By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Do you really want to see the United States fully dependent on import products for everything we buy? I certainly don't, but we're heading there.
I'd like to ask you, do you really not see a problem if every foreign manufacturer that assembles vehicles in this country buys all (or most) of the suppliers it uses. Now you have foreign manufacturing and foreign-owned suppliers dominating auto manufacturing in our own back yard. How in the world could that be good for America?
I believe there needs to be a balance of trade between all countries who sell automobiles in the US and right now there are none. What are we exporting to offset the imports?
Thank goodness the Japanese came to the rescue in later years and raised the bar on quality/reliability and forced American branded car manufacturers to try and raise theirs. At least today, there are good choices. Somebody's grandmother today, could abandon their mid-90's old Impala whale for a world-class technology 06 Honda Civic rather than a Cobalt. Among other things, new Civic was awarded highest crash safety recently by Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
As has been talked about on other Edmunds boards, GM seems to have started its downward march in quality in early 70's. My own 65 and 68 Pontiacs were superior to the 71's I had.
Yes, I rented one too and would have preferred the old model Jeep. The big 3 really need to stop supplying the base models for fleet to rental car companies. For many import owners, a domestic rental car may be the closest they will ever get to even looking at these cars. GM, Ford and Chrysler should be taking this opportunity to put their 'best' product there. But, I suspect low bid wins this contract.
Our jobs! That's the U.S. current greatest export! I read an article on Bangalore, India and it will rival Silicon Valley in about ten years. Parents in India aspire to have their children become software engineers. Newbies start off at $7,000 a year. Senior software engineers get around $25K-$30K a year. How the heck can our IT professionals compete with highly eductated guys willing to work within a salary range from sub-Wal-Mart wages topping out at a low-paid secretary's pay?
And as much as I love my '76 Grand LeMans, I'll readily admit that my '67 Catalina and '69 Bonneville were much better-built cars. One area you can really see it in is the fit and finish. Now the LeMans actually isn't bad, as 70's cars go. The gaps are pretty even, although they are wide. on the 60's cars the gaps are much tighter. Glass in the windows was thicker in the 60's models as well, so even with frameless windows (the Catalina's a convertible, the Bonny was a 4-door hardtop), there was just more of a solid, quality sound when you closed a door...even with the window rolled part-way or all the way down.
One other thing I've noticed about many 70's and 80's cars, is that they really started making them air-tight...almost TOO airtight. On my LeMans, if the window's all the way up, I have to slam the door hard for it to close all the way, where on the older cars you could be much more gentle. Same with my '85 Silverado, and now that I think back on it, my grandma's '85 LeSabre.
I wonder if that might be one of the reasons that a lot of 70's cars started to fall apart...the simple fact that you had to really slam those doors to make them close all the way? :confuse:
I wonder how they get around that problem with newer cars? Newer cars aren't drafty like many of the old 50's and 60's ones were, yet you don't have to slam 'em like the 70's models.
This would cut their costs, increase productivity and reliability, make service and parts a whole lot easier, to say nothing about the better ergonomics across the board...
As Americans, our free market economy has made us all selfish. We will buy whatever pleases us, because we can. If a New Yorker's decision to buy an import affects someone's job in Michigan, so be it.
Build a better car and price it better, and we will buy it. That's how the imports got successful, right?
An exception to that would be luxury cars. Many luxury car buyers don't care much about price. If a Cadillac costs thousands less than the comparable BMW, Mercedes, or Lexus, people still won't buy it until they believe it's a better and more prestigious car than the import. To a luxury buyer, prestige and quality are more important than price.
The hardest part of getting back market share is that people are happy with their BMW and Lexus and not really looking at the domestics. I would encourage Cadillac and Lincoln to pull a page out of the 1990 Lexus playbook and run a sweet short-term lease deal to get luxury car buyers into those cars. If the cars are as good as Ford and GM say, the word of mouth among those rich customers would be priceless.
At the mainstream level, the Big 3 won't be able to thrive again until they get a handle on their pension and healthcare costs. This has to come from union concessions. The unions need to realize that their generous benefits come at an exhorbitant cost that the employers can no longer afford. It's in their best interest to offer major cost savings to the manufacturers. If they can save money on benefits, they can afford to build cars with higher quality materials and price them more aggressively. This will ultimately lead to more cars being sold, more being built, and more jobs building them.
What will it take me to consider buying a domestic?
