Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    A New Study Show Which Vehicles Are Returned In The First Year

      Which Vehicles Get Traded-In the Most After A Year of Ownership?

    While Americans are keeping their cars longer (Experian Automotive says the average ownership length is now 7.75 years), there are some models that owners can't wait to get rid off within a year of buying.

    iSeeCars.com recently compared new car sales against used-car purchases in 2014 to figure out which vehicles were traded-in the fastest. Their analysis showed that on average, around 2.7 percent of all new vehicles are traded in after only a year’s ownership. More surprising was the vehicles that had the highest amount of trade-ins. The expectation would be that the vehicles with the highest amount of trade-ins would be cheap. Not so fast. iSeeCars.com in their analysis the vehicles with highest trade-ins range from $18,000 to $45,000.

    “iSeeCars.com analysts think the fact that consumers are giving more of these cars up than the average is directly linked to quality or perceived quality of the cars,” says Phong Ly, CEO of iSeeCars.com. “Because purchasing a new car is expensive and something most people tend to spend a lot of time on, it stands to reason they would make a change shortly afterward if they felt the quality was lacking.”

    Here's the list of the vehicles with the highest trade-in amounts,

    1. Buick Regal - 10.7 Percent Traded-In
    2. Chevrolet Sonic - 8.9 Percent Traded-In
    3. BMW X1 - 7.8 Percent Traded-In
    4. Dodge Charger - 7.7 Percent Traded-In
    5. Mercedes-Benz C-Class - 7.4 Percent Traded-In
    6. Chevrolet Cruze - 7.2 Percent Traded-In
    7. Nissan Frontier - 6.9 Percent Traded-In

    Source: Forbes

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Does this count fleet cars?  Some of those cars are high on rental car lots, so there could be a buy and sell after one year.

     

    The C-class surprises me, unless people are trading the old one on the new model year, normally I'd think people would keep one of those.  The X1 is tiny, so I could see the yuppies trading to an X3 after a year and realizing they bought a small wagon more than a crossover.

     

    Charger, Sonic and Cruze not surprised, I am surprised the Chrysler 200 or Dodge Journey isn't on there.  If they even make the Journey still.

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    C-Class is a curiosity, but I wouldn't be surprised that buyers are jumping ship to the A4, or even Mercedes' CLA. The CLA still gets the badge, and more stuff inside for a lower price. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    C-Class is a curiosity, but I wouldn't be surprised that buyers are jumping ship to the A4, or even Mercedes' CLA. The CLA still gets the badge, and more stuff inside for a lower price. 

     

    The old C-Class was way behind the times compared to the competition. The new C-Class you'd have to pry from my cold-dead hands.

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Those new C-classes are sweet.  I was hoping to get one as a loaner on my last service visit, but I got a GLK instead.

     

    The Journey must have a lot of sales to Avis and National.  People can't seriously buy that thing.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'll be blunt... the Regal, although a really nice car, doesn't do anything exceptional.  It doesn't offer anything special.  And if you're tall, like me, it's impossible to get in/out of.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Those new C-classes are sweet.  I was hoping to get one as a loaner on my last service visit, but I got a GLK instead.

     

    The Journey must have a lot of sales to Avis and National.  People can't seriously buy that thing.

     

    Why not?  It is one of the few small to mid-size crossovers that still has a V6. The V6 gets pretty good fuel economy (better than the EPA rating).  They updated the interior about 2 years ago.  It has a 3rd row for children at a price point that only gets you a 2-row at Toyota, Honda, GM, and Ford.

     

    Not hard to see why it still sell... you just need to look. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    According to the study methodology, fleet cars were excluded from the analysis. THopefully this will be updated soon on Forbes' website.

    Does this count fleet cars?  Some of those cars are high on rental car lots, so there could be a buy and sell after one year.

     

    The C-class surprises me, unless people are trading the old one on the new model year, normally I'd think people would keep one of those.  The X1 is tiny, so I could see the yuppies trading to an X3 after a year and realizing they bought a small wagon more than a crossover.

     

    Charger, Sonic and Cruze not surprised, I am surprised the Chrysler 200 or Dodge Journey isn't on there.  If they even make the Journey still.

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm really surprised about the Regal.  I wonder what it gets traded on.

     

    In that eassist on buicks thread i started in Buick forum, this was what i posted

     

     

     

     

    There is a glut of used 14's on the market for cheap. Was it possible there were some fleet only regals without turbo OR eAssist?

    For the pricing I could live with less go juice for 30mpg everyday. That would be a luxurious 'econocar' alternative at that price. Cobalt only gets 27-28 in winter anyways.

