Repair-It

Found a caranddriver article about it:

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a1 ... road-test/

At Orange County Raceway the test car ran through the quarter in 16.1 seconds at 86.5 mph more than one second and 9 mph quicker than a Triumph TR6. It is also several mph faster than a 2-liter Porsche 91IT

They seemed to have actually thought it was a good value for the time.

This article is really all I've been saying:
https://www.wardsauto.com/dealers/new-c ... nt-reasons

But in addition to more expensive, technology-laden products, another element to rising vehicle transaction prices – averaging $37,590 in September, according to Kelley Blue Book – is that many consumers opt to pay more.

They are buying more vehicle. They are purchasing SUVs and CUVs that are more expensive than cars. They are buying tricked-out pickup trucks. For example, the base price for a Jeep Gladiator is about $45,000, but a typical transaction price with assorted options and accruements is about $60,000. For a midsize truck.

There is no problem. There is no crisis that can't simply be solved by buying cheaper vehicles that already exist. The automakers are producing what people are buying because that is their job.

Used cars are far better than they used to be. If you want to run a 12 second 1/4 mile, you can buy a lightly used Camaro, Mustang or Challenger and do so for $30k or substantially less depending on exactly what year and what end of 12s we are talking about. You can also go that fast in something with 4 doors and a real back seat if you want to.

The following is the goodcarbadcar list of sports cars. Sales are I think CY19.

Audi A5 23,023
Subaru Impreza WRX 21,838
Chevrolet Corvette 17,988
BMW 2-Series 8,015
Mazda MX-5 Miata 7,753
Infiniti Q60 5,043
Lexus RC 4,591
Toyota 86 / FR-S 3,398
Toyota Supra 2,884
Fiat 124 Spider 2,646
Buick Cascada 2,535
Nissan 370Z 2,384
Subaru BRZ 2,334

Total: 104,432

Here are the big 3 muscle cars:
Ford Mustang 72,489
Dodge Challenger 60,997
Chevrolet Camaro 48,266

Total: 181,752

Some of the cars in the first list are not more expensive than the 3 muscle cars.

By the way, those prices on the 1971 Camaro I found before are with zero options. Unlike today, you actually had to select options to get really basic stuff. It's too late now but here is the whole thing:
http://nastyz28.com/camaro/camaro71.html

Here are some base prices:
https://www.moderncamaro.com/camaromsrp.htm

I do not know what the average transaction price of cars was in 1971. But I already know the 240Z compares favorably.

Base 1971 Impala sedan was $3,742, inflation adjusts to $23,621.44. 2019 Impala which comes with way, way more stuff MSRPs for $28,020. Given ALL of the variables at play, I can't pick at that. I'm not sure that base 1971 Impala has a V8, nor power steering.

bill25 wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2020 7:44 pm Not sure where this is going, but, according to Bing:

Median household income in the United States rose to $63,688 in January 2019

According to KBB:
https://mediaroom.kbb.com/2019-03-01-Av ... -Blue-Book

The analysts at Kelley Blue Book today reported the estimated average transaction price for a light vehicle in the United States was $36,590 in February 2019.

So between 57 and 58% of household income. That is a big increase from 41.6%.

Base Impala is 44% of median household income and again it has far, FAR more standard features than a 1971 base Impala. Base was REALLY base back in the day. But 44% is not too far from the 240Z to Toyota 86 comparison.

Affordable cars are available to people if they want to purchase them. Instead they are buying more expensive cars, electively. All you have to do is look at the price of stuff like pickup trucks. A $50k mid-trim F150 is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the most practical way to get around. Trucks, SUVs, premium crossovers and muscle cars (or sports cars) are not the cheapest way to get around. Not when you can get something completely decent like an Accord, which is universally praised, brand new, for under $24k. And that Accord is actually MORE vehicle than is needed for basic transportation. But people want more expensive stuff. When people are choosing to buy more vehicle than they need, you cannot then conclude that "cars are too expensive."

There is more than that going on.

