as an owner of an 05 Avalon, can tell you all about it. as noted by kdhspyder, this is not a reliability issue at all; more precisely an electronic issue. The Avalon, as well as Lexus models, as well as many many other cars use the car's ECU to control all aspects of the vehicle's operation, including the engine, transmission, braking etc.. Otherwise known as drive-by-wire [DBW]. And furthermore these ECUs have a 'learning' function supposedly to adapt the car to your specific driving habits. What this allows the programmers to do is essentially to modify engine and transmission operation around specific priorities (mileage, power, emissions etc etc.). Sounds great doesn't it? The Toyota problem, and this is only an 'educated' opinion from driving the car for a year, is that the Toyota engineers may have gone a little overboard with the fuel economy thing. The Avalon is the most fuel efficient car in its class and this may one of the reasons. It is a low speed issue and a typical situation where the 'hesitation' can occur: coasting off the highway, the tranny is in 5th naturally: as you stay off the throttle and get down to maybe 20 or 30 you would think the tranny would downshift itself to 2nd or 3rd. But no, the transmission is programmed to hold onto the highest gear possible, thereby reducing engine rpm and improving economy. The hesitation thing happens when you firmly reapply the throttle from those lower speeds, because now the transmission needs to make a multiple gear downshift - which it will do - but not without some delay and a firm 'jerk' (the car does have a lot of power). A slightly smoother more gradual reapplication of power avoids the whole issue, but there are times when you really need [or want] to 'punch' it. Toyota spokesmen have recently conceded that a 'software issue' does exist and it would seem that the fix is nothing more than a reprogrammed chip, but it does remain to be seen if the 'fix' would have a negative impact on mpg or, for that matter, whether, Toyota is going to officially address it, at all. To my knowledge, there has been no service bulletin on this and the dealer will tell you that this is the way it is designed to work (which is largely true). Some drivers find the behavior annoying, others including myself, not nearly so much. I am not sure that, when and if, Toyota does offer a 'fix', and if I'm correct that the fix would cost me a coupla mpg - that I would even have it done. While DBW technology can be a wonderful thing, it can also be overapplied as it is in many, many (MB, VW, BMW, Chrysler come to mind) cars, and the problem should get worse across the board - before it gets better.
Your message on survival really hits home. Cars being the least of poor people's worries (not that transportation isn't critical), but the fact that poor people cannot afford milk, meat or vegatables is outrageous.
I recently read http://www.milkismilk.com/blog.htm that nefarious marketing interests trying to sell high-priced organic milk is actually driving people like this away from milk altogether. It is truyly sad that multi-billion dollar industries are making life so miserable for people in need.
You can buy milk produced from cows not injected with growth hormones for the same price or less than the tainted milk. You do not have to buy the organic brands to do so. Trader Joe's, to name just one supplier, has milk at lower prices, and it is safe to drink. Is the other milk safe to drink? That is a debatable issue which we need not get into in this forum. I just buy the milk I feel it safer, and at a good to better price. I could care less what the restaurants use, as I rarely order milk there. As for Starbucks, there again, I don't care and have never been to one. I prefer tea anyway. Best coffee, is the one that is cheapest. The aroma is better than the taste, when it comes coffee.
Now back to cars. Lucerne comes to mind now. Not sure why. -Loren
My latest purchase is a Subaru Outback... Manufactured in Lafayette Indiana by midwestern folks... by a company named Subaru (Fuji Heavy Industries) which is part owned (20%) by General Motors. My wife's car is a Toyota Camry... manufactured in Tennessee. Then there is the family Dodge Grand Caravan, manufactured in Canada by a company (Daimler-Chrysler) run mostly by German executives. So, which (if any) of these are American cars?
By the way, I consider all three to be quality vehicles. All ride nicely and are very reliable (in my experience).
and the answer is none, of course - a truly American car doesn't exist. Kentucky on the Camry BTW, and if you switch some brands you might find out you are helping folks in Tn. (Nissan), Ohio (Honda), Alabama (Hyundai), S. Carolina (MB, I think). And conversely, Mexico and Canada (Ford and GM). And GM is currently working on some sort of program to have cars and parts built in China! When the Ford Mustang has less US made parts in it than Toyota Sienna, Camrys, & Avalons, then you understand not really to care where something is made - you buy whatever you think is the best for you. If you buy that Mustang because you somehow think it helps the country more than buying that Camry - you are probably wrong!
