Auto Show Hunters

[tpollauf]

The front seat is even still solid! No lardasses

You crack me up !!! Love it !!! Breate in ... Breathe out. You gotta be feeling pretty good by now. Thanks for sharing your thoughts AND most important, for the sake of this forum, THANKS for getting involved here at GenVibe.

[Bookworm]

The front seat is even still solid! No lardasses

You crack me up !!! Love it !!! Breate in ... Breathe out. You gotta be feeling pretty good by now. Thanks for sharing your thoughts AND most important, for the sake of this forum, THANKS for getting involved here at GenVibe.

Oh, I've been in and out of here for the last 12 years. I've also pointed other people here to get information on their car(s). There are still a lot of Vibe/Matrix(s) on the roads today, considering how "few" were made, compared to, say, Accords or Corollas.

[jamsandwich]

The 22 Cross is on the Toyota website, lists starting MSRP for the base at $22.5K, for the AWD at $26.3K. Exterior dimensions are really close to a Vibe, 169HP to a CVT, MPG (city/highway/combined) 2WD 31/33/32 AWD 29/32/30

I think they may be showing up locally soon, or may have already and then sold out, I'm not sure. It seems like it's a good size vs. the Vibe.

It always surprises me how big the Vibe is because I don't think it really looks it. Our neighbour has a CX-3 and at a quick glance it looks roughly the same size, but examining it closer, it seems like it's quite a bit smaller, at least in terms of usable interior space. So many of the vehicles I think might be comparable (Corolla Hatch), other various hatchbacks tend to disappoint.

If I recall correctly, the Vibe was even within spitting distance of the CX-5(!) when it came to seats-down cargo capacity.

[Bookworm]

Looking at the pictures, the Toyota Cross looks exactly like what the Matrix could have evolved to if they hadn't cut the line completely.

fender/wheel guards like the 2003 series. They lost the rear corner windows, but that's because of being forced to have the airbags back there. (It's amazing how they keep screaming "make them safer" and that involves removing the ability to -see-)

Rear door is higher, front grille is that weird huge nose I've been seeing on everything.

It does appear that the interior height, at least for the back, is MUCH shorter than the Vibe/Matrix. Seats are definitely fold-flat.

I guess I have a good idea of what to look for in two/three years when I'm ready for the next car.

Oh - I did come across a 1991 Tercel that was being sold for $1200. I was tempted - manual transmission, still running, parts are readily available and cheap, and you can even still buy interior carpet. Three years from now, my daughter's going to be doing her driver's ed.

[Caretaker]

after dumping Ford, Mazda focused heavily on their zoom-zoom concept. I wish they would now evolve from zoom-zoom to room-room. While they do make the most reliable cars and can compete with Kia for interior quality, I'm not going to shoehorn myself into one of them unfortunately. Huge center consoles, poor headroom and the aforementioned poor visibility out the C and rear windows are just not inviting to me.
Homer wants a hybrid Forester with a traditional shifting transmission, no leaky/sunbaked moonroof and no AWD. And is it too much to ask for brake lights that are bigger than the dime sized dots on the back of a Rav 4 to get the attention of the driver behind me playing Wordle on their phone? Herb, are you listening? Will you build this for me?

[jamsandwich]

Yeah, I may have mentioned it but we sat in the CX-5 and found the room so lacking that we didn't even bother driving it when we bought my wife's CR-V. I was really excited by the idea of the Mazda but in practice it just wasn't going to happen. The guy even opened up a CX-9 for us, and for something that is supposedly a whole class up, I'd say it was probably on par, in terms of capacity, with the Forester or CR-V, or really close to it.

I really dislike the "standard sunroof" that seems to be a thing on higher trims these days. In a RAV-4, the lost headroom basically makes it a non-starter for me.

I feel like in a few years, maybe something closer to an ideal car will be there for me... then again, maybe we're inching closer to being a one-car family. At any rate, I'm happy my wife loves the Honda. And the Vibe continues going strong for me, so I guess no major complaints here.

