Quote :

"Edmunds explanation doesn't make a lot of intuitive sense to me because under their counting method the Corolla falls all the way down the list well past the Focus, which it is ahead of in DOTs list. If Edmunds is correct in the way the DOT is counting by subdividing models, then it would make sense to see trucks jump into the top ten in their list, but I'd expect to see the same order between the Focus and Corolla ESPECIALLY considering there are more variants of the focus than the Corolla (ok, I don't know if this is correct, I'm assuming). If it were the other way around, with the Corolla still being high on Edmunds with the focus being down, then that would make sense to me."

i understand your line of thinking and it would make sense if there actually were more models/engine options of the focus than the corolla, but as it were, there is only one model of the 2010 focus, with 2 engine/transmission option. There is also one model of the 2010 corolla but it has 4 engine/transmission options.

but really, all this is beside the point. Burro's claim that compacts are being traded in for gas guzzling trucks has been pretty thoroughly discredited, which was my original intent in posting the lists.

[Edited on August 10, 2009 at 10:25 PM. Reason : .]

8/10/2009 10:22:18 PM

No, it still makes sense. How, can DOT count Corollas and Focuses and then Edmunds have them so far apart from each other with the Corolla falling way down the list? It also falls below the Civic and the Cobalt.

I'm gonna have to go with the DOT on this one as I'd think they'd have better access to the most relevant data (namely, registrations).

I haven't been able to find out any explanation of how Edmunds gets their data.

Edit:

Quote :

"Edmunds.com's "Top Ten Clunker Buys" list is based on transaction data collected directly from dealers. "

I find that amazing that they have better and faster access directly to dealers than the DOT does.

[Edited on August 10, 2009 at 10:36 PM. Reason : .]

8/10/2009 10:28:13 PM

ah, ok, for some reason i was thinking the edmunds list had the focus below the corolla, which would make sense to me. should have gone back and reviewed the two lists. yes, the way the DOT counts vehicles will tend to reduce the number of vehicles with more variations (i.e. trucks, or the corolla in this case). so, you're right, that's a little odd, but certainly possible.

as far as edmund's methods for collecting data, all i could find was this:

Quote :

"Edmunds.com's "Top Ten Clunker Buys" list is based on transaction data collected directly from dealers. "

[Edited on August 10, 2009 at 10:38 PM. Reason : .]

8/10/2009 10:37:11 PM

Quote :

"Then you're reading comprehension is...terrible."

And your grasp of grammar is atrocious.

No, the link you point to simply points out the methodology of Edmunds vs. the DOT. It does not say anything about why we should not take Edmunds' ranking less seriously than the DOT - in fact, it says the opposite.

What was that about reading comprehension, again?

Quote :

"I didn't study everything that was posted, I didn't notice that it had been posted before, specifically because no one emphasized how fucking wrong douchenburro was to focus on that list instead of a correct one."

The same list was posted on the same page as your link by jwb9984.

Quote :

"Uh, how doesn't it? They created multiple separate buckets for the same damn vehicle."

No, the DOT did that. Edmunds combined them into single vehicles. Your own link says as much. jwb9984 even quotes it for you.

Again, what was that about reading comprehension?

8/10/2009 11:02:01 PM

Quote :

"No, the link you point to simply points out the methodology of Edmunds vs. the DOT. It does not say anything about why we should not take Edmunds' ranking less seriously than the DOT - in fact, it says the opposite."

Yeah, I read it wrong the first time because I can't believe that anyone could blindly look at the Edmunds list and take it at face value.

Quote :

" Again, what was that about reading comprehension?"

Yeah, I was reading shit quickly on an old slow as hell laptop so I could keep up with the conversation.

I wholeheartedly apology that I actually tried to make some sense out of the trash that Edmunds has for a list.

8/10/2009 11:24:05 PM

Quote :

" I wholeheartedly apology that I actually tried to make some sense out of the trash that Edmunds has for a list."

