Dear Linus, The Chevy VOLT is being discontinued.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, RorzNZ said:

You show me a RAV4 that can fit 8 people, have room for all their luggage,  I'll show you my 8 million dollar mansion. 

Sorry, I was speaking about the Highlander with my 8 passenger comment (It's very rare that you'll need to carry 8 people + their luggage. In that case, go with the Sienna, its only 1 mpg less than a Highlander). The main benefits of the RAV4 is the increased cargo capacity & greater cargo flexibility.

 

You show me a Camry that can fit 5 and have room for their luggage. It works either way my friend.

[Guest]

Just now, MagnesiumPC said:

Sorry, I was speaking about the Highlander with my 8 passenger comment (It's very rare that you'll need to carry 8 people + their luggage. In that case, go with the Sienna, its only 1 mpg less than a Highlander). The main benefits of the RAV4 is the increased cargo capacity & greater cargo flexibility.

 

You show me a Camry that can fit 5 and have room for their luggage. It works either way my friend.

 

Can a highlander go off-road like this? Don't think so. Comfortable leather seating for 5 and a half people. 4.5l/km on the highway. They used to use these as Taxis in France. Plenty of room for luggage. Use this for everything, don't need a fancy SUV that won't have 4WD anyway. Probably will have a worse engine too. Want to look cool and not like you are in a horrible marriage with 4 kids? Get a 407 and not a RAV4. CarPlay? Sorted. Auto wipers? Sorted. Heated seats? Sorted. Wheels? Sorted. All for 4k USD. Probably more ground clearance than those SUVs anyway. 

 

You can do anything you want with a sedan that you can with an SUV. I use this for moving sheep, wood, greens, anything I need. Still runs well even though its getting onto 225km. 

 

[Guest]

Just now, RorzNZ said:

 

Can a highlander go off-road like this? Don't think so. Comfortable leather seating for 5 and a half people. 4.5l/km on the highway. They used to use these as Taxis in France. Plenty of room for luggage. Use this for everything, don't need a fancy SUV that won't have 4WD anyway. Probably will have a worse engine too. Want to look cool and not like you are in a horrible marriage with 4 kids? Get a 407 and not a RAV4. CarPlay? Sorted. Auto wipers? Sorted. Heated seats? Sorted. Wheels? Sorted. All for 4k USD. Probably more ground clearance than those SUVs anyway. 

 

You can do anything you want with a sedan that you can with an SUV. I use this for moving sheep, wood, greens, anything I need. Still runs well even though its getting onto 225km. 

 

1: That's not a Camry.

2: We're not talking about offroading. If we were, I'd say the Subaru Ascent.

3: I'm willing to be almost no new sedan comes with trailer hitches pre-installed.

4: When will people learn they aren't most people? What you can do with your sedan is not what most people are comfortable doing with theirs.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, MagnesiumPC said:

1: That's not a Camry.

2: We're not talking about offroading. If we were, I'd say the Subaru Ascent.

3: I'm willing to be almost no new sedan comes with trailer hitches pre-installed.

4: When will people learn they aren't most people? What you can do with your sedan is not what most people are comfortable doing with theirs.

1) We're talking about sedans vs SUV

2) We're talking about practicality. Need to use a trailer? Done. Need to carry more stuff? Roof racks are cheap, like under 100. My car isn't off-roading, its just on a gravel/clay driveway, and then on grass. 

3) They do

4) If we're going that way, I doubt most people need to carry 8 people around in their car, or need larger seats. Most people are fine with a sedan, and if they need to do more work in it, its fine as it is. It is also what the car is comfortable doing, not the person. 

[Blademaster91]

18 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

Can a highlander go off-road like this? Don't think so. Comfortable leather seating for 5 and a half people. 4.5l/km on the highway. They used to use these as Taxis in France. Plenty of room for luggage. Use this for everything, don't need a fancy SUV that won't have 4WD anyway. Probably will have a worse engine too. Want to look cool and not like you are in a horrible marriage with 4 kids? Get a 407 and not a RAV4. CarPlay? Sorted. Auto wipers? Sorted. Heated seats? Sorted. Wheels? Sorted. All for 4k USD. Probably more ground clearance than those SUVs anyway. 

