There really is no hard and fast rule for this anymore, it is totally dependent on the car being considered. For vehicles like the Wrangler and Tacoma that hold their value well there is almost no reason to consider a newish used model since the depreciation hit is negligible and sometimes new is cheaper depending on…
Zaskarx
zaskarx
Yeah, this prettymuch describes the Nissan Rogue perfectly: relatively cheap, dowdy, ubiquitous. and more or less reliable.
I read recently that Gen Z prefers sedans to SUVs, I don’t know how GM plans to shake Buick’s stodgy rep by peddling a bunch of frumpy crossovers and killing off it's only somewhat interesting car.
You, sir, know a great product. I bought a certified used 2018 Regal Sportback for a stupidly low price and it is a great car.
It’s the thing to do these days, take a storied name like Cherokee, Renegade, Blazer, Pathfinder, Eclipse, etc and slap it onto the the blandest lump of crossover possible hoping some of the past excitement will rub off on an otherwise unremarkable product.
We should be so lucky, I’m worried it is going to be a butched-up Escape with a $45k starting price.
No kidding, if that manager worked for me I’d fire him straight away.
Eh, if SUV buyers are too obese/decrepit to get in and out of a normal cars how are they going to break rocks in the gulags? Seems more trouble than it’s worth.
Godwin’s law took a little longer than usual, but not much!
This. My wife and I recently bought a certified 2018 Buick Regal for less than half of MSRP. This is a decidedly uncool car, but it is fast, comfortable, has a great warranty. Plus, it was much cheaper than a used crossover/SUV of the same vintage.
As a resident of Phoenix, I’m not surprised. Suburban sprawl is completely out of control. Many of my coworkers commute obscene distances in order to have an affordable McMansion in the burbs. It’s not uncommon for people here to put 30-40k miles per year on their cars.
Because car buying data shows that women are indeed the ones buying luxury SUVs and the concept of a performance SUV is an oxymoron.
It’s all a marketing exercise; consumers want the appearance of rugged capability but the fuel mileage, comfort, and convenience of a minivan. They have no intentions of ever taking the thing off-road so actual capability is a moot point as long as it looks the part. I think Kia is on to something.
Old school SUVs (like your Bronco) were designed for rugged use offroad - much like the trucks they were based on. With few exceptions, these were body on frame vehicles, thus BOF became synonymous with heavy duty trucks and SUVs.
Just tell them that a mullet isn’t a real haircut and that Van Halen isn’t a real band.
Yeah, it looks like an FJ Cruiser or that 2004ish Bronco concept. Not a bad look, but already dated.
Wow, 500mm (20in) is an insane amount of suspension travel. That’s about what most stadium race trucks have and quite a bit more than the Ford Raptor at a wimpy 13in.
This is the reason I got rid of my Rubicon. It wasn’t a comfortable commuter/road trip car and I couldn’t stomach the pinstriping and undercarriage dents and dings to a $40k SUV when I used it the way it was intended. I didn’t think I would care when I bought it, but stressing out about potential damage killed the joy…
See, that anti-foul coat they install at the factory, there’s nothing we can do about it.
Yeah but how do you account for the lost business due to customers thinking you are an asshole for price gouging? If I saw that nonsense when I walked into the showroom I’d buy my Camry elsewhere.