Well, I guess the GM ignition controversy is going big-time now. The other day I saw a commercial for an accident chaser er, I mean lawfirm saying to call "1-800-4-BAD-CAR" or something like that if you have an affected car, were involved in a collision, etc. It was along the lines of those firms firms that say if you or your son took Risperdal and grew man-boobs, had a pelvic mesh implant and got sick, died, etc, "If you have a phone, you have a lawyer!" type ads.
BTW, the National DeSoto club used to put out a pretty good newsletter as well. I let my membership lapse years ago, so I dunno what it's like these days.
@Stever@Edmunds said:
lol, how do you know it's the "real" Tyson though? Can you trust the pvetting? Can you do the math?
I doubt too many folks can do the math like Tyson can do it.
I don't think anyone here would be gullible to think with any certainty that the one posting under a name is the actual person, but as you stated, there are a bit more legal hoops for someone to jump through if they start implying that they're someone they're not.
For that fact, if you call anyone on the phone, how can you be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN you're soaking to who you think you are?
Of course, you can't, but you likely feel the odds are better that you are, especially if you're the one originating the call.
But, let's be honest... Even when the experts are the actual ones talking or posting, they aren't necessarily correct.
That's where common sense comes into play. If I'm following a poster on the "official" Hayden Planetarium forum, I stand a pretty good chance of it being, at a minimum, a posting authorized by Neil Tyson if its posted under his name.
Likewise, if I'm following a poster with the last name "Edmunds" on this forum, who also claims to be part of the Edmunds family that started this company, chances are its probably the real deal...
andre, I enjoy the marque-specific publications for deep-down info one doesn't normally get from a newsstand mag. I've gotten so tired of general old-car mags being so error-riddled--sheesh, do a bit of fact-checking! LOL My one general-old-car guilty pleasure is Hemmings Classic Car...they do stuff on cars you might not expect (e.g., '57 Chevys and '65 Mustangs might not be on the cover for a whole year!!!!), nice photography, and cheap to subscribe.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
@uplanderguy said:
andre, I enjoy the marque-specific publications for deep-down info one doesn't normally get from a newsstand mag. I've gotten so tired of general old-car mags being so error-riddled--sheesh, do a bit of fact-checking! LOL My one general-old-car guilty pleasure is Hemmings Classic Car...they do stuff on cars you might not expect (e.g., '57 Chevys and '65 Mustangs might not be on the cover for a whole year!!!!), nice photography, and cheap to subscribe.
And it's viewable online. I believe they have an online only subscription. I have subscribed for several years and occasionally look up an older article online. The photography quality is stunning. I pass my paper copies on to a friend with a 64 Ford Galaxy convertible. I hope he passes them on to someone else.
"[T]he Brownstown investment is targeted at “for next generation lithium-ion battery production as well as other future battery systems.”
The announcement comes as GM is in a competition with Silicon Valley electric vehicle maker Tesla Motors to produce an affordable pure electric car. Both companies have said they plan to deliver such a vehicle within three years."
That could help answer the question of whether you need a dealer network to sell EVs.
@imidazol97 said:
Even though we had one when I was growing up (a Custom), I really prefer the "correct" spelling and write Galaxy half the time too.
Either way it's spelled, anyone of age during that era knows the car being discussed.
I had a high school fried who had one, and I have a lot of fond memories of that car. It was a deep dark blue outside, but for the life of me, I couldn't tell you the color of the interior.
Funny how some things stick with you for decades, yet others fade away. Since I spent quite a bit of time riding in it, I'd think I'd be able to remember the interior color...
Ours was white with a blue interior. My brother would cruise around after dark, especially on Friday nights, and pull up behind cars and freak 'em out. All the cops in our area had white Galaxies.
And yet again, we're back into the cars of last century. I guess a Focus just doesn't raise anyone's blood pressure these days.
"[T]he Brownstown investment is targeted at “for next generation lithium-ion battery production as well as other future battery systems.”
The announcement comes as GM is in a competition with Silicon Valley electric vehicle maker Tesla Motors to produce an affordable pure electric car. Both companies have said they plan to deliver such a vehicle within three years."
That could help answer the question of whether you need a dealer network to sell EVs.
@busiris said:
Either way it's spelled, anyone of age during that era knows the car being discussed.
Yeah, but trust me, as a contractor for NASA, they would definitely notice it when I'd accidentally mis-type it as "Galaxie"! And yeah, the spell checker will underline it, but the presentations I put together are so riddled with NASA-ese and acronyms and such that there are redlines all over the place, so it's easy for it to slip through!
We had a 1964 Galaxie 4 door sedan when I was a little kid. Granddad bought it for us, so we'd have an extra car, when I was about 3 years old, for something like $75. It need a new starter or alternator, one of the two, which Granddad was able to replace with ease. Dad had a habit of buying junky cars with stick shifts that, even when they did run, Mom couldn't drive. So we had Mom's good car, Dad's hooptie, and the Galaxie. Dad was supposed to drive the Galaxie, but he hated Fords so he'd tend to drive Mom's car...a '68 Impala 4-door hardtop and then a '75 LeMans coupe, and Mom tended to drive the Galaxie.
As a kid, I hated the car, I think partly because Dad hated Fords, but Granddad (Mom's Dad) hated them too...even though he found this one for us! I guess he still knew a good deal when he saw it.
It was a decent car though. I don't think anything serious ever went wrong with it. After Mom and Dad got divorced, we didn't need it anymore, so it got sold to the mother of a friend of the family, and I think she wrecked it. It was a bright medium blue, as I recall.
And yeah, I agree, "Galaxie" was a cool name, that I think should make a comeback. Although I guess it could sound a bit too 1950's rocket-age, and date itself? I think "Fairlane" and "Falcon" were good names as well.
