Jalopnik 
Enter your username and password.
Detroit, 3:18 PM
Sun Nov 8
7 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jalopnik.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | Email | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler | Email
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin | Email
Associate Editor - Houston:
Matt Hardigree
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Ben Wojdyla
Editor-at-Large:
Mike Spinelli
Contributors:
Mark Arnold
John Krewson | Email
Andy Didorosi
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
Will they be less than a Mini? Possibly Fit/Yaris territory?
If so these will sell nicely, at least here in CA.
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
good news!
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
/glass half empty.
08/17/09
[www.epa.gov]
Oh, and DON'T SELL DIESELS. The take reate for VW Sportwagen diesels was only 81% in June this year. So obviously no one in North America wants diesels either.
[www.autoblog.com]
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but from a standpoint of sheer, cold reason, that just isn't sufficient justification. The overwhelming majority of buyers in non-sports cars/bare-bones econoboxes categories, such as say, midsize sedans and crossovers, buy automatics. And, as you point out, that is 92% of the market. The money goes where the market is. It's that damn simple.
Yes, I realize that it is a terrible thing from an enthusiast standpoint. I get it. But from a business standpoint, it makes sense. And right now, the overwhelming majority of people expect car companies, particularly GM and Chrysler, to do what makes sense from a business standpoint, especially since it's our damn money they are spending.
I'll grant that you have the makings of a fair argument with the diesel thing. But I won't place my bets on the example of one model, especially when all the other diesel models in the lineup have seen sharp declines in sales.
08/17/09
Let's test your 'logic'. What percentage of cars come with a manual? Your business case is just wrong. No one wants to build the manual cars for the manual drivers. Instead, they build pig heavy automatic boats, then, if they deign to put in a manual at all, they only offer them with one engine, instead of the way GM used to do it, with all engines, and all trannies.
People want choice. And people will get it. From Korea, Japan, India, Germany or even England (God bless Lotus) if they can't get it from the locals.
If that 'business case' malarky were true, then Tata, Hyundai, and Lotus wouldn't even be here. You're just wrong.
08/17/09
No, seriously.
And now let's extend your logic out just a little bit:
If current car makers offer few cars with manual transmissions, why might that be? It certainly wasn't a random decision on the part of Rick Wagoner. It was a decision based on the fact that at some point, when both manuals and automatics were available in equal portion, the automatics started outselling the manuals, and took off in popularity from there. More people want automatics than they do manuals. Thusly, car companies build more automatics than they do with manuals. That is a logical business case.
Also, I don't believe the VW statistic. They build however many manuals they project will sell, and even in cars like the little GTI, the DSG outsells the manuals.
What does this tell us?
Enthusiasts (~8% of the market) will always love manuals, and will always be able to get a select few fun cars with manuals. The rest of the world (~92% of the market) likes automatic transmission-equipped toasters. There's a reason that you really don't see manual-equipped Camrys.
Yes, it is the anti-Jalop attitude and an anti-Jalop train of thought. But the majority of the population are not Jalops, and it is a poor Jalop who sees the world for how s/he wants it to be, and not for how it truly is.
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
There may be money to be made from selling manuals, but the question is whether or not that money will offset the cost to produce them. Since GM doesn't make an manual sportwagons, my guess is that the answer is a resounding "no".
And how the hell I am selling the idea of "failure"? Like it or not, GM failed and filed bankruptcy. And they also borrowed billions of dollars of federal money. They are at the mercy of the federal government. The result is that they need to focus on the bread-and-butter cars that sell the most, which are automatic transmission-equipped midsize cars and crossovers.
That's the reality of it.
Going on a hate GM rant for doing what they have no choice in doing is not exactly helping them or your desire for a manual sportwagon. And it's not as if you don't have other options. As we both pointed out BMW has them available in limited quantities, as does VW and Saab (and, just to make a point, the Saab one is actually a GM car, and Saabs are selling about as fast rotten eggs.).
You can't change it, so you may as well get over it and buy a car from another automaker.
08/17/09
08/18/09
08/18/09
Everything changes. All the time.
".. so you may as well get over it and buy a car from another automaker..."
That's what's going to change it.
And believe me, I will.
08/18/09
You really ARE good...
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
(Uncle Rupert won't let me read this unless I subscribe to the WSJ. I am opposed to giving Uncle Rupert any of my money as he'll just spend it on more Glenn Becks; Anyone got another link?)
08/17/09
08/17/09
I would rock a 500 Abarth just so the stupid JCW folks would feel like they were driving last decade's hotness.
08/17/09
08/17/09