America’s Cars Are Getting Older, But Do You Actually Care If A Car’s Platform Is Old?

Today we wrote about the Tesla Model S refresh, with Thomas calling the car “a dinosaur.” This led to a discussion among Autopian writers about platforms; how big of a deal is it that a platform is old? Personally, I don’t think it matters much at all, necessarily; here’s why.

Right out front of my house I’ve got a 2021 BMW i3S, an astonishing little city-car that I adore. This particular vehicle, by 2021, had been on the market for eight years, and many criticized it for being dated. But was it?

The platform itself was not even almost dated; in fact, to this day it’s fair to call the carbon fiber-bodied i3’s chassis “futuristic.” The interior? Its styling holds up to this day, and I believe that to be the case with the exterior as well.  

But where the i3 is dated is in terms of interior tech/infotainment. It has Apple Carplay, a screen that isn’t the size of a billboard, and physical controls; what’s more, the car doesn’t have cooled seats or an overhead 360 degree camera or a panoramic sunroof. I personally don’t want these things, but many do, so I get why folks saw the i3 as dated. What’s more, even though battery/drivetrain/chassis tech was updated between 2014 and 2021 model-years, the i3’s EV tech wasn’t really state-of-the-art by that last model-year. By 2021, the i3 was a $55,000 EV with half the range of a Tesla.

My point is that I don’t really care about platform age as long as that platform gets updated. In the case of the i3, its platform was awesome, and I’d have loved to see it continue on for 20+ years; it was what was bolted to that platform that was shriveling a bit on the vine.

Then there are cars like the Dodge Journey, which stuck around forever, offering weak performance/efficiency, but at a highly competitive price. In that case, I’m totally fine with old bones.

Here are a few thoughts about platform age by Thomas:

I reckon that a platform is too old to buy new when age doesn’t necessarily enhance the ownership experience and the driving experience is close to what you can get elsewhere in a newer, better-driving package. The R35 GT-R lost some of its luster at the end of its run, partly due to a mid-cycle suspension update that increased its tendency to corner entry understeer and partly because a super-fast turbocharged automatic car now describes almost every ICE performance car. On the other hand, a final-year Challenger SRT Hellcat with the six-speed manual would’ve been worth it because that’s a rare experience you couldn’t really get elsewhere brand new without modifying another platform.

What does the data tell us? Well, according to Bank of America, “replacement rate” — defined as the “estimated percentage of an OEM’s sales volume to be replaced with all-new or next-generation models” — actually does matter, with the bank writing in its “Car Wars” analysis:

We believe replacement rate drives showroom age, which drives market share, which in turn drives profits, and ultimately stock prices…

[…]

Although other factors such as mix, price, execution, distribution, brand power, and unforeseen disruptions impact market share, we think this data supports our thesis that successful new products drive higher market share and profits.

Bank of America’s Car Wars report goes on to say that new-model launch activity is stagnating, writing:

As shown in Exhibit 3, we expect OEMs to launch 159 new models during our forecast period (MY2026-29), or an average of just 40 per year. This rate is just below the average number of models launched per year between model years 2006 and 2025. This level of new model introductions is concerning as fewer new models may not stimulate consumer interest, which may pressure total volume.

The lower launch count is largely a result of the delay in new EV programs as consumers remain disinterested, the regulatory push for EVs is relaxed, consumer EV incentives are likely to be eliminated, and potential tariffs are roiling production/supply chain management decisions. This appears to be motivating automakers to focus on core ICE (& Hybrid) products, which should generate solid profit/cash flow. In addition, EVs are not being completely ignored, but development appears to be slowing to more closely mimic consumer demand, which is not much.

So it seems that people usually do care about how old a car is, but at the same, I bet the average person has no clue about the bones underneath their vehicle’s sheetmetal. I personally couldn’t care less as long as the vehicle remains competitive/useful, like a 2001 Jeep Cherokee that, when new, had been on the market for 17 years but still offers great styling and off-road performance at a good price.

Though I suppose now that I’m a dad, the biggest factor in platform age is: Will it excel in all modern crash tests? Anyway, I welcome your thoughts on this.