On 9/24/2015 3:31 PM, Frank wrote:

snip

I have it on good authority that my Subaru dealer makes more money off
of selling used Subaru's than he does new ones.

Subaru and Lexus had the highest resale values across the entire line
for 2015.

Used cars have been more profitable for many dealers than new cars for a
long time. Not just because naive buyers drive up the cost of used cars
but because the dealer is more likely to be able to sell an extended
warranty.

For 2014, four of the the top ten vehicles for resale value were
Toyotas, with the #1 model retaining 70% of its value after five years.
And that's 70% of MSRP, not 70% of the street price. Toyota's typically
sell for 10-20% under MSRP, so the percentages are actually much higher.

Toyota keeps saying that they want to stop the big promotions that lead
to such a big disparity between MSRP and ASP (average selling price) but
they never seem to be able to have the will to achieve it because it
would mean reducing production. It's like oil producing companies saying
that they need to cut production to keep prices higher, they don't do it
because they don't want to lose market share and because even at $40 per
barrel oil is enormously profitable once you've paid for all the
infrastructure.

I also think that keeping high MSRPs is partly political. If they
reduced the MSRP and reduced promotions then they would come under
attack by the government (even though they make a large percentage of
their vehicles in the U.S.).

I also get new at under invoice.

Does anyone pay over invoice?

One relative bought a Camry when there were three separate incentives
going at the same time. $2000 factory to buyer, $1000 for current Toyota
owners, and $500 for cash instead of 0% financing. And that was in
addition to the discounted price from the dealer through USAA (generally
better than the Costco discounts).

On 9/25/2015 8:59 AM, sms wrote:

I also think that keeping high MSRPs is partly political. If they reduced the
MSRP and reduced promotions then they would come under attack by the government
(even though they make a large percentage of their vehicles in the U.S.).

There is also a *perception* issue with buyers! Most people can't place
a "value" on *anything*. So, count on SOMEONE to do that for them.
They then look at everything RELATIVE to this initial price point
(there's a wealth of information on this! fascinating reading!!).

So, if you tell them something is worth $X, they are more likely to pay
CLOSE TO $X for that item -- than if you had told them it is worth $Y
(YX).

And, folks tend to *think* an $X product is *better* than a $Y product.
They simply don't have the skills to be able to decide (independant of
that initial setting of the price point) the actual value of *either*
product!

A firm that I worked at sold a $30,000 device -- in very small quantities
(dozens annually). The cost to build (DM+DL) was very close to that
figure! Perhaps $5,000 in "profit"?

I came up with a more modern design that cut the cost to *$500*. I pitched
my design stating: "We can sell it for $10,000 -- make *twice* the profit
that we are currently making, probably sell twice as many (customers
could AFFORD to buy a SPARE to have on hand -- and still have spent
LESS than that original $30,000) -- which means we'd make *four*
times the profit we are currently making!"

Yet, management and sales were scared that customers would see this as
"cheaper" (lower quality) than the existing, more expensive, less profitable
product. We had "set" the price point in the customers' minds and
expended considerable effort JUSTIFYING it over the years. How could we
suddenly say, "here's a smaller, less expensive way of solving the EXACT SAME
PROBLEM" after having convinced them that they *needed* to spend $30,000
for the solution?

On 9/25/2015 11:59 AM, sms wrote:
On 9/24/2015 3:31 PM, Frank wrote:

snip

I have it on good authority that my Subaru dealer makes more money off
of selling used Subaru's than he does new ones.

Subaru and Lexus had the highest resale values across the entire line
for 2015.

Used cars have been more profitable for many dealers than new cars for a
long time. Not just because naive buyers drive up the cost of used cars
but because the dealer is more likely to be able to sell an extended
warranty.

For 2014, four of the the top ten vehicles for resale value were
Toyotas, with the #1 model retaining 70% of its value after five years.
And that's 70% of MSRP, not 70% of the street price. Toyota's typically
sell for 10-20% under MSRP, so the percentages are actually much higher.

Toyota keeps saying that they want to stop the big promotions that lead
to such a big disparity between MSRP and ASP (average selling price) but
they never seem to be able to have the will to achieve it because it
would mean reducing production. It's like oil producing companies saying
that they need to cut production to keep prices higher, they don't do it
because they don't want to lose market share and because even at $40 per
barrel oil is enormously profitable once you've paid for all the
infrastructure.

I also think that keeping high MSRPs is partly political. If they
reduced the MSRP and reduced promotions then they would come under
attack by the government (even though they make a large percentage of
their vehicles in the U.S.).

I also get new at under invoice.

Does anyone pay over invoice?

One relative bought a Camry when there were three separate incentives
going at the same time. $2000 factory to buyer, $1000 for current Toyota
owners, and $500 for cash instead of 0% financing. And that was in
addition to the discounted price from the dealer through USAA (generally
better than the Costco discounts).

I have to admit that I have not bought a new car in years.

My brother worked for car dealers all his life and is now retired but
had funny stories like the guy that priced a vehicle on the internet and
insisted that they sell to him at his price. Brother said OK but told
me he would have sold it cheaper if the guy had bargained with him.

Did see a friend go through this recently with a new GM vehicle and
there were several discounts like this and it seemed like a good deal
but I think he may have been screwed on the trade in where he got
practically nothing.

Probably a good idea to sell your used vehicle yourself and separate the
deals from used cars and financing.

On 9/25/2015 8:04 AM, Muggles wrote:
With the prices of new Beetles, I can't really afford one right now, but
if the prices of used (automatic - not diesel) Beetles come down I may
easily be able to afford one of those.

Is the problem being discussed with VW only with diesels? I haven't
read every post on the subject and could have missed that detail.

Only diesels (currently -- and probably that's as far as it will
go *at* VW). You'll have to see how "stupid" people are in sorting
out that distinction, going forward.

As a single data point (with all that implies!), note that we had a
neighbor with a "new bug" some years back. It was always in the
shop (though I have no idea what the problems were -- these folks
don't do any of their own maintenance... so, it could have been
"replacing windshield wiper blades"!). They traded it out pretty
early...

