smk4565

Probably all true as far as parts go.

All of those concepts are ugly and what is with the flying buttress C-pillar on the Audi and the Cadillacs, looks chunky and heavy. As far as the active sphere goes, Audi definitely needs more crossover copes for active lifestyle people, I suggest they do a QC1, QC2, QC3, QC4, QC5, QC6, QC7, QC8, and QC9 so they can have 9 Q-coupe versions of their current Q suv's. This way they can have 18 SUVs each 3 inches and $3,000 different in price.

None of those cars listed can be considered reliable. Car and Driver did a long term test on the Guilia Quadrafolio and it was a maintenance nightmare. 2400 miles before the first break down, the rear diff needed replaced at 10,000 miles and it took 31 days to get one and that is before covid supply chain mess was a thing. In 14 months they had the car it spend 80 days out of commission, that's ridiculous. Every time a new Alfa comes out, they makes this "oh we fixed the reliability, it isn't like the old days" statement. Alfa also said they were going to sell 250,000 cars a year globally and they hit like 123,000 in 2019 and have dropped since. Now they say they'll sell 300,000 a year within 4-5 years. This is the biggest empty promise brand ever. I assume Dodge Hornet buyers will need to get to work, not sure what they'll do then their car breaks down and they have to wait 1 month to get parts from Italy. And I have seen worse with collision repairs, not uncommon to wait 6+ months for something like fenders or tailgates on a Jeep Renegade in the past year.

They said the Guilia was going to be reliable and not like Alfa's of the past, and it wasn't, likewise with the Stelvio, likewise with every Maserati currently on sale. I don't believe him for a second, and if they want to put their money where their mouth is, offer a better warranty than Hyundai or on these. They couldn't make a Guilia with a 2 liter turbo 4 reliable, which I think every car company on earth has a 2 liter turbo 4, that is like the most basic and common engine out there. Now they are going to go to a high boost 1.3 liter with an electric drivetrain mixed in, when they have zero history of hybrid powertrains, compared to Toyota who has 25 years of doing it. I don't trust it.

Ford was just ordered in court to pay $1.7 billion in damages for a F250 roof that collapse and killed the occupants. And Ford will appeal, and they’ll still F-series trucks, just like Toyota will keep selling. Toyota was the #1 selling brand in the USA and the world, the Corolla is the best selling car in the world with 1.15 million last year. They must be doing something right. And it isn’t like the Corolla is luxurious or sporty (save for the GR 300 hp version that wasn’t on sale last year). But they are reliable, they last, they are cheap to maintain and that’s what sells.

Exactly. All day long they are people that will pay near $20k for a 15-25 year old Land Cruiser and it’s Lexus twin. It’s not my cup of tea, but the cult following exists.

Probably make it a crossover coupe version of the Blazer EV. It can share parts with the Acura ZDX that's coming back, because yay, crossover coupes.

More power than a Model S Plaid? Or the 1200 hp Lucid? Horsepower doesn't really matter anymore, everything is fast, you can get a Kia that does 0-60 in 3.4 seconds for like $70k.

So I assume they will have to change this to a sedan for production, or do sedan and coupe versions, unless they have a different sedan coming later and the Charger is a coupe only for lower volume as they ramp up EV production. They don't mention power, range, battery size or anything, so I am guessing this is a good bit away from production still, maybe late 2024 as a 2025 model.

GM interiors may look good new, but in 5-10 years the leather will crack, their seat bolster foam gets squashed, the button get rubbed away so you can't tell what it is, etc. This is also my observation on current 10 year old GM interiors, so cars of the early 2010s, but the interiors are on those cars don't hold up, the resale value on them sucks, the rust proofing, the paint quality, doesn't hold up. Now maybe 2022 GM cars have fixed all the quality, but we won't know for 10 years. I agree the Lexus LX interior doesn't look good. But when it's 20 years old it will still be on the road and being sold on Bring a Trailer for $25k despite having 250,000 miles on it, vs a 20 year old Escalade or Grand Wagoner will be rusting in a junk yard. Toyota interiors I don't think are the best, but I think they are above average overall. My original point was they kill it on the reliability and resale and cost of ownership metrics, and that keeps buyers coming back. I think the Hornet interior is fine for the segment, I don't like the all black, but what they have there is on par for the segment.

I would agree on the new Canyon/Colorado vs the current Tacoma since the Tacoma is as ancient as the 4Runner, but they have a new one next year so we'll see what happens. The Tundra Capstone has the same leather from the Lexus LS, that's the best truck interior. I don't think Toyota/Lexus interiors are class leading by any means, but their cars are well built and hold up over time and the Rav4 has a better interior than an Escape or Equinox the Highlander is better than an Explorer/Traverse. Although I think Hyundai/Kia do a better interior than Toyota. The Enclave/Acadia/Traverse are bottom feeders of the 3 row SUV segment.

