• Apr 1, 2011
Nissan Sets All-Time Record, Ford beats GM

It may be a day for fools, but sales numbers reported by the U.S. auto industry today are no joke.

Many sales records were set, including by Nissan, which set an all-time monthly sales record for the history of the company in March. Also, as we mentioned earlier, Ford Motor Company outsold General Motors, which is a rare occurrence that could become more common, and the brand Ford far outsold both Chevrolet and Toyota.

Thanks to some extra time spent formatting this month's table, we'll stop chatting a little early and let you look at the numbers yourself.

Brand/Company Vol. % March 2011 March 2010 DSR%* March 2011 March 2010
Saab 524.06 830 133 500.95 31 5
Mini 68.61 6,087 3,610 62.37 225 139
Dodge 49.47 44,102 29,506 43.93 1,633 1,135
Kia 44.74 44,179 30,522 39.38 1,636 1,174
Mitsubishi 39.12 7,560 5,434 33.97 280 209
Jeep 35.92 33,155 24,393 30.89 1,228 938
Mazda 33.25 30,905 23,193 28.32 1,145 892
Hyundai 31.64 61,873 47,002 26.76 2,292 1,808
Nissan 28.45 109,854 85,526 23.69 4,069 3,289
Ford 28.18 204,276 159,367 23.43 7,566 6,130
Land Rover 26.23 3,441 2,726 21.55 127 105
Honda 25.38 121,039 96,540 20.73 4,483 3,713
Ram 24.10 23,510 18,944 19.51 871 729
Volkswagen 22.70 27,176 22,148 18.16 1,007 852
Volvo 21.62 6,369 5,237 17.11 236 201
Buick 20.91 15,663 12,954 16.43 580 498
Audi 14.31 9,818 8,589 10.08 364 330
Infiniti 13.53 11,287 9,942 9.32 418 382
Subaru 13.16 26,916 23,785 8.97 997 915
Mercedes-Benz 12.60 22,546 20,023 8.43 835 770
BMW 12.38 20,295 18,060 8.21 752 695
Chevrolet 11.29 148,197 133,165 7.17 5,489 5,122
Suzuki 11.18 2,497 2,246 7.06 92 86
GMC 10.67 30,597 27,648 6.57 1,133 1,063
Porsche 10.30 771 699 6.22 29 27
Acura 7.58 12,611 11,722 3.60 467 451
Cadillac 4.51 12,164 11,639 0.64 451 448
Chrysler 3.45 20,463 19,780 -0.38 758 761
Lexus 2.29 20,682 20,219 -1.50 766 778
Lincoln -2.21 8,501 8,693 -5.83 315 334
Toyota -6.66 155,540 166,644 -10.12 5,761 6,409
Jaguar -11.09 874 983 -14.38 32 38
Fiat NA 500 0 NA 19 0
COMPANIES
Chrysler Group 31.43 121,730 92,623 26.56 4,509 3,562
Nissan NA 26.89 121,141 95,468 22.19 4,487 3,672
American Honda 23.45 133,650 108,262 18.88 4,950 4,164
BMW Group 21.74 26,382 21,670 17.24 977 833
Ford Mo Co 19.17 212,777 178,546 14.76 7,881 6,867
Jaguar Land Rover 16.34 4,315 3,709 12.03 160 143
GM 11.44 206,621 185,406 7.31 7,653 7,131
Toyota Mo Co -5.69 176,222 186,863 -9.19 6,527 7,187
*Brands and companies are displayed in descending order according to their percentage change in volume sales. There were 27 selling days in March 2011 versus 26 selling days in March 2010, so the change in monthly sales volume will be different than the change in average daily sales rate (DSR) for each brand/company. Also, brands are combined and reported as companies only if their sales figures are released jointly.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 59 Comments
      • 3 Years Ago
      No mention of Chrysler Group having the highest % vol increase.

      Last month GM was #1 by a longshot but there was no mention of that. However, Toyota was praised for having "appeared to have a great month, which isn't surprising considering that February of 2010 was the company's first full month of U.S. sales after recalls surrounding instances of sudden acceleration really gained national attention." even though they were in the #3 position by a longshot.

