Detroit: Please Bring Back the Stripped Car

Remember Ed Rooney, in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off? He drove a government issue K-car. During the 1980s, the Plymouth K-car was what the government bought when it needed something basic. If you were lucky, it had a $79 AM radio.

We heard a recent car ad; it was a regional buy for the Nissan (NSANY) Versa. The ad’s primary lure? The price. Less than $10,000 bucks, though we are sure taxes and other fees ratcheted up the price a bit. In a time when dollars are tight, you need to keep people coming into dealers and looking.

It’s the oldest trick in the retail book, the loss leader, the cheap car. And it is surprising that American automakers have ceded that cheap market to Asia. After all, when the Germans made Mercedes, Henry Ford made the Model T.

In this climate, American automakers Ford (F), General Motors (GM) and Chrysler are playing around with different sale prices, givebacks and zero percent finance gimmicks. What they are not doing is creating base models where the initial car price is cheap. Really cheap. The last time I looked at an American dealer lot, there were sale prices, but there was not a really cheap car with a very low price, except maybe the Chevy Aveo. That is a missed opportunity.

Base cars were fleet cars

In the last decade, American automakers did many things that were STOO-PID. One thing that was particularly stupid was cutting back on fleet sales. We have a suggestion about why this comes up so often. When sales tank, and are down a whopping 50 percent (like Chrysler in 2008) they can say that part of the sales decline was “planned” as they “intended” for branding purposes to cut down on fleet sales to help the “resale value” of their cars.

Frankly, we would suggest resale value has more to do with quality; there are who knows how many Accords and Camrys running around, and their price is high because they last forever. Fewer means fewer.

What needs to happen?

Each of the Big Three automakers needs to have a strategy to sell at least one cheap base-model car for fleets, taxis, rentals and the like. For decades, Detroit did this. It would have two versions of many models, a fancy version, and a less fancy version. The K-car, the Plymouth Reliant, was sold in a cheap base model to the U.S. government. But better versions of the car were available. With badge engineering, Lee Iacocca turned the Reliant into SE, and then later a New Yorker and a Town & Country.

We quote directly from the Wikipedia entry:

Early advertisements for the K-cars promoted the low $5,880 base price. Rather than honoring that by producing a sufficient amount of base models, Chrysler was producing a larger number of SE and Custom models. When consumers arrived at Plymouth (and Dodge) dealers, they were shocked to find that the Reliant they were planning on purchasing would end up costing hundreds or thousands of dollars more. As a result of this, Chrysler corrected their mistake and began building more base models.

Chrysler made a mammoth mistake in eliminating its Plymouth brand, something we discussed in our 2007 article Down the Road for Chrysler Plymouth Dealers. It lost a cheap-car lure for Chrysler dealers.
Detroit does not seem to get the message; for instance, a base model Ford Focus has an MSRP of $16,180. That’s not horrible, and through discounts you could get it lower, but last year local Toyota dealers sold stripped down Toyota Yaris’ for $13,500.

What else is lovely about a stripped car?

Ugliness: It is supposed to be ugly enough that people who see it will spring for a few thousand more dollars for additional options. Basically, it makes the fancy model look good.

Government: It gives you something to sell to the school board and local city administration.

New markets: Just as Southwest Airlines attracted passengers who might have driven or taken Greyhound (not other airlines), cheap cars attract sales from used car sharks, and do not cannibalize higher profit models.

Repair: Having more customers, even with base models, keeps dealer repair shops busy.

So bring back the stripped base model, Detroit. Remember: the Chevy Chevette sold for $4,995 in 1997.

Disclosure: Long Ford

Comments

[SuperLee:]

You are so correct! We need the return of manual tranmissions and radio optional. These vehicles give great milage and act as real transportation for years.

You could even remove air conditioning as far as that goes. I would rather have my kids have a good reason to get OUT of a car as get in it. It's not an extension of the living room. Besides, if you're uncomfortable with your ride, you might think of moving closer to work.

Jan 07 10:34 AM

[DavidR:]

Completely wrong. A cheap model was a necessity when a) used cars were unreliable, and b) you could only get financing for first time buyers on a new car. Who in their right mind would buy a new Focus with plain steel wheels, vinyl interior, roll down windows, no a/c, no radio and a vinyl floor for $9995 when you can buy a two year old, 30,000 mile Focus with alloy wheels, sunroof, A/C, power windows and locks and a CD player for $9995? As for government sales, there are special order versions that delete many of the extra features, and fleet incentives that push the price to the government far below what you can buy the same car for. Also, the government agencies aren't as dumb as you are, as I have recieved bids from local government agencies and districts specifying one year old vehicles so that they can save money too. Research your facts before you publish this rubbish.

Jan 07 10:47 AM

[OhioNative:]

Not to contradict you (because you actually have good points) but the Model T lost ford his marketshare because he wouldnt change it, he wouldnt add colors, he wouldnt add extras. He was the market leader, and because he didnt change with the times, he lost that position and never regained it. Its not all about price, but also about choice.

