I don't think that the bad service in chrysler service department is only in your town unfortunately. In So. Cal were I live the Chrysler service is pretty crappy. My cousin had a 2003 Chrysler 300m and it was in the shop quite a bit getting sensors replaced. The dealer kept telling his wife that certain things were not covered by their Chrysler extended warrantee when it was. Her solution was to just say ok, and then she would get in her car in the parking lot and call Chrysler corp headquarters. They in turn would call the dealer right away and the problem would always be fixed immediately.
The dealer I bought my 2000 Intrepid wasn't so hot when it came to servicing, either. My first clue was when I brought it in and got the oil changed. The power lock actuator was going bad and with about 35,000 miles on it, the factory warranty was about to expire, so I brought it in. It was January, nasty weather, and I was about to take a trip to Texas, and it needed an oil change, so I paid them to do it, rather than mess with it myself. For the $26.95, I got the privilege of having more oil ON the engine, than IN the engine! At least they got the right amount in it though.
Around 86,000 miles, the oil pressure light started to flicker, at idle. I brought it in. I even told them that you have to let the car warm up first and drive it for awhile. It turns out there was a TSB for just that issue, and they fixed it for free. Unfortunately, it took three trips to the dealer to get it fixed! I've always heard that "three" is the magic number when it comes to these types of things.
Just out of curiosity, when you had the coolant leaks, was the area around the thermostat housing ever one of them? Evidently that was a common problem on the 2.7 when it first came out. Mine had to be replaced around 51,000 miles, to the tune of $210 (local mechanic). I heard that in later years the part was improved, but always wondered if that was true or not. In its defense though, the car has 143,000 miles on it now, so thermostat housing #2 has made it 92,000 miles so far!
"The key difference in how the Big Three and foreign brands support jobs in the U.S. comes outside the factories, according to a 2006 study by the Level Field Institute, a group formed by Big Three retirees in Washington.
"What's driving the difference in jobs ... is investment in research, design, engineering and management," Level Field President Jim Doyle said in a statement on the 2006 study.
The Center for Automotive Research said the Big Three had 24,000 engineers on U.S. payrolls in 2007. The Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association said its member companies had 3,500 U.S. research and development employees in 2007."
I'm a little confused. What is news about this? That they have so many? I am really surprised how many they have here.
The imports are just that. They do the Engineering at their home locations and either build them there and export and/ or build a plant here to build them with as cheap of a work force as possible.
That will change soon though. 27,500 engineers in the US to 3500.
And then, how many of the 3500 are not permanent US citizens? How many college internships are offered? Was the ratio 50,000 to 2,000 just a few years ago? My new neighbor at work who is from the Dayton area tells me that the transplants brought their Japan based supplier base over with them, He interviewed with one of Honda's suppliers. The interview was with a Japanese interviewer, a S. Korean, and then a Chinese. I'm sure that they are part of the 3500 mentioned above. He said their english was terrible with all 3. We are being colonized and the sooner no cars are engineered in America or by Americans, the sooner we'll all be in the lower middle class.
The tv news has Gettlefinger stating that wages for UAW are only 10% of the cost of building a car. He was excluding the UAW at Delphi that supplies many parts for GM cars. Honda has it down to 2% of a car assembly being wages. Where is the other 8% going for Honda? Tokyo I suspect.
just how much featherbedding, union and nonunion, has been infecting US industry for over 30 years, while we thought we could do no wrong...so we have more workers to do the same job which means we have been supporting a surplus for more years than we care to count...GM, I believe, has 5 more levels of management between the CEO and factory floor than Toyota...what do those people do besides shuffle papers and waste corporate money, which, until recently, simply seemed to flow from a never-ending well...
I just read, in succession, On a Clear day you Can See General Motors, the John DeLorean book, and then Call Me Roger, about Roger Smith's tenure as CEO...oddly, altho the books are "unrelated", DeLorean tells about GM from 1956 to the late 1970s, and, for different reasons, the next book covers Smith from 1981 to 1990...read the books and they will explain in perfect detail why GM is in trouble...written 20 and 30 years ago, they could have been written yesterday...they are on point for the GM problems of this hour...
GM has wasted hundreds of billions $$$ on the payroll of people who never should have had jobs to begin with...It would be like a Mom & Pop hardware store in a small town, where, instead of 2-4 employees, they had 50 and wondered why they can't make any money...GM should have jettisoned thousands of middle managers whose sole job was to aggravate those below them and push worthless paper forms around to look busy...
The only shame is that those workers about to be jettisoned have made their lives around GM (Ford, too) but they will become the casualties of war...however, rather than see them for what they lost, you could also say that they had some mighty fat years in a job that never should have been created from the beginning...
The automakers will now slim down to become half its size...Michigan will slowly work thru this but will still become a ghost town compared to what it was, and what ti was was an overemployed money waster...
Kinda like a school system which grows from 1000 to 2000 students...you hire new teachers for the growing student body, but once the "boom class" graduates and the school shrinks back to 1000, you can eliminate the extra teachers as they are unnecessary...cruel to the teachers???...maybe, but when a system does not need you, it is criminal to keep somebody on payroll solely because "they have been there"...for the system it is an evolution, for the individual it is a revolution...
The workers will be eliminated as they simply are no longer needed...the re-training they will be offered will be charity from us, but they better get motivated as there is no time to shed tears, life goes on...
Monday of this week I spoke to the other lawyers in my office, saying that the Big 3 must go Chapter 11 now, to junk all their unnecessary debt and contracts...they ALL reminded me about the "ripple effect" to which I replied that the ripple effect does not matter, we cannot pay people to make (Big 3) cars that no one wants to buy...that was Monday...
Today, after hearing that the UAW will not budge an inch until 2011, despite the possibility of bankruptcy, they ALL came in and said that the UAW can go to hell, and they ALL said that GM/Ford should file for bankruptcy TODAY and stick in up the UAW's collective behind...
