@uplanderguy said:
Circlew and tlong, what are your opinions on automatic headlights? It's OK if you think they're a good idea, even if GM was first to have them across the line.
C'mon, guys...
Let's stop the measuring contest to see whose is the biggest...
Great ideas, regardless of the originating manufacturer, tend to be widely adopted across all similar product lines after a period of time.
That applies to every product, from cars, to computers, to clothes washers, etc...
Maybe I should give credit to Preston Tucker for these innovations on my BMW 328... Adaptive headlights, Alloy wheels, disc brakes, fuel injection, self-sealing tubeless tires, and a direct-drive torque converter transmission.
All of these were all evaluated and/or tested, with the exception of the turning headlamp, but were dropped on the final prototype due to cost, engineering complexity, and lack of time to develop. (Text taken from Wikipedia).
thanks for the link to the VW stop sale order. My son was worried, having recently gotten a 1.8t Jetta, but I suspect his was produced before 2/1, so not included.
Is it really so hard for someone to answer what they think about automatic headlights? I genuinely believe that if it were not a GM thing, we'd have had the discussion here already. I think every car should have it.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
BTW, thank you circlew for the Avanti photo. The whitewalls on that car are too wide (I'm really persnickety about that kind of stuff), but it's still a nice car. Many Studebaker Avantis have survived. Long story made short, but a new friend asked me a few years back if I could help her find the Avanti she bought new in spring '63 and traded in '66. She didn't know the serial number, but told me the color, engine, and trans as she and her husband remembered it. Production records available out there are very detailed, and we were able to 'back into' her serial number and info from the Studebaker National Museum confirmed her as the original owner of that serial no. I put 'feelers' out in our club magazine and Studebaker and Avanti club websites as well as AACA. About a year passed, and a guy on the AACA site said, "I own that car". It had not led a very healthy life, so my friend passed on it, but pretty cool to know it survived and to have found it without a serial number to start with is pretty amazing.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I think they all should have them. My '97 Subaru has "auto-off" so I leave the headlight switch to "on" and forget about them. On the van, I have to switch the lights on manually.
I don't care who invented the feature. Seems like Volvo invented the "modern" seat belt and I always wear mine, but I've held a grudge against that brand since the mid 70s and I'm unlikely to buy one. (Sound a bit familiar?)
I just think it's a great feature that has long-been available on even the cheapest Chevys. I don't know why all makes don't have them, unless it's the thing that GM (rightly so) used to be accused of--the "Not Invented Here" syndrome. Not an evening goes by that I don't see a car with no headlights on--and never once have they been turned on after I've flashed mine at them.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
It's the car company that brings the "invention" to mass market that gets the chocolate bunny---"ideas" like fuel injection were operational on fighter aircraft a decade before Tucker (and in fact experiments go back to the early 1900s), but it was Mercedes who brought an injection car to market (direct injection no less!), and VW the first EFI. Crosley was the first American car with disc brakes (not very good) and GM gave us our first mass produced turbo car. I think Packard gets credit for the lock-up torque converter.
In more modern times, the most significant innovation was probably the Prius.
No, it wasn't iDrive --LOL!
@busiris said:
All of these were all evaluated and/or tested, with the exception of the turning headlamp, but were dropped on the final prototype due to cost, engineering complexity, and lack of time to develop. (Text taken from Wikipedia).
@uplanderguy said:
Personally, I would never buy a car to go with the flow, or buy it because everyone else does. That's actually a bit of a turn-off to me.
I completely appreciate that perspective. It's good that we have choices, and niche products also have important roles to fill. They are often the brands that push the advancement of technology, when the mass-market players are too comfortable to attempt anything too risky.
That's one reason why I am really rooting for Tesla. American made, highly innovative. Too bad the dealer conglomerates are trying to run them out of town in many states. They are cutting off the future US competitiveness in the world when they do that, IMHO.
@imidazol97 said:
I'm going to have to do more following of topics about some of these other brands to determine how long their patterns are. Was the SUA from the beginning of the coverup by toyota/NHSTA until the final NASA resolution (ROFL) a pattern? :SOT
Imid, I know we often don't agree, but you're a really smart guy too. Why do you think the broad market opinions have been so positive on Toyota and Honda over the years, versus some of the US nameplates? Is it really all just a conspiracy, or is there some substance behind that? What is the reasonable (as opposed to conspiracy theory) cause of that?
And by the way, I don't recall Honda transmissions having decades worth of problems. I'm sure every decade there were some bad trannys, but seems like the only big publicized issue was the Ody trannys around 2002-2004. Not many models, and not many years.
@uplanderguy said:
Circlew and tlong, what are your opinions on automatic headlights? It's OK if you think they're a good idea, even if GM was first to have them across the line.
In more modern times, the most significant innovation was probably the Prius.
What's interesting is that the first hybrid sold in the US was a Honda - the original Insight. Toyota really one-upped them and Honda is not known that much for its hybrids.
The Insight was a roller skate - even the little first Prius was a lot more conventional in appearance and function. That did it.