Does the one million include the tow truck drivers and mechanics who service GM products? Not sure that they should be included...
Absolutely a true statement. Buying Big 3 does support a lot of american mechanics and tow truck companies. However, I would rather invest my extra money into education, technology, research, and improvement, rather than wasting it on tow trucks and mechanics.
We need to invest more money into our futures in order to become a better and more competitive country. If all of our hard earned money goes into fixing and towing those vehicles built by the BIG 3, we will be flushing ourselves down the toilet! :mad:
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I don't see Detroit News' biased review as being of similarly priced cars. The V6 Ford was far more expensive than the 4 Cylinder Camry by nearly $1,500 dollars. That is a large margin, enough to put it in another class.
If these were 30,000 dollar cars (which they are not), that would still be a 5% difference in price. If the only way Ford can beat Toyota is by comparing their V6 top of the line model to Toyota's low end 4 banger Camry model, then that shows why they are suffering as a company.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Now take the 2006 CR and look up the LS for 2004, then do the same in the 2005 CR and the two are not even close. Sorry, but the 200 CR is off some how. Same with the Cadillac Deville, which was doing fine in the 2005 mag. then in the 2006 suddenly it is not. I now have some doubts about their data. Too many cars are great in 2003 and then in 2005 , only to be rated bad in 2006 for the SAME model years. Something is terribly wrong here.
There is nothing wrong here. Some American cars can be reliable for one or 2 years, then after that, everything goes to hell and is reflected by changing scores over time.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
If you happen to have the '05 and the '06 take a look at a few years to compare. Try say the Chevy S10. Seems like a flip flop for 2005 report to 2006.
If what you say in indeed the case, then who knows a thing about how good the New GM is? According to the '05 a Cadillac Deville may be an average to below average buy, but by next years data, many years now look terrible. Now showing 2000 thru 2003 as black dots for engines and for cooling. We are talking changes which did not occur from say the 2003 and 2005 magazine, seem to have really escalated in the latest 2006 new cars magazine. Was there a whole bunch of cars with a ticking bomb? And if so, how would one know if the all the good news of 2002-2005 holds as true. Oh my, what to do with all this data. Often data which butts up against each others data. JD Powers data indicates the 4-5 year as average, yet it now shows as very bad in the CR magazine this year as in 2006 for those past years. Past year previously shown as say average in CR. Very conflicting data. One would hope a Cadillac would be a good 10 year car, or should I say 20 year car in that class. -Loren
...my 1989 Cadillac Brougham has been an excellent 17-year car and my 1988 Buick Park Avenue has been an excellent 18-year car. My 1968 Buick Special Deluxe made it to 24 years and could've lasted longer. My Seville STS is a 2002 model and I have seen absolutely no cooling system issues. The engine is fantastic.
You are supporting a million American losers/underachievers who deserved to lose their jobs or take pay cuts long ago!
That's kinda harsh. Only losers who deserve to lose their jobs at GM are Rick Wagoner and all his types who have run the company into the ground while maintaining their 7 figure pay packages.
I agree. It isn't the guys and gals down on the assembly lines that are losers. They're only working with what they are given by the losers in the executive suites.
Indeed...take the assembly line workers from the LS or S class or whatever floats your boat that has extreme quality (although maybe not reliability in the case of the MB) and have them build Cavaliers and Tauri and 300 year old bottlenosed minivans, and those vehicles won't suddenly become world beaters.
But, because Ford HAS to discount more, delivered price might even be a little higher on even a 4 banger 07 Camry. Which it should be, the Camry a superior choice even with the 4 cylinder, and certainly will hold much more of its value as a few years pass. And you forget the obvious bias of a Detroit based publication. The shame is that Fusion and the Five Hundred are arguably 'Detroit's' best efforts in years, thanks to some European influence. If they only had a heart!
Another important consideration is that Ford IMO has recognized the limits of the F/M/Z triplet in terms of production and appeal. They cannot produce 700,000 of these vehicles. If they reach 30,000 retail sales a month this will be a success.
At this level Ford has to appeal to the traditional Ford buyer - a V6 buyer. Just from the various commentary here all the vehicles mentioned are V6's or V8's. That's the detroiter's home market. The 4c Ford is a passing 'nod' to the rest of the US market - the bulk of the US market - but given a limit in supply Ford's natural midsized vehicle will be a V6.