As time goes on, the whole UAW strategy may backfire, as folks who make much less than a UAW member may become quite resentful about buying a car made by someone who makes much more than they do...few cared while times were good, but now that the UAW is front and center on the news, even the average guy may get fed up...
Then there really only WILL be 2 people who will buy Big 3...lemko and rockylee...
school analogy doesn't work, unless......the 1000 students who left, just changed to a new school across town that has low paid teachers with no job rights, is run by foreigners for profit that gets funneled out of the district to another country, gets a special subsidy from the local gov't to help pay for the school construction and furnishings, and half the classes there are taught by video. meanwhile the local taxpayers have to pay unemployment to a bunch of locals who used to teach, and only non-US citizens are still attending the local, state funded teachers colleges.
On the 05 I had, the leak was a porous themostat housing. I discovered the leak the first day I owned the car - so much for the dealer's pre-delivery checklist. The car was actually misting antifreeze out through the grill.
He's putting a lot of business miles on it like I do with my cars. So far Its doing OK for him, other than his gripes about the fuel economy when gas was $4 a gallon here.
school analogy doesn't work, unless......the 1000 students who left, just changed to a new school across town that has low paid teachers with no job rights,
MOST workers in the US have no employment contracts....the union workers are so insulated they have no concept of what life is like outside their little cocoons.
We should ask the Toyota and Honda workers in the US if they'd rather be working for GM or Chrysler? - Those workers that are "low paid" and have "no job rights"?
"non-US citizens" is irrelevant - why mention it? What is the point?
The Nov '08 D3 sales vs the same for the J3. It seems like more people want cars from the D3. I see that the unchanged foreign strategy is to force the D3 out of business. They have sweetened enough states to prevent a bailout. States they have a presence in have senators that are decidedly against the midwest.
GM, I believe, has 5 more levels of management between the CEO and factory floor than Toyota.
I guess that is possible IF the CEO of Toyota is also the plant manager.
Wagoner.............CEO Fritz Henderson...President Gary Cowger.......Vice President Global Manufacturing Tim Lee...............GM North American Manufacturing Plant Managers-on the floor Assistant plant managers-on the floor
How much of that 363000 is fleet, hmm? Also, what percentage of total production is that? I bet the J3 sold closer to 100% of their production. Not so with the D3. Unless of course they discounted them so deeply that they lost money on most of the non-truck sales. Oh, is that cars, or cars AND trucks? SImple gross sales numbers NEVER tell the whole story.
Wagoner.............CEO Fritz Henderson...President Gary Cowger.......Vice President Global Manufacturing Tim Lee...............GM North American Manufacturing Plant Managers-on the floor Assistant plant managers-on the floor
Oh don't even TRY to tell me that the plant managers report directly to Lee without a site supervisor acting as a go-between. Unless the Plant Manager IS the site supervisor, in which case below him and his assistants will be at the very least two more layers including shift and area supervisors, who would also be "on the floor."
Even though the D3 outsold the J3, the J3's vehicles are more desirable. sorry, not buying it.
trucks are a big player? what % are D3 truck sales down after $4 gas this year? How many truck sales have they lost vs the J3?
I'm convinced that the D3 offer better value. Malibus and Impalas have rebates now that bring them down to the price of a smaller, noisier, J3 car, like the civic or mazda3.
how much D3 sales are fleet? Is it that because fleet buyers could not afford J3 prices and TCO. Fleet sales mean that professional buyers have selected your product. People whose livlihood depends on making the right decisions.
Is that a good thing that the J3 keep a smaller % of production in inventory? That way the buyer gets less of a choice and that is better for the buyer?
States they have a presence in have senators that are decidedly against the midwest.
So what is your point? We have leaders from other states trying to seduce companies out of CA all the time. The Midwest stuck it to the NE and the West Coast BIG TIME with the Ethanol Mandate. That is the way things work. There are only so many car buyers. Trying to boost the automakers in your state is what you elected those officials to do. The Michigan delegation all get big kickbacks from GM and the UAW to push legislation that is favorable to the auto industry. There is no thought of how it impacts the rest of the country.
Fleet sales mean that professional buyers have selected your product.
Fleet buyers are not worried about long term reliability. They only keep the car for 1-2 years and dump them. I know people that have always bought used from Budget. They knew the car had regular oil changes and they got a fairly new car for half price.
So the person buying millions of dollars worth of vehicles has determined that the D3 are above average in uptime and depreciation and are therefore the ones to get? Does the standard warranty apply to commercial use, making all cars equal reliability costs for the first few years?
I think if you do some research the reason the B3 sell so many cars to fleet and rental is they discount deeply to get rid of inventory. In Vancouver BC they had lots of Toyota cars at rental. That is not the case here. Those discounts are what hurt the resale of the B3. It gets back to what several people have said. GM builds a given number of cars no matter how many will be sold. Then wholesale them out to get rid of them. I have rented Camry in Vancouver and Malibu in Hawaii. To me they are both basic transportation. I would not want to drive either one cross country. Just not that comfortable. Econoboxes for the masses. So Malibu being the best thing GM has built is not saying much in my opinion.
'68 Malibu coupe = awesome '08 Malibu sedan = just another epsilon platform GM, a tad better looking than the G6, not a different inside as the Saab, and much like the Aura. Take your pick, they are mostly the same, though Saab has a more unique interior and the turbo i4.
As for the so called econoboxes, I found little justify going say CTS over my Honda SE V6 back a couple of years ago. Sure it is FWD, but for the most part the ride comfort, safety, handling, and such are as good as any starter luxo, with perhaps a better looking interior compared to odd interior plastics on the CTS. That said, if buying a CTS I would go first gen. over the bling look new one. They got the art & science ext. look best in first rendition. It is possible that a coupe version though would be a better fit to the new rounded look, though the excessive bling additions do remain. All in all, not too bad if they sold it for under $28K. For $33K + you can get starter German cars or a nice Japan make.