First off,

Base 1971 Impala sedan was $3,742, inflation adjusts to $23,621.44. 2019 Impala which comes with way, way more stuff MSRPs for $28,020.

The Impala back then was probably more desired than the present day one, which would actually make the older one more expensive for the time. The newer one is clearly more car compared to 50 years ago, but may not be more car relative to it's present day competition compared to the older car, and it's competition back then.
Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Impala

Redesigned in 1965, the Impala set an all-time industry annual sales record of more than 1 million units in the United States

Production of the downsized model increased substantially over 1976, and the Impala regained the number one US sales position. The redesigned 1977 Impala/Caprice was named Motor Trend's car of the year.

Also,
Just because banks and dealerships are allowing for 8 year+ car payments, that doesn't mean people can afford them, or that they are a bargain. It just means people want more and banks are allowing that to happen. Things can clearly get artificially inflated due to this. Isn't that the argument with the whole lending and college loans? And houses? Leases and long term loans are allowing car prices to get driven higher. I don't think people wanting things and getting loans and leases = affordability. Check the stats for cars that were bought in 1971 vs lease... Leases are allowing people to drive cars they can't afford, and then they are selling as 3 year old used car with a loan. That was not necessary back then.

bill25 wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:09 pm There is more than that going on.

Okie dokie.

First off,

Base 1971 Impala sedan was $3,742, inflation adjusts to $23,621.44. 2019 Impala which comes with way, way more stuff MSRPs for $28,020.

The Impala back then was probably more desired than the present day one, which would actually make the older one more expensive for the time. The newer one is clearly more car compared to 50 years ago, but may not be more car relative to it's present day competition compared to the older car, and it's competition back then.
Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Impala

Redesigned in 1965, the Impala set an all-time industry annual sales record of more than 1 million units in the United States

Production of the downsized model increased substantially over 1976, and the Impala regained the number one US sales position. The redesigned 1977 Impala/Caprice was named Motor Trend's car of the year.

Sure, fine, don't like my choice of car? You know what? I agree. Let's look at the #1 selling sedan, the Toyota Camry. Side note, there was like barely any competition in 1965. GM dominated and there were a few other options for a fullsize car. Today's landscape is downright crazy compared to those times. Competition is incredibly fierce. But I digress.

According to Bing, the base price of a 2020 Toyota Camry is $24,425. That is 38.3% of the 2019 average household income (so a 2020 car price against a 2019 income). That didn't help your argument. However, I'm not surprised - the current (or the one we just had) Impala was probably the nicest, most upmarket offering GM had since the days of the Caprice. The base W-body cars were nothing to write home about. And I don't think a base 1971 Impala was anything anyone actually bought. They wanted, you know, a radio and power steering and power brakes.

Also,
Just because banks and dealerships are allowing for 8 year+ car payments, that doesn't mean people can afford them, or that they are a bargain. It just means people want more and banks are allowing that to happen. Things can clearly get artificially inflated due to this. Isn't that the argument with the whole lending and college loans? And houses? Leases and long term loans are allowing car prices to get driven higher. I don't think people wanting things and getting loans and leases = affordability. Check the stats for cars that were bought in 1971 vs lease... Leases are allowing people to drive cars they can't afford, and then they are selling as 3 year old used car with a loan. That was not necessary back then.

Yes that's all bad. But this is a free country. Aside from actual loan/financial fraud or other stuff, what exactly are you suggesting?

Big leases and loans aren't necessary today, either. People are passing up the affordable vehicles currently being sold by like every major automaker to get the more expensive vehicles and options. You can't legislate common sense.