Auto lights are a good idea too, might keep local dopes from forgetting to use them in the dark. My auto lights also come on when the wipers are used for more than several swipes.
@uplanderguy said:
Not an evening goes by that I don't see a car with no headlights on--and never once have they been turned on after I've flashed mine at them.
I've seen the same thing, but I think quite often it's due to a driver in an unfamiliar car (whose own regular driver has auto headlights, so the driver assumes ALL cars have auto headlights).
Drivers today are so used to all the automatic things in vehicles that they automatically assume all cars have those features.
I remember my daughter's first car, the base model New Beetle, which had hand-crank windows. She would come home and tell me stories about some of her friends that couldn't figure out how to lower the passenger window, because every car they had ever been in had electric windows.
At the end of the day... We can make cars more and more autonomous, but until they're completely self-driven, the driver is going to be required to understand the correct way to drive. Until that day comes, we're going to have to figure out how to make that happen...
@MrShift@Edmunds said:
It's the car company that brings the "invention" to mass market that gets the chocolate bunny---"ideas" like fuel injection were operational on fighter aircraft a decade before Tucker (and in fact experiments go back to the early 1900s), but it was Mercedes who brought an injection car to market (direct injection no less!), and VW the first EFI. Crosley was the first American car with disc brakes (not very good) and GM gave us our first mass produced turbo car. I think Packard gets credit for the lock-up torque converter.
In more modern times, the most significant innovation was probably the Prius.
No, it wasn't iDrive --LOL!
The one thing I think GM doesn't get much credit for is the design of its small block pushrod engine, which was in non-stop production in the same basic form for 50 years. That's a heckuva achievement, IMO.
@busiris said:
The one thing I think GM doesn't get much credit for is the design of its small block pushrod engine, which was in non-stop production in the same basic form for 50 years. That's a heckuva achievement, IMO.
They may not get much credit for it these days, but they certainly got criticized for it in later years, for hanging onto the same basic design for so long! But, as long as it works, and it competent, who cares if it's overhead cam or underhead cam!
As for fuel injection, Chrysler offered electronic fuel injection in 1958...I don't think VW offered it until 1968. Of course, on the Chryslers it was a ~$400 option on their high performance cars (Adventurer, 300D, Fury, D500), and was so unreliable that most were converted back to dual quads!
On crank windows, back in college I drove a 1969 Dart GT hardtop coupe. Even though it only had crank windows, most of my friends thought it was cool that the back windows rolled down, and most of them either didn't know, or had forgotten, what a hardtop was.
My daughter's friend Claire, probably 15 at the time, said she'd never seen a car with crank windows before when she got into my car. Even my daughter's Cobalt has PW and PDL.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Well GM designed engines that fit the cars and the roads in this country---think of engine design as something like Natural Selection---it depends on geography as much as anything else.
_"It's hardly shocking that Ford's F-Series and Chevrolet's Corvette finished at the top of the rankings as the most American cars you can buy, with a total domestic content score of 87.5 out of 100. "
"But not far behind are Honda's Odyssey, Ridgeline and Crosstour, and Toyota's Camry and Tundra, which all scored a 78.5. That makes them more "American" than cars like the SRT Viper (77.5), Tesla Model S (77.5), Ford Expedition (71), Chevrolet Silverado (70), Dodge Grand Caravan (69), and Chevrolet Camaro (68). "
"The presence of Honda and Toyota's near the top of the domestic content rankings should not come as a too much of surprise. Both automakers have invested heavily in their US manufacturing, design and development facilities."
"Honda has invested more than $14 billion in U.S. manufacturing over the last couple of decades. In 2012, it produced 1.2 million cars at plants in Indiana, Ohio, and Alabama. It also operates a network of component production facilities along with multiple design centers. "
"Toyota's U.S. design and manufacturing operations are extensive as well. It operates major assembly plants in Kentucky, Mississippi, Texas, and Indiana, and maintains a network of engine and transmission production facilities in Alabama, Indiana, and West Virginia. Its California-based design studio, Calty Design Research, is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year."_
I don't think "buy american" is a major marketing force anymore. Buyers tried to be patriotic in the 80s and 90s, and it didn't work out so well for many of them. Either they ended up with something that was less than they wanted, or they thought they wanted it until they drove their friends' cars.
Maybe not in California or either coast, Shifty, but there is still a fair amount of that feeling in the heartland.
tlong, that list from which you quoted shows quite a few D3 models above many foreign-owned companies. That list can be argued, of course, but most (not all, of course) of the top ones are D3.
I used to drive a lot of admittedly low-end Japanese cars as rentals in the '80's. Although they were often 'peppy', I couldn't wait to get out of them. One-inch-thick doors, funky vinyl interior smell, buzzy as all hell, 'lost a hubcap' look as standard equipment. I know the market changed, but I wasn't enamored of it. Plus at that time, old soldiers were probably building them while we'd extradite a guy who was building Fords at the time in our country (and I agreed with that principle).