IIRC, 64 Ford's had a good reputation like the 55. Although I always liked the 63. I always thought Galaxie was a very good name choice for Ford's Impala fighter. It came out in the Sputnik era of '59 having some very nice Thunderbird lines inside and out. The car was quite hot in the GM dominated Chicago market that year. I think the controversial '60 model kind of put a bit of a damper on it though, and I think one could argue that the 61 and 62 were kind of blah, but it recovered for 63/64 helped by the XL models and then only faded in 65 because of the new LTD.
I think the '61-62 Fords are handsome, in a conservative sort of way. The Chevies were a bit more youthful and sporty, but at least they weren't so over-the-top as the Plymouths and Dodge Darts in those years! I think the '63 Ford is a beautiful car...that year, IMO at least, it took on a bit more of a youthful, aggressive look. I don't like the '64 as much as the '63, but I don't have anything against it. FWIW, I'm not that crazy about the '63-64 Chevy, either, although I think the '61 and '62 are beautiful cars.
I do hate, though, how they tended to downgrade model names in those days. Names like Bel Air, Fairlane, and Galaxie were once top line cars, but they would come out with a new name at the top, drop off the cheapest name at the bottom, and then move the existing names down a notch. I guess Plymouth was the only one that didn't do that, at least once they settled on "Fury" for all their big cars, and would just go with the Fury I, II, III, and VIP nomenclature.
Toyota announced five recalls on Wednesday, affecting a total of 6.39 million vehicles globally.
The recalls cover 27 Toyota (TM) models -- including Camry, Corolla, Matrix and Highlander -- the Pontiac Vibe and the Subaru Trezia. Some of the vehicles were made as early as 2004.
Toyota plans to inspect and, if necessary, replace parts including seat rails, steering column brackets, engine starters, windshield wiper motors and air bag cables, the company said in a statement.
The announcement affects around 2 million vehicles in North America, which may be experiencing problems with an air bag cable and seat rails.
Good for them. Pro-active. If you find something wrong, own up to it and fix it. I had a similar recall a couple of years ago for my Vibe. Never experienced the problem but it was called in and fixed free. I think more car companies are realizing this is the way to go.
berri, I have an older friend who was the son of a Studebaker/Packard/Nash/Willys dealer in the '50's, whose Dad became a Ford dealer in the mid-sixties. He has worked on all kinds of cars for decades, and he has said the '63-64 big Fords were really well-built cars, maybe even exceeding what he considers to be the well-built Chevys of the same period.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Are problems back to 2004 in cars being recalled in 2014, really being proactive? Or, is it potential 'face saving' at the last minute; i.e., 'let's not have this GM thing happen to us; we need to get on the stick'? Hard to say of course.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
@uplanderguy said:
Are problems back to 2004 in cars being recalled in 2014, really being proactive? Or, is it potential 'face saving' at the last minute; i.e., 'let's not have this GM thing happen to us; we need to get on the stick'? Hard to say of course.
They're doing the Friday Data Dump as is done in politics. They are hoping to mitigate the damage from the carefully worded admissions. I note seat rails are one of the problems. Sounds like they used a cheap part; it might not be cited as causing an accident (per toyota's words) but sounds as though it could let go during an accident causing loss of any further ability of the driver to regain some control of the vehicle or to cause more injury since the seat is free to follow Newton's Law of Intertia.
I'm watching to see if the faults of toyota here are being excused by posters who would never have said anything mitigating GM's culpability in a recall action.
However, it's as I've said occasionally, they all put on their wheels one lug nut at a time. All cars have some problems. Some problems are able to be covered up and not necessitate a recall; some of the distinctions between having been able to do "secret" recalls or warranties that are whispered about. Those may not end up as public knowledge. May be the Civic engine problems for years were handled that way but now have ended up in a recall. But that recall is under the Firestone Rule which was used for their tires back in the 70s. They delayed the recall until most of the tires had failed and been replaced; so the recall cost much less than if it were to have been done in a timely manner.
As I said, GM did a similar recall a couple of years ago involving different cars including my Vibe. Good for them in that instance too -- no accidents had been reported but they discovered it. Why didn't they in the Cobalt case I don't understand.
Okay, with all the recalls, class action lawsuits, and even congressional investigations, here's the latest business plan that the manufacturers should adopt:
Free car inspections every ten years (or quicker intervals). The manufacturers track warranty claims and repair work done at their dealers, so they should have a pretty good idea of what parts are failing, even if they aren't failing "prematurely".
Think of the upsell possibilities - Mrs. Jones, your CR-V has a known issue with the seat rails so we've inspected yours for free. Yours are fine but you should check them annually (OMG, you're going to die!). Would you like an oil change? We'll do a free tire rotation if you get one. BTW, your back seat is pretty ratty from hauling those dogs around, here's a $500 coupon off an shiny new CR-V.
@suydam said:
As I said, GM did a similar recall a couple of years ago involving different cars including my Vibe. Good for them in that instance too -- no accidents had been reported but they discovered it. Why didn't they in the Cobalt case I don't understand.
It's just like toyota's SUA problems where they didn't properly report the incidents. As I recall, they reported them as short term events lasting on a second or so, rather than the killer full throttle events some of them potentially were. Why? But they had succeeded by doing the Firestone Tire stall with the sludge, I mean gel, problem they had from engine design. People did lose money. People lost money trading in cars that had bad engines. Some people may have been compensated post facto when toyo finally acquiesced and agreed to recall if people could prove they had changed oil one time per year. I don't understand why they didn't admit early on they had PCV flow and hot spot problems with the engine design..
I don't understand why they didn't fix those things right away. Of course, the same could apply to GM.
@suydam said:
Good for them. Pro-active. If you find something wrong, own up to it and fix it. I had a similar recall a couple of years ago for my Vibe. Never experienced the problem but it was called in and fixed free. I think more car companies are realizing this is the way to go.
No doubt Toyota is going to recall more cars after the billion $ that they had to lay out for the floor mat/accelerator thing. It is abou just like any company would after they got hit with that big of a fine.
