Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Rolex on February 21, 2006, 08:37:30 PM
-
It looks like GM will lose the title of largest carmaker this year to Toyota. Not only will Toyota surpass GM in unit sales, it earned more profit last year than all 12 global carmakers combined. That is staggering and the trend looks to continue since Toyota intends on bringing hybrid engines into the mainstream.
Cutting the costs of engines in the #1 car in America (Camery) by 50% didn't hurt...
"Foundry workers at a Toyota Motor Corp. plant in Troy, Missouri, laughed out loud back in 2003 when Toyota Executive Vice President Kosuke Shiramizu traveled from Japan and gave them a new assignment: Cut in half the cost of building V-6 engines for the company's Camry sedan by 2005.
`We were thinking they were either crazy or didn't really mean it,' says Robert Lloyd, 51, who, as president of Toyota's Bodine Aluminum Inc. unit, would be expected to deliver on Shiramizu's goal.
Shiramizu, however, had a secret weapon. Back in Japan, 300 engineers were working on a new technology for pouring molten aluminum into molds to create parts for engines. The new equipment, part of a larger Toyota cost-cutting program called Simple Slim, allows Toyota to use smaller and cheaper molds."
Link >> (http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aTkufGZiqHOs&refer=news_index)
Toyota has done a lot of things right in managing for the future and their long-term approach and investment has been good for suppliers, customers and investors. Will the new 2007 hybrid Camry be a success? I wouldn't bet against it.
-
The Microsoft of low-mid priced cars has arrived :confused:
-
Read an interesting article today on what GM, Ford, and Chrysler's job bank program (initiated and negotiated with the UAW in '84) is costing those companies today.
The annual price tag is staggering.
Are you familiar with this, Rolex?
-
No, I'm not Stringer. How staggering are we talking about?
-
Originally posted by Rolex
No, I'm not Stringer. How staggering are we talking about?
Staggering enough that they have to close plants and cut thousands of jobs to stay in the black :eek:
-
I think for GM alone is $800 million a year (for 6,000 people that are on that program).
For all three I think the tab is $1.2b, but I'll need to check that.
Even the UAW is a little worried about how that program is affecting the companies and how it looks as well.
I'll have to get the article tomorrow at the office.
On a different note Rolex, I am a proponent and practitioner of many of the lean principles introduced by Toyota. Their total commitment to eliminate waste, no matter how small, and no matter where, is amazing.
-
~$133,000 per person? Some people need to be fired, I think.
-
Originally posted by Stringer
On a different note Rolex, I am a proponent and practitioner of many of the lean principles introduced by Toyota. Their total commitment to eliminate waste, no matter how small, and no matter where, is amazing.
Isn't that be recursive? Doesn't a total commitment to reducing waste in itself produce waste? How does a company solve that?
Cripes solving the problem of the waste created by solving the problem of wastes...etc.
-
Yup, everyone is waist deep in it.
-
Originally posted by Rolex
Shiramizu, however, had a secret weapon. Back in Japan, 300 engineers were working on a new technology for pouring molten aluminum into molds to create parts for engines. The new equipment, part of a larger Toyota cost-cutting program called Simple Slim, allows Toyota to use smaller and cheaper molds.
The technology for pouring molten aluminium into moulds has been around since as early as 1990 and possibly earlier. I used to work for another Japanese car company at that time which is when I first heard about this. Not only could the engines be built cheaply, but could be completed in a matter of a few hours.
-
The biggest problem of GM and Ford is their commitment to big engines and beeing outclassed in alternative engines.
Toyota´s hybrid engine technology is a way better technology when it comes to lowering fuel consumption then the Flexi Fuel, Bi Fuel, what ever you call it technologies that the others are using.
Basicly the hybrid engine is a fuel, electricity engine when recharges its batteries while driving on the fuel engine. At lower speeds and lower accelleration the engine uses the electrical engine and if you throttle up the fuel engine kicks in gradually.
The most expencive driving, fuel cost and environment wise, is rush hour city traffic. This is where the hyrbird engine out classes anything in both polution and buck per mile.
The Flexi fuel, bi fuel what ever you call em engines allow you to use alternative fuels. This makes the engine less dependent on oil based fuels. These engines have a big environmental benefit as the ammount of CO2 converted into Oxygen by the sugar canes (to create methanol) is the same as the ammount of CO2 created by the combustion.
There is a problem of using methanol as a fuel source compared to oil based fules in the fact that methanol contains less energy. So you need more fuel to produce the same effect in the engine.
This results in Flexi fuel cars not beeing much cheaper to operate then gasoline cars. They are cheaper but not nearly as much as the hybrid.
What I expect to see in a VERY near future is that you can use methanol in Toyotas hybrid engine.
Though dont fool your selfs not even methanol+electricity hybrid engines are the engines of the future.
Using methanol as a gasoline replacement has potentially HUGE enviromental problems attached to it.
Since methanol is mostly created from sugar canes the increased need of sugar canes can produce huge agrecultural problems. The desire to grow more and more sugar canes and at a higher pace will result in onesided agreculture and over fertilizing. Onesided agreculture drains the soil and will render it useless, over fertilizing also has huge negative side effects (mostly on rivers and lakes).
But at short term the company that first has methanol+electricity hybride engines in their entire lineup will gain a huge upper hand over the others.
Personally I predict that if GM and Ford dont have have a hybrid engine out within two years at least one of them will file bancrupcy.
Tex
-
Originally posted by TexMurphy
Since methanol is mostly created from sugar canes the increased need of sugar canes can produce huge agrecultural problems. The desire to grow more and more sugar canes and at a higher pace will result in onesided agreculture and over fertilizing. Onesided agreculture drains the soil and will render it useless, over fertilizing also has huge negative side effects (mostly on rivers and lakes).
Tex
UNLESS the new "fungus" tech in making ethanol succeeds in turning what is now agricultural waste into fuel. Then you have a win/win and all you need to do is design in a bigger fuel tank to get the necessary range.
Stalks, Straw and Other Refuse (http://www.ceassist.com/wsj_article.htm)
-
Originally posted by TexMurphy
Basicly the hybrid engine is a fuel, electricity engine when recharges its batteries while driving on the fuel engine.
Hehe, I bet they got that idea from those German U-boats! :) The biggest problem of GM and Ford is their commitment to big engines and beeing outclassed in alternative engines.
And that's a problem that's been fostered by the "cheap gas" economy of America. People are undeterred from buying 12mpg gas guzzlers and other house sized vehicles like the Ford Excursion, unless of course there's a gas price hike. The motor industry in Detroit knows this, and also knows that they can make much bigger profits on large luxury vehicles than they can on small, fuel efficient compacts. Or, to use Detroit's own parlance, mini cars = mini profits. And with the oil industry being run like any other business (ie. the more you sell, the more money you make), and with the American motoring public believing in all sincerity that they need that SUV with the 7½ litre V8 engine, and with most of the population being in denial about America's greenhouse gas output (25% of the world total), it's easy to see why Ford and GM have yet to show any commitment to alternative power plants.
-
Sheesh Beetle, change the record already.
-
beet1e
Actually the american consumers are strating to realize that they dont [/i]neeeed[/i] and SUVs is the car class which is droping the most in sales atm. Its this realization combined with increased gas prices (that are here to stay) that Toyota is capitalizing on. 90% of the SUV owners can very easily use a regular station wagon to fill their needs and once they start buying new cars with economy in focus they arnt gonna buy a american car.
If Detroit doesnt turn their focus around ASAP the american manufacturers will be in even worse trouble then they are now. GMs economy is horrible, Fords is bad but not as bad.
Most likely we will see GM selling off brands in a near future inorder to be able to invest in the new technologies needed to be competetive over the next 5-10 years. If this doesnt happen Im quite sure that GM will be filing bankcrupcy.
Tex
-
The future is sailboatcars
-
Please, beet1e. It is the mold costs, process and time to assemble that were wickedly improved. I'd really like to have a civil and intelligent discussion about this without the threat of it being locked. Please don't do this.
I don't think your prediction, Tex, is extreme. Both GM and Ford could be in severe capital stress in a few years. I have 3 main worries:
1. The availability and cost of investment funds needed to bring about the technology and tooling.
2. The lack of successful corporate turnaround history and culture, particularly who the jockey will be. There are only a handful of people in the entire world capable of pulling off a change of course of an organization so large, and with so much momentum.
3. I don't forsee the economy being better next year, or the year after, than it has been the last few years. If growth slows, they will have more difficulty stopping market share and profit loss. Toyota, Honda and Nissan have strong balance sheets and enormous available funds, in addition to more global reach and market share into other growth areas beyond just North America.
Here's a possiblity that won't be accepted easily: GM or Ford may no longer be wholly American companies in a few years.
I also agree that hybrid engines will just be a bridge, but whomever captures the lion's share of the market will be king of the jungle for the next shift.
-
Won't be long before Germany passes up Japan.
Check out "Unpimp your ride" video on the URL below (Select "Preview")
:rofl
http://www.thenewsmarket.com/CustomLink/MediaDetailsEx.aspx?GUID=6939f018-dfd2-4944-a777-0ff7984fc2eb&CustomPage=1&ParentGUID=eaae0a35-f386-4c72-98f5-6726da3881d1
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Won't be long before Germany passes up Japan.
