Safe Cars For Teens II

Last year I wrote an article listing safety criteria and features that are key to choosing a car for the new and inexperienced driver.  While those points are still valid, I wanted to revisit the 10 models I suggested with regard to price. 

Given the global economic crisis and the overwhelming problems of the auto industry, I updated the average retail pricing information in my original blog.  I was surprised that any drops in prices from the 2005 models I reviewed to the 2006 prices were not as dramatic as I would have envisioned, with only a few exceptions. 

You may read the original, full article posted elsewhere in my blog, which not only provides critical decision-making criteria for your purchase, but gives links to the government crash and rollover testing and rating sites, where you can make your own safety evaluation of the potential vehicle purchase.

These were the same 10 models from the prior article, which consistently do well in all of the tests and consumer ratings for safety and reliability, as well as popularity with teens for looks and features like handling, sound systems, and opportunities to customize with cosmetic upgrades. We put together this list based on the results of the safety crash tests done annually by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and for the affordability of the vehicle’s cost as a 2- or 3-year old pre-owned vehicle (2006 coming off of manufacturer lease). Most are recommended in the 4-cylinder model (sounds sluggish, but they are actually quite peppy and handle well). If your teen is paying the bills he or she will appreciate the fuel savings of the 4-cylinder choice! The benefit of a car less than 5 years old is that most desired safety features are now standard.

1. Honda Civic – Honda consistently tops these lists of safety and reliability. The 4-door model received 4 and 5 star ratings. The 4-door Civic can easily be found with a 4-cylinder engine. Comfortable, reliable, sporty-looking, and affordable (which is a relative term). Honda is a mid-ranged priced vehicle as compared with the others on this list. Current average retail for the 4-door EX model is approx $15,000.
2. Honda Accord – Also available with a 4-cylinder engine, a perennially well-rated car for safety and reliability in both the 2- and 4-door models. Sporty looks have improved considerably over the years. Current average retail for the 4-door EX is approx. $16,500
3. Toyota Corolla – The 4-door model is well-rated and affordable with an average retail price of $11,500. The Toyota Avalon (also 4-door model) is also well-rated but cost about $5,000 or more than the Corolla.
4. Mazda 6 Hatchback – with Side Airbags, this is also a highly rated model for safety. The hatchback gives it a sporty look with a bit of interior room. Usually costs slightly less than the Honda Civic, in the average range of $14,000
5. Acura TSX 4-door with side airbags – 5-star driver front and side crash test, 4-star rollover test (2-wheel drive model). A higher-priced choice, at about $18,900.
6. Scion tC – very roomy coupe, 160-hp 4-cylinder, with other standard features like sunroof, 17-inch allow wheels and many safety features. A 3-door hatchback. Well rated, and reasonably priced. A Toyota product in the $14,900 range.
7. Volvo S40 – Volvo has always enjoyed a reputation for safety. On par with the Hondas for pricing.  Average retail is currently about $14,500. 
8. Pontiac G6 – the 4-door model is well-rated for mid-size cars. A 4-cyl model was newly available in 2006. Average retail cost is currently around $11,000.
9. Subaru Forester AWD – well-rated SUV, 4-cylinder turbo. The 2006 model is hard to find.  If you can, it should run approximately $15,000 retail.
10. Honda Pilot – Highly safety-rated, with Honda reliability. Good visibility, roomy interior without excessive exterior size. But a bit pricy for a first vehicle at approximately $18,000 current retail.

All of the vehicles that we chose to include on this list are the 2006 models, and none have any crash or rollover ratings less than 4 stars, which we feel is an important criteria for the inexperienced driver.

You can also print the NHTSA annual publication “Buying a Safer Car” which provides great detail about each model tested for that year, including safety features (the 2006 brochure is still available). This will give you a condensed list on which to make notes at home with your teen while narrowing down your search for the perfect vehicle for your needs.

Buying your teen a car can be a fun family experience.  Just don’t lose sight of the important safety factors and make an emotional decision.  Automobile crashes are the leading cause of death amoung teenagers.  So choose wisely and drive down that statistic. 

Happy Motoring!

Definition of Insanity

Definition of Insanity – Repeating the same behavior and expecting different results. 

 

That is now the definition of the American auto makers. 

 

Having faced (and received) government bailouts in the 1970’s, one would think that they would have taken all steps necessary to prevent that catastrophe from occurring again. 

 

But complacency, arrogance and greed are  deadly sins that corporations cannot afford. 

 

Management refused to plow back profits into the company to make their products more efficient and cost effective, and their plants more flexible to react to change.  Labor maintained a high level of pay which then required that Chrysler products must be sold at minimum prices. After building vehicles that were not what people wanted, that evidenced lower quality then competitors in an effort to boost profits, and refusing to make affordable vehicles, companies like Chrysler found themselves staring at bankruptcy, shutting down plants and laying off workers.  Hat in hand, they went to the Federal Government and the state of Michigan. 

 

After weeks of rising pressure for a federal fix for the multiplying problems of Chrysler Corp., Treasury Secretary G. William Miller produced—and Jimmy Carter approved —a Government bailout. It was designed to prevent the nation’s No. 3 automaker (1978 sales: $13.6 billion) from sliding into a bankruptcy that could have put many thousands out of work and sent a shudder through U.S.

 

Under Jimmy Carter, the federal government and Michigan approved the bailout, in the form of loan guarantees. However, the loans required concessions from the Chrysler workforce, in the amount of more than $400 million. Under the slogans, “We are all in this together to save our country,” and “Buy American,” the UAW leadership approved the concessions.

 

Days later, the state of Michigan cut welfare grants, insisting that the state budget was hit by the Chrysler bailout. The following year, Chrysler closed more than 30 plants in the US, laid off about 45% of both its blue collar and white collar workforce, or about 65,000 people. What happened to the brilliant plan to bail out Chrysler? It cost those same workers their jobs anyway, lined the pockets of top management and top union officials with large profits, and actually cost low-income persons not involved in the automotive industry their welfare subsidies. 

 

The Chrysler subsidy violates two political principles that have been highly important in this country: the principle that individuals are responsible for themselves and the principle that the government should treat people equally. It violates individual responsibility by making Chrysler stockholders and employees into wards of the state and taxpayers into servants of the state. It violates equal treatment by bailing out a particular firm.

 

Here’s a thought: Repeal the laws that force employees to join unions. Individual employees might be willing to work for less than they are now being paid in order to keep their jobs, but they are not allowed to make that kind of bargain because the United Auto Workers (UAW) union has a monopoly on bargaining for most Chrysler employees. It is illegal for any worker to work for less than the wage the UAW has bargained for. If compulsory unionism were repealed, Chrysler would not be in as serious shape as it is in once again.

 

Should the government force taxpayers to subsidize a company whose products do not meet the market test? The answer becomes clear: No. Why should taxpayers have to pay to keep a firm in business? As consumers and producers, they have shown that they do not want to keep it going. Consumers are not willing to pay enough for Chrysler’s products to cover the company’s costs; producers–including suppliers to Chrysler and Chrysler employees–are not willing to sell their goods and services at a cost below Chrysler’s projected revenues. Consumers and producers have spoken, and that should be the end of it. 

 

Tell your government representative that those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it.  And we cannot afford to do so this time around. 

 

Much of the history of the original bailout can be found at the Cato Institute.