Yaris sales hit new low...

[tk-421]

I think there is such a thing as "too reliable a car for too little a profit" for a car manufacturer, and the Yaris most definitely fits that description. They are in the "selling cars" business, after all...

Smaller cars with less stuff in them are easier to make, ship, store and thus they should be easier to sell. It makes no sense to retire the model, other than lack of sales due to current Yaris owners keeping their cars for 10 years (and Toyota is to blame for that).

Another thing one should consider is that newer Yaris models have become pretty expensive. People expect more for that $15K these days...

[JustPassinThru]

Originally Posted by tk-421

I think there is such a thing as "too reliable a car for too little a profit" for a car manufacturer, and the Yaris most definitely fits that description. They are in the "selling cars" business, after all...

That is the thinking that put Detroit where it is today.

They are in the business of selling cars, sure. I am NOT in the market to buy a car so that I can buy another car in a year or two. I am in the market to find the BEST answer to my needs for the lowest cost.

Toyota fits that bill; because the cars are indestructible. If they cheapen the car so that it only lasts a few years...THEN THERE IS NO REASON FOR ME TO BUY TOYOTA.

If they limit quality to only their premium and full-size line...I don't need a premium car with all the gimmicks and I don't need a full-size car. I DO need quality. If Toyota tries to tell me that I can only have quality in a full-size car - as Chevrolet used to demonstrate to THEIR customers - then I will find another enterprising brand that WILL offer quality in small packages.

As Toyota did to capture the American market.

What I'm saying is, this line of thinking is FATAL to the future.

As to the Yaris not selling...if there's not the market or they don't want the market, then that, as they say, is that.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by JustPassinThru

That is the thinking that put Detroit where it is today.

They are in the business of selling cars, sure. I am NOT in the market to buy a car so that I can buy another car in a year or two. I am in the market to find the BEST answer to my needs for the lowest cost.

Toyota fits that bill; because the cars are indestructible. If they cheapen the car so that it only lasts a few years...THEN THERE IS NO REASON FOR ME TO BUY TOYOTA.

If they limit quality to only their premium and full-size line...I don't need a premium car with all the gimmicks and I don't need a full-size car. I DO need quality. If Toyota tries to tell me that I can only have quality in a full-size car - as Chevrolet used to demonstrate to THEIR customers - then I will find another enterprising brand that WILL offer quality in small packages.

As Toyota did to capture the American market.

What I'm saying is, this line of thinking is FATAL to the future.

As to the Yaris not selling...if there's not the market or they don't want the market, then that, as they say, is that.

One 'Yaris' is selling here in the U.S. .......It's just called the Prius c . IMO, there are several reasons for this - 1. I think why? is correct re the trend away from manual transmissions. I'd think the main reason = as people spend more time stuck in traffic, they don't want to be bothered with a manual (more so than MPG or performance reasons). - 2. Media messages that hybrids always = a smaller overall carbon footprint (not the case). - 3. Trendiness/bandwagon/politically correct/(or some combination of these) nature of a certain segment of U.S. consumers.

[JustPassinThru]

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

One 'Yaris' is selling here in the U.S. .......It's just called the Prius c . IMO, there are several reasons for this - 1. I think why? is correct re the trend away from manual transmissions. I'd think the main reason = as people spend more time stuck in traffic, they don't want to be bothered with a manual (more so than MPG or performance reasons). - 2. Media messages that hybrids always = a smaller overall carbon footprint (not the case). - 3. Trendiness/bandwagon/politically correct/(or some combination of these) nature of a certain segment of U.S. consumers.

Agree with all of this. ESPECIALLY the trendiness/media hype. Hybrids, to me, are a ripoff - they offer better fuel economy IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES. They shine in stop-and-go traffic; their technology is a waste on the open road, where regenerative braking doesn't factor in. The cost is high enough that to make up the DIFFERENCE in fuel economy (assuming the EPA figures are reflected in real-world) one would need to keep the car over 100,000 miles. And at that point, the more complex drivetrain might make maintenance more costly.

I like things SIMPLE. I have had, in the past, a VW Super Beetle; an old mail jeep; a Pinto. All of them simple and straightforward to care for. Nothing complex to go wrong - although I wasn't enthused about the belt-driven camshaft on the Pinto (and later it did fail; the engine was designed for clearance). So, when the Prius C and the Yaris sit side-by-side...guess where I'm drawn?

Toyota seems to want to be The Green Car Company. And they may pull it off; but sadly for them, they're in direct competition with Government Motors. And government, in any form, don't like competition. Hence the BS stories about ghost-accelerating cars; about forced recalls for silly issues; the lawsuits about somehow "discriminating" against (insert name of favored victim group here). So...I think, the more they stray from their message of "Basic, quality transportation" the more risky is their future.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by JustPassinThru

the more complex drivetrain might make maintenance more costly.