Even though the D3 outsold the J3, the J3's vehicles are more desirable. sorry, not buying it
Neither are most people. As I said, raw numbers don't tell all. Fleet sales don't indicate desirability in any way, only the lowest price for N number of cars. It's also telling how deep the discounts were with some brands, and whether or not the cars were sold at a profit, and how much. Remember, the idea isn't to just sell more cars. The idea is to make more money which means to achieve the ideal balance of sales volume and per-unit profitability. If GM were profitable they wouldn't be begging for a handout, now would they?
trucks are a big player? what % are D3 truck sales down after $4 gas this year? How many truck sales have they lost vs the J3?
Likely very little if any truck sales have been lost to the J3. American manufacturers still make the best full-size trucks around and I'm not sure anyone in their right mind would look anywhere else for one (compact ones are another story..the Frontier is nice, and the Ranger is getting long in the tooth).
I'm convinced that the D3 offer better value. Malibus and Impalas have rebates now that bring them down to the price of a smaller, noisier, J3 car, like the civic or mazda3.
That's nice...but it's likely that it costs considerably more for GM to build a Malibu or Impala than it does for Honda to build a Civic or Mazda to build their fun-derful 3. Which means GM is selling those cars at a loss. Which is a poor business decision and leads to all sorts of messy things like not being profitable, and begging for taxpayer handouts.
Fleet sales mean that professional buyers have selected your product. People whose livlihood depends on making the right decisions.
You're thinking commercial sales, like the contractor who buys a truck. THe smart ones buy F-Series or RAM, by the way. Fleet sales, on the other hand, are bought in bulk through a fleet department by a fleet buyer, sight-unseen, and NOT by anyone who is going to end up driving them. Fleet sales are things like rental cars, police cruisers, cabs, government sedans, etc.
Is that a good thing that the J3 keep a smaller % of production in inventory? That way the buyer gets less of a choice and that is better for the buyer?
No. But you're thinking of what's best for you. I'm thinking what's best for the company. Keeping less production in inventory reduces storage costs and interest on the loans taken to purchase them from the manufacturer. It also means that there is demand for the product if the customers are grabbing them off the lots quickly. Which means the dealer doesn't need to resort to deep, below-profit-level discounts just to get them off the lost and stop costing them money to hold on to.
To sum up your comment: The car of the year sucks, All GM drop in value fast, but only because they are in rental fleets, and it was JD Powers doing the rating so they are not actual legit winners of anything. Rental fleets don't buy cars, GM gives them to Alamo at cost because they can't sell them.
Also implied by your comment: The B3 can't sell their cars, so they give them away to rental fleets at wholesale. No actual consumers would want them. Further, the 2008 motor trend car of the year is just basic transportation and since some were in rental fleets, they are definitely pitiful. I guess GM was so dumb, they added extra shifts to make a car that was not selling. Further, we are a country of well off masses who should not settle for a Malibu. Only 100 million of us live at or below the poverty level. Only 47 million kids have no health insurance. Only 29% of Floridian and only 31% of Californian homeowners are upside down in their houses, so who are these people who are going to settle for an econobox for the masses? Further, since of millions of peoples 401k balances just nearly dissapeared, a summer of $3.60 gas was just followed by a summer of $4.20 gas, and only half a million or more jobs are now getting lost each month, why should GM build another Malibu as an econocar for the masses when the masses need and can most surely afford far more pampering than the Malibu provides. The masses are all trying to start their next vacation where they need to drive across the country. It only takes a month if you stay 2 weeks.
I said it was an econobox for the masses. I said it compares to the Camry. One not better than the other. I remember when the Cougar came out and was "car of the year". It was a total flop. The rest of your rant in incoherent. If you and 100 million Americans are at the poverty level you are not hardly in the market for a Malibu or Camry. You should be looking for a 6 year old beater for $1000. You also would not be in favor of spending billions to keep over paid UAW workers that are in the top 10% of wage earners on the job.
I am glad you brought that topic up! This is exactly what I was thinking. This is the kind of quality GM should be putting out, but to get that on a GM, it would set you back all the way into the $40k's range. I think that is too high! There is a huge contrast between the CTS and the cars below it in the GM line up. The quality difference is large. I am thinking now in the year 2008 and approaching 2009 that there are other cars in the segment that would satisfy and not break the bank.
I do think the CTS is quite attractive, but when you see the price on the window, you ask yourself, wait, is it worth it? I am thinking no. Not when I can get a new 09 Mazda 6, Acura TSX, Acura TL, Accord, VW, or even a C-class mercedes, BMW. See, there are other cars that offer more value and bang for the buck. You simply are paying for the name, but if you think about it, to get that kind of name and quality, you have to pay alot for a GM car in the line up. That car is up there high on the list, but the lower cars don't get that kind of touch of quality.
I think GM will find that their CTS is a bit overpriced, in my opinion too, I think it should be priced around $30-$35k. Because, if I have money to spend on a car, it wouldn't be the CTS.
Like the new Cadillac Escallade Hybrid, WOW!! LOL! Seriously, that thing is already silly enough, but adding more crap to it. By the time you get it paid off, you'll dump it, you cannot possibly see the benefits of the hybrid for years! If I did get an SUV, It might be a loaded Chevy smaller model. I can justify that if you have kids, if not, your just being silly.
Take Honda for instance, If you get a Civic, Fit, you still feel like they put quality into the product. Instead, like GM, you have the "lower end "cars (supposed to mean your lower priced cars), and well, you feel like they skipped a bit on the quality. You get a Honda LX Civic and you still see value there.
