I have the LS Sport which has the dual exhaust and quicker axle ratio, which may be why the sticker said 17/25 mpg, but I have NEVER exceeded 20 mpg no matter how I drive...if it has the "performance" rear end, then the sticker should have stated 17/20...I really thought with gentle driving it might get near 25 highway, but never...
That's only marginally better than my Expediton. To bad the 5.4 won't fit under the hood. It would probably wouldn't have cost to much to put it under the hood with the 6 speed trans. That would have livened it up a bit and would probably get better fuel economy too.
But, the CV and GM's fate were sealed along time ago. It was a nice car in it's day, but those days are gone.
That's only marginally better than my Expediton. To bad the 5.4 won't fit under the hood. It would probably wouldn't have cost to much to put it under the hood with the 6 speed trans. That would have livened it up a bit and would probably get better fuel economy too.
Oh, the 5.4 will definitely fit...only problem is, you have to cut a hole in the hood! :P
As for fuel economy, I know Lemko has complained about his Grand Marquis not being nearly as efficient as his old 1988 Park Ave was. I have a friend who has a 2004 Crown Vic, but I don't think he pays too much attention to its fuel economy. He's the type that gripes about it when it comes time to fill it up, but if you got into a conversation with him about comparing fuel economy, if you throw out a figure for your car, he'll see you that figure and raise you an MPG or two!
If someone thinks all that info about you from various forms you have filled in online, data from credit applications, the three (is there a fourth now?) credit tracking companies, and other public and private records disappears, they should try googling their own name. Then try 411.com, switchboard.com. You'll get all kinds of offers from companies willing to share the data they have aggreggated about you.
It also offers: Aliases & Maiden Names Misdemeanors & Felonies Up to a 40-year Address History Phone Numbers Age & Date of Birth Property Ownership Marriages & Divorces Bankruptcies Neighbors & Possible Relatives And other useful information
And earlier screen offered court records, criminal records, and public records.
Better sources are available for finding someone than these; these are for the general public. Private investigators will learn a lot about someone. E.g., I tried to find someone I knew 30-35 years ago. I found he had been in court many times suing and being sued. He had filed bankruptcy. He had several driving violations. This I found from public records without paying any company $40.
Yeah. And all that information passes the "accuracy" test. Right!!!!
Even if the information was 75% accurate (and I HIGHLY doubt that it is) that would be far more errant information needed in order to distort a survey.
Periodically, I get credit card applications addressed to my dog.... "Pre-approved" applications. That's because I used her name on a magazine subscription years ago.
I also get service reminders for cars that I haven't owned in years.
Credit information is highly regulated nowadays and a company better have a good reason for asking for a credit report on someone or risk a lawsuit. I doubt a car reliability survey qualifies as a "suitable" reason.
Do you really think companies like JDP are hiring private investigators to search out details on their respondents?
As for fuel economy, I know Lemko has complained about his Grand Marquis not being nearly as efficient as his old 1988 Park Ave was.
Well it doesn't take a genius to figure out why, an '88 P/A has a curb weight around 3400lbs, a '05 or so Grand Marquis is over 4k lbs. Add a larger engine and to motivate the weight and what do you expect. I bet an 88 P/A gets significantly better fuel economy than than Lemko's DTS, but I've never heard him complain about that.
According to fueleconomy.gov the DTS gets slightly worse mileage than a GM it shows GM 16/23 vs DTS 15/22 on . That's the car he should be complaining about;)
The playing field is a little lopsided..but I not going to spend any more time for this topic is loaded with transplant ideologues..
But that isn't a good excuse to make crappy cars for high prices. If the Big 3 had a lopsided playing field, they should have gone out swinging. They should have made stellar high quality vehicles and sold them for prices that couldn't be beat. If their costs were too high due to lopsided playing fields, then they'd of lost money on the cars, and eventually went out of business.
Oh wait, they went out of business anyway overcharging for poor quality.
If they had gone out swinging making great cars but unable to compete on price, I think the American public (including myself) would have been more sympathetic to the Big 3 industry. But since they chose to deceive the public and sell crap for the price of gold, they receive no sympathy from MOST Americans.
That excuse does not justify why they made such poor product in every measurable way.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
According to fueleconomy.gov the DTS gets slightly worse mileage than a GM it shows GM 16/23 vs DTS 15/22 on . That's the car he should be complaining about;)
I wonder how hard you have to beat on cars to get those new, lower mpg ratings? My 2000 Park Ave, for example, is rated 16/25, while the original sticker was 18/27. Yet on the highway, I've had no trouble breaking 30.
I just got back last night from Cedar Point in Ohio. We took my buddy's 2006 Xterra, which is rated a piggy 14/19, although the window sticker at the time was 16/21. We managed around 22 mpg on the trip. 3 adults on board, a/c going most of the time, and enough luggage to conjure up images of Thurston and Lovey packing for a 3 hour tour! We weren't exactly babying it, either.
