You're not far off - about 10 years ago Hyundai hired all the top engineers away from Toyota and Hyundai's reliability greatly improved and Toyota fell into the toilet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Hyundai I think wanted to tackle reliability first - it's what made the Japanese basically destroy the American car makers who sold complete caca in the reliability department.
The 5/5 rating comes from the Lemon Aid - which is based on actual repair records, survey reports - Phil Edmonston is the Ralph Nadar of the car industry. He was talking about the sudden surges in Toyota cars well before(several years before) it cam to light.
Lemon-Aid author talks tough about buying cars | Wheels.ca
Car Talk: I'm looking for a compact hatch
Printable View
-
01-13-2012, 02:35 AMRGA
-
01-13-2012, 10:34 AMWoochifer"All the top engineers"? C'mon, I know you're a fan of Kia/Hyundai, but I would have to assume that's a rather exaggerated view. Toyota's a huge company and their car development is done by teams all over the world. Are you saying that all of Toyota's top engineers from around the world not only quit the company, but went to work for a Korean rival?Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Remember Toyota stopped being Toyota well before 10 years ago. It was nearly two decades ago when they began decontenting their vehicles, using more common parts between different models, and designing their cars around profitability and price targets. This is how most other car companies design their vehicles, and Toyota simply applied those types of cost cutting and streamlining methods when they decided to make profit growth and becoming the #1 car company in the world their primary goals.
The Toyota Way, as it existed until the mid-90s, relied on a very close knit relationship between the management, engineering teams, production line workers, and suppliers. But, this type of tight collaboration could not keep up with Toyota's explosive growth and mushrooming number of geographically dispersed plant locations. So, they had a choice to either stay a smaller car company focused on product and engineering goals, or a profit and volume-driven car company with the stated goal of becoming the world's #1 volume car maker. They chose the latter.
Toyota's reliability didn't fall into the toilet. The quality control systems at their plants and engineering resources still rank among the best in the world, and the cars themselves are still in the upper reliability tier. But, they no longer fanatically overengineer their cars, and Toyota simply fell back in line with the rest of the industry. But, falling back towards the industry average is not how Toyota built their reputation. If not for the green halo that they wear thanks to the Prius, Toyota right now would be just another car company that makes boring commuting appliances with above average reliability (rather than exceptional reliability).
And if you check JD Power's latest IQS results, Hyundai this year fell below the industry average, two years after they ranked as the #1 non-luxury brand. As I wrote in an earlier post, Consumer Reports found that the reliability will often correlate with the time elapsed since the last model revision, and it's no surprise that Hyundai dropped in the rankings in a model year where they had three new models introduced, along with a brand new drivetrain.
There's a big difference between the ambition to be a big car company versus becoming the #1 car company. The hubris and arrogance underlying that kind of ambition ultimately undid GM, and it brought Toyota back to earth. VW now has its sights on becoming the #1 car company in the world, and their new decontented cars show they are chasing after volume and profit, rather than focusing on the driving experience and product quality. Right now, maintaining their product focus is the challenge facing Hyundai as they grow as a car company.
That's probably the best place to start. Over the past decade, Hyundai has made all the right moves, but they also need to resist the temptation to overreach, as some industry observers have accused them of doing (i.e., their 40 MPG claims that have come under scrutiny from Consumer Watchdog, which was founded by Harvey Rosenfeld, one of Ralph Nader's former deputies). They've begun loading up their cars with all sorts of tech gadgets. Might look good on a checklist, and attract more interest from younger car buyers. But, larding up a car with crapulent (one of topspeed's favorite terms) tech features is also a very quick way to send the reliability rating into a nosedive, as evidenced by Ford's tumble in the reliability rankings and even Hyundai now dropping below the industry average. This is something that the Toyota of old would have never done.Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
I know you keep pushing the Lemon Aid guide, but when I looked at it a few years ago, I recall that it relies entirely on secondary data sources such as service bulletins and recalls, along with some selected anecdotal quotes from readers. And I'm skeptical of using those sources as a reliability barometer, because there's no consistency with how or when service bulletins and recalls are issued. It's very useful for informing the public on potential problem areas on specific car models or manufacturers, but poor for drawing comparative conclusions about different car companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Unlike JD Power, Consumer Reports, and True Delta, Lemon Aid does not conduct its own reliability survey, which means that it does not have a consistent database to draw apples to apples conclusions between different models. Yes, all of those surveys have their own issues, but at least the conclusions are drawn from comparable data and large sample sizes.