Check out "Unpimp your ride" video on the URL below (Select "Preview")
:rofl
http://www.thenewsmarket.com/CustomLink/MediaDetailsEx.aspx?GUID=6939f018-dfd2-4944-a777-0ff7984fc2eb&CustomPage=1&ParentGUID=eaae0a35-f386-4c72-98f5-6726da3881d1
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Isn't that be recursive? Doesn't a total commitment to reducing waste in itself produce waste? How does a company solve that?
Cripes solving the problem of the waste created by solving the problem of wastes...etc.
Thrawn,
I would encourage you to look a little deeper into their system. You are off the mark.
-
The future is sailboatcars
Now this man is thinking the right way! Ironically our school should pick up 4 Land Sailors in the near future.
-
Wtg America....keep buying those foreign cars!!.....when GM and Ford go down kiss our country good-by...If GM goes down so does roughly 900,000
jobs!!...People dont reilize that most profits of foriegn car sales goes back to that country....also....they say"these cars are built in America"these statementS are great publicity for dumb Americans that dont know the inside scoop.
Is it too hard to see that the rubber makers, the plastic workers,metal workers and so many others are losing thier jobs because these forieghn car makers are importing everything to make these cars in America??
I could go on and on...but heres the bottom line...If you go to japan or China...Do they buy american made products..no...because they are loyal to their countrys and the products They build. We as Americans dont look at it the same way its sad to say.
Don't give me the foreign cars are built better than American cars..everyday I see Chev and ford cars with 150,000 to 250,000 miles and still running strong!!
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!
-
Originally posted by Kaw1000
Wtg America....keep buying those foreign cars!!.....when GM and Ford go down kiss our country good-by...If GM goes down so does roughly 900,000
jobs!!...People dont reilize that most profits of foriegn car sales goes back to that country....also....they say"these cars are built in America"these statementS are great publicity for dumb Americans that dont know the inside scoop.
Is it too hard to see that the rubber makers, the plastic workers,metal workers and so many others are losing thier jobs because these forieghn car makers are importing everything to make these cars in America??
I could go on and on...but heres the bottom line...If you go to japan or China...Do they buy american made products..no...because they are loyal to their countrys and the products They build. We as Americans dont look at it the same way its sad to say.
Don't give me the foreign cars are built better than American cars..everyday I see Chev and ford cars with 150,000 to 250,000 miles and still running strong!!
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!
You might want to say this to those working on assembly lines in the U.S. (as well as suppliers) for many foreign automobile companies and see what their reaction is. They may feel that you are taking food out of their mouth, since they work for a foreign company in the U.S. and cash their paychecks here, thereby injecting money into our own economy.
Of course "profits" except those made by dealerships go back to foreign countries, its how they gain capital by building more assembly lines and a better line of automobiles.
Your theory is about 25 years outdated.
-
Here's a couple of links to the Job Banks program:
The first one takes a good view to both sides of the equation:
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/17/A01-351179.htm
The next one is an editorial:
http://www.assemblymag.com/CDA/ArticleInformation/features/BNP__Features__Item/0,6493,167172,00.html
-
Originally posted by TexMurphy
Personally I predict that if GM and Ford dont have have a hybrid engine out within two years at least one of them will file bancrupcy.
You do realize that Toyota loses money on every hybrid they sell?
I repeat: Toyotas hybrid cars are not profitable. It's all about good PR with envirowhackos and other lefties.
-
Given the inherent complexity, hybrid cars seem like a mechanic's dream. The ones I've seen are also tiny and uncomfortable.
I'll stick with my V-8 Buick, thanks.
Let the city people drive the tin cans.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
You might want to say this to those working on assembly lines in the U.S. (as well as suppliers) for many foreign automobile companies and see what their reaction is. They may feel that you are taking food out of their mouth, since they work for a foreign company in the U.S. and cash their paychecks here, thereby injecting money into our own economy.
Of course "profits" except those made by dealerships go back to foreign countries, its how they gain capital by building more assembly lines and a better line of automobiles.
Your theory is about 25 years outdated.
yea maybe.. but what do u tell the 30 to 40 thousand people that worked in gm and ford factorys when they lose their job??? yea they are injecting money into our ecomony about half of what it used to be!! again WAKE UP!!
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
You do realize that Toyota loses money on every hybrid they sell?
I repeat: Toyotas hybrid cars are not profitable. It's all about good PR with envirowhackos and other lefties.
It is true that Prius originally lost money. Building the hybrid did cost more than it was sold for, at first. But over the years, Toyota managed to overcome production expenses to reduce that cost to below the window-sticker price. By late 2002, the THS design had proven so successful that Toyota decided to invest again. That made Prius, once again, unprofitable. Fortunately, the new HSD design was created for use in the entire fleet of Toyota passenger vehicles, every single model... which means it is quite inappropriate to place the entire burden of that research & development solely on just one vehicle, Prius.
By the end of the 2004 model year, there will be 250,000 Prius on roads worldwide. In early 2005, a hybrid version of Toyota Highlander and Lexus RX400 will be introduced. Both will also use the HSD design. The following year, 2 or 3 more HSD equipped vehicles are expected to debut. That same year, Nissan is expected to begin selling hybrids using HSD as well. Toyota is clearly on the way to achieving profit. Losing money will soon be just a memory from the past.
-
Originally posted by Stringer
Thrawn,
I would encourage you to look a little deeper into their system. You are off the mark.
I'm sure I am, that's why I was asking question. :o
-
Originally posted by Kaw1000
yea maybe.. but what do u tell the 30 to 40 thousand people that worked in gm and ford factorys when they lose their job??? yea they are injecting money into our ecomony about half of what it used to be!! again WAKE UP!!
We tell them the same thing that we told Boeing Employees when we lost 50,000 jobs in 2002. Find another job. Most did. Those that did not went to school, got a better education, and a better job. Unemployment is at its lowest in this state in 6 years! In 2002 it was 6.9% unemployed, now it is 5.3%.(shrugs)
-
Toyota is clearly on the way to achieving profit. Losing money will soon be just a memory from the past.
Thanks for backing me up.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Thanks for backing me up.
But they're losing money because of investment funked. Yes, it confirms what you said, you just failed to state the reason they are losing money. ;) Investment.
-
you're all full of Muda
-
Sorry Thrawn, my bad. I thought you weren't sincere in your questions.
I'll start another thread when I get a chance about lean techniques. I say lean techniques because the principles of lean are not just applicable to manufacturing processes, but are applicable to any process.
-
Are you gonna give us a 5S class Stringer?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
We tell them the same thing that we told Boeing Employees when we lost 50,000 jobs in 2002. Find another job. Most did. Those that did not went to school, got a better education, and a better job. Unemployment is at its lowest in this state in 6 years! In 2002 it was 6.9% unemployed, now it is 5.3%.(shrugs)
Employment is is up...lets see in 2 or 3 years if that holds true!!
-
Funked,
I've got a 30 mile one way commute. I will look seriously at the Toyota Highlander Hybrid as my next vehicle.
I'm by no means an enviro-whacko or a leftie. I am, however, very cash flow focused. I look at the hybrid as a way to lessen my gas expenditures.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Are you gonna give us a 5S class Stringer?
Hehe, MT, I only wish I could make a living at giving classes on it. Hmmmm, Consultant type muuulaaa!!!
-
OMG! I find myself agreeing with Ripsnort. :eek: How embarrassing! :p:D
I would say that Toyota isn't really losing money on the hybrids. I take the view that the ones they've sold so far are part of their R&D programme. Think of those sales as part of their "user acceptance testing" programme.
-
Originally posted by Kaw1000
Wtg America....keep buying those foreign cars!!.....when GM and Ford go down kiss our country good-by...If GM goes down so does roughly 900,000
jobs!!...People dont reilize that most profits of foriegn car sales goes back to that country....also....they say"these cars are built in America"these statementS are great publicity for dumb Americans that dont know the inside scoop.
Is it too hard to see that the rubber makers, the plastic workers,metal workers and so many others are losing thier jobs because these forieghn car makers are importing everything to make these cars in America??
This is the same attitude that killed the British Motorcycle industry. It's also the same attitude that--to a certain extent--killed the Mac. Keep buying those US cars, no matter how much they suck. Pretty soon they will suck so much that you have no choice and have to buy foreign. I don't think that this attitude is the only cause of the problem, but it definitely helps it along.
We are seeing this happen already. No one wants american cars anymore. Here on the west coast, I hardly see any american cars at all, seriously. Lots of american SUVs, but the gas crunch is affecting that market even here in rich SoCal. (Detroit was another story, I thought there was something wierd about the place until I figured out it was the almost total lack of imports on the road).
Originally posted by Kaw1000
Don't give me the foreign cars are built better than American cars..everyday I see Chev and ford cars with 150,000 to 250,000 miles and still running strong!!
Poor gas mileage, rattling everywhere, stodgy stale designs. A lot of people care about these things. And the 150K mileage thing applies to US trucks/SUVs (those big blocks run forever)...US cars are falling apart by that time, and no one wants them.
-
Originally posted by Stringer
Funked,
I've got a 30 mile one way commute. I will look seriously at the Toyota Highlander Hybrid as my next vehicle.
I'm by no means an enviro-whacko or a leftie. I am, however, very cash flow focused. I look at the hybrid as a way to lessen my gas expenditures.