I'd be curious to see what kind of fuel economy my Park Ave would've gotten on that same trip. It probably would've been more at home in the midwest, anyway. Good lord, I can't remember the last time I've seen so many domestic cars!
I'm just trying to make sense of Canadian - built Buicks with Chinese components being called domestic cars. Sure, those profits can, and will be, invested globally, but at least they'll make a stop here in the USA; that's more than you can say for Toyota's profits. Also, nearly all the best Toyota jobs - the people who make the design, engineering and manufacturing decisions are NOT here in America. And, while I agree that GM and Ford management feels little obligation to resist global outsourcing, if, in the past, they had competent management, many of the transplant factories would have THEIR logos out front today. Who knows? Perhaps the day will come when Ford will take over Honda's Ohio plant to build Fusions.
General Motors announced on Tuesday that it has established a new division to manage the company’s South American operation. The new division will be headquartered in Sao Paulo, Brazil.
When you bail out the auto companies, the money goes to other countries!
Sounds like the tired old argument that if Toyota or Honda make cars in the US, the "profits" go to Japan. So much better that we pay off GM - NOT!
I just got back last night from Cedar Point in Ohio. We took my buddy's 2006 Xterra, which is rated a piggy 14/19, although the window sticker at the time was 16/21. We managed around 22 mpg on the trip.
That's not bad. My 2001 Nissan Pathfinder never got much more than 16-17hwy. I can break 18 in my Expedition if I drive slow (65 or below), get above 70 and it drops like a rock w/o a tail wind. At 75 it gets between 15-17. Though I did get 18.5 last summer driving to Kansas City. I set the cruise at 85, but I had a 20-30 mph tail wind.
Granted I think the new EPA standards are merely an average. Some people will beat them others will not. I usually do not beat them. When I drove my grandpa's '00 P/A from Tampa to Ohio, I averaged around 27-28mpg. Definitely impressive for that size of car.
I'm just trying to make sense of Canadian - built Buicks with Chinese components being called domestic cars. Sure, those profits can, and will be, invested globally, but at least they'll make a stop here in the USA; that's more than you can say for Toyota's profits.
So, what would one call the massive investments in plant and equipment that the foreign manufacturers have made in the US? They didn’t take their profits and put them in a Japanese bank vault. They spent a large amount of it here, both in $$$ and %%%.
Also, nearly all the best Toyota jobs - the people who make the design, engineering and manufacturing decisions are NOT here in America.
If, by that comment, you mean there are few high-paying jobs here related to foreign auto manufacturers, I would say you might find it very difficult to find supporting data on that subject. In the upstate of SC, where BMW manufactures cars (and Michelin’s NA headquarters reside, there are a large number of great paying engineering jobs.
And, while I agree that GM and Ford management feels little obligation to resist global outsourcing, if, in the past, they had competent management, many of the transplant factories would have THEIR logos out front today.
Possibly. Unfortunately, the Big-3 continued to operate as if the US was the manufacturing center of the world like it was in 1950, after WWII. I often think that many of the Big-3 executives still believe that Berlin and Tokyo have streets lined with rubble from bombing.
Who knows? Perhaps the day will come when Ford will take over Honda's Ohio plant to build Fusions.
Possibly. Unfortunately, the Big-3 continued to operate as if the US was the manufacturing center of the world like it was in 1950, after WWII. I often think that many of the Big-3 executives still believe that Berlin and Tokyo have streets lined with rubble from bombing.
I think there are a few posters on Edmunds as well as the GM boards I visit who also fall into this category... :sick:
Where do the corporate profits go? ....to the corporation. Who owns the corporation? ...the shareholders. Who are the shareholders? Do you want to own part of Toyota Motor Corp? It's traded on the NY Stock Exchange. Go for it. :shades:
Where do the corporate profits go? ....to the corporation. Who owns the corporation? ...the shareholders. Who are the shareholders? Do you want to own part of Toyota Motor Corp? It's traded on the NY Stock Exchange. Go for it. :shades:
No kidding, nearly 70% of BP is owned by pension funds between the UK and US. DUH! The same bone heads who are calling for BP to cut it's dividends probably have a pension or 401k funds invested in BP.
Hi, I'm new to the forum and I require some advice on importing a kit car manufactured by Everett-Morrison into Canada. Is this possible? What would be the best way to do this.....through a broker?
Any information would be helpful.....appreciate the advice. Thanks, Randall
>"General Motors announced on Tuesday that it has established a new division to manage the company’s South American operation. The new division will be headquartered in Sao Paulo, Brazil."
Do the GM fans think this is a good thing?
Putting Brazilian workers to work, while American workers may be required to work for one of the "FOREIGN" manufacturers building cars here.
Guess it is Okay, since some of the money will help the fat cat top GM executives to stay fat. But won't do a thing for the American worker! :mad:
Actually, both cars are significantly better on the highway than they are in the city. I might be a little harder on the Grand Marquis because I consider it my everyday beater while I consider my DTS the good car. As far as everyday beaters go, the Park Ave was perfect! The car in our fleet that probably gets used the most, however, is my wife's 2005 LaCrosse which is similar in configuration to the Park Ave.
