Save money. Yes, it is hard to start at 60. Save at 18+ yrs. of age. That's the game. You may not like the game of life, but it still won't change. People should hire the aged, but as you point out, it doesn't always work out that way. When USA gets a national health care plan, perhaps that will help. Companies consider the young as in better health. - Loren
IIRC, the Japanese themselves placed voluntary restrictions on the amount of cars they imported into this country back in the 70's and earlier 80's. They weren't hit specifically with a tariff, but as supply was restricted, it made demand go up, and it was common for people to pay over MSRP for high-demand models like the Accord, Camry, Prelude, etc.
As for trucks, there was a tariff on them, but I forget how much it was. There was some kind of loophole though, that if they shipped the trucks over here as just a chassis-cab model, and then built the beds here and attached them in the US, it got them around that tariff.
Interestingly, while Japanese vehicles back then were notorious for rusting, with Toyota trucks it was mainly the bed, the component that was made in the good old US of A, which did most of the rusting! The cab and front-end clip usually held together pretty well!
As for trucks, there was a tariff on them, but I forget how much it was. There was some kind of loophole though, that if they shipped the trucks over here as just a chassis-cab model, and then built the beds here and attached them in the US, it got them around that tariff.
It was /is 25%!! on trucks. That is until the new Free Trade agreement with Thailand goes into effect and the Toyota, Nissan and Ford trucks ( diesel ) made there are allowed to come here duty free.
Interestingly, while Japanese vehicles back then were notorious for rusting, with Toyota trucks it was mainly the bed, the component that was made in the good old US of A, which did most of the rusting! The cab and front-end clip usually held together pretty well!
I was in the steel business then. The rusting was due to the use of 'mild' steel as opposed to 'galvanized' steel which is the norm in every vehicle everywhere now. It's the reason you don't see any mid-90's vehicles rusted out now. In fact you can carve your initials in your vehicle and it won't rust through for 5 yrs minimum.
It's the reason you don't see any mid-90's vehicles rusted out now. In fact you can carve your initials in your vehicle and it won't rust through for 5 yrs minimum.
Oh, I still see vehicles that are less than 10 years old that have rust-through. And interestingly, the majority of them seem to be Japanese vehicles. The biggest offenders seem to be the '94-97 Accord and Toyota pickups from that era. I have seen an occasional full-sized GM, Ford, or Dodge pickup.
Now, the majority of them are NOT rusty, and they have come a long way since the "good old days". Oh, now that I think about it, the rocker panel on the driver's side of my buddy's '98 Tracker was rusting. It wasn't all the way through, but it had a long, narrow, 6-7 inch spot where I'm sure if you beat on it enough with a screwdriver, it would have punched through. I had never noticed it until just the other weekend, when he cleaned it up real good just before trading it in on a new Xterra.
As for the "carving your initials" thing, here's something kinda odd. My 1985 Silverado has most of the paint on the floor of the bed scraped away, through the primer, and down to the bare metal. Yet it just won't rust! But then it IS rusting around the rocker panels, lower edges of the doors, etc. I guess it's just a matter of where moisture and dirt collect, and never dry out. I had thougt about painting the bed of the truck, but since it's not rusting, I figured why bother...it'll just get scraped up again!
The American car companies have a big advantage because of their dealership base.
All the americans have to do is build a good safe vehicle that gets good fuel mileage. Some are beginning to build safe cars, but they had to be forced into doing so. None are building cars that get good MPG. Something like an average of 30 MPG. Not 30 on the highway but one that averages 30 mpg. They claim good mileage but it isn't so.
Europe has better vehicles because of their deisels. The Americans are still stuck on racing, racing and more racing. They don't care if their cars only avergae 12 to 16 mpg.
But why is my friend's Civic 95 rusted out behind the rear wheels-been that way for couple of years or more? It's not like she drove in during the salty days of winter and never washed it. It did not get daily driving when salt was down. It did short trips.
Not tariffs. Not an official action. It could have been legally challenged.
Of course Japan knew any WTO appeal would have been met with a US challenge against its Kiertsu system, agricultural barriers and barriers against US microchips and computers at the time.