[Caretaker]

I was going down the highway when I saw these boomerang shaped daytime running lights in the parking lot of my closest Kia dealership. It stunned me for a second, but I was able to avoid an accident and pull in to the dealership. I was not aware that the new Sportage had been delivered. They told me it has been a few weeks now. I sat in the base model inside the dealership. Amazing vehicle, despite all the hard plastics in the base model. I actually had to put the driver's seat forward (just) a bit from its furthest position. I don't ever remember doing that in a vehicle. Even with the seat back, I had "Elantra Touring" like legroom in the back seat. The "flopping around room" for my legs in the driver's seat was satisfactory for such a large center console; not ideal, but satisfactory and MUCH better than the CX5. The storage area in the back is cavernous with easy levers to flip down the rear seats (which go all the way down even with the headrest attached and only graze the front seat backs as they fall). The side mirrors are huge. The seat comfort is typical firm Hyundai quality material. I told the salesman to email me when the hybrid version comes out, as well as the next Kia Niro. The negatives I noticed on the new Sportage are: 1. I didn't like the left arm resting position with the seat all the way back. 2. I didn't particularly like the arm reach to the steering wheel with my seat in the proper position. While I can grab the lower wheel just fine, the 10-2 position seemed to extend my arm to a place where it wouldn't stay there long in that position during a long drive. 3. there is no spare tire; only a run-flat kit. I'm sure the hybrid will be the same given the battery pack will be stored under the aft section. Anyway, the car is as impressive as the dozens of reviews I've watched on you tube.

[joatmon]

1. I admire your self control. A couple of years ago I started looking so that I'd be familiar with what was available, and bought something two months later. I guess the thought of a new car compelled me. Afraid of that, I haven't been paying a lot of attention to new models.

2. The redesigned KIA logo always makes me think of Nine Inch Nails

3. I have nothing productive to offer in this post. Guess that should have been said first

[Caretaker]

I think #1 and #2 are useful. I can't say enough how grateful I am to all those in India, South Africa and Australia for their YouTube posts, as they always seem to get releases of new models about a year before we do in the US. I watch hours of video of models I am interested in. One can't think of everything to look for when going into a dealer and sitting in a car for the first time so sometimes I bring notes with me from what I learned from the overseas videos. Many other times, multiple opinions of the same item (ie: seats were way too unsupportive, or automatically comes with a sunroof) help me to weed through the models or trims that I once was interested in but due to consensus among multiple testers/drivers, I can negate the models from my list.
It would be all too easy to simply park a new Sportage, Forester or Crosstrek in my driveway today. These are three outstanding vehicles. However, since I hate driving and will not suddenly love driving as I get older, long road trips are out, and with it, the need for a larger vehicle with huge trunk space. I have always driven Corollas in whatever iteration, and can't see me driving a larger vehicle now that there are 276 million registered cars on the road in the US. I have avoided hundreds of accidents due to driving small vehicles. With more distracted idiots, that makes collision avoidance even more imperative. As I've said before, if my Vibe died tomorrow, I'd be getting a Crosstrek Sport. I really want to see the 2023 offering however and avoid getting a 6 year old dated design. Ideally I will have a hybrid in my driveway as gas prices are likely to soar in the coming decade as oil finally gets the boot and electrification takes the stage.
Regarding the Kia logo, all I see is KN as in North Korea.

[Bookworm]

Just as an FYI - almost all cars now only come with a run flat kit, at best. It's a way for them to reduce curb weight (and save money).

I think that's part of the reason for all the hard plastics as well - they're eliminating as much metal that before would provide rigidity to softer materials.

[Caretaker]

I just got back from the Honda dealer where I had a nice test sit in the new HRV. The one they got in was an EX-L so the interior was nicely appointed with leather.

Pros:
1. VERY NICE car. The doors open and close like a more expensive vehicle
2. very good visibility out all of the windows.
3. very good view out the front overlooking the hood
4. flat floor folding rear seats providing for a very large storage area
5. excellent air conditioner diffusing in a FL sunbaked interior
6. large side mirrors
7. good leg room and arm reach to the steering wheel with the seat and wheel set all the way back
8. good/adequate leg room for the rear passenger with the driver's seat set all the way back

Negatives:
1. BIG negative: the General Manager doesn't believe Honda will be coming out with a hybrid version of this any time soon. Sorry, but this is 2022 and with gas heading towards $6 a gallon until the day we all drive electric vehicles, I'm not buying a 28 mpg gas powered vehicle. It's 40mpgs (hybrid) or nothing. My Vibe already gets 28 mpgs around town.
2. BIG negative: the stupid center console is sculpted but it (nor the door handle) does not allow for very good flopping around room. It was not the worst in the world, but it was bad enough for me to want to wait to see the next Kia Niro and Subaru Crosstrek
3. Regarding the center console, it was beautifully designed with a very impressive storage bin. However, as my leg was beating on it, I noticed that the console was shaking and was not very sturdy. It didn't promote confidence.
4. I don't like the "civic" vent diffuser look whereby it stretches the entire length of the dash. The air doesn't actually come out of the entire honeycombed diffuser so my biggest gripe is trying to clean the thousands of nooks of dirt/dust. I see it as a Q-tip nightmare.
5. The EX-L automatically comes with a moon roof. While the headroom was excellent and the moonroof did not make me feel claustrophobic, it is just another passageway for the hot FL sun to bake the interior. No thanks.