Good lord, I can't remember the last time I've seen so many domestic cars! Were you passing through Raytown? :P
>"That's only marginally better than my Expediton. To bad the 5.4 won't fit under the hood. It would probably wouldn't have cost to much to put it under the hood with the 6 speed trans. That would have livened it up a bit and would probably get better fuel economy too."
Saw somewhere that the problem is more the height of the engines rather than the distance between wheel wells. So why not re form the hood to be a bit higher?
The 2011 Mustangs have some pretty impressive engines available from the 4.6 V8 and the V6 platforms. It would stand to reason that doing the same "Tweaking" to the 5.4 could be even more impressive.
While it may be that Manufacturers don't make a large profit from police sales, the advertisement of police preferring a particular brand is priceless.
When Glock Pistols came to this country in the mid/early 80s, most thought a "Plastic" gun would never hold up. But eventually more and more Law enforcement agencies found them to be extremely reliable and with long longevity. As they became popular with law enforcement they became more popular with the public.
Our local Sheriff and City Police are switching to Chargers for the better performance when they replace worn out or wrecked Fords. And there are more Chargers on the road belonging to private citizens.
A lot of Sheriff deputies come into our Shooting range. Conversation, besides guns, leads to their cruisers. They really like the Charger performance, but all have said they would prefer to have the full frame of the Ford in an accident.
I don't know if there is any validity that a body on frame is any safer than unibody, but they seem to think it is. How much could it cost to change the shape of the Ford hood?
Glock pistols are great. There's hardly any recoil and the bullet goes to the target almost like you were pointing your finger at it and telling the bullet where to go. I have a subcompact Glock 26 as my CCW. I had my qualms about a "plastic gun" until I tried out my buddy's Glock 17.
There's a 23 year-old girl in my office who bought a new red Charger 5.7 Hemi last year. Dodge should use her in their advertising she praises the car so much. The Philadelphia Police Department uses Hemi Chargers for highway patrol use. The remainder of the fleet is mostly Crown Vics and Impalas.
Actually, both cars are significantly better on the highway than they are in the city. I might be a little harder on the Grand Marquis because I consider it my everyday beater while I consider my DTS the good car.
Have you ever checked the fuel economy on that Grand Marquis when you do a long highway run? Like when you come out for the car shows? I'd guess it should be able to get around 24-25 mpg without too much trouble.
Were you passing through Raytown?
Ahh, you caught that reference! Actually, we passed through Lordstown, and could see the factory where they build the Cobalt/G5. That parking lot was full of GM vehicles!
Where did the profit go? Back to the USA.. Thank you very much!!!
I doubt much of the profits from overseas operations make it back to the US other than helping the stock price (for ford anyway). It potentially gets double taxed that way. I'm sure most of the profits made in China, Europe, and SA are reinvested into new products and operations for those markets.
Saw somewhere that the problem is more the height of the engines rather than the distance between wheel wells. So why not re form the hood to be a bit higher?
The 2011 Mustangs have some pretty impressive engines available from the 4.6 V8 and the V6 platforms. It would stand to reason that doing the same "Tweaking" to the 5.4 could be even more impressive.
Yeah, I've read the 5.4 is to tall too. I don't know how much the hood would have to change to make it fit, but the 3v 4.6 from the Explorer would work as it's around 290hp and 300ft-lbs of torque, add a 6speed trans and it would be a strong running car.
The 2011 Mustang no longer uses the 4.6, it's got a new 5.0 32v DOHC v8 with like 412hp and 390 ft-lbs of torque or so. Now were talkin.
June 23, 2010 4:02 p.m. LORDSTOWN, Ohio -- The last Chevrolet Cobalt to be made at the General Motors Complex was driven off the assembly line at 3:35 this afternoon by autoworker Charmaine Phillips. The car is headed for a Chevy dealership in W. Franklin, N.H., according to the plant's spokesman, Tom Mock. In the six years since the Cobalt was launched, the GM plant has turned out 1.1 million cars.
That's kinda cool...roughly 24 hours after we drove past the plant, on the way home. So, I wonder how soon the first Cruze will roll off the assembly line? There's a big mural on the side of the factory that says "The Cruze is coming!" It was there last year, too.
Brazil and South America are huge markets. It would be nice if US plants were used to supply them. That's not happening. In fact, some of the cars built down there may wind up being sold here. Chinese-built Caddies are coming here. At least, this should help GM repay the US taxpayers. If you want to help US auto workers, support the effort to organize Toyota's US factories. GM is still a lot more American than, say, Hyundai or Audi. Not like in 1956, though.
Organize the Toyota plants? I guess those Toyota workers aren't as happy as Toyota led us to believe. Maybe they got sick of being "permatemps?"
I remember driving through Newark, Delaware and seeing a GM factory with a Chevrolet Malibu displayed on a pedestal and a sign that read "Home of the Chevy Malibu."