I look at a Civic or a Fit and see acres of hard plastic just like in all low price cars. You're not going to get much at that price point. Fits and Civics are dull little transportation capsules for those who have little and should expect little. I can say the same about Cobalts, Foci, and Calibers too. Nobody who really loves cars are going to consider any of them.
You really want to talk about austere? You really don't get much in a C-Class or a 3-Series for around $30K. I haven't seen such barren interiors since I sat in a 1981 Ford Escort. Heck, you're better off buying any of the above cars compared to them and saving $15K. You're simply paying a premium for a three-pointed star or a blue and white roundel on the hood.
So Malibu is car of the year. Slow year for development of the auto, is it not. Looks like the auto industry has run out of new stuff of any substance. Add in no really eye catching designs in cars for the masses, and well let's just say, not much going on. It is *yawn* New Malibu as Car of the Year?" It is just a re-brand of the other cars GM has with the same platform - nothing really new. Most excitement looking ahead for the big three are all retro models, as in been there - done that. Solstice Coupe, if had been done correctly, could have been a winner. Purpose built as a LIGHT coupe first, with some normal height door window sills, a seat position less than bathtub, a better brake position, as in not too high above that of the gas pedal, a bit thinner A pillars, and it would basically rock. A little V6 as an option engine and the current i4 as standard, selling for $20K would be awesome. We got instead was an overpriced, no roll bar, drop top, bathtub to drive within. Then they decided to make the coupe, which in turn adds weight, when it is usually the other way around. Funny how people like fat cars, fat wheels/tires, with fat price tags due to assorted fluff added. The Camaro will look pretty nice, but then again, it suffers puffed up syndrome too, with too tall doors and width as everything must be supersized like the fries with your meal.
I've heard that the 4-cyl version of the Fusion is supposed to be much-improved for 2010, which is a good thing. It almost seemed like Ford skimped on the 4-cyl with the current model to force you into a V-6, whereas Honda, Toyota, and Nissan give you a decent 4-cyl to begin with.
I dunno if I really like the facelift, though. The front-end looks a bit like a blending between a Toyota Tundra and an Avalon, and the rear-end looks a bit too busy, with un-necessary angles in the taillights.
Had a 1998 Corolla which got similar gas mileage, which cost me around $15,300 or less with tax and license, I think it was. Pretty sure you can still get them around $15K + tax now, perhaps a little more. And they get 32 to 38 MPG with ease. As for the Fusion, it seems like a pretty nice little car. If they sold the 3.5V6 for say $22K, and it looked like Ford was here to stay ( hope so ), then I would consider it when looking for FWD nicer mid-sized cars. Compares well with the Camry and looks better. The 3.0 engine is just so yesterday..... the i4 version, if you can not afford the extra bucks for gas, if sold for say $18K, for a nice version of the Fusion, seems like a fair deal. Strip models should start at $16K.
If they took the Milan and made the 3.5V6 standard, it would be the bargain and the better looking model of them all, current and future styles.
The 3.5V6 not being in the Mustang 2010 is just so wrong. Guess it would trump the V8 if they put in the 3.5V6 with 300HP now. This is 2009 though, so let's get with it !!! Why call a car a 2010 when it is not up to 2009 standards?
The 3.5V6 not being in the Mustang 2010 is just so wrong. Guess it would trump the V8 if they put in the 3.5V6 with 300HP now. This is 2009 though, so let's get with it !!! Why call a car a 2010 when it is not up to 2009 standards?
Yeah, Ford should have used the 3.5 or 3.7 as the base engine in the Mustang. But even at 300hp, the v6 would still be way off on torque.
The 2010 Fusion look real nice. The current model seems like a good car, but I'm not sold on its looks.
"I've heard that the 4-cyl version of the Fusion is supposed to be much-improved for 2010"
That is part of the problem with the Big 3...somehow, the first or 2nd year of a car never seems to have what it needs, they always need an extra year or so to figure out how to make a decent engine to put in it, whereas Hon and Toy give a decent 4 cyl from the start...we always seem to play catch up, and yet, ya gotta know that the engineers know better than that...
That's because Americans like to do two things: Go fast and turn left. Haven't you seen NASCAR? :shades:
Case in point: when the Solstice did come out, people complained that it wasn't a Camaro basically. Not enough power, not big enough, etc etc. People who are actually looking for a Solstice buy Miatas.
Oh don't even TRY to tell me that the plant managers report directly to Lee without a site supervisor acting as a go-between. Unless the Plant Manager IS the site supervisor, in which case below him and his assistants will be at the very least two more layers including shift and area supervisors, who would also be "on the floor."
I hate it when I make a mistake. I was going by memory so here is a breakdown after looking at the actual names.
Tim Lee is in charge of about 50 manufacturing plants in NA. There is a level below him split by country/operations/etc. Some of these people have Assembly plants reporting to them. So below this level there is a plant manager at each plant.
1 Wagoner.............CEO 2 Fritz Henderson...President 3 Gary Cowger.......Vice President Global Manufacturing 4 Tim Lee...............GM North American Manufacturing 5 Manufacturing Manager-Assembly plants 6 Plant Managers
But the bottom line is that unless the President of Toyota is "on the floor" there is no way there is 5 more levels between the CEO and "on the floor" at GM than at Toyota. At the most there is one level. I have no idea what goes on below the plant manager at the Toyota plants but I would think they would be similar.
Toyota:
1 Fujio Cho Chairman 2 Katsuaki Watanabe President (replaced Press) 3 Shigeru Hayakawa President of US Operations(replaced Watanabe) 4 ????? Vice President of US operations (replaced Hayakawa) 5? Johnny Tucker Plant Manager
Above are what I could find for Toyota. There may be more in there but I could not get any names below Hayakawa except for Plant Managers. When they announced Hayakawa's promotion they did not mention his replacement. BUT since Toyota has only a few plants here in the US the Plant Managers probably report directly to the VP of US operations.