Overall, I think this new HRV is an absolute winner. I didn't drive it, but since it is a civic powerplant, I trust the driving dynamics are excellent. If I was in the market for an ICE car, I certainly would buy one, but only after visiting the nearby Subaru dealer and sitting in the Forester and Crosstrek one last time. I was very impressed to say the least. However, I still want to wait for more hybrid offerings and that elusive 40mpg.

[joatmon]

Good you got a chance to check one for fit. Also nice to have the luxury of time, being able to wait for one that checks all the boxes instead of having the pressure of an immediate need.

[Bookworm]

Just something to plug into your thinking about hybrids.

In general, hybrids can be great - for about 100,000 miles. After that, the hybrid systems start to break down, just like the ICE stuff starts needing more maintenance. Hybrid systems are like gasoline turbos - great in concept, terrible in practice, expensive as hell to replace/repair.

IMO, if you want to keep the car as long as these, either go all electric or ICE until the after-market hybrid parts market is solid.

[Caretaker]

you just made me go and read about 10 different articles from reputable automotive outlets. They say: "the batteries don't like cold; they don't like heat; they last from 80,000-200,000 miles"..................essentially, their longevity is very difficult to pin down. Oh, and there's this:

Electric vehicle fires
While hybrid and electric vehicles have become more common, existing data collection systems have not yet adequately captured the
frequency of fires involving these specific vehicles. In a recently published Fire Technology invited paper, Sun, Bisschop, Niu, and Huang provided a comprehensive overview of battery fires in electric vehicles. Most fire incidents involving battery electric vehicles or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles began in the battery power system. The battery system could, in terms of propulsion, be compared to gasoline capacity in internal combustion
engine vehicles (ICEVs). Electric vehicle (EV) fire risk increases with more batteries and with batteries containing more energy.
In addition to trauma from impact, batteries can be stressed by temperature extremes and fluctuations, heavy rain, overcharging, or
charging too quickly. Manufacturing and design issues can also play a role. As manufacturers increase the range of EVs by adding more
lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), the potential heat that could be released in a fire grows.

I think I'll walk for the next 15 years.

[Bookworm]

What you have to do is avoid the _car_ industry information about the batteries.

Here's the relative scoop on most well made lithium batteries.

1) Energy density is somewhat related to heat, but as long as you're not dying, they're not dying. If they get too cold (freezing and below) then the biggest problem is the electrolyte structure crystallizing (that's the best way I can put it)

2) A standard lithium-ion battery, that is LiPo and similar, has roughly 500 charge cycles before it starts to noticeably lose total energy capacity. Something constantly trickle charged may not show the effect as badly as something that gets discharged a decent amount regularly. So, if you have a car with a 200 mile range, and you drive 20 miles a day - don't charge it every night. Charge it once a week. That gives you a 60 mile buffer to use for the 'cool the battery' 'heat the battery' etc. A once a week charge would mean that you could get ten years of driving out of it before the battery shows significant wear. (theoretically)
At 1000 charge cycles, you're likely to be down to 50% of your original capacity.

3) Fires. This is usually a function of physical damage to one or more cells. That's why most of the batteries are built in 'blocks' of cells, which the system can isolate if they start getting unbalanced. (physical damage includes a cell going into reverse and being back charged, which makes it heat up rapidly - then pop. ) I'm not going to get into what kind of damage, because it's all over the place, based on the location of the battery. The ones that aren't physical damage, are caused by poor processing of the substrates, which happens in cheaper batteries.

4) Temperature. If you don't park your car on the street all day, in the sun or snow, and keep it in a garage or under cover most of the time, the temperature isn't as big of a deal on the electronics. This is also why even the EV's have coolant pumps and coolant. It's both for heating and cooling - of the batteries. You're a secondary consideration

Does that help?