As well as the fact it costs a lot to ship cars across the Pacific and then across the US, that making factories in Japan is far more expensive than the US for environmental (earthquake resistant construction adds between 10 to 20% to the cost os buildings) and regulatory issues, the higher cost of energy, the Japanese labor shortage, and the fact the it is harder to fire workers when the market changes in Japan than in the US.
currency issues by the Fed
Modern US monetary policy at best favors the large investment banks. It has never been implemented to protect manufacturers.
The Fed by driving interest rates from the 18% level to under 4% accomplished a lot. The stock markets soared for 20 yrs; Housing and housing prices soared for 20 yrs; Imports were effectively priced out of this market for 20 yrs; The purchase of American assets by foreign investors was encouraged thereby driving up values; Investment in America ( transplants ) was encouraged which in turn employed more Americans;
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.
Whoa!!! that's a little far fetched, but since were stretching, what I'd really want is for all the underachievers at GM to just shoot themselves in the head, and lock themselves in a room so as to not waste medical expenses or treatment trying to save their lives.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Imports were effectively priced out of this market for 20 yrs;
Does not make logical sense and is certainly not supported by the evidence.
First, interest rates were low because inflation was low.
Second, the booming economy allowed mass purchases of US and imported items. Which the people did, in droves.
Third, and as a result of two, the US has been in trade deficit or near it for the last 20 years.
The purchase of American assets by foreign investors was encouraged thereby driving up values;
Lower interest rates would encourage US acquisitions abroad. Foreign investors would be more tied to whatever their own interest rates were (in Japan at the same time, the rates were almost zero, when one considers the willingness of the Japanese government to clean up bad debt).
Investment in America ( transplants ) was encouraged which in turn employed more Americans;
Again, US interest rates would have played more an indirect roll in foriegn investment. The booming consumer markets attracted foriegn interest, but issues such as difficult labor issues in Europe and shrinking labor pool in Japan, higher energy and regulatory costs and shipping charges for big ticket items all drove foreign investment in the US - and increasingly Northern Mexico and Southern Canada.
American manufacturers are trying to re-capture the glory of the early 70s muscle cars, we see the GTO, GT500H, Hemis all over the place, and a new Camaro on the way.
But...with oil prices hitting highs, are they pigeon-holed in this V8 segment? Because if they are, and a lot of customers want something fuel efficient, are they perhaps avoiding the Ford/Chevy/Dodge stores altogether?
You say Chevy, people think Small Block. You say Dodge/Chrysler, it's Hemi. Ford? Well, you don't exactly think Mod V8 but stay with me. :P
Any how, it just seems like they are trying to rekindle the glory days when gas was cheap and noone was even worried about oil supply.
Is that thinking outdated? For the mainstream, I mean. There will always be an enthusiast niche for V8s, but most people are just shopping for efficient commuter cars. Are the former Big 3 simply missing this boat?
Conversely, you say Honda and people think VTEC. You say Toyota and nowadays people think hybrid (HSD). They certainly have the advantage in terms of image when gas prices are the first thing on your mind.
Maybe this is just history repeating itself. Those musclecars seemed to hit their peak right around 1970-71. Then suddenly the gov't started cracking down with emissions standards that forced them to begin cutting compression and strangling them off. Then the fuel crisis hit.
I just hope this decade doesn't finish off with 4-cylinder Mustangs, V-8 Camaros putting out a max of 170 hp, and the Charger nameplate getting thrown on some little foreign job!
Not tariffs. Not an official action. It could have been legally challenged.
Of course Japan knew any WTO appeal would have been met with a US challenge against its Kiertsu system, agricultural barriers and barriers against US microchips and computers at the time.
But the net effect of the "voluntary" restraints was the same as a tariff - the price of Japanese automobiles was driven up when compared to competitive domestic vehicles. What really matters is whether it was legally challenged, and, if I recall correctly, it wasn't.
Because the supply of Japanese cars - particularly Toyotas, Hondas and Nissans - was restricted by the quotas, dealers could demand full sticker (remember that domestics were offering incentives even in the 1980s) and even add what were known as "dealer markups."
The government did not "suddenly crack down". The emmissions standards were discussed openly before they were passed in 1970. They were gradually phased in. The automakers put off meeting emmission standards until they had to. When they finally put the catalytic converters on, fuel economy improved. They could have done that in the first place.