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
tlong, that list from which you quoted shows quite a few D3 models above many foreign-owned companies. That list can be argued, of course, but most (not all, of course) of the top ones are D3.
Yes, but some of those "rankings" use the HQ country as a significant factor in the rankings, which pretty much drops the rankings of foreign nameplates even if designed and nearly fully built here. I don't agree with that, since it's the upper HQ management of all those companies for which I have the least respect anyway.
It's good that different people like different things. There is the person who wants the large luxo-barge, the person who wants the inexpensive budget small car, the person who wants the premium luxury or sporty experience, etc. All those desires lead to good variety in the market. I'm glad we have so many choices in vehicles, unlike in our internet providers or TV providers. Heaven help us if that ever happens to the auto industry and there are only say, two players left. That would create market stagnation and higher prices.
tlong, here is the complete, actual list that your quotes were made about, above...just the list is here, without any editorializing. They address the Fiat/Chrysler situation at the bottom of the list.
Definitely not mainstream. Long hood/short deck and curved side glass before most anyone else was doing it. Frankly, I'll take that clip over a '63 Corvette with its headlights up. I also think the split window in a '63 'Vette is a dumb idea; I prefer the '64-67 one-piece window. BTW, the Avanti rear window was the single biggest piece of glass in automobile production at that time. I know I'm in the minority. I rather like it that way.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I generally discount ranking tables like that, if for no other reason than the criteria used to create the rankings.
As you pointed out, US company gets 6 points off the bat, foreign company gets zilch.
Now, if one is attempting to suggest the importance of the bottom line contribution to a national economy, the point could be argued it has some value, but in a simple ranking of how much something is made somewhere, not so much.
It could easily be argued that rankings like this can be arranged in any order so that the desired result can be achieved.
Honestly, it really is no more than a numerical arrangement, not that different in theory to a musical arrangement in that the notes are placed in an order to get the desired musical melody...
I agree, but it's not that it's commissioned by the D3 or anything (to my knowledge)...it's a business school. Not that that should give it any weight, but on the other hand, I wouldn't liken it to a study sponsored by automakers.
I'm pleasantly surprised by the detail used...unlike the lists oft-copied here, "Worst cars of all time!", which often don't even get the year or model name right.
You like BMW's and they make a sizeable contribution to the economy in your area. That's all good. That's one of the reasons I've had three Lordstown-built cars...all inexpensive to buy and reliable over a lonnngggg run as well.
I think in the old days, people did generally care more about "buying local". In the late eighties, when I first got seriously into the Studebaker hobby, I'd drive out to South Bend (their hometown) on backroads as time allowed. I'd still see a good number of Studebakers "outstanding in their field" on properties in rural Indiana. Most I used to see are gone now, but I definitely took notice of that at the time.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
We both grew up in an era before Internet access and "volume" marketing.
When I was a kid, folks buying cars didn't grab the phone and start calling a tri-state area in an attempt to save $50 on a new vehicle. They shopped the local dealerships, then made their selection and purchased it. It wasn't because they didn't want to save money, but more of just how it was done then.
I've known some cheap folks in my time, but very few back then would drive 150 miles from my hometown to Atlanta to save a few bucks on a car, especially when they knew they would be depending on the local dealership for maintenance. In fact, I remember the Pontiac dealership owner telling people that if they thought it was a good idea to drive to the "big city" for a better deal, then perhaps they should also consider driving there to get their car repaired/serviced.
Dealerships could act that way back then... No now, though...
Interstate highways, better communications and the advent of mass marketing have all but destroyed that business model in most of the US, although pockets may still be out in highly rural, isolated areas.
One point I forgot to mention, regarding the "worst cars of all time".
There is surely a case to be made that some crappy vehicles have been produced over the years, but like everything else, cars need to be taken in the context of the times in which they were created.
Case in point... The Stude Avanti a few postings back... That long hood and short deck looks a lot like a BMW Z4 design characteristic.
The Chrysler Airflow was a flop, too, but it was one of the first cars to seriously consider the effects of wind resistance and aerodynamics that EVERY car today is designed to optimize.
When did curved side glass become more common, anyway? IIRC, the 1957 Imperial was the first domestic car to use curved side glass, although it was rather subtle.
At GM, the '65 full-sizes were the first to have it, after the '63 Corvette Sting Ray (Avanti trickled out a few months before other '63's though...;)). I think the '63 Riviera had it. In mid-sizes I believe the '64 GM's got it, now that I think about it. Chevy II didn't get it 'til '68 I'm pretty sure. Lincoln had it in '61. I'm fuzzier on Mopars. Ford compacts didn't have it in '63, that I know, but I'd have to look closely at pics of their full-size cars to tell. I know that Lincoln went back to flat side glass for '64 and '65. The new '63 Rambler Classic and Ambassador had it, but the American did not that year.