      Great job Ford! I am happy for you! But the bias around here is more than evident.

        • 3 Years Ago
        Chrysler seems to have had their best month since 2008, excepting the big fire sale they held in Sep 2010. Lot of Chrysler product this month, and I'm curious to see if they can sustain this level of sales without throwing huge cash on the hood or going to fleet.
        • 3 Years Ago
        I agree... Last month (for Feb 2011) AUTOBLOG tried everything in the book to explain GM's numbers had to do with nothing else but incentives... even tho their transaction prices were up far above everyone else's and that the higher incentives were a result of older vehicles like DTS, Impala, and STS, yet completely bypass the fact that Ford's spur in sales are a direct result to them boosting Fleet numbers like CRAZY, while their transaction prices are lower than GM's, and incentives went up
        • 3 Years Ago
        Everything I cited is fact, and worthy of note regardless of the reasons for it. Autoblog failed to cite those facts yet chose to cite others which compare the same. So no, I am not wrong. According to your own link, Nissan's ratio of incentive to transaction price is even higher than that of GM. Yet above we read this:

        "Many sales records were set, including by Nissan, which set an all-time monthly sales record for the history of the company in March."

        So no, I am not wrong. The bias around here is more than evident. You've just demonstrated it once again yourself.
        • 3 Years Ago
        In comparison to March of 2010, Toyota's marketshare DROPPED; which isn't good considering that Toyota's marketshare had also dropped in March 2010 due to the sudden acceleration issue, etc.
        • 3 Years Ago
        Actually GM's incentive spending is still higher as a fraction of transaction price, so there isn't bias, you're just wrong:

        http://www.bradenton.com/2011/04/01/3080185/transaction-prices-remain-flat.html
        • 3 Years Ago
        What also didn't get mentioned is the fact that Toyota gave away Camrys and Corollas for free for 30 days(0 Down, 90 days no payments) during March to boost sales numbers. But at the end of the month, jack up prices on most all models and announced that they will have a profit loss for the quarter, blaming it all on the earthquake.
      • 3 Years Ago
      The first shipment of Fiat 500s was chosen as 500 units. That's apparently all they've brought over here so far.

      The BTN chart has gone through a few iterations of sorting. This version seemed to be the winner back when everything was crazy down and we all wanted to see if anyone else kept up with Subaru and Hyundai. Maybe it's time to revisit the current preferred sort.

      Did smart sell so few that they dropped off the list, or did they not release their numbers yet, or are they already folded into Mercedes numbers?

      Lincoln so desperately needs compelling products.
      • 3 Years Ago
      When GM gets ahead, it is because incentives, or too much of them, that is. When Ford wins, then it is kudos for Ford. Seems to me that Consumer Reports and many media do want to have an all-american hero. Will all the dead weight, frivolous lawsuits, and unbearable financial burden in Chapter 11 gone, GM is in a position to compete with the products. The market reacted favorably to their March results (over 4% gain GM stock). The message is this: while lowering their incentives level, sales were still showing a sustainable growth. Ford stock showed a little increase, but not as much. Mullaly is at the end of the wave: surfing on GM and Chrysler reorganization will not be as easy as in the past two years. This whole saga about Government Motors which the so-called auto journalist (especially GOP)really hammered to death will soon be a thing of the past.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Please look at the big picture not just a simple total incentives number. GM is actually below the industry in incentives/average transaction price.

      http://blog.truecar.com/2011/04/01/transaction-prices-remain-flat-while-incentives-decline-according-to-truecar-com/
        • 3 Years Ago
        I was looking at 2010 for some reason, way to call me out
        • 3 Years Ago
        Actually if you look at the numbers you linked today, GM is worse than average (higher numbers are worse for the incentive/transaction ratio).
      • 3 Years Ago
      Looks like most of Ford’s success came at GM’s expense.