IMO they are turning their back on the largest and fastest growing part of this segment.
and the only real market that 'Detroit' can be competitive in - trucks/SUVs/minivans - evaporating faster than gas prices are rising. This has been going on for more than 30 years, ever since 'Detroit' has been unable to manufacture anything truly competitive in the sedan market. The Mazda built 2.3 4 cylinder is actually a good little engine, but you are right -the future,at least as it applies to the American market, the powerful AND economical V6, in cars sized appropriately for American tastes. GM does have a leg up in E85 capable vehicles, but all of 'Detroit' is hopelessly behind in appliance technology (hybrids). It is easy to blame the UAW for Detroit's problems and maybe also a little unfair although it is certainly true that those mfgrs. will continue to be hamstrung financially unless something changes in those 'porky' contracts. Not the American worker, however, they seem to do fine building Toyotas, Nissans, Hondas etc. etc.
If GM and Ford went out of business Toyota and Honda would fill the void by employing those laid off by expanding its operations in the US
Ha! actually, since Toyo/honda would not be able to employ those pl the instant they became unemplyed, the U.S. economy would take a HUGE hit, and as soon as N. America stops being such a profitable market for toyota and Honda, the will leave, they have no interest here except selling cars. If they couldn't do that, they wouldn't stay here, it would be extremely unprofitable.
You are supporting a million American losers/underachievers who deserved to lose their jobs or take pay cuts long ago!
Really? So youve met all of these people then? And even if some of them are, you're saying you want them out of a job? Well that means you're going to pay for their welfare and such right? Because I'm not going to, ou're te one who wants peoplpe living on the street, commiting crimes and being a drian on society.
My wife has an 06 500 for a company car. She had a choice of a GrandPrix, Impala, or 500. She picked the 500 mainly due to the rear seat room that is limo like compared to the GP/Impala and the huge truck.
I haven't compared, but she used to have an 01 Impala and I would swear the new one seems smaller in the rear seat.
Anyway, she has put about 6500miles on the 500 and while it makes a great company car, I sure wouldn't buy one. It's still plagued with cheapness. A few buzzes in the dash are already cropping up. The ride has a solid and competent feel to it, but steering and braking feel are lacking.
Even though it may be completely reliable, nothing about the car would make me buy it over a Camry, Altima, or Accord.
I test drove an 04 Maxima last week. After reading comments about the cheapness of the interior, I actually didn't find it offensive. It was very solid, w/o a squeak or rattle, the switches (when compared to the 500 and my Suburban) had a quality feel to them. It was fun to drive and a good used value. Don't think I'd buy one new, but it seemed like a good car to buy used.
GM and Ford will never walk away from F150's, Silverado's, Sierra's, Corvette's, and Cadillacs. For the foreseeable future there is little competition for them here and they make enormous protits.
Ford, GM and DC are already out-the-door in the auto business, with the above exceptions. In the future all of the detroiter's autos will be imported.
Most of the 'foreign' nameplate autos will be made in the US.
The UAW, IBEW, Teamsters and other unions will be marginalized to specific plants with little influence on the US auto market.
People in the upper Midwest will suffer somewhat while people in the South will prosper somewhat.
The US auto market will grow faster yet since the cost of auto's will be lower and more people can afford them.
China and then India will pass the US as the No 1 and No 2 auto markets in the world. Their booming markets will suck up all the natural resources that often come here first. Steel, coal, aluminum, oil, engineers, etc.
We will pay whatever price China and India ( and their markets ) decide should be the price for natural resources. If they decide that their economies can support oil at $125 a barrel then that's what we will pay also.
Those workers will never work again, is what you are saying? Will not look for work elsewhere if a GM plant should close? And they will live under a bridge somewhere, and then become criminals? Wow, not a good resume'. I would sure how you are wrong. We have been told the USA has a good skilled labor force, and companies from around the World have come here to open shop. Is this an illusion? Something like a David Copperfield trick and plants, such as the one in Alabama, do not exist? Smoke a mirrors
America does need more manufacturing. More jobs is a good thing. Those working for failing companies need to say money, and have at least a six month stash of cash to keep them afloat when a ship is sinking. This goes for one and all actually. Avoid non-housing debt, and save as much as possible. Good for emergencies and great for retirement.