The big problem was Toyota felt that floor mat/accelerator interference was not their fault, as using the mat clips and using only one floor mat is common sense, and the warnings are also in the owner's manuals. But they should have known better that people would not use their heads in todays "it was not my fault" society. I guess I should have sued Ford over a floor mat/accelerator interference problem I had decades ago. But no, I just used my head and bought some clips at the autoparts store.
I predict we will continue to see more and more recalls from all the makers. This is not really a bad thing, except all car prices will rise as a result. Funny how the "gm" hate group still believes (and keeps praying!) that it was electronics that failed. This has never been proven.
I hope that gm gets out of the huge mess that they are in and comes back. I don't wish this on any company. I wish gm and gm owners the best. Sad to here about the 13 confirmed deaths due to the switches. It is a shame that the actions of probably a few caused the deaths, but I think gm will come out okay in the long run.
@Stever@Edmunds said:
Okay, with all the recalls, class action lawsuits, and even congressional investigations, here's the latest business plan that the manufacturers should adopt:
I'd make it against the law for the politicians to have congressional hearings. Just grandstanding for reelection.
Think of the upsell possibilities - Mrs. Jones, your CR-V has a known issue with the seat rails so we've inspected yours for free. Yours are fine but you should check them annually (OMG, you're going to die!). Would you like an oil change? We'll do a free tire rotation if you get one. BTW, your back seat is pretty ratty from hauling those dogs around, here's a $500 coupon off an shiny new CR-V.
Right on. This model of getting the cars in for regular servicing at the dealership allowed them to fix known problems that hadn't risen to recall status without the owner realizing the gravity of the repair.
"Mr. Flannelshirt, we replaced your ignition switch while we were doing your 30,000 mile check at no cost. The earlier model was having a few problems for some folks, but yours is good to go. See you in 8,000 miles for your next oil change! Be sure to have your 60K check when your Subaru gets there. Have a good day!"
I wonder if the silent recall is done at the premium vehicle stores. Around here they advertise they come get your Infinity/toyota lexus/MB and leave a loaner for you at your home. They keep it for the day for that oil change. Good time to repair those flawed parts.
There's been posts about "silent" recalls on the forums for years, especially from Honda owners.
But what about getting a software upgrade "on the sly" when you get your oil changed at the dealer? That's not really a recall or even a TSB. It could simply be maintenance.
(@uplanderguy, sounds like two fires reported, no accidents in the current Toyota recall).
@imidazol97 said:
I wonder if the silent recall is done at the premium vehicle stores. Around here they advertise they come get your Infinity/toyota lexus/MB and leave a loaner for you at your home. They keep it for the day for that oil change. Good time to repair those flawed parts.
Maybe. But it could also be something going on behind the scenes at even your run of the mill Chevy store as well. Heck, my buddy was a service mgr. at a GM dealer and according to him, they did a lot of that stuff. Now whether there was any actual recall coverup or they were just being proactive who knows...
But my point is, with the internet available, I'm sure there are people in every business (Not just cars) who have techs scouring for potential reoccurring problems and trends. It doesn't take much investigation to find out what problems are commonplace and how many people are affected. And heck, if they are replacing a part on my car because there is some sort of "trend" that it might be faulty, then go for it! If it doesn't cost me anything, why should I complain? Obviously it isn't being done for free on the manufacturers end so obviously they are going to be taking the hit financially taking care of their screwup! And so what, they replaced my widget with a brand new one that has been most likely engineered not to fail the same way as the original lol...
Remember when Honda tweaked the software in their hybrid to preserve battery life and wound up hammering the mpg? Sometimes it's better just to leave well enough alone.
@Stever@Edmunds said:
Remember when Honda tweaked the software in their hybrid to preserve battery life and wound up hammering the mpg? Sometimes it's better just to leave well enough alone.
Agreed. Conspiracy theory in me says that they did that once everyone read articles about the questionable and undetermined lifespan of batteries in the Prius... I find that Honda gets a lot of their "lessons learned" changes thru what happens at Toyota... Like the design of the Insight being eerily similar to the Prius or the 98 Accord being eerily similar to the design of the 97 Camry for instance...
Prii have been out more than a decade (17 years actually) - if the Toyota motive batteries were failing at big rates, the online community would be all over it, just like gel or failed transmissions (pick your brand). I think Honda was going by internal reporting - that tells me their hybrid wasn't designed or built as well as Toyota's. The Insight certainly didn't sell well and is going away this year. Don't hear much about the motive batteries failing on other Honda hybrids though.
@Stever@Edmunds said:
if the Toyota motive batteries were failing at big rates, the online community would be all over it, just like gel or failed transmissions (pick your brand). I think Honda was going by internal reporting - that tells me their hybrid wasn't designed or built as well as Toyota's.
The public information about batteries failing or deteriorating in Prius's has been trivial. Two questions in my mind are did toyota make changes in the batteries sold in the US after they went into service as they did have any failures AND did toyota sell Prius's elsewhere or at least the platform so they they were Alpha and Beta tested somewhere else? Both would be good business practices.
And if I recall, some car models were sold elsewhere for a time and then when the wrinkles were ironed out (and most/all cars have wrinkles) they were sold here. That gives the appearance and the reality to the US buyer that the cars indeed were nearly problem free.
I hope they've made some changes in the batteries over the years. After 17 years Toyota should have kept working to improve them while whacking the production costs.
The Prius is about the only platform out there that reminds me of the old VW Bugs - remember the VW ads noting little outward appearance changes but lots of internal improvements?
The Prius was first sold just in the Japanese market. And who's to say that's not a pickier group of owners?
I think this just shows how Toyota has become Americanized, like most of the other Asian firms. It's MBA's are just like Detroit's, worry about the stockholder and investors, not the customers. This is how cheap parts and design come into play.
I could post fifty comments on the Toyota recalls of today for the next two weeks, but that would be churlish. This is my one and only comment on them.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
It appears that, for some folks, recalls are a lose-lose proposition...
Proactively recall, and get slammed for trying to hide problems.
Wait until problems arise, and get slammed for being unresponsive and insensitive to the customer.
