Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Rank the Big 4 Ford, GM, Toyota, Chrysler. Best? Worst?

11314151719

Comments

  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    Soon is relative. The auto industry is over 100 years old and that is a nanosecond in universe time. I'll bet it takes a good part of the next nanosecond for an pure-bred American Auto Company to gain that spot again, if ever. :(

    Regards,
    OW
  • oldguy70oldguy70 Posts: 97
    As much as I lament the situation for the former Big 3, Toyota is now in no.1 spot and will very likely remain there.
    Toyota is just too far out ahead of the US automakers just now in all categories especially quality and reputation for reliability.
    That's not to say that GM might catch up someday, but for now they're going to have to be satisfied playing second fiddle.
    Also too, it's GM's fault in the long run; too big, too arrogant, for too long.
    As for Ford and Chrysler? I think they're on the way out. It's just a matter of when now.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    I agree with your entire post! Well said!

    Regards,
    OW
  • grbeckgrbeck Posts: 2,361
    Chrysler's survival is very iffy...but as to whether Ford or GM is more likely to survive:

    GM has been making progress, but its largest vehicles (full-size pickups and SUVs), the Corvette and Cadillacs are still its best offerings. That has been the GM story since the 1960s.

    GM's smaller passenger cars are either mediocre or underwhelming (except for the Aura, and even it still hasn't bested the class leader). And I'm seeing too much emphasis on vehicles like 700-horsepower Corvettes, when what GM really needs is a Cobalt that makes money and bests the Civic and Mazda3.

    Which tells me that GM hasn't undergone a fundamental culture change, which it really needs to do if it is to survive, especially if gas prices continue to rise.

    Mullaly is taking on Ford's entrenched corporate culture, and attacking the root of its problems. And Ford has learned a great deal from Mazda and Volvo, and incorporated that knowledge into its vehicles. Imagine how awful Ford's lineup would be without the Mazda-based vehicles!

    The key question is whether he will have enough time to do so, or whether changes in the market will simply overwhelm his efforts.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    "Imagine how awful Ford's lineup would be without the Mazda-based vehicles!"

    Umm....Ford has non-Mazda based vehicles? Oh wait, yeah, they do. Everything with a frame is pure-Ford. If it's not body-on-frame, it's Mazda-based :D
  • wtd44wtd44 Posts: 1,211
    If the American automotive industry fades to grey, and becomes a relative extension of foreign interests, we could readily "live to regret it."
    In all honesty, I do not perceive the off shore branded vehicles as really being superior to the domestic brands-- not in the larger picture. But our car culture has gone dangerously far off that shore, so to speak, and we need to drag it back and preserve the industrial base of this nation. Who's tending the store? And by the way, I for one hope that Daimler liberates Chrysler. If our good friends and neighbors, the Canadians buy Chrysler's option, it would be a great boon to North America. That is only slightly less good than if the USA grabs it back, wouldn't you agree?
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    I already regret the fate of the US Auto industry because after hoping beyond hope that they would find a way to offer superior product, I see only failure.

    IOW, I went with my heart in 2006 and purchased a superior product.

    It would be great if some rich US engineers who love cars bought Chrysler and ran it regardless of what bean counters say is good for the company, and instead make great cars! How much money would they loose if the product blew away anything on the road? It should be a challenge rather than saving $2/unit for 200,000 pieces of crap! Tear after year of that led to the current fate. Let's try something completely different and see what happens.

    Regards,
    OW
  • wtd44wtd44 Posts: 1,211
    And while the offshore axis specializes in copying and reverse engineering, the domestics find such an approach anathema. Maybe the best hope is that Chrysler just melts into a current builder's holdings, but who could that be? All the domestics are in trouble. By the way, in mid April I bought a new 2007 Jeep GC.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    Chrysler Group to Be Sold to Cerberus
    Monday May 14, 7:05 am ET
    By Matt Moore and Tom Krisher, AP Business Writers
    DaimlerChrysler to Sell Controlling Stake of Chrysler Group to Cerberus Capital Management LP

    FRANKFURT, Germany (AP) -- DaimlerChrysler AG will sell 80.1 percent of its money-losing Chrysler Group to private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management LP for $7.4 billion, the company announced Monday, undoing a 1998 merger aimed at creating a global auto giant.
  • smittynycsmittynyc Posts: 291
    Daimler's only getting $1.35 billion in cash out of the deal. After putting in $36 billion ten years ago.