Why the attraction to a bug? (I can see a *classic* just for
nostalgia -- surely not SAFETY! : ) Are you looking for
small? Fuel efficient? Cute? etc.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 07:40:11 -0400, Consumer
wrote:

If you are able to make all your own car repairs, buying a used car might be the most economical solution.

But, if you depend on auto repair shops, a used car can be more expensive over time.
Have a break-down 500 miles from home and you'll see what I mean.

Me, I buy new plain-Jain cars, keep them until the mfg warranty runs out, then buy another new one.
What repairs? I had more "repairs" to my one-and-only new car in the
first 6 months than on my last 2 used cars over 3 years - and they
were both 10 years old or older when purchased.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 07:05:48 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/24/2015 6:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/24/2015 6:31 PM, Frank wrote:

I have it on good authority that my Subaru dealer makes more money off
of selling used Subaru's than he does new ones.

I also get new at under invoice.

I've heard that from a couple of local dealers. They like selling used.

The big win for the dealer on "new" is that they are more likely
to CONTINUE to encounter those customers in their service departments!

No, the big win for the new car dealer is the profit they will make on
the trade-in. Generally speaking at least twice the profit they make
on the new car.

Last used car I bought was in the 1980's. I never found them to be a good
value with the miles I dreive.

My attitude wrt used has always been: I've *got* a used car. I know
exactly how it has been driven, maintained, likely expectations of
future reliability and costs, etc. Why should I swap this for some
OTHER car whose background is a complete mystery?

I only get rid of "my" used cars when I KNOW they are going to start
getting expensive, or they are no longer meeting my requirements (I
sold my PT Cruiser to buy a pickup truck because the back of the
cruiser was ALWAYS full of stuff and I virtually never used the back
seat).

When we replaced our 13 yo vehicle, recently, we had several friends
willing to buy the old one from us. But, avoided that option: no
desire to have them "revisiting the well" some time down the road
when something went wrong and they magically felt *we* should
be responsible for it...
Neighbor arond the corner had been "jonesing" for a PT for a while
and jumped on mine as soon as I put it up for sale. 3 years and no
complaints from the neighbour.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:33:03 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 9/25/2015 7:40 AM, Consumer wrote:


Me, I buy new plain-Jain cars, keep them until the mfg warranty runs
out, then buy another new one.


I do that but I like all the goodies. I have the Limited with every
option.
And I buy 'em when you are finished.
One car I bought sold new for 38,000. I bought it 6 years old for
$5000 and sold it 12 yars later for $1700. Total mechanical repairs up
to 240,000km was less than $3000, and about halt that was "normal wear
and tear" items. For an 18 year old car it was in pretty good
condition - but not as good as my current 20 year old pickup. (The
truck is a Ford - the car was a Chrysler)

On 9/25/2015 9:50 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 07:05:48 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/24/2015 6:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/24/2015 6:31 PM, Frank wrote:

I have it on good authority that my Subaru dealer makes more money off
of selling used Subaru's than he does new ones.

I also get new at under invoice.

I've heard that from a couple of local dealers. They like selling used.

The big win for the dealer on "new" is that they are more likely
to CONTINUE to encounter those customers in their service departments!

No, the big win for the new car dealer is the profit they will make on
the trade-in. Generally speaking at least twice the profit they make
on the new car.

There's no guarantee that there *will* be a trade-in. Or, that the trade in
will have any appreciable resale value. (car before last was traded in
needing some significant repairs; a dealer would have had to invest a
fair bit to get it roadworthy, etc.)

On 9/25/2015 9:14 AM, Frank wrote:
On 9/25/2015 11:59 AM, sms wrote:
One relative bought a Camry when there were three separate incentives
going at the same time. $2000 factory to buyer, $1000 for current Toyota
owners, and $500 for cash instead of 0% financing. And that was in
addition to the discounted price from the dealer through USAA (generally
better than the Costco discounts).

I have to admit that I have not bought a new car in years.

My brother worked for car dealers all his life and is now retired but had funny
stories like the guy that priced a vehicle on the internet and insisted that
they sell to him at his price. Brother said OK but told me he would have sold
it cheaper if the guy had bargained with him.

Did see a friend go through this recently with a new GM vehicle and there were
several discounts like this and it seemed like a good deal but I think he may
have been screwed on the trade in where he got practically nothing.

Probably a good idea to sell your used vehicle yourself and separate the deals
from used cars and financing.

Yup. Trade and other "financing" issues should be negotiated separately
from the sale price. Dealer has too much "wiggle room" when you lump all
the into the same transaction.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:40:37 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 9:23:41 AM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 9/24/2015 9:48 AM, Muggles wrote:

As others point out, VW is in a heap of trouble and probably best avoided.

I've been wanting to buy a VB Beetle, but not a new one. Are the older
models (by a few years) a bad idea, too?

"older models (by a few years)" is still a "new" (redesigned, not "classic")
beetle, right?

The cars named in the recent disclosure are sure to take a hit -- in the
short term and possibly even longer. A lot will depend on the sort of
fix that VW puts forward and how it affects the perceived value of those
vehicles. My hunch is that any *cheap* fix (e.g., a software upgrade)
will result in a vehicle's performance falling below what their owners
(and prospective resale owners) would be happy with.

[If this is NOT the case, then why would VW have shot itself in the
foot so forcefully? Their actions suggest that strict compliance with
the letter of the law would have affected fuel efficiency or overall
performance in a way that would have caused potential buyers to "look
elsewhere"]

How much spillover to other models NOT named is up for debate. Note
BMW already took some heat over *suspicion* that they might be
similarly cheating (no evidence to suggest this!).

People who are fearful by nature will probably lump all VW products
into that category; perhaps even all diesel offerings there *and*
from other vendors.

If your question concerns your potential *exposure* if you opt to
purchase a used bug, I'd not be too concerned. OTOH, if you were
wondering how this would affect the purchase price of said bug,
it will depend on how much fear-mongering the media heaps on
others "competing" for that used vehicle that *you* want.

