2012 Scion iQ priced from $15,995*

[czykvw]

15,995? maybe for this..

[Mikedav]

Ahhhh....TCL

- Why won't [insert manufacturer] sell this [insert sub compact] in the US? Totally unfair, they would sell bucket loads, especially with a diesel and a manual box.

Car introduced at a price that allows for a profit

- Jesus man, its hella expensive, this car should have been like [insert cost price - 40%]. why would I buy this over [insert larger economy car]? I just don't get it. Another screw up by [insert manufacturer]

--------

Like most things, cars have a fixed cost (absolute basics for a car) and the variable costs (size, equipment, quality, spec etc). TCL seems to think if you reduce the size of the car by 20%, you reduce the price by that or more. Its bollocks. You can only get the base cost down so much before you have to go to mad steps. The Tata Nano is proof of this - to get it so cheap it has no bootlid, for gods sake. The Citroen C1 has a tailgate that IS the rear window and the parcel shelf is held by one string.

Its impossible for an IQ to be half the price of a slightly larger rival simply because its half the size.

Unrealistic expectations.

[Turq]

Ahhhh....TCL


Its impossible for an IQ to be half the price of a slightly larger rival simply because its half the size.

But should it cost -more- than a considerably larger rival?

[Mikedav]

But should it cost -more- than a considerably larger rival?

If its better equipped, if the R&D for the packaging was more expensive, if the materials are better quality....sure. Why is a Boxster more than an F350? Extreme example perhaps, but highlights that size is one component of the mix.

[eunos94]

If its better equipped, if the R&D for the packaging was more expensive, if the materials are better quality....sure. Why is a Boxster more than an F350? Extreme example perhaps, but highlights that size is one component of the mix.

We live in a land where peoples houses don't have to touch. Where people have front yards bigger than your "gardens" (we call them back yards) and most people live 10+ miles from work because we sprawl not stack. We've got room to spare.

You see once upon a time we lived on this tiny island with evil overlords. One day we escaped to this gigantic continent, gave the natives small pox and called it home. We're cool like that and like our space. If you want us to go small you have to make it worth our while by saving us BIG money.

This is why the Metro was a success. Why the Yugo even though it was horrific sold oodles and why Hyundai can now charge $70,000 in the USA without getting laughed at. They knew the lesson that Americans can't pass up a bargain. Price it low enough and people will buy it just because "OMG can you believe I got all this car for just $$$$".

At $7999 the iQ could get 25mpg, have a top speed of 70mph and go 0-60 in 18 seconds and we would STILL buy it just because it's cheap.

The End

[BsickPassat]

Wow, just wow.

This over priced gimmick has a 1.3L and you cannot get it with a stick.

That is simply stupid, even in the US. Small engines need a stick to be more flexible and practical.

The more I learn about this overpriced toy the less I like it.

To be more flexible and practical for small engines.... a well executed CVT makes perfect sense, more sense than a manual, which, like an automatic, becomes bound by its fixed gearing. CVT has its upper and lower limits of its gear ratios.

[Bav17]

Can't tell if serious....

Smart IS made by Mercedes.....

Ooohhh didn't catch that one....

[VW1.8Tsunami]

15,995, no haggle pricing? Sheesh, I bought my 2010 Forte EX for 16.5k OTD. The Forte was a total econobox with mediocre (at best) build but remind me again what the iQ has that makes it so special???

[Boost Addicted]

Made my choice. Euro ftw.

[phinney]

To be more flexible and practical for small engines.... a well executed CVT makes perfect sense, more sense than a manual, which, like an automatic, becomes bound by its fixed gearing. CVT has its upper and lower limits of its gear ratios.

No that CVT is controlled by a computer and it doesn't have enough brains to match the superior calculating ability of the human brain.

Not only that CVT is MORE EXPENSIVE than a good manual 5sp. If you are buying an economy car you most likely want the option of a lesser cost option.

If that CVT breaks and it might after warranty it is going to cost you dearly. While the tried and tested manual will be very low maintenance in the long run.

[czykvw]

Ahhhh....TCL

- Why won't [insert manufacturer] sell this [insert sub compact] in the US? Totally unfair, they would sell bucket loads, especially with a diesel and a manual box.