And also the chevette was made up until1987 (not 1994...it was produced in brazil until 1994), it cost $5k. which is just about $9k today. the price point where Nissan and Hyundia are at the moment.

Jan 07 10:55 AM

[John Rosevear:]

DavidR nails it. Factor in the additional up-front cost of designing and sourcing things like alternative floor coverings, hand-cranked window mechanisms, and the like, and you end up adding cost to the overall program in order to reduce your per-unit margins. Not a winning formula.

Jan 07 10:56 AM

[TB3:]

It has been shown time and again that in tough times, buyers will buy down to a smaller less expensive car, but they will not scrimp on the options they have come to expect to make the car at least comfortable, if not a sheer pleasure. P. S. Car manufacturers have a difficult enough time making a profit on small, loaded cars, let alone stripped down models which they would have to sell at a loss. It helps to keep in mind that manufacturers are in the business to make money, not please uninformed columnists indulging in flights of fancy.

Jan 07 11:00 AM

[epeon:]

When people say that auto manufacturers cannot make money on base level cars they are missing the point. When the market tanks and all you can sell are basic cars, you had better structure your business so that you can at least break even on those basic cars. Because, if you don't, someone else will and they will run you out of business.

Back in the 70s and 80s that is precisely what the japanese did. You could buy toyotas and datsuns (old name for nissan) cheap. The bottom end bought them. And, as the young kids moved up in the world, so did toyota, nissan, and honda. They now service the middle class market.

Jan 07 11:10 AM

[TomF75:]

Here's an even better idea for Detroit. Cut out the ridiculous gimmicks to begin with. All these schnooks keep complaining that we don't give them credit for their quality improvements. How am I supposed to take you seriously when, if I buy your car today...I can't guarantee you won't slash the price w/ some ridiculous "Employee Pricing" gimmick thus destroying my resale value. Additionally, I can't think of any Honda, Toyota, or Nissan buyers out there who walk onto a lot expecting 25% off MSRP. Well, you can certainly get that w/ Detroit. How am I suppossed to take your claims of quality seriously when you'll knock 30% off the price. Nothing IMHO cheapens Detroit's image more than this garbage. If you want to sell the car for $21,000 then just sell it at $21k. Don't price it at $25, then beg me to take it off your hands when you drop your pants.

Here's another suggestion, stop with the garbage plastic interiors. Last year I was actually considering the top model Pontiac G8 (w/ the large V-8). I set one foot in the car noticed that on a $30K car you got the same crummy interior that you got in a $15K Saturn. Thats pathetic...compare the interiors of a G8, Acura TL, Maxima (all cars in a similar price point) and tell me which one you'd rather sit in for 15-20,000 miles per year. To steal a quote from Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear regarding the Chrysler Crossfire..."10,000 parts all made by the lowest bidder". That about sums up my opinion of 90% of what Detroit sells.

Jan 07 11:10 AM

[TomF75:]

that should read 10,000 parts all made by the lowest bidder

Jan 07 11:13 AM

[Chris B:]

The author is right about cheap cars. If a large car company only sells cars that people can afford during boom years, it will go bankrupt during bust years.

When you are facing the possibility of a layoff or foreclosure, you're not looking to pay thousands of dollars extra to have DVD players, GPS, subscription radio, leather, 4WD, and alloy rims. More importantly, you couldn't get financing for it even if you wanted to buy it. Look at the data and the statements from the companies - lack of subprime financing is the biggest reason for the dropoff in sales. The days of people who earn $30k a year buying $40k luxury cars on 7 year balloon loans are over, probably for good (just like the subprime $250k McMansion). That's the reason we are seeing more cars in the sub-$15k range such as the Versa, Fit, and Yaris. Luxurious Tahoes and Explorers are all over the used lots with deep discounts.

Jan 07 11:15 AM

[AmericanVOR:]

"...the Chevy Chevette sold for $4,995 in 1997."

Ummmm... 1997?

The last production year for the Chevette was 1987.

Jan 07 11:24 AM

[Estimated P...:]

Every single quote bashing this article has said that individual consumers would not want to purchase a "stripped" car. I do believe his main point is these cars would be sold for use as fleet cars, taxis and rental cars by selling to these institutions automakers could generate SOME revenue and put the 10s of thousands of employees sitting on the sidelines back to work. Not to mention most of these union employees are getting at least partial paychecks to sit around.

Jan 07 11:28 AM

[Garland Pol...:]

Great points all. And I meant 1987 for the Chevette, not 1997. By then, I guess Chevy had introduced Geo?

The point of adding crank windows and such is totally valid; you don't want to INCREASE the price of a car just to make it seem like it is cheap. But I do think some things can be eliminated. For instance, cars used to have simple rolled plastic on the floors, rather than carpet. Of course you might save $10 bucks with that...but Part of selling a cheap car is creating a perception of value in the upper end models. If you sell the base model with vinyl floor, you make $100 by selling the carpet version.

