The new Porsche 911 is already making the rounds as a 2017 model, available in March 2016. I see that the 2017 Honda Ridgeline is also making an appearance in early 2016. I can understand a month or two early, but a full year early is just stupid. If it first goes on sale in March 2016, it is a 2016 model. I will not be impressed at how futuristic you are if you release 2031 model next year.
I think the rule is that it has to be assembled no earlier than Jan 1 of the year proceeding the stated model year.
Automakers have been doing this for decades.
So have magazines.
Given that large corporations routinely topple governments, carry out assassinations, and cause massive destruction to the environment, I hardly feel that this practice is among their most egregious.
1979 RX-7s were first sold in early 1978. (March, I think. If true it makes a nice coincidence re: my birthday)
1997 F-150s and Escorts were first sold in January 1996. What made this fun was Ford continued to make 1996 models alongside them, and clueless folks would look at the production date and say it was 1996MY.
This is why the build date is trivia and the important info is the underhood emissions sticker - that IS the model year for the vehicle.
So how long until we see 2017 PRHT ND Miatas?
I think I am disturbed by the fact that a new 1997 F-150 is older now than an early build 1979 RX-7 (it will have the hood prop on the right side, not the left) was when that F150 was built.
I was WORKING when those F-150s came out. There was a high Holy E36 M3 Quotient when they were released. F-150s had traditionally been scary handling, floppy piles of crap that were anvils only because you couldn't tell the difference between perfect condition and POS. Then the '97 came out like it had just beamed down from the Mothership. Smooth engine, chassis dynamics that were "acceptable" instead of "OMG you DRIVE this on the STREET? With OTHER PEOPLE AROUND?" And people bought up as many 1996 models as they could because they hated that the 4.6 revved a couple hundred RPM higher than the old 5.0 so therefore it was bad because anything higher than idle is a sign of weakness (see also: people who idolize Diesel engines that have absolutely pathetic figures displacement/boost wise but by gum they don't need to rev over 2000rpm because them's sissy motors that need shifting)
What I am getting at is, now I feel old.
The 1965 Mustang came out on April 9th, 1964. Forget what people want to tell you, there is no such thing as a 1964.5 Mustang, that's just "insider slang" for an early-build '65 model.
So if you want to blame someone for this nonsense, you'll need a time machine.
'99 Miatas went on sale in early 1998 and helped make up for the fact that there were no '98 model year cars. Silly? I guess, but definitely not without precedent.
Gee... I'm still trying to remember it's 2016 not 2015 when I try to write the date on things.
The model year thing has confused me ever since I was a young lad. I've sense given up trying to make sense of it.
The whole model year thing is uniquely North American. In the rest of the world the year of the car is the year it was built. So an early Miata is an 89 Miata. If you change models duering the year so be it. So you can have for instnace a 97NA Miata or a 97NB Miata in Europe.
One thing the NA system does have going for it is it really helps us Engineers tracking running changes. it's a lot easier to tie engineering changes to a model year change over rather than lots of actual difference changes, especially if change B needs change A on a different component to work. If A and B both happen on a model year, you can bring them in together. With the Euro system it makes change control a lot more challenging, especially if change A gets delayed. You have to make sure change B is held off until Change A is finally in, and make sure you have enough of the old part B on hand.
You'll need to log in to post.