Good point.

I like things SIMPLE.

simple and straightforward to care for. Nothing complex to go wrong

I do as well.

So, when the Prius C and the Yaris sit side-by-side...guess where I'm drawn?

Even in the Fiesta rental I had, I didn't like that my left foot didn't have anything to do !

somehow "discriminating" against (insert name of favored victim group here).

[bronsin]

Originally Posted by Kal-El

Meanwhile, Nissan Versa (2 cars really), sold 15,630 copies (almost 23 times that of Yaris).

This is really sad to see. Especially since Yaris is a very good car with merits being ignored by shoppers, most notably reliability.

Yaris = $20,000 Versa = $15,000 may have something to do with it. People buying a small car for them a thousand or two less will cinch the deal.

Maybe Toyota will get smart and bring back the $11,000 2001 ECHO?

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by bronsin

Yaris = $20,000 Versa = $15,000 may have something to do with it. People buying a small car for them a thousand or two less will cinch the deal.

Maybe Toyota will get smart and bring back the $11,000 2001 ECHO?

Cheapest Versa vs cheapest Yaris (Base) for 2014 = a bit under $2500.00. From what I've noticed in the past, dealers in NJ tend to order option laden Yarii. In the past couple of years I've noticed that trend spread to some high volume dealers in other areas as well.

I wonder how many of those '1-2k less will cinch the deal' people are looking at total cost of ownership....and basing the MPG off what owners are getting (can discover online), rather than the EPA ratings.

[juicyjosh]

Guys and gals, we all realize the 2014 Yaris is a 2005 Yaris, which is a 2007 Daihatsu Charade..., right?

Would YOU buy a 2005 100-hp FWD car... TODAY IN 2014?

I know I wouldn't.

There's also a minimal commission payout to Toyota sales reps for selling the Yaris, so the sales reps aren't going to be pushing these cars to begin with. The point is significant: Salespeople aren't going to spend 4 hours to trying to convince someone to buy a cheaply-made car hoping to make $1xx.00 commission when they can much more easily sell a "nicer" Camry or Corolla and make $3xx.00.

But Toyota's milking the 2005 Yaris (a.k.a. 2007 Daihatsu Charade) for all it's worth. The 2012-on Yaris has an exterior and interior refresh, but it's only a facelift. Like everything else in life, what's inside is more important. In the case of the Yaris, the engine, drivetrain, suspension are all circa 2005. (So the 2012 SE has disks in the rear; There's so little weight back there that there's no significant performance benefit.) However for 2012, Toyota remapped the ecu for "softer" throttle response to get an extra 1 mpg City and Highway for the MT. Thanks Toyota for completing the initially only partially botched castration of what little cojones this car ever had to begin with.

I leased the car because of a unique situation I was in at the time where I needed something cheap with Toyota reliability, and I had no time to be working on cars. And I got a 5-speed fwiw. At least it was cheaper than the auto, and I'm averaging 29 mpg on 87 octane, which isn't bad, though could be better for a 2300-lb. car with a very optimistic 106-hp rating.

Hopefully this helps ppl to not lose any sleep over this car's demise.

[roxy1]

Originally Posted by juicyjosh

Guys and gals, we all realize the 2014 Yaris is a 2005 Yaris, which is a 2007 Daihatsu Charade..., right?

Would YOU buy a 2005 100-hp FWD car... TODAY IN 2014?
.

I owned an 07 yaris and now a 14 yaris. the 14 is a little longer, has different sheet metal, a different interior, is definitely quieter, has a better ride, gets a little better mileage, and is safer. it is definitely a different generation yaris. so no, a 2014 yaris is not a 2005 yaris.

the 2007 charade is a 2nd gen yaris that was simply given the charade name, and that was just to make it as easy as possible for diahatsu to carry on in those markets. who cares? nobody here, im sure.

at 2300 lbs, I will gladly buy lots of 100-ish horsepower cars. the fiat 500, at 101 hp, is the most fun car ive had since a 1980 vw rabbit. the service experience more than the car led me away from fiat.

if hp is ones only determining factor then you will always be chasing more hp. for many small car drivers, hp is not a major determining factor.

we will see, in the next 10-15 years, more subcompacts, perhaps even diesels, with a little more torque but under 100 hp.

would I buy a 100 hp car in 2014?......heck, id buy a 85 hp diesel subcompact in a second.

[why?]