And on Toyota's sudden acceleration recalls, my opinion has basically been that 1) the majority of the sudden accelerations resulted from driver error; and 2) Toyota rushed their drive-by-wire systems to market as part of their massive decontenting and cost cutting program, and they got caught in the same first-to-market reliability issues that are normally associated with German car makers.Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
On point 1, drivers can alleviate sudden acceleration by simply shifting the car into neutral. At the risk of stereotyping, IMO Toyota attracts a lower percentage of the enthusiast drivers that would know this. Their clientele will tend to be people who don't care as much about the driving experience itself, but simply want a reliable appliance that takes them from point A to point B. Also, Toyota drivers are far likelier to opt for automatic transmissions than buyers of competing models, and thus likelier to encounter sudden acceleration, since it's a non-issue with a manual transmission.
With that said, the manner in which Toyota widely deployed drive-by-wire systems in a very short time goes squarely against the revered Toyota Way. They introduced their electronic throttle and ignition systems before competitors did, and installed them in nearly all of their best selling models very quickly.
In decades past, Toyota was fine with letting the competition go to market first with newer technologies, and have them deal with fixing the bugs. But, replacing two mechanical systems with one electronic system in this case also saved money and fit in perfectly with their new-found decontenting ethos where they were trying to reduce the number of unique parts and systems in their cars.
In actuality, electronic throttle and ignition systems are far more reliable than the older mechanical designs. The problem is that a failure on an integrated electronic system is more serious, and by combining the ignition with the throttle controls, Toyota provided a single point of failure for what used to be two separate systems. Sudden acceleration also occurs with older cable throttle linkages, but it's a somewhat easier recovery with a stuck accelerator pedal than a failed electronic throttle control.
One of the mainstream science magazines (forget which one) found that Toyota's electronic control units were installed without EMI shielding, and speculated that made the system more vulnerable to seemingly random failure. That also potentially explains why tests by the federal govt and Stanford University were unable to replicate the Toyota sudden acceleration issue, since I don't think they ever tested EM interference (the much publicized SIU test that created sudden acceleration in the lab was done under conditions very unlikely to occur in real life). Other car companies have been more deliberate about deploying drive-by-wire systems, and likely learned from Toyota's mistakes, in much the same way that Toyota used to do with them. -
01-14-2012, 04:58 AMRGA
Just to be clear - I am not a fan of any car company. I like the fact that Hyundai has stepped it up but I have never owned one and with luck I never will.
The lemon aid is model specific but I don't see that as a problem since I am not a "fan" of looking at the company - If I plan to buy a given kind of compact car - then I could care less if the company builds a great truck or a lousy truck - or for that matter whether they build a truck at all. I want comparisons on the long term (not IQS) of the vehicle - the short term ownership is protected under warranty so it would be less important how it does during the first 18 months. Most cars survive the early going - it's in year 6 out of the warranty that I wand to know about - and it's usually here where the American cars with their golden IQS suck the big one.
As for Hyundai and engineers - I did not check this information - it was from a mechanic (no affiliation with and non Korean car owner) . Korea is very close to Japan - not much of a commute - couple hours by boat ride from Fukuoka. Looking it up - it might be a little semi-theft that helped Hyundai Hyundai might have Stolen Toyota Corporate "Secrets" - Motor Trend The General Forum Forum -
01-17-2012, 08:07 PMWoochiferThe IQS is actually a very good predictor of long-term reliability. Issues with the drivetrain and specific components will begin to show up within the first year of ownership. Issues that come up early are likelier to continue cropping up as a group of vehicles ages. Since Lemon Aid only bases its conclusions on anecdotal repair reports, it has no real data on true reliability rates.Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Historically, Toyota and Honda have been loathe to issue recalls on their cars, opting instead to issue service bulletins. It's that unwillingness to do a recall that ultimately cost Toyota dearly. American car companies are less hesitant to issuing recalls, even though they know the PR hit that they will take. And different car companies have different policies as to when/if they issue a service bulletin or a recall. That's why you can't read into this and draw conclusions between different car companies and car models.