Want a Tesla that lasts (well, at least, the battery lasts, the rest of it will rattle and fall apart) 10 years? Light driving, charge it slowly at night unless critically necessary, and do full discharge/recharge cycles. If you have an EV that you have to do 200 miles a day in, every day? You may be on the "replace the battery every two years" channel.

(Edit - forgot to explain why I know this thungas. I'm an IT consultant, and I've been working with tech batteries since phones still had lead acid and NiCd. That 286 laptop from my uncle was really interesting to take apart.)

[Caretaker]

4) Temperature. If you don't park your car on the street all day,

Are you kidding? My Vibe's radio blinks in and out from the searing FL sun. The radio looks like Carol Anne is inside sending me cryptic messages.
I use an external windshield cover to reflect as much light/heat before it enters the cabin. As for a garage, we've been happily renting for years now so no luxury of a two car garage for the foreseeable future.

Back to new car hunting.............. if you had not seen it, yesterday, Subaru formally put a stake in my heart by revealing that the new Crosstrek with the new, tall center infotainment center (now in most of their cars), and a removed emergency brake handle, will not be coming out this year. Their website (and Car and Driver) released the info on the Crosstrek's "new and improved" color for '23.

[Bookworm]

I've owned 7 vehicles in 35 years of driving, (one being a secondary 'spare' vehicle, so it doesn't count for years driven) and I've owned one new vehicle in that time. Of course, while I loved that 98 Kia Sportage, it had a failed manual transmission after the warranty gave out, and was never fixed properly - which messed my knee up, even now, 19 years later.

So, I'm not sure how good looking for a new car might be

[Caretaker]

Kia is absolutely "killing it" right now. The new Sportage is amazing; just too big for my needs. Kia is far outclassing Toyota as recently demonstrated with Toyota's painfully slow new offering, the Corolla Cross. The car is simply an insult to the Corolla nameplate. It is assembled with old but admittedly reliable components. Meanwhile, Honda comes out with the HRV at a time when gas is $6 a gallon and fails to offer a hybrid and fails to offer the Civic's stronger turbo engine. If it wasn't for Hyundai/Kia's Theta II engine embarrassments, there wouldn't even be a contest as to who's putting out the best product at the common-man's-price-point. If Subaru would just partner with Hyundai group instead of "stand still" Toyota, their extremely well design boxes would lead the way with some interiors that no longer look like they are from 10 years ago.
So yes, it is very frustrating looking for a car during this "just in time," no chip, True Car crappola dominated era.

[Bookworm]

I actually like the looks and specs on the Cross. Maybe it's because I don't need a fast car. Never have. Cars, to me, are tools. They should do the job you need them to do as best as possible, but there's no need to jazz them up any more than necessary - like jewelling a hammer, or gold plating a screwdriver (unless you're doing it as a corrosion inhibitor against hydrofluoric acid or something) (no, I don't understand most Tesla owners. They're really only great cars if your regular commutes are less than 60 miles in a day, but EXPENSIVE)

My father used to talk about Ford. Great engines, great transmissions, and can't put them together properly to save their lives. That seems to be how a lot of car companies are. The ones that make fantastic engines have hard times with everything else, and vice versa. Maybe if someone set an engine compartment _standard_, we could get vehicles where you could have a Subaru, Toyota, or Mazda engine in your car body. That, and they actually cough up the source code for the ECUs.

[Caretaker]

I certainly wish I could sit in a Cross, but being the buttheads Toyota dealers are, they won't even let you sit in one as they are all sold. I don't mind them not allowing us to drive someone's purchase, but sit in it? I went to Kia yesterday and they believe the Niro is still a few months away. These are the same dealers who were surprised to have the new Sportage offloaded on to their lots many weeks before they were expecting. Seems odd, as I would think they need purchase orders for any car on their lot. At $5 a gallon gas, I'm still holding out for a 53 mpg car. My Vibe's 28 mpg around town is just as good as any current Subaru or Toyota 30 mpg car. At nearly double the gas mileage with no plugging in to be had, if it fits my long legs, it likely will be ordered.

[Bookworm]

I know a little about the cars and how they're distributed. One customer was a 'pool' for several manufacturers. That is, they kept the heavy duty trucks on their lot, which would be sold through dealers. Most didn't have bodies on them, just the cab and frame. The dealer would only have one, for example, actually there on site. When one was sold, it was pulled from the pool at this customer, outfitted for sale, then the dealer would pick it up.