Regarding 'long hood, short deck', other than two-seat cars, I can't think of a car that did it before the '53 Studebaker coupes which evolved into the Hawks. The Avanti had it, too, as did the '63 Riviera. Other GM cars of the Avanti's era still had short-hood, long-deck styling! I like full-size Pontiacs of that era mostly for their wonderful interiors, but I guess I've been away too long...when I see pics online now, the rear overhang looks almost ridiculous to me. Just MHO.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
@uplanderguy said:
Regarding 'long hood, short deck', other than two-seat cars, I can't think of a car that did it before the '53 Studebaker coupes which evolved into the Hawks. The Avanti had it, too, as did the '63 Riviera.
I recall associating the Avanti in its era with the XKE Jaguar as a design for speed.
Two more execs have been shown the door at GM, one in HR and one in charge of communications. Early wags are saying this is showing that Barra is being proactive and will help the stock price rise (might be a buy - it was down about 20% and has eased up 3% today when the story hit the press. (valuewalk.com)
It did set land speed records for a production car at Bonneville and was pretty 'slippery' despite not being designed in conjunction with a wind tunnel--and those records were set with Andy Granatelli at the wheel! Andy was a rather large fellow. I do admire the No. 5 domestic automaker at the time for coming up with a car like the Avanti, like it or not. No one in our family had a Studebaker; I just remember a fair amount around town and some even turned my head as a kid. OK, I wasn't a normal kid.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
The last new Studebaker I remember seeing as a kid was our neighbor's 1960 Lark 4-door. If I recall correctly, it was sort of a aqua blue-green in color. She was a nurse for the health department and used the car in making her rounds all over the county. When she switched positions in 1963 and became the health department manager, she traded it in for a new 1963 Pontiac Catalina.
Maybe, Mr. Shiftright, but that wasn't the domestic styling trend through the '40's and most of the '50's--hell, even into the sixties. After mid-sixties, I'd say, everybody did it, and I mean everybody.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
yes the late 1940s was quite the opposite---short nose and big long butt.
But you know how it is, the cars of the preceding decade always look old fashioned after 10 years, so stylists go to the other extreme---back and forth, back and forth....even when the styling makes no functional sense. You may remember 1970s cars with long hoods, but when you opened them up, there was 2- feet of nothing in front of the engine!
My dad had a '71 Mustang convertible. The hood seemed like it was a mile long. I don't think my arms were long enough to check the oil from the front;)
uplander, I think GM was one of the first and probably the only company that pretty much has DRL and auto-headlights standard across the board.
I know DRLs are optional on Fords. Both my wife's Taurus and my old Expedition had DRLs. My '14 Ram has auto-headlights, but does not have DRLs. I've read I can take it to the dealer and they can activate them (uses the front LED turn signals). I don't think I'll do it. The auto-headlight sensor is very sensitive, and it doesn't have to be very dark for them to turn on the lights, plus I can set them to turn on when the wipers are on.
Plus on my wife's Taurus and my Ram, it's still easy to drive w/o headlights on. If I turned the lights off and didn't put them back on auto, no lights. Add an always back lit gauge cluster and it's easy to forget you don't have lights on at dusk or an area with a lot of street lights.
My daughter's PT doesn't have them, but she claims she never pulls out of a parking space without turning her headlights on, and I'm glad about that. Of course, younger daughter's Cobalt has them. I never turn mine off..no reason to.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
@suydam said:
I thought all cars had auto headlights now for many years. My '01 Maxima did and even my base '04 Vibe does. I just leave it on auto all the time.
Nope .. my '13 Elantra GT has 3 settings: completely off, DRL only and full headlights.
Which I'm not fond of because the DRL setting also illuminates the dashboard lights, so I tend to forget to click over to full headlights when it gets dark.
One thing I wonder about...are cars nowadays "smart" enough to turn off the headlights, or interior lights, if you accidentally leave them on? I know my old 2000 Intrepid would turn them off after about 15 minutes. I would imagine that since then, cars have only gotten "smarter"...at least, I'd like to think!
Sometimes though, it seems like minor features get de-contented to keep costs down. When I got my Mom's '86 Monte Carlo, I ran out of gas once, when I discovered, too late, that it didn't have a low fuel warning light! Prior to that, I had gotten used to cars that, while older, at least had them...a 1982 Cutlass Supreme and a 1979 Chrysler Newport. So I just figured the Monte would have one as well. But I was wrong. Unless, it had one and the light was simply burned out? It was about 12 years old by the time I got it. And, in those days, there was still a lot of stuff optional that we take for granted these days.
@dieselone said:
uplander, I think GM was one of the first and probably the only company that pretty much has DRL and auto-headlights standard across the board.
I know DRLs are optional on Fords. Both my wife's Taurus and my old Expedition had DRLs. My '14 Ram has auto-headlights, but does not have DRLs. I've read I can take it to the dealer and they can activate them (uses the front LED turn signals). I don't think I'll do it. The auto-headlight sensor is very sensitive, and it doesn't have to be very dark for them to turn on the lights, plus I can set them to turn on when the wipers are on.
Plus on my wife's Taurus and my Ram, it's still easy to drive w/o headlights on. If I turned the lights off and didn't put them back on auto, no lights. Add an always back lit gauge cluster and it's easy to forget you don't have lights on at dusk or an area with a lot of street lights.