Unless you're buying a used car, knowing something about the reliability of a 6 year old car says nothing about a current model that's selling at a dealership brand new. For one thing, most car models undergo substantial changes within a 6-year timeframe that render info from that long ago meaningless. As indicated in that Consumer Reports post from last year, the reliability of a car model will generally increase as it goes through its production cycle. The ~15% variance that Consumer Reports observed between a car model in its 1st year versus one in its 4th year is actually wide enough to represent the difference between landing in the top 10 versus the bottom 10.Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
The 1999 Ford Focus (its first production year) was by all accounts an unreliable car. But, that says absolutely nothing about later model years, where the Focus became an above average reliability car. The revised Focus came out last year, and issues with the touch screens and dual clutch transmissions have already been reported. But, that doesn't say anything about how the newer Focus models will perform (touchscreen issues are relatively easy to fix, and a software update has already been issued), nor anything about how the car will perform as it goes through its current production cycle. -
02-09-2012, 06:57 PMWoochifer
Looks like the compact hatchback club will gain another new member. For all of the Hyundai recommendations on this thread, I didn't give them much of a look, because I wanted a hatchback and the Elantra Touring wagon was a carryover of the previous model, which I did not like.
Lo and behold, Hyundai is now set to debut the two-door coupe and five-door hatchback versions of the Elantra. This looks like a seriously competitive car for this class. Depending on how Hyundai prices the Hyundai GT hatchback, it could really challenge the Focus, Mazda3, Impreza, and Golf. As one of the other enthusiast sites said, the compact hatchbacks now available in the U.S. have never been better.
2013 Hyundai Elantra GT delivers lightness, functionality
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....gt-chicago.jpg
In terms of styling, I generally like lines on the Elantra GT, but the proportions look a bit stubby in the back (but they increased the interior space by making the car taller, which probably gives it those slightly awkward looking proportions). The interior though looks great.
http://cdn.automoblog.net/wp-content...gt-623x414.jpg
The bottomline on the Elantra GT is that it's nearly a foot shorter than the Focus, Mazda3, and Impreza, and a few inches longer than the Golf. However, it has more interior space than all of them. While the Elantra GT has a less powerful engine, it also weighs less than all of them and ties the Mazda3 Skyactiv for the highest EPA fuel economy.
What remains to be seen is how the car performs, and how the fuel economy measures up in real world driving. And the new hatchback is much smaller than the current Elantra Touring wagon, and it looks like Hyundai will not bring the wagon back.
Like the Focus, Hyundai loaded the car with technology features, which has its benefits and drawbacks. The benefit obviously is that the manufacturer can wow the customers with a long list of standard features and eye-popping technology. The disadvantage is that these cutting edge features can be frustrating to operate while driving, and they tend to be very buggy.
Ford's experience with loading up its newer models with technology gadgets led to a big drop in its reliability ranking. And Hyundai, which debuted many of these features on other models, has seen its reliability ranking drop as well (in the latest JD Power IQS ranking, Hyundai is now below the industry average, after rating #1 among non-luxury brands just two years ago).
The reliance on gadgetry was one reason I wound up not going with the Focus (base models are available, but in order to get options that I wanted, most of those cars I saw also came with the bug-ridden tech features that I did not want).
Seeing Hyundai seeming to hit its stride is now a glaring contrast to how far behind Honda has fallen. The new dumbed-down Civic is still selling well, but how much longer can they continue pumping out bland and unimaginative cars before their sales do start to decline as other manufacturers continue to raise the bar and aggressively try to one up each other. -
02-10-2012, 06:05 AMFeanor
That's certainly an appealing hatch back, though as you say, objective evaluations are still pending.
Hatchbacks in this league are a bit small for our needs, though. I'm still very inclined to the Mazda5 later this year IF I can get a good deal with some kind of trade for my old Taurus wagon.