If GM and Ford have the right cars, people will buy. I would NOT count on people buying domestic out a sense of charity. I see some domestic cars on the road, which are not rentals. Some cars being sold these days. Those which are less than inspiring in looks or engineering are still slow to sell. That is not the consumers fault. And it is not the Union labors fault. Those cars not selling, are just wrong. Plain and simple, trying to sell the un-sellable without deep discounting. -Loren
Probably won't get to the point they would never work again. Most, however, will not earn the same pay they did as autoworkers. Most will end up in low-paying service and retail jobs. Their curtailed paychecks will result in curtailed spending which will effect the economy at large.
...the young and smart autoworkers should be working toward earning a degree and/or learning a marketable skill/trade. The old heads have had it. It's most likely Wal-Mart in their future. I doubt Toyota, Honda, etc. would be interested in picking up these older guys.
"The old heads have had it. It's most likely Wal-Mart in their future."
So what you're saying is that folks with years and years worth of experience working for American auto manufacturer's don't have marketable skills in case they lose their factory job?
In other words, they are only good for WalMart greeters......or American autoworkers? Wow. That doesn't say much for the typical domestic automaker laborer now does it?
And if these folks REALLY don't have any skills and are only good for Wal-Mart, why are they earning top dollar in an auto plant? Aren't they then ALREADY being subsidized by those folks that buy a domestic car?
...age discrimination is supposedly against the law, but it does exist and is hard to prove. My mother is looking for a new job, has an excellent work ethic, and is probably better qualified than any of the other applicants. The application didn't ask for her birth date, but they can figure out Moms is older because she has 14 years on one job and 8 on her current job. Nobody's calling.
My Dad got laid-off at 60, went back to school to learn to be a maintenance electrician, and graduated at the top of the class. Dad and his classmates went to apply for a job with a company that was opening a nearby plant. All the young guys were immediately hired while all the old guys were left out in the cold.
The real corporate world doesn't care how skilled or dedicated these senior ex-autoworkers are. They'd just as soon shoot 'em like old dogs.
They probably would expect higher salaries, for starters. I'm not saying it's right, but let's paint the whole picture.
A lot are probably union, too, and the import brands have tried to avoid that. Look at how many times UAW has tried and failed to unionize the Altima plant.
In other words, they are only good for WalMart greeters......or American autoworkers? Wow. That doesn't say much for the typical domestic automaker laborer now does it?
And if these folks REALLY don't have any skills and are only good for Wal-Mart, why are they earning top dollar in an auto plant? Aren't they then ALREADY being subsidized by those folks that buy a domestic car?
Nonsense.
Take a world with an ever growing population base, add huge strides in productivity and family ties to an area where the UAW factories are located making relocation thousands of miles a way difficult at best, and you have people having to lower their expectations if laid off.
The same does happen at transplant factories that either downsize or adopt new technology that obviates jobs I am sure.
It is not like assembly line workers for any car company, domestic or transplant have the skills necessary to, say, launch a start up rocket casing factory.
they have a tax on milk because they thought that it was too cheap and state where I live they have another tax on it to advertize it because they people where not buying enough, 1gal of milk is $4.75 to $5.10 per gallon. stuff like this is one example why the US markets are so screwed up. The goverment thinks the price on some grown food is too low they pay farmers to NOT grow it to drive the price up. The US auto companies felt threatned by the asian makers so instead of improving thier product and offering what people wanted they got import limits put in place, the asian companies got around it by building factories here. A dodge built by mitsubishi is not classed as imported but a toyota was, they can build as many dodges in china as they want with no import limit but any cars built by a forign company overseas is under the restriction.
If the american auto companies can't keep thier buisness going and make cars of quality and price people will buy should they really be in buisness? should the goverment try to use taxes and restrictions to keep up companies building substandard consumer goods?
"...and you have people having to lower their expectations if laid off."
Yes. Anytime ANYONE of ANY age in ANY industry is forced to seek employment elsewhere (through either a layoff or simply being fired), their expectations will be lowered. That doesn't mean their expectations will be realized.
But that doesn't automatically translate into nothing but WalMart jobs which is the point I was objecting to. If, IN REALITY, the ONLY other job someone can get is as a WalMart greeter, then that individual was probably marginal to begin with.
Got it in one. It's very easy to see a GM in 2015 that does the following:
*builds BOF trucks and full-size SUVs in North America (3 plants) 1.25 million per year *builds low-volume specialty vehicles (Corvette, Solstice/Sky, Camaro, Cadillacs) in the US (2 plants) 0.075 million per year *builds high-end large FWD cars and crossovers in Canada (1 plant) 0.3 million per year
Everything else comes off the boat from China (small and mid-size crossovers, small, medium, and large FWD cars) or Holden's export factory in Korea (full-size RWD cars and crossovers).