1. Better sound insulation.
2. No BatMan styling.
3. Better interiors, no more cheap hard container plastic please, no more uneven gaps.
4. Better engines.
I very much DO care about price because I'm not going to pay more and get the same or less. The last time I went car shopping, I bought a new Cadillac Seville STS. I did seriously consider a new Lexus LS430. The interior of the Lexus did seem marginally nicer than the Cadillac, but I didn't feel it was $5K nicer! It also had a less-powerful, smaller V-8 and was a brand with which I was unfamiliar. I stayed with Cadillac and am pleased with my decision.
The engine in the LS is less powerful, but is not carrying the tonnage the Caddy is, so it has been rated as fast, or faster than the Caddy in a sprint. Is the STs using a 6-speed yet? i don't know. Lexus will be up to 8-speeds shortly.
Rich people like a good deal, as long as it's not a desperate fire sale, like $10k off on a Pheaton, that cripples an already poor image of prestige.
I don't know about this 1990 Lexus lease playbook, but Lexus made the Best New Luxury car and Best car Overall at that time, and didn't need heavily subsidized leases to move a car that was clearly a cut above. Between the low price, new engine design, sweet design, and flawless advertising, that was the proverbial Grand Slam.
The problem is obvious to me. The Americans, and to a lesser extent the Germans, underestimated the Japanese (Toyota in particular), and sleep-walked through the last 15-20 years. Now they pay the price.
There is little room to raise the state-of-the-art without turning cars into hovercraft. The Germans are trying to make their cars computers, the Americans are trying to use HP to mask deeper issues.
To my generation, the US has struck out. And the Japanese have earned the right to lead.
Good posts regarding rentals and Big 3 vehicle perception!
DrFill
Now it's GM and Ford's turn. Many of today's luxury buyers would never consider trading their luxury import for "American crap". Caddy and Lincoln need to prove they're worthy alternatives.
Ford motor company "gets it" and has shown some VERY attractive and well put together interiors in the past few years. Chryslers have been more "industrial" than attractive, but IMO are solid and sturdy. GM interiors on most cars continue to be disasters (my PRIME example of this is the G6). Some show signs of improvment like the Sky/Solstice and the new GMT900's (which the only way to go with those was UP). Problem is that what I noticed is that the appearance seems to be getting better, but the precise action and sturdiness still leaves a bit to be desired...
If they did, why hasn't the world copied it, like every other Toyota/Lexus innovation?
Please explain. :confuse:
DrFill
Wrong. I am a New Yorker. And, I care very much about someone's job in Michigan. My father worked for Ford, was a UAW worker (retired) and still lives there. I bought a Subaru. Not because of the free market and not because I am selfish. I bought a Subaru (which was built in Indiana by Americans) because I needed an incredibly safe and incredibly reliable car. I also needed all-wheel drive. That's not selfish--that's prudent. I wanted to buy an American car but there was nothing that even remotely compared to the quality, reliability and price of the Subaru. My decision was based on data. Look at Consumer Reports. The data proves overwhelmingly that the imports are more reliable.
I'm a New Yauker too. So quit playa-hatin'! :mad:
Does the Magnum offer AWD?
DrFill
Back in 1990, Lexus offered a 2 year lease on their new LS400. They used an 81% residual factor, making the payment incredibly low compared to their targeted competitors (BMW 7, Mercedes S, Jaguar XJ, etc.). My father traded in his 1987 Mercedes S430 for the new Lexus. I was with him at the dealer, and I personally saw another Mercedes and a BMW swapped for the LS that day. A quick glance at their used lot showed plenty of these top cars had been traded in.
At the time, my father was a member at a very exclusive country club. Most of these members could afford any car they wanted. Once they saw "one of their own" driving this new Lexus, it gave instant credibility. Within a month, there were 5 more Lexus sedans in the club's parking lot.
At the end of the 2 year lease, my father had his mid-life crisis (albeit late) and wanted a sports car. He chose the Lexus SC, a newcomer at the time. His experience with the Lexus sedan was so positive that he really didn't shop for anything else. The price wasn't cheap because by then Lexus had earned the reputation and prestige that allowed them to charge a profitable price, as they still do to this day.
Lexus got exactly what they wanted. More customers from word of mouth, followed by repeat customers willing to pay luxury prices. I know there are many households that have owned multiple Lexuses (Lexi?) over the past 15 years. This is what Cadillac and Lincoln need to shoot for.
And I too am a New Yorker. My comment was not to imply that New Yorkers are selfish. It's just the first state that came to mind to make my point. Most Americans are selfish, regardless of state.
The United States depends on capitalism.
Lincoln? They're not even trying. As for a Town Car, I can get the same thing in a Mercury Grand Marquis for $10K-$15K less. The LS is so long in the tooth it could be a sabre-toothed tiger. The botched the translation from prototype to actual car on the Zephyr. Don't even get me started on the super-stupid Mark truck! Cadillac is so far ahead of them it's not funny.