 

You can do anything you want with a sedan that you can with an SUV. I use this for moving sheep, wood, greens, anything I need. Still runs well even though its getting onto 225km. 

 

A highlander with AWD can certainly go off road better than a sedan could, and can tow up to 5,000lbs.

Better engine than the 2.7L 4cyl or 3.5L V6 in the Toyota? Well Renault bought most of Nissan and Mitsubishi, quality of those cars in engines and transmissions have gone way down ever since Renault has owned them.

 I dobut most people care how they look if they need an SUV to haul their cargo, but would care about putting a trailer behind their sedan and taking it off road.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, RorzNZ said:

1) We're talking about sedans vs SUV

2) We're talking about practicality. Need to use a trailer? Done. Need to carry more stuff? Roof racks are cheap, like under 100. My car isn't off-roading, its just on a gravel/clay driveway, and then on grass. 

3) They do

4) If we're going that way, I doubt most people need to carry 8 people around in their car, or need larger seats. Most people are fine with a sedan, and if they need to do more work in it, its fine as it is. It is also what the car is comfortable doing, not the person. 

You seem to forget about America, and our above average waistlines. Most people aren't willing to modify their car in any way. period. They won't install a trailer hitch. They wont want a trailer. Most people are not fine with sedans. Thats why Ford & GM are removing them from their lineup. More people are buying SUVs then sedan. Just admit it. There is no reason to buy a sedan. They're not much more efficient, and they're not as practical for most people.

[Guest]

Just now, Blademaster91 said:

A highlander with AWD can certainly go off road better than a sedan could, and can tow up to 5,000lbs.

Not like this, I used the 407 because I can lose it and not care, the clay is quite unstable due to the rain that fell the week before. I use a land cruiser usually, but I didn't want to risk losing it. You could get the highlander with AWD and tow up to 5k lbs, but then its like comparing two different price ranges, can't really compare the two, of course one is going to be better. 

Just now, Blademaster91 said:

Better engine than the 2.7L 4cyl or 3.5L V6 in the Toyota? Well Renault bought Nissan and Mitsubishi, quality of those cars in engines and transmissions have gone way down ever since Renault has owned them.

It's a Peugeot, which have engines made by Peugeot and Ford. 2l Turbodiesel. (Probably the same in a highlander TBH, the Toyota equivalent is in the avensis, the last of the 407s had 3.6l v6 turbodiesels made by PSA (Ford, Peugeot, Citroen), so you can get equivalent or better engines in both scenarios, but there is a cost difference for both. IDK I probably shouldn't have bought it up. Diesels are way better for towing and off-roading anyway. 

Just now, Blademaster91 said:

 I dobut most people care how they look if they need an SUV to haul their cargo, but would care about putting a trailer behind their sedan and taking it off road.

Looks cool IDK, can't argue a subjective point. (Not that this whole conversation isn't).

6 minutes ago, MagnesiumPC said:

You seem to forget about America, and our above average waistlines. Most people aren't willing to modify their car in any way. period. They won't install a trailer hitch. They wont want a trailer.

Comes from the factory like this, if you need a trailer just rent one. If you need more space, which you won't need, get a roof rack. If you don't want a roof rack, use the boot. 

6 minutes ago, MagnesiumPC said:

Most people are not fine with sedans. Thats why Ford & GM are removing them from their lineup. More people are buying SUVs then sedan. Just admit it. There is no reason to buy a sedan. They're not much more efficient, and they're not as practical for most people.

You haven't stated any real reasons that they aren't more efficient or less practical. Theres no need for an SUV if you already have a sedan. More people are buying SUVs because thats what's available and SUV covers a large range of vehicles. 

[dalekphalm]

1 hour ago, MagnesiumPC said:

Carry 8 people, actually have room for luggage, have larger seats for added comfort, etc.

Yeah and most people don't need to carry 8 people plus luggage. And for those who do, a Minivan is probably more practical and comfortable anyway.

