Is improving new-vehicle affordability actually showing up in the showroom?

[JLeo99]

New-vehicle affordability appears to be improving, but elevated borrowing costs may still be keeping that improvement from translating into stronger demand.

Even when the vehicle is more affordable on paper, the monthly payment can remain the real barrier. That puts more weight on deal structure, trade equity and total ownership cost.

This pattern surfaced while I was reviewing the broader automotive reporting collected for this week’s AutoIntel briefing, but I’m curious how it compares with what dealers are seeing on the ground.

Are customers becoming more payment-sensitive? Are you seeing buyers move down in trim, extend loan terms or walk away once financing is presented?

Context: https://autointel.news/weekly/

 

[carguyfiles]

The place to watch this is the used lot, and that number has not improved at all.
We pull listing data across 196 rooftops. Across 10,823 priced used units the median ask is $28,295, median mileage 50,534, median model year 2023. Only 6.6% come in under $10,000, which is 714 cars out of the whole set, and 45.4% are $30,000 and up. Full table is in our report, Facebook Marketplace Used-Car Report 2026 | AutoLander
So when the payment lands wrong on the new car, the step down you used to have is not sitting on your lot. The customer who needed a $12,000 unit with 60,000 miles gets shown a three year old car with 50,000 miles at $28,000, and the term is what stretches to make it fit. Put Experian's used-car average of 11.19% next to the new-car 6.35% on top of that, and the payment sensitive customer is the one carrying the worse rate on the older collateral. That is the walk you are describing, and it lands after the numbers come back rather than during the trim conversation.
Worth counting this week: your own used units under $15,000 this morning, then the same count in 30 days. If it is flat or falling while your floor traffic is payment sensitive, the affordability story on the new side is not reaching your showroom.
Against myself, this is dealer inventory only, so it misses private party completely, and that is where the cheap car went. A GM who tells me their cash buyers are all shopping Marketplace private sellers now is probably right, and that customer is not in our data at all.
Full disclosure, I build software for this, so weigh accordingly.

 

[JLeo99]

The place to watch this is the used lot, and that number has not improved at all.
We pull listing data across 196 rooftops. Across 10,823 priced used units the median ask is $28,295, median mileage 50,534, median model year 2023. Only 6.6% come in under $10,000, which is 714 cars out of the whole set, and 45.4% are $30,000 and up. Full table is in our report, Facebook Marketplace Used-Car Report 2026 | AutoLander
So when the payment lands wrong on the new car, the step down you used to have is not sitting on your lot. The customer who needed a $12,000 unit with 60,000 miles gets shown a three year old car with 50,000 miles at $28,000, and the term is what stretches to make it fit. Put Experian's used-car average of 11.19% next to the new-car 6.35% on top of that, and the payment sensitive customer is the one carrying the worse rate on the older collateral. That is the walk you are describing, and it lands after the numbers come back rather than during the trim conversation.
Worth counting this week: your own used units under $15,000 this morning, then the same count in 30 days. If it is flat or falling while your floor traffic is payment sensitive, the affordability story on the new side is not reaching your showroom.
Against myself, this is dealer inventory only, so it misses private party completely, and that is where the cheap car went. A GM who tells me their cash buyers are all shopping Marketplace private sellers now is probably right, and that customer is not in our data at all.
Full disclosure, I build software for this, so weigh accordingly.

This is exactly the kind of on-the-ground context I was hoping for.

The missing piece isn’t simply whether new vehicles are becoming more affordable, it’s whether dealers still have a realistic step-down available when the new-car payment doesn’t work. If that customer moves to an older vehicle carrying a substantially higher rate, the payment problem may not improve at all.

Your point that the walk happens after the numbers come back, rather than during the trim conversation, is especially useful. Tracking the number of dealer-held units below $15,000 over time also seems like a practical way to test whether affordability is actually improving locally.

Do you think the disappearance of those affordable units is driven more by acquisition and recon economics, or by the cars increasingly moving through private-party channels before dealers can retail them?

I appreciate the data, and the disclosure.