    That's just incredible. I mean, I understand why they had to do it, but man.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,476
    Makes the 1,500 dollar loss I took selling a used Range Rover on Saturday look pathetic.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    The deal in 1998 was a complete fairytale failure they knew it and this was their solution....dump the thing for any cost.

    Now, what do you think the equity firm will do to make the best cars in the world?

    My money says they will slash and burn. Let's see the new management team that will head this new enterprise. They have a huge task to turn this baby around and create shareholder value.

    Regards,
    OW
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,173
    Wonder what this means to future product like the much anticipated Challenger?
  • wtd44wtd44 Posts: 1,211
    ...Two Grand Cherokees and a Concorde; 2007, 2004, 1996. I'm hopeful for the future. :shades:
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,173
    Those new Wranglers must be flying off the lots, I see more and more of them everywhere I go. And they ain't cheap by anymeans... Even the Compass appears to be selling well. As is the Dodge Nitro and new Sebring. So there are a few brightspots in the Chrysler lineup.

    I'm rooting for them here. :shades:
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    The point is that if they actually were built with exceptional materials and quality that is bulletproof not the crappy product you get today, then sales would be hard to stop.

    Oh, they'd stop alright - because the price-points would put them in the luxury category, out of reach of their intended victims, er, I mean customers.....

    Ford saw this with the Jaguar S-Type/Lincoln LS fraternal twins - the quality of the stuff in the Lincoln was Jaguar, but they couldn't sell them at the price they needed to, because they were Lincolns, and not all that good looking either.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    I hear you. I had an '03 LS great car and not do good looking. And residual dropped like the value of Chrysler Corp.!

    That is the issue with the US. Out side of the late '60's and some here and there nice looking models, the seeds were sown for the results we see today.

    There is no soul in Detroit anymore!

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    Not so fast....

    Take this car company, please


    "The sale of Chrysler will be a wrenching but much-needed step for the U.S. auto industry," says Jim Ostroff in Kiplinger.com. Chrysler, General Motors, and Ford need to slash the cost of their unionized work forces to "compete with foreign brands," and Cerberus will be a "catalyst for change." If the United Auto Workers refuse to "scrap" costly health-care and pension benefits, Cerberus "will simply walk away, leaving Chrysler's future in grave doubt."

    The official line is that Cerberus is paying $7.4 billion for 80 percent of Chrysler, says Allan Sloan in The Washington Post (free registration required), but hardly any of the money is going to DaimlerChrysler. In fact, Daimler is pumping so much money back into the struggling U.S. automaker that it is essentially paying Cerberus to "cart Chrysler away" like "an old junker." Daimler paid $36 billion to buy Chrysler in 1998, but that turned out to be one of the all-time "deals from hell."

    I would continue to say away from Chrysler for now...

    Regards,
    OW
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,687
    is a smokescreen. Of that money, most goes to Chrysler rather than Daimler. Between the money promised to Chrysler by Daimler and Cerberus for various financial obligations and future product development, Daimler is actually paying Cerberus more than $600 million to take Chrysler off their hands. Read the press release. And good riddance to bad rubbish is what they're saying back in Germany. Their shareholders over there have been screaming bloody murder for well over a year about the "Chrysler division".

    I notice Dodge is now running this fairly pathetic TV ad promoting their fuel economy? Really? Fuel economy at Dodge? Apparently the 28 mpg rating of the Charger V-6 and the 32 mpg of the Caliber is worth celebrating. Not in my book...in fact it perfectly highlights one of the reasons Dodge and Chrysler are in a bad slump, no fuel-efficient models.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • wtd44wtd44 Posts: 1,211
    Cerberus is not a pack of fools. Look forward to seeing Chrysler leading a dying American industry into the path of sustaining health.
Sign In or Register to comment.