If it's not currency manipulation, it's something else...
I don't know what Lincoln is doing. They need to fix it or kill it.
Your kidding right? Why would anyone want an 8 speed gearbox in a car?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Think of it as a Red Tag sale that worked.
If protecting the American auto industry is that important to the country, and that important to the country, the government should be supporting it. The government could have placed tariffs on imports, and made it more difficult for imports to sell at better prices than domestics. Especially from countries with low cost labor, and not only full vehicle manufacturers but also parts suppliers. They could help level the playing field by releaving some of the big 3's legacy cost burdens. In other words, they could take action to help make it more profitable for the big 3 to do business.
But they haven't. As a consequence, Big 3 companies have more fixed costs than most other brands, and therefore make less money per vehicle than those other brands. This gives them less money to put into improved interiors, better drivetrains, higher build quality, added reliability, quicker redesigns, and on and on.
One answer would be to charge more. To do that, Americans would have to pay a premium for the domestic offerings, even if they were inferior products, to support these companies. No American should be expected to do that. Call it selfish, but it is simply capitalism. Besides, if they did, they would be cheating other areas of the economy anyway because they would have less disposable income to spend elsewhere.
The real answer to the big 3's problems are two-fold. They must seriously cut down their fixed operating costs, such as labor. Second, they must also have full lineups of vehicles that are as desirable as the top import branded cars in their class. Doing just one or the other just won't cut it, because ignoring the other factor will still be a problem and continue the downward spiral. For example, GM could have the cheapest labor in the world, but if their cars were still seen as inferior they still would have to sell them on the cheap and would not make much profit. If they have the best cars on the market, but also the highest fixed costs, they still wouldn't make enough money to continue to support improvements and redesigns to keep those cars at the top.
it's call "marketing". When you open a brand new store, you give away goodies so people will remember you and the great product you are selling. And hopefully they will come back for more. It happens all the time.
Instead we get the cheapest models of US brands compared with the typical higher level purchased by real consumers...
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That settles it! I'm not considering Lexus for a car next year unless they have a 12-speed. I want bigger and better to compare at the sports bar; it's 12 or NOTHING!!! ROFLOL
If you have good motors, you don't need all those speeds. Just more mechanism to go wrong in the tranny.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Do you think you might be just a little biased?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The car is always washed before being returned to us and the dealer always follows up with either a letter or phone call to ask about the service experience.
If American products had better quality, I'd own one too.
In 2003 when I was deciding between a 4Runner and a TrailBlazer, quality was on my mind too. I just couldn't go with the Chevy since it already had 9 recalls since it's introduction in 2002. My Toyota to date has had -0- recalls.
Is this really an apples to apples comparison?
I rented an Altima last year and (except for a pretty decent engine) the car was a piece of crap. Terrible interior and the road noise was unbearable. It was a base model. Higher end Altimas have nicer interiors and apparently more insulation and NVH features because they are much quieter than the base model. Rental car companies don't buy high end vehicles.
I do not buy base models. My comparison of the rental car Altima was not apples to apples because what I am used to is a nice cabin with nice appointments.
decisions 20 years ago with regards to pensions and benefits. Even if they could design a car equal to a great foreign car - it would cost $2000 more per car (due to these 20 yr old disasterous labor agreements). The Americans are in trouble Im afraid, and that is what happens when you think short term vs. long term. I am basically pro-union and dont think we'd be better off without Ford or GM, but if managment of your company makes terrible decisions, and unions think that they've won something by asking for so much, it makes it tough to compete with other countries in the long run, and that is exactly what we are seeing now. Very sad, but I bet 5 years from now there will be 75,000-100,000 fewer workers at GM and Ford. (btw: This is the same kind of thinking that we have with Social Security. Nobody wants to make the right choices now, which may be painful to some, in order to save the program in the long run. Wait and see the mess we'll have in 15-20 years with soc sec).
So the real question should be - why SHOULD we make an effort to buy American brands just for the sake of buying an American brand, when those same American brands buy and sell foreign cars, build their so-called "domestic" cars OUS, use numerous foreign parts, and often have less American value-added content than a "foreign" brand vehicle?
Trailblazer 8
4Runner 2
Explorer 2
see www.nhtsa.dot.gov "quick links" - recalls and type in the information.
My uncle has an '03 Corolla. I think it's a CE model, and I forget if that's the base or not. Anyway, it IS a nicely trimmed little car, but the Cobalt has a better driving position, for my body at least.
Now driving the car, I might end up hating it with a passion. But sitting in one, it at least gave me a favorable impression.