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

I'm assuming (from a U.S. perspective only, of course) that you mean when what we call the ECHO first came out ? The base pice on the 07 5M USDM 3-door was at least 11k+, IIRC.
I agree.
Good points. The only one of those that matters to me personally is the 6-speed manual (which of course the Yaris has in other markets ).
()
What percentage or fraction of your ability to do the above is attributable,do you think, to the fact that you've removed your rear seating area, and other items . Even if I could squeeze a couple more MPG out of an automatic over the same car with a manual, I'd still want the manual (as long as the model in question isn't really heavy) knowing I could push the car and compression start it in a pinch if I needed to do that.
Yep +++ .

Actually the base 2007 Yaris was $9999. And the 6 speed Yaris manual in other countries has a much better ratio for gas mileage than our 5th gear does, our 5th gear is totally useless.

As to my gas mileage, very little. My 2nd tank of gas I managed to hit 44 mpg. The car was completely stock, and I still have no idea how I managed it. A better sorted gear box would make it easier.

Originally Posted by Flipper_1938

I personally don't want stop-start or direct injection. Neither of those technologies are proving to be trouble free.

I really would prefer my existing yaris didn't have ABS (ASB= Anti-Stop Brakes)

A 6 speed manual trans would be nice though.

stop start is simply a better battery/heavy duty starter. Other countries, such as Japan, they are standard and have been for quite a while.

While Direct Injection has had some odd problems, I am sure they will be taken care of, and the benefits are massive. A 2liter turbo Mercedez Benz can get a 26/38 EPA rating, am I really suppose to believe a Yaris cannot match that?

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

I was going by a general assumption that the set up on a 6-speed vs a 5-speed (on average) would allow the 6-speed to be at a lower rpm (and likely higher MPG) than the 5-speed at the same MPH.
If one wound through the gears ALWAYS at a low rpm (trying to get to 5th or 6th as quickly as possible without 'bogging'), wouldn't the diminished efficiency of more gears to 'row'/'wind' through be minimal, or almost non existent ?

Totally non existent if you do it right, and much better than a "three speed." That is just absurd. If you shift our current 5 speed at 1500 rpm's, you are in 5th before you hit 25 or so. And if we had a 6 speed and better gearing it would help gas mileage.

Originally Posted by bronsin

In most six speed transmissions the highest speed is equal to or lower than the comparable highest speed in a five speed, four speed etc.
It is unusual for it to be higher which would result in lower rpms.
If you accelerated the engine to the same rpm in a six, five, and four speed transmission before shifting up you would have slightly less mpg the more speeds you shifted through. More speeds does NOT mean more mpg. The eight speed autos Chrysler and others have come out with are just pulling the wool over the eyes of the unwary consumer.
However as you suggest the difference might not be much or even noticeable in practical experience.
And a three speed transmission would not be as adaptable to varying road conditions as a six, five, or even four speed.
HOWEVER!
Manufacturers are guilty of misleading the public in many things. All the time they were increasing the size, weight, and displacement of cars like the Corolla they said "And the mileage is improved!"
Not so.
My sister in law had something like an 85 Camry that got 38 mpg around town while my wifes 05 Camry gets 22.
If you have your heart set on a six speed (soon to be SEVEN speed!) before purchasing get a print out of the final drive ratio of each speed and compare it to the five speed. In many case there IS no five speed to compare it to!
BUT you can always SKIP gears as I did on my motorcycles when going cross country or commuting to work. I shifted my ST1100 and 1300 1-3-5.

The Yaris six speed box has a lower 6th speed, which would result in much better gas mileage.

Originally Posted by juicyjosh

Guys and gals, we all realize the 2014 Yaris is a 2005 Yaris, which is a 2007 Daihatsu Charade..., right?
Would YOU buy a 2005 100-hp FWD car... TODAY IN 2014?
I know I wouldn't.
There's also a minimal commission payout to Toyota sales reps for selling the Yaris, so the sales reps aren't going to be pushing these cars to begin with. The point is significant: Salespeople aren't going to spend 4 hours to trying to convince someone to buy a cheaply-made car hoping to make $1xx.00 commission when they can much more easily sell a "nicer" Camry or Corolla and make $3xx.00.
But Toyota's milking the 2005 Yaris (a.k.a. 2007 Daihatsu Charade) for all it's worth. The 2012-on Yaris has an exterior and interior refresh, but it's only a facelift. Like everything else in life, what's inside is more important. In the case of the Yaris, the engine, drivetrain, suspension are all circa 2005. (So the 2012 SE has disks in the rear; There's so little weight back there that there's no significant performance benefit.) However for 2012, Toyota remapped the ecu for "softer" throttle response to get an extra 1 mpg City and Highway for the MT. Thanks Toyota for completing the initially only partially botched castration of what little cojones this car ever had to begin with.
I leased the car because of a unique situation I was in at the time where I needed something cheap with Toyota reliability, and I had no time to be working on cars. And I got a 5-speed fwiw. At least it was cheaper than the auto, and I'm averaging 29 mpg on 87 octane, which isn't bad, though could be better for a 2300-lb. car with a very optimistic 106-hp rating.
Hopefully this helps ppl to not lose any sleep over this car's demise.