1 hour ago, MagnesiumPC said:

Actually, the Camry has a higher MPG rating. And, according to CARMAX, the difference in annual fuel costs is only $324. For $324, you get seating for 3 additional people, more legroom, & greater flexibility is cargo storage.

Where are you getting these figures?

 

1. 2019 Camry (non-hybrid):

 

2. 2019 Highlander (non-hybrid):

 

This comes from the official government regulatory website (fueleconomy.gov) - which are basically best case scenarios.

 

I chose the most fuel efficient non-hybrid, regular gasoline option.

 

As you can see, the Camry saves $500 per year, and has a massive 11 MPG advantage.

 

Let's take the conservative figure, 11.4 years for the average lifetime of a car:

https://www.autotrader.com/car-shopping/buying-car-how-long-can-you-expect-car-last-240725

At $500 per year, that's $5700 over the lifetime of the car. PLUS the $10,000 cost premium of buying a Highlander over a Camry.

 

Even if we take the average 6 years of "new car ownership", that's still $3000 over 6 years in gas, and still of course plus the $10,000 cost premium.

 

Camry's are cheaper, more affordable, better on gas, and just as (if not more) practical for the average person.

 

For those who need more carry space, a RAV4 makes far more sense than a Highlander.

[dalekphalm]

1 hour ago, MagnesiumPC said:

You seem to forget about America, and our above average waistlines. Most people aren't willing to modify their car in any way. period. They won't install a trailer hitch. They wont want a trailer. Most people are not fine with sedans. Thats why Ford & GM are removing them from their lineup. More people are buying SUVs then sedan. Just admit it. There is no reason to buy a sedan. They're not much more efficient, and they're not as practical for most people.

Hold on a second here. People are buying SUV's because they like them. Not because they're a better financial investment or are more practical.

 

And it's North America that is driving the SUV trend. Big vehicles that are high off the ground and huge.

 

Yes SUV's are getting more efficient and aren't nearly as bad a trade-off as they used to be, but please, see my post above.

 

People don't need iPhones or flagship android phones either, but Galaxy S9's and iPhone's sell like crazy. Just because something is the most popular doesn't mean it's the most practical or the best decision.

 

People buy things for all kinds of reasons. SUV's are mostly for show or for fun. I wager that very few people buy an SUV because a sedan wouldn't do what they need.

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Yeah and most people don't need to carry 8 people plus luggage. And for those who do, a Minivan is probably more practical and comfortable anyway.

Where are you getting these figures?

 

1. 2019 Camry (non-hybrid):

 

2. 2019 Highlander (non-hybrid):

 

This comes from the official government regulatory website (fueleconomy.gov) - which are basically best case scenarios.

 

I chose the most fuel efficient non-hybrid, regular gasoline option.

 

As you can see, the Camry saves $500 per year, and has a massive 11 MPG advantage.

 

Let's take the conservative figure, 11.4 years for the average lifetime of a car:

https://www.autotrader.com/car-shopping/buying-car-how-long-can-you-expect-car-last-240725

At $500 per year, that's $5700 over the lifetime of the car. PLUS the $10,000 cost premium of buying a Highlander over a Camry.

 

Even if we take the average 6 years of "new car ownership", that's still $3000 over 6 years in gas, and still of course plus the $10,000 cost premium.

 

Camry's are cheaper, more affordable, better on gas, and just as (if not more) practical for the average person.

 

For those who need more carry space, a RAV4 makes far more sense than a Highlander.

However, you forgot to address one thing: depreciation. SUVs are much better at holding onto their value over time due to the rapid increase in demand. However, I agree the RAV4 is more practical than a Highlander. That wasn't the point I was trying to make.

 

I got my numbers from CarMax because their listing was the first to show up. I used the LE trim due to it being shared among all three vehicles. My point is / was in relation to relative efficiency. Having a vehicle that can carry more people / cargo is an advantage many people aren't willing to give up. For most Americans, an 8 mpg difference isn't that much. Using the EPA's Fuel Economy comparison, The difference in gallons per 100 miles is within ~ 1 gallon for all three of the vehicles. Yes. The Highlander is less efficient. But, the difference in efficiency isn't that significant for most Americans to care about. The major

differences are upfront cost.