But the net effect of the "voluntary" restraints was the same as a tariff - the price of Japanese automobiles was driven up when compared to competitive domestic vehicles. What really matters is whether it was legally challenged, and, if I recall correctly, it wasn't.
Because the supply of Japanese cars - particularly Toyotas, Hondas and Nissans - was restricted by the quotas, dealers could demand full sticker (remember that domestics were offering incentives even in the 1980s) and even add what were known as "dealer markups."
I do not disagree with any of this.
My quarrel above was with a poster who had repeated the false, yet oft repeated, claim that the US government stepped in to legally shield US automobile manufacturing. Other than the Chrylser loans, which were repaid in full with interest, it never happened.
On the other hand, state subsidies to transplants making factories in the US provided tremendous government assistance to the foreign makes.
But to this day, it seems like the former Big 3 fight and resist any bumps in CAFE while makers like Honda continue to accumulate CAFE credits for exceeding the minimums time and again.
I guess it's just an inherent advantage that some of the import brands have. They started out here by selling small cars, that's their image and their heritage.
Fuel efficiency will only become more and more important, so they have the inside lane in this race.
would lose that economy advantage quickly if they had a wider range of vehicles, such as full-sized pickups, vans, SUVs, etc. While Toyota and Nissan do offer full-sized trucks and SUVs, and Honda's pushing out some pretty heavy midsized ones, at this point they're still bit players, and their strengths are mainly still in midsized and compact cars, and more fuel-efficient crossovers.
If big trucks and SUVs weren't so danged popular, GM would probably start getting more credits as well.
Isn't BMW the manufacturer that usually gets fined the most in this country for failing to meet the CAFE regs?
The government may not have "legally" shielded the Big Three from the Japanese, but the voluntary import quotas achieved the same result. The prices of Japanese imports were driven up, because the supply was artificially restricted by the quotas. That may have been a de facto shield, but it was a shield nonetheless. The effect on customers - what really matters - was the same.
And while the transplants have received state subsidies for new plants, so have the domestics when they remodel or revamp existing ones.
GM, Ford and Chrysler are quite adept at obtaining tax breaks or incentives for plant renovations. And when the domestics build a new plant (the Toledo Jeep plant that was the subject of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the legality of government tax breaks, or GM's Lansing Cadillac plant, to name two recent examples), they receive subsidies, too.
If people are against state governments providing assistance to ALL manufacturers - fine, I'm against it, too. But the foreign transplants aren't the only ones that have benefited from this practice.
I think so. I think Porsche also pays hefty fines.
But premium brands can more easily absorb those, they just pass them on to consumers, who happily pay for the extra performance.
Chevy shoppers aren't really the same as your average BMW or Porsche shopper, though. Well, maybe Corvette shoppers, but not most people that visit a Chevy dealer.
Actually you have it exactly backwards. Here's why.
Lower interest rates affect the currency since that is where large companies and banks park their excess funds/investment.
Basic example: You are in country E with an interest rate of 8% and a currency unit 'E'. I am in country U with an interest rate of 8% and a currency unit '$'.
Presently our currencies are in balance 1 E = 1 $.
We each have lots of excess funds to invest somewhere. It doesn't matter where we put our excess funds since your interest rates are the same as mine.
Now my country overnight reduces our interest rates to 3%. YAHOOOO!!! Housing and the stock markets go ballistic. All the credit card debt is now cheaper. Everyone in my country is ecstatic!!! Except me!!
I have all these excess funds to invest and overnight I just lost 5% in intererst which is 62.5% of my income. I am now going to look elsewhere to park my '$' such as in your banks with the 8% interest rates. The only problem is that I own billions of '$' and now I have to buy billions of your 'E' in order to make deposits in your banks. When I and all my friends with extra money decide to dump our '$' to buy your 'E' it drives down the value of the '$' and increases the value of the 'E'. Now our ratio's are not 1 E = 1 $ but something like 1 E = 1.25 $.
Before the currency adjustment an auto cost 10,000E in your country and 10,000$ in my country. Equilibrium.