Jan 07 11:34 AM

[AmericanVOR:]

In theory, I do agree with your points. We should be offering a value minded "go-kart" with fenders.
Some issues with that is overall part content between levels, scheduling, and piece price.

For example, when power windows were new, it was extra to have them included, so the price reflected the content.

Today, the wire harness that runs through the car contains all the connections anyway. It would actually be more expensive to order different harnesses for each option level.

Then there are safety requirements that need to be satisfied. An impact beam inside a door will be designed with all available options in place, then used across the model line. The money involved in design, testing, and materials are already designed into the vehicle.

At that point, with the engineering and part content in place, it becomes a minimal expense to toss in the power window assembly which is bought in large quantities.

A manual windw would be a different assembly and would require its own design and engineering. If it is a low volume option, it would actually cost more than one might think to purchase.

This is just one example where, pricewise, it may make more sense to equip a car with options that we feel it could be cheaper without. Truth is, they might not be able to make a less equipped car all that much cheaper.

And if I wanted to sell cars, I could take an equipped model of a in the class of a competitor's and price it just a little higher than thiers and say, "Look how much more you get here for just another $30 a month in your payment."

Just saying...

Jan 07 11:48 AM

[mbr:]

Overpadded, overgadgeted, overassisted, oversized outside, underspaced inside, overheavy, overengined, in sum underengineered and overpriced, that's today's US designed car. Where is the Model T philosophy?

Jan 07 11:49 AM

[tirereviews:]

I think Ford gets it, albeit a little late. The subcompact Ford Fiesta sold in Europe (not to be confused with the crappy Festiva we had in the 90s) should be arriving on our shores within a year or two.

Chevy had the right idea coming out with the outsourced Aveo, but it was absolutely sub-par compared to the Toyota Yaris, Nissan Versa, and hello! -- the very successful Honda Fit. The Japanese may have copied Detroit in the 60s and 70s, but they have been and still are leading innovation and "what people want".

Jan 07 12:00 PM

[karguy:]

Hey author, way to jump on the domestic bashing ban wagon. This is one of the more useless uniformed articles I have read in a while. GM does sell striped down versions and advertise them. I have one as a second car. Why don't you write something original and maybe be positive about the industry and companies that keep you employed.

Jan 07 12:19 PM

[plymouth1962:]

I long for the days when you could buy a Plymouth in Savoy,Belvedere,Fury and Sport Fury.They had 2 doors ,four doors, sedans, hard tops and convertibles.....your choice.And the options were your choice.
Not the way it is today, you have a choice of 6 platforms as long as you want a 4 door sedan with front wheel drive.M

Jan 07 12:27 PM

[dabigtoe:]

The GEO line was all rebadged imports. The GEO Prizm was a Toyota Corolla with different trim. And, in case you weren't aware, the Pontiac Vibe is simply a rebadged Toyota Matrix. So why aren't people lined up to buy Vibes? The same reason they are not buying Matrixs right now -they can't get a loan. Even for $4995.


On Jan 07 11:34 AM BrandlandUSA wrote:

> Great points all. And I meant 1987 for the Chevette, not 1997. By
> then, I guess Chevy had introduced Geo?
>
> The point of adding crank windows and such is totally valid; you
> don't want to INCREASE the price of a car just to make it seem like
> it is cheap. But I do think some things can be eliminated. For instance,
> cars used to have simple rolled plastic on the floors, rather than
> carpet. Of course you might save $10 bucks with that...but Part of
> selling a cheap car is creating a perception of value in the upper
> end models. If you sell the base model with vinyl floor, you make
> $100 by selling the carpet version.

Jan 07 12:29 PM

[Old Zephyr:]

A number of factual errors in here . . . I will just "focus" in on one.

I don't know where the author gets the idea that a stripped Ford Focus has a MSRP of over $16K. Look at their website! The base Focus S Sedan is $14,995 plus delivery, and with rebates and employee pricing, it is under $13K *including* destination and delivery. And it's a lot more car than a Yaris, gets better highway MPG (35) than a Fit (33). And you can actually find a stripped Focus on most lots.

The Versa that is under $10K is a manual transmission, no A/C. If you want either of those, you have to buy both, and you're at $12K not including destination and delivery.

Jan 07 02:41 PM

[Jobu37:]

The Fiesta is not going to come over as a stripper. The majority of it's sales will be at prices above where the bottom end Focus currently sells. The allure for the car in Europe is due to the high-end feel of the car along with it's superior driving dynamics. Most likely that won't change once we get it over here.