Chevrolet has come out with the 'Orlando', obviously intended to compete with the Mazda5. I await reports; if they are good and the Orlando is cheaper than the Mazda5, I might consider the Orlando.
http://www.gm.ca/images/vehicles/201..._ph_big_01.jpg
As I recall Ford was also planning an apparent Mazda5 competitor, the C-Max but it isn't available yet, at least not in Canada. -
02-10-2012, 12:26 PMWoochiferUnfortunately, GM opted not to bring the Orlando to the U.S. Kia also stopped importing the Kia Rondo to the U.S., but continues to make it available in Canada. I guess the market for MPV/space wagons is stronger in Canada.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Ford is still on track to bring the C-MAX to all of North America. Unfortunately, they will not bring over the larger 7-passenger version, and apparently, Ford will only sell the 5-passenger C-MAX with a hybrid or plug-in drivetrain -- no conventional gas-powered drivetrains available at all. Given how hybrid sales have nosedived over the past year, this is not a good sign. From what I see, Ford is now looking at the C-MAX as its version of a halo vehicle -- a niche product to burnish its green credentials (and presumably boost its CAFE rating) and serve as a test platform for its EV drivetrain, rather than a product to market and sell to the masses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Car and Driver Blog » Ford Cancels 7-Passenger C-Max for U.S., Will Sell Only 5-Seat Hybrid and Plug-In Models
http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-cont...id-626x382.jpg
In Europe and Asia, MPVs are huge sellers, so Ford sells the C-MAX in those markets like any other conventional car. Since MPVs are almost viewed as an alien species in the U.S., I guess Ford did not want to do the heavy lifting to seed the market for a MPV-type car. So, they have relegated the C-MAX to the green ghetto, because it's a "unique" design (to U.S. buyers at least) that they can tout as their green car.
And in some ways they are right. The only runaway success among hybrids in the U.S. has been the Toyota Prius, which has a unique and immediately identifiable design. This appeals to those buyers who are trying to make a statement with their car purchase (no different than the image statement that a lot of SUV buyers have been making). Sales for all of the hybrids that simply drop a hybrid drivetrain into an existing car design have been miserable and dropping fast. For all of the attention that hybrids get, their numbers are only a drop in the bucket.
It's really too bad that no one seems willing to do a concerted marketing and sales campaign to establish a mainstream market for MPVs. The Mazda5 has the U.S. MPV market to itself, but still does virtually no marketing and advertising for that. And Mazda deliberately limits the number of Mazda5s that they import to North America in order to reserve more units for the more established European and Asian markets. What would the market look like if MPVs like the Mazda5, Rondo, Orlando, and C-MAX received the same types of the megadollar ad campaigns that helped fuel the SUV craze in the 1990s? Of course, practicality and "just right" austerity don't make for the same kind of sexy marketing pitch as the whole rugged outdoorsy "freedom" image making that accompanied the SUV commercials (who cares if it's really a minivan/station wagon in drag -- it can go off-road, even if it never does). -
02-10-2012, 01:38 PMFeanor
Looks like the C-Max (in Canada) will be available as as a hybrid or an electric. Neither of these is of interest to me since the extra cost of these types is too high to justify based on the mileage we do.
I so see plenty of Mazda5's on the road here southern Ontario. I'm surprised the Orlando won't be available in the 'States, as I was that the Rondo isn't. I seems Canadians are more inclined to smaller and cheaper vehicles. I don't thing Canadians are more environment-conscious; it's just that Canadians have a bit less disposable income and face higher vehicle prices+taxes and higher taxes of fuel. Yes! you can influence public purchasing habits using tax policies. -
02-10-2012, 03:13 PMWoochiferYep, no conventional gas-powered drivetrain for the C-MAX at all in North America. Responses like yours are exactly why I think Ford is shooting itself in the foot by limiting the C-MAX to the green market.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Ford is trying to position the C-MAX as a standalone eco car in North America. They figure that because the Prius sells like crazy, while using a separate and distinct body style, they could do the same thing with the C-MAX. Never mind that the C-MAX is just another gas-powered MPV in Europe and Asia, and that Honda's CR-Z and Insight models (both of which have their own distinct body styles and sold only as hybrids) are flops.
I would have preferred to see Ford offer the C-MAX as a mainstream volume car (i.e., with a gas engine, and with a full range of options), and back it up with a marketing and sales campaign befitting that type of vehicle. If it flops, then so be it. But, at least make an honest effort to establish a market for that type of car in North America. There have got to be others like myself that are frustrated with the lack of alternatives to the 3-box sedan/minivan/SUV troika that currently dominates the U.S. car market.
