Vehicle Buying Power...

[Coastie05]

So the point of this thread is to have a conversation about buying power changes over the years. I like to watch a YouTube channel called Pete's S10 Page and I came across an interesting videos with some stats. This video is a "what's new" video about the 1997 S10. At about 6:38ish in the video they share a stat that interests me.

The 2.2 liter engine was extremely popular and for the 1996 model year it accounted for over 60% of the sales. So, what I'm asking is what's changed from then to now? Inflation included, are people just making more money and can afford the higher trims with the bigger engine? Did having toys become more affordable today than in the 90's? Or are companies just allowing for longer terms to allow people to buy something they really can't afford?

I was in 5th grade in 1997, so I truly don't know the answer but I know someone here will be able to share. Anyway...here's the video.

 

[CKN]

Here we go yet again......

 

[Coastie05]

Here we go yet again......

What I missing? I didn't see a thread that mirrored mine. I'm asking a simple question...why were ppl in the 90's buying 4 cylinder trucks and now we're the extreme minority (until the turbo 4 got dropped into them).

 

[wander2039]

It's discussed a few times but the purposes of trucks have changed drastically in the last 20 years, even 10 years. 4 door trucks weren't common till I was in my 20's, I was born in 1980. All the trucks we had growing up were single cabs and farm trucks. We had to take them on occasion as a family and that was interesting. Granted the sister and I were fairly skinny, even my parents. We all fit on the bench seat. As far as 4 cylinder the iron duke in my 88 was a piece of junk, the 2.2L was a slug also. But it did the job. I'd say most of those are fleet sales, very few people I knew had 4 cylinders trucks.

 

[Graham Piccinini]

Old school mentality is Function>Form.
These days it's Form>Function. Majority is trying to show off, at the cost of a mortgage-size car payment.
Also lots of people are in the technology field, which opened more financial options than 90's ever had. So those techies are buying expensive toys.
Lastly, people in the 90s were more interested in saving money and had common sense. These days common sense is gone, and younger people are busy spending parent's money for biggest and baddest vehicles.

 

[clinebarger]

The 2.2L was extremely underpowered & MPG wasn't that much better than a 4.3L in real world scenarios. The 2.3L Ranger & 2.5L Dakota were pretty underpowered as well.

I used to own a base model '97 S-10 with a 4.3L/NV3500, It was a okay truck for what it was....But I wouldn't want to own one now. Fullsize trucks are better in just about every aspect.

 

[bullwinkle]

We had loads of them as company vehicles at the vending company I worked for then-always manuals, first the 2.5 Duke, then the 2.8 & 4.3 V6s-literally couldn’t kill them! When they bought my first in ‘86 (Iron Duke 4 speed) they were UNDER $10K new-and most of them made it to 200,000 miles+! Those days are long gone…

 

[Vercingetorix]

0-60 in 16 seconds just doesn’t cut it anymore.

 

[Leo99]

It's discussed a few times but the purposes of trucks have changed drastically in the last 20 years, even 10 years. 4 door trucks weren't common till I was in my 20's, I was born in 1980. All the trucks we had growing up were single cabs and farm trucks. We had to take them on occasion as a family and that was interesting. Granted the sister and I were fairly skinny, even my parents. We all fit on the bench seat. As far as 4 cylinder the iron duke in my 88 was a piece of junk, the 2.2L was a slug also. But it did the job. I'd say most of those are fleet sales, very few people I knew had 4 cylinders trucks.

I was born in 1963 so seeing an extended cab truck was novel. A four door pickup then became novel. Today a single cab pick up is novel.

 

[bullwinkle]

The 2.2L was extremely underpowered & MPG wasn't that much better than a 4.3L in real world scenarios. The 2.3L Ranger & 2.5L Dakota were pretty underpowered as well.

I used to own a base model '97 S-10 with a 4.3L/NV3500, It was a okay truck for what it was....But I wouldn't want to own one now. Fullsize trucks are better in just about every aspect.

I got to drive a 4.3 5 speed one once before I quit-loaded (not heavily) I was able to spin/chirp tires in 1st, 2nd, & 3rd easily! It was pretty fast compared to the noisy, slow 2.5 with it’s 2500-4000 RPM “power band”!

 

[Leo99]

Old school mentality is Function>Form.
These days it's Form>Function. Majority is trying to show off, at the cost of a mortgage-size car payment.
Also lots of people are in the technology field, which opened more financial options than 90's ever had. So those techies are buying expensive toys.
Lastly, people in the 90s were more interested in saving money and had common sense. These days common sense is gone, and younger people are busy spending parent's money for biggest and baddest vehicles.

Depends on how old school you go. The cars in the 40s and 50s and into the 60s to the early 70s had a lot of form. Things got boring in the late 70s to early 2000s. Things are still kind of boring but people don't want boring on the inside as well as the outside.