I don't think we can have it both ways. Either we encourage problems (and, yes, there will always be problems) to be fixed before they cause cost, injuries and deaths, or we wait until after tragedy strikes some unsuspecting consumers.
That's why Consumer Reports doesn't figure recalls into their assessment of reliability. They want to encourage companies to issue recalls once a problem is discovered, not to cover them up because they are afraid of possible bad publicity. Today's vehicles are very complex, and some problems don't become evident until later on, so recalls are a fact of life.
Really, the only thing about a recall that is negative IMHO, is that they usually require an unscheduled service stop. Even I can't say they're completely separate from "quality" though, as they are usually the result of a poor-quality part--no matter whose recall it is.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Here are five takeaways from the hearings and what we know so far from the actions of GM and government officials.
The GM bailout failed and $10 billion in taxpayer money has been squandered.
Starting in 2009, the U.S. Treasury put $51 billion into General Motors -- through loans and stock purchases -- and ultimately lost $10 billion. Part of President Obama's strategy to put GM through "quick wash" bankruptcy, this left most of the existing management in place.
Managements' mediocre commitment to quality and safety helped put GM in financial trouble a decade ago, and now we see that problem continue unabated.
Had GM been forced through conventional bankruptcy reorganization, private investors would have replaced much of the existing senior management with more customer-focused leadership. Better quality-control systems to guard against issues like the ignition switch scandal could have saved lives.
GM's culture is broken. The company can't make safe cars.
GM has heavily layered and highly compartmentalized management and product-design structures. Problems like the ignition switch can be discovered by GM engineers -- as the result of customer complaints or tragic accidents -- but go unnoticed by other units and senior leadership.
All this results in top management left unaware of tragic defects, and the public driving unsafe vehicles that should have never been put on the road.
There's not much accountability for bureaucrats at the Obama White House.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration was aware of the ignition switch problem as early as 2007, but took no concrete action to protect drivers and passengers.
President Obama was quick to hold investors and company officials accountable after the 2010 BP Horizon disaster, but not nearly enough happened to the government officials charged with overseeing the project and who turned a blind eye or were simply lazy.
Now, members of Congress from both parties are livid with NHSTA about its lax response to the GM ignition switch problem, but the White House is not rushing to get to the root of accountability at NHTSA or replace the administrator.
The safety of all GM vehicles is now in question.
During the first three months of 2014, more than 6 million GM vehicles were recalled to repair product defects. Of 23 auto brands ranked by Consumer Reports for quality, GM's Chevrolet and Cadillac are 19 and 20. And the consumer watchdog only recommended for purchase about one-quarter of the models produced under those nameplates, even before this scandal broke.
If Barra did not know about the ignition switch problem in her position heading product development, purchasing and global supply chain management, what other safely issues is she unaware of -- or is she aware but not yet revealing?
Until she can certify all GM products are free of suspected but unpublicized safety defects, it is irresponsible to put a child in a GM vehicle.
U.S. media bias is whitewashing the president's culpability.
In 2008, I testified before the Senate Banking Committee that a federal bailout of the automakers would be a grave mistake.
Subsequently, after the industry recovered to profitability, I was repeatedly called by journalists asking if I would care to recant my statements.
Now, the failure of the bailout to break the GM culture of complacency toward poor quality and inattention to safety has been fully demonstrated by the ignition switch scandal. But I am not hearing from those progressive advocates of the Obama administration in the Fourth Estate.
Markets, not government ministries, should be left to discipline incompetence but that does not seem to happen in Barack Obama's America. Instead, we simply "quick wash" insolvent companies, subsidize them and let incompetent managers continue to prey on consumers.
Peter Morici is an economist and professor at the University of Maryland Robert H. Smith School of Business.
@uplanderguy said:
About floor mats--I've said it before--I could stack four mats in my Cobalt and it wouldn't touch the gas pedal.
Fine, you could do that. But the fact is Toyota's design did not allow you to do that. That was changed to give more room between floor and pedal, and the bottom of pedal was shaped differently, and people were told to use the clips to hold the mats in again. You should do this on any car, as I found out long ago. Why you would want to put in that many, I don't know. The Ford I was talking about decades ago had the original mat in, only one, but it slid forward and caused the accelerator to stick down. Fortunately, I had enough sense to safely get myself out of that situation by putting it in neutral.
The 'haters' here are those who hate GM. mcdawgg, I know you are not a regular poster here but if you are a regular viewer you would clearly see that.
I honestly see both – haters of gm, AND haters of Toyota, etc. I just say stop spewing the hate on both sides, and I am for every company doing well. Life is too short to hate a company, person, etc. Besides, it seems some people would love to see a company have problems, but they obviously forget that there are innocent, normal every-day people who are going to suffer from those problems. And if one person spews hatred, it doesn’t make it right to do the same.
I honestly hope the best for gm, Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, etc.
mcdawgg, it's about degrees....see how many mentions of GM recalls have been made by one person. I absolutely, positively, guarantee you that you won't see anything like it for any other recall here...ever. Different person, but a GM recall of less than 5,000 rates one picture posted multiple times--Honda recall of 900,000 rates a mention....by me. Everybody has a right to their opinion, but it's hard to take someone seriously when their logic is so incredibly uneven. Of course, it's anyone's right here to post whatever they want. I know that.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Actually I don't think any of those statements are true but let's talk about them by all means:
One cannot say the US "lost" money on GM because one has to account for all the safety net programs and money that would have been instituted to deal with this massive worker layoff and supplier damage.
I tend to agree, that GM culture is broken, but in fact, statistically, one could never prove in a million years that, per capita, more people die/are injured in GM cars as opposed to any other, apples to apples line of cars.
Passing the buck is a phenomenon that existed long before any Obama whitehouse....just say "the Whitehouse, 1800-2014"
US media does not favor the president and never has. This has been disproven time and time again, through cataloging hundreds of thousands of pro and con articles; even more surprising, the so-called "liberal media" offers the harshest criticisms that actually have substance. It is the presentation of rational pro and con arguments that suggest to some people a "bias", since such arguments are not extreme pro or con rants against GM, or the NY Yankees, or whatever.