I mean you're making an argument that McDonalds should not sell a Big Mac to a fat person. I think that is a losing argument. The libertarians have that one right. Drug legalization. There are other similar issues in society. As long as one person's freedom does not impinge upon you, they're good to go. Someone's car loan and resulting repo and/or bankruptcy really doesn't effect you, does it? I mean certainly not as a first or even second order effect. The best you could do logically is say, these people taking out 8 year loans are partially responsible for driving up the cost of cars. Sure, you could probably do something with that, but, that characterization is a little off base. They are driving up the AVERAGE cost but that's because automakers are filling the demand with SUVs, premium everything, high output engines and other performance. To literally re-quote that Wards Auto article, average transaction prices are rising because people are buying more vehicle. Parse it however you want, people want bigger, nicer, fancier, and they may or may not over extend themselves to get it. But they are making that CHOICE.

You have to stop looking at people as victims (one side of the political aisle clearly does this, though and it seeps through our culture, right to this very thread imo). People make decisions. They have to live with those decisions. It's not up to big government to come in and hold our hand. This is fundamental stuff.

these people taking our 8 year loans are partially responsible for driving up the cost of cars.

That was my only point...

https://www.motortrend.com/news/cheapest-new-sedans/
https://www.motortrend.com/news/top-10- ... -new-cars/

Cheapest New Sedans for 2020
2020 Toyota Corolla - $20,555
2020 Hyundai Elantra - $20,105
2020 Nissan Sentra - $20,015
2020 Volkswagen Jetta - $19,815
2020 Subaru Impreza sedan - $19,595
2020 Kia Forte - $18,855
2020 Chevrolet Sonic sedan - $17,595
2020 Kia Rio sedan- $16,815
2020 Toyota Yaris sedan- $16,605
2020 Hyundai Accent - $16,250
2020 Mitsubishi Mirage G4 - $15,990
2020 Nissan Versa - $15,655

Although it's the cheapest new sedan, the Versa is not the least expensive new car on the market. That title goes to the Chevrolet Spark hatchback at $14,095.

Related:

Cheapest New Cars for 2020:
Kia Forte - $18,715
Kia Soul - $18,535
Chevrolet Sonic - $17,595
Honda Fit - $17,120
Kia Rio - $16,675
Toyota Yaris - $16,555
Hyundai Accent - $15,925
Nissan Versa - $15,625
Mitsubishi Mirage - $14,990
Chevrolet Spark - $14,095

A few points to make:
- Some of these are better than others but I'll go out on a limb and say they are probably all as good or better than the cheapest cars you could buy 20+ years ago.
- I don't think anyone pays MSRP for any new car and while I wouldn't expect $8k off at these price points, these should all be cheaper than the prices in the article.

Here are some of the features from some of the listed vehicles to see what you get at these price points:

For 2020, Hyundai has fine-tuned the Elantra by boosting fuel economy 2 mpg on most models, with the most efficient Elantra netting up to 36 mpg combined. Standard features include a 5-inch touchscreen, remote keyless entry, a 3.5-inch instrument cluster display, and a good number of safety technologies such as forward collision avoidance assist and lane keeping assist. It separates itself from many other affordable sedans with its long five-year/60,000 basic warranty and 10-year/100,000 powertrain warranty.

The new 2020 Nissan Sentra has improved greatly from its predecessor. As we noted in our Sentra review, it's quicker and more stylish than before. Although it's not among the best driving affordable sedans on the market, it benefits from a spacious interior. A 7-inch touchscreen is standard, as are many safety technologies. Higher trims are still a good value, with SV Premium Package models boasting quilted leather-appointed seats for just $23,655.

What? A German car that's affordable? One of the cheapest new sedans for 2020, the Volkswagen Jetta, has a spacious, if spartan, interior with many technology features. That includes a 6.5-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, and LED headlights and 16-inch aluminum alloy wheels are unexpected standard goodies.

The Kia Forte is the cheapest car in its compact sedan competitive set. Although it's one of the lowest-priced sedans around, it's packed with standard technologies, including an 8-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. The Forte boasts fuel economy of up to 35 mpg combined and a roomy back seat.

Slotting between the Spark city car and the Malibu midsize sedan, the Sonic is available as a sedan or hatchback. It offers agile handling, and its 1.4-liter turbocharged engine offers good power for passing other cars. A 7-inch touchscreen is standard and includes Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.

