telluride, Traverse, CX-9, Pathfinder.

Explorer Platinum compares to RX-L, MDX; QX60;and base XT6 and Lincoln Aviator (or whatever they are calling the Lincoln Explorer these days)

It's an interesting strategy--we'll see how it works for Ford. Those looking at lux makes for their SUV I think, in large part, will balk at spending that much on a Ford instead of the lux nameplate.

mmarshall

Apparently, not important enough. Except for sports cars and exotics, look at the color-chips for most of the vehicles in production today. Mostly black, white, grays/silvers, and some dull or dark funeral-home shades. True color-choices, for the majority of today's vehicles, are a thing of the past.

Toys4RJill

A Chevrolet Traverse. You now hit $56K for the top spec. These two models have their own little spot in their own top spec segment as well as the Dodge Citadel Durango....

tex2670

I'm suspicious that the price of a top level Chevy Traverse does not match the quality or the features of Explorer Platinum, MDX, etc., etc.

tex2670

People still CHOOSE those colors.

There's hundreds--maybe 1000s--of ice cream flavors. But there's a reason why vanilla is the best seller.

Toys4RJill

Quality is subjective...people like certain things..... So is brand image. Some people would not be caught dead in an Acura, or Lexus nameplate and would rather have a Chevrolet or Dodge.. or Ford.....I highly doubt the long-term GM fan or the long term Ford fan will give the Palisade the thought...same guys will probably dismiss Toyota as well.

tex2670

Correct--the blindly brand loyalists are unlikely to give another brand a shot. It's no different than Chevy vs Ford. Or Honda vs. Toyota. If someone wants to rule out a good alternative to the car they are shopping for, that's their problem.

Quality is only partially "subjective". If anyone told me that an MB GL 450 was higher quality than a Chevy Traverse, I'd just think they were clueless. That's not subjective in any way, shape of form.

And someone who wouldn't be "caught dead" in an Acura because they prefer a Chevy or Dodge--that has zero to do with "quality" perceptions.

Toys4RJill

And so be it. A Chevrolet Traverse trumps all vehicles in the class for size. It has 98 cubic feet of space. The most when the 3rd row is up. Has quite a bit of horsepower over the Korean brands as well as Toyota. I think it is superior in EPA MPG but I am not sure. It also starts at less and tops out at more. Starts and less, tops at out more.

Quality is still subjective. Not everyone likes a Mercedes interior.

tex2670

You can not like something that is high quality. You are talking style, not quality. Style is 100% subjective.

Toys4RJill

Absolutely people can not like something that is high quality.

mmarshall

Gotta agree with Jill on this one. People often decide that they are going to go with certain nameplates or vehicle, despite how well or how poorly they are built, or what is perceived as quality. Emotion, like it or not, is a major element of many purchases or leases.

Toys4RJill

Glad you agree.
I will add, what is a poor material to may not be a poor material to someone else. Same for quality and value.

tex2670

I do too. Except she kept saying that "quality" was subjective, but the examples she kept citing to were of style issues, not quality issues.