I'm just going by Toyota's testimony before Congress where it was clear that all important decisions were made in Japan. What design and engineering jobs are here are a small part of the company total; there's no comparison to the days when our Big Three did 99% of that work here, although, that could change.
It's kind of like having a bicycle manufacturer based in China that does all the design, engineering, and parts manufacturing work and having the bikes assembled in the U.S. by a Wal~Mart employee in the back room.
It's kind of like having a bicycle manufacturer based in China that does all the design, engineering, and parts manufacturing work and having the bikes assembled in the U.S. by a Wal~Mart employee in the back room.
I read an article in our local news paper about Huffy a few weeks ago, the CEO is from my area and he graduated from the University of Illinois. Anyway, in the article it said the design and engineering is done at their US office (at least that is how I understand it) and they mainly sub the manufacturing, which of course is done in China.
Heck, I bought my daughter a $350 Trek at a bicycle shop that was still manufactured in China. You've pretty much have to spend big bucks to find a bike made in the states.
Or, if you want to help US workers KEEP THEIR JOBS, make damn sure the UAW never gets within 100 miles of any US plant...maybe the UAW headquarters should be on the site of the Deepwater Horizon drilling site... :shades:
I know this much. If I had a design I developed myself for a special widget or electronic device, I sure as hell wouldn't want to deal with employing everyone to manufacture the product. I've had positions where I've managed hundreds of employees and my wife does so now, it's basically baby sitting and worrying about who's stealing and/or taking advantage of your business (You would not believe how many $120k+/yr 40hr/wk employees my wife has had to fire for stealing, harassment, or just not showing up to work) . It's a major PITA. I'd gladly contract out the manufacturing to who ever could build my product as cheap as possible and maintain my quality standards.
If I'm competing with products from around the world, then I HAVE to be able to compete on price even if I have to build it in Mexico or China to do so. If I could build the product with US workers then great, but I don't feel like I'm obligated to do so, particularly if I sell my product internationally. Goal number one is to stay in business.
It means there is no free lunch. We either buy American or devalue our life savings. The gov just prints money to pay unemployment for those who lose their jobs due to the purchase of foreign products. That dilutes the money supply, making everything cost more. Making the dollar worth a fraction of what it was worth 10 years ago.
Yes, there is competition in the auto sales industry, making all products better. Like I've said many times before, how could trading a miniscule difference in vehicle quality offset the loss of half of your life savings?
I spend less than 5% of my resources in the purchase of vehicles. I am more concerned about the other 95% of my resources losing it's value. Gov overspending, partly to pay laid off US auto industry workers and the 2nd and 3rd ties suppliers to them, and the service industry that they once supported, is a huge longstanding burden on all of us. Then there is the lost real estate value and then lost prop tax base leading to laid off state and local workers. All that is the trickle down effect of signing on the line to buy an Asian or European vehicle.
Yes, but in the long run all those negative effects you mention turn into long term benefits. Sure, there are short term negatives, but in the long run, we are way better off if people do what they are good at.
We want people doing something productive. Making shoddy cars with questional parts and shoddy workmanship isn't a productive effort. However, the man and/or woman that can't build a good car to save their life might be excellent at making a great hamburger or cheeseburger. The management of GM, while failing in the business world, might be able to mix up the world's best milkshake.
Perhaps they'd make good productive musicians, artists, or some might invent the next great thing (like an IPOD with some resemblance of sound quality and fidelity).
We shouldn't waste our lives and efforts supporting a mediocrity, at best and putting it nicely.
The point is, we should have our fellow Americans doing something they are good at, and enjoy, and obviously, making cars ain't it!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
We either buy American or devalue our life savings.
The real point is that "buy American" is a complex statement. The reality is that GM has over 50% of it's employees offshore and it is not making any profits. So it is not paying any corporate income taxes. A car made in Canada is not employing any US workers and those workers are paying Canadian, not US, income taxes.
A car made in the US such as a Camry with 75% US content is employing a plant, its workers, utility providers, a local economy, restaurants, suppliers, transportation. The suppliers then provide income to even more workers who buy houses, TVs, eat at resaurants, etc. Those workers pay US income taxes. That plant pays US income taxes. In many cases the US transplants even do their design work in the US. There is a HUGE ripple effect.
If the profit margin on a car is 10%, then max 10% of the money goes to the parent corporation and 90% of the value is spent in the country of manufacture.
So I don't see why a failed enterprise such as GM, with most of its manufacturing outside the USA, who has sucked $60B out of the US taxpayer to produce still too many mediocre vehicles, is a company we should celebrate, or defend, or desire their Canadian car sales rather than Toyota's US car sales. Tell me why GM is so important that we support a failure that brings less economic potential to the table than the successful Toyota, or Honda, or Hyundai, or Subaru, or BMW who make vehicles in this country?