In the case of the automobiles, the salesmen don't necessarily know what's going to be available. The dealer has, roughly (and i'm somewhat guessing) slots for the amount of credit they get for cars from the manufacturer. that is, if they already have X million of inventory on the lot, they can't ask for more trucks until they've sold some of that inventory. Right now, the dealers are still taking any inventory they can get from the manufacturers; likely only the contact between the dealer and the manufacturer (and up) know what's likely to be coming, and mostly just a "We have 25 X allocated to your area. We can deliver 8 to you. yes or no?"

So, the cars on the lots aren't owned by the dealer. They're owned by the manufacturer until the dealer sells them, and the dealer pays a fee for the vehicles if they sit too long. That encourages the dealer to provide inventory turnover, even if they don't make a profit on the car.

[Caretaker]

Interesting. Then why the need for the dealer invoice? I always thought the dealers bought the cars from the manufacturer and financed them through the bank, kind of like when we "buy" a house, it is the bank that actually owns the house. The faster the dealership sells their vehicles, the lower the amount of loan interest they pay, and the longer the car sits on the lot, the more interest the dealer is paying to the bank; thus the urgent need to have sales, make deals and reduce their inventory.
In the years before I used my outstanding auto buying service in DC, I used to go in, demand to see the manager on duty and ask to see what they paid for the vehicle. I would offer them a reasonable profit depending on how long the vehicle resided on their lot, also reminding them that "Mr. Subaru" was going to cut them a nice holdback bonus at the end of the quarter/year as a result of the sale.

[Bookworm]

The dealer invoice _is_ what they pay, in most cases. In the case of the trucks from the 'pool', however, the 'pool' company got 'invoice', plus any overages for them sitting on the lot too long, and the fees for outfitting the trucks. (service body, booms, etc)

For the cars, just think of it as they're paying the manufacturers, but in many cases, they're "buying" them from their own lots, rather than buying them and having them shipped. Remember, as dealers, they're basically buying from the manufacturers anyway so it doesn't matter so much where they're stored. The manufacturer doesn't want to have them sitting on -their- property any longer than they have to.

I'm sure different dealers do it different ways. Some buy everything, some wait till they sell them, some have a mix. Without going and asking a liar.. I mean, the main manager for a stealership, it'd be hard to say.

[Caretaker]

Well guess who finally got to sit in a Corolla Cross. Yes it was the base model, but it at least gave me what I needed to determine if I should order up the hybrid version when it comes. Toyota just posted the hybrid on their corporate website this week. I would anticipate the hybrid to be coming to our shores at the beginning of next year. After sitting and poking around the car in the 100 degree heat, I immediately jumped back in my Vibe and went to the Subaru dealer to compare it to the Crosstrek (and then hopped in a Forester to do a Subaru to Subaru comparison).
The dimensions from Edmunds puts the Crosstrek one inch longer, and the Corolla Cross one inch higher and one inch wider.
My impressions:

Overall interior size perception: Despite the similar measurements, I felt VERY cramped in the Corolla Cross. This impression was immediate once I sat in the driver's seat and was confirmed and compounded the moment I got into the Crosstrek. Winner: Crosstrek

Driver comfort: The Corolla Cross' leg room for the driver was good, as was my steering wheel position (arm reach) with the seat all the way back. The leg room in the Crosstrek is excellent, as is the arm reach to the steering wheel. The flopping around room for the driver is much better in the Crosstrek, even with my leg hitting their stupid emergency brake handle. Winner: Crosstrek by a mile.

Front Passenger comfort: The Corolla Cross' design was such that I wouldn't want to spend a lot of time in either seat on a long trip. Winner: Crosstrek by a mile.

Rear Passenger comfort: I could BARELY wedge myself into the Corolla Cross' back seat with the driver's seat all the way back. The foot room was excellent, but the leg/knee room was appalling. A few minutes later when I jumped into the back seat of the Crosstrek, I enjoyed the comfort and the view. I didn't like the head clearance getting in/out of the back of the Crosstrek and wish the vehicle was a bit higher in overall height. I did forget to look to see if the Crosstrek had rear vents like the Corolla Cross does, but just from a seated comfort level.....Winner: Crosstrek by a mile

Side view: the mirrors on the Corolla Cross are VERY large. Winner: Corolla Cross by a mile

Other things: although it was the base model, the rear hatch on the Corolla Cross weighed about a million pounds. My god was it heavy. I can only hope that the LE and XLE have some kind of electric assist. I'm a very strong guy and it was not pleasant shutting that door. I had mentioned in an earlier post that the Corolla Cross has been dinged in the press for being assembled with "yesterday's" components; essentially an old new car. That is exactly the way the car presents itself inside. I felt like I was getting into a 15 year old model. Any Kia interior puts the Corolla Cross to shame. Moreover, I felt more roomy after getting back into my Vibe for the drive down to the Subaru dealer.