Car introduced at a price that allows for a profit

- Jesus man, its hella expensive, this car should have been like [insert cost price - 40%]. why would I buy this over [insert larger economy car]? I just don't get it. Another screw up by [insert manufacturer]

--------

Like most things, cars have a fixed cost (absolute basics for a car) and the variable costs (size, equipment, quality, spec etc). TCL seems to think if you reduce the size of the car by 20%, you reduce the price by that or more. Its bollocks. You can only get the base cost down so much before you have to go to mad steps. The Tata Nano is proof of this - to get it so cheap it has no bootlid, for gods sake. The Citroen C1 has a tailgate that IS the rear window and the parcel shelf is held by one string.

Its impossible for an IQ to be half the price of a slightly larger rival simply because its half the size.

Unrealistic expectations.

I feel like auto companies take advantage of the U.S.
Its all one huge game, and every company knows how to play it.
If no one offers a really affordable car, everyone wins. get it?

[Chris_V]

While the tried and tested manual will be very low maintenance in the long run.

Tell that to Hyundai Genesis coupe and new Mustang buyers...

[phinney]

Tell that to Hyundai Genesis coupe and new Mustang buyers...

There will always be rare exceptions to the rules

And those vehicles are generally expensive toys.

Not to mention that everybody knows that Hyundai can't build a great manual transmission even the reliable versions they have are not great to use.

[Chris_V]

There will always be rare exceptions to the rules

One would think that 100+ years into making those simple mechanical boxes that there would be no more exceptions.

The point is, in a cheap economy car, a CVT might in fact be as reliable and better suited than a manual. And I LIKE manuals in small engine cars. it's a Toyota. They don't have a long history of making unreliable automatics (merely boring ones).

[Volvo_D]

Made my choice. Euro ftw.

world's most lonely tent sale.

and congrats on a sharp little runabout!

[BsickPassat]

One would think that 100+ years into making those simple mechanical boxes that there would be no more exceptions.

The point is, in a cheap economy car, a CVT might in fact be as reliable and better suited than a manual. And I LIKE manuals in small engine cars. it's a Toyota. They don't have a long history of making unreliable automatics (merely boring ones).

While some in TCL like driving manuals... the rest of the lazy Americans... don't.

[302W]

Unrealistic expectations.

Eh, I'm not sure you fully appreciate the pricing issue here. The IQ is a 1000 pounds cheaper than the cheapest 500 in Britain, while the iQ will be $400 more than the cheapest 500 in America. And I bet the 500 in Britain can be had with less options and power than here.

[phinney]

One would think that 100+ years into making those simple mechanical boxes that there would be no more exceptions.

There will always be glitches in QC and design error after all human beings are creating them.

The point is, in a cheap economy car, a CVT might in fact be as reliable and better suited than a manual. And I LIKE manuals in small engine cars. it's a Toyota. They don't have a long history of making unreliable automatics (merely boring ones).

I don't see the CVT being better suited to a very small engined car like this.

As far as reliability the durability factor far and away is on the side of the manual trans.


But most importantly is the purchase price.... Folks today are looking to save any way they can and plunking down an extra 1500+ for that CVT is quite a chunk of change not to mention that this car is aimed at those looking for an economical car.

[BRealistic]

world's most lonely tent sale.

and congrats on a sharp little runabout!

Fiat owners take excessive steps to avoid leaks.

[BRealistic]

At $7999 the iQ could get 25mpg, have a top speed of 70mph and go 0-60 in 18 seconds and we would STILL buy it just because it's cheap.

But here is the question from a business standpoint:

Is it better to sell 50,000 cars at a profit of $100 per car, or to sell 5,000 cars at a profit of $1000 per car?

[cougar]

But here is the question from a business standpoint:

Is it better to sell 50,000 cars at a profit of $100 per car, or to sell 5,000 cars at a profit of $1000 per car?

I would actually assume the former. The profit ends up being the same, but it looks much more impressive in a press release to have sold 50k cars than 5000 cars.

[eunos94]

But here is the question from a business standpoint:

Is it better to sell 50,000 cars at a profit of $100 per car, or to sell 5,000 cars at a profit of $1000 per car?