Now, inside our respective countries the prices are the same 10,000E and 10,000$ but if I want to buy one of your vehicles from E then I have to take 12,500 of my $ to buy 10,000 of your E. Your products seem to be 25% more expensive in my view since my currency has deteriorated in relation to yours.
OTOH if you want to buy a 10,000$ vehicle in my country 'U' then you only have to take 8,000E out of your account exchange it for 10,000$ and buy a 'U' vehicle. To you it seems if I am offering you a 2,000E discount.
This encourages the sales of my products ( exports )and discourages the sales of your products ( imports ).
Similar examples: at 1E = 1.25$ 10,000 acres at 100$/acre costs me 1,000,000$ to buy. 10,000 acres at 100$/acre costs you only 800,000E to buy.
When interest rate decreases make a currency weak ( such as the US$ now is ) then everything in our country is on sale at a discount. Land, buildings, companies, products, labor, everything.
When interest rate decreases make a currency weak ( such as the US$ now is ) then everything in our country is on sale at a discount. Land, buildings, companies, products, labor, everything.
Throughout the low interest period of the late 80s and 90s, the dollar was strong against the major currencies.
There were many reasons for this, primarily because the US stock market was doing so well.
The dollar only recently started to weaken. This may make some of what you say germane to the here and now. It does not make anything germane to what was happening 10 years ago.
Throughout the low interest period of the late 80s and 90s, the dollar was strong against the major currencies.
There were many reasons for this, primarily because the US stock market was doing so well.
The dollar only recently started to weaken. This may make some of what you say germane to the here and now. It does not make anything germane to what was happening 10 years ago.
Your view is off by some decades. This link from the St Louis Federal Reserve Bank shows that in relation to the Yen the Dollar was 3 times stronger back in the 70's than it is now. Twice as strong in the 80's than it is now.
In the late 70's / early 80's rates here were as high as 20% Prime!! The Fed under Greenspan made a concerted effort to bring them down to under 4% early this century. You can see from the chart what happened to the value of the Dollar vs the Yen. In the 70's it could buy 300+ Yen now it can only buy ~120 Yen. This decrease in value is directly related to the planned slide of the $ vs the other currencies.
Here is the link on Prime Rates from the St Louis Fed from 1955 onward. Note the peak in the 'low interest' 80's.
BTW, Europe and Japan hate the Fed for this. It makes their respective products much more expensive.
The dollar has not recently begun to slide it's been going on intentionally for nearly 40 yrs. Actually with the recent spike in interest rates here the dollar is stronger and more attractive vs the other currencies.
I lived through all this and was doing business here, in Europe, Japan and Asia during this entire period. It was my daily job to know what was happening.
After WWII and the bad years of the 1950s, the Yen was hugely undervalued coming up into the 1970s. With the rebirth of the Japanese economy, the weakening of the Soviet threat and following the Kennedy Round of Gatt and other unilateral negotations, the Japanese took internal measures to bring their currency closer to where it should be.
As the Economist and other independent financial services consistently show, the Yen even today is most likely undervalued by around 10%.
BTW, Europe and Japan hate the Fed for this. It makes their respective products much more expensive.
So to get Europe and Japan to love the US we should over value our currency? How many years in the last 20 has the US run a trade surplus with either Japan or Europe? Japanese and European complaints about US currency manipulation ring hollow.
The dollar has not recently begun to slide it's been going on intentionally for nearly 40 yrs. Actually with the recent spike in interest rates here the dollar is stronger and more attractive vs the other currencies.
No it is not. I've been following the currency for the last few years. The Yen, which had been staying stubbornly around 117 (and even over 120 for a stretch) was at 109 today.
The Euro was around 1.10 in 2002. It was at .78 a few minutes ago.
Well there have been times when it stayed below -40 for over 4 weeks here and the panels didn't crack they shattered when the car slid sideways into a snow bank, it was not a high speed accident and temp that day was below -40. at -40 metal would act the same he would have had dents.
Depends on how deep you carve them and where you live. Where I live they spray calicum chloride in the summer and uria and salted sand/gravel in the winter, just about any break in the finish well lead to rust/corrosion in about a year, the calcium chloride will even eat into aluminum/alloy rims.
Rust ( oxidation ) - yes. Rust-through - no. Due to the galvanized steel it won't rust through for 5 yrs min which is the standard min warranty with most ( every? ) vehicle.