     

     

    I am not convinced all these regals are being 'traded in'.  I did recongnize there were a buttload of 2014 regals for good deals, but i bet they were fleet vehicles or otherwise dealer vehicles that were titled and then turned used.  I can't help but think there is a sub story behind this.  The Regal is a good vehicle and the only thing i can think is some old farts bought Regals thinking they were floaters and then found out they were not and maybe wanted the bigger backseat of the lacrosse too.

     

    GM prob built a whole batch of 14 regals non turbo for fleets only and those are the used regals we see being 'traded in'.  a few turbos in the mix too.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Regal needs a V6.  It is not a premium vehicle without one.

    But a possible $70,000 Cadillac CT6 is going to have a 4-cyldiner, so by that level of engine placement the Regal should have a base turbo 3-cylinder and the top end Lacrosse a turbo four.

     

    Personally, I think Cadillac should use the 330 hp V6 as their base CTS and CT6 engine, turbo 4 in ATS only.  I am all for the "there is no replacement for displacement" argument, since the Maxima, Camry, Passat, Accord all come with a V6, I'd have no problem with a Regal V6.  If the Malibu is 4-cylinder only, giving the Regal a V6 is a good way to separate the two.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Regal needs a V6.  It is not a premium vehicle without one.

    But a possible $70,000 Cadillac CT6 is going to have a 4-cyldiner, so by that level of engine placement the Regal should have a base turbo 3-cylinder and the top end Lacrosse a turbo four.

     

    Personally, I think Cadillac should use the 330 hp V6 as their base CTS and CT6 engine, turbo 4 in ATS only.  I am all for the "there is no replacement for displacement" argument, since the Maxima, Camry, Passat, Accord all come with a V6, I'd have no problem with a Regal V6.  If the Malibu is 4-cylinder only, giving the Regal a V6 is a good way to separate the two.

     

     

    Is this really going to be the dead horse you beat for the next 5 years?

    The CT6 (bigger than a 740i remember) actually has a curb weight a few pounds under the Buick Regal and an all new 8-speed auto to make the most of the 2.0T's torque.  It is not the same transmission that the CTS has currently, so you can't base the performance off that. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Kinda makes you wonder what model Regal was traded in....base models I could see, but I like the GS....

     

    Sonic- You really don't get the fun models until you get the higher trims...at that point you are in Cruze range already....with very few leases on them...

     

    Cruze- No one seems to like the 1.4 in that car....doesn't help that the engine has issues also.....also one of the oldest looking compacts out there.....

     

    X1-Why? The realized they wasted money on this little thing....

     

    Charger- Bet most were traded for the new model....

     

    C class- other automakers stepping up their game....

     

    Nissian- Can only think they might have been traded in on the new GM twins......

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As has been noted by several people already, I sure wish they would've included an idea at least of what these vehicles people are obtaining in place of them.  That might help explain some things ... & maybe give more insight.  But, what do I know!?

     

     

    Cort :) www.oldcarsstronghearts.com

    1979 & 1989 Caprice Classics | pigValve, paceMaker, cowValve
    "And the simple truth so very much clearer" __ Everything __ 'Hooch'
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My wife and I bought a Regal GS six speed manual in 2013, the car was awesome. However it had to have timing chains replaced at 6,000 miles, we traded for a crew cab 6.2l sierra

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    As has been noted by several people already, I sure wish they would've included an idea at least of what these vehicles people are obtaining in place of them.  That might help explain some things ... & maybe give more insight.  But, what do I know!?

     

     

    Cort :) www.oldcarsstronghearts.com

    1979 & 1989 Caprice Classics | pigValve, paceMaker, cowValve
    "And the simple truth so very much clearer" __ Everything __ 'Hooch'

    oy

    Nothing wrong with a little more info.....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Another harebrained theory:  Buick buyers WANT a soft riding, quietly luxurious car to drive after dealing with patients all day.  Regal jars them with its Euro sport sedan demeanor, it is incongruous with what people expect, and want, from a Buick. LaCrosse, Enclave and Verano seem to fit in better with that image.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I see no reason Buick can't offer both types of cars. If you want something sporty, get the Regal (and it's not bone jaring at all, unless you're in a GS using the GS setting, then what do you expect?). If you want soft luxury, get the Lacrosse or Enclave

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    agree with Drew here.  Buick can do both, within reason.  That 2011 Regal manual I test drove a few weeks ago was just about perfect for me.  Fairly quite and nice riding, but not a floater.  Still very luxurious.  Regal is the best car for it.  One that car is redone, lightened etc., it will improve in the market i think.  Its not marketed now, and its tight in the rear seat, but the car is a nice size for between small and barge.