I know that Ford is also planning to make hybrid and plug-in drivetrains available with the Focus and Fusion. But, as I mentioned already, hybrids based on existing car designs have mostly flopped. Ford seems to assume here that limiting the C-MAX to hybrid/plug-in drivetrains will actually help the C-MAX's sales potential by giving it a green halo. Problem with this assumption is that the Prius represents the only big hybrid success story and other hybrid-only cars have flopped. -
02-10-2012, 07:33 PMrecoveryone
All this car talk Woo, I think you jinx me, my old SVT Contour is limping along now and I too am in the market for a replacement now. Unlike you I'm not concern with green so I have narrow my choices to the players below:
http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/c.../crossfire.jpg
05 Chrysler Crossfire SRT 6, A Mercedes in Chrysler clothing @ 330 HP
http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/c...yone1/C230.jpg
05 Mercedes C230 Kompressor, Sport feel with 4 doors like my old SVT. -
02-11-2012, 06:34 PMWoochiferYeah, I think we might have the same mechanic doing all this behind the scenes.Quote:
Originally Posted by recoveryone
I'm kinda surprised that with you being a Ford guy, you're not looking at the Focus ST. When I went to L.A. Auto Show, that car and the Shelby GT500 were the big headliners.
Of course, these seem like a higher trim level as well, so it seems that you want some more luxo goods to go with the ponies. The Crossfire seems like the more unique drive, particularly if you can find one with that street racer engine under the hood. Strange as it seems now, Chrysler had a pretty good product focus at that time. Too bad, that focus was only sustained on a few models. Things fell apart not too long afterwards.
Like I said, if this were a few years ago, I'd be looking at the hot hatches like the GTI and Mazdaspeed3. I'm coming over from an Acura Integra GS-R, so I am used to a certain level of sportiness in my daily drive. But, with a preschooler and changes in our priorities, fuel economy and emissions became more of a consideration. Fortunately, the current compact hatchback options include a few models that balance the fuel economy and performance considerations very well. -
02-12-2012, 07:55 AMrecoveryone
I stopped by CarMax last night and took a look at the Crossfire they had, If not for the rain and cold air, I would have spent more time poking around, but the wife kept saying how cold she was. It was a good oportunity to take a quick look and not be bog down in saleman BS......."just had another customer ready to buy". I think I threw him by telling him I knew there was another one at the Orange County store with only a few more miles on it. lol
As for ford, I not soley a ford man, but more of being seen driving something most people don't see often. the fummy part is that some of my past vehicles have had Ford infulance, Volvo's 760's Mazda Rx7 and my SVT Contour. -
02-14-2012, 06:41 PMWoochiferYeah, I get the impression that the Crossfire kinda flew under the radar. It uses a Daimler chassis and obviously you're looking at the high performance engine that they bolted onto that car later on. Chrysler at least was trying to make interesting cars at that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by recoveryone
IIRC, the Crossfire and the even more radically designed Prowler roadster (see below) both came out of Chrysler's California design center in La Jolla.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...e_Julep%29.JPG
But, when the private equity leeches took over Chrysler, one of the first things they did was shutter the La Jolla facility. Compare that move to Hyundai basically turning their California design center loose on the new Elantra.
BTW, I read that the 2.3L turbo Mustang might be making a comeback, if the rumors are true (this time as a 320+HP monstrosity that the Mustang will share with the revised Ford Focus RS). Ah, memories of the SVO ...
Pseudo-Rumor Of The Day: 2014 Ford Mustang To Get Focus RS Turbocharged 4-Cylinder | The Truth About Cars
http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/...mustangsvo.jpg -
02-14-2012, 07:38 PMblackraven
I took a drive in a Crossfire. It drove nice but it was a little under powered with the 216HP Mercedes V6. The interior was made of cheap, flimsy hard plastic every where. I had a chance to buy the SRT 335HP convertible version which listed for $50K but was selling for $33K when they were shutting down production.
