smk4565

8k unit lead over Mercedes, close race going into Q4.

I feel like Infiniti hasn't released a new car in 4 years, and it was a re-bodied GLA, and their sales numbers show.

Big drops here, Lexus cars outside of the ES are dead in the water, LC is overpriced, GS is older than dirt and needs killed, likewise with the IS. They probably should just go with the ES and LS, ES for volume and the platform share, and LS just because you need a flagship car even if it doesn't have much volume. They should be selling 20,000 Tundras a month also, that thing needs redone in a bad way.

Up 4.8% for the month, down 0.5% for the year in a market that is shrinking. SLC is a dead car, current GLA is probably out of production and new CLA just hit dealers in September, the SUVs are on fire, and they have GLB and EQ C coming to next year. I wish more people bought the sedans, but people are just leaving sedans sadly.

It won't work. The only way subscription could work is for drivers there are borderline un-insurable. People could pay anywhere from $500-4000 a year on car insurance. If you are a high risk driver that can only get a $300 a month rate for insurance, then maybe a subscription makes sense. But even then I am not sure it does. Subscription only works to a ride share service. Like if Uber offered unlimited rides for $300 a month, people would sign up for that. And that business model for Uber only works with an autonomous car when there is no labor cost involved.

China might do that. I don't see how Subaru and Mazda survive as independents with how expensive self driving and electric car development is. If Toyota bought both, and utilized the AWD system of Subaru, the sky active engines of Mazda and Toyota hybrids and their own stuff, they can come up with a powertrain they can put all over the place, and have a 4 brand line up.

I would hope for $100k you get a hybrid powertrain. You aren't getting build quality or reliability for that price. Nor are you getting a car that can beat an AMG in performance. Spending $5 billion on Maserati is practically throwing money away. They aren't a good brand, to make them relevant it would take like $25 billion to turn it around. This is a dead brand walking, living on nostalgia pseudo Italian flair.

Toyota should just buy 100% of Subaru, FCA, Mazda and Nissan, kill half the brands and consolidate all that and get it over with.

They could and there is no reason they can’t introduce a new engine family more than once every 15 years. This company is like FCA trying to run on a shoe string budget.

Agreed, he won't do any of those things they say he will.

Not enough engine choices, there should be minimum 3 engine offerings. Probably has worst in class fuel economy due to the only engine being a 5.6 V8 from a 2007 Infiniti M56.

GM doesn’t need an A45 competitor, they could use a competitor to this engine for rear drive application. Although look at the bulk of GM sales which is front drive crossover with a thirsty 300 hp V6. If GM has this motor it could replace the 3.6 V6 company wide. On the Mercedes side, I like them using what that have in as many places as they can use it, it would be a waste to only use this engine in A-class and GLB. C-class and GLC can use it too.

It makes sense to use it in larger cars, add a mild hybrid to it plus being around 380-400 hp depending on tune and this could be the E400/E450 engine and replace the six cylinder in C43 and GLC43. Most car company people refuse to comment on future product, Moers always seems willing to offer it up. Which I think is smart because they can gauge customer reaction before they do it.

The main problem with the Arteon is an Audi A4 2.0T Premium is $42,000. The secondary problem is the Kia Stinger is cheaper, the new Hyundai Sonata is a looker inside and out and much cheaper. This car just has a horrible value quotient.

0-60 doesn't matter in practical use, but nor do 1/4 mile times. The issue is how do you measure a car's acceleration? Can you measure 0-30 time at a peak of 2500 rpm to judge how a car feels or pulls away under light load? There is no way to compare power/torque delivery of a vehicle due to weight, transmissions and gearing being different on all of them that you can' just compare horsepower. Cars spent most of their life driving under 60 mph, unless you do constant interstate driving. And the times you are above 60 at interstate speed you aren't really using acceleration. So I think 0-60 makes sense in that it shows how much acceleration power a car has in typical driving speeds.

To add to this, in 2030, China and big chunks of the EU may ban ICE vehicles for sale. So given that those are Mercedes 2 biggest markets, it would make sense that they have a full EV line post 2030. 12 years ago was iPhone 1, 14 years ago was the launch of You Tube. A lot can happen in 10-15 years. If Daimler pours R&D dollars into electric cars they can get that battery cost down, they can probably reduce warranty costs and build/design complexity, there may be other areas to pick up savings when the economies of scale kick in.

About 10-12 years is what they get from an engine, and that usually involves some overhauls along the way. They could go to a turbo 4 with more electric power, but I feel like in 10 years they'll have the batteries figured out and no one is going to want a n ICE when you can just get any amount of power you want from an electric, with more cabin space and less maintenance. Wouldn't surprise me if the whole Mercedes line was electric only in 2030.

The 48 volt mild hybrid V8, Inline 6 and inline 4 are new engines, most models don't even have them yet. So you figure this is a fresh engine line, the 4.0 V8 has been around a few years, but has a 2020 MY update. The I-6 launched in 2019. That engine line with little tweaks and upgrades can get them to 2030. By then they will have an all EV line up I would imagine.

Needed a power bump years ago and I doubt the cost of a 2.4 liter engine vs a 2 liter engine is pretty negligible.

Toyota can't put Lexus-level quality and reliability into the Tundra and beat any domestic truck in that area? Toyota can't beat them in fuel economy and price? I think Toyota is slacking in full size trucks. The current Tundra is the worst full size truck on sale, and there is no excuse for that with the resources Toyota has.

Toyota ran Ford and FCA out of sedans and GM is retreat. Toyota has the #1 selling SUV in the country. Toyota has the #1 selling mid-size truck. I don't see why they can't penetrate full size trucks with better success than they are now.

Nice update with some solid powertrain choices. This should continue to sell well andI bet the hybrid take rate is pretty high.

About time. You'd think 1 of the 300,000 or so people that work at Toyota would have figured out you can't sell a 2007 platform truck in 2019 and be competitive. There is zero reason why Toyota shouldn't have 20% of the full size truck market, and I am talking half tun trucks, not the F350 and up stuff which they don't have a vehicle to compete with.

If they already profit share then the UAW doesn’t really have anything to complain about.

Sure unions are greedy, but GM had $8 billion on net income least year, Mary Barra made $22 million. Corporations are greedy too. Maybe what GM should do is offer a profit share bonus, so on years like 2018 when there is an $8 billion profit, take $1 billion of that and pay to the workers. So then the workers also have incentive to build quality product, and ensure the company does well.