I have a 45 mile one way commute, but I find my 30 mpg sufficient enough not to give up a sports car feel for that of one that isn't much fun to drive! Your "milege" may vary. :)
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
You do realize that Toyota loses money on every hybrid they sell?
I repeat: Toyotas hybrid cars are not profitable. It's all about good PR with envirowhackos and other lefties.
It's also probably about investment and some amount of long-term thinking. People do want to save gas and clear out the smog (and not just the bunny loving wackos). Toyota is doing a great job IMO of positioning themselves as the "experts" on hybrids, and when the demand kicks in they will be in the right place at the right time.
-
Originally posted by Stringer
Funked,
I've got a 30 mile one way commute. I will look seriously at the Toyota Highlander Hybrid as my next vehicle.
I'm by no means an enviro-whacko or a leftie. I am, however, very cash flow focused. I look at the hybrid as a way to lessen my gas expenditures.
why not look at the ford Escape??:aok
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
Given the inherent complexity, hybrid cars seem like a mechanic's dream.
4 valves per cylinder and overhead cams and variable valve timing and distributorless ignitions are also more complex than your standard big-block. They seem to have handled it just fine.
Originally posted by J_A_B
The ones I've seen are also tiny and uncomfortable.
That's changing. And besides, smallness is not an inherent feature of hybrid technology.
Originally posted by J_A_B
I'll stick with my V-8 Buick, thanks.
And I'll stick with my 7 1/2 liter gas-guzzling SUV. :D Doesn't change the situation though.
-
Later this year, you'll see the new, more powerful hybrid engine in the best selling car in American, the Camry, and also the Lexus hybrids go on sale in the US. The hp is double the current Prius model and the Camry hybrid will be made in Kentucky.
-
My opinion on High-breeds: Anything to get us less dependent on foreign oil so we can make their leaders "3rd world status" again. :aok
-
Originally posted by Stringer
I'll start another thread when I get a chance about lean techniques. I say lean techniques because the principles of lean are not just applicable to manufacturing processes, but are applicable to any process.
Thanks Stringer, it would be very much appreciated.
-
Originally posted by Rolex
Later this year, you'll see the new, more powerful hybrid engine in the best selling car in American, the Camry, and also the Lexus hybrids go on sale in the US. The hp is double the current Prius model and the Camry hybrid will be made in Kentucky.
assembled in Kentucky.....Made in japan!!:eek:
-
Originally posted by Kaw1000
assembled in Kentucky.....Made in japan!!:eek:
*Ahem*
http://www.toyota.com/about/news/manufacturing/2005/09/30-1-tmmtx.html
Toyota will have the annual capacity to build 1.81 million cars and trucks, 1.44 million engines, and 600,000 automatic transmissions in North America by 2008. The company’s direct employment is 38,000 and direct investment is more than $16.3 billion with annual purchasing of parts, materials, good and services from North American suppliers totaling nearly $26 billion. Toyota’s North American-produced vehicles are the Avalon, Camry, Corolla, Matrix, Sienna, Solara, Sequoia, Tacoma, Tundra and the Lexus RX330.
-
Originally posted by phookat
4 valves per cylinder and overhead cams and variable valve timing and distributorless ignitions are also more complex than your standard big-block. They seem to have handled it just fine.
Indeed. My Toyota Celica GTi-16 had all that - and that was in 1988.
-
Thanks for the links, Stringer. What a sad program where everyone loses.
BTW, KAW1000: Japanese companies rarely (if ever) repatriate profits back to Japan. Where do you think the money came from to build all the plants in the US? Every major Japanese manufacturer employs more people outside Japan than they do in Japan.
-
Originally posted by wetrat
The Microsoft of low-mid priced cars has arrived :confused:
I'd like to see the recall statistics of Toyota versus any "U.S." auto manufacturer.
-
"And besides, smallness is not an inherent feature of hybrid technology."
This is true, and in fact hybrid tech would permit the automakers to build really BIG cars that still get great fuel economy. However, until they actually do so, I'm uninterested in hybrids just as I'm uninterested in conventionally-powered tin can cars. With people growing tired of SUV's with the associated high CoG and poor handling, perhaps the era of the fullsize car might make a comeback.
Unfortunately, the large number of women who can't drive anything bigger than a go-kart and the even larger number of kids who have never known anything better than a Honda Civic might stand in the way of a return of really well-designed road cars.
J_A_B
-
"I'll stick with my V-8 Buick, thanks."
J_A_B let's be honest. You're Buick is an anomoly and your experience is in no way a common occurance for a GM consumer grade product - Ford and Chrysler too.
"a return of really well-designed road cars."
Bartender? I'll have some of what he's drinking! :)
-
GM's current "consumer grade products" are so popular and well-made that the company is fast approaching bankruptcy. Ford isn't far behind.
They can find all the excuses they want, in the end they're simply building crappy cars that not enough people buy. Few people who want to buy a Honda or Toyota will buy GM's or Ford's lame copies, and they've managed to alienate their traditional buyers too. Small wonder they're sinking like a rock.
What do you drive, by the way?
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
GM's current "consumer grade products" are so popular and well-made that the company is fast approaching bankruptcy. Ford isn't far behind.
Fifteen years ago management struck a deal with unions that made it all but impossible to close auto plants or lay off workers without incurring massive costs. GM also agreed to retiree benefits that put it at a severe disadvantage. Much of what ails GM today flows from that accounting reality and its inability to increase the business at home.
$1,600-per-vehicle is added for legacy costs, mostly retiree health and pension benefits.
-
Other than SUV's I believe fleet sales have been floating Ford and GMs boat for the past few years.
Right now I own a 96 Crown Vic w/80k on it and a 2001 Accord with 60k. IMO the Accord (although smaller, lighter and less appointed too) is by far and away the better car.
We bought the Vic from our elderly neighbor with the idea that my wife and two kids would be infinitely safer driving around town in a low mileage V8 powered tank. However I now regret it.
We gave my wifes niece our old 1992 Accord (160k miles) for use in college and while she's had no repair bills (and I did not do much beyond oil changes to it and a starter replacement) we've had a major repair bill ($400plus) every three or four months to fix this engineered to deteriorate peice of *****t Crown Vic.
And during the 80's we'd owned Fords, a Pontiac, a Chrysler and a Mitsubishi that gave us 242K in miles before the tranny went and we gave it to my wif'es couisin to have.
But in 92 we went Honda (her Accord) and Toyota (my Camry). Seeing what friends and family have gone through after they bought US minivans and pass cars we absolutely wil not even consider heading to a Ford, GM or Chrylser dealer lot.
This summer when we go to buy a new car it'll be another Accord or a Camry.
And fwiw I do not blame the Us auto worker or the unions (especially when one sees these ridiculous bonuses execs got) - I blame the engineering and the planned early obsolesence designed into the products.
p.s sorry for blatant spelling errors. I rushed to post as I'm leaving for the day.....)
-
See Rule #4
-
"your not the sharpest tool in the shed are you"
This from the guy who failed to notice I mentioned earlier in the thread that I drive a Buick.
EDIT: It is nice, though, to see the forum getting some new blood. It keeps things interesting. I doubt any of the old-timer O'clubers would ever accuse me of supporting Japanese automakers.
J_A_B
-
With all due respect.....what did you mean by "crappy car thing"..what automaker are u supporting??
I dont think people understand that if ford and gm goes down the whole country goes down....I just dont understand why peeps can't get that!
American autos are one of last big manufacturers..Its really our last stand in the world market!!!
-
Kaw1000 you are and others like you are the problem.
I graduated from a major University in the South and got my first job with GM 10.5 years ago. I was shocked when I moved to Detroit. Where I was from people were glad to have a good job and worked hard to keep it. In Detroit and the surrounding areas, there is a strong feeling of entitlement. “My dad worked here for 30 yrs now its my turn” kind of thinking. I could tell you stories about the UAW that nobody would believe. If you wonder why US cars suck just go visit an assembly plant in the Midwest (our best plants are in the South, btw). The UAW is a criminal organization (strong historic links to organized crime) that runs an extortion racket circa 1930. Thank God for Japanese cars, now the US consumer doesn’t have to pay for an Out-Law criminal organization.
I loved my years at GM. The salaried folks I worked with are some of the best and talented people I’ve ever met. As an engineer we just couldn’t do our jobs. The UAW made its so difficult at every stage of a program…from tool and die to prototyping and finally production. We have a saying at General Motors, “The Inmates are Running the Asylum.” That sums it up.
-
Originally posted by Choocha
Kaw1000 you are and others like you are the problem.
I graduated from a major University in the South and got my first job with GM 10.5 years ago. I was shocked when I moved to Detroit. Where I was from people were glad to have a good job and worked hard to keep it. In Detroit and the surrounding areas, there is a strong feeling of entitlement. “My dad worked here for 30 yrs now its my turn” kind of thinking. I could tell you stories about the UAW that nobody would believe. If you wonder why US cars suck just go visit an assembly plant in the Midwest (our best plants are in the South, btw). The UAW is a criminal organization (strong historic links to organized crime) that runs an extortion racket circa 1930. Thank God for Japanese cars, now the US consumer doesn’t have to pay for an Out-Law criminal organization.
I loved my years at GM. The salaried folks I worked with are some of the best and talented people I’ve ever met. As an engineer we just couldn’t do our jobs. The UAW made its so difficult at every stage of a program…from tool and die to prototyping and finally production. We have a saying at General Motors, “The Inmates are Running the Asylum.” That sums it up.