Craigslist reports that prices for used VW's are already down ~20%.
VW is expected to have a drop in sales for the month of Sept
while most other automakers are posting *record* sales figures.
How long that persists is anybody's guess...

The book,"Unsafe at Any Speed" killed the Chevrolet Corvair and even when GM redesigned the rear suspension, as I read in a car magazine, so it was more advance than that on the Corvette, it was too late and sales declined until the car was discontinued. It's a very interesting story about GM upper level management ignoring the safety concerns of suspension engineers. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Car Monster
The book "unsafe at any speed" did NOT kill the Corvair. It actually
prolonged it's life. What killed the Corvair was the Camaro. It was a
LOT cheaper to build, and could command a higher price, so more
profit. GM hung on with the corvair untill 1969 - 2 or 3 years after
bringing out the Camaro -

Unsafe at any speed was published in 1965, after the "problem" with
the corvair had already been solved in production.. (1964 was the last
year of "first generation" Corvairs with the same rear suspension
geometry as the VW and Porsche of the same time period.) The 1965 to
69 Corvairs shared the same rear suspension geometry as the Corvette.

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 12:06:49 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:40:37 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 9:23:41 AM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 9/24/2015 9:48 AM, Muggles wrote:

As others point out, VW is in a heap of trouble and probably best avoided.

I've been wanting to buy a VB Beetle, but not a new one. Are the older
models (by a few years) a bad idea, too?

"older models (by a few years)" is still a "new" (redesigned, not "classic")
beetle, right?

The cars named in the recent disclosure are sure to take a hit -- in the
short term and possibly even longer. A lot will depend on the sort of
fix that VW puts forward and how it affects the perceived value of those
vehicles. My hunch is that any *cheap* fix (e.g., a software upgrade)
will result in a vehicle's performance falling below what their owners
(and prospective resale owners) would be happy with.

[If this is NOT the case, then why would VW have shot itself in the
foot so forcefully? Their actions suggest that strict compliance with
the letter of the law would have affected fuel efficiency or overall
performance in a way that would have caused potential buyers to "look
elsewhere"]

How much spillover to other models NOT named is up for debate. Note
BMW already took some heat over *suspicion* that they might be
similarly cheating (no evidence to suggest this!).

People who are fearful by nature will probably lump all VW products
into that category; perhaps even all diesel offerings there *and*
from other vendors.

If your question concerns your potential *exposure* if you opt to
purchase a used bug, I'd not be too concerned. OTOH, if you were
wondering how this would affect the purchase price of said bug,
it will depend on how much fear-mongering the media heaps on
others "competing" for that used vehicle that *you* want.

Craigslist reports that prices for used VW's are already down ~20%.
VW is expected to have a drop in sales for the month of Sept
while most other automakers are posting *record* sales figures.
How long that persists is anybody's guess...

The book,"Unsafe at Any Speed" killed the Chevrolet Corvair and even when GM redesigned the rear suspension, as I read in a car magazine, so it was more advance than that on the Corvette, it was too late and sales declined until the car was discontinued. It's a very interesting story about GM upper level management ignoring the safety concerns of suspension engineers. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Car Monster
The book "unsafe at any speed" did NOT kill the Corvair. It actually
prolonged it's life. What killed the Corvair was the Camaro. It was a
LOT cheaper to build, and could command a higher price, so more
profit. GM hung on with the corvair untill 1969 - 2 or 3 years after
bringing out the Camaro -

Unsafe at any speed was published in 1965, after the "problem" with
the corvair had already been solved in production.. (1964 was the last
year of "first generation" Corvairs with the same rear suspension
geometry as the VW and Porsche of the same time period.) The 1965 to
69 Corvairs shared the same rear suspension geometry as the Corvette.

Sales for the Corvair fell even after the suspension problem was addressed. I think they're pretty neat little cars but it's been generally accepted that Ralph Nader was instrumental in the demise of the little car. ^_^

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevro...#Legal_fallout

[8~{} Uncle Unsafe Monster

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 09:58:58 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/25/2015 9:50 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 07:05:48 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/24/2015 6:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/24/2015 6:31 PM, Frank wrote:

I have it on good authority that my Subaru dealer makes more money off
of selling used Subaru's than he does new ones.

I also get new at under invoice.

I've heard that from a couple of local dealers. They like selling used.

The big win for the dealer on "new" is that they are more likely
to CONTINUE to encounter those customers in their service departments!

No, the big win for the new car dealer is the profit they will make on
the trade-in. Generally speaking at least twice the profit they make
on the new car.

There's no guarantee that there *will* be a trade-in. Or, that the trade in
will have any appreciable resale value. (car before last was traded in
needing some significant repairs; a dealer would have had to invest a
fair bit to get it roadworthy, etc.)
"on the average" new cars get traded every 3-5 years. "On the
average" the trade-ins are in pretty good shape. This fom my 25 years
experience in the "business" - 10 of them as dealer service manager.

Also, "on the average" the dealer "steals" the trade-in.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:00:52 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/25/2015 9:14 AM, Frank wrote:
On 9/25/2015 11:59 AM, sms wrote:
One relative bought a Camry when there were three separate incentives
going at the same time. $2000 factory to buyer, $1000 for current Toyota
owners, and $500 for cash instead of 0% financing. And that was in
addition to the discounted price from the dealer through USAA (generally
better than the Costco discounts).

I have to admit that I have not bought a new car in years.

My brother worked for car dealers all his life and is now retired but had funny
stories like the guy that priced a vehicle on the internet and insisted that
they sell to him at his price. Brother said OK but told me he would have sold
it cheaper if the guy had bargained with him.

Did see a friend go through this recently with a new GM vehicle and there were
several discounts like this and it seemed like a good deal but I think he may
have been screwed on the trade in where he got practically nothing.

Probably a good idea to sell your used vehicle yourself and separate the deals
from used cars and financing.