A friend of mine bought a saturn, against my advice, well car spent at least 4 days of every month in the shop, in the first year it got towed 8 times (she had the car 13 months), she finaly gave car back to the dealer and got some of her money back and got a kia, 4 years later and the Kia has never had more than fluid/filter changes. P.S. you do not want to see what happens to the saturn plastic body panels at -40 or colder, it isn't nice, think of baseball and house window.
That's fine 'cause you can probably get a helluva a deal on a Impala as GM struggles to find somebody that agrees with you. Ford has the same problems with the Fusion/500 as well. And the folks that are buying those cars, they would be better off looking into Sonatas/Azeras - opinion, of course.
I never had an issue with my two Saturns. While I have since sold them both, I happen to know the current condition of my '95 SL2.
My nephew is using it as a college car. 190k miles and no major maintenance issue.
As for your p.s., a couple points. First, with the exception of a couple mountain passes, how frequently does it get below -40 in the lower 48? What happens to any car - or machine for that matter below -40? And where is the evidence the polymer panels crack at -40?
The US auto companies felt threatned by the asian makers so instead of improving thier product and offering what people wanted they got import limits put in place, the asian companies got around it by building factories here.
Wrong.
The only import limits were on light trucks. There was talk of import limits on autos. Never happened.
Asian companies made plants in the United States primarily because shipping autos can be a fairly expensive proposition. Add higher energy prices in Japan, earthquake risks, more stringent factory pollution control, Japanese lifetime employment concepts, Southern States giving huge tax breaks and outright incentives to transplant factories and suddenly it makes more business sense to make cars in the US as opposed to Japan.
Salaries paid in Korea and China on the other hand - along with lower costs, and you have a compelling reason to move manufacturing from the US to those countries.
should the goverment try to use taxes and restrictions to keep up companies building substandard consumer goods?
With the exception of the Chrylser loans from the government about 30 years - all repaid with interest - I am not aware of US tax dollars going to US companies.
As for State subsidies, see above. All the transplants got huge subsidies to build their plants in the US.
Illinois gave away the store to Mitsubishi for its plant in Normal. Mitsubishi hardly uses it now, but refuses to sell, apparently owing to some sort of infighting among investors in Japan.
I may recall incorrectly here but weren't there tariffs imposed on imported CARS during a period of time? That's not a limit on numbers, but a cost increase to level the playing field because of the dumping factor. It seems it was around the Carter presidency period. I think they got around that by building plants here-which they didn't want to do for several reasons but did do.
Everything I read said only limits on light trucks.
It is possible in the 1970s Japan had some punitive import laws and the US had some retalitory laws in place.
Japanese companies have a very stong incentive for making auto plants in the US, as I listed above. The only reason not to was the lifetime employment issue, something which took care of itself with changing politics and declining Japanese population.
Comments
as noted by kdhspyder, this is not a reliability issue at all; more precisely an electronic issue. The Avalon, as well as Lexus models, as well as many many other cars use the car's ECU to control all aspects of the vehicle's operation, including the engine, transmission, braking etc.. Otherwise known as drive-by-wire [DBW]. And furthermore these ECUs have a 'learning' function supposedly to adapt the car to your specific driving habits. What this allows the programmers to do is essentially to modify engine and transmission operation around specific priorities (mileage, power, emissions etc etc.). Sounds great doesn't it?
The Toyota problem, and this is only an 'educated' opinion from driving the car for a year, is that the Toyota engineers may have gone a little overboard with the fuel economy thing. The Avalon is the most fuel efficient car in its class and this may one of the reasons.
It is a low speed issue and a typical situation where the 'hesitation' can occur: coasting off the highway, the tranny is in 5th naturally: as you stay off the throttle and get down to maybe 20 or 30 you would think the tranny would downshift itself to 2nd or 3rd. But no, the transmission is programmed to hold onto the highest gear possible, thereby reducing engine rpm and improving economy. The hesitation thing happens when you firmly reapply the throttle from those lower speeds, because now the transmission needs to make a multiple gear downshift - which it will do - but not without some delay and a firm 'jerk' (the car does have a lot of power). A slightly smoother more gradual reapplication of power avoids the whole issue, but there are times when you really need [or want] to 'punch' it.
