5 ms·

Some of the numbers, while true, create the false impression that you are required to play the F-150 truck game. In fact, I recently paid under 30K for a brand

Some of the numbers, while true, create the false impression that you are required to play the F-150 truck game. In fact, I recently paid under 30K for a brand new Mazda CX-5 with some extras. There was some insurance premium increase, but relatively small considering that my previous car was already 10 years old. I could have bought a new Subaru Crosstrek, quoted to me for 26K, which is far from a barebones car - a new KIA Rio S can be had for under 20K. What's happening is that people are seeing more value out of bigger and more expensive cars, so there is a preferences shift happening. Also, think of inflation. 22 years ago I bought a new Honda Civic EX with manual transmission for 18K, which would be around 30K today. This car would be unthinkable in today's market - barebones radio, stick shift, no camera, no screen and noisy engine. If you have the Crosstrek example in mind, cars are actually getting cheaper, at least in terms of cost-benefit (like computers got cheaper as technology improved).

everdrive 3y ago
>This car would be unthinkable in today's market - barebones radio, stick shift, no camera, no screen and noisy engine. All I really want are bare-bones vehicles. I had to practically fight with the Nissan dealership to get their base-model trim. I wish manufacturers would still offer basic vehicles.
- ptmcc 3y ago
  Such a vehicle is impossible to offer even if they wanted to (they don't) because things like backup cameras and other safety-related equipment are legally required. Once you require a camera, you require a screen. Once you have a screen say goodbye to your barebones radio. Et cetera. But automakers would rather you sell you a high-margin truck or SUV than a barebones economy car, anyway. And hardly anyone would buy them even if they did offer them, as we've observed in the decline of sales of regular sedans and hatchbacks in the US over the past couple decades.
  - kube-system 3y ago
    > Once you have a screen say goodbye to your barebones radio. This is not necessarily the case. When backup cameras were first mandated some manufacturers put the screens in the rear view mirror. The reason everyone has a screen on the dash these days is because new car buyers are often demanding smartphone integrations.
    - kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
      If they have to add $100 in mandated components they're going to delete $100 in componentry that can be shifted to the screen. Knobs cost money.
      - kube-system 3y ago
        If it was purely penny pinching, they could have stuck with the cheaper smaller screens in the rear view mirror and put a blank panel in the dash instead of a stereo, like base model vehicles of the past sometimes had. But most automakers are spending a couple of extra bucks on a nicer and more expensive screen in the dash because new car buyers don't want to spend new car money on a car with a dashboard that looks like it's from 2001, and it doesn't make sense to save $50 on a car if you can't sell it. Not long ago, you used to be able to buy new cars without AC, power steering, power windows, power locks, automatic transmissions, painted bumpers, stereos, passenger side mirrors, cupholders, center consoles, etc. And it is still legal to do so. But consumer preferences have changed.
        kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
        Wire harnesses are expensive. Running a video signal over the roof uses more wire than keeping it all in the dash.
        kube-system 3y ago
        They are, but not really that much. Automakers frequently run harnesses with unused wires for lower trims because the expense to inventory multiple parts is more than the wire costs. So it isn't so expensive that they don't waste some wire. On many models there's already a harness run to the front of the roof for other reasons, (garage door opener, compass, safety systems, dome lights, map lights, visor lights, mirror dimmer, microphone) so the labor and assembly costs are mostly already happening anyway. We're talking tens of pennies or single digit dollars of additional cost in material at most. If we pick a popular vehicle with this feature, a 2010 F150, there's a 16 pin connector there, with 12 wires populated. 2 are for the camera. Does it cost more than running 10 wires there? Yes. Was it so much that Ford didn't actually ship the car that way? No. https://www.f150forum.com/attachments/f38/470443d1489862009-2010-f150-video-cap-mirror-16-pin-plug-2010-rear-view_1.jpg https://www.f150forum.com/attachments/f38/470443d1489862009-...