 

 

 

[Yoinkerman]

SUVs also make car manufacturers way more money. So why not convince people that's what they want?

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Hold on a second here. People are buying SUV's because they like them. Not because they're a better financial investment or are more practical.

 

And it's North America that is driving the SUV trend. Big vehicles that are high off the ground and huge.

 

Yes SUV's are getting more efficient and aren't nearly as bad a trade-off as they used to be, but please, see my post above.

 

People don't need iPhones or flagship android phones either, but Galaxy S9's and iPhone's sell like crazy. Just because something is the most popular doesn't mean it's the most practical or the best decision.

 

People buy things for all kinds of reasons. SUV's are mostly for show or for fun. I wager that very few people buy an SUV because a sedan wouldn't do what they need.

People like SUVs because they're more practical & hold onto their value better. Most SUVs are not super high of the ground. Most SUVs are not super massive. Most people buy SUVs for the added practicality. They are by know means more fun. Usually, they have floatier handling and worse acceleration. Two things fun does not make.

[Blademaster91]

1 hour ago, RorzNZ said:

Not like this, I used the 407 because I can lose it and not care, the clay is quite unstable due to the rain that fell the week before. I use a land cruiser usually, but I didn't want to risk losing it. You could get the highlander with AWD and tow up to 5k lbs, but then its like comparing two different price ranges, can't really compare the two, of course one is going to be better. 

It's a Peugeot, which have engines made by Peugeot and Ford. 2l Turbodiesel. (Probably the same in a highlander TBH, the Toyota equivalent is in the avensis, the last of the 407s had 3.6l v6 turbodiesels made by PSA (Ford, Peugeot, Citroen), so you can get equivalent or better engines in both scenarios, but there is a cost difference for both. IDK I probably shouldn't have bought it up. Diesels are way better for towing and off-roading anyway.

Yeah I probably should have avoided bringing up engines, many companies share drivetrain platforms depending on the market. The price difference is significantly more with an SUV,and i really don't like the increase in popularity while discontinuing car models,since most don't even need an SUV. Maintenance stuff like tires for an SUV are quite a bit more expensive also. If i wanted something that can go offroad i'd get something like a Subaru Crosstrek, nice ground clearance,plenty of cargo space while still car sized. I don't know of any cars that come with a tow hitch or offer one, you usually have to get something like a crossover. North American consumers usually either buy an SUV or truck for any serious towing, and unfortunately only trucks offer diesel engine options.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Yeah I probably should have avoided bringing up engines, many companies share drivetrain platforms depending on the market. The price difference is significantly more with an SUV,and i really don't like the increase in popularity while discontinuing car models,since most don't even need an SUV. Maintenance stuff like tires for an SUV are quite a bit more expensive also. If i wanted something that can go offroad i'd get something like a Subaru Crosstrek, nice ground clearance,plenty of cargo space while still car sized. I don't know of any cars that come with a tow hitch or offer one, you usually have to get something like a crossover. North American consumers usually either buy an SUV or truck for any serious towing, and unfortunately only trucks offer diesel engine options.

Ugh all this Subaru off-road stuff, so gross! I'd look into the levorg, which I hear is coming to US if you're keen on them though. I prefer real 4WD, not Subaru's awd system, and the legacy's are just too low on the ground for serious 4WD, not that I do much of that now anyway. Their speakers are usually budget as well, and I'm kind of into car audio.

[Ja Krispie]

I'm one of the few people it seems who enjoys a good v8 engine lol. I do love my truck. It's a 2005, paid for and I maybe put a couple thousand miles a year on it. The majority of my driving is in a company vehicle. I will say I've been debating on getting either a hatchback car or a small SUV for something more practical for things like road trips and grocery shopping. My truck isn't great for groceries.

[Zannah]

On 11/28/2018 at 10:35 AM, Disgruntled Homer said:

I consider those Crossovers. I still don't like them as much as Sedans, though. On an unrelated note, I'm sad to see Manual Transmissions being phased out.