Do you realize the US economy employs roughly 55 million more people today vs. 1975. That's about a 38% increase in jobs vs a 28% increase in population. Gee, maybe some industries outside of the US auto industry have done well. We sure know the domestic automakers are not responsible for the added jobs.
I obtained my data from the BLS website comparing 1975 to 2005. I used 2005 because the report showed about 9 million more jobs for 2010, but since the report was issued in 2008, I used the 2005 data since I figured many jobs from 2005 have been lost.
I know many people making $100k plus in jobs and industries that weren't around 30+ years ago and many are women. If we kept the same economy mix we had 30 years ago, we'd probably have 40% unemployment.
Unfortunately, many simply can't grasp any concept extending beyound the nationality of the nameplate.
Let's make it really simple.
In this example, there are only 2 car manufacturers.
Company one makes it cars 100% in Asia, but brings the profits home to the US.
Company two does the exact opposite. It completely builds 100% of its cars in the USA, but sends its profit from those care sales to Asia.
If option one is preferable, who is going to buy the cars brought here? After all, just how many autos does the corporate office executive pool need? And, how much in taxes are these (relatively few) guys paying?
If option two is in play, the workers making those cars also have the ability to purchase the cars they make, as well as pay taxes to support roads and infrastructure. True, some money goes overseas, but the lion's share stays in the USA, where the jobs, asembly plants, and supported infrastructure resides.
To me, the answer is obvious. The China "miracle" proves the point.
No, the Chinese worker doesn't make the UAW wage, but then again, is it really a 100K/year job to install wheels onto a car on the assembly line?
The global economy is here, and its not going away.So, those who can't adapt are going away. Its really just that simple.
Wow, dave! I couldn't have said it better myself! Philadelphia is a microcosm of what happens when you lose your industrial base. There's also all the social ills that are a result of joblessness and poverty: crime, violence, diminished quality of life, less city services, drug and alcohol addiction, disintegration of familes, etc.
Yeah, but what's the U.S. population today versus what it was in 1975? If 55 million more people are employed, but we have 100 million more people than we did in 1975, then 45 million people are out of work!
The domestics had 80% market share in the 70's and the economy was horrible. Stagflation, high unemployment, gas lines. Yep, good times.
Were you alive (or maybe better, aware) during the '70's? Yes, gas lines due to OPEC. Stagflation/inflation, sure. But high unemployment? Compared to now? Besides cyclical ups and downs then, I think most people would say that, adjusted for inflation, the economy for more people, was better then than it is now.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Did you read my post! I don't have the report up now, but it stated that the population has grown around 28% and employment has grown over 38% and that is despite the fact productivity has also increased over 30% and our population is older with more retirees than ever.
Back then, a layoff meant you had a good shot of returning to your job when things got better. Today, there really is no such thing as a "layoff." You are essentially fired! Back then, you had a reasonable shot at getting as good or a better paying job in case you lost your old one. Today, you are lucky to get a job that pays even less than the one you had. Back then, a kid graduating from college had an advantage over the remainder of the workforce. Today, you've got guys with Master's Degrees on the dole or working at Wal~Mart! :mad:
Comments
That's only marginally better than my Expediton. To bad the 5.4 won't fit under the hood. It would probably wouldn't have cost to much to put it under the hood with the 6 speed trans. That would have livened it up a bit and would probably get better fuel economy too.
But, the CV and GM's fate were sealed along time ago. It was a nice car in it's day, but those days are gone.
Oh, the 5.4 will definitely fit...only problem is, you have to cut a hole in the hood! :P
As for fuel economy, I know Lemko has complained about his Grand Marquis not being nearly as efficient as his old 1988 Park Ave was. I have a friend who has a 2004 Crown Vic, but I don't think he pays too much attention to its fuel economy. He's the type that gripes about it when it comes time to fill it up, but if you got into a conversation with him about comparing fuel economy, if you throw out a figure for your car, he'll see you that figure and raise you an MPG or two!
. Toyota Camry
2. Honda Accord
3. Ford Escape
4. Ford Focus
5. Chevrolet Rentabu
6. Honda Odyssey
7. Dodge RAM
8. Toyota Tundra
9. Jeep Wrangler
10. Toyota Sienna
Full List
Checking for a James Smith in Dayton, I got this:
http://www.peoplefinders.com/checkout/offer.aspx?type=people-name&item-id=679515- - - - - 791&item-count=99&fn=James&mn=&ln=Smith&city=Dayton&state=OH&searchtype=people-n- - - - - ame
It also offers:
Aliases & Maiden Names
Misdemeanors & Felonies
Up to a 40-year Address History
Phone Numbers
Age & Date of Birth
Property Ownership
Marriages & Divorces
Bankruptcies
Neighbors & Possible Relatives
And other useful information
And earlier screen offered court records, criminal records, and public records.
Better sources are available for finding someone than these; these are for the general public. Private investigators will learn a lot about someone. E.g., I tried to find someone I knew 30-35 years ago. I found he had been in court many times suing and being sued. He had filed bankruptcy. He had several driving violations. This I found from public records without paying any company $40.