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - msabalau 3y ago
    I bought brand new Honda Fit with a backup camera 9 years for 17K. There isn't some magic safety dust that is forcing the entry level prices to rise by nearly $10K.
- manchego 3y ago
  I agree that buyers should have the option to purchase simpler cars. But I think backup cameras are too valuable of a safety improvement to leave out. About a year ago I saw a toddler very likely saved by the backup camera and proximity sensor. This is of course just anecdotal, but it sold me.
  - mixmastamyk 3y ago
    Wouldn't the proximity sensor be enough? Sounds cheaper and much less prone to unwanted surveillance.
    - manchego 3y ago
      Yeah, I guess then you don't need a screen for display. And to be honest the proximity sensor may have had the greater effect in the situation I referenced. I could hear it beeping from where I was about 30 feet from the car.
- lwansbrough 3y ago
  I really wish the Hilux Champ was available in North America. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Hilux_Champ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Hilux_Champ
- hedgehog 3y ago
  I think the base models are there mostly to be able to advertise a more attractive starting price. I got the base trim of my car but anecdotally the dealership was getting very few of them and on the road I also see very few.
  - everdrive 3y ago
    I did manage to get a base model Nissan Frontier. The features it has and lacks are pretty interesting. It's not manual adjusting mirror -- and I don't mean it's got a little knob on the inside. You roll the window down, and then push the mirror itself with your hands to adjust it. I don't mind it being so basic, but it's interesting that this exists, but not the option for manual locks or manual windows.
    - bluGill 3y ago
      Manual locks require new jigs on the assembly line for the different parts. Since most people want automatic locks they can save the cost of building those jigs and the inventory management to go with them by not offering it. You only get something as an option if the profit of having the with and without version is more than just offering the "better" option to everyone.
- whartung 3y ago
  If you want a bare bones car, you would probably have good luck getting a 2 year old vehicle from a rental fleet. Those tend to be pretty bare bones vehicles. It was funny, I rented a truck from Home Depot. It was brand new, less than 100 miles on the clock. And, yea, it was lucky to have paint. Automatic transmission, radio, and air conditioner were the top drawer items. Imagine taking 2 knobs, perhaps 1" in diameter, and AM/FM button, and a LED matrix display big enough to display 105.5 and a "stereo" and AM/FM light. That's how big the radio was on this otherwise large dashboard. Vinyl floors, vinyl bench seat, crank windows. And there's something to it. There's a simplicity having a hot <-> cold slider and a fan speed knob versus arguing with a "climate control" system. It's quite difficult to find stripped models on the dealer lot. They'd much rather upsell you the sunroof you don't want because "well, that's all we have". I've never had a real problem ordering a car, just have to be willing to wait for it, but they've all been domestic. 3 of my last 4 cars were ordered to my spec.
  - hot_gril 3y ago
    Best new car dash/interior I've seen was inside a U-Haul. I'm holding onto my old cars for now. If/when EVs become default, that'll be a compelling reason to buy a new car.
globular-toast 3y ago
The increase in larger vehicles on the road is making it increasingly unpleasant and unsafe to drive/ride smaller vehicles or use no vehicle at all. It's technically not required to join in, but it essentially is. The only way to avoid the unpleasantness is to join in and get one yourself.
- gcnnbdff 3y ago
  [dead]
mbfg 3y ago
i bought a 2005 Ram 2500 for $25,000, today it would cost minimally $75,000. I actually need a truck to haul hay every week. i dread when the thing rots apart. I will have no answer.
- randomdata 3y ago