Love it, but it is also really an Echo from the turn of the century. And they keep a lot of the good stuff out of the USA.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by roxy1

I owned an 07 yaris and now a 14 yaris. the 14 is a little longer, has different sheet metal, a different interior, is definitely quieter, has a better ride, gets a little better mileage, and is safer. it is definitely a different generation yaris. so no, a 2014 yaris is not a 2005 yaris.

the 2007 charade is a 2nd gen yaris that was simply given the charade name, and that was just to make it as easy as possible for diahatsu to carry on in those markets. who cares? nobody here, im sure.

at 2300 lbs, I will gladly buy lots of 100-ish horsepower cars. the fiat 500, at 101 hp, is the most fun car ive had since a 1980 vw rabbit. the service experience more than the car led me away from fiat.

if hp is ones only determining factor then you will always be chasing more hp. for many small car drivers, hp is not a major determining factor.

we will see, in the next 10-15 years, more subcompacts, perhaps even diesels, with a little more torque but under 100 hp.

would I buy a 100 hp car in 2014?......heck, id buy a 85 hp diesel subcompact in a second.

After reading JuicyJosh's post I was mulling over my response. No need. You hit the nail on the head.

[Superfly]

Originally Posted by juicyjosh

Guys and gals, we all realize the 2014 Yaris is a 2005 Yaris, which is a 2007 Daihatsu Charade..., right?

Would YOU buy a 2005 100-hp FWD car... TODAY IN 2014?

I know I wouldn't.

There's also a minimal commission payout to Toyota sales reps for selling the Yaris, so the sales reps aren't going to be pushing these cars to begin with. The point is significant: Salespeople aren't going to spend 4 hours to trying to convince someone to buy a cheaply-made car hoping to make $1xx.00 commission when they can much more easily sell a "nicer" Camry or Corolla and make $3xx.00.

But Toyota's milking the 2005 Yaris (a.k.a. 2007 Daihatsu Charade) for all it's worth. The 2012-on Yaris has an exterior and interior refresh, but it's only a facelift. Like everything else in life, what's inside is more important. In the case of the Yaris, the engine, drivetrain, suspension are all circa 2005. (So the 2012 SE has disks in the rear; There's so little weight back there that there's no significant performance benefit.) However for 2012, Toyota remapped the ecu for "softer" throttle response to get an extra 1 mpg City and Highway for the MT. Thanks Toyota for completing the initially only partially botched castration of what little cojones this car ever had to begin with.

I leased the car because of a unique situation I was in at the time where I needed something cheap with Toyota reliability, and I had no time to be working on cars. And I got a 5-speed fwiw. At least it was cheaper than the auto, and I'm averaging 29 mpg on 87 octane, which isn't bad, though could be better for a 2300-lb. car with a very optimistic 106-hp rating.

It has nothing to do with the Yaris having low-end hp numbers. People are buying Fiat 500s, Smart ForTwos and Prius C's and all have low hp.

But I agree with most of the rest of your post. Toyota has no idea what to do with the Yaris because they have the Corolla and the Prius C. The former offers more room, a more powerful engine, a solid reputation for reliability and updated options. The latter offers high fuel economy and similar size. Both have minimally higher MSRPs which can (and are at this moment) offset with enticing/generous incentives such as 0% financing and cash back. The Yaris competitors offer similar things. How can the Yaris sell if it is being killed by it's own family line-up not to mention updated competitors?

I love this damned car but Toyota is failing it miserably. As I stated in several other threads, something has to change. Cut the entire production line to one model (the cheapest configuration) and turn it into your lowest priced, stripper model; tune or change the engine and tranny and redesign the sheet metal and turn it into a hot hatch; shrink the dimensions and make it a Fiat, Spark and Mini competitor; drop the Yaris from Toyota and place it under the Scion badge; offer more colors or interior options. Something has to give. I am waiting to see the 2016 model. It should give us all a good indication of what direction Toyota is headed (although I would argue pawning off production to Mazda is probably a good sign TMC is letting the Yaris drift to it's own demise).