My 2008 Escape Hybrid did not have DRL when I got it. But I knew DRL were required in Canada, and it is the same model, so I looked it up. The feature can be turned on by the dealer via the Smart Junction Box - it is a simple computer setting. I had them turn it on - it is a good safety feature in the daytime. I suspect any late model Ford will have the capability - but maybe not enabled.
Not sure, but I would think all cars made today would have battery drain protection that would turn lights off after some period of time. Every car I've had in the last 10 years or so (that I can recall ever having "tested" that feature on by carelessly leaving an interior light or headlights switched "on") did (Toyota, Nissan, BMW, Mini, Subaru are the brands I'm speaking of here).
@uplanderguy said:
My daughter's PT doesn't have them, but she claims she never pulls out of a parking space without turning her headlights on, and I'm glad about that. Of course, younger daughter's Cobalt has them. I never turn mine off..no reason to.
My 09 Tacoma has the optional daytime running lights, but the headlights will switch off when the ignition is turned off, so I could simply leave them in the "on" position forever. My daughter's Subaru Crosstrek also acts in the same manner. Neither has auto "on" headlights sensitive to outside lighting conditions.
Comments
C'mon, guys...
Let's stop the measuring contest to see whose is the biggest...
Great ideas, regardless of the originating manufacturer, tend to be widely adopted across all similar product lines after a period of time.
That applies to every product, from cars, to computers, to clothes washers, etc...
Maybe I should give credit to Preston Tucker for these innovations on my BMW 328... Adaptive headlights, Alloy wheels, disc brakes, fuel injection, self-sealing tubeless tires, and a direct-drive torque converter transmission.
All of these were all evaluated and/or tested, with the exception of the turning headlamp, but were dropped on the final prototype due to cost, engineering complexity, and lack of time to develop. (Text taken from Wikipedia).
thanks for the link to the VW stop sale order. My son was worried, having recently gotten a 1.8t Jetta, but I suspect his was produced before 2/1, so not included.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Is it really so hard for someone to answer what they think about automatic headlights? I genuinely believe that if it were not a GM thing, we'd have had the discussion here already. I think every car should have it.
BTW, thank you circlew for the Avanti photo. The whitewalls on that car are too wide (I'm really persnickety about that kind of stuff), but it's still a nice car. Many Studebaker Avantis have survived. Long story made short, but a new friend asked me a few years back if I could help her find the Avanti she bought new in spring '63 and traded in '66. She didn't know the serial number, but told me the color, engine, and trans as she and her husband remembered it. Production records available out there are very detailed, and we were able to 'back into' her serial number and info from the Studebaker National Museum confirmed her as the original owner of that serial no. I put 'feelers' out in our club magazine and Studebaker and Avanti club websites as well as AACA. About a year passed, and a guy on the AACA site said, "I own that car". It had not led a very healthy life, so my friend passed on it, but pretty cool to know it survived and to have found it without a serial number to start with is pretty amazing.
I think they all should have them. My '97 Subaru has "auto-off" so I leave the headlight switch to "on" and forget about them. On the van, I have to switch the lights on manually.
I don't care who invented the feature. Seems like Volvo invented the "modern" seat belt and I always wear mine, but I've held a grudge against that brand since the mid 70s and I'm unlikely to buy one. (Sound a bit familiar?)
I just think it's a great feature that has long-been available on even the cheapest Chevys. I don't know why all makes don't have them, unless it's the thing that GM (rightly so) used to be accused of--the "Not Invented Here" syndrome. Not an evening goes by that I don't see a car with no headlights on--and never once have they been turned on after I've flashed mine at them.
It's the car company that brings the "invention" to mass market that gets the chocolate bunny---"ideas" like fuel injection were operational on fighter aircraft a decade before Tucker (and in fact experiments go back to the early 1900s), but it was Mercedes who brought an injection car to market (direct injection no less!), and VW the first EFI. Crosley was the first American car with disc brakes (not very good) and GM gave us our first mass produced turbo car. I think Packard gets credit for the lock-up torque converter.
In more modern times, the most significant innovation was probably the Prius.
No, it wasn't iDrive --LOL!
I completely appreciate that perspective. It's good that we have choices, and niche products also have important roles to fill. They are often the brands that push the advancement of technology, when the mass-market players are too comfortable to attempt anything too risky.
That's one reason why I am really rooting for Tesla. American made, highly innovative. Too bad the dealer conglomerates are trying to run them out of town in many states. They are cutting off the future US competitiveness in the world when they do that, IMHO.
Imid, I know we often don't agree, but you're a really smart guy too. Why do you think the broad market opinions have been so positive on Toyota and Honda over the years, versus some of the US nameplates? Is it really all just a conspiracy, or is there some substance behind that? What is the reasonable (as opposed to conspiracy theory) cause of that?
And by the way, I don't recall Honda transmissions having decades worth of problems. I'm sure every decade there were some bad trannys, but seems like the only big publicized issue was the Ody trannys around 2002-2004. Not many models, and not many years.
