on 2040-cars

Auto blog

New auto loans could soon extend out to 84 months

Cars and trucks are more expensive than ever before. In order to boost sales and help consumers afford new vehicles, automakers are offering longer and longer terms for auto loans. This past week, Bloomberg reported that FCA's Ram Trucks division is currently offering the longest loans. Some stretch to 73 months. Jeep, Fiat and Chevy aren't far behind. More noteworthy is that we'll likely soon see lenders moving from 73-month to 84-month loans. That's seven years worth of interest. More than two-thirds of US auto sales come from light trucks like the Ford F-150, Chevy Silverado and Ram 1500. The average transaction price of a new vehicle is well over $30,000. It's not difficult to spec out a heavily-optioned truck up to $60,000. Vehicles depreciate from the moment they roll off a dealer lot, and these six or seven-year loans could hurt consumers and lenders both in the long run. The U.S. Senate voted last week to kill rules that would prevent discriminatory auto lending. These Obama-era guidelines were meant to curtail lenders who offered higher loans based on race, religion, sex or national origin. Related Video: News Source: Bloomberg Chevrolet Fiat RAM Car Buying car loan car values

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.

What if the mid-engine Corvette is really a Cadillac?

Call me crazy, but I'm not convinced the mid-engine Corvette is the next Corvette. The rumor is strong, yes. And, contrary to some of the comments on our site, Car and Driver - leader of the mid-engine Corvette speculation brigade - has a pretty good record predicting future models. But it's another comment that got me thinking: or maybe it's a Cadillac. There is clearly something mid-engine going on at GM, and I think it makes sense for the car to be a Cadillac. First off, check out how sweet the 2002 Cadillac Cien concept car still looks in the photo above. Second, there are too many holes in the mid-engine Corvette theory. There are too many holes in the mid-engine Corvette theory. The C7 is relatively young in Corvette years, starting production almost three years ago as a 2014 model. Showing a 2019 model at the 2018 North American International Auto Show would kill sales of a strong-selling car before its time. Not to mention it would only mean a short run for the Grand Sport, which was the best-selling version of the previous generation. More stuff doesn't add up. Mid-engine cars are, in general, more expensive. Moving the Vette upmarket leaves a void that the Camaro does not fill. There's not much overlap between Camaro and Corvette customers. Corvette owners are older and enjoy features like a big trunk that holds golf clubs. Mid-engine means less trunk space and alienating a happy, loyal buyer. Also, more than 60 years of history. The Corvette is an icon along the likes of the Porsche 911 and Ford Mustang. I'm not sure the car-buying public wants a Corvette that abandons all previous conventions. And big changes bring uncertainty - I don't think GM would make such a risky bet. Chevrolet could build a mid-engine ZR1, you might say, and keep the other Corvettes front-engine. Yes they could, and it would cost a ton of money. And they still need to fund development of that front-engine car. I highly doubt the corporate accountants would go for that. But a Cadillac? Totally. Cadillac is in the middle of a brand repositioning. GM is throwing money at this effort. A mid-engine halo car is the just the splash the brand needs to shake off the ghosts of Fleetwoods past. And it's already in Cadillac President Johan De Nysschen's playbook. He was in charge of Audi's North America arm when the R8 came out. A Caddy sports car priced above $100,000 isn't that unreasonable when you can already price a CTS-V in that range.