Yeah. And all that information passes the "accuracy" test. Right!!!!
Even if the information was 75% accurate (and I HIGHLY doubt that it is) that would be far more errant information needed in order to distort a survey.
Periodically, I get credit card applications addressed to my dog.... "Pre-approved" applications. That's because I used her name on a magazine subscription years ago.
I also get service reminders for cars that I haven't owned in years.
Credit information is highly regulated nowadays and a company better have a good reason for asking for a credit report on someone or risk a lawsuit. I doubt a car reliability survey qualifies as a "suitable" reason.
Do you really think companies like JDP are hiring private investigators to search out details on their respondents?
LOL!!!!!!!
Well it doesn't take a genius to figure out why, an '88 P/A has a curb weight around 3400lbs, a '05 or so Grand Marquis is over 4k lbs. Add a larger engine and to motivate the weight and what do you expect. I bet an 88 P/A gets significantly better fuel economy than than Lemko's DTS, but I've never heard him complain about that.
According to fueleconomy.gov the DTS gets slightly worse mileage than a GM it shows GM 16/23 vs DTS 15/22 on . That's the car he should be complaining about;)
Cool! That would be the billybob special.
But that isn't a good excuse to make crappy cars for high prices. If the Big 3 had a lopsided playing field, they should have gone out swinging. They should have made stellar high quality vehicles and sold them for prices that couldn't be beat. If their costs were too high due to lopsided playing fields, then they'd of lost money on the cars, and eventually went out of business.
Oh wait, they went out of business anyway overcharging for poor quality.
If they had gone out swinging making great cars but unable to compete on price, I think the American public (including myself) would have been more sympathetic to the Big 3 industry. But since they chose to deceive the public and sell crap for the price of gold, they receive no sympathy from MOST Americans.
That excuse does not justify why they made such poor product in every measurable way.
I wonder how hard you have to beat on cars to get those new, lower mpg ratings? My 2000 Park Ave, for example, is rated 16/25, while the original sticker was 18/27. Yet on the highway, I've had no trouble breaking 30.
I just got back last night from Cedar Point in Ohio. We took my buddy's 2006 Xterra, which is rated a piggy 14/19, although the window sticker at the time was 16/21. We managed around 22 mpg on the trip. 3 adults on board, a/c going most of the time, and enough luggage to conjure up images of Thurston and Lovey packing for a 3 hour tour! We weren't exactly babying it, either.
I'd be curious to see what kind of fuel economy my Park Ave would've gotten on that same trip. It probably would've been more at home in the midwest, anyway. Good lord, I can't remember the last time I've seen so many domestic cars!
When you bail out the auto companies, the money goes to other countries!
Sounds like the tired old argument that if Toyota or Honda make cars in the US, the "profits" go to Japan. So much better that we pay off GM - NOT!
That's not bad. My 2001 Nissan Pathfinder never got much more than 16-17hwy. I can break 18 in my Expedition if I drive slow (65 or below), get above 70 and it drops like a rock w/o a tail wind. At 75 it gets between 15-17. Though I did get 18.5 last summer driving to Kansas City. I set the cruise at 85, but I had a 20-30 mph tail wind.
Granted I think the new EPA standards are merely an average. Some people will beat them others will not. I usually do not beat them. When I drove my grandpa's '00 P/A from Tampa to Ohio, I averaged around 27-28mpg. Definitely impressive for that size of car.
There is a design studio in both California and Detroilet (Ann Arbor actually).
CALTY DESIGN RESEARCH, INC.
So, what would one call the massive investments in plant and equipment that the foreign manufacturers have made in the US? They didn’t take their profits and put them in a Japanese bank vault. They spent a large amount of it here, both in $$$ and %%%.
Also, nearly all the best Toyota jobs - the people who make the design, engineering and manufacturing decisions are NOT here in America.
If, by that comment, you mean there are few high-paying jobs here related to foreign auto manufacturers, I would say you might find it very difficult to find supporting data on that subject. In the upstate of SC, where BMW manufactures cars (and Michelin’s NA headquarters reside, there are a large number of great paying engineering jobs.
And, while I agree that GM and Ford management feels little obligation to resist global outsourcing, if, in the past, they had competent management, many of the transplant factories would have THEIR logos out front today.
Possibly. Unfortunately, the Big-3 continued to operate as if the US was the manufacturing center of the world like it was in 1950, after WWII. I often think that many of the Big-3 executives still believe that Berlin and Tokyo have streets lined with rubble from bombing.
Who knows? Perhaps the day will come when Ford will take over Honda's Ohio plant to build Fusions.
Perhaps. We’ll see.
I think there are a few posters on Edmunds as well as the GM boards I visit who also fall into this category... :sick:
Yes. I have seen some of them as well...
LOL!!!
Who owns the corporation? ...the shareholders.
Who are the shareholders?
Do you want to own part of Toyota Motor Corp? It's traded on the NY Stock Exchange.