      Estimated Market Share - March 2011
      (With comparison to Feb 2011)

      Ford Mo Co.: March ‘11: 17.10% ----Feb. ’11: 15.77%
      GM: March ‘11: 16.61%---- Feb. ’11: 20.84%
      Toyota Mo Co.: March ‘11: 14.16% ----Feb. ’11: 14.28%
      American Honda: March ‘11: 10.74% ----Feb. ’11: 9.87%
      Chrysler Group: March ‘11: 9.78% ----Feb. ’11: 9.57%
      Nissan NA: March ‘11: 9.74% ----Feb. ’11: 9.3%
      Hyundai Kia: March ‘11: 8.52% ----Feb. ’11: 7.68%
      VAG: March ‘11: 3.04% ----Feb. ’11: 3.14%
      Subaru: March ‘11: 2.16% ----Feb. ’11: 2.18%
      BMW Group March ‘11: 2.12% ----Feb. ’11: 2.0%
      Jaguar Land Rover March ‘11: 0.35% ----Feb. ’11: 0.33%

      Other March ‘11: 5.68%. ----Feb. ’11: 5.04%

      TOTAL March ‘11: 1244278 100.00%
      • 3 Years Ago
      SUGGESTION: Wouldn't this spreadsheet read better if it was in order based on which Brand/Company that had the Highest sales numbers for the month (March 2011), instead of which brand had the greatest % increase in sales from last month?

      Isn't that what everyone is primarily looking for? It's what the article about the spreadsheet is all about. Ford #1, GM #2, Toyota #3....

      This is great information and much appreciated, but if the Vol % column was moved behind the March 2010 column, and sorted based on the March 2011 numbers, it would read so much better. And put the winners in order.

      Just a suggestion....

        • 3 Years Ago
        I actually prefer the way it is set up now because raw numbers don't really tell you how well a company is doing. Take Saab for example. Based on number of sales they should be down at the bottom but their current position tells you how well they're doing in comparison to last year.

        Maybe it's just me but I prefer the "Most Improved" style of the spreadsheet.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Nissan did an incredible job of moving metal this month, and it's barely a top-10 performance?

      This is a new high water mark for Nissan, pegging the needle, and totally unexpected level of incentive spend.

      If they can keep the momentum going, 2011 could be a breakout year for Nissan.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Thank you leasing and people slowly finding out about the Saab 9-5 for that HUGE increase in sales. I think for the rest of the year Saab will post about if not over 100% sales increase just because they now have leasing again. Curious as to how things will turn out once they get the 9-4X.
      • 3 Years Ago
      More impressive is MINI doubling its sales. No mention of that?
        • 3 Years Ago
        Looks like the Countryman is a hit? I've seen several in my town. I wants Beach Comber!
        • 3 Years Ago
        MINI doesn't generate as many flamewars so autoblog has no interest in noting what they do.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Hey Chrysler, only 85,000 vehicles to go to pass GM! With really no sub-compacts, compacts or vans in the line-up presently and so much new product in the immediate pipeline and a vastly improved current product, I think it's a real possibility. Oh yea, GM has the Volt, "HOLY FLOP!!!"
      Look for Chrysler to pass GM calander year 2013. Look out Ford..your next...
      Remember you saw it here first from MoPar Willy.....2013
        • 3 Years Ago
        JS, That's a good point. Just too much MoPar exhuberance from old Willy here. In truth, I do believe when new product comes on line, Chrysler will increase sales and market share significantly. Realistically, I'd love to see Chrysler a solid # 3 with all domestics taking a bigger slice. Chrysler will benefit from the Fiat global dealer network with increased oversea sales and with sub-compacts, compacts, a range of commercial vans, an expanded Dodge Jeep and Chrysler potfolio all in the pipeline, if it's top shelf, Chrysler will be on the move.
        I still like 2013.
        • 3 Years Ago
        Chrysler has a LONG, LONG way to go before they would top Ford and GM. It isn't going to happen. What I would love to see Chrysler do is beat their own Asian competition while remaining relatively small and offering great, uniquely Chrysler products which turn good profits. Chrysler doesn't need to be big. They just need to be great at what they do. I have a lot of faith that they will do this. Being a huge mass marketer isn't always the best thing for a car company. Look at how much it's begun to hurt Toyota.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Hey AB,

      Double-check your Porsche numbers.

      • 3 Years Ago
      524% way to go Saab!

      (lol but still way to go)
    • Load More Comments