Sounds just like the IAM union that I worked for here in WA state for 14 years...
-
I know about your Union Rip, your lucky that you are competing with a sorry socialist state. if you had to face down the Japanese or Koreans, Boeing would be dead 10 yrs ago.
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
With people growing tired of SUV's with the associated high CoG and poor handling, perhaps the era of the fullsize car might make a comeback.
Not for me. Can't do a desert trip with a station wagon. :)
Well actually you can, if you wanna be stuck in the sand for a couple days.
And the trend crowd likes SUVs not only for the space, but for the "safety" and macho factors, so you're probably not going to convince them either.
-
Originally posted by Choocha
I know about your Union Rip, your lucky that you are competing with a sorry socialist state. if you had to face down the Japanese or Koreans, Boeing would be dead 10 yrs ago.
So why the shades account if you know us?
Anyway, Boeing started offloading work to vendors, including global vendors, in the early 90's. The workforce of the IAM went from 50,000 strong down to its current level which is/was roughly 20,000. Compared to our counterparts doing the same job outside of Boeing (Machinist, Tool Maker) we were overpaid. It was the downfall of the strong union that Boeing once had. Sure, the mucky mucks get a big paycheck, but the union chiefs were just as greedy.
-
Carmaker!?!?!
GM is just a giant finance corp and mortgage lender. The fact that they still assemble cars as a side business is kind of a lark.
-
Jesus Christ, did I just read the word "peeps"?
-
"With all due respect.....what did you mean by "crappy car thing"..what automaker are u supporting??"
What I mean is most of the newer cars the US makers are building are, to put it simply, crap.
Does stuff like the Pontiac Aztek ring a bell? Or, how about how GM has totally wrecked the once-proud Cadillac division into little more than a Lexus-ripoff? Heck, if not for the Escalade, Cadillac would likely have followed Oldsmobile into oblivion. That's quite an "accomplishment" of sorts--taking a name that dominated its market for 50 years and running it into the ground in barely a decade. It takes incompetence on a monumental scale to acheive those kinds of results!
I support our companies, but not mindlessly so. I won't waste money on overpriced products that are ugly and unappealing. If GM and Ford want to run themselves into the ground, then there's nothing I can do about it except remember better times.
I drive a Buick. It's ten years old. I'd love to buy something newer, but the newer cars are just crap. Practically every new car on the market represents a DOWNGRADE over what I drive now in every attribute that matters to me. I refuse to buy a foreign model, so I just buy older cars instead. I'm happy with the Buick, and I saved a heck of a lot of money.
J_A_B
-
No hiding here....I'm an old timer just had my account errrrrr....frozen (sorry about that again skuzzy)
-
Originally posted by Kaw1000
I dont think people understand that if ford and gm goes down the whole country goes down....I just dont understand why peeps can't get that!
American autos are one of last big manufacturers..Its really our last stand in the world market!!!
I sincerely doubt that.
-
Rolex.
Id like to point on two issues that are very troubling for GM and Ford.
1. For GM they have a huuuuge problem with their branding. They are virtually rapeing their brands and destroying the brand lables.
What GM is doing is trying to have everything from entry level to premium level cars for all their brands. Inorder to do this they put cadilac lables on opels, saab lables on subaru´s, daewoo lables on chevies.
Instead of developing the brand and making it into a leading brand within its segment they make all brands into a fuzzy mist in every segment.
This has already totally destroyed SAAB (it has resulted in 1000s of jobs beeing lost in sweden) and more are to come.
2. For Ford the problem is panic savings. Ford is saving like mad. You cant throttle up and hit the breaks at the same time.
Yes for brands that are doing badly you have to cut costs IF COSTS IS THE PROBLEM. If a brand is underdeveloped within its segment you wount make more proffit if you cut costs.
Anyways back to the problem.
Ford is doing soooo badly that actually VOLVO is one of the brands that make the biggest proffit in the entire ford family. Volvo is actually making huge proffits at the moment and its no supprice since its the most technologiacly developed brand in the family.
With Fords panic saving strategy all brands including the very profitable Volvo is forced to save. This means that the brand which is the cutting edge technology brand in the family has very agressive saving plans.
Instead of allowing Volvo to invest Ford is forcing Volvo to save. So that means that its slowing down the technological advance within the family.
I know your saying that Volvo is a insignificantly small part of Ford and it might be but its a brand which has always been leading in safety and enviroment sound cars. These are two values that will only increase in the future. Sure Americans in general dont care about the enviromental effects but atm eviromentally good cars and low cost of ownership are walking hand in hand.
If Ford doesnt stop trying to break and throttle at the same time and GM doesnt stop mollesting their brands their problems will continue.
Tex
-
Originally posted by TexMurphy
Rolex.
Id like to point on two issues that are very troubling for GM and Ford.
1. For GM they have a huuuuge problem with their branding. They are virtually rapeing their brands and destroying the brand lables.
What GM is doing is trying to have everything from entry level to premium level cars for all their brands. Inorder to do this they put cadilac lables on opels, saab lables on subaru´s, daewoo lables on chevies.
Instead of developing the brand and making it into a leading brand within its segment they make all brands into a fuzzy mist in every segment.
This has already totally destroyed SAAB (it has resulted in 1000s of jobs beeing lost in sweden) and more are to come.
This is a great point: when I was living in the US I never understood why US carmakers made identical cars under different badges. Surely it makes sense to mathc models to brands in a way that emphasizes whatever they think the brand stands for in the minds of the customers.
-
TexMurphy,
As a Sweed you understand the sad demise of SAAB...a once proud company known for thier inovative designs....until GM got thier hands on them. Now they are making WRX's in Japan and sticking a SAAB badge on them. As a former GM employee (3 months ago I left) I must say sorry.
Also, what American exec's did to Opel...a proud brand (yes GM owned them for a long time) by not investing in diesel technology, then was forced into a bad contract with Fiat to get thier diesel technology, then had to bail them out to the tune of 2 billion...just because some fat bellybutton over paid American exec. in the mid 1980's (Jack Eaton) told Opel engineers "Diesels ...what the hell. Euro's don't want diesels."
-
GM still owns Vauxhall and Opel I believe. The latest round of Vauxhalls are pretty good.
-
I agree that diluting a brand does them no good, Tex. Except for some limited brands (all low-end, I believe), neither GM, nor Ford have any global presense other than those acquired. I've always found it mystifying that GM has been so disinterested (I suppose clueless isn't too harsh) about international sales.
Holden, I understand health care was a major swing point in Toyota's decision to build their new factory in Ontario instead of the US, in spite of the huge financial incentives offered in other competing southern states. I live in the most expensive country in the world, yet my health insurance costs about 1/4 of equivalent coverage in the US.
-
Rolex,
GM is doing well in China. Better than everybody. Strange thing, the Royal Family, before the revolution drove Buicks. You know, Buicks that sell for 1 million today circa 1930's. So Buicks...the crappy ones they sell now go for 100k overthere!!!!! Go figure.
If you don't believe me do some research.
-
Originally posted by phookat
It's also probably about investment and some amount of long-term thinking. People do want to save gas and clear out the smog (and not just the bunny loving wackos). Toyota is doing a great job IMO of positioning themselves as the "experts" on hybrids, and when the demand kicks in they will be in the right place at the right time.
I just thought it was funny that some guy was saying GM needed to solve their profitability issues by producing cars that don't earn profit.
-
I don't really care... I never buy new cars and I can allways build a rear wheel drive car with a real frame under it.
As for the auto unions? who cares. they are reaping what they sow.
hybrids? who buys em? not the family with two people on minimum wage... they aren't gonna spend 30k to have a hybrid that gets 40 mpg when they can buy a 10k new car that gets over 30 mpg or... a $1000 car that gets over 20 mpg... How many miles you got to drive to make up a 20-29k difference? and....
How much does it cost when the hybrid needs work? I know a prius driver with 130k on his and he needs 2k worth of work on it. How much gas can I buy for 2k?
Let the yuppie mid managers who eat at fr4esh express buy the hybrids and do all the grief on em.... if they ever get good enough and affordable enough... and cheap enough to maintain.... the little guy will buy em..
no car company is now making money on hybrids... No companmy will go broke in the foreseeable future because they don't have hybrids. There may not be hybrids (as we know them) in 5 years.
As for saab.... how do you run a car company that made cars no one bought into the ground?
So long as American car companies continue to do work on performance parts and vehicles I don't care what else happens to em.
lazs
-
lazs2
What you are saying is very valid. The low end consumers are not gonna pay for new technology if new tech is more expencive. That is why its so smart of Toyota to push the tech into Lexuses and mid to high end toyotas.
The low end Yarises and Corollas will be getting it when the production series is so high that it doesnt generate a extra cost.
Tex
-
all car companies do that. there is nothing wrong with American engineered cars... some of the best features are American ones.... poorly executed.
If you have to pay twice as much for labor then you have to cut quality in half.... generaly speaking and... at the level we are at in auto manufacturing.
Maybe this will be a chance for the American car companies to unsadle themselves from the UAW criminals.
If that happens.... The American car companies will not only be able to compete but will be on the forefront.
lazs
-
My new Dodge gets 30+ MPG and rides better than any of the two imports I've ever owned. I guess it boils down to a matter of perception.