Go for it. :shades:
Toyota stock FAQ
Who owns the corporation? ...the shareholders.
Who are the shareholders?
Do you want to own part of Toyota Motor Corp? It's traded on the NY Stock Exchange.
Go for it. :shades:
No kidding, nearly 70% of BP is owned by pension funds between the UK and US. DUH! The same bone heads who are calling for BP to cut it's dividends probably have a pension or 401k funds invested in BP.
Any information would be helpful.....appreciate the advice.
Thanks,
Randall
Importing Car into Canada from US
And welcome!
Do the GM fans think this is a good thing?
Putting Brazilian workers to work, while American workers may be required to work for one of the "FOREIGN" manufacturers building cars here.
Guess it is Okay, since some of the money will help the fat cat top GM executives to stay fat. But won't do a thing for the American worker! :mad:
OH the Hypocrisy !
Kip
Good lord, I can't remember the last time I've seen so many domestic cars!
Were you passing through Raytown? :P
Saw somewhere that the problem is more the height of the engines rather than the distance between wheel wells. So why not re form the hood to be a bit higher?
The 2011 Mustangs have some pretty impressive engines available from the 4.6 V8 and the V6 platforms. It would stand to reason that doing the same "Tweaking" to the 5.4 could be even more impressive.
While it may be that Manufacturers don't make a large profit from police sales, the advertisement of police preferring a particular brand is priceless.
When Glock Pistols came to this country in the mid/early 80s, most thought a "Plastic" gun would never hold up. But eventually more and more Law enforcement agencies found them to be extremely reliable and with long longevity.
As they became popular with law enforcement they became more popular with the public.
Our local Sheriff and City Police are switching to Chargers for the better performance when they replace worn out or wrecked Fords. And there are more Chargers on the road belonging to private citizens.
A lot of Sheriff deputies come into our Shooting range. Conversation, besides guns, leads to their cruisers. They really like the Charger performance, but all have said they would prefer to have the full frame of the Ford in an accident.
I don't know if there is any validity that a body on frame is any safer than unibody, but they seem to think it is. How much could it cost to change the shape of the Ford hood?
Kip
There's a 23 year-old girl in my office who bought a new red Charger 5.7 Hemi last year. Dodge should use her in their advertising she praises the car so much. The Philadelphia Police Department uses Hemi Chargers for highway patrol use. The remainder of the fleet is mostly Crown Vics and Impalas.
Have you ever checked the fuel economy on that Grand Marquis when you do a long highway run? Like when you come out for the car shows? I'd guess it should be able to get around 24-25 mpg without too much trouble.
Were you passing through Raytown?
Ahh, you caught that reference! Actually, we passed through Lordstown, and could see the factory where they build the Cobalt/G5. That parking lot was full of GM vehicles!
I doubt much of the profits from overseas operations make it back to the US other than helping the stock price (for ford anyway). It potentially gets double taxed that way. I'm sure most of the profits made in China, Europe, and SA are reinvested into new products and operations for those markets.
My dad's '92 CV would routinely get 25mpg on the hwy, but it had the tall rear gear ratio and only like 190hp back then.
The 2011 Mustangs have some pretty impressive engines available from the 4.6 V8 and the V6 platforms. It would stand to reason that doing the same "Tweaking" to the 5.4 could be even more impressive.
Yeah, I've read the 5.4 is to tall too. I don't know how much the hood would have to change to make it fit, but the 3v 4.6 from the Explorer would work as it's around 290hp and 300ft-lbs of torque, add a 6speed trans and it would be a strong running car.
The 2011 Mustang no longer uses the 4.6, it's got a new 5.0 32v DOHC v8 with like 412hp and 390 ft-lbs of torque or so. Now were talkin.
Not any more:
June 23, 2010 4:02 p.m.
LORDSTOWN, Ohio -- The last Chevrolet Cobalt to be made at the General Motors Complex was driven off the assembly line at 3:35 this afternoon by autoworker Charmaine Phillips.
The car is headed for a Chevy dealership in W. Franklin, N.H., according to the plant's spokesman, Tom Mock.
In the six years since the Cobalt was launched, the GM plant has turned out 1.1 million cars.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I remember driving through Newark, Delaware and seeing a GM factory with a Chevrolet Malibu displayed on a pedestal and a sign that read "Home of the Chevy Malibu."
I read an article in our local news paper about Huffy a few weeks ago, the CEO is from my area and he graduated from the University of Illinois. Anyway, in the article it said the design and engineering is done at their US office (at least that is how I understand it) and they mainly sub the manufacturing, which of course is done in China.
Heck, I bought my daughter a $350 Trek at a bicycle shop that was still manufactured in China. You've pretty much have to spend big bucks to find a bike made in the states.
That's the point. There is a comparison here. Things have already changed. It's called global manufacturing...
Who do you think designs Government Motors small cars for Chevy, Pontiac, (previously) Suzuki, ?
Daewoo Motor Co. (GMDAT)
Where do you think most of Saturns lineup came from before it was kitshanned and is now being transferred to Buick?
