RE: Ford Fiesta ST vs. Toyota Yaris GRMN

[ecsrobin]

Add in the running costs of a Ford vs Subaru and the fiesta is a far better option for a daily whilst still getting 90% the performance of the Impreza.

My fiat 500 is close to the performance of a 95 Subaru whilst returning 10-20mpg more than the Impreza and pumping out a lot less gas in the process. I’d say that’s pretty good progress in 25years.

[big_rob_sydney]

Deep Thought said:

Bingo! And we have a winner - in Australia. As i've said i've no idea. You've told us yourself its an anomaly - i would suggest down to YEN / AUS$ changes, changes in import duties, etc, etc. But i dont know.

What i would say is, whilst a Subaru looked terrific value at the time - as it offered a lot more power compared to its rivals - your $39,000 Subaru WRX (translating to around £24,000) with the same power today would look a bit Meh.

Actually, maybe thats it - back in 1992 a WRX looked outrageous value at $40,000 / £20,000 with 200BHP whereas in todays money it simply doesnt?

In 1992 it offered 200BHP when a Golf GTI offered maybe 110BHP, whereas now the Subaru WRX offers 268BHP but a Golf GTI offers 230BHP?

So ultimately to keep the prices relatively flat, we've seen a massive drop in bangs per buck with the WRX, hence why its now relatively cheap?

I've no idea why its an anomaly but the exception doesnt make the rule, which is what you're trying to do.

I don't want to selectively quote you, so I've just taken your last contiguous bit.

I think the overall point I'm making, you've captured in your second last line; "hence why its now relatively cheap?"

I don't find these cars to be particularly cheap for what they are, and I'm not impressed by the development that 25 years appears to have not provided.

[Deep Thought]

big_rob_sydney said:

Deep Thought said:

Bingo! And we have a winner - in Australia. As i've said i've no idea. You've told us yourself its an anomaly - i would suggest down to YEN / AUS$ changes, changes in import duties, etc, etc. But i dont know.

What i would say is, whilst a Subaru looked terrific value at the time - as it offered a lot more power compared to its rivals - your $39,000 Subaru WRX (translating to around £24,000) with the same power today would look a bit Meh.

Actually, maybe thats it - back in 1992 a WRX looked outrageous value at $40,000 / £20,000 with 200BHP whereas in todays money it simply doesnt?

In 1992 it offered 200BHP when a Golf GTI offered maybe 110BHP, whereas now the Subaru WRX offers 268BHP but a Golf GTI offers 230BHP?

So ultimately to keep the prices relatively flat, we've seen a massive drop in bangs per buck with the WRX, hence why its now relatively cheap?

I've no idea why its an anomaly but the exception doesnt make the rule, which is what you're trying to do.

I don't want to selectively quote you, so I've just taken your last contiguous bit.

I think the overall point I'm making, you've captured in your second last line; "hence why its now relatively cheap?"

I don't find these cars to be particularly cheap for what they are, and I'm not impressed by the development that 25 years appears to have not provided.

Oh Jesus - you dont want to selectively quote me, but you've just selectively quoted me??

Are you for real?

The full sentence was "So ultimately to keep the prices relatively flat, we've seen a massive drop in bangs per buck with the WRX, hence why its now relatively cheap?" (in Australia)

And it was a possible reason why Subarus in Australia appear relatively cheap. As i said i dont have the time nor inclination to go through Australia / Asia import charges history and YEN / AUS$ fluctuations over the last 30 years either but chances are its a combination of all three.

As i said the exception (in a foreign country on the other side of the world) doesnt prove the rule (here in the UK), but sadly it does seem to be the basis for your entire argument

Edited by Deep Thought on Sunday 12th August 12:56

[big_rob_sydney]

Deep Thought said:

big_rob_sydney said:

Deep Thought said:

Bingo! And we have a winner - in Australia. As i've said i've no idea. You've told us yourself its an anomaly - i would suggest down to YEN / AUS$ changes, changes in import duties, etc, etc. But i dont know.

What i would say is, whilst a Subaru looked terrific value at the time - as it offered a lot more power compared to its rivals - your $39,000 Subaru WRX (translating to around £24,000) with the same power today would look a bit Meh.

Actually, maybe thats it - back in 1992 a WRX looked outrageous value at $40,000 / £20,000 with 200BHP whereas in todays money it simply doesnt?