If the Maryland School of Business dishes out MBAs, then that explains why it doesn't know how a business is run. GM is full of MBAs, and THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
Seems to me that the big MBA programs have become very Finance centric over the past decade or two. It has always been that the Stockholder comes first because they are the owners. However, the theory used to be that product and consumer satisfaction led to good stockholder returns over time when combined with strong corporate management. That seems to have changed in the Finance world to an emphasis on short term trading and gains, rather than longer term focus. I think the result is an over emphasis on quarterly and annual performance, so executive bonuses seem to be set up that way frequently. The ultimate result is all too often dumb short term moves like too much cost cutting to pump up the short term results. This is true pretty much throughout Wall Street and certainly not limited to auto manufacturing. However, I guess we can rest knowing that the rest of the world seems to be following our newfound approach to corporate finance and management. So big surprise we're seeing these messes at Toyota now. A lot of those vehicles were developed during the non family Wanatabe (however you spell it) leadership. I'm pretty sure that he was an American educated MBA (Harvard I believe).
Comments
Well, I guess the GM ignition controversy is going big-time now. The other day I saw a commercial for an accident chaser er, I mean lawfirm saying to call "1-800-4-BAD-CAR" or something like that if you have an affected car, were involved in a collision, etc. It was along the lines of those firms firms that say if you or your son took Risperdal and grew man-boobs, had a pelvic mesh implant and got sick, died, etc, "If you have a phone, you have a lawyer!" type ads.
BTW, the National DeSoto club used to put out a pretty good newsletter as well. I let my membership lapse years ago, so I dunno what it's like these days.
I doubt too many folks can do the math like Tyson can do it.
I don't think anyone here would be gullible to think with any certainty that the one posting under a name is the actual person, but as you stated, there are a bit more legal hoops for someone to jump through if they start implying that they're someone they're not.
For that fact, if you call anyone on the phone, how can you be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN you're soaking to who you think you are?
Of course, you can't, but you likely feel the odds are better that you are, especially if you're the one originating the call.
But, let's be honest... Even when the experts are the actual ones talking or posting, they aren't necessarily correct.
That's where common sense comes into play. If I'm following a poster on the "official" Hayden Planetarium forum, I stand a pretty good chance of it being, at a minimum, a posting authorized by Neil Tyson if its posted under his name.
Likewise, if I'm following a poster with the last name "Edmunds" on this forum, who also claims to be part of the Edmunds family that started this company, chances are its probably the real deal...
Right - trust but verify.
andre, I enjoy the marque-specific publications for deep-down info one doesn't normally get from a newsstand mag. I've gotten so tired of general old-car mags being so error-riddled--sheesh, do a bit of fact-checking! LOL My one general-old-car guilty pleasure is Hemmings Classic Car...they do stuff on cars you might not expect (e.g., '57 Chevys and '65 Mustangs might not be on the cover for a whole year!!!!), nice photography, and cheap to subscribe.
And it's viewable online. I believe they have an online only subscription. I have subscribed for several years and occasionally look up an older article online. The photography quality is stunning. I pass my paper copies on to a friend with a 64 Ford Galaxy convertible. I hope he passes them on to someone else.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Galaxie. We just had this conversation.
GM is cranking up the Voltage.
GM boosting investment at Volt assembly plant and Brownstown battery factory (Detroit Free Press)
"[T]he Brownstown investment is targeted at “for next generation lithium-ion battery production as well as other future battery systems.”
The announcement comes as GM is in a competition with Silicon Valley electric vehicle maker Tesla Motors to produce an affordable pure electric car. Both companies have said they plan to deliver such a vehicle within three years."
That could help answer the question of whether you need a dealer network to sell EVs.
It passed my spell checker on FireFox.
Even though we had one when I was growing up (a Custom), I really prefer the "correct" spelling and write Galaxy half the time too.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Either way it's spelled, anyone of age during that era knows the car being discussed.
I had a high school fried who had one, and I have a lot of fond memories of that car. It was a deep dark blue outside, but for the life of me, I couldn't tell you the color of the interior.
Funny how some things stick with you for decades, yet others fade away. Since I spent quite a bit of time riding in it, I'd think I'd be able to remember the interior color...
Ours was white with a blue interior. My brother would cruise around after dark, especially on Friday nights, and pull up behind cars and freak 'em out. All the cops in our area had white Galaxies.
And yet again, we're back into the cars of last century. I guess a Focus just doesn't raise anyone's blood pressure these days.
My first car was a dark blue Galaxie. There's another heritage name that should come back. Ford Europe had the "Galaxy", a MPV type thing.
I think it has already answered it.
Yeah, but trust me, as a contractor for NASA, they would definitely notice it when I'd accidentally mis-type it as "Galaxie"! And yeah, the spell checker will underline it, but the presentations I put together are so riddled with NASA-ese and acronyms and such that there are redlines all over the place, so it's easy for it to slip through!
We had a 1964 Galaxie 4 door sedan when I was a little kid. Granddad bought it for us, so we'd have an extra car, when I was about 3 years old, for something like $75. It need a new starter or alternator, one of the two, which Granddad was able to replace with ease. Dad had a habit of buying junky cars with stick shifts that, even when they did run, Mom couldn't drive. So we had Mom's good car, Dad's hooptie, and the Galaxie. Dad was supposed to drive the Galaxie, but he hated Fords so he'd tend to drive Mom's car...a '68 Impala 4-door hardtop and then a '75 LeMans coupe, and Mom tended to drive the Galaxie.
As a kid, I hated the car, I think partly because Dad hated Fords, but Granddad (Mom's Dad) hated them too...even though he found this one for us! I guess he still knew a good deal when he saw it.
It was a decent car though. I don't think anything serious ever went wrong with it. After Mom and Dad got divorced, we didn't need it anymore, so it got sold to the mother of a friend of the family, and I think she wrecked it. It was a bright medium blue, as I recall.