There is no quality gap anymore, even though there still exists an "illusion" of a gap. We have caught up and surpassed the Europeans, and are par with the Japanese. I still do not know why we are not announcing this to the consumers in their ads, perhaps because it is still too subjective!
You people that drive Lexus, BMW, etc need help. These are the people who drink Heineken over Bud. I love drinking a Bud when I know I am in a higher tax bracket than everyone in the room. Guess what...cars are the worst investment, since all it does is depreciate. My wife and I almost got a divorce because she bought a Lexus. I hate driving that car because it is in my head that people are going to think we are snobs. I was raised that people who drive expensive vehicles, are usually driving to make up for something. I am in Sales, and if I start driving a Lexus, my client may think I have it made, and really do not need his business. So, I drive a Chevy Trailblazer, a good "ordinary" vehicle several people on this forum like to state.
There is no longer a quality gap in engineering, but we have to start making more cosmetically appealing vehicles. For example, you see two women standing next to each other...chances are you will approach the more attractive women and check her out! :surprise:
This is not a true statement. Many of the foreign brands are supplying themselves with parts from suppliers located in the US, that they bought years ago, or in some cases recently. They call these parts "American". I don't.
The real issue is where the corporation is located. Home-based in the US makes the corporation an "American" company producing "American" vehicles. Why do you think Japan, Korea and Germany want to build plants here? Because they will "muddy" the line between what's domestic and what's not.
Guess what? It's working.
First, you state that I am selfish because I chose a car that was best for me, regardless of how my choice affected others. This is wrong. The dictionary says that being selfish means "acting and taking into account only the interests of oneself." In buying my Subaru, I took into account other factors beyond my personal self-interest. For example, gas mileage, low emissions, Subaru's record on the environment, etc. So, by definition, if one takes into account factors other than their self interest, they are not being selfish.
Second, free market capitalism might be good or it might be bad (that is not the discussion here). An individual can act in a non-selfish manner while operating within a free market. The two do not necessarily go hand in hand.
Third, saying most Americans are selfish is unfair. Aid after 911, the Asian tsunami and Katrina are all good examples of the generosity of of the vast majority of Americans.
If I were really selfish, I would have bought a Land Rover, a car that I really like but, in my mind, is a truly selfish purchase.
Ugh, I used to drink Bud. Either that or Busch, Red Dog, or whatever else happened to be on sale. I tolerated it, but when I finally sold my condo last year, I swore I'd start splurging on some things here and there, and these days it's usually Rolling Rock or Yuengling. Of course, I usually get it from the discount liquor store, and I'm not paying THAT much more...usually that cheap stuff was around $15 for a 30-pack, while the Rolling Rock/Yuengling is around $18-21 for a 24 pack.
So basically, I've gone from around 50 cents per beer to around 75-85. And yes, I actually AM anal enough to calculate something like that, so I do still think price to an extent. But the little extra is worth it to me.
I'm guessing that others feel that way about their cars. Can't really fault them for that...it's nice to have choice and buy what you really want.
BTW, depending on what type of sales you were in, wouldn't a more expensive vehicle that makes you look successful actually work to your benefit sometimes? Now if you're catering to a group of people who are Chevy/Honda, down-to-earth types, I'd think a Trailblazer would be okay. But if you were trying to work with a clientele that was used to the most expensive of everything, seems to me they'd thumb their nose at you for driving a Chevy (or Honda).
And I hate to say it, but it's a fickle world we live in. Heck, even back when I delivered pizzas, when I went from driving an '89 Gran Fury to a brand new 2000 Intrepid, 16 year old girls who wouldn't give me the time of day (not that I'd take it! :surprise: ) were practically flinging their goodies in my face and crying "Andre will you marry me?"
Funny thing too, when I started driving that new car, many people started tipping me better. :confuse: I think the Fury scared some people though, because it had been a copcar, and maybe people thought I was a jerk for driving it?
I agree with you, for the most part if you do good by your car you should have it for a long tie and it will treat you good.
are the people who drink Heineken over Bud.
You drink bud? Well there is no accounting for taste. I do drink more expensive beer but only because they actually do taste better (and at the post it is actually cheaper). But I understand what you are saying.
Guess what...cars are the worst investment, since all it does is depreciate.
If you look at it strictly on the bases of what you buy it for and what you can sell it for then I would say yes. Beyond that thinking actually cars are good investments if you don't live in a downtown area. If you don't think so try going to work or shopping or many other activities without one. Either you spend a lot of time walking or pay high prices for a cab. You say your in sales, how much more in sales can you do (and make more money at it) with a car than without?
Yes its a deprecitable asset but it saves you so much in so many areas that in reality its a pretty good investment. And in that respect a $15k Chevy does the same as a $100k Benz.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D