If you (a business) have performed your job properly there are now 50,000 new asses in your seats which when they (customers) are ready to move up to a more expensive (profitable) vehicle will return to you for service and future purchases (providing you have done your job properly). This is how Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Volkswagen (lesser extent in recent history) and Hyundai/KIA have grown to be giants in the US automotive industry.

This is actually a prime position for Suzuki, Fiat and the Chinese to fill but there is no reason that the others can't fill these significant gaps. Well besides pride, greed and pure stubborness that is.

Eunos94.
Department of Redundancy Department.

[phinney]

I would actually assume the former. The profit ends up being the same, but it looks much more impressive in a press release to have sold 50k cars than 5000 cars.

It's not just about what it looks like to shareholders. It also gives a company a presence on the road, the more of their products are out there the more substantial the brand looks to consumers, sure it might be a bit of herd mentality but that is some part of human nature.

VWoA should take note. But they won't as usual.

[Burnin8r]

VWoA should take note. But they won't as usual.

They will take note, and it will read NO PROFIT = NO POLO FOR NORTH AMERICAN MARKET

[BRealistic]

It's not just about what it looks like to shareholders. It also gives a company a presence on the road, the more of their products are out there the more substantial the brand looks to consumers, sure it might be a bit of herd mentality but that is some part of human nature.

VWoA should take note. But they won't as usual.

Don't forget ten times the product liability.
Profit margins are about making the most money with the least amount fo risk, not impressing shareholders.

[eunos94]

VWoA should take note. But they won't as usual.

Volkswagen needs to design a car to slot in below the Jetta and Golf intentionally designed to be a $10,000 to $14,000 vehicle that can seat 4, gets 40+mpg hwy and that has something fun or unique to offer the consumer.

They already have to viable concepts that could maybe possibly fill that niche. The Bulli and UP concepts. I'm leaning more towards the Bulli since its cuter (in a bulldog way not a Hello Kitty way) and more functional in appearance. Toss in their corporate 1.4 or 1.6 with an optional GTI packaged 1.2TSI (at a premium of course) and a blumotion super high mpg TDI or Hybrid option. It can span nearly a $10,000 range and be both a price leader and profit earner.

What do I know though. I'm just the idiot that buys things. I don't invent the stuff others buy.

[VW1.8Tsunami]

Don't forget ten times the product liability.
Profit margins are about making the most money with the least amount fo risk, not impressing shareholders.

Market share can be more important than profit margins in respect to long term goals. The practice of selling a product at a loss to gain market share is not an unheard of practice. IIRC, fuji film and toyota (prius) both did just that.

[BRealistic]

Market share can be more important than profit margins in respect to long term goals. The practice of selling a product at a loss to gain market share is not an unheard of practice. IIRC, fuji film and toyota (prius) both did just that.

I guessif Toyota was trying to wiggle into a new market they might sell at cost to move tens of thousands...... but Toyota has been selling (lots of) economy cars for decades.

Also note that selling a stripped price leader version can devalue the entire model line.

[VW1.8Tsunami]

I guessif Toyota was trying to wiggle into a new market they might sell at cost to move tens of thousands...... but Toyota has been selling (lots of) economy cars for decades. .

That could very well be there reasoning for their asking price. I was just offering up a different strategy and how it could be better. I don't really believe that Toyota has really established itself in the 'quirky' ultra subcompact segment (500, smart, etc).

Also note that selling a stripped price leader version can devalue the entire model line.

Or it can help bring in more buyers that end up spending more for an upgraded model. MKVI Jetta is a perfect example. The 15.9k price tag brought in more buyers, however, the average sales price of the MKVI jetta is on par for the average price of the MKV.

[Cutandpaste]

Ahhhh....TCL

- Why won't [insert manufacturer] sell this [insert sub compact] in the US? Totally unfair, they would sell bucket loads, especially with a diesel and a manual box.