This article is completely flawed. Demand is what dictates residuals. The fact that a large percentage of import loyalists demand more Camrys and Accords is why they have higher residual values. When you start "dumping" more cars on a market than there is natural demand the tranaction prices have to come down to move the product. This is the game that the Big 3 were forced to play due to inflexible UAW contracts that made it slightly more profitable to keep churning them out instead of paying the workforce to sit idle. The long-term ramifications of this strategy is why the Big 3 currently trail the competition in residuals. Along with a flawed perception of materially higher quality for the imports. GM still uses this approach on certain models (Impala, and Pontiac) and Chrysler has no choice but to do so. When they don't follow this model you see sales numbers down 50%+. The only fleeting that Ford is aggressive at is "fleet only" models such as Crown Vic. Through June 2008 Ford was down to 13.58% rental fleet. Chrysler was 27.45% and GM a much improved 15.60%. The king of residuals, Honda, was at .75% rental fleet. Yes, point 75 percent. Honda's retail demand in the marketplace is where anybody in the car business should want to be. The company that is most aggressively moving toward fleet dumping is Nissan they came in at 13.07% and very likely will fall behind Ford in the next survey.

You can't manufacture demand you have to earn it. Ford and GM for the most part are doing the things necessary to earn it but as always perception lag can exist for many years. Fortunately, for Ford, the lag is already into it's 3rd year and the tide may be turning for them sooner than Honda and Toyota would like.


On Jan 07 12:00 PM tirereviews wrote:

> I think Ford gets it, albeit a little late. The subcompact Ford Fiesta
> sold in Europe (not to be confused with the crappy Festiva we had
> in the 90s) should be arriving on our shores within a year or two.
>
>
> Chevy had the right idea coming out with the outsourced Aveo, but
> it was absolutely sub-par compared to the Toyota Yaris, Nissan Versa,
> and hello! -- the very successful Honda Fit. The Japanese may have
> copied Detroit in the 60s and 70s, but they have been and still are
> leading innovation and "what people want".

Jan 07 03:05 PM

[John Q:]

Cars are a bargain today with all the options. In Nov. 1995, I purchased a 1996 Chevy Blazer for $22K. Last week I purchased 2008 Chevy Equinox for $18.5K or a 16% reduction yet I have Onstar, XM Radio, better warranty, more room, quieter ride, radio controls on the steering wheel, better crash protection (5 star), stability control, traction control, ect.

Yet I purchased new water heater 8 years ago installed it was $425 from Lowe's and last week I had to replace it and it was $785 or an increase of 85%.

That is why I think cars are a bargain today. If cars were going up in price like water heater I would have paid $42K for Chevy Equinox.

Jan 07 04:39 PM

[mikekrause05:]

It probably couldn't hurt. While an undergrad at Northern Illinois University (1985-1990), I drove two Toyota Corollas (a '76 and a '79). One manual, one auto, both with manual windows, no A/C and only a stock AM radio. I added an aftermarket stereo on my own. Granted, they had no airbags, and the only reason that I got rid of them was because they rusted away (mechanically still running), I would argue that there is a market for the "stripper" car. A true "car for the times"?

Jan 07 04:53 PM

[Dogfoodtase:]

Don't ever bring back the chevette. No one wants to buy a car that is also a rental car. Kills all the value in the car.

If quality kept resale values high, then we could buy a used Mercedes for peanuts.

No one is buying a car with a stick (except me). It keeps my friends from borrowing it.

Jan 07 05:20 PM

[elcopone:]

It's not a matter of low-priced/high-priced or stripped/loaded for Detroit. It's simply a matter of putting out ANY model the consumer actually wants, is excited about, and wants to buy. A low-price model does nothing if the entire lineup still has the same old ugly styling, poor quality and plastic interiors.

Jan 07 05:55 PM

[DavidR:]

On Jan 07 11:15 AM Chris B wrote:

> When you are facing the possibility of a layoff or foreclosure, you're
> not looking to pay thousands of dollars extra to have DVD players,
> GPS, subscription radio, leather, 4WD, and alloy rims. <snip>


If you are facing the possibility of layoff or forclosure, you aren't looking to pay ANYTHING...

Run some quick math. The auto maker has to average about $2000 profit on each car to justify the risk and expense of being in business, the transportation company charges $800 to ship the car, health care legacy costs are $1600 per car, the dealer has to average $1000 profit per car (more really, but I don't want to start another flaming thread). That's $5400 in cost structure before GM even builds the darn thing. Can you engineer the car, buy the real estate, build a factory, crash test, train the workers, obtain the financing, and actually build a car for the remaining $4600 so it will sell profitably at $10k?..... NO. Content is what builds value in the car and justifies the price necessary to sell the car profitably. Strip away the content and you loose far more value than the sum cost of the items removed. The ONE business case for an entry level car was to bring 1st time buyers into your brand. Now that 1st time buyers can't get financing (that's what Ford Credit and GMAC used to do) there is nobody in line to buy entry level vehicles. Rental car companies shun stripped down cars because even they know that the small additional cost of popular options increases the return they receive when they resell the car at auction.

Jan 07 08:22 PM

[automillwight:]

ford is coming out with the all new Taurus in april. it will come with the plain jane model called the GL.

Jan 07 09:09 PM

[bobbiemcgee:]

buy a 7-8 yr old Honda. Drive for 10 yrs. Repeat.

Jan 07 10:01 PM

[Heroray:]

Sure, Buy your Honda, Nissan Toyota.