I like the idea, but I've never had them.
What's interesting is that the first hybrid sold in the US was a Honda - the original Insight. Toyota really one-upped them and Honda is not known that much for its hybrids.
The Insight was a roller skate - even the little first Prius was a lot more conventional in appearance and function. That did it.
Auto lights are a good idea too, might keep local dopes from forgetting to use them in the dark. My auto lights also come on when the wipers are used for more than several swipes.
I've seen the same thing, but I think quite often it's due to a driver in an unfamiliar car (whose own regular driver has auto headlights, so the driver assumes ALL cars have auto headlights).
Drivers today are so used to all the automatic things in vehicles that they automatically assume all cars have those features.
I remember my daughter's first car, the base model New Beetle, which had hand-crank windows. She would come home and tell me stories about some of her friends that couldn't figure out how to lower the passenger window, because every car they had ever been in had electric windows.
At the end of the day... We can make cars more and more autonomous, but until they're completely self-driven, the driver is going to be required to understand the correct way to drive. Until that day comes, we're going to have to figure out how to make that happen...
The one thing I think GM doesn't get much credit for is the design of its small block pushrod engine, which was in non-stop production in the same basic form for 50 years. That's a heckuva achievement, IMO.
They may not get much credit for it these days, but they certainly got criticized for it in later years, for hanging onto the same basic design for so long! But, as long as it works, and it competent, who cares if it's overhead cam or underhead cam!
As for fuel injection, Chrysler offered electronic fuel injection in 1958...I don't think VW offered it until 1968. Of course, on the Chryslers it was a ~$400 option on their high performance cars (Adventurer, 300D, Fury, D500), and was so unreliable that most were converted back to dual quads!
On crank windows, back in college I drove a 1969 Dart GT hardtop coupe. Even though it only had crank windows, most of my friends thought it was cool that the back windows rolled down, and most of them either didn't know, or had forgotten, what a hardtop was.
My daughter's friend Claire, probably 15 at the time, said she'd never seen a car with crank windows before when she got into my car. Even my daughter's Cobalt has PW and PDL.
Well GM designed engines that fit the cars and the roads in this country---think of engine design as something like Natural Selection---it depends on geography as much as anything else.
_"It's hardly shocking that Ford's F-Series and Chevrolet's Corvette finished at the top of the rankings as the most American cars you can buy, with a total domestic content score of 87.5 out of 100. "
"But not far behind are Honda's Odyssey, Ridgeline and Crosstour, and Toyota's Camry and Tundra, which all scored a 78.5. That makes them more "American" than cars like the SRT Viper (77.5), Tesla Model S (77.5), Ford Expedition (71), Chevrolet Silverado (70), Dodge Grand Caravan (69), and Chevrolet Camaro (68). "
"The presence of Honda and Toyota's near the top of the domestic content rankings should not come as a too much of surprise. Both automakers have invested heavily in their US manufacturing, design and development facilities."
"Honda has invested more than $14 billion in U.S. manufacturing over the last couple of decades. In 2012, it produced 1.2 million cars at plants in Indiana, Ohio, and Alabama. It also operates a network of component production facilities along with multiple design centers. "
"Toyota's U.S. design and manufacturing operations are extensive as well. It operates major assembly plants in Kentucky, Mississippi, Texas, and Indiana, and maintains a network of engine and transmission production facilities in Alabama, Indiana, and West Virginia. Its California-based design studio, Calty Design Research, is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year."_
I don't think "buy american" is a major marketing force anymore. Buyers tried to be patriotic in the 80s and 90s, and it didn't work out so well for many of them. Either they ended up with something that was less than they wanted, or they thought they wanted it until they drove their friends' cars.
Maybe not in California or either coast, Shifty, but there is still a fair amount of that feeling in the heartland.
tlong, that list from which you quoted shows quite a few D3 models above many foreign-owned companies. That list can be argued, of course, but most (not all, of course) of the top ones are D3.
I used to drive a lot of admittedly low-end Japanese cars as rentals in the '80's. Although they were often 'peppy', I couldn't wait to get out of them. One-inch-thick doors, funky vinyl interior smell, buzzy as all hell, 'lost a hubcap' look as standard equipment. I know the market changed, but I wasn't enamored of it. Plus at that time, old soldiers were probably building them while we'd extradite a guy who was building Fords at the time in our country (and I agreed with that principle).
>
Yes, but some of those "rankings" use the HQ country as a significant factor in the rankings, which pretty much drops the rankings of foreign nameplates even if designed and nearly fully built here. I don't agree with that, since it's the upper HQ management of all those companies for which I have the least respect anyway.
It's good that different people like different things. There is the person who wants the large luxo-barge, the person who wants the inexpensive budget small car, the person who wants the premium luxury or sporty experience, etc. All those desires lead to good variety in the market. I'm glad we have so many choices in vehicles, unlike in our internet providers or TV providers. Heaven help us if that ever happens to the auto industry and there are only say, two players left. That would create market stagnation and higher prices.