I don't like their facts, so I will continue to talk shit about them, even though I couldn't understand.

8/10/2009 11:31:55 PM

http://bluenc.com/bank-run-burr-lies-again

Quote :

"So it was reported on Wednesday of last week that Burr said he'd support Cash for Clunkers. The vote occurred Thursday evening, the very next day; and, you may be shocked to learn that Burr voted against the additional funding for Cash for Clunkers. "Bank Run" Burr lied again."

8/10/2009 11:36:48 PM

Quote :

"I wholeheartedly apology that I actually tried to make some sense out of the trash that Edmunds has for a list."

I appreciate your forthrightness in admitting your error, but I still don't understand why you take issue so much with Edmunds' methodology. The only thing I see you bring up is the relative ranking of the Corolla vs. the Focus; otherwise, the basic manner of their methodology seems more sound at first glance. (This of course is subject to change conditioned on additional facts.)

8/10/2009 11:40:45 PM

it would be most telling to see a more complete DOT list (or an edmunds style list with a breakdown of what each model sold). because a fusion hybrid is a lot different than the biggest-engine fusion out there.

8/10/2009 11:45:06 PM

Quote :

"I appreciate your forthrightness in admitting your error, but I still don't understand why you take issue so much with Edmunds' methodology. The only thing I see you bring up is the relative ranking of the Corolla vs. the Focus; otherwise, the basic manner of their methodology seems more sound at first glance. (This of course is subject to change conditioned on additional facts.)"

Because I assume...and I suppose this could be a hell of an assumption...that the DOT data will be more correct absent a complete fabrication of the data to make it look good. I'm not saying Edmunds can't get fast information from the dealers, but I'm skeptical. I'm guessing it's possible they have some survey company take samples for them, possibly by calling dealers directly and asking them what the sales were. And one can imagine that would be fraught with errors if it is done that way. Maybe it is done some other way, but without a good explanation from Edmunds on why their method is so much better, I'm going to assume it isn't.

[Edited on August 11, 2009 at 6:57 AM. Reason : .]

8/11/2009 6:56:58 AM

why couldn't edmunds just take the gubment's data and add up the models that are actually the same thing?

8/11/2009 9:26:04 AM

This is not that complicated. the DOT does not even have a complete list to release because, try and recall, dealers are having a terrible time submitting their paperwork. As such, the DOT figures are estimates based on what has been submitted. I was at a Toyota dealership recently and they said they have barely been able to submit seven out of every hundred cars they sold.

The Edmonds list is a survey, yes, but there are not that many dealers in the country, only in the tens of thousands. It is conceivable that they have managed to survey all of them. And there is no incentive I know of for the dealer to lie.

And try to remember, this is the DOT, they have not released their complete list, so you cannot take their figures and add up the various models yourself. Humans are political animals and the DOT has an incentive to make their masters look good, so they released the figures the way they did, because it is both technically true and misleading. Releasing the rest of the list would eliminate the misleading part, so they have not done it.

8/11/2009 10:19:21 AM

1. getting more people driving more efficient cars = good
2. destroying perfect good vehicles = bad
3. people going into debt when they don't need to = bad

8/11/2009 10:23:04 AM

Quote :

"As such, the DOT figures are estimates based on what has been submitted."

How do you know this?

8/11/2009 10:32:15 AM

Speaking to that Toyota dealer I mentioned above. He said the only information they could have is what Citigroup told them, which couldn't be much, because most clunker paperwork has not been submitted due to structural blunders at Citigroup. Blunders which, oddly enough, only seemed to make life difficult for non-GM dealers. Although he did suggest that might be due to GM dealers being better at navigating bureaucracy.

[Edited on August 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM. Reason : .,.]

8/11/2009 11:07:54 AM

I think your information is stale. The government reported last week that 775 million, or 185000 cars worth, had been spent. Is 1/3 of the total not a reasonable sample size for them to project from?