It also depends on the definition of "On the floor." Shift supervisors are a bit iffy...some of them work out of offices. Some work"on the floor" but at desks and aren't actual line workers or even UAW members (since they're supervisors). Same with area supervisors that might report to a shift supervisor, though they're more likely to actually be working something on the line as opposed to sitting at a desk. When you get to that level it's hard to tell, and a lot of it is spin to begin with.
But the point was that there are not another 5 levels of management at GM over Toyota between the CEO and the guy on the floor. Maybe one but I am just not familiar with the Toyota system. I think we can agree the plant manager at either concern is not giving direct orders to the floor guys. From there on I do know that at the GM plants I worked at the guys under the plant manager were very concerned with and were on the floor on a daily basis seeing what was going on in their areas.
And these area managers (body shop, trim, paint, etc.) are in charge of more than just the hourly workers and their supervision (used to call them General Foreman and Foremans) but also on quality and efficiency and everything else in their area. From what I can tell they do not have General Foremans any more. They have guys in charge of shifts responsible for everything also. Guess I would call them General Foremans.
Maybe lazy is the wrong word for UAW workers. How about sloppy uncraftsmenlike unprofessional work ethics and pride???
It was probably UAW workers that built my Dodge Neon afterall. Maybe they weren't being lazy, but they were definitely careless, negligent, and unattentive.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
When I buy expensive cars like yours, I negotiate for a factory extended warranty no matter who builds it.
If I had paid $1 for an extended warranty on my 2003 Accord V6 Coupe, it would have been an utter and total waste of that dollar as that dollar would have been nuch better spent on GM stock shares rather than extended Honda warranties. LOL!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I'm going to have a hole burning in my wallet and pockets to dump a load of cash on a 2008 Acura TL or 2009 Honda EX Coupe V6 or 2007 335i or 2009 Audi A3 or 2009 370Z.
If I win the lottery, I'm getting an R8.
Too bad I don't play the lottery.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I'm glad you're getting good service out of your Accord. However, if you get a Honda like the last 2 I bought you'll wish you had the extended warranty. Sorry, I don't buy into the mythical reliability of Japanese cars based on my family's experience with them, and, will not pay premium prices to own one.
My '07 Expedition had developed a severe exhaust rattle the past week. It sounded like a loose heat shield. It got to the point where it was driving me nuts, so I decided to take a look to see what was loose before making a trip to the dealer.
Well, I got underneath and was looking around the drivers side exhaust before the Y where the exhaust combines to the muffler. I was looking at the heat shield where the clanking was coming from. You'll never guess what I found. A Snap-On LED flashlight! No joke, it was sitting between the heat shield and a frame cross-member adjacent to the transmission. The only thing I can think of is I had the trans serviced by a Ford dealer back in July. The tech must have left it up there when he was servicing the trans. I can't imagine that it came from the factory. The flash light still works but it's pretty beat up with some heat damage. I'm debating whether I should return it to the dealer, I'm sure it's an expensive light. I don't have a charger to recharge the battery and the on/off switch is on its last leg.
Considering I paid $22,500 for a 2008 AWD CR-V EX (which is the same price I paid in 1997 for my GP GTP), I hardly consider that a premium price. I cross-shopped an Equinox and it was a premium to theCR-V.
While I have not been in the new CRV, I did rent an Equinox for two weeks in Hawaii. That is a rattle trap POC. I usually rent Trailblazers or Explorers. Alamo did not have my Trailblazer when I arrived and gave me an Equinox. I will not settle for that again. Alamo gave me an HHR in Alaska to drive. That is not much of a vehicle either.
I have rented over 100 vehicles in the last 25 years. All but 3 were domestic. I do not see a lot of improvement since the 1980s when I rented Ford Thunderbirds almost exclusively every 3 weeks for several years. I liked driving those rental Tbirds from Hertz. I would get consistent 30 MPG on the highway. They were nice driving and quiet. I left Hertz when they quit building the Tbird and put me in a Taurus which I hated the looks. Switched to Alamo and got lots of Grand Prix and the like. I just did not like those cars. I have rented a few Malibus which are better than the Pontiac with the little trunk opening. What were they thinking? I have never bought a new GM or Ford car. From all the Domestics I have driven the 1989 to 1997 Thunderbird was my favorite. Not much else since 1960 that I liked. Now all the PU trucks look like crap. With their plastic bumpers. That is not a truck. They all went down hill in the 1990s and none have come back to what a PU truck should be. HP is not everything.
Comments
Regards,
OW
http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2008250
Around 86,000 miles, the oil pressure light started to flicker, at idle. I brought it in. I even told them that you have to let the car warm up first and drive it for awhile. It turns out there was a TSB for just that issue, and they fixed it for free. Unfortunately, it took three trips to the dealer to get it fixed! I've always heard that "three" is the magic number when it comes to these types of things.
Just out of curiosity, when you had the coolant leaks, was the area around the thermostat housing ever one of them? Evidently that was a common problem on the 2.7 when it first came out. Mine had to be replaced around 51,000 miles, to the tune of $210 (local mechanic). I heard that in later years the part was improved, but always wondered if that was true or not. In its defense though, the car has 143,000 miles on it now, so thermostat housing #2 has made it 92,000 miles so far!
"What's driving the difference in jobs ... is investment in research, design, engineering and management," Level Field President Jim Doyle said in a statement on the 2006 study.
The Center for Automotive Research said the Big Three had 24,000 engineers on U.S. payrolls in 2007. The Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association said its member companies had 3,500 U.S. research and development employees in 2007."
What makes a car American? (CNN)
The imports are just that. They do the Engineering at their home locations and either build them there and export and/ or build a plant here to build them with as cheap of a work force as possible.
That will change soon though. 27,500 engineers in the US to 3500.
