No Reserver One Owner Navigation Back Up Camera Carfax Certified Very Clean on 2040-cars

Auto blog

These are the cars with the best and worst depreciation after 5 years

The average new vehicle sold in America loses nearly half of its initial value after five years of ownership. No surprise there; we all expect that shiny new car to start depreciating as soon as we drive it off the lot. But some vehicles lose value a lot faster than others. According to data provided by iSeeCars.com, trucks and truck-based sport utility vehicles generally hold their value better than other vehicle types, with the Jeep Wrangler — in both four-door Unlimited and standard two-door styles — and Toyota Tacoma sitting at the head of the pack. The Jeep Wrangler Unlimited's average five-year depreciation of 30.9% equals a loss in value of $12,168. That makes Jeep's four-door off-roader the best overall pick for buyers looking to minimize depreciation. The Toyota Tacoma's 32.4% loss in initial value means it loses just $10,496. The smaller dollar amount — the least amount of money lost after five years — indicates that Tacoma buyers pay less than Wrangler Unlimited buyers, on average, when they initially buy the vehicle. The standard two-door Jeep Wrangler is third on the list, depreciating 32.8% after five years and losing $10,824. Click here for a full list of the top 10 vehicles with the least depreciation over five years. On the other side of the depreciation coin, luxury sedans tend to plummet in value at a much faster rate than other vehicle types. The BMW 7 Series leads the losers with a 72.6% drop in value after five years, which equals an alarming $73,686. BMW's slightly smaller 5 Series is next, depreciating 70.1%, or $47,038, over the same period. Number three on the biggest losers list is the Nissan Leaf, the only electric vehicle to appear in the bottom 10. The electric hatchback matches the 5 Series with a 70.1% drop in value, but since it's a much cheaper vehicle, that percentage equals a much smaller $23,470 loss. Click here for a full list of the top 10 vehicles with the most depreciation over five years.

Scion was Toyota's lost generation

Toyota's top North American leader was succinct in explaining the reasons for killing Scion. "It's the right decision at the right time," Jim Lentz said. It's hard to disagree. In a strong market that saw 17.5 million sales last year, Scion volume dipped three percent. Its product lineup has withered for years, which is always a telltale sign a brand doesn't have the full support of its owner. Though enthusiasts love the FR-S sports car, it's the fruit of a joint project with Subaru that also produced the BRZ. Scion's coolest car has a twin sold by one of its rivals. After the FR-S launched in 2012, Scion got nothing – squat – in the way of new products until the iA and iM arrived late last year, IHS senior analyst Stephanie Brinley noted. "[Scion] was not successful in building a visual brand identity or product personality," she said. Lentz, Scion's first vice president and now CEO of Toyota's North American division, admitted the market has changed. "Younger customers have a different mindset," he said. In the early oughts, a brand that catered to a youthful demographic made some sense, and this is one front where Toyota can declare victory. Seventy percent of Scion's buyers were new to Toyota, and the average age was 36 years old. The problem is, not enough of them buy Scions anymore. Scion hit a highwater sales mark of 173,034 vehicles in 2006 and hasn't come close to reaching that since. The recession hurt Scion, too. It bottomed out in 2010 with just 45,678 sales, a time when the rest of the industry was beginning to recover. There was a brief uptick (73,507) in 2012, but Scion failed to capitalize on that momentum and sales fell for three more years. Toyota is calling Scion's pending death a "transition" back to the main company. Sure, most of the cars will be rebadged Toyotas, like the FR-S, iA, and iM. The C-HR, an attractive future crossover that would have given Scion a boost, will go into production as a Toyota. But make no mistake: This is a failure. Toyota is closing a brand in the same way General Motors scrapped Oldsmobile, Ford shuttered Mercury, and Chrysler dropped Plymouth. Those brands languished for years. Toyota moved quicker to put the fork in Scion, which prevented it from becoming a long-term drain on the parent company. Lentz was dead on. It's the right time. News & Analysis News: Sergio Marchionne is against a Ferrari SUV Analysis: His exact words were, "you have to shoot me first," Bloomberg reported.

Automakers not currently promoting EVs are probably doomed

Okay, let's be honest. The sky isn't falling – gas prices are. In fact, some experts say that prices at the pump will remain depressed for the next decade. Consumers have flocked to SUVs and CUVs, reversing the upward trend in US fuel economy seen over the last several years. A sudden push into electric vehicles seems ridiculous when gas guzzlers are selling so well. Make hay while the sun shines, right? A quick glance at some facts and figures provides evidence that the automakers currently doubling down on internal combustion probably have some rocky years ahead of them. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is a prime example of a volume manufacturer devoted to incremental gains for existing powertrains. Though FCA will kill off some of its more fuel-efficient models, part of its business plan involves replacing four- and five-speed transmissions with eight- and nine-speed units, yielding a fuel efficiency boost in the vicinity of ten percent over the next few years. Recent developments by battery startups have led some to suggest that efficiency and capacity could increase by over 100 percent in the same time. Research and development budgets paint a grim picture for old guard companies like Fiat Chrysler: In 2014, FCA spent about $1,026 per car sold on R&D, compared with about $24,783 per car sold for Tesla. To be fair, FCA can't be expected to match Tesla's efforts when its entry-level cars list for little more than half that much. But even more so than R&D, the area in which newcomers like Tesla have the industry licked is infrastructure. We often forget that our vehicles are mostly useless metal boxes without access to the network of fueling stations that keep them rolling. While EVs can always be plugged in at home, their proliferation depends on a similar network of charging stations that can allow for prolonged travel. Tesla already has 597 of its 480-volt Superchargers installed worldwide, and that figure will continue to rise. Porsche has also proposed a new 800-volt "Turbo Charging Station" to support the production version of its Mission E concept, and perhaps other VW Auto Group vehicles. As EVs grow in popularity, investment in these proprietary networks will pay off — who would buy a Chevy if the gas stations served only Ford owners? If anyone missed the importance of infrastructure, it's Toyota.