This hidden gem has a lot to offer. We liked the Kia Rio so much that it was a finalist in our 2018 Car of the Year competition. We've praised the Rio for its smooth and quiet ride, along with its attractive interior. Some of the lowest-priced sedans on the market offer few technologies, but that's not the case with the Rio. It has a good number of standard features, including a 7-inch infotainment touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.

Of all the cheapest new sedans for 2020, the Versa takes the cake. It has the lowest starting price of any sedan on the market, and it has its fair share of positive traits. Although slow and underpowered, the Versa has a well-designed interior, and lots of standard features. These include three USB ports, a 7-inch touchscreen, automatic emergency braking with pedestrian detection, lane departure warning, and high beam assist. Although it's the cheapest new sedan, the Versa is not the least expensive new car on the market. That title goes to the Chevrolet Spark hatchback at $14,095.

From the cheapest car list:

Base Price: $19,520
One of the most charming ways to spend $20,000 is the 2020 Hyundai Veloster. With a 147-hp engine, it's also one of the most powerful, too. If you can handle a slightly loud commute and a six-speed manual (an automatic is $1,000), the Veloster 2.0 includes a 7.0-inch screen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, plus 17-inch alloy wheels, automatic emergency braking, and a lane keeping assist system. Not to mention, of course, that asymmetrical three-door styling.

2019 Nissan Kicks
Base Price: $19,685
Like the Soul, the Kicks offers SUV-like styling at an affordable price. This front-drive hatch boasts a floating-roof look, plus automatic emergency braking, a spacious cabin, and on the 2019 model, respectable 31/36 mpg fuel economy. The 2019 model's pricing is listed above.

Some inflation adjusted comparisons:
- $20k in today's money is $13,350 in 2000. That bought you a base 2000 Civic DX sedan with automatic and very few standard features. $20k buys you way more car today.
- $16k in today's money is $10,680 in 2000. That bought you a base Civic CX hatch, manual, with literally no options at all. The cheapest Corolla in 2000 was the VE at $12,418 with zero options. The 3-speed automatic is $500 more. Yikes. Reliable car, though, I'm sure.

Median household income was $42,148 so an $11k car was 26% of that. Median household income in 2019 was $63,688 and 26% of that is $16,558.88. I could make a pretty easy argument that today's 26% of median household income car is way better than the one from 20 years ago - so 26% buys you MORE car, not less car, than it did 20 years ago. These cars have features that were luxuries only 5 or 10 years ago. That was NOT the case in 2000. The base models in 2000 were very base. That base Civic did not have:
- Power steering
- A/C
- Floor mats (lol)
- If I am not mistaken, it had no radio of any kind. not even 1 speaker
- And I could go through the standard list of these cheap cars and probably come up with 50 other things it didn't have (many of which were completely unavailable).

Toyota Yaris - $16,555
Hyundai Accent - $15,925
Nissan Versa - $15,625
Mitsubishi Mirage - $14,990
Chevrolet Spark - $14,095

Out of your 2 lists, these are the only ones that fit the "under $16,558" criteria, and they are not good. Having AC or power windows doesn't automatically make them better than the rock solid reliable Civic DX you mentioned. Out of this list of cars, the Yaris is probably the only one to come close.

The higher priced cars, if they are more car, are also more money, which doesn't support your argument.

$16,558.88 buys you more car today than $11,000 did in 2000. $11k didn't even buy a whole car by today's standards...

There is more choice, more safety, more technology, more space/comfort, more features. It would take a while to compile a list of cars in the $11k range back in 2000 but it would all be pretty sad. You couldn't even get a base Corolla for that. The base Corolla VE was 29.5% of 2000 median household income, and that was still far more barebones than the cars in the article. In fact, upgraded to the 3 speed auto, but nothing else, it was 30.6%. 30.6% of 2019 median household income is $19,488.53 which gives you access to almost everything on the list, and, again, we are still dealing with a completely stripped base corolla with a 3-speed auto. It's not even close.