Yup. Trade and other "financing" issues should be negotiated separately
from the sale price. Dealer has too much "wiggle room" when you lump all
the into the same transaction.
The easiest $800 my dad ever made was when he went to deal the
Chrysler wagon on the REbel wagon. They were going to give him $200 on
the trade. Dad said "no dice - I'll keep the Chrysler" then went on to
negotiate the best price on the Rebel. After signing the deal and
putting down his deposit, he said "Now who wants to buy my Chrysler".
The dealer principal walked in, looked at it, and asked Dad for the
keys. Dad threw him the keys and said "don't let it get away from
you".

There was a cloud of tire smoke and 2 strips of rubber 8 1/2 inches
wide down the street from the old 413. The dealer principal came back
and offered Dad $1000 on the spot. Of course, he took it!!!

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:53:39 -0400, wrote:

Also, "on the average" the dealer "steals" the trade-in.

Correct. Never offer a trade-in. Friend of my wife walked away,
keeping her car and sold it to my wife for cash. Still below blue
book, but better than the dealer offered.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:22:30 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 12:06:49 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:40:37 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 9:23:41 AM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 9/24/2015 9:48 AM, Muggles wrote:

As others point out, VW is in a heap of trouble and probably best avoided.

I've been wanting to buy a VB Beetle, but not a new one. Are the older
models (by a few years) a bad idea, too?

"older models (by a few years)" is still a "new" (redesigned, not "classic")
beetle, right?

The cars named in the recent disclosure are sure to take a hit -- in the
short term and possibly even longer. A lot will depend on the sort of
fix that VW puts forward and how it affects the perceived value of those
vehicles. My hunch is that any *cheap* fix (e.g., a software upgrade)
will result in a vehicle's performance falling below what their owners
(and prospective resale owners) would be happy with.

[If this is NOT the case, then why would VW have shot itself in the
foot so forcefully? Their actions suggest that strict compliance with
the letter of the law would have affected fuel efficiency or overall
performance in a way that would have caused potential buyers to "look
elsewhere"]

How much spillover to other models NOT named is up for debate. Note
BMW already took some heat over *suspicion* that they might be
similarly cheating (no evidence to suggest this!).

People who are fearful by nature will probably lump all VW products
into that category; perhaps even all diesel offerings there *and*
from other vendors.

If your question concerns your potential *exposure* if you opt to
purchase a used bug, I'd not be too concerned. OTOH, if you were
wondering how this would affect the purchase price of said bug,
it will depend on how much fear-mongering the media heaps on
others "competing" for that used vehicle that *you* want.

Craigslist reports that prices for used VW's are already down ~20%.
VW is expected to have a drop in sales for the month of Sept
while most other automakers are posting *record* sales figures.
How long that persists is anybody's guess...

The book,"Unsafe at Any Speed" killed the Chevrolet Corvair and even when GM redesigned the rear suspension, as I read in a car magazine, so it was more advance than that on the Corvette, it was too late and sales declined until the car was discontinued. It's a very interesting story about GM upper level management ignoring the safety concerns of suspension engineers. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Car Monster
The book "unsafe at any speed" did NOT kill the Corvair. It actually
prolonged it's life. What killed the Corvair was the Camaro. It was a
LOT cheaper to build, and could command a higher price, so more
profit. GM hung on with the corvair untill 1969 - 2 or 3 years after
bringing out the Camaro -

Unsafe at any speed was published in 1965, after the "problem" with
the corvair had already been solved in production.. (1964 was the last
year of "first generation" Corvairs with the same rear suspension
geometry as the VW and Porsche of the same time period.) The 1965 to
69 Corvairs shared the same rear suspension geometry as the Corvette.

Sales for the Corvair fell even after the suspension problem was addressed. I think they're pretty neat little cars but it's been generally accepted that Ralph Nader was instrumental in the demise of the little car. ^_^

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevro...#Legal_fallout

[8~{} Uncle Unsafe Monster
The sales of the Corvair dropped significantly just after September
1966, when the new Camaro came out. It was less expensive and was
available with the VERY healthy 302 Z28 option - which took a lot of
sales from the Turbocharged Monza..

On 9/25/2015 9:50 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 07:05:48 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 9/24/2015 6:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/24/2015 6:31 PM, Frank wrote:

I have it on good authority that my Subaru dealer makes more money off
of selling used Subaru's than he does new ones.

I also get new at under invoice.

I've heard that from a couple of local dealers. They like selling used.

The big win for the dealer on "new" is that they are more likely
to CONTINUE to encounter those customers in their service departments!

No, the big win for the new car dealer is the profit they will make on
the trade-in. Generally speaking at least twice the profit they make
on the new car.

Do people still trade in their old cars? Here they sell them on
craigslist or on one of those lots where you pay a fee to put the car there.

I found it amusing that the Toyota dealer is pushing a third year of
prepaid service on new cars that already come with two years. The thing
is that the only real service that is needed during that time is an oil
change every 10,000 miles. They kept repeating, "it uses synthetic oil
which is expensive."

On 09/25/2015 08:23 AM, Don Y wrote:
The cars named in the recent disclosure are sure to take a hit -- in the
short term and possibly even longer. A lot will depend on the sort of
fix that VW puts forward and how it affects the perceived value of those
vehicles. My hunch is that any *cheap* fix (e.g., a software upgrade)
will result in a vehicle's performance falling below what their owners
(and prospective resale owners) would be happy with.

My impression is the problem is with the diesels, with about 450,000 in
the US. I can't find a breakdown but I don't think they've sold that
many New Beetles so I assume the bulk of the TDIs are in Jettas followed
by Golfs.

Europe is where it will get ugly.

On 09/25/2015 09:04 AM, Muggles wrote:
With the prices of new Beetles, I can't really afford one right now, but
if the prices of used (automatic - not diesel) Beetles come down I may
easily be able to afford one of those.

Is the problem being discussed with VW only with diesels? I haven't
read every post on the subject and could have missed that detail.

Yes, it's the TDI diesel. The market is unpredictable but I don't see
why that would impact the gas engine models, which are the majority in
the US market.

