balthazar

For trinacriabob ~ https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1976-pontiac-grand-lemans/

Thru September of '21, Chevrolet sold 24,803 Bolts. Thru November of '21, Ford sold 24,791 Mach-Es. Ford is expected to surpass Chevy here due to the temporarily-suspended production of the Bolt, but it's interesting that the oft-maligned Bolt is more popular than the Mach-E so far.

My 'family sedan' truck is 241". Of the 23 vehicles I've owned, only 2 were under 200"- the powertrain-less shell of a '63 Nova I flipped (183"), and a '95 Taurus wagon I got for my son to drive for a year & a half (193").

^ I guess; tho they're (7-series : 207") the size of mid-size cars of the pre-downsize era. Definitely holds true for the (commonly perceived as) mainstream brands tho. I suppose if I wish to be reasonable, cars over 200" could be considered 'full-size' by process of elimination.... but if we're sticking to the narrative that pickups & SUVs are the 'family sedans of yesterday', just over 207" is a compact. ?

You've all seen a pic of my very first car, taken this past June. October '21 marked 35 years under my ownership. Dropping the motor off to the rebuilder this weekend. There were a couple of serious prior contenders for my first car- a '59 Pontiac Catalina 4-dr flattop and a '63 Studebaker GT Hawk. I might include a '59 Eldorado Biarritz convertible, but the $1500 asking price was wildly out of my pocket's range, plus I was only 15 yrs old.

“Full-size now” is a marketing-based fallacy. There’s no full-sized sedans left, haven’t been for decades.

Prepare to be unnerved : https://aeon.co/videos/whats-it-like-to-chat-with-an-ai-that-mimics-you-uncanny-conversations-with-replika

194" is the exact same size as a Malibu.

NOW it’s not, but early this year/last year it WAS. And I shopped numerous dealers before buying. Last time I noticed a MA at my dealer was on a last gen Ford GT. It’s certainly possible that both of our experiences are accurate…

Dealer MA’s were never the norm outside of super-specialty models. I bought a well sought-after truck early this year for well under MSRP. NOW it’s a norm however.

That wasn't my example. I posted a hypothetical that a Mach-E with a $10 grand M.A. over MSRP is still coming in $6 grand under the Model Y. If the Mach-E is a better vehicle in many metrics (per some reviews), one would still be happy to pay less than a lesser SUV, right? Or to look at it another way; what if Ford is making $10 grand off the Mach-E at the base MSRP of $42.8K? Is Ford "being greedy"? Should it instead be $37.8K?? I'm having difficulty determining where your 'objection line' truly lies.

^ Dumb (but within their right). It's a better, and better built vehicle than the Tesla Model Y, another BE SUV that starts $16 grand higher. Even a M.A. of 10 grand on the Mach-E is still a great deal, no?

Pickings are razor thin right now. toyoter dealer nearby is down roughly 60% from normal, and half of what's on the lot looks pre-owned / off-brand. If you can wait, I'd recommend it. Or- order one if you want; from discussion with the sales dude, it seems ordered vehicles sidestep M.A. pricing. Look into it, get better pricing and the exact vehicle you want. Just don't expect a sub-MSRP number (but you've indicated you prefer paying MSRP, so that shouldn't be an issue for you).

https://www.barrons.com/articles/gm-posco-ev-battery-supply-partnership-51638381203?siteid=yhoof2

OEMs (almost always) maintain a set MSRP for the model year, and adjust rebates at the first of every month to adjust to market conditions. At least right there the buyer has a basis of comparison. When dealers invest in advertising & competition, that further exerts a small degree of price control in the local market. This all favors the consumer. In an OEM-controlled direct-sales model, there is nothing to stop the OEM from bumping MSRP monthly, because the OEM has zero competition (as with Tesla). I stated it here before; my local Buick-GMC dealer had a '21 Yukon Denali on the floor, with a $10K market adjustment. $83K > now $93K. I was told it was the last of 8 Yukons, and the other 7 all flew out the door, all with $10K M.A. on the sticker/no rebates. They had people buying them sight-unseen 4 states away. Buyers aren't walking away from these in this market. M.A. isn't something I would ever want to pay, either, but this IS an unprecedented market. Dealers charging M.A. are quite simply shifting their revenue to make up for major supply issues.