8/11/2009 12:16:50 PM

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20090813/D9A1VGAG1.html

Quote :

"WASHINGTON (AP) - Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, the nation's top car salesman in recent weeks, has cited the Obama administration's best-seller list of mostly smaller, fuel-saving cars like the Ford Focus to describe the success of the Cash for Clunkers rebate program. But what LaHood and other administration officials usually don't mention is that some trucks and sport-utility vehicles that get less than 20 miles per gallon, like the Ford F-150 truck and one version of the Cadillac SRX Crossover, also are being purchased with the new government subsidies. Both are bulky vehicles weighing more than 6,000 pounds when loaded that boast at least 248 horsepower. Just how many consumers used the federal rebates to buy these larger, not-so-green vehicles is unclear. The Obama administration has declined so far to release detailed records of purchases under the program being compiled by the Transportation Department, listing every clunker deal requesting rebates. The Associated Press requested the data July 31. The Transportation Department distributes regular summaries of sales from the clunkers program and has used the electronic sales information from dealers to bolster arguments that Americans are dumping gas guzzlers for gas savers. But its failure to release detailed records means the public can't verify those claims. "Today almost 200,000 new fuel-efficient automobiles averaging 25 miles per gallon are on the road instead of gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs," LaHood wrote on his official blog just before Congress voted to spend $2 billion more for the government rebates last week. Even the Top 10 list of mostly smaller, fuel-efficient cars that LaHood has cited as evidence of the program's success is being questioned. A different Top 10 sales list produced by Edmunds.com, an auto consumer Web site, from dealer sales data shows fewer small cars and more large vehicles like trucks and utility vehicles make up the best sellers. Both lists of top sellers include, for example, the fuel-saving Toyota Corolla, and the clunkers program by its definition is encouraging consumers to dump older, less fuel-efficient cars for new, more efficient models. But the program, now expanded to $3 billion and offering rebates of up to $4,500, isn't limited to the best gas savers on the market. And that's good news to Beny Ledesma, general sales manager at Williamson Cadillac-Hummer in Miami. The dealership has sold three 2009 Cadillac SRXs - the six-cylinder engine model - through the clunkers program, he said, and is finishing paperwork on two more. Ledesma hopes to sell the other 14 at the dealership, along with some of the Hummer H3Ts on the lot that are eligible for clunker rebates. Both vehicles get about 18 mpg, considerably less than the 25.3 mpg average that LaHood has attributed to new cars purchased under the clunker program. "The Cash for Clunkers is definitely generating traffic for Cadillac and Hummer," Ledesma said. It's not just Honda Civics and Toyota Priuses, two cars that get as much as 29 mpg and 50 mpg respectively, that people can buy with the $3 billion in government rebates. They can also buy versions of the 2009 Lexus RX 350 or 2009 Lincoln MKX, both pricey five-passenger utility vehicles that get about 19 mpg and are capable of towing a small boat. Buyers must have trade-ins that qualify for such deals - comparable vehicle types with at least 2 mpg less in fuel efficiency than the new purchase. And the new vehicle can't cost more than $45,000. Even a high-end 2009 BMW X3 crossover utility vehicle, priced at just under $40,000, counts as a gas saver eligible under the government program, with 19 mpg. White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the administration is reviewing the AP's request for the clunkers transaction data that would show all cars purchased and traded under the program, and their fuel efficiency ratings. She said new vehicles purchased are raising the average fuel economy of cars and trucks on the nation's highways and "getting the dirtiest and most polluting vehicles off the road." Dealers have submitted requests for rebates on 292,447 vehicles sold, at a cost of about $1.2 billion to the government, according to sales data summarized by Transportation Department officials. It shouldn't come as a surprise that less fuel-efficient vehicles are being purchased with clunker rebates, said Lena Pons of the watchdog group Public Citizen. Congress agreed to loosen fuel efficiency requirements under the program when it passed the initial legislation earlier this year. Pons said Public Citizen also is seeking sales data from the program to determine whether it has led to drivers replacing larger trucks with smaller cars, or whether vehicles purchased under the program are only marginally better in fuel efficiency."

