2004 Saturn Vue-rear Hatch Door-red on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Are orphan cars better deals?

Most folks don't know a Saturn Aura from an Oldsmobile Aurora. Those of you who are immersed in the labyrinth of automobilia know that both cars were testaments to the mediocrity that was pre-bankruptcy General Motors, and that both brands are now long gone. But everybody else? Not so much. By the same token, there are some excellent cars and trucks that don't raise an eyebrow simply because they were sold under brands that are no longer being marketed. Orphan brands no longer get any marketing love, and because of that they can be alarmingly cheap. Case in point, take a look at how a 2010 Saturn Outlook compares with its siblings, the GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave. According to the Manheim Market Report, the Saturn will sell at a wholesale auto auction for around $3,500 less than the comparably equipped Buick or GMC. Part of the reason for this price gap is that most large independent dealerships, such as Carmax, make it a point to avoid buying cars with orphaned badges. Right now if you go to Carmax's site, you'll find that there are more models from Toyota's Scion sub-brand than Mercury, Saab, Pontiac, Hummer, and Saturn combined. This despite the fact that these brands collectively sold in the millions over the last ten years while Scion has rarely been able to realize a six-figure annual sales figure for most of its history. That is the brutal truth of today's car market. When the chips are down, used-car shoppers are nearly as conservative as their new-car-buying counterparts. Unfamiliarity breeds contempt. Contempt leads to fear. Fear leads to anger, and pretty soon you wind up with an older, beat-up Mazda MX-5 in your driveway instead of looking up a newer Pontiac Solstice or Saturn Sky. There are tons of other reasons why orphan cars have trouble selling in today's market. Worries about the cost of repair and the availability of parts hang over the industry's lost toys like a cloud of dust over Pigpen. Yet any common diagnostic repair database, such as Alldata, will have a complete framework for your car's repair and maintenance, and everyone from junkyards to auto parts stores to eBay and Amazon stock tens of thousands of parts. This makes some orphan cars mindblowingly awesome deals if you're willing to shop in the bargain bins of the used-car market. Consider a Suzuki Kizashi with a manual transmission. No, really.

Even Saturn prices are leaving the stratosphere as used-car demand soars

Initially marketed as "a different kind of car company," General Motors-owned Saturn unceremoniously closed its doors in early 2010 after years of slumping sales and degradation of the brand. The firm's star is unexpectedly beginning to rise again as demand for used cars balloons in America, and values of used Saturn models are outpacing the industry average. Citing data provided by Car Gurus, The Drive is reporting that Saturn's transaction prices have increased more than any other carmaker's during the past 90 days. They've gone up by 26.15% since March 2021, and they've skyrocketed by 30.24% since June 2020. For context, Subaru posted increases of 12.13% and 20.26%, respectively, and the industry-wide averages stand at 17.11% and 30.23%. Used cars are more expensive across the board, but luxury models generally gained less value than cheaper models built by mainstream brands. In spite of the increase, Saturn's transaction prices remain the lowest on the market, according to the same source. The average sale is pegged at $6,284, versus $23,734 for Toyota and $17,507 for Kia. One factor undoubtedly influencing this difference is that, as we mentioned, the last Saturn was built over a decade ago. There's no such thing as a late-model Saturn, so all of its cars are lugging around 10-plus years of depreciation. If you want to surf this trend, the most expensive Saturn is the Outlook (2007-2010), an SUV that was basically a GMC Acadia with a different badge. It sells for $6,770, on average. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the humble Ion (2003-2007; pictured) trades hands for $4,446; it dented Saturn's average by losing 0.49% of its value during the past 30 days. What this means in the grand scheme of things is open to debate. What's certain is that more motorists are buying used as the ongoing chip shortage creates delivery delays and leaves dealers with low inventory levels, a situation forcing companies to take unprecedented measures. Ford is offering a $1,000 incentive to keep buyers in the fold, for example. Some might end up with their name on a Saturn title simply because it was the first car they stumbled upon. Others, especially drivers 30 and older, might remember the brand's reputation for building value-packed cars that were vaguely interesting.

US database may have overstated deaths in GM ignition switch recall

The FARS analysis didn't take into account fatal accidents where the airbags weren't supposed to deploy. Earlier today, we reported that the actual death toll attributable to GM's ignition switch problem had crested the 300 mark according to new research, well up from the original reports of 12 to 13 deaths. Now, word is breaking that the US government database that informed the study that the report was based on may have significantly overstated the correlation between the study and the GM recall. The initial study was conducted by Friedman Research on behalf of the Center for Auto Safety, and used something called the US Fatality Analysis Reporting System. To recap, the study claimed that over a 10-year period, 303 people were killed in Chevrolet Cobalt and Saturn Ion coupes and sedans when their airbags failed to deploy. These undeployed airbags were then linked to GM's ignition switch recall, which as we've explained before, can turn the ignition out of the "run" position and into the "off" or "accessory" position, disabling the airbags in the process. Now, according to a report from The Detroit News, which cites research from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and the National Study Center for Trauma and EMS at the University of Maryland, the FARS analysis didn't take into account fatal accidents in conditions where the airbags weren't supposed to deploy (which isn't to say crashes and deaths weren't caused by loss of control from the ignition switching off in the GM vehicles). According to the report, this was a significant number of the cases. There is another potential problem, too. According to that same report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration uses both FARS and another database on fatalities, called the National Automotive Sampling System/Crashworthiness Data System (NASS/CDS). Where FARS uses what the DetNews calls "not always reliable" police data to record vehicular deaths within 30 days of a crash, NASS/CDS relies on what's known as a probability sample. It collects data on 5,000 crashes each year – including some found in the FARS database – to calculate a probability figure. According to a 2009 IIHS study, "Among crashes common to both databases, NASS/CDS reported deployments for 45 percent of front occupant deaths for which FARS had coded nondeployments." In plain English, FARS doesn't provide a reliable count airbag deployments.