I just don't get how financially viable it is to have these brands with low volume, niche products like Dodge and Chrysler. The Charger/300/Challenger are dead after this year, the Durango if it isn't, will be dead soon (although they could do a Grand Cherokee clone for a new one). The 2024 Chrysler lineup is the Pacifica and the 2024 Dodge lineup is Hornet and maybe Durango. And the Charger EV and Airflow probably arrive in 2025. Doesn't seem like enough volume to justify either of those brands. Especially since over at Jeep they will fill any market segment they can. Toyota's interiors in general are better than GM, Ford or Stellantis in the same segment, with the exception being the 4Runner vs whatever you want to compare it to since that thing is so dated. And that isn't what they are selling on, it is the cost of ownership, dependability and resale value that sells them. A 10 year old Rav4 sells for about the same as a 10 year old Cadillac or Lincoln that probably cost twice as much when new. Look at prices of a 10 year old Dodge/Chrysler, they are just about worthless because of how they fall apart.

Toyota/Lexus are still the gold standard of cost of ownership and resale value in the eye of the consumer.

CX-30 I was thinking of. They have that in a turbo, and CX-50 I assume has a turbo. Mazda's product planning is stupid, just make more versions of the same SUVs, and try to pass it off as new product when that CX-5 has been on the market like 6 years with no change. Surprised that Hyundai doesn't have the 2.5 turbo in the Tucson since it is in the Santa Fe, but that is an easy add, and they have the Kona N. There is some performance small SUV's out there, but not a lot of volume out of them.

Going for sport should help the Hornet stand out. The GLA and X1 are in the low 6's 0-60 but also cost more. The Escape 2.0 turbo and the CX-3 Turbo and CX-5 Turbo would probably be in the ballpark of the Hornet. Just depends on how many buyers of small SUVs rank performance as their top attribute they are shopping for.

But will the Hornet get compared with the premium brands or the RAV4, CX-5 and Equinox that will be bigger and roomier perhaps for the same money. I don't think a car buyer is going to look at a GLA, a Q3 and a Dodge Hornet. Maybe Dodge against Ford and Chevy. The Equinox even after the refresh still seems boring and dated, the Escape is nothing good, CX-5 or RAV4 seem to be the better options and the Tucson seems pretty good.

My guess is people buying a Hornet will want a usable back seat.

The Compass is 173 inches long, the Tonale is 178, so I assume the Hornet is also. Escape and RAV4 are about 180 and Equinox is 183. An Encore GX is 171 inches long. The Hornet is probably sized how it is because the Alfa was sized against GLA/Q3/X1/X2 type cars. Since Alfa has the Stelvio as their X3/GLC rival, which would be Equinox size. Ok, I thought they maybe still had some. This list of eligible cars is going to change again in January, so I’m curious to see what drops off and what comes back. If a $7500 credit comes back for the Bolt then that’s the deal of the decade there.

I am sure it doesn’t go to zero but the Fusion Energi when off EV only mode got less mpg than a Fusion hybrid. The Volt was 42 mpg after you use up the electric range, a Camry hybrid is 50 mpg. It is also possible they went the PHEV route to get tax credits because under the old law the would have but now the Hornet won’t qualify. And 3 years ago when development started they would have had no idea the law would change on them.

I think it was eligible before, but Ford was about to run out of credits so tho are good to go now. Assuming their batteries have enough North American content to qualify.

Fuel economy might not be, but I'd question reliability and build quality. And a Rav4 hybrid or Prime could top this in fuel economy I'd guess, likewise with the Escape hybrid and PHEV. I get the use case for the PHEV, but most of those once the battery is depleted is less efficient than a regular hybrid because you are just carrying extra battery weight, plus you have the maintenance costs of 2 powertrains. I think just going all EV makes more sense. And I'd guess the price is $29,900 and Destination is like $1500. Dodge and Jeep like to do crap like that for advertising purposes. And you can raise it a year later, that "under $40k" F150 Lightning lasted like 3 months, now it is like $49k for the base model with destination. Dodge has always had to rely on rock bottom price to sell, as you pointed out with the Journey, this thing will be Cadillac XT4 pricing with 1 option package. Risky strategy by them to go up market, especially given how Alfa Romeo is bombing.

They need a small crossover since that is the #1 segment, but there are also like 20 vehicles in this segment. You have to be there but it is crowded space, going with a performance angle at least lets them stand out. I feel like Alfa Romeo and Dodge SUVs aren't really what a lot of people are looking for though and I wouldn't trust reliability of this compared to a Rav4 or CR-V. In the launch presentation the head of Dodge mentions people in this segment shop fuel economy, value, practicality, etc and how that's boring and Dodge will sell performance and attitude, etc. But people paying $30k for a car are usually more on a budget and won't buy a car that sucks gas or has costly maintenance repairs.

I don’t count plug in hybrid as EV and that’s what Stellantis has.

They have the same lithium ion batteries and radial flux motors that Tesla and everyone uses. When they get the silicon anode batteries and axial flux motors it is said they will get 20-40% more energy density and power over the current offerings.

Looks kind of like a Kia EV6 with a Chevy front end. Still 3 years away and who knows what their production volume will be. Nothing really new here, what would be ground breaking in the EV segment is to have vehicles in dealer lots rather than this order now and get it in 6-8 months model that exists now. Also not sure Stellantis even has a level 2 system so promising level 3 is big step.