8/13/2009 9:37:55 AM

Quote :

"like the Ford F-150 truck and one version of the Cadillac SRX Crossover, also are being purchased with the new government subsidies. Both are bulky vehicles weighing more than 6,000 pounds when loaded that boast at least 248 horsepower."

That's just a dumb thing to state, "when loaded". That Cadillac weighs less than 4500lbs, nobody gives a shit what its Gross Vehicle Weight Rating is (GVWR). People care about curb weights (vehicle weight with fluids topped off, but no cargo or passengers).

I think all this fuss is just dumb. As sarijoul pointed out, a mileage improvement from 15-18 is far better than going from 20-25. The end result is less fuel used. The point if this bill isn't to eradicate the sales of trucks/SUVs. If it was they could have had a minimum requirement of 22mpg or something along those lines.

8/13/2009 10:07:08 AM

Quote :

"like the Ford F-150 truck and one version of the Cadillac SRX Crossover, also are being purchased with the new government subsidies. Both are bulky vehicles weighing more than 6,000 pounds when loaded that boast at least 248 horsepower."

That's just a dumb thing to state, "when loaded". That Cadillac weighs less than 4500lbs, nobody gives a shit what its Gross Vehicle Weight Rating is (GVWR). People care about curb weights (vehicle weight with fluids topped off, but no cargo or passengers).

I think all this fuss is just dumb. As sarijoul pointed out, a mileage improvement from 15-18 is far better than going from 20-25. The end result is less fuel used. The point if this bill isn't to eradicate the sales of trucks/SUVs. If it was they could have had a minimum requirement of 22mpg or something along those lines.

8/13/2009 10:07:08 AM

[Edited on August 13, 2009 at 2:07 PM. Reason : nvm, i misunderstood]

8/13/2009 2:02:21 PM

Quote :

"Rare Maserati to be crushed as part of Cash for Clunkers program In Colorado a man traded in a rare 1985 Maserati, with only 18,000 miles on it, as part of the "Cash for Clunkers" program. But like all "Cash for Clunker" trade-ins, the car will soon be crushed. The man said the engine frequently has problems and he's been trying to sell it for months. By trading it in, he got $3,500 for it, roughly the same as he was trying to sell it for. "Probably half our deals right now are Cash for Clunkers," Billy Mills, general sales manager for Go Subaru, said. Most of the clunkers Go Subaru has taken in through the program are predictable. Many are large SUVs and pickup trucks. Some are in pretty bad shape. "Ninety-nine percent of them are clunkers," Wes Guthrie, a salesperson at Go Subaru, said. "I took somebody's car in the other day that their door wouldn't shut anymore, and they were using a bungee to shut the door." Then there was the "clunker" a man drove onto the lot that surprised everyone. "I was like, 'Wow, that's a cool car,'" Guthrie said of the 1985 Maserati BiTurbo. The Italian sports car is in near-mint condition with its odometer reading a mere 18,480 miles. "It is kind of one of those cars where you go, 'Wow. Can't believe that one is a clunker,'" Guthrie said. But it is. It qualified for the program and the owner received $3,500 for it that he used toward a new Subaru Impreza. The interior of the Maserati is pristine, with all leather, suede and wood trim. The issues with the car were under the hood. "He said that he could drive it down the road for about 10 minutes, and then he had to call his mechanic," Guthrie said of the owner's experience. The Maserati owner had been trying for many months to sell the car without success. His asking price for the car was roughly the same as the $3,500 he got from Cash for Clunkers. "So he got what he was asking for it," Mills said. "He just got it from the government instead of a customer." While the Maserati stands out in the lot full of clunkers, it will suffer the same fate. The car will have its engine destroyed and the car will be crushed. "Its one of those cars where you go, 'Wow, I wish it didn't have to be crushed, but unfortunately it does,'" Guthrie said. "

What a shame! And I honestly don't believe nobody wouldn't buy that for $3,500.

http://www.portfolioweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=MultiPublishing&mod=PublishingTitles&mid=6EECC0FE471F4CA995CE2A3E9A8E4207&tier=4&id=6E19B6E84F144C16BED9278DA3C392D8

8/14/2009 12:57:44 PM

Fuckign rediculous. you would think the dealership would just buy the Maesarati off the guy for the rebate. Fix the car up and sale it for mad $profits.