On that we are definitely in agreement!
tlong, here is the complete, actual list that your quotes were made about, above...just the list is here, without any editorializing. They address the Fiat/Chrysler situation at the bottom of the list.
http://www.american.edu/kogod/autoindex/2014.cfm
Blech, one of the ugliest front clips in history IMO...
Definitely not mainstream. Long hood/short deck and curved side glass before most anyone else was doing it. Frankly, I'll take that clip over a '63 Corvette with its headlights up. I also think the split window in a '63 'Vette is a dumb idea; I prefer the '64-67 one-piece window. BTW, the Avanti rear window was the single biggest piece of glass in automobile production at that time. I know I'm in the minority. I rather like it that way.
I generally discount ranking tables like that, if for no other reason than the criteria used to create the rankings.
As you pointed out, US company gets 6 points off the bat, foreign company gets zilch.
Now, if one is attempting to suggest the importance of the bottom line contribution to a national economy, the point could be argued it has some value, but in a simple ranking of how much something is made somewhere, not so much.
It could easily be argued that rankings like this can be arranged in any order so that the desired result can be achieved.
Honestly, it really is no more than a numerical arrangement, not that different in theory to a musical arrangement in that the notes are placed in an order to get the desired musical melody...
I agree, but it's not that it's commissioned by the D3 or anything (to my knowledge)...it's a business school. Not that that should give it any weight, but on the other hand, I wouldn't liken it to a study sponsored by automakers.
I'm pleasantly surprised by the detail used...unlike the lists oft-copied here, "Worst cars of all time!", which often don't even get the year or model name right.
You like BMW's and they make a sizeable contribution to the economy in your area. That's all good. That's one of the reasons I've had three Lordstown-built cars...all inexpensive to buy and reliable over a lonnngggg run as well.
I think in the old days, people did generally care more about "buying local". In the late eighties, when I first got seriously into the Studebaker hobby, I'd drive out to South Bend (their hometown) on backroads as time allowed. I'd still see a good number of Studebakers "outstanding in their field" on properties in rural Indiana. Most I used to see are gone now, but I definitely took notice of that at the time.
We both grew up in an era before Internet access and "volume" marketing.
When I was a kid, folks buying cars didn't grab the phone and start calling a tri-state area in an attempt to save $50 on a new vehicle. They shopped the local dealerships, then made their selection and purchased it. It wasn't because they didn't want to save money, but more of just how it was done then.
I've known some cheap folks in my time, but very few back then would drive 150 miles from my hometown to Atlanta to save a few bucks on a car, especially when they knew they would be depending on the local dealership for maintenance. In fact, I remember the Pontiac dealership owner telling people that if they thought it was a good idea to drive to the "big city" for a better deal, then perhaps they should also consider driving there to get their car repaired/serviced.
Dealerships could act that way back then... No now, though...
Interstate highways, better communications and the advent of mass marketing have all but destroyed that business model in most of the US, although pockets may still be out in highly rural, isolated areas.
Is it better or worse?
I don't know... But, it's definitely different.
One point I forgot to mention, regarding the "worst cars of all time".
There is surely a case to be made that some crappy vehicles have been produced over the years, but like everything else, cars need to be taken in the context of the times in which they were created.
Case in point... The Stude Avanti a few postings back... That long hood and short deck looks a lot like a BMW Z4 design characteristic.
The Chrysler Airflow was a flop, too, but it was one of the first cars to seriously consider the effects of wind resistance and aerodynamics that EVERY car today is designed to optimize.
When did curved side glass become more common, anyway? IIRC, the 1957 Imperial was the first domestic car to use curved side glass, although it was rather subtle.
At GM, the '65 full-sizes were the first to have it, after the '63 Corvette Sting Ray (Avanti trickled out a few months before other '63's though...;)). I think the '63 Riviera had it. In mid-sizes I believe the '64 GM's got it, now that I think about it. Chevy II didn't get it 'til '68 I'm pretty sure. Lincoln had it in '61. I'm fuzzier on Mopars. Ford compacts didn't have it in '63, that I know, but I'd have to look closely at pics of their full-size cars to tell. I know that Lincoln went back to flat side glass for '64 and '65. The new '63 Rambler Classic and Ambassador had it, but the American did not that year.
Regarding 'long hood, short deck', other than two-seat cars, I can't think of a car that did it before the '53 Studebaker coupes which evolved into the Hawks. The Avanti had it, too, as did the '63 Riviera. Other GM cars of the Avanti's era still had short-hood, long-deck styling! I like full-size Pontiacs of that era mostly for their wonderful interiors, but I guess I've been away too long...when I see pics online now, the rear overhang looks almost ridiculous to me. Just MHO.