  Even if we assume your truck is now worthless, that's only $1,300 per year. More realistically, assuming you have kept it in reasonable condition, it is probably worth around $8k now, or $900 per year. That's nothing in the grand scheme of things. In your case, that's only $17 per load of hay. Approximately one small bale per load pays for it. That still leaves a lot of meat for the truck to haul – especially a 2500. It is not surprising that the price of new trucks has skyrocketed. I too bought a truck for my farm in the same era for around the same price and I'm glad I did, because in hindsight it was an absolute steal. The ROI it has provided has been off the charts. Again, it is not surprising that new trucks have gone up in price to close the gap. Fantastic investment opportunities never last.
  - bluGill 3y ago
    I bought my F350 15 years ago for $10k, if is worth 7k now. (1999, 7.8 diesel engine). However I have also paid $1000/year to ensure it, which for as little as I use it works out to nearly $.50/mile. It hasn't been a great investment (as a diesel it doesn't like to start in winter), but I can never find anyone to rent me a truck when I need one so it stays (I can rent a truck shaped vehicle with fine print that doesn't let me use it for what I want a truck for)
- tfourb 3y ago
  Not sure how much hay we are talking, but why not buy a smaller used car with a tow hitch and a trailer? Trailers cost a fraction of what you pay in markup on a pickup over a small car and most cars are more than capable of towing a small to mid-sized trailer. Bonus: you can unhitch the trailer and have a way easier time fitting into parking spaces ;-)
  - 3y ago
karaterobot 3y ago
I think this is basically right. But the other part of it is that manufacturers actually have gotten better at pricing, if better is defined as getting people to pay a little bit more than they expected. Locking pretty important stuff behind higher trim packages, or even just making it an overpriced add-on, for example. It's upselling, sure, which they've always done (cf. all the 80s jokes about rustproofing and undercarriage protection). But they've really turned it into an art form in the last 4-5 years. I forget which make and model it was, but I was pricing out some car on a website, and you could get a blue car for, let's say $40k, but if you wanted a red car you had to also get heated leather seats, the deluxe navigation package, the deluxe safety package, different tires and hubcaps, and pay something like $46.5k. I'm fairly certain you just mix red dye into the paint rather than blue dye...
Sohcahtoa82 3y ago
> Some of the numbers, while true, create the false impression that you are required to play the F-150 truck game. This is exactly it. The average may have gone up, but there are STILL plenty of relatively low-cost sedans out there. And they're GOOD cars! A brand new Toyota Corolla is only a hair over $22K. Even the hybrid is just over $24.5K. And it'll get 50 mpg! Honda Civic starts at $24K.
scruple 3y ago
I paid $24k out the door for a Subaru CrossTrek in 2014. Crazy to see the price hasn't moved much despite a decade passing.
Someone1234 3y ago
You're right. But one thing to keep in mind, is that with full comprehensive insurance, you're also paying to cover other people's vehicles, so if the average price of a vehicle increases your premiums can too. My premiums have increases, while my vehicle has remained the same (and no tickets/claims/incidents).
rainsford 3y ago
Given that the article starts off with a story about someone at the lower end of the economic spectrum being unable to afford a car, it seems borderline misleading to then discuss car affordability in terms of the average new or used car price. As you suggested, the fact that the average new car sale is $49k in no way prevents you personally from buying something like a Civic, Corolla, or Impreza and getting a perfectly good new car for half the price. It's not even like housing, where there are supply issues making things unaffordable. Car makers offer cheaper models and would presumably make more of them if more people demanded them. Also while there is nothing wrong with spending $49k or more on a car, it's wild to me that this is the average new car sale price in the US considering the median household income is something like $75k. Spending an equivalent to 2/3 of your yearly income on a depreciating asset when there are perfectly reasonable cheaper alternatives does not seem reasonable as the rule rather than the exception. If you make a lot of money or like nice cars, sure, but as the case for the average buyer...wow.