Toyota spokesmen have recently conceded that a 'software issue' does exist and it would seem that the fix is nothing more than a reprogrammed chip, but it does remain to be seen if the 'fix' would have a negative impact on mpg or, for that matter, whether, Toyota is going to officially address it, at all. To my knowledge, there has been no service bulletin on this and the dealer will tell you that this is the way it is designed to work (which is largely true).
Some drivers find the behavior annoying, others including myself, not nearly so much. I am not sure that, when and if, Toyota does offer a 'fix', and if I'm correct that the fix would cost me a coupla mpg - that I would even have it done.
While DBW technology can be a wonderful thing, it can also be overapplied as it is in many, many (MB, VW, BMW, Chrysler come to mind) cars, and the problem should get worse across the board - before it gets better.
What have you driven on the track?
I recently read http://www.milkismilk.com/blog.htm that nefarious marketing interests trying to sell high-priced organic milk is actually driving people like this away from milk altogether. It is truyly sad that multi-billion dollar industries are making life so miserable for people in need.
Now back to cars. Lucerne comes to mind now. Not sure why.
-Loren
-Loren
Manufactured in Lafayette Indiana by midwestern folks... by a company named Subaru (Fuji Heavy Industries) which is part owned (20%) by General Motors.
My wife's car is a Toyota Camry... manufactured in Tennessee.
Then there is the family Dodge Grand Caravan, manufactured in Canada by a company (Daimler-Chrysler) run mostly by German executives.
So, which (if any) of these are American cars?
By the way, I consider all three to be quality vehicles. All ride nicely and are very reliable (in my experience).
gearhead4
You are supporting a million American losers/underachievers who deserved to lose their jobs or take pay cuts long ago! :lemon: :lemon:
Absolutely a true statement. Buying Big 3 does support a lot of american mechanics and tow truck companies. However, I would rather invest my extra money into education, technology, research, and improvement, rather than wasting it on tow trucks and mechanics.
We need to invest more money into our futures in order to become a better and more competitive country. If all of our hard earned money goes into fixing and towing those vehicles built by the BIG 3, we will be flushing ourselves down the toilet! :mad:
If these were 30,000 dollar cars (which they are not), that would still be a 5% difference in price. If the only way Ford can beat Toyota is by comparing their V6 top of the line model to Toyota's low end 4 banger Camry model, then that shows why they are suffering as a company.
There is nothing wrong here. Some American cars can be reliable for one or 2 years, then after that, everything goes to hell and is reflected by changing scores over time.
If what you say in indeed the case, then who knows a thing about how good the New GM is? According to the '05 a Cadillac Deville may be an average to below average buy, but by next years data, many years now look terrible. Now showing 2000 thru 2003 as black dots for engines and for cooling. We are talking changes which did not occur from say the 2003 and 2005 magazine, seem to have really escalated in the latest 2006 new cars magazine. Was there a whole bunch of cars with a ticking bomb? And if so, how would one know if the all the good news of 2002-2005 holds as true. Oh my, what to do with all this data. Often data which butts up against each others data. JD Powers data indicates the 4-5 year as average, yet it now shows as very bad in the CR magazine this year as in 2006 for those past years. Past year previously shown as say average in CR.
Very conflicting data. One would hope a Cadillac would be a good 10 year car, or should I say 20 year car in that class.
-Loren
-Loren
That's kinda harsh. Only losers who deserve to lose their jobs at GM are Rick Wagoner and all his types who have run the company into the ground while maintaining their 7 figure pay packages.
At this level Ford has to appeal to the traditional Ford buyer - a V6 buyer. Just from the various commentary here all the vehicles mentioned are V6's or V8's. That's the detroiter's home market. The 4c Ford is a passing 'nod' to the rest of the US market - the bulk of the US market - but given a limit in supply Ford's natural midsized vehicle will be a V6.
IMO they are turning their back on the largest and fastest growing part of this segment.
The Mazda built 2.3 4 cylinder is actually a good little engine, but you are right -the future,at least as it applies to the American market, the powerful AND economical V6, in cars sized appropriately for American tastes. GM does have a leg up in E85 capable vehicles, but all of 'Detroit' is hopelessly behind in appliance technology (hybrids).
It is easy to blame the UAW for Detroit's problems and maybe also a little unfair although it is certainly true that those mfgrs. will continue to be hamstrung financially unless something changes in those 'porky' contracts. Not the American worker, however, they seem to do fine building Toyotas, Nissans, Hondas etc. etc.