And yeah, I agree, "Galaxie" was a cool name, that I think should make a comeback. Although I guess it could sound a bit too 1950's rocket-age, and date itself? I think "Fairlane" and "Falcon" were good names as well.
IIRC, 64 Ford's had a good reputation like the 55. Although I always liked the 63. I always thought Galaxie was a very good name choice for Ford's Impala fighter. It came out in the Sputnik era of '59 having some very nice Thunderbird lines inside and out. The car was quite hot in the GM dominated Chicago market that year. I think the controversial '60 model kind of put a bit of a damper on it though, and I think one could argue that the 61 and 62 were kind of blah, but it recovered for 63/64 helped by the XL models and then only faded in 65 because of the new LTD.
I think the '61-62 Fords are handsome, in a conservative sort of way. The Chevies were a bit more youthful and sporty, but at least they weren't so over-the-top as the Plymouths and Dodge Darts in those years! I think the '63 Ford is a beautiful car...that year, IMO at least, it took on a bit more of a youthful, aggressive look. I don't like the '64 as much as the '63, but I don't have anything against it. FWIW, I'm not that crazy about the '63-64 Chevy, either, although I think the '61 and '62 are beautiful cars.
I do hate, though, how they tended to downgrade model names in those days. Names like Bel Air, Fairlane, and Galaxie were once top line cars, but they would come out with a new name at the top, drop off the cheapest name at the bottom, and then move the existing names down a notch. I guess Plymouth was the only one that didn't do that, at least once they settled on "Fury" for all their big cars, and would just go with the Fury I, II, III, and VIP nomenclature.
Toyota announced five recalls on Wednesday, affecting a total of 6.39 million vehicles globally.
The recalls cover 27 Toyota (TM) models -- including Camry, Corolla, Matrix and Highlander -- the Pontiac Vibe and the Subaru Trezia. Some of the vehicles were made as early as 2004.
Toyota plans to inspect and, if necessary, replace parts including seat rails, steering column brackets, engine starters, windshield wiper motors and air bag cables, the company said in a statement.
The announcement affects around 2 million vehicles in North America, which may be experiencing problems with an air bag cable and seat rails.
Good for them. Pro-active. If you find something wrong, own up to it and fix it. I had a similar recall a couple of years ago for my Vibe. Never experienced the problem but it was called in and fixed free. I think more car companies are realizing this is the way to go.
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
berri, I have an older friend who was the son of a Studebaker/Packard/Nash/Willys dealer in the '50's, whose Dad became a Ford dealer in the mid-sixties. He has worked on all kinds of cars for decades, and he has said the '63-64 big Fords were really well-built cars, maybe even exceeding what he considers to be the well-built Chevys of the same period.
Are problems back to 2004 in cars being recalled in 2014, really being proactive? Or, is it potential 'face saving' at the last minute; i.e., 'let's not have this GM thing happen to us; we need to get on the stick'? Hard to say of course.
They're doing the Friday Data Dump as is done in politics. They are hoping to mitigate the damage from the carefully worded admissions. I note seat rails are one of the problems. Sounds like they used a cheap part; it might not be cited as causing an accident (per toyota's words) but sounds as though it could let go during an accident causing loss of any further ability of the driver to regain some control of the vehicle or to cause more injury since the seat is free to follow Newton's Law of Intertia.
I'm watching to see if the faults of toyota here are being excused by posters who would never have said anything mitigating GM's culpability in a recall action.
However, it's as I've said occasionally, they all put on their wheels one lug nut at a time. All cars have some problems. Some problems are able to be covered up and not necessitate a recall; some of the distinctions between having been able to do "secret" recalls or warranties that are whispered about. Those may not end up as public knowledge. May be the Civic engine problems for years were handled that way but now have ended up in a recall. But that recall is under the Firestone Rule which was used for their tires back in the 70s. They delayed the recall until most of the tires had failed and been replaced; so the recall cost much less than if it were to have been done in a timely manner.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
As I said, GM did a similar recall a couple of years ago involving different cars including my Vibe. Good for them in that instance too -- no accidents had been reported but they discovered it. Why didn't they in the Cobalt case I don't understand.
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
Have there been no accidents of any kind reported in the Toyota recalls? I haven't looked; guess I can/should.
Okay, with all the recalls, class action lawsuits, and even congressional investigations, here's the latest business plan that the manufacturers should adopt:
Free car inspections every ten years (or quicker intervals). The manufacturers track warranty claims and repair work done at their dealers, so they should have a pretty good idea of what parts are failing, even if they aren't failing "prematurely".
Think of the upsell possibilities - Mrs. Jones, your CR-V has a known issue with the seat rails so we've inspected yours for free. Yours are fine but you should check them annually (OMG, you're going to die!). Would you like an oil change? We'll do a free tire rotation if you get one. BTW, your back seat is pretty ratty from hauling those dogs around, here's a $500 coupon off an shiny new CR-V.
It's just like toyota's SUA problems where they didn't properly report the incidents. As I recall, they reported them as short term events lasting on a second or so, rather than the killer full throttle events some of them potentially were. Why? But they had succeeded by doing the Firestone Tire stall with the sludge, I mean gel, problem they had from engine design. People did lose money. People lost money trading in cars that had bad engines. Some people may have been compensated post facto when toyo finally acquiesced and agreed to recall if people could prove they had changed oil one time per year. I don't understand why they didn't admit early on they had PCV flow and hot spot problems with the engine design..
I don't understand why they didn't fix those things right away. Of course, the same could apply to GM.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
No doubt Toyota is going to recall more cars after the billion $ that they had to lay out for the floor mat/accelerator thing. It is abou just like any company would after they got hit with that big of a fine.
The big problem was Toyota felt that floor mat/accelerator interference was not their fault, as using the mat clips and using only one floor mat is common sense, and the warnings are also in the owner's manuals. But they should have known better that people would not use their heads in todays "it was not my fault" society. I guess I should have sued Ford over a floor mat/accelerator interference problem I had decades ago. But no, I just used my head and bought some clips at the autoparts store.