We'll probably be seeing an end of the SUV era as the country slides into the econobox era again like back in the '80s.
-
If you pay twice as much for labor, I think you should get twice as much quality built into the product. Americans assemble Fords, Chevys, Toyotas, Hondas, Chryslers and Nissans every day.
It is the cars, it is the engineering, it is the management and it is the systems in place that make the difference.
I hope GM and Ford can become motivated to build better cars that people want at prices they can afford. It's good for competition and the economy.
-
lazs2,
You are 100% right. GM has the talent, infastrure, and processes in place to surpass Toyota. What people don't realize is that the UAW reach is far greater than just assembly. Skilled trades, tool makers, even clay modeling. GM stoped clay modeling years ago and they still keep a staff of UAW clay modelers because of Union intimidation.
For example, my friend, a talented engineer was responsible for implementing a new manufacturing process that would save money by reducing headcount in an area. We traveled to our first plant to implement and he had all four of his tires slashed. They had it all on video but the Plant manager refused to pull the video out of fear from UAW reprisals. The project was pulled because it was deemed "to political." Toyota has been using a similar process for 10 years.
We had some engineers up from Mexico once. Good and talented guys. We took them to the prototype shop for a pilot build of THIER new project. The Union official told them they weren't allowed inside because they were taking American Jobs. We told them the protoype shop was building a product THEY DESIGNED thereby providing them with work. He agreed. Everything was fine until one of the engineers touched a tool. A near Riot broke out and the ENTIRE workforce in the shop walked out. This shop was prototyping many products including the new corvette. But not anymore. Everything stopped and GM lost weeks of valuable time trying to get the shop running again.
Stupid fks..
-
Originally posted by Rolex
I live in the most expensive country in the world, yet my health insurance costs about 1/4 of equivalent coverage in the US.
You get what you pay for...from the WSJ today...
Only about one in five men with prostate cancer in the U.S. will die from it. But, according to a study by the Commonwealth Fund, about 57% of British men, and nearly half of French and German men, will do so. In Britain only 40% of cancer patients are even permitted to see an oncologist to treat the disease. Two-thirds of Canadian provinces report sending their colon cancer patients to the U.S. for treatment.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
all car companies do that. there is nothing wrong with American engineered cars... some of the best features are American ones.... poorly executed.
If you have to pay twice as much for labor then you have to cut quality in half.... generaly speaking and... at the level we are at in auto manufacturing.
Maybe this will be a chance for the American car companies to unsadle themselves from the UAW criminals.
If that happens.... The American car companies will not only be able to compete but will be on the forefront.
lazs
I know Nissan builds cars in this country. I'm pretty sure Toyota and Honda do the same.
Do they not hire UAW labor?
-
Quality cannot be 'built' into a car. It has to be designed in from the drawing board. With proper design and manufacturing techiques cars cannot be built poorly.
If you design the parts of a car with 3/4" of slop for adjustment, then guess what? You get slop.
Infinity/Nissan discovered it was too difficult to get a consistent build due to the car flexing as it moved over the factory assembly floor. So, they built a factory where the car sits in one place and the assemblers (robots and/or humans) are moved to the car. Not only did it improve consistency, but they were able to tighten up the play in the car.
It was also easier to use robots for assembly as the robot could be more accurately placed than trying to accurately place the car in proximity to the robot.
Materials are the next issue with American cars. While we have very good metals, the rest of the car really lacks. One thing I notice about current American cars is how the interior degrades really quickly. They fade, crack, break apart at seams and just fall apart in a few years time. This is just poor/cheap materials.
My 10 year old Infinity I30 interior looked brand new when I got rid of it. I did nothing special, it just looked really good. Conversely, my neighbors 4 year old Chrysler looked really bad. He now owns a Lexus.
There is not an American car in any driveway of the block I live on. Sad really, but until the American car manufacturers 'get it', thier sales and profits will continue to fall. Cars are too expensive to be buying one based on country loyalty.
-
GM and Ford make decent cars mechanicaly, will one last as long as a honda? Probably not, but I bet they last as long as a toyota.
GM and Ford fail, in that they do not build cars anyone would want. Other then the mustang both companies car line is just not very apealing.
Plus on the compact car market, they are dealing with a customer that has heard for years US cars are crap and they do not consider them.
Hell I wouldnt buy a ford focus over a civic.
GM and ford going under won't kill the country, that is just silly. It will hurt things for some people, but the end? Hardly.
I dont think either is going to go under, they will probably declare bankrubsy and get out of all their bad labor contracts, close all the US plants down and move them to mexico, then continue to sell cars no one wants.
-
Skuzzy,
Generaly speaking, 70% of quality issues are design related. You are right. The problem, you must EXECUTE your design. GM fails in the EXECUTION phase (mostly). Sure, you can blame GM mangers to a degree. But the majority of the problem is with the UAW.
BTW, the UAW has failed to organize one transplant facility in the United States. This is a very, very sore issue with them. Toyota in Georgetown, Ky actually allows the UAW to have an office in thier plant but they have failed on every vote to organize them.
Skuzzy,
Most of the vehicle content of GM car comes from captive suppliers like Deliphi..which is in chapter 11 and is also represented by the UAW. GM has been trying to diversify its supplier base but, again the UAW fights them at every turn.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Materials are the next issue with American cars. While we have very good metals, the rest of the car really lacks. One thing I notice about current American cars is how the interior degrades really quickly. They fade, crack, break apart at seams and just fall apart in a few years time. This is just poor/cheap materials.
Taking care of your equipment factors into this. I have a 9 year old Ford with a perfect interior that the previous owner took very good care of, and I take very good care of.
I've seen a late 90's Lexus with a torn up faded interior because the owner never treated the leather. (shrugs)
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
GM and Ford make decent cars mechanicaly, will one last as long as a honda? Probably not, but I bet they last as long as a toyota.
I don't know about the cars, but the Toyota trucks last forever. Quite common to see them with 250,000 miles or more on em.
-
There is no doubt any car can be abused and it will show it. There is also no doubt if one takes meticulous care of a car it will show it, for the most part.
I wanted a Mustang when I was shopping for a new car. I was excited by the prospect of having one, but I did not get one. I did not even drive one. I sat in one, then after 1 minute of looking it over, I got out of it and walked away. I was really disappointed in it. The interior is cheap. It shows.
The engine selection is terrible. Either a V8 (not a bad engine at all mind you, but not for the economy minded either), or a pathetic 4.0L V6 (a freakin truck engine!!!) with enemic power. What are these people thinking?
So I end up with a 2.5L V6 producing 50% more horsepower than the Ford V6, and getting over 31 MPG in a car that weighs several hundred pounds more than the Mustang. It did cost more, but I will pay for something I think is a good value. I keep cars 10 years, so cost of ownership is a big deal to me. And the sound system in it is superb. The Mustang sound system was pathetic.
I also drove a Corvette. I liked it too. More than ample power, but the dang thing was already squeaking and rattling before I pulled off the dealership lot for the test drive.
----
I had a set of criteria for my new car and was not going to settle for anything less. I wanted a car that handled well (read, sporty), got good gas mileage, had a nice sound system, rear wheel drive, and was quiet (getting older, I enjoy listening more to music than exhaust notes). All other points were optional, within some limits. Pretty simple criteria as far as I was concerned. Look around though. Not many cars met that criteria and no American made car was close.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
some of the best features are American ones.... poorly executed.
Which features would those be? I really can't think of anything. OTOH, I can think of design features which US cars lack, like OHC engines. There's no excuse for that, UAW included.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
The engine selection is terrible. Either a V8 (not a bad engine at all mind you, but not for the economy minded either), or a pathetic 4.0L V6 (a freakin truck engine!!!) with enemic power. What are these people thinking?
Hey, that V6 was an upgrade! Remember the older v6 ford engines in the mustangs stolen from the Taurus?
Also, 25 mpg isn't bad for a V8 that produces 300 hp. ;) Thats the '05 Mustang.
Interiors are like exteriors, what you think looks good others may not. My wife loves the interior of her Mustang, I love the interior of my BMW. If it works for her, who am I to tell her "its looks cheap"...thats my opinion, not hers.
-
In Britain only 40% of cancer patients are even permitted to see an oncologist to treat the disease.
(http://www.zen33071.zen.co.uk/bsflag.gif)
-
Rip, I get 24MPG in town, which is where I spend most of my drive time.
You talking about the earlier Mustang, or the 06 Stangs in reference to what your wife has?
It was not the look of the interior. It was the material selection and how it was put together. Cheesy is the best way I can describe it. even my wife was disappointed and she wanted me to get the Mustang too.
The seating was pretty bad too. Felt like a padded bench seat.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Rip, I get 24MPG in town, which is where I spend most of my drive time.
You talking about the earlier Mustang, or the 06 Stangs in reference to what your wife has?
It was not the look of the interior. It was the material selection and how it was put together. Cheesy is the best way I can describe it. even my wife was disappointed and she wanted me to get the Mustang too.
The seating was pretty bad too. Felt like a padded bench seat.
Wife has an 05. (New body style)
Like I said, thats your (and your wifes opinion) Mine too I might add, but I see alot of Mustangs on the roads (new ones) so its not everyones opinion.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I don't know about the cars, but the Toyota trucks last forever. Quite common to see them with 250,000 miles or more on em.
