AutoObserver Readers Have Fun, Get Frothy Over 'DOA'
June 26, 2008
A storm of response greeted this week's story listing new or coming-soon models that were
conceived and developed long before gasoline topped $4 per gallon and thus "don't stand a chance" in the fuel-cost-frenzied U.S. market. Most readers took issue of some kind with our choices, or the rationale behind which models were selected as instant losers.
To be sure, some of AO's selections already have proven themselves as strong sellers, or surely will become big sellers. But the variety of commentary from readers adds plenty of spice to the already tongue-in-cheek piece - and in many cases, adds more to the dialogue.
"The current economic stagnation is accelerating this shift in taste," said one respondent agreeing with the general "changed rules" premise of the commentary and who thinks downsizing now is inevitable.
"Americans will still pause along the way down the luxury ladder, stopping for a brief respite in a Venza or Accord. Eventually though, they will realize a $16,000 Corolla or Fit will do the trick. If enough of us get 35-40 mpg it will help lead to more energy security."
Most, however, took issue with our choices:
"I agree with most of this article with one exception. How did the Accord make it onto a DOA list," asks a reader, pointing out the Accord currently is one of the nation's best-selling cars.
"How does a car that sells (well) because of its good gas mileage and comfortable package get rated as DOA?" the reader asks.
Our answer: The Accord is one example whose sales results counter the general premise of the story. Although we largely believe most of the models cited "don't stand a chance," the Accord clearly doesn't fit that construct. But the primary criticism of the Accord reinforces the story's message: it was designed to be larger and more powerful - attributes consumers now appear willing to give up in favor of improved efficiency. And we insist Honda didn't bother to engineer much innovation into its volume-seller, taking the easy - and now, wrong - way out.
BMW's way-out X6 instilled plenty of controversy. Here's our favorite response:
"But back to the X6. This particular vehicle is a perfect example of what I hate about the direction of the crossover/SUV market. Enormous proportions on the outside, without functional and practical room on the inside," bemoans the reader.
"I could spend all night writing about the number of crossovers and SUVs that have no more room for people and luggage than an average sized mid-sized sedan, or even a small hatchback. It pisses me off to be honest, because, I'm a guy who likes to go biking and hiking and camping and the like. And I need room on the inside - not a lot of bulky, sculpted sheet metal on the outside.
Some readers sought to add to our list: "One car that I think is surely DOA is the (Saturn)
Astra," said one. "Seriously, I've yet to see one!"
We agree. Had we the story to rewrite, we certainly would have added the poorly packaged, cheaply fitted and too-hastily "Americanized" Astra. In addition, the currency exchange is going the wrong way for the Astra to work for Saturn.
"Wow. I'm really surprised the 'new for 2008' Kia Borrego SUV wasn't mentioned," added
another reader. "This V8-powered SUV is a decade late to the SUV party and is surely doomed."
The same reader took another shot: The V6 powered Dodge Challenger SE gets decent fuel mileage (25 mpg highway), so stop picking on it. Not everyone wants a boring, slow hybrid family sedan."
Perhaps the best commentary was provided by a frequent contributor, "Fulcrumb." We replay it virtually in its entirety, which is rich in wit and insight.
"The '09 F-Series launch has been reportedly pushed back two months to Novemberish. This will give the dealers time to move out the '08s and the foundries to crank up V6 production," says Fulcrumb.
"I say bring out an updated version of the Manual Transmission Special Value Package from the 90's: V6, 5-or 6-speed manual, free A/C, AM/FM/6CD, and Sync - she'll (the'09 F-150) stay in the top five.
"I'd like to like the Lincoln MKS - but 'flagship?' Maybe a dingy to row out TO the flagship. The original MKR (concept car) was salsa muy caliente; this is catsup.
"Honda Pilot: sunglasses between the headlights, huh?
"Toyota Venza: product planners everywhere, but Chrysler thinks the Pacifica is the new black. To wit: the 7/8th scale Subaru Tribeca.
"We are entering another automotive dark age like we had in the mid 70s," the always-astute Fulcrumb asserts. "Back then, the double whammy of the oil embargo and new EPA regulations gave us the Mustang II, Vega, Chevette, Renault Le Car, Pacer, ad nauseum. Let's all hope this one ends with the decade."
We'll finish with the first respondent, who calls into question author Bill Visnic's journalistic and editorial skills.