All the manufacturers game the system, VW was just a little sneakier.
Despite all the whining at least VW didn't kill anybody, unlike
Government Motors ignition switches or the lowest bidder exploding airbags.

On 9/25/2015 7:15 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 09/25/2015 08:23 AM, Don Y wrote:
The cars named in the recent disclosure are sure to take a hit -- in the
short term and possibly even longer. A lot will depend on the sort of
fix that VW puts forward and how it affects the perceived value of those
vehicles. My hunch is that any *cheap* fix (e.g., a software upgrade)
will result in a vehicle's performance falling below what their owners
(and prospective resale owners) would be happy with.

My impression is the problem is with the diesels, with about 450,000 in the US.
I can't find a breakdown but I don't think they've sold that many New Beetles
so I assume the bulk of the TDIs are in Jettas followed by Golfs.

Europe is where it will get ugly.

Yup. The fallout here will be "by association"... folks ignorant of
details and just seizing on the words "VW" and "cheating".

You also have a lot more voices and axes to grind in Europe. Lots
of "officials"/politicians to answer to -- and folks who want to
make political hay of this sort of thing.

If I was running the show, I'd go out of my way to *quickly* clean house
and uncover and disclose EVERYTHING that MIGHT be pertinent. I'd even
publish the source code so third parties could examin it to identify
the extent of the "problem" as well as being able to "rebuild it"
(i.e., take a blank ECU and install software that is, theoretically,
identical to the software described in the source code listings to
PROVE that the source code tells the entire story).

Yeah, this is considered trade secret material. But, your pants are
down around your ankles, time to suck it up and take your medicine!
(other car manufacturers undoubtedly have the essence of any of
the *legitimate* algorithms already sorted out... you're not really
giving away much other than your pride -- which you already
lost when you committed/admitted the offense!) Get it over and
done with. Don't give anyone the opportunity to claim you should
have been *more* open ("Hey, we gave you the source code, what more
do you want??")

On 09/25/2015 02:34 PM, sms wrote:
Do people still trade in their old cars? Here they sell them on
craigslist or on one of those lots where you pay a fee to put the car
there.

I loathe selling stuff so if I don't trade a car in it usually becomes a
'free to a good home' deal. I tend to buy new cars and drive them until
they die so the question hasn't come up too often. The F150 I bought in
'86 is still in the driveway.

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 3:01:38 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:22:30 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 12:06:49 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:40:37 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 9:23:41 AM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 9/24/2015 9:48 AM, Muggles wrote:

As others point out, VW is in a heap of trouble and probably best avoided.

I've been wanting to buy a VB Beetle, but not a new one. Are the older
models (by a few years) a bad idea, too?

"older models (by a few years)" is still a "new" (redesigned, not "classic")
beetle, right?

The cars named in the recent disclosure are sure to take a hit -- in the
short term and possibly even longer. A lot will depend on the sort of
fix that VW puts forward and how it affects the perceived value of those
vehicles. My hunch is that any *cheap* fix (e.g., a software upgrade)
will result in a vehicle's performance falling below what their owners
(and prospective resale owners) would be happy with.

[If this is NOT the case, then why would VW have shot itself in the
foot so forcefully? Their actions suggest that strict compliance with
the letter of the law would have affected fuel efficiency or overall
performance in a way that would have caused potential buyers to "look
elsewhere"]

How much spillover to other models NOT named is up for debate. Note
BMW already took some heat over *suspicion* that they might be
similarly cheating (no evidence to suggest this!).

People who are fearful by nature will probably lump all VW products
into that category; perhaps even all diesel offerings there *and*
from other vendors.

If your question concerns your potential *exposure* if you opt to
purchase a used bug, I'd not be too concerned. OTOH, if you were
wondering how this would affect the purchase price of said bug,
it will depend on how much fear-mongering the media heaps on
others "competing" for that used vehicle that *you* want.

Craigslist reports that prices for used VW's are already down ~20%.
VW is expected to have a drop in sales for the month of Sept
while most other automakers are posting *record* sales figures.
How long that persists is anybody's guess...

The book,"Unsafe at Any Speed" killed the Chevrolet Corvair and even when GM redesigned the rear suspension, as I read in a car magazine, so it was more advance than that on the Corvette, it was too late and sales declined until the car was discontinued. It's a very interesting story about GM upper level management ignoring the safety concerns of suspension engineers.. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Car Monster
The book "unsafe at any speed" did NOT kill the Corvair. It actually
prolonged it's life. What killed the Corvair was the Camaro. It was a
LOT cheaper to build, and could command a higher price, so more
profit. GM hung on with the corvair untill 1969 - 2 or 3 years after
bringing out the Camaro -

Unsafe at any speed was published in 1965, after the "problem" with
the corvair had already been solved in production.. (1964 was the last
year of "first generation" Corvairs with the same rear suspension
geometry as the VW and Porsche of the same time period.) The 1965 to
69 Corvairs shared the same rear suspension geometry as the Corvette.

Sales for the Corvair fell even after the suspension problem was addressed. I think they're pretty neat little cars but it's been generally accepted that Ralph Nader was instrumental in the demise of the little car. ^_^

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevro...#Legal_fallout

[8~{} Uncle Unsafe Monster
The sales of the Corvair dropped significantly just after September
1966, when the new Camaro came out. It was less expensive and was
available with the VERY healthy 302 Z28 option - which took a lot of
sales from the Turbocharged Monza..

I always thought the Corvair was a neat little car but I've never driven one and don't recall if I've even been a passenger in one. I find it hard to believe that a Camaro Z28 would cut into sales of a base Corvair. Everything I've ever seen or read seems to blame Ralph Nader's book for sullying the reputation of the Corvair but other sources I just read blame the Ford Mustang and GM's response to it by coming up with the Camaro. GM stopped promoting the Corvair which already had slow sales because of the bad reputation it had garnered and GM let it quietly die. So the Camaro did have a lot to do with the demise of the little rear engined car. From what I read, another problem was that the Corvair didn't share many parts with other GM cars. This made it more expensive to produce. The Camaro on the other hand could be easily modified with all kinds of parts from other GM vehicles. I wonder what would have happened if GM hadn't abandoned the little car? We'll never know. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Car Monster

On 09/25/2015 09:39 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
I always thought the Corvair was a neat little car but I've never driven one and don't recall if I've even been a passenger in one.