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by Superfly

The former offers more room

Which some people don't care about....they'd rather have more parking options.

a more powerful engine

It's an economy car. If power is such an important concern, why buy an economy car?

a solid reputation for reliability

As does the Yaris.

The latter offers high fuel economy and similar size

.

But increased complexity that can drive up costs in the long run.....and it doesn't offer a manual transmission

How can the Yaris sell if it is being killed by it's own family line-up not to mention updated competitors?

The Prius c should have been called the Yaris Hybrid in the U.S., IMO. That it wasn't...and that that was the correct decision from a marketing standpoint...IMO, shows an insecure bandwagon mentality on the part of U.S. consumers.

Cut the entire production line to one model (the cheapest configuration) and turn it into your lowest priced, stripper model; tune or change the engine and tranny and redesign the sheet metal and turn it into a hot hatch; shrink the dimensions and make it a Fiat, Spark and Mini competitor; drop the Yaris from Toyota and place it under the Scion badge; offer more colors or interior options.

All good ideas.

[kimona]

If a Toyota buyer is simply in the market for a compact economy car, then it makes sense to overlook the Yaris when he/she can buy a Corolla for less... especially when it's bigger, gets better gas mileage, and has the popular Corolla nameplate. Besides hatchbacks are still not that desirable to many US buyers.

And, if the buyer is simply looking for any Japanese economy car, then the Yaris is far too expensive! For example, a basic 4-door Versa has a window of $12800, while a similarly equipped Yaris is $16280.

Bottom line: A new Yaris is way overpriced... even if it is a Toyota.

[Kal-El]

Yup, and it comes down to the Yaris being built in Japan vs the Versa being built in Mexico. That's the main disparity. Which is why Toyota has decided to team with Mazda to have its next model built in Mexico alongside the Mazda2. It's the only real way to get the price down.

The other thing Versa has going for it is that it is the biggest sub-compact package. Really, it is the size of a compact. That's what gets American buyers to sign on.

[roxy1]

I bought the yaris because I wanted a hatchback. corolla doesn't come in a hatch.

only the corolla with the cvt gets better mileage than the yaris. the corolla that starts at $16800 is the stick, rated at 28/37. the cvt in the corolla (and most every other cvt ive driven) takes the last bit of joy out of driving.

if Toyota wanted to push the yaris, they would market it more and push up inventories. in the subcompact market, hatch sales have either caught up or surpassed the sedan sales over the last few years.....sonic, fiesta, versa...and Honda doesn't even bother with a fit sedan.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by roxy1

I bought the yaris because I wanted a hatchback. corolla doesn't come in a hatch.

only the corolla with the cvt gets better mileage than the yaris. the corolla that starts at $16800 is the stick, rated at 28/37. the cvt in the corolla (and most every other cvt ive driven) takes the last bit of joy out of driving.

if Toyota wanted to push the yaris, they would market it more and push up inventories. in the subcompact market, hatch sales have either caught up or surpassed the sedan sales over the last few years.....sonic, fiesta, versa...and Honda doesn't even bother with a fit sedan.

I read Kimona's post #22 and Kal-El's post #23 (filled the 15.6" on my smaller windows laptop on whatever zoom setting I have right now in Safari). I highly respect Kimona's opinion and highly respect Kal-El's opinion, but I was still SMH. I was already starting to write the reply in my head. Two thoughts stuck out above others. One, we're kind of talking about apples and oranges because Kimona mentions/prefers an automatic, and Kal-El a sedan, while I prefer a manual 3-door hatch. Two, I thought if one took me, roxy1, and other like minded owners (from YW, and people posting their results/opinions on Yahoo Autos, Edmunds.com, etc.....who don't go crazy re hypermiling or maintenance, but do try to drive to generally drive to get the best fuel economy we can)....and took (let's say) 300 new cars for 300 people and 100 had a manual 3-door Yaris, 100 had a manual 5-door Mazda 2, and 100 had a manual Versa sedan and each one was driven the same number of miles (but over 200,000 for each), that the Yaris would have the lowest overall cost of ownership. It might not beat the Mazda 2 by much, but I think the Yaris would deliver the lowest overall cost. I think the Versa would bring up the rear, given those parameters. I started to scroll down to reply and......LOL, I see this as the next post. If I had elaborated beyond the above, some of our thoughts would have run together.

[kimona]

I bought my Yaris because it was a Toyota... and because I wanted a hatchback. My 2007 was very reasonably priced equipped with automatic, power windows/locks/mirrors, and 60/40split folding rear seat. Even though I'm not a big fan of the 3rd generation Yaris, I'd still buy one similarly equipped if the price was right... which isn't the case.