everdrive 3y ago

>This car would be unthinkable in today's market - barebones radio, stick shift, no camera, no screen and noisy engine. All I really want are bare-bones vehicles. I had to practically fight with the Nissan dealership to get their base-model trim. I wish manufacturers would still offer basic vehicles.

ptmcc 3y ago
Such a vehicle is impossible to offer even if they wanted to (they don't) because things like backup cameras and other safety-related equipment are legally required. Once you require a camera, you require a screen. Once you have a screen say goodbye to your barebones radio. Et cetera. But automakers would rather you sell you a high-margin truck or SUV than a barebones economy car, anyway. And hardly anyone would buy them even if they did offer them, as we've observed in the decline of sales of regular sedans and hatchbacks in the US over the past couple decades.
- kube-system 3y ago
  > Once you have a screen say goodbye to your barebones radio. This is not necessarily the case. When backup cameras were first mandated some manufacturers put the screens in the rear view mirror. The reason everyone has a screen on the dash these days is because new car buyers are often demanding smartphone integrations.
  - kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
    If they have to add $100 in mandated components they're going to delete $100 in componentry that can be shifted to the screen. Knobs cost money.
    - kube-system 3y ago
      If it was purely penny pinching, they could have stuck with the cheaper smaller screens in the rear view mirror and put a blank panel in the dash instead of a stereo, like base model vehicles of the past sometimes had. But most automakers are spending a couple of extra bucks on a nicer and more expensive screen in the dash because new car buyers don't want to spend new car money on a car with a dashboard that looks like it's from 2001, and it doesn't make sense to save $50 on a car if you can't sell it. Not long ago, you used to be able to buy new cars without AC, power steering, power windows, power locks, automatic transmissions, painted bumpers, stereos, passenger side mirrors, cupholders, center consoles, etc. And it is still legal to do so. But consumer preferences have changed.
      - kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
        Wire harnesses are expensive. Running a video signal over the roof uses more wire than keeping it all in the dash.
        kube-system 3y ago
        They are, but not really that much. Automakers frequently run harnesses with unused wires for lower trims because the expense to inventory multiple parts is more than the wire costs. So it isn't so expensive that they don't waste some wire. On many models there's already a harness run to the front of the roof for other reasons, (garage door opener, compass, safety systems, dome lights, map lights, visor lights, mirror dimmer, microphone) so the labor and assembly costs are mostly already happening anyway. We're talking tens of pennies or single digit dollars of additional cost in material at most. If we pick a popular vehicle with this feature, a 2010 F150, there's a 16 pin connector there, with 12 wires populated. 2 are for the camera. Does it cost more than running 10 wires there? Yes. Was it so much that Ford didn't actually ship the car that way? No. https://www.f150forum.com/attachments/f38/470443d1489862009-2010-f150-video-cap-mirror-16-pin-plug-2010-rear-view_1.jpg https://www.f150forum.com/attachments/f38/470443d1489862009-...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- msabalau 3y ago
  I bought brand new Honda Fit with a backup camera 9 years for 17K. There isn't some magic safety dust that is forcing the entry level prices to rise by nearly $10K.
manchego 3y ago
I agree that buyers should have the option to purchase simpler cars. But I think backup cameras are too valuable of a safety improvement to leave out. About a year ago I saw a toddler very likely saved by the backup camera and proximity sensor. This is of course just anecdotal, but it sold me.
- mixmastamyk 3y ago
  Wouldn't the proximity sensor be enough? Sounds cheaper and much less prone to unwanted surveillance.
  - manchego 3y ago
    Yeah, I guess then you don't need a screen for display. And to be honest the proximity sensor may have had the greater effect in the situation I referenced. I could hear it beeping from where I was about 30 feet from the car.
lwansbrough 3y ago
I really wish the Hilux Champ was available in North America. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Hilux_Champ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Hilux_Champ
hedgehog 3y ago
I think the base models are there mostly to be able to advertise a more attractive starting price. I got the base trim of my car but anecdotally the dealership was getting very few of them and on the road I also see very few.
- everdrive 3y ago
  I did manage to get a base model Nissan Frontier. The features it has and lacks are pretty interesting. It's not manual adjusting mirror -- and I don't mean it's got a little knob on the inside. You roll the window down, and then push the mirror itself with your hands to adjust it. I don't mind it being so basic, but it's interesting that this exists, but not the option for manual locks or manual windows.
  - bluGill 3y ago
    Manual locks require new jigs on the assembly line for the different parts. Since most people want automatic locks they can save the cost of building those jigs and the inventory management to go with them by not offering it. You only get something as an option if the profit of having the with and without version is more than just offering the "better" option to everyone.
whartung 3y ago
If you want a bare bones car, you would probably have good luck getting a 2 year old vehicle from a rental fleet. Those tend to be pretty bare bones vehicles. It was funny, I rented a truck from Home Depot. It was brand new, less than 100 miles on the clock. And, yea, it was lucky to have paint. Automatic transmission, radio, and air conditioner were the top drawer items. Imagine taking 2 knobs, perhaps 1" in diameter, and AM/FM button, and a LED matrix display big enough to display 105.5 and a "stereo" and AM/FM light. That's how big the radio was on this otherwise large dashboard. Vinyl floors, vinyl bench seat, crank windows. And there's something to it. There's a simplicity having a hot <-> cold slider and a fan speed knob versus arguing with a "climate control" system. It's quite difficult to find stripped models on the dealer lot. They'd much rather upsell you the sunroof you don't want because "well, that's all we have". I've never had a real problem ordering a car, just have to be willing to wait for it, but they've all been domestic. 3 of my last 4 cars were ordered to my spec.
- hot_gril 3y ago
  Best new car dash/interior I've seen was inside a U-Haul. I'm holding onto my old cars for now. If/when EVs become default, that'll be a compelling reason to buy a new car.