My brother had a rental, '60 or '61. At that time it was an utilitarian
economy car, Chevy's answer to the Falcon or Valiant. It had the
powerslide transmission and iirc the shifter was a vertical slide on the
dash sort of like a heater control. It was interesting for its
innovations but I preferred the styling on the Valiant or Falcon as did
the public.

It took a couple of years before it morphed into the sporty Monza
package with a turbo from its plain jane econobox roots. But by then
Ford had morphed the Falcon into the Mustang and Nader had done his
damage. Chevy even shot themselves in the foot with the Chevy II.
Conventional, not bad looking, and you could stuff some very interesting
mills under the hood.

You do have to wonder what would have happened if Chevy had went
straight to the poor man's 356 version instead of an economy car. They
could have also done their homework a little better and realized Beetles
had a bad habit of turning turtle. I wonder why Nader gave them a pass?

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:39:40 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 3:01:38 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:22:30 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 12:06:49 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:40:37 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 9:23:41 AM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 9/24/2015 9:48 AM, Muggles wrote:

As others point out, VW is in a heap of trouble and probably best avoided.

I've been wanting to buy a VB Beetle, but not a new one. Are the older
models (by a few years) a bad idea, too?

"older models (by a few years)" is still a "new" (redesigned, not "classic")
beetle, right?

The cars named in the recent disclosure are sure to take a hit -- in the
short term and possibly even longer. A lot will depend on the sort of
fix that VW puts forward and how it affects the perceived value of those
vehicles. My hunch is that any *cheap* fix (e.g., a software upgrade)
will result in a vehicle's performance falling below what their owners
(and prospective resale owners) would be happy with.

[If this is NOT the case, then why would VW have shot itself in the
foot so forcefully? Their actions suggest that strict compliance with
the letter of the law would have affected fuel efficiency or overall
performance in a way that would have caused potential buyers to "look
elsewhere"]

How much spillover to other models NOT named is up for debate. Note
BMW already took some heat over *suspicion* that they might be
similarly cheating (no evidence to suggest this!).

People who are fearful by nature will probably lump all VW products
into that category; perhaps even all diesel offerings there *and*
from other vendors.

If your question concerns your potential *exposure* if you opt to
purchase a used bug, I'd not be too concerned. OTOH, if you were
wondering how this would affect the purchase price of said bug,
it will depend on how much fear-mongering the media heaps on
others "competing" for that used vehicle that *you* want.

Craigslist reports that prices for used VW's are already down ~20%.
VW is expected to have a drop in sales for the month of Sept
while most other automakers are posting *record* sales figures.
How long that persists is anybody's guess...

The book,"Unsafe at Any Speed" killed the Chevrolet Corvair and even when GM redesigned the rear suspension, as I read in a car magazine, so it was more advance than that on the Corvette, it was too late and sales declined until the car was discontinued. It's a very interesting story about GM upper level management ignoring the safety concerns of suspension engineers. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Car Monster
The book "unsafe at any speed" did NOT kill the Corvair. It actually
prolonged it's life. What killed the Corvair was the Camaro. It was a
LOT cheaper to build, and could command a higher price, so more
profit. GM hung on with the corvair untill 1969 - 2 or 3 years after
bringing out the Camaro -

Unsafe at any speed was published in 1965, after the "problem" with
the corvair had already been solved in production.. (1964 was the last
year of "first generation" Corvairs with the same rear suspension
geometry as the VW and Porsche of the same time period.) The 1965 to
69 Corvairs shared the same rear suspension geometry as the Corvette.

Sales for the Corvair fell even after the suspension problem was addressed. I think they're pretty neat little cars but it's been generally accepted that Ralph Nader was instrumental in the demise of the little car. ^_^

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevro...#Legal_fallout

[8~{} Uncle Unsafe Monster
The sales of the Corvair dropped significantly just after September
1966, when the new Camaro came out. It was less expensive and was
available with the VERY healthy 302 Z28 option - which took a lot of
sales from the Turbocharged Monza..

I always thought the Corvair was a neat little car but I've never driven one and don't recall if I've even been a passenger in one. I find it hard to believe that a Camaro Z28 would cut into sales of a base Corvair. Everything I've ever seen or read seems to blame Ralph Nader's book for sullying the reputation of the Corvair but other sources I just read blame the Ford Mustang and GM's response to it by coming up with the Camaro. GM stopped promoting the Corvair which already had slow sales because of the bad reputation it had garnered and GM let it quietly die. So the Camaro did have a lot to do with the demise of the little rear engined car. From what I read, another problem was that the Corvair didn't share many parts with other GM cars. This made it more expensive to produce. The Camaro on the other hand could be easily modified with all kinds of parts from other GM vehicles. I wonder what would have happened if GM hadn't abandoned the little car? We'll never know. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Car Monster
Not only did the corvair not share "many" parts, the power train
parts were quite expensive to build. The engine block, heads, and cyls
were all very different in manufacturing concept to ANY other north
American engine and were much more expensive to manufacture than even
a high output V8

The transaxle was totally unique as well.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 22:26:02 -0600, rbowman
wrote:

On 09/25/2015 09:39 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
I always thought the Corvair was a neat little car but I've never driven one and don't recall if I've even been a passenger in one.

My brother had a rental, '60 or '61. At that time it was an utilitarian
economy car, Chevy's answer to the Falcon or Valiant. It had the
powerslide transmission and iirc the shifter was a vertical slide on the
dash sort of like a heater control. It was interesting for its
innovations but I preferred the styling on the Valiant or Falcon as did
the public.