The motor and tranny may and the rest of the major mechanicals but the rest will be falling apart just like everyone elses car.
my Buddies 2000 toyota trucks interior is already falling apart and it has 80k on it.
Reminds me of an 80s GM car as a mater of fact.
Plus he has replaced:
The starter, the ignition switch, the parking brake switch is bad, the AC and radio nobs fall off and the sun roof handle falls out.
Real great qaulity there.
-
"Which features would those be? I really can't think of anything. "
I can't think of any really useful features that a Honda Civic has. When I see one, all I see is a tiny, cheap, uncomfortable, flimsy sardine can. I can't understand why anyone who lives outside a city would ever want one.
As someone else noted, the US automakers have a lot of baggage just in how nearly everyone everyone under age 30 automatically assumes they're crap without even driving them. Heck, people called my 3400 pound Cadillac a "boat" just based on the name alone, sight unseen (never mind the car weighed about the same as a Ford Taurus). Oddly enough--every single person I ever let drive the Cadillac, hasn't bought a Japanese car since.
I drive a Buick now, but that Cadillac was the best-designed 4-door car I've ever seen. It was almost mind-boggling. They managed to fit a large car into a midsize package. The interior was massive; its back seat had more legroom than most cars FRONT seats. It severely needed a better engine, but all engines from the '80's were crap--give that car a modern engine and you'd have a world beater. And that style sold very well; it was one of Cadillac's best-selling models ever. So what did Cadillac do? They replaced that style with a larger, bulkier, uglier design and jacked up the price $10K more and sales plummeted like a rock. Idiots. How people so utterly stupid make it into such high management positions?
That's the REAL advantage the Japanese builders have--their managemet isn't a bunch of retards. The only thing GM's management is good for is comming up with excuses for their incompetence. (Pontiac Aztek anyone?) I maintain that GM can find all the excuses they want, but their problems are inherentently caused by mismanagement on a monumental scale. Heck, I'm about as pro-american-cars as a person can get, and not even I'm willing to buy the crap GM is building now.
J_A_B
-
And why do people hate bench seats so much? Your wifey can't slide across if you have bucket seats.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
The motor and tranny may and the rest of the major mechanicals but the rest will be falling apart just like everyone elses car.
my Buddies 2000 toyota trucks interior is already falling apart and it has 80k on it.
Reminds me of an 80s GM car as a mater of fact.
Plus he has replaced:
The starter, the ignition switch, the parking brake switch is bad, the AC and radio nobs fall off and the sun roof handle falls out.
Real great qaulity there.
Too new. Look to the 70's and 80's stuff.
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
And why do people hate bench seats so much? Your wifey can't slide across if you have bucket seats.
J_A_B
There is a reason I like sporty suspensions. I hate to slow down. I have to have buckets which have good lateral support and grip due to my driving style. While most people slow down when they enter a curve on the freeway, I speed up. Part of the fun of driving for me.
-
JAB,
Pontiac Aztek was a swing for the fences thing...they missed. Management has turned around Cadillac. The STS's are the best built American cars now. How'd they do it. By getting the UAW to accept unprecendented concessions at the Lansing Grand River plant. Basicly, the car is build in a "modular" process, where most of the subassemblys are built by suppliers...most with no UAW. The only thin the UAW does is final assembly, and that is it.
-
Sandy
I owned a 78 toyota hilux longbed, and it was the worst pile of **** I EVER owned. Rusted, never ran right, gas tank rusted out, the drivers door window fell out, the bumper in the back fell off, the radiator started to leak, the back brake cylinders all went out in under 80k.
Granted, I never changed the oil, (it leaked out so I figured at a qaurt a week it was getting an oil change every month anyway.)
It stopped running at 80k all together so I let it get towed and forgot about it.
Granted, that was prolly a combo bad luck on that particular toyota truck and lack of taking care of it. But every modern toyota I have delt with has been crapy as well. Maybe I am toyota cursed or expect to much.
-
^ Indeed.
And J_A_B, if you have a car with manual transmission (I hate that "stick shift" expression) a bench seat isn't really practicable, except if it's one of those ghastly column shift efforts. Also, you need a handbrake with manual (not one of those American style pedal operated "emergency" brakes), so that you can start on hills without rolling back. Being able to do that is part of the British driving test - you fail the test if you can't coordinate the controls to be able to do it properly.
The roads here are very different from the roads you're used to, J_A_B, and I need a car that can corner well - so mushy suspension wouldn't cut it for me. I chose the 4WD "quattro" option on my aluminium can because the cornering and traction are so much better than with 2WD - "due"? The 4WD, ABS and ESP systems all interact to provide the best traction, roadholding and cornering ability - these are important on our wet and winding roads...
-
I think Gm and Ford have a way to go yet. Ford actually made 2billion last year but lost 1.5 billion on N American operations. Gm has some 13 billion in cash on hand.
Kirk kerkorian is buying as many gm shares as he can, hes a suuccessful investor....buy now on the downswing!
Also, great article in forbes magazine. Basically suggest Catepillar as the model for GM and Ford to fight the jap auto makers. Cat faced this same problem in the 80's from jap and foreign competiton, they're now stronger than ever. This was mostly accomplished by moving factories to areas in the country that were not controlled by the UAW.
mtndog
-
Somebody said on page 1 of this thread that they were looking at the Highlander hybrid. Not a particularly good choice. It's a V6 hybrid, and you're gonna pay quite a bit more to get the same mileage, and nearly identical performance, for an overall higher cost of ownership in the long-term. For the Lexus version, same platform, just add $10k for a different badge on the front. The V6 Accord Hybrid has the same pitfalls.
-
"these are important on our wet and winding roads..."
They're also handy features on Ohio's broken and slushy winter roads. When there's a foot of half-melted slush on the road, the Buick takes some coaxing to get it to move, and a bit more coaxing (and perhaps a minor prayer) to get it to stop. I considered getting an anchor I could throw out the window, but physics defeats me here--the anchor required to stop a sliding two-ton Buick is probably heavier than I could easily toss with my left arm.
The worst part, though, was being forced to stop on a steep hill on a one-lane road in WVa and having the Buick--with its tires locked--start sliding down the hill. Sliding down a hill with a sheer drop 2 feet off the side of the narrow road and no guardrails is a sort of interesting experience (my wife bailed out). The anchor would have come in useful then, too.
Somehow, and I will never comprehend how, a guy in one of those Kia mini-SUV's managed to turn around within the width of the one-lane road and just drive back down. That impressed me as I was looking for a tree to tie my land-barge to so it wouldn't fall over the edge and plummet into the ravine. If I move to WVA--and I intend to--I will definately buy some sort of 4x4.
J_A_B
(see, I make fun of my own stuff too)
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
"Which features would those be? I really can't think of anything. "
I can't think of any really useful features that a Honda Civic has. When I see one, all I see is a tiny, cheap, uncomfortable, flimsy sardine can. I can't understand why anyone who lives outside a city would ever want one.
Still doesn't answer the question. What features do US cars have that are better? Again, I can't think of anything. Maybe I should rephrase that. What technology and design features do US cars have that are better than imports?
As far as import features that are better, have you driven a Civic? It's very well put together (not flimsy at all), efficient, sporty, and will generally last a long time in that condition without a lot of care and hassle. Those are features that most US cars don't have, and that's why people don't buy them...not because they're prejudiced against US cars. As far as how comfortable it is, compare it to other cars the same size.
A lot of that is because of modern technology. Like an OHC VVT engine. Whether the lack of this kind of thing in US cars is bad management or bad engineering or bad UAW, well I don't care. It's inexcusable any way you cut it.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
There is a reason I like sporty suspensions. I hate to slow down. I have to have buckets which have good lateral support and grip due to my driving style. While most people slow down when they enter a curve on the freeway, I speed up. Part of the fun of driving for me.
:aok :aok My best yet is 85 mph on a 20 mph Cloverleaf. :D (This was AFTER I got my new Firestone F1's)
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Being able to do that is part of the British driving test - you fail the test if you can't coordinate the controls to be able to do it properly.
Here in the States, you get a license by being alive. Well, OK, 50% alive. :D
-
What happens to hybrids when the batteries no longer hold a charge? Where do those chemicals go?
Environmentally-friendly... blah!
-
best features? look at a new vette... look at the suspension and drive train... we are talking a 525 hp car that gets 26 mpg and will do 200 mph and pull a g on the skidpad... and.... cost 65k.... name anything like it from anyone else.. Oh... we do have OHC engines by the millions... in 4, 6 and 8 cyl versions. Our computer and fuel injection systems are inovative.
as for the hybrids...as gofaster says... where do the batteries go when they are dead? how much to replace em? the management systems... Like I said, I know someone facing a 2k bill just to fix the management/computer system on a prius.
lazs
-
mtndog,
do you have a link or a date so I can read that article?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
:aok :aok My best yet is 85 mph on a 20 mph Cloverleaf. :D (This was AFTER I got my new Firestone F1's)
Cool. We have a couple of long sweepers here I look for an excuse to drive on when we are out. :)
One of them is slightly banked and a slightly decreasing radius. The best I have made on it was 147mph (slight drift) in my old Z. The IS is still being broke in, but I took it at 95 one day. Felt well planted and secure. I think it may go the distance. Different set of tires will be needed though. The Bridgestones on the IS are ok, but there are better.