I disagree, I think Impalas are very nice cars, and I actually like them better than fusion/ five hundred.
Ha! actually, since Toyo/honda would not be able to employ those pl the instant they became unemplyed, the U.S. economy would take a HUGE hit, and as soon as N. America stops being such a profitable market for toyota and Honda, the will leave, they have no interest here except selling cars. If they couldn't do that, they wouldn't stay here, it would be extremely unprofitable.
Really? So youve met all of these people then? And even if some of them are, you're saying you want them out of a job? Well that means you're going to pay for their welfare and such right? Because I'm not going to, ou're te one who wants peoplpe living on the street, commiting crimes and being a drian on society.
I haven't compared, but she used to have an 01 Impala and I would swear the new one seems smaller in the rear seat.
Anyway, she has put about 6500miles on the 500 and while it makes a great company car, I sure wouldn't buy one. It's still plagued with cheapness. A few buzzes in the dash are already cropping up. The ride has a solid and competent feel to it, but steering and braking feel are lacking.
Even though it may be completely reliable, nothing about the car would make me buy it over a Camry, Altima, or Accord.
I test drove an 04 Maxima last week. After reading comments about the cheapness of the interior, I actually didn't find it offensive. It was very solid, w/o a squeak or rattle, the switches (when compared to the 500 and my Suburban) had a quality feel to them. It was fun to drive and a good used value. Don't think I'd buy one new, but it seemed like a good car to buy used.
GM and Ford will never walk away from F150's, Silverado's, Sierra's, Corvette's, and Cadillacs. For the foreseeable future there is little competition for them here and they make enormous protits.
Ford, GM and DC are already out-the-door in the auto business, with the above exceptions. In the future all of the detroiter's autos will be imported.
Most of the 'foreign' nameplate autos will be made in the US.
The UAW, IBEW, Teamsters and other unions will be marginalized to specific plants with little influence on the US auto market.
People in the upper Midwest will suffer somewhat while people in the South will prosper somewhat.
The US auto market will grow faster yet since the cost of auto's will be lower and more people can afford them.
China and then India will pass the US as the No 1 and No 2 auto markets in the world. Their booming markets will suck up all the natural resources that often come here first. Steel, coal, aluminum, oil, engineers, etc.
We will pay whatever price China and India ( and their markets ) decide should be the price for natural resources.
If they decide that their economies can support oil at $125 a barrel then that's what we will pay also.
End of story. Be prepared.
Will not look for work elsewhere if a GM plant should close? And they will live under a bridge somewhere, and then become criminals? Wow, not a good resume'. I would sure how you are wrong. We have been told the USA has a good skilled labor force, and companies from around the World have come here to open shop. Is this an illusion? Something like a David Copperfield trick and plants, such as the one in Alabama, do not exist? Smoke a mirrors
America does need more manufacturing. More jobs is a good thing. Those working for failing companies need to say money, and have at least a six month stash of cash to keep them afloat when a ship is sinking. This goes for one and all actually. Avoid non-housing debt, and save as much as possible. Good for emergencies and great for retirement.
If GM and Ford have the right cars, people will buy. I would NOT count on people buying domestic out a sense of charity. I see some domestic cars on the road, which are not rentals. Some cars being sold these days. Those which are less than inspiring in looks or engineering are still slow to sell. That is not the consumers fault. And it is not the Union labors fault. Those cars not selling, are just wrong. Plain and simple, trying to sell the un-sellable without deep discounting.
-Loren
You apparently have no confidence in Americans. That's a shame.
Rather than blame the messenger, why not illuminate us.
What do you think 1000s of primarily middle aged factory workers will wind up doing in the face of mass layoffs?
So what you're saying is that folks with years and years worth of experience working for American auto manufacturer's don't have marketable skills in case they lose their factory job?
In other words, they are only good for WalMart greeters......or American autoworkers? Wow. That doesn't say much for the typical domestic automaker laborer now does it?
And if these folks REALLY don't have any skills and are only good for Wal-Mart, why are they earning top dollar in an auto plant? Aren't they then ALREADY being subsidized by those folks that buy a domestic car?
My Dad got laid-off at 60, went back to school to learn to be a maintenance electrician, and graduated at the top of the class. Dad and his classmates went to apply for a job with a company that was opening a nearby plant. All the young guys were immediately hired while all the old guys were left out in the cold.