     

    Adjustable suspensions is one way a lux car maker can do both, cush and sport.  I wonder if Cadillacs new rep as drivers cars is taking away from their old cush rep, and affecting their sales.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      IHS Markit recently published their analysis on how long Americans are holding onto their vehicles. The average according to the firm stands at 11.9 years, the highest amount since they have been tracking this. Also, about one in four vehicles is over sixteen years old. We should note that this data came before COVID-19 started to wreak havoc on the U.S. IHS notes that new cars only made up 6.1 percent of vehicles in operation in 2019, down 0.8 percent when compared to high of 2016. This highlights falling new car sales.
      But the question lingering over automakers and analysts is will the pandemic cause sales to fall even further as more people hang on to their vehicles.
      "People are going to keep their vehicles because they don't know if they're going to be driving to work in the future, they don't know if they're going to be driving to work anytime soon even. If you're not accumulating the miles, you might keep that vehicle on the road a little longer," said Todd Campau, associate director of aftermarket solutions at IHS Markit.
      IHS estimates that new cars in operation could drop to 5% or less in the coming year or so. The firm also expects the age to climb upward in the coming years as owners consider whether or not to spend the hefty amount on a car, when their current vehicle is still quite good.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), CNBC

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      IHS Markit recently published their analysis on how long Americans are holding onto their vehicles. The average according to the firm stands at 11.9 years, the highest amount since they have been tracking this. Also, about one in four vehicles is over sixteen years old. We should note that this data came before COVID-19 started to wreak havoc on the U.S. IHS notes that new cars only made up 6.1 percent of vehicles in operation in 2019, down 0.8 percent when compared to high of 2016. This highlights falling new car sales.
      But the question lingering over automakers and analysts is will the pandemic cause sales to fall even further as more people hang on to their vehicles.
      "People are going to keep their vehicles because they don't know if they're going to be driving to work in the future, they don't know if they're going to be driving to work anytime soon even. If you're not accumulating the miles, you might keep that vehicle on the road a little longer," said Todd Campau, associate director of aftermarket solutions at IHS Markit.
      IHS estimates that new cars in operation could drop to 5% or less in the coming year or so. The firm also expects the age to climb upward in the coming years as owners consider whether or not to spend the hefty amount on a car, when their current vehicle is still quite good.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), CNBC
    • By William Maley
      There has been a prevailing thought about the likes of Uber and Lyft that once they switch from human drivers to self-driving vehicles, they would stand to see a significant reduction in overall operating costs. This possibly means consumers could see these services as an alternative to owning a vehicle. But a new study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) disputes that claim.
      Researchers Ashley Nunes and Kristen D. Hernandez examined the San Francisco market on the per-mile cost of an automated taxi service to owning a vehicle. They found an automated taxi would range between $1.58 and $6.01 per mile, while the conventional vehicle would be at $0.72 per mile.
      "When we started going into this work, we found there's a lot of hand-waving. There was a notion that 'All we have to do is remove the driver, assume a reduction in insurance, and there's our great number.' We said, 'Let's hold it up to scrutiny.' It didn't hold up," explained Nunes to Automotive News.
      The massive disparity gap isn't due to ownership or maintenance, rather a fundamental issue about the taxi market in general. Nunes said taxi operators drive too many miles without a paying customer - hence their higher costs. In San Francisco, the MIT researchers found a 52 percent utilization rate for ride-hailing. Even if they were able to reach 100 percent utilization, Nunes said they would still be "unable to provide a fare that's comparable to car ownership."
      "Their approach with the investment folks has been, 'Trust us, we'll figure this out and it'll be this great utopia where everyone is jumping from an Uber to a scooter to an air taxi.The future may well be all those things. But you need to demonstrate you can offer the service at a price point that consumers are willing and able to pay. Thus far, they are unable to do so," said Nunes.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      There has been a prevailing thought about the likes of Uber and Lyft that once they switch from human drivers to self-driving vehicles, they would stand to see a significant reduction in overall operating costs. This possibly means consumers could see these services as an alternative to owning a vehicle. But a new study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) disputes that claim.
      Researchers Ashley Nunes and Kristen D. Hernandez examined the San Francisco market on the per-mile cost of an automated taxi service to owning a vehicle. They found an automated taxi would range between $1.58 and $6.01 per mile, while the conventional vehicle would be at $0.72 per mile.
      "When we started going into this work, we found there's a lot of hand-waving. There was a notion that 'All we have to do is remove the driver, assume a reduction in insurance, and there's our great number.' We said, 'Let's hold it up to scrutiny.' It didn't hold up," explained Nunes to Automotive News.
      The massive disparity gap isn't due to ownership or maintenance, rather a fundamental issue about the taxi market in general. Nunes said taxi operators drive too many miles without a paying customer - hence their higher costs. In San Francisco, the MIT researchers found a 52 percent utilization rate for ride-hailing. Even if they were able to reach 100 percent utilization, Nunes said they would still be "unable to provide a fare that's comparable to car ownership."
      "Their approach with the investment folks has been, 'Trust us, we'll figure this out and it'll be this great utopia where everyone is jumping from an Uber to a scooter to an air taxi.The future may well be all those things. But you need to demonstrate you can offer the service at a price point that consumers are willing and able to pay. Thus far, they are unable to do so," said Nunes.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    • By William Maley
      Ask Peter Welch, the CEO of the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) what worries him the most, he'll admit that it is average consumers getting priced out of new cars.
      He admitted this yesterday at the Automotive News World Congress in Detroit. Welch said that the latest figures he has seen - through October of last year - reveal the average retail price of a new car climbing to a new high of $35,366. The average monthly payment is hovering at $538, and interest rates have climbed to an average of 5.76 percent (new) and 9 percent (used). Longer loan terms are becoming common, with the average length standing at 64.3 months.
      "You know, people buying $55,000 pickup trucks with $1,000-a-month payments — I've never seen it. A lot of people don't think that's sustainable," said Welch.
      "That is going to put a giant dent in the SAARs and it almost makes me wonder if at some point we're going to see another Henry Ford," offering new and more affordable vehicles.
      Aside from more people buying more expensive trucks and utility vehicles, Welch said other reasons for the increases in prices come down to new fuel economy standards and safety equipment. He sees new car prices rising towards $40,000 with $800 monthly payments.
      On a slightly positive note, NADA predicts that 16.8 million light vehicles will be sold in 2019. While down from 17.3 million in 2018, Welch notes there are some positive economic indicators "such as high employment rates, a solid GDP and a healthy economy overall."
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) 