"I do not know who Bill Visnic is, but he seems as if he is trying to make himself credible by attacking literally everyone. It is quite reminiscent of every article a New York Times food critic has written," the reader asserts, adding, "It is apparent that he failed out of his English 101 class too many times."
In the interests of full disclosure, we assure everyone Visnic toughed out a no-compromises "C" in freshman English. The first time through.
Photos by Manufacturers
1 - Honda Accord: Equal split between defenders and detractors.
2 - Saturn Astra: Yeah, we shoulda added this dog.
3 - Kia Borrego: Another new SUV the world has left behind.
Posted by Michelle Krebs at 4:15 PM under Commentary , Companies | Comments (4) | digg this | Seed Newsvine
"The Accord is one example whose sales results counter the general premise of the story. Although we largely believe most of the models cited "don't stand a chance," the Accord clearly doesn't fit that construct."
If the Accord "clearly doesn't fit that construct," then why was it included in the list? One of the things taught in English 101 is that the title (particularly for a list) should apply for everything included in the list. If it doesn't, one of two things should happen: A) remove the item not fitting with the title from the list or B) change the title.
It does not surprise that Visnic received a “C” in English 101. A better question: what grade did his editor receive?
“But the primary criticism of the Accord reinforces the story's message: it was designed to be larger and more powerful - attributes consumers now appear willing to give up in favor of improved efficiency."
Yes, the first half is correct. When this Accord was designed three or four years ago, larger and more powerful was the only way to go. The second half is only partially correct. Consumers do “appear” willing to give those up. Just like Honda, you think it would be natural to assume that as more consumer are favoring smaller, more efficient engines over larger, more powerful ones, the 190 hp four-cylinder engines would nearly snuff out the demand for the V6 Accord. Just like Honda, you’re wrong. As AutoObserver published in an article in the not-so-distant past, the reason the Accord’s sales were struggling for a while was because of the lack of V6’s available. Now, as they are able to adjust their product mix and tailor it to what the consumer is demanding, their sales are skyrocketing. After the first few months of the introduction, the Accord WAS down. Now, it is up nearly 7%. Next month will likely bring that number up even further.
Consumers are willing to give up space and power for efficiency, but all those people driving V8’s aren’t immediately ready to drop to an inline 4, particularly weak ones found on the Corolla and Civic. They are opting for powerful V6 family sedans that still offer as much space in the second row seat, as well as a tremendous increase in fuel efficiency.
“And we insist Honda didn't bother to engineer much innovation into its volume-seller, taking the easy - and now, wrong - way out.”
Though I entirely disagree with you yet again, I’m not going to even start on this one. Good use of the word “much” though, as it is used in such a subjective and vague manner, there’s no way to pin you to the wall. Hardly the “wrong – way” as the sales numbers show.
Posted by: snickers1 | June 27, 2008 at 1:35 PM
The Mazda6 should have been on the list.
Posted by: 1487 | June 30, 2008 at 6:49 AM
"We agree. Had we the story to rewrite, we certainly would have added the poorly packaged, cheaply fitted and too-hastily "Americanized" Astra."
Why would the Astra be on the list if the list is about new vehicles that that fuel efficiency? The Astra isnt "cheaply fitted" at all and such a statement is ridiculous. The Astra's interior is rivaled only by the Rabbits and far exceed the cheap plastic interior of the Corolla. The Astra isnt "Americanized" because its supposed to be an authentic European compact. In the past people criticized GM and Ford for "dumbing down" European cars for sale here in America so Saturn didnt change the Astra. The Astra lacks an ad budget and a sedan and that explains its sales so far. I wouldnt be surprised if sales increase once people become aware of the car.
Posted by: 1487 | June 30, 2008 at 6:54 AM
"Our answer: The Accord is one example whose sales results counter the general premise of the story. Although we largely believe most of the models cited "don't stand a chance," the Accord clearly doesn't fit that construct. But the primary criticism of the Accord reinforces the story's message: it was designed to be larger and more powerful - attributes consumers now appear willing to give up in favor of improved efficiency. And we insist Honda didn't bother to engineer much innovation into its volume-seller, taking the easy - and now, wrong - way out."
That was so out of touch, it made me giggle.
Posted by: brockster | July 28, 2008 at 7:17 AM