It took a couple of years before it morphed into the sporty Monza
package with a turbo from its plain jane econobox roots. But by then
Ford had morphed the Falcon into the Mustang and Nader had done his
damage. Chevy even shot themselves in the foot with the Chevy II.
Conventional, not bad looking, and you could stuff some very interesting
mills under the hood.

You do have to wonder what would have happened if Chevy had went
straight to the poor man's 356 version instead of an economy car. They
could have also done their homework a little better and realized Beetles
had a bad habit of turning turtle. I wonder why Nader gave them a pass?
The Monza Turbo came out in 1962 and was the first mass produced
turbocharged engine in North America (along with the Oldsmobile
JetFire 215 cu inch aluminum V6)

On 9/25/2015 11:39 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:



I always thought the Corvair was a neat little car but I've never driven one and don't recall if I've even been a passenger in one. I find it hard to believe that a Camaro Z28 would cut into sales of a base Corvair. Everything I've ever seen or read seems to blame Ralph Nader's book for sullying the reputation of the Corvair but other sources I just read blame the Ford Mustang and GM's response to it by coming up with the Camaro. GM stopped promoting the Corvair which already had slow sales because of the bad reputation it had garnered and GM let it quietly die. So the Camaro did have a lot to do with the demise of the little rear engined car. From what I read, another problem was that the Corvair didn't share many parts with other GM cars. This made it more expensive to produce. The Camaro on the other hand could be easily modified with all kinds of parts from other GM vehicles. I wonder what would have happened if GM hadn't abandoned the little car? We'll never know. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Car Monster


I had a '62 Corvair Monza. Even had an AM/FM radio. It was a good car
in most respects, great in snow, comfortable in the front bucket seats.
Had a few quirk, but it was fun to drive and handled well.

I also survived with only a head cut being broadsided by a
tractor=trailer. Car did not survive though.

On 09/25/2015 10:24 PM, rbowman wrote:

With the prices of new Beetles, I can't really afford one right now, but
if the prices of used (automatic - not diesel) Beetles come down I may
easily be able to afford one of those.

Is the problem being discussed with VW only with diesels? I haven't
read every post on the subject and could have missed that detail.

Yes, it's the TDI diesel. The market is unpredictable but I don't see
why that would impact the gas engine models, which are the majority in
the US market.

All the manufacturers game the system, VW was just a little sneakier.
Despite all the whining at least VW didn't kill anybody, unlike
Government Motors ignition switches or the lowest bidder exploding airbags.

VW was simply doing what many people who support what they fondly
imagine to be "the free enterprise system" and who oppose government
regulation say corporations are obligated to do: make as much money for
their shareholders as possible.

Perce

On 9/26/2015 12:06 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
VW was simply doing what many people who support what they fondly
imagine to be "the free enterprise system" and who oppose government
regulation say corporations are obligated to do: make as much money for
their shareholders as possible.

Perce

I'd much rather have the free enterprise system
selling me what I want (fuel mileage and performance)
rather than government telling me what to do.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

rbowman wrote:
On 09/25/2015 08:23 AM, Don Y wrote:
The cars named in the recent disclosure are sure to take a hit -- in the
short term and possibly even longer. A lot will depend on the sort of
fix that VW puts forward and how it affects the perceived value of those
vehicles. My hunch is that any *cheap* fix (e.g., a software upgrade)
will result in a vehicle's performance falling below what their owners
(and prospective resale owners) would be happy with.

My impression is the problem is with the diesels, with about 450,000 in
the US. I can't find a breakdown but I don't think they've sold that
many New Beetles so I assume the bulk of the TDIs are in Jettas followed
by Golfs.

Europe is where it will get ugly.
Tourag and Passat have TDI models.

leza wang posted for all of us...



Sorry for off topic
-------------------

Hi

A friend of mine who is a senior citizen and want to buy a new car to replace her standard old car. She is very good driver with very clean driving history. Her current car is Volkswagen golf. She is thinking of buying a new Volkswagen golf but automatic of course (easier to drive). Do you have any other recommendation on which car (brand name) she should consider. Too many options and technologies are not really required, just basic stuff but most
be automatic.

Thank you in advance.

Please take the time to go with her to visit the dealers. Have her get in &
out of EVERY one of them through the different model lines. Observe what
works for her, narrow the list then go for test drive.
It will take much time but will be worth it. At least to shield her from the
salespersons baloney. Make a point to the salesperson that you will NOT be
deciding or purchasing today. I prefer foreign makes. Toyota, Honda, Subaru,
Nissan. Ford is the only US car I have had that was dependable. How close is
the dealer, loaners, pickup/delivery for service? I am afraid you will have
to do a lot of research for past thoughts and remember anything posted here
is just someones opinion-including mine. I'm sorry not to give a magical
answer but I just went through this myself. You might save money getting a
2015 model as it's end of model year. Good luck.

--
Tekkie

On 9/25/2015 11:18 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 9/25/2015 8:04 AM, Muggles wrote:
With the prices of new Beetles, I can't really afford one right now, but
if the prices of used (automatic - not diesel) Beetles come down I may
easily be able to afford one of those.

Is the problem being discussed with VW only with diesels? I haven't
read every post on the subject and could have missed that detail.

Only diesels (currently -- and probably that's as far as it will
go *at* VW). You'll have to see how "stupid" people are in sorting
out that distinction, going forward.

That was my first question.

As a single data point (with all that implies!), note that we had a
neighbor with a "new bug" some years back. It was always in the
shop (though I have no idea what the problems were -- these folks
don't do any of their own maintenance... so, it could have been
"replacing windshield wiper blades"!). They traded it out pretty
early...

Why the attraction to a bug? (I can see a *classic* just for
nostalgia -- surely not SAFETY! : ) Are you looking for
small? Fuel efficient? Cute? etc.

I think it's cute, different, not so small that a big husband can't sit
in the passenger seat, and not so big that I feel like I'm still driving
a mini-van.