globular-toast 3y ago

The increase in larger vehicles on the road is making it increasingly unpleasant and unsafe to drive/ride smaller vehicles or use no vehicle at all. It's technically not required to join in, but it essentially is. The only way to avoid the unpleasantness is to join in and get one yourself.

gcnnbdff 3y ago
[dead]

mbfg 3y ago

i bought a 2005 Ram 2500 for $25,000, today it would cost minimally $75,000. I actually need a truck to haul hay every week. i dread when the thing rots apart. I will have no answer.

randomdata 3y ago
Even if we assume your truck is now worthless, that's only $1,300 per year. More realistically, assuming you have kept it in reasonable condition, it is probably worth around $8k now, or $900 per year. That's nothing in the grand scheme of things. In your case, that's only $17 per load of hay. Approximately one small bale per load pays for it. That still leaves a lot of meat for the truck to haul – especially a 2500. It is not surprising that the price of new trucks has skyrocketed. I too bought a truck for my farm in the same era for around the same price and I'm glad I did, because in hindsight it was an absolute steal. The ROI it has provided has been off the charts. Again, it is not surprising that new trucks have gone up in price to close the gap. Fantastic investment opportunities never last.
- bluGill 3y ago
  I bought my F350 15 years ago for $10k, if is worth 7k now. (1999, 7.8 diesel engine). However I have also paid $1000/year to ensure it, which for as little as I use it works out to nearly $.50/mile. It hasn't been a great investment (as a diesel it doesn't like to start in winter), but I can never find anyone to rent me a truck when I need one so it stays (I can rent a truck shaped vehicle with fine print that doesn't let me use it for what I want a truck for)
tfourb 3y ago
Not sure how much hay we are talking, but why not buy a smaller used car with a tow hitch and a trailer? Trailers cost a fraction of what you pay in markup on a pickup over a small car and most cars are more than capable of towing a small to mid-sized trailer. Bonus: you can unhitch the trailer and have a way easier time fitting into parking spaces ;-)
- 3y ago

karaterobot 3y ago

I think this is basically right. But the other part of it is that manufacturers actually have gotten better at pricing, if better is defined as getting people to pay a little bit more than they expected. Locking pretty important stuff behind higher trim packages, or even just making it an overpriced add-on, for example. It's upselling, sure, which they've always done (cf. all the 80s jokes about rustproofing and undercarriage protection). But they've really turned it into an art form in the last 4-5 years. I forget which make and model it was, but I was pricing out some car on a website, and you could get a blue car for, let's say $40k, but if you wanted a red car you had to also get heated leather seats, the deluxe navigation package, the deluxe safety package, different tires and hubcaps, and pay something like $46.5k. I'm fairly certain you just mix red dye into the paint rather than blue dye...

Sohcahtoa82 3y ago

> Some of the numbers, while true, create the false impression that you are required to play the F-150 truck game. This is exactly it. The average may have gone up, but there are STILL plenty of relatively low-cost sedans out there. And they're GOOD cars! A brand new Toyota Corolla is only a hair over $22K. Even the hybrid is just over $24.5K. And it'll get 50 mpg! Honda Civic starts at $24K.

scruple 3y ago

I paid $24k out the door for a Subaru CrossTrek in 2014. Crazy to see the price hasn't moved much despite a decade passing.

Someone1234 3y ago

You're right. But one thing to keep in mind, is that with full comprehensive insurance, you're also paying to cover other people's vehicles, so if the average price of a vehicle increases your premiums can too. My premiums have increases, while my vehicle has remained the same (and no tickets/claims/incidents).

rainsford 3y ago

Given that the article starts off with a story about someone at the lower end of the economic spectrum being unable to afford a car, it seems borderline misleading to then discuss car affordability in terms of the average new or used car price. As you suggested, the fact that the average new car sale is $49k in no way prevents you personally from buying something like a Civic, Corolla, or Impreza and getting a perfectly good new car for half the price. It's not even like housing, where there are supply issues making things unaffordable. Car makers offer cheaper models and would presumably make more of them if more people demanded them. Also while there is nothing wrong with spending $49k or more on a car, it's wild to me that this is the average new car sale price in the US considering the median household income is something like $75k. Spending an equivalent to 2/3 of your yearly income on a depreciating asset when there are perfectly reasonable cheaper alternatives does not seem reasonable as the rule rather than the exception. If you make a lot of money or like nice cars, sure, but as the case for the average buyer...wow.