Opel (Germany)
SAIC (China)
How about cars like the G8 or the GTO?
Australia. (Zeta was developed and designed there IIRC)
GM has numerous engine plants all over China, Korea, India and in the Middle East (Uzbekistan for example).
Sorry, calling GM an "American company" is about as misleading as calling Canadian and mexican built GM vehicles "American"...
lmao. Toyo would be off their dam rockers to let a leech like the UAW in their house. :sick:
If I'm competing with products from around the world, then I HAVE to be able to compete on price even if I have to build it in Mexico or China to do so. If I could build the product with US workers then great, but I don't feel like I'm obligated to do so, particularly if I sell my product internationally. Goal number one is to stay in business.
Yes, there is competition in the auto sales industry, making all products better. Like I've said many times before, how could trading a miniscule difference in vehicle quality offset the loss of half of your life savings?
I spend less than 5% of my resources in the purchase of vehicles. I am more concerned about the other 95% of my resources losing it's value. Gov overspending, partly to pay laid off US auto industry workers and the 2nd and 3rd ties suppliers to them, and the service industry that they once supported, is a huge longstanding burden on all of us. Then there is the lost real estate value and then lost prop tax base leading to laid off state and local workers. All that is the trickle down effect of signing on the line to buy an Asian or European vehicle.
We want people doing something productive. Making shoddy cars with questional parts and shoddy workmanship isn't a productive effort. However, the man and/or woman that can't build a good car to save their life might be excellent at making a great hamburger or cheeseburger. The management of GM, while failing in the business world, might be able to mix up the world's best milkshake.
Perhaps they'd make good productive musicians, artists, or some might invent the next great thing (like an IPOD with some resemblance of sound quality and fidelity).
We shouldn't waste our lives and efforts supporting a mediocrity, at best and putting it nicely.
The point is, we should have our fellow Americans doing something they are good at, and enjoy, and obviously, making cars ain't it!
All of our problems are because of people buying Asian and European vehicles. You're joking right?
The domestics had 80% market share in the 70's and the economy was horrible. Stagflation, high unemployment, gas lines. Yep, good times.
The real point is that "buy American" is a complex statement. The reality is that GM has over 50% of it's employees offshore and it is not making any profits. So it is not paying any corporate income taxes. A car made in Canada is not employing any US workers and those workers are paying Canadian, not US, income taxes.
A car made in the US such as a Camry with 75% US content is employing a plant, its workers, utility providers, a local economy, restaurants, suppliers, transportation. The suppliers then provide income to even more workers who buy houses, TVs, eat at resaurants, etc. Those workers pay US income taxes. That plant pays US income taxes. In many cases the US transplants even do their design work in the US. There is a HUGE ripple effect.
If the profit margin on a car is 10%, then max 10% of the money goes to the parent corporation and 90% of the value is spent in the country of manufacture.
So I don't see why a failed enterprise such as GM, with most of its manufacturing outside the USA, who has sucked $60B out of the US taxpayer to produce still too many mediocre vehicles, is a company we should celebrate, or defend, or desire their Canadian car sales rather than Toyota's US car sales. Tell me why GM is so important that we support a failure that brings less economic potential to the table than the successful Toyota, or Honda, or Hyundai, or Subaru, or BMW who make vehicles in this country?
I obtained my data from the BLS website comparing 1975 to 2005. I used 2005 because the report showed about 9 million more jobs for 2010, but since the report was issued in 2008, I used the 2005 data since I figured many jobs from 2005 have been lost.
I know many people making $100k plus in jobs and industries that weren't around 30+ years ago and many are women. If we kept the same economy mix we had 30 years ago, we'd probably have 40% unemployment.
Unfortunately, many simply can't grasp any concept extending beyound the nationality of the nameplate.
Let's make it really simple.
In this example, there are only 2 car manufacturers.
Company one makes it cars 100% in Asia, but brings the profits home to the US.
Company two does the exact opposite. It completely builds 100% of its cars in the USA, but sends its profit from those care sales to Asia.
If option one is preferable, who is going to buy the cars brought here? After all, just how many autos does the corporate office executive pool need? And, how much in taxes are these (relatively few) guys paying?
If option two is in play, the workers making those cars also have the ability to purchase the cars they make, as well as pay taxes to support roads and infrastructure. True, some money goes overseas, but the lion's share stays in the USA, where the jobs, asembly plants, and supported infrastructure resides.
To me, the answer is obvious. The China "miracle" proves the point.
No, the Chinese worker doesn't make the UAW wage, but then again, is it really a 100K/year job to install wheels onto a car on the assembly line?
The global economy is here, and its not going away.So, those who can't adapt are going away. Its really just that simple.
Were you alive (or maybe better, aware) during the '70's? Yes, gas lines due to OPEC. Stagflation/inflation, sure. But high unemployment? Compared to now? Besides cyclical ups and downs then, I think most people would say that, adjusted for inflation, the economy for more people, was better then than it is now.