Then wonder where all the jobs went.
Buy your Imported Jeans, Silverwear, and household appliances, and profess we need too Become a "Service Economy", We dont need Mfg anymore.

Then Still Wonder where all the Jobs went.

Jan 07 10:44 PM

[BobMichigan...:]

"So bring back the stripped base model, Detroit. Remember: the Chevy Chevette sold for $4,995 in 1997."

This tells you all you need to know about this "analyst's" knowledge of the auto industry.

1997 GM did sell the highest mileage, cheapest car available. The Metro. They dropped it due to lack of interest.

Jan 08 12:40 AM

[BobMichigan...:]

Give the gift that keeps on giving, buy a Honda and give poverty to your neighbor. The best part is you get the gift back!

Then you wonder why you can only afford a POS 18 year old Honda.

On Jan 07 10:01 PM bobbiemcgee wrote:

> buy a 7-8 yr old Honda. Drive for 10 yrs. Repeat.

Jan 08 12:43 AM

[Markham Lee:]

There is one major flaw in this argument: in the 1980s cars weren't as reliable as they are now, and the used market wasn't as strong. In other words there is no point in buying a stripper Malibu when I can get a used Accord for the same price.

That's the real problem Detroit faces as far as resale a lot of consumers would rather have a used import than a brand new American car.

I know this consumer (I've always bought Japanese or German) would rather have a 4 year old import than a brand new American car, and to be honest it isn't really about longevity - it's the simple fact that I like the styling, performance, interiors, etc, a lot better.

Speaking of which:

I would buy a Ford Mondeo if I was looking at a midsized family car, too bad it isn't sold in the U.S. and some dolt at Ford thought that the American consumer would prefer the Fusion...

...even though European customers are buying Mondeos instead of Accords.

-M

Jan 08 05:14 AM

[Markham Lee:]

I understand your point of view Bob, however I shouldn't have to buy a product I don't find appealing just to support Detroit. This is America after all.

I drive American cars all the time when I travel for work and I'm always quite happy to get back into my German sedan, it's not about the name plate it's the way the car performs.

If America catches up they can get my money.

Jan 08 05:17 AM

[john s. gordon:]

i'm always amazed to discover how many (american) people today have never driven a 5-on-the-floor & wouldn't know how if they had to.

go to italy - a car with automatic transmission can't find a buyer - nobody wants it (they waste gas @ 9.00/gal).
> jack

Jan 08 09:18 AM

[a. palmer jr.:]

Don't forget the fine effort put forth by GM in building the Vega. I guess the ones left over did make fine drag cars however.

Jan 08 09:28 AM

[Lansing_guy:]

You know, I'm from Detroit and I live in Lansing and I drive a Mazda. My first two cars were bowties and both of them were nothing but problems. Also, as a Michigan native and current resident, what the hell have the Big Three done for my community the past 20 years except gut it and ship its parts to Brazil and Canada and Mexico? It's time for us to find a new niche in this economy, friend, the old way is gone already.


On Jan 07 10:44 PM Heroray wrote:

> Sure, Buy your Honda, Nissan Toyota.
>
> Then wonder where all the jobs went.
> Buy your Imported Jeans, Silverwear, and household appliances, and
> profess we need too Become a "Service Economy", We dont need Mfg
> anymore.
>
> Then Still Wonder where all the Jobs went.
>

Jan 08 09:45 AM

[Valley Outs...:]

This is the most baby-boomer minded article I've read in a while. "Where is my manual transmission, AM radio, hand-crank window model?" Is there anything that sounds more dated? Garland, do you actually drive such a car? I didn't think so.

After going for years without power mirrors and driving at night with the right mirror shining in my eyes and having no way to move it while driving, I swore I would never buy a car again without power everything. No one wants to drive a stripped down model, and this has been 'priced into the market' as they say. Detroit just follows the trends that the consumer research tells them, and they cannot be faulted for that.

A stripped down model is the way of the past--it has no role in the future, sorry.

You could compare it to the Netbooks vs Laptops marketplace.

Netbooks are widely successful in the PC arena not because they are stripped down, but because they went back to the true reason people liked laptops in the first place--they are portable! Ask anyone who's lugged an 8lb laptop thru an airport if they wish it wasn't a third the weight. Of course they do! Yes they are stripped down in terms of features and cost less, just like a Plymouth Fury, but no one has to carry a Fury. The few number of features is not the primary reason they are successful--the weight and size is. Even the words "Desktop Replacement" make my shoulder hurt.

Jan 08 11:03 AM

[Wadhamite:]

Nobody is mentioning Kia. A real bargain today. And, when China gets its act together and offers an econobox for under $10,000 -- watch out. My first two cars, back in the 1960s, were VW Beetles with two lights on the dash (make that three when the high beam indicator is included) instead of the LED Christmas trees that modern cars have. Manual transmission; crank windows; no A/C; no fog lights; no air bags (the first one did'nt even have seat belts); no computers; AM radio. I could afford to drive back then.