I have another one which is pure torture for a car. A negative camber, decreasing radius turn going from high to low. Speed rated at 45MPH. Best I have been able to do is 65MPH through it. Nasty beast, but fun at the same time. One of those adrenaline rush turns.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
as for the hybrids...as gofaster says... where do the batteries go when they are dead?
Battery Heaven? Unless they were bad....
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Cool. We have a couple of long sweepers here I look for an excuse to drive on when we are out. :)
One of them is slightly banked and a slightly decreasing radius. The best I have made on it was 147mph (slight drift) in my old Z. The IS is still being broke in, but I took it at 95 one day. Felt well planted and secure. I think it may go the distance. Different set of tires will be needed though. The Bridgestones on the IS are ok, but there are better.
I have another one which is pure torture for a car. A negative camber, decreasing radius turn going from high to low. Speed rated at 45MPH. Best I have been able to do is 65MPH through it. Nasty beast, but fun at the same time. One of those adrenaline rush turns.
I hear to much adrenaline can make the bones of older men brittle... :D
-
Is that the voice of experience. :D
-
No no, I am still young!
(In comparison at least!) :D
-
Numbers are not the best indicator of age. Trust me. I know a lot of people younger than me who are older than me. :)
-
"have you driven a Civic?"
Yes. Several of them.
"What features do US cars have that are better? "
If you're talking about the cars they're building today, virtually none. Hence why I say they're building crap now.
US automakers have actually gone backwards in terms of development and quality. Take Buick as an example--no sedan they've built in the last ten years has the same level of performance as the one I own. Isn't that pathetic? With all the technological advances over the last decade, they can't even match one of their own former products that used a lot of 1970's-era technology. Or, rather, they can but for some idiotic reason, don't.
The US makers have decreased quality while increasing price, then pretend to not understand why they're doing so poorly.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Numbers are not the best indicator of age. Trust me. I know a lot of people younger than me who are older than me. :)
Ahh true, I have been acused of never maturing past 15 so I am pretty safe I think. ;)
-
Guess I got to ask.... are we talking about cars here or transportation?
I mean... why would anyone own a front wheel drive car?
lazs
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Ahh true, I have been acused of never maturing past 15 so I am pretty safe I think. ;)
They must have been talking about IQ. :rofl
Lazs - agreed. AWD is best. :D
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I mean... why would anyone own a front wheel drive car?
lazs
Easy to handle in the snow... especially if it has ABS.
You've been on the road. Most people aren't all that good at driving.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
best features? look at a new vette... look at the suspension and drive train... we are talking a 525 hp car that gets 26 mpg and will do 200 mph and pull a g on the skidpad... and.... cost 65k.... name anything like it from anyone else..
Vette's a nice car, no doubt. I put it more in the category of Hot Rod though. People build 500+ small blocks all the time. But taking that as an example...why not OHC/4 valve? Why not VVT? Yeah, it's kind of cool to do a 7K rpm pushrod block...but doesn't seem like there's any need when there are better alternatives.
Look at it this way, from a DIY perspective. We already know the benefits that this "new" technology has for 4-bangers. Imagine applying it to a big block. Imagine a big block that develops power to 7K RPM (without blowing up), and still has a 1K idle. But we can't have it, cause US blocks are stuck on rockers.
Originally posted by lazs2
Oh... we do have OHC engines by the millions... in 4, 6 and 8 cyl versions.
Why are there *any* pushrod engines left in the lineup? Everything from econoboxes to SUVs should have been upgraded by now. Why the slack?
Originally posted by lazs2
Our computer and fuel injection systems are inovative.
Quite the opposite IMO. We had carbs when everyone had EFI, we had TBI when everyone else was sequential. We are (or were) behind the curve there, I think.
Originally posted by Sandman
Easy to handle in the snow... especially if it has ABS.
Yup. You can floor it, whatever, and no ill effects on ice. Other than that, if you aren't interested in the extreme edges of handling (I'm not talking about people who take sweepers at 147 :) ) then awd rwd fwd it makes little difference.
-
phoo... you are missing the point. We have ohc V8's the reason that vette (and others) use the pushrod (and extremely inovative all alluminum) v8 is space... have you looked at even a tiny little 4.6 liter ohc v8? The pushrod v8 is lighter and stronger and more durable and smaller in all dimensions while still giveing a 427" motor... please tell me how GM would have improved this package with an ohc engine?
ABS will do nothing for you for traction... you are probly talking about traction control which was pretty much invented an d perfected by American car companies.
We have some of the best computer controls in the world... they are also very versitile and flexible and can be programed with aftermarket chips... As for the vette being a "hot rod".... maybe but.... it gets 26 mpg... it has air and killer stereo and leather seats and every luxury item known to man and will go 200 mph and do 0-60 in a little over 4 sec.... all with the air and stereo on... all for 65k.... name anything by any manufacturer that even aproches that level of refinement for twice the price... You can add an aftermarket supercharger with a factory warranty and add another 150hp if you want for a couple grand.... try that with your exotic or non exotic your-0-peean euro trash cars.
front wheel drive.... those aren't even cars in my book..
I really do normally try to stay out of arguements about cars with people who don't care about cars except as pods for moving people.
oh... and one of the best 4 bangers for power to weight and power to size was the olds quad 4... nobody wanted it.
lazs
-
This was posted over at AGW, and I thought it was apropos.
"23 February 2006
By Robert Farago
A couple of days ago, I was talking to an auto industry analyst about the world’s largest automaker. We were discussing the cracks in GM’s hull, trying to figure out which of The General's compartments were already breached, which are filling with water and which remain viable. A wistful tone in the analyst’s voice indicated head-shaking dismay. “I’m no longer hearing anything positive about GM,” he revealed. “The conversations range from how bad it is, to how bad it’s going to get.” I didn’t want to sound like a paranoid fantasist to a new source, so I tried not to out-pessimist the doomsayers. But it wasn’t easy.
GM’s supply situation is dangerously dire. If former subsidiary and mission critical parts supplier Delphi doesn’t reach an agreement with its unionized workers by March 30th -- the third and “final” deadline -- a judge will void the company’s labor contracts. Pundits poo-poo the possibility; they reckon the UAW will make concessions and GM will fork over the necessary union blood money to keep Delphi chugging along. But… over at Tower Automotive, the smaller but equally bankrupt GM supplier tried to cut $1.50 to $3 from their union members’ $13 to $15 hourly wages. The United Auto Workers (UAW), United Steel Workers and International Union of Electrical Workers (IUEW) said no. On Monday, a judge will void Tower’s union contracts. The inevitable strike will deprive GM’s Hail Mary GMT900 SUV’s of vital suspension components (amongst other things).
This ominous development reflects the indisputable fact that the UAW and its brother unions are not prepared to surrender a single dime in their salaries, pensions or health care benefits. Not one. Not ever. (I doubt UAW Boss Big Ron Gettelfinger has ever said the word "concession" in public.) What's more, the unions are literally spoiling for a fight. To wit: members of IUEW will vote today to authorize its leaders to strike Delphi as and when. That’s 33,000 Delphi workers ready, willing and able to walk at a moment’s notice. It's not posturing; it’s preparation.
The unions own GM. If organized labor strikes even one key supplier, they'll be giving The General a 90-day death sentence. While some analysts believe that's no bad thing-- the situation forces the unions to accept responsibility for the fate of the company paying its wages, leading them to take the hit needed to keep those wages coming-- nothing could be further from the truth. The UAW and its fellow unions are like a cancer: they will feast on their host until it dies. End of story. Why would they walk out on Delphi and send GM into Chapter 11? Because they can. Look at the Rust Belt. How avoidable was that? By the same token, General Motors gives in to union demands when it can’t afford to because that’s what they do.
GM didn't rush in, bail out Tower and protect its new SUV's because the supplier is only the tip of an iceberg that’s gouging a hole in the General’s hull. GM’s constant efforts to low-ball its suppliers, its poor credit (downgraded by Moody’s on Tuesday to B1, five rungs below investment grade) and the looming prospect of bankruptcy are all inflicting fatal wounds to its supply chain. Suppliers are caught in the squeeze between rising commodity costs, declining production (due to lost market share) and contracts that reduce pricing over time. TTAC’s Deep Throat reports that an inferior part for the GMT-900 recently forced GM to return to a “quality supplier.” The supplier refused to invest its own money to create the part and demanded a contract stipulating that the automaker would pay a true market rate for the finished component.
This is not an isolated case. GM used to provide suppliers an advanced payment program arranged by GE Credit. Late last year, GE bailed on the entire business, in favor of GMAC (yes, the same GM-owned finance company currently on the block). If that wasn't a bad sign of GM's financial situation in and of itself, GMAC then tightened the restrictions. The payment program is no longer available to the broad spectrum of GM suppliers. Bottom line: GM's current procurement process fails to assure parts manufacturers adequate financial compensation, doesn’t provide protection against program termination due to budgetary constraints or model “realignment”, and can’t possibly guarantee payment if GM files for Chapter 11.