Fuck gov't waste and Ca$h for Clunker$

8/14/2009 1:52:22 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maserati_Biturbo

8/14/2009 1:57:36 PM

^

Quote :

"It is number 28 in the BBC book of "Crap Cars" and is Time Magazine's worst car of 1984."

[Edited on August 14, 2009 at 2:16 PM. Reason : \/ 11 seconds]

8/14/2009 2:15:09 PM

Quote :

"He said that he could drive it down the road for about 10 minutes, and then he had to call his mechanic"

Quote :

"It is number 28 in the BBC book of "Crap Cars" and is Time Magazine's worst car of 1984"

People think, "Oh! A Maserati, how cool! It may be a Maserati, but it's a mass-produced piece of shit. It has a 180 hp V6.

They guy couldn't sell it. It's unwanted refuse. It's not a collector car.

8/14/2009 2:15:20 PM

It's a collector's car, certainly somewhat rare. Quality for lots of small volume cars from 30-40 years ago is shit but the car still has more value than most.

And I honestly don't think anyone cares what Time magazine things about it, they're not a car magazine.

8/14/2009 2:43:32 PM

The value is what someone will pay for it.

I found one in Wilmington if you'd like to buy it: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Maserati-1984-Maserati-BiTurbo-Very-Rare-and-Very-Fast_W0QQitemZ170370761859QQcategoryZ6313QQcmdZViewItem

[Edited on August 14, 2009 at 3:51 PM. Reason : ]

8/14/2009 3:45:28 PM

I'm not a good example. I'm not a fan of Maseratis

8/14/2009 3:53:32 PM

Administration plans to wind down clunkers program
Posted: Today at 12:03 a.m.
Updated: 12 minutes ago

Quote :

"WASHINGTON — The Obama administration developed plans to wind down the popular Cash for Clunkers program and an announcement on when the incentives will end was expected Thursday. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood reiterated his pledge that dealers would be reimbursed for the incentives. LaHood told ABC News in an interview that the program would not continue through Labor Day, but did not elaborate on an end date. 'We don't want to run out of money. And I want to be able to substantiate what I'm saying here. If you do a deal with us, you submit the paperwork, you will be paid,' LaHood said."

http://www.wral.com/business/story/5828847/

If it's such a great program, why stop so soon?

Oh, and there's this:

Car Dealers Association Warns Against 'Clunkers' Program
Thursday, August 20, 2009; 3:12 PM

Quote :

"The National Automobile Dealers Association is cautioning its members to not take in trade-ins under the popular 'Cash for Clunkers' program, warning that there may be no more money left after the government processes thousands of backlogged applications."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/20/AR2009082002699.html

8/20/2009 4:18:20 PM

Quote :

"If it's such a great program, why stop so soon?"

uh, because it was a great program?

the program wasn't meant to last forever. i believe they initially wanted 4 billion dollars and would run til that ran out sometime in Nov. they projected. Turns out if was more popular than they originally imagined. DAMN THEM

8/20/2009 4:28:39 PM

^ Did you happen to catch the second part of the post?

8/20/2009 4:32:17 PM

wait, what? it's running out of money? they didn't allocate indefinite funds for it?

you're telling me the program must eventually come to an end? no one could have seen this coming. you gotta be shittin' me.

[Edited on August 20, 2009 at 4:36 PM. Reason : .]

8/20/2009 4:34:49 PM

^ Stop being a buffoon. Enough funds should have been allocated to cover the trade-ins that dealers have taken, yes.

Which part of this fundamental premise don't you understand?