--
Maggie

On 09/25/2015 10:48 PM, wrote:
The Monza Turbo came out in 1962 and was the first mass produced
turbocharged engine in North America (along with the Oldsmobile
JetFire 215 cu inch aluminum V6)

And meanwhile the Falcon was eating their lunch. It was a great idea but
they missed their market trying to sell it as an economy car. By the
time they got around to impressing the crew at Sports Cars Illustrated
the ship had sailed. Or was it Car and Driver by then?

On 09/26/2015 01:26 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Tourag and Passat have TDI models.

I don't have the numbers handy but I believe those are also a minor
slice of VWs American market.

On 09/26/2015 03:34 PM, Tekkie® wrote:
I am afraid you will have
to do a lot of research for past thoughts and remember anything posted here
is just someones opinion-including mine. I'm sorry not to give a magical
answer but I just went through this myself. You might save money getting a
2015 model as it's end of model year. Good luck.

There certainly isn't a magical answer. My mother traded a full sized
Dodge for a Gold Duster. It was a nice ride but it had me puzzled since
she had always insisted the family bucket had four doors. Her rationale
was if she bought something with four doors she would be the duty driver
every time her old girlfriends wanted to go someplace but none of the
old biddies were up to climbing in and out of the backseat of the Duster.

On 09/26/2015 09:01 PM, Muggles wrote:
I think it's cute, different, not so small that a big husband can't sit
in the passenger seat, and not so big that I feel like I'm still driving
a mini-van.

You just like the little flower vase. Admit it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/au...h-anymore.html

No offense, but after VW discovered they'd built a chick car, they tried
to reinvent it.

Its like the Miata. The Miata is really a competent car but it got the
reputation of being a chick or gay ride and never overcame it.

On 9/26/2015 10:58 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 09/26/2015 09:01 PM, Muggles wrote:
I think it's cute, different, not so small that a big husband can't sit
in the passenger seat, and not so big that I feel like I'm still driving
a mini-van.

You just like the little flower vase. Admit it.

A flower vase? Where? I love flowers!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/au...h-anymore.html


No offense, but after VW discovered they'd built a chick car, they tried
to reinvent it.

Its like the Miata. The Miata is really a competent car but it got the
reputation of being a chick or gay ride and never overcame it.

What can I say, I'm a chick. (—•€¿—•)

--
Maggie

On 9/26/2015 8:47 PM, rbowman wrote:

There certainly isn't a magical answer. My mother traded a full sized Dodge for
a Gold Duster. It was a nice ride but it had me puzzled since she had always
insisted the family bucket had four doors. Her rationale was if she bought
something with four doors she would be the duty driver every time her old
girlfriends wanted to go someplace but none of the old biddies were up to
climbing in and out of the backseat of the Duster.

We did a similar calculus with our recent purchase. SWMBO originally
liked a larger vehicle. But, it didn't take long to realize her friends
would be cheerfully suggesting *she* drive to most of the places that
they frequent, weekly.

Ignoring the cost of fuel, wear and tear on the vehicle, etc. she had
no desire to be worrying about *their* timetables as if a chauffeur:
"I have a doctor's appointment at 12:15 so we'll have to leave early?"
"Why don't we all go out for lunch?"
"Can you pick me up a AFTER Mary next week (instead of BEFORE)? I
have some errands to run in the early morning..."
"Why don't we listen to WXXX today?"
Plus, the obligation imposes requirments on her (SWMBO) attendance!
She can't just decide at the last minute to "stay home"!

On 9/26/2015 8:01 PM, Muggles wrote:
Why the attraction to a bug? (I can see a *classic* just for
nostalgia -- surely not SAFETY! : ) Are you looking for
small? Fuel efficient? Cute? etc.

I think it's cute, different, not so small that a big husband can't sit
in the passenger seat, and not so big that I feel like I'm still driving
a mini-van.

frown Do you have money to burn? I.e., do you care about the reliability
and safety of the vehicle that hauls you around town?

Find something that is affordable and comfortable. If you want to be
"cute", put a big red bow on the front grill. Or, "eyelashes" above
the headlights. Or, a *tail* curving up over the back of the car
from the rear bumper.

(seriously -- I have seen all of the above)

It will make your car more memorable (to you and others), won't cost
you much, won't alter the value, reliability or safety of the ride,
etc. A photo of a local vendor who is known for their crazy cars:
http://everydaychildhood.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/trulynolen3.jpg
Look carefully at the front end details...

On 09/26/2015 10:03 PM, Muggles wrote:
A flower vase? Where? I love flowers!

You never saw those in the New Beetle? Not the new Beetle; they dropped
the flowers in 2012. Little bud vase on the dashboard, sort of like a
hearse. Sometimes the German mind goes off the rails. I mean what sort
of manly man is going to drive a car with a damn sprig of pansies?

Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 9/26/2015 12:06 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
VW was simply doing what many people who support what they fondly
imagine to be "the free enterprise system" and who oppose government
regulation say corporations are obligated to do: make as much money for
their shareholders as possible.

Perce

I'd much rather have the free enterprise system
selling me what I want (fuel mileage and performance)
rather than government telling me what to do.

-
.
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
. www.lds.org
.
.
How come, don't want to fiddle with your car? You can reproprogram ECU
for example. You modify any part of the car to your heart's content.
Today's cars are more electronics than mechanics. Like Volvo has more
than 20 microprocessors controlling the car one way or the other.
Engine, transmission, suspension, brakes, drive train, collision
avoidance system.... You name it.

Muggles wrote:
On 9/26/2015 10:58 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 09/26/2015 09:01 PM, Muggles wrote:
I think it's cute, different, not so small that a big husband can't sit
in the passenger seat, and not so big that I feel like I'm still driving
a mini-van.

You just like the little flower vase. Admit it.

A flower vase? Where? I love flowers!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/au...h-anymore.html


No offense, but after VW discovered they'd built a chick car, they tried
to reinvent it.

Its like the Miata. The Miata is really a competent car but it got the
reputation of being a chick or gay ride and never overcame it.

What can I say, I'm a chick. (—•€¿—•)

Are you a motor vehicle operator or driver? Miata has grown little
bigger now.