 

[eljefino]

That S10 is a Cavalier that can spin one rear wheel.

The EPA/CAFE changed some rules about a vehicles "shadow", meaning cars and trucks have to be bigger at a given MPG, or whatever MPG targets they have to meet are more easily met with huge bodies. The tiny form factor of that S10 can't compete. We also got nice "city cars" like the corolla that grew substantially, with bumper body effects, to shade more pavement.

We also live in a world, now, where you're not allowed to have anyone under 12 in the front seat. There are typically exceptions if there's no rear seat but it's a turn off for families.

I would also expect the actual transaction price for a stripper 4 cyl S10 could be significantly lower than MSRP or the V6.

As for the public, they aren't buying new Mitsubishi Mirages in any sort of numbers.

 

[atikovi]

0-60 in 16 seconds just doesn’t cut it anymore.

Sure it can. It's the car makers marketing that wants to convince us that we all need pickups and SUVs to go 0-60 in 6 seconds and they are more than happy to provide those high profit vehicles.

 

[tbm5690]

Sure it can. It's the car makers marketing that wants to convince us that we all need pickups and SUVs to go 0-60 in 6 seconds and they are more than happy to provide those high profit vehicles.

I wouldn't feel too safe with that performance merging amongst cars that pretty much all can do that run in 10 seconds or less.

 

[atikovi]

I wouldn't feel too safe with that performance merging amongst cars that pretty much all can do that run in 10 seconds or less.

What's the relevance of that? Merging isn't a drag race. You're getting into a lane of traffic moving at a steady speed. If you're on an on ramp you're already doing 30, so 30-60 mph doesn't take all that much time.

 

[OVERKILL]

What's the relevance of that? Merging isn't a drag race. You're getting into a lane of traffic moving at a steady speed. If you're on an on ramp you're already doing 30, so 30-60 mph doesn't take all that much time.

There are some on-ramps that make that a serious challenge

 

[Coastie05]

0-60 in 16 seconds just doesn’t cut it anymore.

My ‘22 4 cylinder Colorado does 0-60 in about 10 seconds which is the same amount of time as my old ‘14 Civic and just slightly slower than my old ‘13 CRV. I’m just not seeing why 60% of S10 sales in ‘96 were 4 cylinder and now today (until the ‘23 came out) the V6 Colorado was the one that sold the most. I’m guessing longer finance terms made it more affordable. What was normal financing in the 90’s, like 48 months? Now ppl finance 72-84 months to “afford” a vehicle.

 

[Skippy722]

My ‘22 4 cylinder Colorado does 0-60 in about 10 seconds which is the same amount of time as my old ‘14 Civic and just slightly slower than my old ‘13 CRV. I’m just not seeing why 60% of S10 sales in ‘96 were 4 cylinder and now today (until the ‘23 came out) the V6 Colorado was the one that sold the most. I’m guessing longer finance terms made it more affordable. What was normal financing in the 90’s, like 48 months? Now ppl finance 72-84 months to “afford” a vehicle.

I don’t think price had much to do with it… even now it’s not a ridiculous price to upgrade the engine, to upgrade from the V6 to the V8 on my truck cost me $1,450, which also upgrades the transmission.

 

[SammyChevelleTypeS3]

I was born in 1963 so seeing an extended cab truck was novel. A four door pickup then became novel. Today a single cab pick up is novel.

I was born in 1957. We had full time working farms in both sides of the family. They raised some cattle while farming was the largest part. Everyone I grew up knowing in the area who had trucks , really USED trucks for the intended purpose trucks were developed for. WORK & the outdoors life. All had a rifle in the window rack behind the seat. Today trucks come with interiors almost as luxurious and limosines. I do not think many who pay close $100,000 these days for one of those gigantic trucks (with near show car finish paint jobs) and interiors as plush and nice as little studio apartments intends to do any thing close to work with them or even much of what is called off roading. Certainly not mudding. Yet to each his own.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

So the point of this thread is to have a conversation about buying power changes over the years. I like to watch a YouTube channel called Pete's S10 Page and I came across an interesting videos with some stats. This video is a "what's new" video about the 1997 S10. At about 6:38ish in the video they share a stat that interests me.

The 2.2 liter engine was extremely popular and for the 1996 model year it accounted for over 60% of the sales. So, what I'm asking is what's changed from then to now? Inflation included, are people just making more money and can afford the higher trims with the bigger engine? Did having toys become more affordable today than in the 90's? Or are companies just allowing for longer terms to allow people to buy something they really can't afford?

I was in 5th grade in 1997, so I truly don't know the answer but I know someone here will be able to share. Anyway...here's the video.

To make these comparisons you have to find a similarly sized vehicle sold today and then make adjustments for differences in options. Another thing is that it's not enough to just compare difference in prices but you also must adjust for wages.