2013 Jeep Wrangler Sport 2-door Commando Green Auto With Tons Of Extras Ipad 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.

Stellantis sees vehicle loan durations extended amid banking turmoil

Stellantis is seeing clients seeking longer-term financing and leasing deals for their vehicles as a consequence of higher global interest rates, the carmaker's head for the business said. Chief Affiliates Officer Philippe de Rovira said loans which normally had a three-year maturity were now increasingly moved to four years. "This allows customers to get a car for a monthly instalment that is similar to that they had before," he said. The world's third largest carmaker by sales on Tuesday announced it had completed a plan announced in late 2021 to reshuffle and simplify its leasing and financing operations in Europe. Under its terms, Stellantis created a 50-50 single long term multi-brand leasing company named Leasys with Credit Agricole Consumer Finance. It also set up local joint ventures in European countries for its new Stellantis Financial Services unit, formerly Banque PSA Finance, with BNP Paribas Personal Finance and Santander Consumer Finance. "These banks have always had better funding conditions than those we can have as an automaker," de Rovira said. Benefits of the plan included cutting the number of financing and leasing entities the group runs in each country and the number of IT systems it uses, with expected savings exceeding 30% in this particular area, he added. De Rovira said the group had a huge portfolio of orders it had not yet delivered due to supply chain shortages impacting production. "Demand is not our main issue. The issue is to deliver as fast as we can cars that are in our order portfolio, which is still at record levels," he said. The group aims to expand its corporate leased vehicle fleet to more than one million units in 2026 and to double net income from its so-called banking activities to 5.8 billion euros ($6.3 billion) by 2030. De Rovira said Stellantis was not seeing a downward trend in vehicle pricing. "Probably the significant price increases we have seen in 2021 and 2022 will not be repeated because the context is changing, but for the moment we don't see decreases, we see stabilisation". ($1 = 0.9188 euros) (Reporting by Giulio Piovaccari and Gilles Guillaume; Editing by Jan Harvey) Earnings/Financials Plants/Manufacturing Alfa Romeo Chrysler Dodge Jeep RAM

Trying the new Compass and other Jeeps on for size

If any brand has license to sell several like-sized SUVs, it's Jeep, which invented the concept in the first place. Yet, with the Cherokee, Renegade, and the redesigned 2017 Jeep Compass revealed at the LA Auto Show, just how like-sized is this trio of compact SUVs? Well, as it turns out, that answer is more complicated than just looking at various spreadsheets of specifications. After the cover was pulled off the new Compass, I managed to explore each back-to-back-to-back to see how their back seats and cargo areas compare. Perhaps obviously, the Renegade is the smallest of the trio no matter how you look it. Well, it actually has the most headroom, but rear legroom is cramped (a 6-footer can't sit behind another 6-footer) and it's quite obvious the cargo area is about nine cubic feet smaller with the rear seats raised. However, the Cherokee and Compass are surprisingly similar both on paper and in person – and even more surprisingly, the newer, smaller-on-the-outside Compass is actually a bit more spacious despite being nine inches shorter in overall length. View 14 Photos When seated in back, my knees were just touching the driver seat when it was motored most of the way back to accommodate my 6-foot-3 frame. However, the Cherokee's slightly chunkier seatback meant the Compass actually had a bit more rear legroom. I then set the passenger seat to a more average distance and again, the Compass had a slight advantage. The Cherokee did have a bit more under-thigh support, however, which indicates the seat is mounted a bit higher. But that creates a problem, as headroom is more significantly affected when the panoramic sunroof is specified. In the Cherokee, my head was into the sunroof cavity and resting against its rigid surround. In the Compass, there was just enough clearance. It should be a difference, both in terms of headroom and perceived roominess that those of average height should notice. As for their cargo areas, the Compass' is larger and more useable. With the rear seats raised, it has 27.2 cubic feet versus the Cherokee's 24.6. You can scoot its sliding seat forward to nearly equal the Compass, but of course doing so reduces its rear legroom. The main reason is width. The Cherokee is noticeably narrow and it gets worse when equipped with the optional subwoofer. In terms of maximum cargo volume with the rear seats lowered, the Compass has 59.8 cubic feet to the Cherokee's 54.9.