It’s not too much of a stretch to imagine that at some point, one way or another, GM’s entire supply chain will collapse. How’s that for dark? You want light? How about this: I’ve received dozens of emails from frustrated workers, designers and administrators inside GM. No question: there’s an enormous amount of creativity and passion locked-up inside General Motors. Once The General shakes off its union, deep-sixes its insufferable bureaucracy, dumps unnecessary brands and gets down to the business of building a limited number of great cars, it will build a limited number of great cars. When it comes to GM, the parts are greater than the whole."
http://thetruthaboutcars.com/content/11407149391580627324/index.php
-
Originally posted by phookat
Vette's a nice car, no doubt. I put it more in the category of Hot Rod though. People build 500+ small blocks all the time. But taking that as an example...why not OHC/4 valve? Why not VVT? Yeah, it's kind of cool to do a 7K rpm pushrod block...but doesn't seem like there's any need when there are better alternatives.
Look at it this way, from a DIY perspective. We already know the benefits that this "new" technology has for 4-bangers. Imagine applying it to a big block. Imagine a big block that develops power to 7K RPM (without blowing up), and still has a 1K idle. But we can't have it, cause US blocks are stuck on rockers.
Why are there *any* pushrod engines left in the lineup? Everything from econoboxes to SUVs should have been upgraded by now. Why the slack?
Quite the opposite IMO. We had carbs when everyone had EFI, we had TBI when everyone else was sequential. We are (or were) behind the curve there, I think.
Yup. You can floor it, whatever, and no ill effects on ice. Other than that, if you aren't interested in the extreme edges of handling (I'm not talking about people who take sweepers at 147 :) ) then awd rwd fwd it makes little difference.
You do know GM had a very good OHC inline 6 in the 60s, called the sprint 6(Pontiac put it in firebirds)that was inovative as hell, but no one wanted it because it was pricey and why bother when you could get a nice 326 V8 instead?
You do know that chevy was fuel injecting cars in the 50s?
You do know most of the "inovations" you claim had been done as far back as ww2 on aircraft engines.
GM keeps the pushrod V8s because they do the job for less money and just as good as a complicated OHC v8 would.
They key is there was no need. There is now with gas prices going up so they may change the engine lineup. but 5 years ago I would take a pushrod v8 in a car over an overly complicated OHC V8 any day.
You ever hear the term: keep it simple Stupid?
-
Interesting read Thrawn.
Why can't GM just fire the unions and hire non union labor?
I bet what happends is they go chapter 11, fire the unions close all the UAW plants, make new plants in mexico, kill a few davisons that have needed killing for years(GMC, Pontiac, and Buick), and then do ok from there.
Or they get bought out and the above happends under the rains of another company.
-
question:
is it possible to find a 25+ year old japanese import with less rust than a 56 chev thats been sitting in some farmers feild for god knows how long?
and will that still apply in 10 years?
-
"the UAW and its brother unions are not prepared to surrender a single dime in their salaries, pensions or health care benefits. Not one. Not ever. (I doubt UAW Boss Big Ron Gettelfinger has ever said the word "concession" in public.) What's more, the unions are literally spoiling for a fight."
Well why would they? Why should they?
"Judge approves bonus plans for Delphi execs - Six-month incentive plan awards up to $21 million"
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060211/AUTO01/602110310/1148
Same crap occured with Enron, Tyco and Worldcom (recent big profile examples) employees got skrewwed over royally while the executives made out VERY well before, during and after bankruptcy too. After all is said and done employees lose thier jobs, watch thier retirement flat line, lose out on wel deserved promotions and merit increases - all that is except the execs.
BIG bonuses for being incompetent or a thief? Who are you anti-union types
kidding?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
ABS will do nothing for you for traction... you are probly talking about traction control which was pretty much invented an d perfected by American car companies.
I really do normally try to stay out of arguements about cars with people who don't care about cars except as pods for moving people.
lazs
Not talking about traction. I'm talking about stopping... especially in ice and snow.
For most people cars are just that... people movers. It's not a lifestyle or a hobby or a sport. It's simply a means of travel.
My wife's car is a front wheel drive Dodge with ABS... it keeps her (and drivers like her out of trouble).
It's a good thing. Most drivers aren't nearly as proficient as they might think. Especially in areas like here at home where we get about five inches of precipitation per year. Most people here seem to lose their minds if is snows.
-
Originally posted by vorticon
question:
is it possible to find a 25+ year old japanese import with less rust than a 56 chev thats been sitting in some farmers feild for god knows how long?
and will that still apply in 10 years?
Depends on where you live. Cars around here don't rust much at all.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
You do know most of the "inovations" you claim had been done as far back as ww2 on aircraft engines.
I know. Which makes it all the more puzzling.
Originally posted by GtoRA2
GM keeps the pushrod V8s because they do the job for less money and just as good as a complicated OHC v8 would.
Nonsense. They did it with the Caddys, and they did it with the ZR1/2. Because it's better. So yes, you can fit a 32V motor in a Vette. It does help the powerband, it does help RPM and drivability. And as far as expense...if the imports can do it in econoboxes, why not the US? Is there something good about staying in the stone age? Not if the sales figures are any reflection.
Not saying the Vette is a bad car, cause it isn't. But look at the rest of the lineup. Barf.
Originally posted by GtoRA2
They key is there was no need. There is now with gas prices going up so they may change the engine lineup.
And the result of that negligence (among other things like fit and finish) is that US cars are in the tank today. Maybe if they had done these things *before*...it wouldn't be so bad.
Originally posted by GtoRA2
You ever hear the term: keep it simple Stupid?
That doesn't seem to have helped the reliability records of US cars.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I don't know about the cars, but the Toyota trucks last forever. Quite common to see them with 250,000 miles or more on em.
One of my trucks is a 1983 RN6 4x4 Toyota.
The box is going to hell but the mechanical and cab are great.
-
phoo... are you aware that the zr1 motor in the vette was hand assembled by mercury outboard at a huge expense... the hp came at a cost of 5 times that of a pushrod engine... repairs on the engine are allmost your-0-peeen expensive and the motor is shoehorned in you can't work on it...
everything it does.. a pushrod motor does as well for a lot cheaper and fits better.... it would not even fit in the newer more aerodynamic vettes.
you said it yourself.... they did it on the very limited production vette and the very expensive and large caddy.... It can be done by American companies... that is a given... but at this point.... why? you didn't answer that.
Would you buy a buick with a 300 hp northstar ohc motor in it if it cost 5k more than a buick with a 350 hp pushrod smallblock with the same warranty and cheaper maintenance cost? why would you?
sandy... abs is about standard on every car made now isn't it? I don't care about it but it is probly a good feature.
course... most of the cars you guys are talking about aren't even cars to me...
and... the exotics from the your-0-peeans all cost 2-5 times more than the vette say and don't perform as well and cost 10 times as much to keep up.
If you want to talk people moving pods that are luxurious and troublefree and cheap built by non UAW slobs... I am out of the discussion because I will freely admit the japs do it better. Anhything to do with hives they do better.
lazs
-
The econobox period may not be coming back if this is any indication...
2007 Tundra, available with a new 5.7 V8.
(http://www.autoblog.com/media/2006/02/12-07-Tundra.jpg)
(http://www.autoblog.com/media/2006/02/IMG_4476.jpg)
(http://www.autoblog.com/media/2006/02/30-07-Tundra.jpg)
-
pickups are ideal platforms for the cumbersome ohc V8... lots of room.
My Lincoln is another example of a good place to put one.... even so... it fills the engine compartment from side to side while displacing only about 280 cubic inches.
lazs
-
"Would you buy a buick with a 300 hp northstar ohc motor in it if it cost 5k more than a buick with a 350 hp pushrod smallblock with the same warranty and cheaper maintenance cost? why would you?"
Not only that, Lazs, but the oh-so-modern Northstar Buick has WORSE performance than the old model with the 350 smallblock engine.
"My Lincoln is another example of a good place to put one.... even so... it fills the engine compartment from side to side while displacing only about 280 cubic inches."
My wife's Grand Marquis has that same engine, and not only is it huge for its displacement, it's lack of low-end torque is almost comical. I consider that car extremely underpowered; I can't imagine how sluggish the heavier Lincoln must be.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by lazs2
sandy... abs is about standard on every car made now isn't it? I don't care about it but it is probly a good feature.
I am pretty sure ABS is standard on almost evey Us car as well, I pretty sure the whole jeep line with the exception of the Rubicons (maybe other wranglers) have ABS.
The Rubicons do not have it because it is dangerous off road(not even an option for it).
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I don't know about the cars, but the Toyota trucks last forever. Quite common to see them with 250,000 miles or more on em.
I don't believe that, Sandman.
The econobox period may not be coming back if this is any indication...
2007 Tundra, available with a new 5.7 V8.
A 5.7L with 330 HP and 375 Ib/ft of torque? Ugly and Useless....
-
Originally posted by Rafe35
I don't believe that, Sandman.
Google is your friend. I know three guys at work... each has older model Toyota SR5 IIRC. Every one of them is 200,000 +
So... I'll back my earlier statement down a bit. ;)
-
The Lincoln is actually a few hundred pounds lighter than the grand marquis... don't ask me why. I did a "few things" to the Lincoln and it does seem to move out a little better now... some of the feeling of slowness is attributed to how quite and balanced the damn thing is. Still.... I would prefer a more powerful engine with some low end grunt.
I would not care if GM lost top spot if it meant that they could dump the union and start producing the things that I see comeing out of their research and development areas.... No car company could touch them for performance. Ford and the pentstar could follow... give useless jag and saab back to the your-0-peeans... never liked em anyway.
lazs