Jan 08 11:05 AM

[Paul Killinger:]

When last I checked, our local government officials were driving loaded SUV's and pickups. You have a terrific idea, but it is better suited to a nation that hasn't already discarded the last vestiges of its sanity.

As for cheap cars, the best value I've seen is the Jeep Patriot. It comes reasonably well loaded with many safety and technology features (ABS and stability control) for under $13K. The question is will they be around to honor the lifetime warranty.

Jan 08 12:02 PM

[steve cyester:]

Great article makes an excellent point. I refuse to pay new car prices & always buy used. Currently I drive a 2000 Volvo V40 & it has WAY more stuff on it than I can begin to figure out. In fact, I have to consult the manual before I push one of the odd buttons on the console or dashboard. I'm afraid I migh disconnect the axle or something. I'd love to see the base models return. I long for the day when it was my decision whether I wanted power windows & A/C & autiomatic transmission and other goodies.

Jan 08 12:20 PM

[Garland Pol...:]

Thanks for all your GREAT comments. Valley Outsider, you ask the question..do I drive a stripped down car? Well sort of...I have that $13,500 Yaris. While it has AC and a great stereo, it still has crank windows and a manual transmission. It's fine for what I need, getting around town.

From 1990 to 2004, I drove a Honda Civic 1990 two door, that had 200K miles on it. it drove forever. Big pain cause it didnt have AC, though it did have a good stereo.


On Jan 08 11:03 AM Valley Outsider wrote:

> This is the most baby-boomer minded article I've read in a while.
> "Where is my manual transmission, AM radio, hand-crank window model?"
> Is there anything that sounds more dated? Garland, do you actually
> drive such a car? I didn't think so.
>
> After going for years without power mirrors and driving at night
> with the right mirror shining in my eyes and having no way to move
> it while driving, I swore I would never buy a car again without power
> everything. No one wants to drive a stripped down model, and this
> has been 'priced into the market' as they say. Detroit just follows
> the trends that the consumer research tells them, and they cannot
> be faulted for that.
>
> A stripped down model is the way of the past--it has no role in the
> future, sorry.
>
> You could compare it to the Netbooks vs Laptops marketplace.

>
>
> Netbooks are widely successful in the PC arena not because they are
> stripped down, but because they went back to the true reason people
> liked laptops in the first place--they are portable! Ask anyone
> who's lugged an 8lb laptop thru an airport if they wish it wasn't
> a third the weight. Of course they do! Yes they are stripped down
> in terms of features and cost less, just like a Plymouth Fury, but
> no one has to carry a Fury. The few number of features is not the
> primary reason they are successful--the weight and size is. Even
> the words "Desktop Replacement" make my shoulder hurt.

Jan 08 12:32 PM

[Georgen:]

Other than AC, the savings on amenities such as power windows vs. crank would be minimal, ditto for power mirrors and many of he formerly luxury options. Standard shift is also a source of cost reduction. The fly in this ointment is resale. Try selling a stick shift AC-less car on the used car market. The savings on initial purchase is more than eradicated at resale. Also, as a previous poster stated, UAW represented plants cannot make a small low-value car profitably.

Jan 08 03:11 PM

[omahajoe:]

The State of Nebraska got tired of giving away their well maintained stripped models @ auction. They now buy nice cars that cost more new, but return much more @ auction. They are not going to change that policy.

Jan 08 04:07 PM

[Pent up demand:]

Fleet sales are a good thing? Yeah, nothing better for resale than hundreds of thousands of rode-hard-put-away-wet fleet vehicles hitting the used market every year.

Jan 08 04:53 PM

[Guero:]

Another idea: build a car that doesn't start falling to pieces shortly after the warranty is up. And I am not necessarily speaking of the big things, like the engine. I am sick & tired of Detroit windshield wiper motors, power windows, power locks, A/C fans & other smaller systems going kaput right after the 50K mark. Until this is addressed, I'm sticking with Toyota.

Jan 08 05:00 PM

[steve cyester:]

I come from an hardcore 3 generation GM family and I stopped buying GM because everything I bought and my family member bought seemd to do nothing short of keep Mr Goodwrench's pockets full. The last GM product I had was a bowtie and it was pure trash. I wanted to support GM but felt abandoned by them and the zone manager and dealer. So I quit beating my head against the wall and went Toyota and Volvo. Best move I ever made. My last Toyota pickup had 200k on it and never had a significan mechanical issue, while my GMC and Chevy driving truck buddies BRAG about how they get nearly 100K before they have to get the engine rebuilt. Like that's good! Add to the falling reputation of the Big 3, look at some of the products from the failure department at GM -- Chevy HHR, Aztec, Vinyl siding on the Avalanche, buying the Hummer company, Chevy SSR, the GM-ruined Saab, the late great Oldsmobile, the soon to be late great Saturn, probably bye-bye to Pontiac…and the beat goes on all the way back to Chevette, Corsica, Citation, Vega, etc. Just one dud after another. GM and Chrysler are losers and I place the bulk of the blame on incompetent management and to a lesser degree some on unions.. I had a Grand Marquis and it was a very good car. My next American car will be a Ford product. I will never again darken the doors of GM...they failed me and failed to keep my loyalty and their business. A consumer can only take so much.