Mazda's 2019 cars can come with a 6 speed manual transmission, not all companies are phasing it out. I think there will always be some demand for them. 

[MarkHawk]

Did Linus ever do any videos on the Volt or cars after his purchase? The only ones I've seen covering the Volt was "What happened to Linus's car" and when he installed his home charger. He seemed pretty excited at two points to do a review, I just haven't found any mention of it since. I might be needing to buy a car soon and Volt is on my short list of plug-in Hybrids right now. 

[LinusTech]

3 hours ago, MarkHawk said:

Did Linus ever do any videos on the Volt or cars after his purchase? The only ones I've seen covering the Volt was "What happened to Linus's car" and when he installed his home charger. He seemed pretty excited at two points to do a review, I just haven't found any mention of it since. I might be needing to buy a car soon and Volt is on my short list of plug-in Hybrids right now. 

Still planning to. I really like it. 

[dalekphalm]

15 hours ago, LinusTech said:

Still planning to. I really like it. 

Good to hear - I unfortunately didn't even consider it when I bought my last vehicle. It's one of the LTT pieces of content I'm most looking forward to.

 

I hope you'll be able to come up with different video ideas beyond just a review. There's a lot of potential content there, and I personally wouldn't mind a bit more car-focused stuff, especially if you can tie it back into tech.

[Bouzoo]

3 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Good to hear - I unfortunately didn't even consider it when I bought my last vehicle. It's one of the LTT pieces of content I'm most looking forward to.

 

I hope you'll be able to come up with different video ideas beyond just a review. There's a lot of potential content there, and I personally wouldn't mind a bit more car-focused stuff, especially if you can tie it back into tech.

Compare it with new NSX, give it the crown for better value for money, make Ford not discontinue them. Profit. 

[Shorty7778]

On 1/18/2019 at 11:41 PM, LinusTech said:

Still planning to. I really like it. 

Shocking...

[ShredBird]

I think the Volt came out at a time that the world wasn't really ready to embrace the full on EV yet.  Dedicated EV's didn't quite have the range until Tesla hit the market and it's smart to realize that for most short trips around town you have just enough electric range to get the job done and you can carry fuel so you don't have range anxiety.  Diesel electric was a genius design choice as opposed to a Prius style hybrid approach.

GM and the world are ready to embrace full EVs now.  The Volt was a great stop gap and was the car the people and the market needed, but time to move and build full on EVs.  I got the opportunity to ride in one recently and I liked it quite a bit, that being said the Model 3 is also a pretty solid drive as well.  It's good to have options now.

[dalekphalm]

11 hours ago, ShredBird said:

I think the Volt came out at a time that the world wasn't really ready to embrace the full on EV yet.  Dedicated EV's didn't quite have the range until Tesla hit the market and it's smart to realize that for most short trips around town you have just enough electric range to get the job done and you can carry fuel so you don't have range anxiety.  Diesel electric was a genius design choice as opposed to a Prius style hybrid approach.

GM and the world are ready to embrace full EVs now.  The Volt was a great stop gap and was the car the people and the market needed, but time to move and build full on EVs.  I got the opportunity to ride in one recently and I liked it quite a bit, that being said the Model 3 is also a pretty solid drive as well.  It's good to have options now.

Keep in mind that the Volt is not an EV. It's a PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid EV). It still has a gasoline ICE - though I think they call it a "range extender", rather than a true "engine" (though it's the same thing really).

[RejZoR]

Reason being is that Chevrolet has run out of government funds for "green" cars. Without it, the price of the car would increase so much that it wouldn't be sustainable, so they simply killed it off.

[ThePD]

The Volt's styling was poor. If you compare it to a Model 3, who in the right mind would pick the volt? Not to mention, having to deal with the dealerships is always a hassle. I learned first hand how bad Chevy's customer service was when I bought a 2016 Camaro SS and it turned out to be a massive lemon. The car was tearing itself apart in the back and the dealerships would hmm and haw at fixing it when it was under warranty.

The horrendous customer service Chevy dealerships gave me ensured I would never buy another product from them. There are many reasons why people wont buy X car... sometimes it's just because of the badge on the front.