My new neighbor at work who is from the Dayton area tells me that the transplants brought their Japan based supplier base over with them, He interviewed with one of Honda's suppliers. The interview was with a Japanese interviewer, a S. Korean, and then a Chinese. I'm sure that they are part of the 3500 mentioned above. He said their english was terrible with all 3. We are being colonized and the sooner no cars are engineered in America or by Americans, the sooner we'll all be in the lower middle class.
The tv news has Gettlefinger stating that wages for UAW are only 10% of the cost of building a car. He was excluding the UAW at Delphi that supplies many parts for GM cars. Honda has it down to 2% of a car assembly being wages. Where is the other 8% going for Honda? Tokyo I suspect.
I just read, in succession, On a Clear day you Can See General Motors, the John DeLorean book, and then Call Me Roger, about Roger Smith's tenure as CEO...oddly, altho the books are "unrelated", DeLorean tells about GM from 1956 to the late 1970s, and, for different reasons, the next book covers Smith from 1981 to 1990...read the books and they will explain in perfect detail why GM is in trouble...written 20 and 30 years ago, they could have been written yesterday...they are on point for the GM problems of this hour...
GM has wasted hundreds of billions $$$ on the payroll of people who never should have had jobs to begin with...It would be like a Mom & Pop hardware store in a small town, where, instead of 2-4 employees, they had 50 and wondered why they can't make any money...GM should have jettisoned thousands of middle managers whose sole job was to aggravate those below them and push worthless paper forms around to look busy...
The only shame is that those workers about to be jettisoned have made their lives around GM (Ford, too) but they will become the casualties of war...however, rather than see them for what they lost, you could also say that they had some mighty fat years in a job that never should have been created from the beginning...
The automakers will now slim down to become half its size...Michigan will slowly work thru this but will still become a ghost town compared to what it was, and what ti was was an overemployed money waster...
Kinda like a school system which grows from 1000 to 2000 students...you hire new teachers for the growing student body, but once the "boom class" graduates and the school shrinks back to 1000, you can eliminate the extra teachers as they are unnecessary...cruel to the teachers???...maybe, but when a system does not need you, it is criminal to keep somebody on payroll solely because "they have been there"...for the system it is an evolution, for the individual it is a revolution...
The workers will be eliminated as they simply are no longer needed...the re-training they will be offered will be charity from us, but they better get motivated as there is no time to shed tears, life goes on...
Monday of this week I spoke to the other lawyers in my office, saying that the Big 3 must go Chapter 11 now, to junk all their unnecessary debt and contracts...they ALL reminded me about the "ripple effect" to which I replied that the ripple effect does not matter, we cannot pay people to make (Big 3) cars that no one wants to buy...that was Monday...
Today, after hearing that the UAW will not budge an inch until 2011, despite the possibility of bankruptcy, they ALL came in and said that the UAW can go to hell, and they ALL said that GM/Ford should file for bankruptcy TODAY and stick in up the UAW's collective behind...
As time goes on, the whole UAW strategy may backfire, as folks who make much less than a UAW member may become quite resentful about buying a car made by someone who makes much more than they do...few cared while times were good, but now that the UAW is front and center on the news, even the average guy may get fed up...
Then there really only WILL be 2 people who will buy Big 3...lemko and rockylee...
Regards:
OldCEM
He's putting a lot of business miles on it like I do with my cars. So far Its doing OK for him, other than his gripes about the fuel economy when gas was $4 a gallon here.
Regards:
OldCEM
MOST workers in the US have no employment contracts....the union workers are so insulated they have no concept of what life is like outside their little cocoons.
We should ask the Toyota and Honda workers in the US if they'd rather be working for GM or Chrysler? - Those workers that are "low paid" and have "no job rights"?
"non-US citizens" is irrelevant - why mention it? What is the point?
I guess that is possible IF the CEO of Toyota is also the plant manager.
Wagoner.............CEO
Fritz Henderson...President
Gary Cowger.......Vice President Global Manufacturing
Tim Lee...............GM North American Manufacturing
Plant Managers-on the floor
Assistant plant managers-on the floor
Fritz Henderson...President
Gary Cowger.......Vice President Global Manufacturing
Tim Lee...............GM North American Manufacturing
Plant Managers-on the floor
Assistant plant managers-on the floor
Oh don't even TRY to tell me that the plant managers report directly to Lee without a site supervisor acting as a go-between. Unless the Plant Manager IS the site supervisor, in which case below him and his assistants will be at the very least two more layers including shift and area supervisors, who would also be "on the floor."
because this does not happen in europe, with all the reasons for this?
trucks are a big player? what % are D3 truck sales down after $4 gas this year? How many truck sales have they lost vs the J3?
I'm convinced that the D3 offer better value. Malibus and Impalas have rebates now that bring them down to the price of a smaller, noisier, J3 car, like the civic or mazda3.
how much D3 sales are fleet? Is it that because fleet buyers could not afford J3 prices and TCO. Fleet sales mean that professional buyers have selected your product. People whose livlihood depends on making the right decisions.
Is that a good thing that the J3 keep a smaller % of production in inventory? That way the buyer gets less of a choice and that is better for the buyer?
So what is your point? We have leaders from other states trying to seduce companies out of CA all the time. The Midwest stuck it to the NE and the West Coast BIG TIME with the Ethanol Mandate. That is the way things work. There are only so many car buyers. Trying to boost the automakers in your state is what you elected those officials to do. The Michigan delegation all get big kickbacks from GM and the UAW to push legislation that is favorable to the auto industry. There is no thought of how it impacts the rest of the country.
Fleet buyers are not worried about long term reliability. They only keep the car for 1-2 years and dump them. I know people that have always bought used from Budget. They knew the car had regular oil changes and they got a fairly new car for half price.
