1996 Ford Ranger Xlt Standard Cab Pickup 2-door 2.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hot sales have Detroit automakers shortening summer shutdowns

Back in May, there was speculation that the Detroit Three automakers would maintain or perhaps even extend their traditional summer shutdowns, mostly due to a bitingly cold winter that saw below-freezing temperatures infiltrate the southernmost reaches of the US, putting a chill on auto sales. Now, though, the numbers are in, and thanks to some promising sales figures, it looks like some domestic line workers are going to be working clear through July, in some cases.
According to Automotive News, Ford has slashed its traditional two-week hiatus for factory workers in half at four of its plants, while both Chrysler and General Motors will keep factories running nonstop (two plants in Chrysler's case and a third of GM's factories).
This is, as we said, thanks to some positive numbers. Chief among those is the Seasonal Adjusted Annual Rate, which was at an eight-year high of 17 million units. Individual figures were less promising. GM, embroiled in its recall scandal, still saw a one-percent increase while Ford dropped six percent in year-over-year sales. Chrysler was the big winner, though, with a nine-percent jump in June.

Average transaction prices climb to a record $36,270 in January

The automotive sector made a hash of the numbers last month, a mess of pluses and minuses clogging the transaction-price charts according to Kelley Blue Book. The overall industry rose one percent, even though buyers bought fewer cars and light vehicles in January 2018 vs 2017 using the selling-day adjusted rate. Due to January transaction prices rising to $36,270, a record for January, the value of new vehicles sold climbed more than $1 billion compared to January 2017. KBB's transaction prices don't include customer incentives, which changes the complexion slightly; average incentive spending rose to just over ten percent. The average transaction price in December 2017 was $36,756, so January dropped a bit - nothing unexpected, with the month annually blamed for "January doldrums." More revealing is the fact that the average transaction price in January 2017 was $34,910. This year's plumped-up figure came courtesy of the continued shift to crossovers, SUVs, and light trucks, which shouldn't surprise anyone who's read an automotive blog in the past 20 years. That category comprised nearly 70 percent of new vehicle sales for the month. Some manufacturers profited more than others, though. Fiat Chrysler managed 12.8 percent fewer sales in January compared year-on-year, but the company's vehicles sold for $1,300 more. The Ford brand suffered a 6.3-percent dip in sales, but brand transaction prices increased $2,000, while a Lincoln sold for $8,700 more on average. General Motors sold more cars and sold them for more money; overall GM transaction prices rose four percent, or $1,270, while a GMC traded hands for seven-percent more than in January 2017 and a Cadillac got $2,300 more on average. Of KBB's listed automakers, the Volkswagen Group got the most of out its customers, transaction prices rising at the German automaker by 5.6 percent to $42,243 in January 2018 compared to a year earlier. American Honda followed with a 4.3-percent increase to $28,991, GM in third at 4.1 percent to $40,313. Find your next car at Autoblog using our new and used car listings or the Car Finder tool. Broken out by segment, minivans rocked the table, transaction prices leaping by 7.9 percent to $35,380 compared to January a year earlier. Luxury cars boasted the next-highest rise, at 3.6 percent to $58,533.

2020 Ford Escape hybrids vs other crossover fuel sippers: How they compare on paper

Along with a new generation of Escape, Ford also reintroduced the world to the 2020 Ford Escape Hybrid. And if that weren't enough, Ford is adding a plug-in hybrid version. This is a sign of the times: people are more crossover crazy than ever, but are also seeking ways to use less fuel, whether it's for environmental or purely money-motivated reasons. The Ford hybrids aren't the only fuel-efficient compact crossovers on the market. They will be going head-to-head with conventional hybrids including the 2019 Kia Niro, 2019 Nissan Rogue Hybrid and 2019 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid. There are other plug-in hybrids including the 2019 Subaru Crosstrek PHEV, 2019 Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV and the plug-in version of the 2019 Kia Niro. There are even a couple diesels in the form of the 2019 Chevy Equinox and 2019 GMC Terrain. So we've rounded up the details on all these crossovers to see who leads and lags in criteria such as power, fuel efficiency, space and price. Check out all their details below. 2019 Subaru Crosstrek Hybrid View 68 Photos How do their engines and fuel economy compare? Conventional Hybrids and Diesels Let's face it, if you're buying one of these crossovers, one of the things that matters most to you is just how frugal with fuel they are. We'll start off with the conventional hybrids and diesels, and the clear victor is the Kia Niro, which in base FE trim, manages to hit 50 mpg combined. This is thanks to it sharing its powertrain with the Hyundai Ioniq, the Hyundai equivalent of the Toyota Prius. Buyers should take note that only the FE returns such high fuel economy. The LX and EX drop to 49 mpg, and the S Touring and Touring get 43. Even then, the least efficient Niro is the most efficient of the normal hybrids and diesels. It is nearly the least powerful, though, with 139 horsepower. Just behind it is the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid. It delivers 40 mpg combined, and it has an ace up its sleeve: it comes standard with all-wheel drive. Every other vehicle in this powertrain group has front drive standard, and the Niro isn't available with all-wheel drive at all. If that weren't enough, the RAV4 Hybrid also boasts the most power at 219 horses. While we can't say anything about Escape Hybrid fuel economy, we do know that it will make 198 horsepower, which is close to the class-leading RAV4. The least powerful of these is the Equinox and Terrain, and they return the worst fuel economy at 32 mpg.