Car introduced at a price that allows for a profit

- Jesus man, its hella expensive, this car should have been like [insert cost price - 40%]. why would I buy this over [insert larger economy car]? I just don't get it. Another screw up by [insert manufacturer]

--------

Like most things, cars have a fixed cost (absolute basics for a car) and the variable costs (size, equipment, quality, spec etc). TCL seems to think if you reduce the size of the car by 20%, you reduce the price by that or more. Its bollocks. You can only get the base cost down so much before you have to go to mad steps. The Tata Nano is proof of this - to get it so cheap it has no bootlid, for gods sake. The Citroen C1 has a tailgate that IS the rear window and the parcel shelf is held by one string.

Its impossible for an IQ to be half the price of a slightly larger rival simply because its half the size.

Unrealistic expectations.

I understand the pricing and the engineering behind it. The IQ is a packaging marvel. It is still hard for me to understand that it will be 15-20k. One reason the Versa sells so well is its not uppity, its cheap, basic and people want/need that.

Then again, these micro cars get pretty crappy MPG considering the size and weight. They get 30-35 MPG. I checked out the Fiat 500 and while neat/cute, the price (over 20k for the model I would get) and MPG (32 or so MPG) make my head scratch. Makes no sense to me.

Even today, the Beetle has gotten now more expensive and more uppity. I think its stupid. The Beetle should be IMO, a bare bones car for people that want something different and cheap at around 10-12k.

I really was interested in the IQ until I saw pricing and the MPG. I do love this though

[CP1]

A bit pricey for what it is; why not just get the new Yaris?

[phinney]

Market share can be more important than profit margins in respect to long term goals. The practice of selling a product at a loss to gain market share is not an unheard of practice. IIRC, fuji film and toyota (prius) both did just that.

That's the problem with most US based businesses or divisions of other companies.

They REFUSE to look at the long term health and vision that will benefit the company for years to come.

Instead these short term obsessed executive nimrods just keep right on doing the same old stupid things over and over and over again.

[Mikedav]

Eh, I'm not sure you fully appreciate the pricing issue here. The IQ is a 1000 pounds cheaper than the cheapest 500 in Britain, while the iQ will be $400 more than the cheapest 500 in America. And I bet the 500 in Britain can be had with less options and power than here.

Could be due to exchange rate fluctuations between the $ and the Yen vs £ and the Yen? Not sure.

Why the Yugo even though it was horrific sold oodles and why Hyundai can now charge $70,000 in the USA without getting laughed at. They knew the lesson that Americans can't pass up a bargain. Price it low enough and people will buy it just because "OMG can you believe I got all this car for just $$$$".

Ignoring the juvenile rhetoric, for me this is the problem.

In the NA market, small will always mean economy / cheap / basic - downsizing is seen as the ultimate compromise, and if you're going to do it then it needs to be seriously cheap. No value whatsoever is placed on the iQs packaging, for example, because there are few places where that would be useful. In Tokyo, on the other hand, this may be its greatest selling point (a 4 seated car in a tiny footprint).

If this is the prevailing attitude, then compacts like the iQ and 500 (which are 'premium' small cars as apposed to, say, a Toyota Aygo or a Fiat Panda) are a mistake in NA. They Should sell a stripper spec $8,500 Aygo instead. Rear glass is the hatch, rear doors designed tom eliminate the need for rear wings....etc etc. Cheap.

[Burnin8r]

Then again, these micro cars get pretty crappy MPG considering the size and weight. They get 30-35 MPG. I checked out the Fiat 500 and while neat/cute, the price (over 20k for the model I would get) and MPG (32 or so MPG) make my head scratch. Makes no sense to me.
]

actually manual trans 500s are returning 40+ mpg in real world driving conditions.

if you are looking at the auto version then you should ask yourself if you are more concerned with convenience than economy.

offering the iQ with no manual trans is ****ing ponderous.

[eunos94]

If Toyota could sell the Aygo for $7499 stripped to the bones and nicely equipped with automatic, A/C and premium sound (mp3 cd player) for $8999 or less. It could succeed. Now if they could only do that pricing with the Yaris they'd sell as many as they could build.

However the Aygo has a more playful attitude in it's corporate face. It has a name built for a cool ad campaign similar to the old "hi" Neon ads. Has potential if they also include the 3 door (the $7499 one charge $500 more for the more door).

However if they renamed it something oh.. like.. hmm... maybe.. Tercel? It could have more potential with Toyota for lifers. I know the Yaris would technically be the Tercel but who besides us knows that?