PDA

View Full Version : How things have changed.



digifish
9th November 2007, 08:48 AM
This morning I was in a group of cars travelling down the freeway. They were

Dihatsu Sirion
Suzuki Swift (new)
Ford Festiva (new)
Holden Astra

Nothing patricularly noteworthy, what is interesting is that they were all full of middle aged males. You know something, that little patch of road was for a moment a happier, friendlier place :)

EDIT: ...and my Astra seemed bigger...too big, I thought a Fiat 500 may be a better size :)

In 1998 I bought an SB barina to run about in. I was the only bloke driving around in a small car. Not any more.

digifish

cbrmale
9th November 2007, 09:14 AM
I read this morning that local car makers are seeking more assistance from the Government to save the car industry. The big problem is they are making the wrong sort of cars! I could have bought any one of the local cars for the same or less money than my SRi (and I have a family) but for few reasons:

1. Big cars are more expensive to run: both high fuel costs and high depreciation - and these days the two are linked closer.
2. I have a ten-year-old house in the suburbs of Canberra, and I couldn't fit a Camry or Magna into the garage! There are double roller doors and a centre pillar, and it's a combination of the angle of the drive and the narrow door opening. I would have to rebuild the garage with a single door and extra reinforcement for the roof to get one in.
3. I don't really need a big car for the family, because we only travel as the four of us a couple of times a year. The Astra is big enough for the family on those times (and this is why I bought a SRi 2.2 hatch, because I need the hatch and I wanted the 2.2).
4. I just don't like driving or parking big cars - they are awkward in the traffic and difficult to get into tight parking spots.

I don't have any mercy for the local industry, because they have been living a fools paradise. This has happened before (six and eight cylinder sales collapsed in the mid-1970s and again in the early-1980's) Fuel crises have happened before, only in the past the local industry also made small and medium-sized cars.

Wraith
9th November 2007, 09:30 AM
One of my biggest grudges with most car manufacturers and all their new model cars, is they just keep getting bigger and bigger with each new model of a particular series...........WHY ??? it's just not neccessary and would save them huge costs as well !!!

Surely they can't just continually keep upsizing each new model ??

It's my only point of dislike with the new VE Commodore, ie: it's physical size is just too big...

GreyRex
9th November 2007, 10:48 AM
One of my biggest grudges with most car manufacturers and all their new model cars, is they just keep getting bigger and bigger with each new model of a particular series...........WHY ??? it's just not neccessary and would save them huge costs as well !!!

Surely they can't just continually keep upsizing each new model ??

It's my only point of dislike with the new VE Commodore, ie: it's physical size is just too big...

I think your average customer perceives a newer car as being better if it has more of everything, including size. Manufacturers tend to add more and more standard features as well, so that can increase weight. Also, how do we think are cars are becoming safer? Increased structural integrity generally means increased weight. Although Mazda seems to be going great guns lately with new models nearly the same weight... Mazda 2, MX5...

digifish
9th November 2007, 11:00 AM
Also, how do we think are cars are becoming safer? Increased structural integrity generally means increased weight.

It doesn't have to. F1 cars have been made a lot safer with no weight penalty. The selection of advanced composites will reduce weight and increase safety.

But it's at added cost....for a while, until it is the standard and the volumes are up. I don't buy the argument that weight and safety have to be linked.

digifish

cbrmale
9th November 2007, 12:04 PM
Size and the corresponding increase in weight are all to do with majority customer desires at the time these cars were designed, which is mostly some years ago. Remember that the customers for these cars are fleets, and fleet drivers do not pay the running costs of their cars. Eighty percent of new Commodores and Falcons are sold to fleets, and the majority of privately owned Australian cars have been bought second-hand two to three years old (and probably thrashed and abused for those two or three years).

However, car fleets are not a bottomless pits of money, and fleets are downsizing as happened during previous oil price rises.

As far as fleet drivers and size goes, I suggest the desire for a bigger car is inversely proportional to the size of something else. And when you get to the two-tonne Landcruiser for commuting to Sydney CBD, you are getting into major masculinity crisis territory! And quite a few of the two-tonne Landcruisers with the roof mounted air intakes (it's amazing how many times I haven't been able to drive my car to work because there's two metres of water across the road) are also fleet vehicles!

The cost of these fleets are passed onto us, the consumer, through the overall pricing of goods and services. In other words, if sales reps and managers drove Vivas and Astras rather than Commodores and Landcruisers, we would pay less for milk and bread and almost everything else you can think of.

rjastra
9th November 2007, 05:13 PM
Although Mazda seems to be going great guns lately with new models nearly the same weight... Mazda 2, MX5...

1. The MX5 sales are slipping. The weight of the NC was more than the NB it replaced. Mazda forgets to tell people that it ditched the spare wheel and fitted a much lighter engine and still couldn't stop a weight increase :)

2. The MAzda2 is lighter because it is smaller than the car it replaced. They deleted the heavy sliding/folding rear seat. Also the old model was rather chunky for its class :)

Smoke and mirrors ;)

GreyRex
9th November 2007, 06:32 PM
1. The MX5 sales are slipping. The weight of the NC was more than the NB it replaced. Mazda forgets to tell people that it ditched the spare wheel and fitted a much lighter engine and still couldn't stop a weight increase :)

2. The MAzda2 is lighter because it is smaller than the car it replaced. They deleted the heavy sliding/folding rear seat. Also the old model was rather chunky for its class :)

Smoke and mirrors ;)

All i was meaning was at least they're making an effort. Most manufacturers have decent increases with each model and it seems uncommon to find a manufacturer that doesn't. Sales figures didn't enter into it, was more the principle:) :)

bornwild
9th November 2007, 10:00 PM
Well, they used to drive those V8's because they could afford it...now it's a different story. Same story used to be with Europe in the early 90's. I remember the BMW 318 of the time used to drink around 12-13l average!!!

:)