In 1992 it offered 200BHP when a Golf GTI offered maybe 110BHP, whereas now the Subaru WRX offers 268BHP but a Golf GTI offers 230BHP?

So ultimately to keep the prices relatively flat, we've seen a massive drop in bangs per buck with the WRX, hence why its now relatively cheap?

I've no idea why its an anomaly but the exception doesnt make the rule, which is what you're trying to do.

I don't want to selectively quote you, so I've just taken your last contiguous bit.

I think the overall point I'm making, you've captured in your second last line; "hence why its now relatively cheap?"

I don't find these cars to be particularly cheap for what they are, and I'm not impressed by the development that 25 years appears to have not provided.

Oh Jesus - you dont want to selectively quote me, but you've just selectively quoted me??

Are you for real?

The full sentence was "So ultimately to keep the prices relatively flat, we've seen a massive drop in bangs per buck with the WRX, hence why its now relatively cheap?" (in Australia)

And it was a possible reason why Subarus in Australia appear relatively cheap. As i said i dont have the time nor inclination to go through Australia / Asia import charges history and YEN / AUS$ fluctuations over the last 30 years either but chances are its a combination of all three.

As i said the exception (in a foreign country on the other side of the world) doesnt prove the rule (here in the UK), but sadly it does seem to be the basis for your entire argument

Edited by Deep Thought on Sunday 12th August 12:56

The reason I chose the last complete contiguous part of your post was simply because you engage in splitting up people's posts section by section, to the point where it's a mess.

I also found most of your posting to be waffle and not worth replying to.

As in this case, you've made assertions, such as :

"So ultimately to keep the prices relatively flat, we've seen a massive drop in bangs per buck with the WRX, hence why its now relatively cheap?" (in Australia).
"
Now, quite how on earth you get a massive drop in bangs for bucks, when the power has gone up and the price has gone down, not only in outright terms, but in inflation adjusted terms, just shows me you don't have a clue about what you are posting.

Those are your words highlighted.

Next you're going to come out with "I was tired when I wrote that", "I didn't get enough sleep", "It's a simple mistake", or some other bullst argument.

[Deep Thought]

big_rob_sydney said:

The reason I chose the last complete contiguous part of your post was simply because you engage in splitting up people's posts section by section, to the point where it's a mess.

I also found most of your posting to be waffle and not worth replying to.

As in this case, you've made assertions, such as :

"So ultimately to keep the prices relatively flat, we've seen a massive drop in bangs per buck with the WRX, hence why its now relatively cheap?" (in Australia).
"
Now, quite how on earth you get a massive drop in bangs for bucks, when the power has gone up and the price has gone down, not only in outright terms, but in inflation adjusted terms, just shows me you don't have a clue about what you are posting.

Those are your words highlighted.

Next you're going to come out with "I was tired when I wrote that", "I didn't get enough sleep", "It's a simple mistake", or some other bullst argument.

I break it out because you use a scattergun approach and i wanted to respond to each of the main points. Its common practice, sorry if it confuses you.

And again, you're missing the point :-

In 1992 a WRX cost £25K ish there with 200BHP. That was outrageous at the time. Crazy BHP.

Now in Australia its rougly the same price @ £25K ish but has had a power increase only to 270BHP or.

My point was that over the same timeframe other manufacturers have in some cases doubled their power and enhanced their offering significantly whereas Subaru seems to have opted for more power yes, but not to the x2 levels of most other manufacturers.

Lets be honest a 270BHP these days is nothing special in that class, whereas 200BHP back in 1992 was - to the extent where here in the UK the WRX has been withdrawn.

So what i was pitching was that the combination of not a huge advancement in power, fit and finish and specification, combined with perhaps changes in import duties and fluctuation between the AUS$ and the YEN may be the combined reason why you're seeing that anomaly in pricing.

Again - i dont really know why you're seeing the anomaly with the WRX in Australia, but it is an anomaly, not the norm. As i said i neither have the time nor inclination to find the root cause. Dont really care about car pricing on the other side of the world for one particular car frankly.

Oh and wheres this cheapest car being £6K in 2018 and £6K being the cheapest car in 1992 example gone? You've been asked repeatedly

Edited by Deep Thought on Monday 13th August 10:15

Edited by Deep Thought on Monday 13th August 10:42

[Rawwr]

Rawwr said:

Rawwr said:

Which two cars did you have in mind?