Jan 08 05:04 PM

[DavidR:]

On Jan 08 05:14 AM Markham Lee wrote:

<snip>
> Speaking of which:
>
> I would buy a Ford Mondeo if I was looking at a midsized family car,
> too bad it isn't sold in the U.S. and some dolt at Ford thought that
> the American consumer would prefer the Fusion...
>
> ...even though European customers are buying Mondeos instead of Accords.
>
>
> -M


Ford tried to sell the Mondeo here...TWICE. Once as the Ford Contour/Mercury Mystique, and the second time as a Jaguar. Both times were a flop.

Jan 08 05:20 PM

[DavidR:]

One of the best "stripper car" ideas to come out of US car makers a while back was when Jeep came out with the new Grand Cherokee, they kept building the old Cherokee and called it the "Classic". The engineering was paid for, the tooling was paid for, and a new fresh model was available for those who had to have the newest thing. The old model soldiered on along side the new one for YEARS. GM did the same thing for one year when the Malibu was re-designed. They continued building the old Malibu, changed its name to "Classic" and sold them to rental agencies and governments.

GM does still build a "stripper". It is called the Cobalt XFE. It comes with roll down windows, no cruise control, a 5 speed manual transmission, and hubcaps. It has a 3/36 warantee with 5/100 powertrain, gets 37 MPG highway (2MPG better than Corolla) and is in the $14,000 price range after rebates.

Jan 08 05:35 PM

[icandoitdon:]

are you serious?

every one of the former "big 3" are at bankruptcy's door, brought their by their mindless devotion to bloated, expensive, high margin, gas guzzling dinosaurs.

i'll tell you what the domestic automobile manufacturers need. they need japanese management who knows what their doing. get a clue.


On Jan 07 11:00 AM TB3 wrote:

> It has been shown time and again that in tough times, buyers will
> buy down to a smaller less expensive car, but they will not scrimp
> on the options they have come to expect to make the car at least
> comfortable, if not a sheer pleasure. P. S. Car manufacturers have
> a difficult enough time making a profit on small, loaded cars, let
> alone stripped down models which they would have to sell at a loss.
> It helps to keep in mind that manufacturers are in the business to
> make money, not please uninformed columnists indulging in flights
> of fancy.

Jan 08 11:02 PM

[James Brumley:]

Interesting debate - a lot of good points on both sides. Ultimately though, I think the author's premise is flawed not in principle but in practice.

If it were just quality, or just coolness, or just reliability, or just features, or just a good price that the average consumer wanted, then Detroit's big three could compete.

However, consumers want (and understandably) at least measurable amounts of all five of those qualities in anything they buy, A stripped down car is cheaper, but if the other key criteria aren't met, then it's just not good enough - a stripped car doesn't meet four of the five criteria (usually)

To be clear, I'm not saying every car Detroit makes has to be off the charts on those five criteria, but each criteria has to be addressed.

Fact is, Asia has managed to meet all five criteria - affordably - and still managed to ship cars over here, and still beat Detroit on price. American consumers don't want the world, but the marketplace isn't wrong...ever.

I think (though respectfully) the author doesn't recognize that the stripped car was popular at a time when lifestyles didn't require us to be in our cars more than in our homes. 40 years ago, putting 15K miles on a car per year was unheard. Now it's the norm, and consumers can't roll the clock back that much. As much as I'm in my car, I want something that's reasonably nice... nicer than the average stripped auto from the 70's. Japan has supplied something comfortable, affordable, as well as semi-stylish for me. Detroit hasn't.

As for the fleet argument, I don't know what fleets are like where you're all from, but near here we still have large fleets....made up of relatively-stripped Japanese imports.

Jan 08 11:55 PM

[john s. gordon:]

vega - another GM f**kup. any engineer knows you can't build an engine with aluminum block & iron head. the dissimilar metals cause gasket failure & then you get a warped block = heavy oil consumption = throwaway.

interesting story in veloce today this week about a fellow had his fiat 500 (vintage 1959 or so) completely restored & then drove it all over europe (2 cylinders, 60 mpg) & then shipped it to the u.s.a. he lives here in fairfax station, VA.
> jack

Jan 09 09:42 AM

[Leftfield:]

Thanks to their legacy costs, Detroit would lose money on strippers. They'll have to make it up on volume.

They point to the Chrysler bailout as virtual proof the taxpayers will make out on the bailouts. They had a plan then, the K car. Now, short of bankruptcy restructuring, none of them are viable given the sheer magnitude of their mismanagement.

As for Wall Street, look at the endless parade of shenanigans for decades where often bailouts were given (like, Latin American debt crisis). Wherever the pigouts begin, they increase.

Remember, the very night Detroit won high import tarrifs on Japanese imports in the mid-eighties, the execs got huge bonuses.