The real corporate world doesn't care how skilled or dedicated these senior ex-autoworkers are. They'd just as soon shoot 'em like old dogs.
A lot are probably union, too, and the import brands have tried to avoid that. Look at how many times UAW has tried and failed to unionize the Altima plant.
-juice
And if these folks REALLY don't have any skills and are only good for Wal-Mart, why are they earning top dollar in an auto plant? Aren't they then ALREADY being subsidized by those folks that buy a domestic car?
Nonsense.
Take a world with an ever growing population base, add huge strides in productivity and family ties to an area where the UAW factories are located making relocation thousands of miles a way difficult at best, and you have people having to lower their expectations if laid off.
The same does happen at transplant factories that either downsize or adopt new technology that obviates jobs I am sure.
It is not like assembly line workers for any car company, domestic or transplant have the skills necessary to, say, launch a start up rocket casing factory.
stuff like this is one example why the US markets are so screwed up.
The goverment thinks the price on some grown food is too low they pay farmers to NOT grow it to drive the price up.
The US auto companies felt threatned by the asian makers so instead of improving thier product and offering what people wanted they got import limits put in place, the asian companies got around it by building factories here.
A dodge built by mitsubishi is not classed as imported but a toyota was, they can build as many dodges in china as they want with no import limit but any cars built by a forign company overseas is under the restriction.
If the american auto companies can't keep thier buisness going and make cars of quality and price people will buy should they really be in buisness? should the goverment try to use taxes and restrictions to keep up companies building substandard consumer goods?
Yes. Anytime ANYONE of ANY age in ANY industry is forced to seek employment elsewhere (through either a layoff or simply being fired), their expectations will be lowered. That doesn't mean their expectations will be realized.
But that doesn't automatically translate into nothing but WalMart jobs which is the point I was objecting to. If, IN REALITY, the ONLY other job someone can get is as a WalMart greeter, then that individual was probably marginal to begin with.
-juice
take it as a joke or fact your option.
*builds BOF trucks and full-size SUVs in North America (3 plants) 1.25 million per year
*builds low-volume specialty vehicles (Corvette, Solstice/Sky, Camaro, Cadillacs) in the US (2 plants) 0.075 million per year
*builds high-end large FWD cars and crossovers in Canada (1 plant) 0.3 million per year
Everything else comes off the boat from China (small and mid-size crossovers, small, medium, and large FWD cars) or Holden's export factory in Korea (full-size RWD cars and crossovers).
P.S. you do not want to see what happens to the saturn plastic body panels at -40 or colder, it isn't nice, think of baseball and house window.
-juice
I never had an issue with my two Saturns. While I have since sold them both, I happen to know the current condition of my '95 SL2.
My nephew is using it as a college car. 190k miles and no major maintenance issue.
As for your p.s., a couple points. First, with the exception of a couple mountain passes, how frequently does it get below -40 in the lower 48? What happens to any car - or machine for that matter below -40? And where is the evidence the polymer panels crack at -40?
You do know, of course, that Audi, Volkswagen, Honda Acura, Isuzu, Subaru, and Saab have OnStar. Is it for the same reason? :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Wrong.
The only import limits were on light trucks. There was talk of import limits on autos. Never happened.
Asian companies made plants in the United States primarily because shipping autos can be a fairly expensive proposition. Add higher energy prices in Japan, earthquake risks, more stringent factory pollution control, Japanese lifetime employment concepts, Southern States giving huge tax breaks and outright incentives to transplant factories and suddenly it makes more business sense to make cars in the US as opposed to Japan.
Salaries paid in Korea and China on the other hand - along with lower costs, and you have a compelling reason to move manufacturing from the US to those countries.
should the goverment try to use taxes and restrictions to keep up companies building substandard consumer goods?
With the exception of the Chrylser loans from the government about 30 years - all repaid with interest - I am not aware of US tax dollars going to US companies.
As for State subsidies, see above. All the transplants got huge subsidies to build their plants in the US.
Illinois gave away the store to Mitsubishi for its plant in Normal. Mitsubishi hardly uses it now, but refuses to sell, apparently owing to some sort of infighting among investors in Japan.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Everything I read said only limits on light trucks.
It is possible in the 1970s Japan had some punitive import laws and the US had some retalitory laws in place.
Japanese companies have a very stong incentive for making auto plants in the US, as I listed above. The only reason not to was the lifetime employment issue, something which took care of itself with changing politics and declining Japanese population.