'08 Malibu sedan = just another epsilon platform GM, a tad better looking than the G6, not a different inside as the Saab, and much like the Aura. Take your pick, they are mostly the same, though Saab has a more unique interior and the turbo i4.
As for the so called econoboxes, I found little justify going say CTS over my Honda SE V6 back a couple of years ago. Sure it is FWD, but for the most part the ride comfort, safety, handling, and such are as good as any starter luxo, with perhaps a better looking interior compared to odd interior plastics on the CTS. That said, if buying a CTS I would go first gen. over the bling look new one. They got the art & science ext. look best in first rendition. It is possible that a coupe version though would be a better fit to the new rounded look, though the excessive bling additions do remain. All in all, not too bad if they sold it for under $28K. For $33K + you can get starter German cars or a nice Japan make.
Neither are most people. As I said, raw numbers don't tell all. Fleet sales don't indicate desirability in any way, only the lowest price for N number of cars. It's also telling how deep the discounts were with some brands, and whether or not the cars were sold at a profit, and how much. Remember, the idea isn't to just sell more cars. The idea is to make more money which means to achieve the ideal balance of sales volume and per-unit profitability. If GM were profitable they wouldn't be begging for a handout, now would they?
trucks are a big player? what % are D3 truck sales down after $4 gas this year? How many truck sales have they lost vs the J3?
Likely very little if any truck sales have been lost to the J3. American manufacturers still make the best full-size trucks around and I'm not sure anyone in their right mind would look anywhere else for one (compact ones are another story..the Frontier is nice, and the Ranger is getting long in the tooth).
I'm convinced that the D3 offer better value. Malibus and Impalas have rebates now that bring them down to the price of a smaller, noisier, J3 car, like the civic or mazda3.
That's nice...but it's likely that it costs considerably more for GM to build a Malibu or Impala than it does for Honda to build a Civic or Mazda to build their fun-derful 3. Which means GM is selling those cars at a loss. Which is a poor business decision and leads to all sorts of messy things like not being profitable, and begging for taxpayer handouts.
Fleet sales mean that professional buyers have selected your product. People whose livlihood depends on making the right decisions.
You're thinking commercial sales, like the contractor who buys a truck. THe smart ones buy F-Series or RAM, by the way. Fleet sales, on the other hand, are bought in bulk through a fleet department by a fleet buyer, sight-unseen, and NOT by anyone who is going to end up driving them. Fleet sales are things like rental cars, police cruisers, cabs, government sedans, etc.
Is that a good thing that the J3 keep a smaller % of production in inventory? That way the buyer gets less of a choice and that is better for the buyer?
No. But you're thinking of what's best for you. I'm thinking what's best for the company. Keeping less production in inventory reduces storage costs and interest on the loans taken to purchase them from the manufacturer. It also means that there is demand for the product if the customers are grabbing them off the lots quickly. Which means the dealer doesn't need to resort to deep, below-profit-level discounts just to get them off the lost and stop costing them money to hold on to.
Also implied by your comment: The B3 can't sell their cars, so they give them away to rental fleets at wholesale. No actual consumers would want them. Further, the 2008 motor trend car of the year is just basic transportation and since some were in rental fleets, they are definitely pitiful. I guess GM was so dumb, they added extra shifts to make a car that was not selling. Further, we are a country of well off masses who should not settle for a Malibu. Only 100 million of us live at or below the poverty level. Only 47 million kids have no health insurance. Only 29% of Floridian and only 31% of Californian homeowners are upside down in their houses, so who are these people who are going to settle for an econobox for the masses? Further, since of millions of peoples 401k balances just nearly dissapeared, a summer of $3.60 gas was just followed by a summer of $4.20 gas, and only half a million or more jobs are now getting lost each month, why should GM build another Malibu as an econocar for the masses when the masses need and can most surely afford far more pampering than the Malibu provides. The masses are all trying to start their next vacation where they need to drive across the country. It only takes a month if you stay 2 weeks.
I said it was an econobox for the masses. I said it compares to the Camry. One not better than the other. I remember when the Cougar came out and was "car of the year". It was a total flop. The rest of your rant in incoherent. If you and 100 million Americans are at the poverty level you are not hardly in the market for a Malibu or Camry. You should be looking for a 6 year old beater for $1000. You also would not be in favor of spending billions to keep over paid UAW workers that are in the top 10% of wage earners on the job.
I do think the CTS is quite attractive, but when you see the price on the window, you ask yourself, wait, is it worth it? I am thinking no. Not when I can get a new 09 Mazda 6, Acura TSX, Acura TL, Accord, VW, or even a C-class mercedes, BMW. See, there are other cars that offer more value and bang for the buck. You simply are paying for the name, but if you think about it, to get that kind of name and quality, you have to pay alot for a GM car in the line up. That car is up there high on the list, but the lower cars don't get that kind of touch of quality.
I think GM will find that their CTS is a bit overpriced, in my opinion too, I think it should be priced around $30-$35k. Because, if I have money to spend on a car, it wouldn't be the CTS.
Like the new Cadillac Escallade Hybrid, WOW!! LOL! Seriously, that thing is already silly enough, but adding more crap to it. By the time you get it paid off, you'll dump it, you cannot possibly see the benefits of the hybrid for years! If I did get an SUV, It might be a loaded Chevy smaller model. I can justify that if you have kids, if not, your just being silly.
Take Honda for instance, If you get a Civic, Fit, you still feel like they put quality into the product. Instead, like GM, you have the "lower end "cars (supposed to mean your lower priced cars), and well, you feel like they skipped a bit on the quality. You get a Honda LX Civic and you still see value there.
Its too bad GM has their priorities mixed up.
You really want to talk about austere? You really don't get much in a C-Class or a 3-Series for around $30K. I haven't seen such barren interiors since I sat in a 1981 Ford Escort. Heck, you're better off buying any of the above cars compared to them and saving $15K. You're simply paying a premium for a three-pointed star or a blue and white roundel on the hood.