How can this country keep shooting itself in the foot (and now, several other places) and be viable? Of course, the lower 40% at least, has long lost ground. Only Wall Street gains have masked deterioration for many others. Does anyone remember how we were actually #1 in almost everything good and productive and how that is now mostly a silly hollow empty phrase?

Jan 09 10:36 AM

[billddrummer:]

I bought a 2008 Kia Spectra with power windows, brakes, side curtain airbags, AM/FM/CD, remote door locks, power side mirrors, automatic, tire pressure monitoring system, auxiliary jack for an iPod, and 15-inch wheels.

MSRP? $14,000.

I question whether the Detroit 3 can do that.

Jan 09 03:57 PM

[User 334481:]

I've noticed that it's just about impossible to buy a basic car anymore. If you look at a car from the '80s it looks so small small and spartan compared to the big, bloated, gadget-filled "economy" cars today. My car is a '97 Mitsubishi Mirage. It has crank windows which suit me just fine. It's only "luxury" is air conditioning (which I almost never use). The gas mileage is 43 on the highway, higher than almost any non-hybrid car you can buy today. It doesnt have side curtain air-bags, but I like to practice accident avoidance. I guess that is progress . . .

Jan 09 04:49 PM

[Sol Rosenberg:]

Help me out here, are we talking about my Toyota Corolla that was manufactured in Fremont, California or my Toyota Solara that was manufactured in Georgetown, Kentucky?

On Jan 07 10:44 PM Heroray wrote:

> Sure, Buy your Honda, Nissan Toyota.
>
> Then wonder where all the jobs went.

Jan 10 03:45 AM

[pockyclips ...:]

Bravo. I spent Xmas and New Years weekend looking for a 6 cylinder, manual
transmission, regular cab pickup. No such thing on the 3 Ford, 3 Chevy, and 2 GMC dealership lots. I will be forced to buy Toyota or Nissan, and will have to take an extended cab. And then they wonder why sales are down?

Jan 10 10:17 AM

[john s. gordon:]

sol R/ - you say manufactured in CA, KY - you mean assembled. the guts of these things are imported from japan. the rubber hoses are made by gates in denver CO.
> jack

Jan 10 01:25 PM

[Retiredtrav...:]

I am beyond the babyboomer age, but if I were still working I would own the cheapest most dependable car I could buy. Most of these comments are from people who have been spoiled by comforts and style who are not willing to bite the bullet to survive. I grew up in the age of the big jalopies which even then were too expensive for the salary I made. So I had to bite the bullet and buy the bargain used car just to get to and from work. The so called "family car" just had to wait until I had to have more room for family.

It's called sacrifice. What are we willing to do to sacrifice for survival? Other than walking to work, or buying a open air puddle jumper, I would think sacrificing the comfort luxuries of todays transportation would be the wisest thing to do. After all the worst situation you can be in is to be unemployed and without transportation to get to work if you happen to find a job, or even to get to the unemployment office to apply.

Bottom line, cars are primarily for transportation to assist in making a living without having to walk 25 miles to and from work. If you are fortunate enough to have a job that makes enough that you can afford a few luxuries, so be it. Or if like me you have already made it into retirement, then go for it and enjoy your retirement until your next life comes into being. That's what retirement is all about, doing what's necessary to get there, and it always means sacrifice.

As long as your transportation is enclosed out of the weather, has a heater, roll down windows for fresh air, at least two seats, is safe to keep someone from killing you, and is reasonably efficient and dependable, what more could you ask for to get you to work on time? It's called doing what is necessary to survive in this recent economy for as long as it takes. Those who haven't learned that lesson soon will, the hard way.

Jan 13 11:20 AM

[Retiredtrav...:]

I am beyond the babyboomer age, but if I were still working I would own the cheapest most dependable car I could buy. Most of these comments are from people who have been spoiled by comforts and style who are not willing to bite the bullet to survive. I grew up in the age of the big jalopies which even then were too expensive for the salary I made. So I had to bite the bullet and buy the bargain used car just to get to and from work. The so called "family car" just had to wait until I had to have more room for family.

It's called sacrifice. What are we willing to do to sacrifice for survival? Other than walking to work, or buying a open air puddle jumper, I would think sacrificing the comfort luxuries of todays transportation would be the wisest thing to do. After all the worst situation you can be in is to be unemployed and without transportation to get to work if you happen to find a job, or even to get to the unemployment office to apply.

Bottom line, cars are primarily for transportation to assist in making a living without having to walk 25 miles to and from work. If you are fortunate enough to have a job that makes enough that you can afford a few luxuries, so be it. Or if like me you have already made it into retirement, then go for it and enjoy your retirement until your next life comes into being. That's what retirement is all about, doing what's necessary to get there, and it always means sacrifice.

As long as your transportation is enclosed out of the weather, has a heater, roll down windows for fresh air, at least two seats, is safe to keep someone from killing you, and is reasonably efficient and dependable, what more could you ask for to get you to work on time? It's called doing what is necessary to survive in this recent economy for as long as it takes. Those who haven't learned that lesson soon will, the hard way

Jan 13 11:26 AM