Never had any poor paint on GMs: '93, '98, '03, '04, '09', '16, '16, '21. Not to say -like you say olds; it didn't happen. - - - - - RE quality, also correct that every OEM has problems (well, I would hope at the price point that Rolls' are perfect). IMO tho, certain things 'cross that line' and permanently damage that OEM's image in my book. An example from the 'HTF Did That Possibly Happen?!?' chapter is a photo I saw of a Tesla body in the assembly plant, with a huge gapped crack at the base of the A-pillar... which had also been painted over. Can't fathom how an unstressed body shell could crack like that while still on the assembly line... and NOT get caught before paint. Actually, I'm not entirely certain it didn't make it all the way out the plant door like that. I think Tesla will survive long-term and one day become profitable overall. I'm not as sure that their quality will improve (and they definitely have real & numerous issues), but will give them the benefit of the doubt. Most customers seem OK, there are of course those that have been outraged; remember this international embarrassment?

Chinese automakers, in a nutshell :

I believe that's a Dodge St Regis, circa 1980. That quarter window treatment always was tragic.

'56 Lincoln ~

- - - - - - - - - - - DETROIT (Reuters) - Stellantis NV Chief Executive Carlos Tavares said external pressure on automakers to accelerate the shift to electric vehicles potentially threatens jobs and vehicle quality as producers struggle to manage the higher costs of building EVs. Governments and investors want car manufacturers to speed up the transition to electric vehicles, but the costs are "beyond the limits" of what the auto industry can sustain, Tavares said in an interview at the Reuters Next conference released Wednesday. "What has been decided is to impose on the automotive industry electrification that brings 50% additional costs against a conventional vehicle," he said. "There is no way we can transfer 50% of additional costs to the final consumer because most parts of the middle class will not be able to pay." Automakers could charge higher prices and sell fewer cars, or accept lower profit margins, Tavares said. Those paths both lead to cutbacks. Union leaders in Europe and North America have warned tens of thousands of jobs could be lost. Automakers need time for testing and ensuring that new technology will work, Tavares said. Pushing to speed that process up "is just going to be counter productive. It will lead to quality problems. It will lead to all sorts of problems," he said. Tavares said Stellantis is aiming to avoid cuts by boosting productivity at a pace far faster than industry norm. "Over the next five years we have to digest 10% productivity a year ... in an industry which is used to delivering 2 to 3% productivity" improvement, he said. "The future will tell us who is going to be able to digest this, and who will fail," Tavares said. "We are putting the industry on the limits." Electric vehicle costs are expected to fall, and analysts project that battery electric vehicles and combustion vehicles could reach cost parity during the second half of this decade. Like other automakers that earn profits from combustion vehicles, Stellantis is under pressure from electric vehicle maker Tesla Inc and other pure electric vehicle startups such as Rivian. The electric vehicle companies are far smaller in terms of vehicle sales and employment. But investors have given Tesla and Rivian higher market valuations than the owner of the Jeep SUV brand or the highly profitable Ram pickup truck franchise. That investor pressure is compounded by government policies aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union, California and other jurisdictions have set goals to end sales of combustion vehicles by 2035. The United Kingdom has set 2030 as the deadline for going all-electric. Tavares said governments should shift the focus of climate policy toward cleaning up the energy sector and developing electric-vehicle charging infrastructure. Stellantis, created in 2021 with the merger of French automaker Peugeot SA and Italian-American automaker Fiat Chrysler NV, is on track to deliver 5 billion euros in cost reduction through streamlining its operations, Tavares said. Tavares has accelerated Stellantis' electric vehicle development, committing 30 billion euros through 2025 to developing new electric vehicle architectures, building battery plants and investing in raw materials and new technology. On Tuesday, Stellantis said it had invested in solid-state battery startup Factorial alongside German automaker Daimler AG. "We can invest more and go deeper in the value chain," Tavares said. "There may be other (investments) in the near future." - - - - - - - - - - -

After 15 years of trying in vain, it took a national gas crisis for the japanese to rise above ‘niche segment’, and primarily because there were few significantly fuel-efficient US models. With established players a-plenty here now, there is no market void like in the ‘70s. Plus, the demographic that bought cheap, miserly cars then is gone. Gotta have those heated/cooled seats!!

Chinese makes have been attempting to gain access to the USDM but have failed numerous times (on a host of issues) to be OK’d. Do they fonally have their shit together??

Morgan Stanley industry forecast says Ford's BE percentage of all its sales in 2030 will only be 33.7%. That would represent 1.22 million BE Fords. Thru the 3rd quarter of 2021, Ford has sold 21K BE's.

That's a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of existing homes. - - - - - Here's the issue RE "64% believe it will have a positive effect on climate change". Automobiles are (reputedly) 29% (IIRC) of 'greenhouse gas' emissions. Selling 100% BE's in the U.S. will be on the order of 15 million (no evidence to suggest that consumers will switch en mass). But 15 million is only 0.05% of all vehicles in the U.S.. Therefore- the effect on climate change would be 5% of 29%... or; the net influence on climate change from automobiles would be maybe 1.5%. Yet we have 64% of this tiny sample of consumers thinking they'll see a change.