I recall associating the Avanti in its era with the XKE Jaguar as a design for speed.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Two more execs have been shown the door at GM, one in HR and one in charge of communications. Early wags are saying this is showing that Barra is being proactive and will help the stock price rise (might be a buy - it was down about 20% and has eased up 3% today when the story hit the press. (valuewalk.com)
It did set land speed records for a production car at Bonneville and was pretty 'slippery' despite not being designed in conjunction with a wind tunnel--and those records were set with Andy Granatelli at the wheel! Andy was a rather large fellow. I do admire the No. 5 domestic automaker at the time for coming up with a car like the Avanti, like it or not. No one in our family had a Studebaker; I just remember a fair amount around town and some even turned my head as a kid. OK, I wasn't a normal kid.
Steve, thanks for the info--interesting for sure.
Long hoods and short decks go back to the 1930s. There's really nothing new out there, just modern re-interpretations.
The last new Studebaker I remember seeing as a kid was our neighbor's 1960 Lark 4-door. If I recall correctly, it was sort of a aqua blue-green in color. She was a nurse for the health department and used the car in making her rounds all over the county. When she switched positions in 1963 and became the health department manager, she traded it in for a new 1963 Pontiac Catalina.
Maybe, Mr. Shiftright, but that wasn't the domestic styling trend through the '40's and most of the '50's--hell, even into the sixties. After mid-sixties, I'd say, everybody did it, and I mean everybody.
yes the late 1940s was quite the opposite---short nose and big long butt.
But you know how it is, the cars of the preceding decade always look old fashioned after 10 years, so stylists go to the other extreme---back and forth, back and forth....even when the styling makes no functional sense. You may remember 1970s cars with long hoods, but when you opened them up, there was 2- feet of nothing in front of the engine!
The Monte Carlo was really bad about that...extremely long hood, but it was considered stylish by the mass market then.
My dad had a '71 Mustang convertible. The hood seemed like it was a mile long. I don't think my arms were long enough to check the oil from the front;)
uplander, I think GM was one of the first and probably the only company that pretty much has DRL and auto-headlights standard across the board.
I know DRLs are optional on Fords. Both my wife's Taurus and my old Expedition had DRLs. My '14 Ram has auto-headlights, but does not have DRLs. I've read I can take it to the dealer and they can activate them (uses the front LED turn signals). I don't think I'll do it. The auto-headlight sensor is very sensitive, and it doesn't have to be very dark for them to turn on the lights, plus I can set them to turn on when the wipers are on.
Plus on my wife's Taurus and my Ram, it's still easy to drive w/o headlights on. If I turned the lights off and didn't put them back on auto, no lights. Add an always back lit gauge cluster and it's easy to forget you don't have lights on at dusk or an area with a lot of street lights.
My daughter's PT doesn't have them, but she claims she never pulls out of a parking space without turning her headlights on, and I'm glad about that. Of course, younger daughter's Cobalt has them. I never turn mine off..no reason to.
I thought all cars had auto headlights now for many years. My '01 Maxima did and even my base '04 Vibe does. I just leave it on auto all the time.
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
Nope .. my '13 Elantra GT has 3 settings: completely off, DRL only and full headlights.
Which I'm not fond of because the DRL setting also illuminates the dashboard lights, so I tend to forget to click over to full headlights when it gets dark.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and let us know! Post a pic of your new purchase or lease!
MODERATOR
2015 Subaru Outback 3.6R / 2024 Kia Sportage Hybrid SX Prestige
One thing I wonder about...are cars nowadays "smart" enough to turn off the headlights, or interior lights, if you accidentally leave them on? I know my old 2000 Intrepid would turn them off after about 15 minutes. I would imagine that since then, cars have only gotten "smarter"...at least, I'd like to think!
Sometimes though, it seems like minor features get de-contented to keep costs down. When I got my Mom's '86 Monte Carlo, I ran out of gas once, when I discovered, too late, that it didn't have a low fuel warning light! Prior to that, I had gotten used to cars that, while older, at least had them...a 1982 Cutlass Supreme and a 1979 Chrysler Newport. So I just figured the Monte would have one as well. But I was wrong. Unless, it had one and the light was simply burned out? It was about 12 years old by the time I got it. And, in those days, there was still a lot of stuff optional that we take for granted these days.
My 2008 Escape Hybrid did not have DRL when I got it. But I knew DRL were required in Canada, and it is the same model, so I looked it up. The feature can be turned on by the dealer via the Smart Junction Box - it is a simple computer setting. I had them turn it on - it is a good safety feature in the daytime. I suspect any late model Ford will have the capability - but maybe not enabled.
My '99 Quest was sort of like that. There was a module you could buy back in the day for ~$50 that would enable the DRL function on the US versions.
Not sure, but I would think all cars made today would have battery drain protection that would turn lights off after some period of time. Every car I've had in the last 10 years or so (that I can recall ever having "tested" that feature on by carelessly leaving an interior light or headlights switched "on") did (Toyota, Nissan, BMW, Mini, Subaru are the brands I'm speaking of here).
My 09 Tacoma has the optional daytime running lights, but the headlights will switch off when the ignition is turned off, so I could simply leave them in the "on" position forever. My daughter's Subaru Crosstrek also acts in the same manner. Neither has auto "on" headlights sensitive to outside lighting conditions.