One of these days I will learn to post cites and make this easier for everyone...:):):)
Actually the manual Fit Sport that I kept overnight was quite the fun little ride. Lots of plastic and overpriced, but fun to drive.
Maybe I can interest you in a 2010 Ford Fusion? I think I'd like a smaller hatch, but the dash on the hybrid looks like fun:
Oh yeah, Edmunds got 42 in heavy LA traffic in one.
I dunno if I really like the facelift, though. The front-end looks a bit like a blending between a Toyota Tundra and an Avalon, and the rear-end looks a bit too busy, with un-necessary angles in the taillights.
If they took the Milan and made the 3.5V6 standard, it would be the bargain and the better looking model of them all, current and future styles.
The 3.5V6 not being in the Mustang 2010 is just so wrong. Guess it would trump the V8 if they put in the 3.5V6 with 300HP now. This is 2009 though, so let's get with it !!! Why call a car a 2010 when it is not up to 2009 standards?
Yeah, Ford should have used the 3.5 or 3.7 as the base engine in the Mustang. But even at 300hp, the v6 would still be way off on torque.
The 2010 Fusion look real nice. The current model seems like a good car, but I'm not sold on its looks.
That is part of the problem with the Big 3...somehow, the first or 2nd year of a car never seems to have what it needs, they always need an extra year or so to figure out how to make a decent engine to put in it, whereas Hon and Toy give a decent 4 cyl from the start...we always seem to play catch up, and yet, ya gotta know that the engineers know better than that...
Oh SWEET! I want! :shades:
Case in point: when the Solstice did come out, people complained that it wasn't a Camaro basically. Not enough power, not big enough, etc etc. People who are actually looking for a Solstice buy Miatas.
Umm, no!
Me neither, but someone told me about it once. :P
I hate it when I make a mistake. I was going by memory so here is a breakdown after looking at the actual names.
Tim Lee is in charge of about 50 manufacturing plants in NA. There is a level below him split by country/operations/etc. Some of these people have Assembly plants reporting to them. So below this level there is a plant manager at each plant.
1 Wagoner.............CEO
2 Fritz Henderson...President
3 Gary Cowger.......Vice President Global Manufacturing
4 Tim Lee...............GM North American Manufacturing
5 Manufacturing Manager-Assembly plants
6 Plant Managers
But the bottom line is that unless the President of Toyota is "on the floor" there is no way there is 5 more levels between the CEO and "on the floor" at GM than at Toyota. At the most there is one level. I have no idea what goes on below the plant manager at the Toyota plants but I would think they would be similar.
Toyota:
1 Fujio Cho Chairman
2 Katsuaki Watanabe President (replaced Press)
3 Shigeru Hayakawa President of US Operations(replaced Watanabe)
4 ????? Vice President of US operations (replaced Hayakawa)
5? Johnny Tucker Plant Manager
Above are what I could find for Toyota. There may be more in there but I could not get any names below Hayakawa except for Plant Managers. When they announced Hayakawa's promotion they did not mention his replacement. BUT since Toyota has only a few plants here in the US the Plant Managers probably report directly to the VP of US operations.
And these area managers (body shop, trim, paint, etc.) are in charge of more than just the hourly workers and their supervision (used to call them General Foreman and Foremans) but also on quality and efficiency and everything else in their area. From what I can tell they do not have General Foremans any more. They have guys in charge of shifts responsible for everything also. Guess I would call them General Foremans.
It was probably UAW workers that built my Dodge Neon afterall. Maybe they weren't being lazy, but they were definitely careless, negligent, and unattentive.
If I had paid $1 for an extended warranty on my 2003 Accord V6 Coupe, it would have been an utter and total waste of that dollar as that dollar would have been nuch better spent on GM stock shares rather than extended Honda warranties. LOL!
If I win the lottery, I'm getting an R8.
Too bad I don't play the lottery.
Regards:
OldCEM
Well, I got underneath and was looking around the drivers side exhaust before the Y where the exhaust combines to the muffler. I was looking at the heat shield where the clanking was coming from. You'll never guess what I found. A Snap-On LED flashlight! No joke, it was sitting between the heat shield and a frame cross-member adjacent to the transmission. The only thing I can think of is I had the trans serviced by a Ford dealer back in July. The tech must have left it up there when he was servicing the trans. I can't imagine that it came from the factory. The flash light still works but it's pretty beat up with some heat damage. I'm debating whether I should return it to the dealer, I'm sure it's an expensive light. I don't have a charger to recharge the battery and the on/off switch is on its last leg.
Regards,
OW
While I have not been in the new CRV, I did rent an Equinox for two weeks in Hawaii. That is a rattle trap POC. I usually rent Trailblazers or Explorers. Alamo did not have my Trailblazer when I arrived and gave me an Equinox. I will not settle for that again. Alamo gave me an HHR in Alaska to drive. That is not much of a vehicle either.
I have rented over 100 vehicles in the last 25 years. All but 3 were domestic. I do not see a lot of improvement since the 1980s when I rented Ford Thunderbirds almost exclusively every 3 weeks for several years. I liked driving those rental Tbirds from Hertz. I would get consistent 30 MPG on the highway. They were nice driving and quiet. I left Hertz when they quit building the Tbird and put me in a Taurus which I hated the looks. Switched to Alamo and got lots of Grand Prix and the like. I just did not like those cars. I have rented a few Malibus which are better than the Pontiac with the little trunk opening. What were they thinking? I have never bought a new GM or Ford car. From all the Domestics I have driven the 1989 to 1997 Thunderbird was my favorite. Not much else since 1960 that I liked. Now all the PU trucks look like crap. With their plastic bumpers. That is not a truck. They all went down hill in the 1990s and none have come back to what a PU truck should be. HP is not everything.