-
02-15-2012, 06:31 PMrecoveryone
Well, if look at my new avatar you know what I got :), have to take it in for a new HU, can't be caught using my cell phone :( lol
-
02-16-2012, 08:12 AMFeanorCongrats on the "new" ride! One of the silver linings in Chrysler's subpar resale value is finding a nice little hidden gem like this on the used car market. I would guess that the Mercedes SLKs (which share the same platform) sell for a lot more, but can't hold a candle to the Crossfire's performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by recoveryone
Well, if look at my new avatar you know what I got :), have to take it in for a new HU, can't be caught using my cell phone :http://forums.audioreview.com/off-topic-non-audio/car-talk-im-looking-compact-hatch-37348-post377233.html#post377233\" rel=\"nofollow\">
-
02-20-2012, 06:27 PMYStoneCQuestion for RC
Don't care much for the badges; it's more involvement. Just hate to be able to thumb, though; gives a control and power; right after I've thumbed; I beat my chest and let out a Tarzan call like Carol Burnett used to do :)
------------------------------------ -
03-15-2012, 07:08 PMWoochifer
Quick update ...
My Mazda3 has now clocked 3,800 miles. It's mostly highway driving, but I have a nearby canyon road that I like to occasionally take on my way home just so I can work the gears and the curves.
Based on my readings from the pump, I am averaging about 34.5 MPG, which exceeds the EPA combined rating. So far, I have a high tank fill of 39.5 MPG (which was probably a short fill) and a low of 30.4 MPG during the initial break-in period when I purposely did a lot of local driving. This is pretty good considering that my commute has a couple of big grades. Unfortunately, the car's mileage computer typically overshoots the fuel economy by 2-3 MPG, and it seems that the accuracy is especially bad if I'm driving on a hilly road.
As I mentioned before, the Mazda3's not a barnburner off the line, but man does it feel good throwing that car into a turn. Aside from a little bit of hesitation on the downshifting in auto mode, I have no complaints about the vehicle.
One other observation ... man, these direct injection engines are LOUD! At startup, my car sounds like a diesel (and most diesels are also direct injected) -- much louder than the VTEC engine on my Integra, and the convention fuel injected engine on our Mazda5. I started noticing this with other cars as well, especially with luxury and performance cars, which are likelier to use direct injected engines. In the parking lot today, I heard a BMW X5 start up and dang if that thing didn't sound like diesel truck! Rumor has it that the Ford Mustang, which has one of the nicer engine and exhaust notes out there, is going to go direct injection soon. I can't imagine someone firing up a Mustang, and the engine clattering like a diesel!
http://photos.motoiq.com/MotoIQ/Tech...P1030850-L.jpg -
03-16-2012, 02:55 AMRGA
Just great - more fraking noise pollution.
-
03-16-2012, 10:37 AMWoochiferRight, so to protect fragile golden eardrums, cars should stick with less advanced port injection engines that pollute more, gobble more fuel, and have less power? :sosp:Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
-
03-16-2012, 10:47 AMbobsticks
Why a hatchback? How about an SUV?
Video - Bentley $180,000 Superluxury SUV for Rich Soccer Moms - WSJ.com -
03-16-2012, 11:17 AMFeanorAh! Conspicuous consumption! :20:Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsticks
http://www.bentleymotors.com/media/m..._F_overlay.jpg
But surely the convertible CGTC12 would be more your speed, 'Sticks??
http://www.bentleymotors.com/media/m...YLOC32LS_2.jpg -
03-16-2012, 11:19 AMWoochiferBecause I actually want to enjoy my drive! :ihih:Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsticks
Yeah, I've seen that abomination. Just another grotesque overpriced poseurmobile for people who hate driving. If there's any bright side to this, these land yachts are pure profit for the automakers -- people who overpay for these Bentley SUVs are subsidizing the R&D for VW's other models.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsticks
-
03-16-2012, 11:29 AMWoochiferYep, a lot of what you're buying is that conspicuous Bentley badge. Underneath all that British coachwork, the Bentley Continental's mechanicals come straight from the VW Phaeton, which was discontinued in the U.S. due to low sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
What's funny is that hardly anyone wanted to pay $80,000 for a decked out Volkswagen. But, slap on a new body, add the Bentley badge, and raise the price to ~$200,000, and all of a sudden they can't build enough of them. Strange thing this car biz is ... -
08-16-2023, 11:08 PMRebLinn
I see that many perceive the car only for the price. This is not quite the right position. If you look only from this side, then the racing car will be the most expensive car)) But who can drive it except for professional racers? I like to watch racing shows from those new tracks they made in Africa. It's really beautiful and dangerous. I usually look for broadcast messages from a local site - 1xbet.com.zm. It is a pity that I will not see it with my own eyes, but I will never miss an important race.