I predict we will continue to see more and more recalls from all the makers. This is not really a bad thing, except all car prices will rise as a result. Funny how the "gm" hate group still believes (and keeps praying!) that it was electronics that failed. This has never been proven.
I hope that gm gets out of the huge mess that they are in and comes back. I don't wish this on any company. I wish gm and gm owners the best. Sad to here about the 13 confirmed deaths due to the switches. It is a shame that the actions of probably a few caused the deaths, but I think gm will come out okay in the long run.
I'd make it against the law for the politicians to have congressional hearings. Just grandstanding for reelection.
Right on. This model of getting the cars in for regular servicing at the dealership allowed them to fix known problems that hadn't risen to recall status without the owner realizing the gravity of the repair.
"Mr. Flannelshirt, we replaced your ignition switch while we were doing your 30,000 mile check at no cost. The earlier model was having a few problems for some folks, but yours is good to go. See you in 8,000 miles for your next oil change! Be sure to have your 60K check when your Subaru gets there. Have a good day!"
I wonder if the silent recall is done at the premium vehicle stores. Around here they advertise they come get your Infinity/toyota lexus/MB and leave a loaner for you at your home. They keep it for the day for that oil change. Good time to repair those flawed parts.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
There's been posts about "silent" recalls on the forums for years, especially from Honda owners.
But what about getting a software upgrade "on the sly" when you get your oil changed at the dealer? That's not really a recall or even a TSB. It could simply be maintenance.
(@uplanderguy, sounds like two fires reported, no accidents in the current Toyota recall).
Maybe. But it could also be something going on behind the scenes at even your run of the mill Chevy store as well. Heck, my buddy was a service mgr. at a GM dealer and according to him, they did a lot of that stuff. Now whether there was any actual recall coverup or they were just being proactive who knows...
But my point is, with the internet available, I'm sure there are people in every business (Not just cars) who have techs scouring for potential reoccurring problems and trends. It doesn't take much investigation to find out what problems are commonplace and how many people are affected. And heck, if they are replacing a part on my car because there is some sort of "trend" that it might be faulty, then go for it! If it doesn't cost me anything, why should I complain? Obviously it isn't being done for free on the manufacturers end so obviously they are going to be taking the hit financially taking care of their screwup! And so what, they replaced my widget with a brand new one that has been most likely engineered not to fail the same way as the original lol...
Remember when Honda tweaked the software in their hybrid to preserve battery life and wound up hammering the mpg? Sometimes it's better just to leave well enough alone.
About floor mats--I've said it before--I could stack four mats in my Cobalt and it wouldn't touch the gas pedal.
The 'haters' here are those who hate GM. mcdawgg, I know you are not a regular poster here but if you are a regular viewer you would clearly see that.
Agreed. Conspiracy theory in me says that they did that once everyone read articles about the questionable and undetermined lifespan of batteries in the Prius... I find that Honda gets a lot of their "lessons learned" changes thru what happens at Toyota... Like the design of the Insight being eerily similar to the Prius or the 98 Accord being eerily similar to the design of the 97 Camry for instance...
Prii have been out more than a decade (17 years actually) - if the Toyota motive batteries were failing at big rates, the online community would be all over it, just like gel or failed transmissions (pick your brand). I think Honda was going by internal reporting - that tells me their hybrid wasn't designed or built as well as Toyota's. The Insight certainly didn't sell well and is going away this year. Don't hear much about the motive batteries failing on other Honda hybrids though.
The public information about batteries failing or deteriorating in Prius's has been trivial. Two questions in my mind are did toyota make changes in the batteries sold in the US after they went into service as they did have any failures AND did toyota sell Prius's elsewhere or at least the platform so they they were Alpha and Beta tested somewhere else? Both would be good business practices.
And if I recall, some car models were sold elsewhere for a time and then when the wrinkles were ironed out (and most/all cars have wrinkles) they were sold here. That gives the appearance and the reality to the US buyer that the cars indeed were nearly problem free.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I hope they've made some changes in the batteries over the years. After 17 years Toyota should have kept working to improve them while whacking the production costs.
The Prius is about the only platform out there that reminds me of the old VW Bugs - remember the VW ads noting little outward appearance changes but lots of internal improvements?
The Prius was first sold just in the Japanese market. And who's to say that's not a pickier group of owners?
I think this just shows how Toyota has become Americanized, like most of the other Asian firms. It's MBA's are just like Detroit's, worry about the stockholder and investors, not the customers. This is how cheap parts and design come into play.
I could post fifty comments on the Toyota recalls of today for the next two weeks, but that would be churlish.
This is my one and only comment on them.
It appears that, for some folks, recalls are a lose-lose proposition...
Proactively recall, and get slammed for trying to hide problems.
Wait until problems arise, and get slammed for being unresponsive and insensitive to the customer.
I don't think we can have it both ways. Either we encourage problems (and, yes, there will always be problems) to be fixed before they cause cost, injuries and deaths, or we wait until after tragedy strikes some unsuspecting consumers.
I'm leaning towards the proactive stance...
That's why Consumer Reports doesn't figure recalls into their assessment of reliability. They want to encourage companies to issue recalls once a problem is discovered, not to cover them up because they are afraid of possible bad publicity. Today's vehicles are very complex, and some problems don't become evident until later on, so recalls are a fact of life.
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
Really, the only thing about a recall that is negative IMHO, is that they usually require an unscheduled service stop. Even I can't say they're completely separate from "quality" though, as they are usually the result of a poor-quality part--no matter whose recall it is.
Unless the recall was covered up for 10 years and potentially criminal.
Here are five takeaways from the hearings and what we know so far from the actions of GM and government officials.
Starting in 2009, the U.S. Treasury put $51 billion into General Motors -- through loans and stock purchases -- and ultimately lost $10 billion. Part of President Obama's strategy to put GM through "quick wash" bankruptcy, this left most of the existing management in place.