8/20/2009 4:51:45 PM

A lot of dealers are going to get fucked over. Oh well, they should have known better than to trust the gov't.

8/20/2009 4:58:06 PM

all the dealers will get their monies.

you can't prove or disprove your statement or mine. why don't we just let the people in charge of this shit do their jobs instead of all the bullshit speculation.

also, arguing that the program hasn't been effective is retarded. it clearly has been. if you want to argue about the management of the program, that's fine, but let's wait until we have some actual data to support our claims.

[Edited on August 20, 2009 at 5:04 PM. Reason : .]

8/20/2009 5:03:02 PM

it would be pretty cool if you didn't have to have the trade-in car registered in your name for at least a year to be eligible for this...then you could just buy some $500 beater and turn it into a $3500+ credit

8/20/2009 5:15:35 PM

^^ Um. . .it's not "bullshit speculation" that a major advocacy group representing nearly 20,000 auto dealers has told these dealers to no longer participate in the Cash for Clunkers program--can you read?

Car Dealers Association Warns Against 'Clunkers' Program
Thursday, August 20, 2009; 3:12 PM

Quote :

"The National Automobile Dealers Association is cautioning its members to not take in trade-ins under the popular 'Cash for Clunkers' program, warning that there may be no more money left after the government processes thousands of backlogged applications."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/20/AR2009082002699.html

And I've at least provided evidence to support my position. What have you provided--other than your obviously biased opinion?

8/20/2009 5:24:29 PM

Quote :

"there MAY be no more money left after the government processes thousands of backlogged applications"

they're speculating

either way, the program will end Monday. seems like it was a pretty popular and effective program.

[Edited on August 20, 2009 at 5:32 PM. Reason : .]

8/20/2009 5:29:32 PM

^ Once again, it's not "speculation" that. . .

Quote :

"The National Automobile Dealers Association is cautioning its members to not take in trade-ins under the popular 'Cash for Clunkers' program. . . ."

The NADA's caution may be based on speculation, but that's another matter.

8/20/2009 5:55:36 PM

no, that's THE matter. your evidence that the program is flawed is partly based on the fact that the NADA is advising dealers not to participate anymore. But their caution is based off of total speculation.

[Edited on August 20, 2009 at 6:03 PM. Reason : .]

8/20/2009 6:02:04 PM

^ So, "speculation" has no value?

8/20/2009 6:04:03 PM

only when it suits your agenda.

8/20/2009 6:07:53 PM

Quote :

"^ So, 'speculation' has no value?"

8/20/2009 6:18:04 PM

What a cocksucker.

8/20/2009 6:38:35 PM

^ Who, jwb9984?

8/20/2009 6:50:35 PM

No.

8/20/2009 6:51:42 PM

^ Who, then, you?

If some of you can't handle the fact that NADA has advised its nearly 20,000 auto dealer membership "to not take in trade-ins under the popular 'Cash for Clunkers' program," then I don't really give a good god damn. Piss off.

8/21/2009 3:25:29 AM

instead of thinking about the dealers that are getting screwed by this i'm going to think about the dealers that this is helping out

8/21/2009 3:33:35 AM

^^ lol

For someone who thinks so highly of himself, you're an idiot.



Go make some pedantic grammar posts

[Edited on August 21, 2009 at 9:22 AM. Reason : ]

8/21/2009 9:21:52 AM

^ Shut. . .the fuck. . .up.

GM to loan money to car dealers still waiting for check from government

Quote :

"'There's a lot who have not gotten paid, including us, for many transactions totaling over $100,000,' said Jim Simms of Simms Chevrolet. 'This is a good move for General Motors as far as a strategy because there are a lot of dealers who need cash flow and need it really bad.'"

http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/story?section=news/local&id=6975306

GM is having to front money to dealers due to Cash for Clunkers' paperwork and bureaucracy. Yeah, the government will be fucking A-1 at running health care. Sweet Jesus.

8/21/2009 11:29:34 AM