In the end: if you are short, you will have no problem enjoying the Corolla Cross but should wait for the hybrid because you'll get run over trying to get this anemic gas engine up to speed. The added hybrid in the coming months/year will be a game changer. HOWEVER...........while I was at Subaru, the "maybe he's smart, probably he's an idiot" sales manager (who was not a pimply kid by the way) told me that the word is a hybrid is on the way for the Crosstrek. I peppered him with questions after he made the statement, trying to determine if it was just the same old pathetic Subaru mild hybrid (plug in, yes plug in only) that they currently offer on the Crosstrek or was this some up to date Toyota-Subaru consortium hybrid that will give the Crosstrek some real added mpgs? He could not elaborate. I need to find someone who knows a Subaru engineer to determine what is actually coming down the pike in order to better assess whether I should patch up my old cars and wait for a real Crosstrek hybrid or settle for another gasoline only car.

[Bookworm]

I know a master service tech who, after 27 years, left Subaru two weeks ago. (former employee was placed as manager over him, extremely abusive, he was only the first who quit, three others have also quit. GM tried to offer him more money and NOT have that guy involved in his work, but the reply was "The guy's still there." )

I'll try to remember to ask him about hybrids. If anyone knows, he will.

[Caretaker]

thank you kindly. I'm sure there has to be more to the consortium than just the BRZ roadster. I just wrote John McElroy as well to get his thoughts on why manufacturers are not letting consumers know what is coming down the pike. I fully understand the old logic when lots were full of cars to sell, but now? You'll understand my perspective when you read my note to John. Should he reply, I'll repost the Q&A on this site. Should he not reply, I'll post the Q.

[Caretaker]

Here's what I got back from John McElroy. His usual sharp tongue humor and brilliant insight; the best in the business. His response had not even crossed my mind. My quip to him first:

Hello John and Sean,

Given our "just in time" and chip shortage auto production environment we are stuck in, it seems to me that auto manufacturers would now try to be a bit more forthcoming on any new technologies and models coming down the pike. Up until now, any potential buyer who has attempted to get answers from a dealership knows all too well that salespersons have never been told any information about upcoming models/designs because any honest dealership employee might feel compelled to tell the truth to an inquiring customer. In essence, if the dealer and staff are not told anything about the future, they cannot be put in a situation of holding back information about an upcoming model they may know about. Instead, dealers can steer the customer's question away from what is coming, to why they should buy a vehicle in their current inventory/lineup.
For an example, while there are little to no new Subaru vehicles on any dealer's lot, auto enthusiasts and the auto press know that Subaru has been consorting with Toyota on several upcoming models beyond just the BRZ. Rumor is that a "new" hybridization of Subaru models is on the way, presumably with a real "Prius-like" hybrid design and not the plug-in version currently found in the Subaru (Crosstrek) lineup.
While I completely understand the corporate logic of "don't tell the dealerships anything because it will result in lost sales," given that there are "no" cars on the lot for sale, it seems that maybe Subaru would want to broadcast what is coming down the pike. Why? Because at $5 a gallon for gas, and as an uninformed customer, I can only assume that Subaru will be offering me more of the same gas powered products in the future while at the same time, companies like Kia come out with a hybrid Sportage and soon the new Niro. Again, at $5 a gallon for gas, Subaru is going to lose my business to Kia who has and will have a 53 mpg hybrid. So to me, the manufacturer's old game plan of "know nothing because I tell them nothing" when there is a lot full of vehicles still to be sold may no longer apply in a "just in time" production environment, especially one that is coupled with a painfully expensive gas price environment.
Your thoughts?
My best to everyone on the Autoline team.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the feedback.

Keep in mind that the turn-over with sales people at car dealerships is horrific. Most last about 6 months and go somewhere else. So even if Subaru dealers told their sales people what’s coming up, half of them who knew it would be gone in just a matter of months.

John McElroy
www.Autoline.tv

[joatmon]

Insurance cost is something I always fail to consider when car shopping, but after reading this article, I think I'll add it as a decision factor

https://www.theautopian.com/progressive ... -to-steal/