      View full article
  • Posts

    • It may take some marketshare. It's likely to grabs a bunch of the 'look at me' vanity sales... maybe Leonardo DiCaprio will drive one to an awards show no one watches. But I doubt it'll break 100K in year 2- it just doesn't address truck buyer's needs & wants. Don't forget- that claimed $39K starting price doesn't go as fast nor tow as much, and Tesla raises prices just about MONTHLY... so a number announced going on 2 years ago now is likely going to be a good $5K more. And they're all going to be the same color. Also, the Tesla brand name doesn't carry any weight with the truck demographic. By nearly every metric, it has a steep uphill climb.
    • I get that leading in one or two metrics is meaningless, it is like those commercials that say car A has more standard horsepower than car B, meanwhile car B gets better fuel economy and has 2 option engines that car A doesn’t mention in their commercial. But the Cybertruck has a lot of good metrics, attractive price, and unique styling plus the Tesla brand name.  I think it will sell just fine, I’d be shocked if it wasn’t 100k units a year and I think they could do 200k.     I am not saying the Cybertruck will outsell the F150, but it will take a little market share from existing trucks.
    • Wow.  I didn't realize that.  It's the "reboot" of an older interior, and a very good job of it. Like that dome light on the side of the console.  I think I see a manual window crank.  If so, that's wild.
    • Terminally ill big boy:   
    • ^ You are conflating assembly point with company home country. - - - - - The infinitesimal differences in maximum rated towing or payload do not drive sales by themselves, as the major players are commonly within a few percentage points of each other. This has been patiently explained here numerous times; the 'top number' in a given criteria doesn't drive sales by itself. Ram TD has 1,075 TRQ whereas GMC/ Chevy has 910, but the Ram doesn't handily outsell its competition, thusly disproving your 'model'. Because that's exactly it- (and with trucks especially); they need to be competitive. And they are, and then truck consumers pick the BEST BALANCE of features and capabilities and personal preferences and PRICE and buy 'X'. The Tesla pickup tries to pass off uncompetitiveness in product with "re-invention", and it's just laughable. And what little actually tangible things it does offer (the front trunk, no fuel costs... I can't think of anything else) are going to be offered by a host of competitors by the time it ever gets out. Couple that with the LACK of certain features and it has an immense uphill battle for marketshare. When you ignore the vast data set of the 'Phoenix Rising' of pickups over the last 50 years and instead take a hard left turn and try to pitch it as 'This is what you really want', it just comes off as ill-prepared and unresponsive.
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. 2QuickZ's
      2QuickZ's
      (46 years old)
    2. martin01
      martin01
      (27 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...