Managements' mediocre commitment to quality and safety helped put GM in financial trouble a decade ago, and now we see that problem continue unabated.
Had GM been forced through conventional bankruptcy reorganization, private investors would have replaced much of the existing senior management with more customer-focused leadership. Better quality-control systems to guard against issues like the ignition switch scandal could have saved lives.
GM has heavily layered and highly compartmentalized management and product-design structures. Problems like the ignition switch can be discovered by GM engineers -- as the result of customer complaints or tragic accidents -- but go unnoticed by other units and senior leadership.
All this results in top management left unaware of tragic defects, and the public driving unsafe vehicles that should have never been put on the road.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration was aware of the ignition switch problem as early as 2007, but took no concrete action to protect drivers and passengers.
President Obama was quick to hold investors and company officials accountable after the 2010 BP Horizon disaster, but not nearly enough happened to the government officials charged with overseeing the project and who turned a blind eye or were simply lazy.
Now, members of Congress from both parties are livid with NHSTA about its lax response to the GM ignition switch problem, but the White House is not rushing to get to the root of accountability at NHTSA or replace the administrator.
During the first three months of 2014, more than 6 million GM vehicles were recalled to repair product defects. Of 23 auto brands ranked by Consumer Reports for quality, GM's Chevrolet and Cadillac are 19 and 20. And the consumer watchdog only recommended for purchase about one-quarter of the models produced under those nameplates, even before this scandal broke.
If Barra did not know about the ignition switch problem in her position heading product development, purchasing and global supply chain management, what other safely issues is she unaware of -- or is she aware but not yet revealing?
Until she can certify all GM products are free of suspected but unpublicized safety defects, it is irresponsible to put a child in a GM vehicle.
In 2008, I testified before the Senate Banking Committee that a federal bailout of the automakers would be a grave mistake.
Subsequently, after the industry recovered to profitability, I was repeatedly called by journalists asking if I would care to recant my statements.
Now, the failure of the bailout to break the GM culture of complacency toward poor quality and inattention to safety has been fully demonstrated by the ignition switch scandal. But I am not hearing from those progressive advocates of the Obama administration in the Fourth Estate.
Markets, not government ministries, should be left to discipline incompetence but that does not seem to happen in Barack Obama's America. Instead, we simply "quick wash" insolvent companies, subsidize them and let incompetent managers continue to prey on consumers.
Peter Morici is an economist and professor at the University of Maryland Robert H. Smith School of Business.
Fine, you could do that. But the fact is Toyota's design did not allow you to do that. That was changed to give more room between floor and pedal, and the bottom of pedal was shaped differently, and people were told to use the clips to hold the mats in again. You should do this on any car, as I found out long ago. Why you would want to put in that many, I don't know. The Ford I was talking about decades ago had the original mat in, only one, but it slid forward and caused the accelerator to stick down. Fortunately, I had enough sense to safely get myself out of that situation by putting it in neutral.
I honestly see both – haters of gm, AND haters of Toyota, etc. I just say stop spewing the hate on both sides, and I am for every company doing well. Life is too short to hate a company, person, etc. Besides, it seems some people would love to see a company have problems, but they obviously forget that there are innocent, normal every-day people who are going to suffer from those problems. And if one person spews hatred, it doesn’t make it right to do the same.
I honestly hope the best for gm, Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, etc.
Yes, Toyota and Ford also know about criminal recalls. It's very tragic, but it's not a one-way street.
mcdawgg, it's about degrees....see how many mentions of GM recalls have been made by one person. I absolutely, positively, guarantee you that you won't see anything like it for any other recall here...ever. Different person, but a GM recall of less than 5,000 rates one picture posted multiple times--Honda recall of 900,000 rates a mention....by me. Everybody has a right to their opinion, but it's hard to take someone seriously when their logic is so incredibly uneven. Of course, it's anyone's right here to post whatever they want. I know that.
Never said only GM is alone in dysfunction. Toyota = GM=VW
You would think we would hold GM to a higher "Standard"
Why?
Should a GM car be safer than a Ford or Toyota?
Speaking only for myself, I think I'd prefer ALL cars to be equally safe.
Yes. I would expect that from GM above all.
Actually I don't think any of those statements are true but let's talk about them by all means:
One cannot say the US "lost" money on GM because one has to account for all the safety net programs and money that would have been instituted to deal with this massive worker layoff and supplier damage.
I tend to agree, that GM culture is broken, but in fact, statistically, one could never prove in a million years that, per capita, more people die/are injured in GM cars as opposed to any other, apples to apples line of cars.
Passing the buck is a phenomenon that existed long before any Obama whitehouse....just say "the Whitehouse, 1800-2014"
US media does not favor the president and never has. This has been disproven time and time again, through cataloging hundreds of thousands of pro and con articles; even more surprising, the so-called "liberal media" offers the harshest criticisms that actually have substance. It is the presentation of rational pro and con arguments that suggest to some people a "bias", since such arguments are not extreme pro or con rants against GM, or the NY Yankees, or whatever.
If the Maryland School of Business dishes out MBAs, then that explains why it doesn't know how a business is run. GM is full of MBAs, and THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Seems to me that the big MBA programs have become very Finance centric over the past decade or two. It has always been that the Stockholder comes first because they are the owners. However, the theory used to be that product and consumer satisfaction led to good stockholder returns over time when combined with strong corporate management. That seems to have changed in the Finance world to an emphasis on short term trading and gains, rather than longer term focus. I think the result is an over emphasis on quarterly and annual performance, so executive bonuses seem to be set up that way frequently. The ultimate result is all too often dumb short term moves like too much cost cutting to pump up the short term results. This is true pretty much throughout Wall Street and certainly not limited to auto manufacturing. However, I guess we can rest knowing that the rest of the world seems to be following our newfound approach to corporate finance and management. So big surprise we're seeing these messes at Toyota now. A lot of those vehicles were developed during the non family Wanatabe (however you spell it) leadership. I'm pretty sure that he was an American educated MBA (Harvard I believe).