The data is in the two Fed Reserve links. It's not my history its just the facts.
If you are looking at the last few years your view is too narrow. Go back 30-40 yrs when this issue first came up. That's when the decision first was made by the Europeans and the Asians to invest in the US.
It was simply too expensive to pay Japanese/German workers to build expensive cars then transport them and pay duty on them when US workers could be employed to build them 'at a discount', land could be bought 'at a discount', machinery and factories could be bought 'at a discount' simply because the US currency was dropping like a rock due to low interest rates.
I think you have your terminology mixed up therefore your understanding also.
Yes the Euro was 1.10 to the dollar in 2002 ( it was about the same back in the mid-90's when the Euro first came into existance ) while now it's 0.78 to the dollar. What this means is that the US dollar is about 30% weaker than it was in 2002.
In 2002 you could buy 110 Euro's with $100. Today you can only buy 78 Euro's with $100.
This is due mainly to the difference in interest rates between the US and Europe. The US rates are significantly lower than in Europe. US products are more attractive and European products are 30% more expensive than they were in 2002.
The data is in the two Fed Reserve links. It's not my history its just the facts.
If you are looking at the last few years your view is too narrow. Go back 30-40 yrs when this issue first came up. That's when the decision first was made by the Europeans and the Asians to invest in the US.
Your argument, to the extent I follow your posts, is the change in the value of currency was simply the result of the US Fed manipulating interest rates.
In fact, coming out of WWII, European and Japanese currencies were near worthless. The situation was not good for the global economy. As a result, the major Western economies took significant efforts on many fronts to bring currencies closer to the economic reality in the various nations.
Your original suggestion that the currencies came in line simply as a result of the US Fed manipulating interest rates to save the US at the expense of Europe and Japan is simply not true.
I think you have your terminology mixed up therefore your understanding also.
Yes the Euro was 1.10 to the dollar in 2002 ( it was about the same back in the mid-90's when the Euro first came into existance ) while now it's 0.78 to the dollar. What this means is that the US dollar is about 30% weaker than it was in 2002.
Exactly. That is what I am saying above. In spite of higher interest rates now from where they were in the late 90s and early 00s, the dollar is weaker.
This is due mainly to the difference in interest rates between the US and Europe. The US rates are significantly lower than in Europe. US products are more attractive and European products are 30% more expensive than they were in 2002.
US interest rates are higher now than they have been in the past few years. The Euro is trending up, not down.
Interest rates are only one factor in a currency's strength. Other factors include the public markets and other investment opportunities, the political stability of the country, and investment opportunities elsewhere.
The Yen has also strengthened against the dollar - albeit not as dramatically as the Euro - yet Japan has moved its very low interest rates nary a bit.
Toyota is having the Avalon, Camry and other cars built here. This will result and is resulting in the the typical American built car problems. I feel very nervous and would prefer my Japanese car be made in Japan.
American build other things well, cars aren't one of the things we build well.
Toyota is having the Avalon, Camry and other cars built here. This will result and is resulting in the the typical American built car problems.
Since 1995 ALL the Avalons have been built in KY. For 10+ years there has been nary a peep about any quality issues!!!
Outside of a few isolated incidents like the 160 units your statement is just inaccurate. Are the Japan-built better than the KY-built. This is just a matter of personal opinion. There is nothing at all to indicate if it is fact.
10 yrs of problem-free Avalon production would disprove your point. 20+ years of the Camry being ranked No 1 in terms of reliability demolishes your feeling.
Personally after 4 Camry's and 500,000+ miles on them since 1989 I can assure you that quality/reliability is of no concern.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion but it's not based in facts.
Toyota just had a minor recall on the new 6 spd. trans in the Camry - 190 (or so) out of several thousand. Those transmissions apparently assembled in Japan - NOT the US made units. Quality has all to do with specifications of supplied parts and, of course, assembly techniques and quality control procedures. Something the 'Japanese' mfgrs. have excelled at for a number of years regardless of nationality of the worker. The American cars lag in quality because they don't do these things as well along with some influence by the unions (policies that provide limited rewards for productivity or quality). To improve, the American mfgrs. need two things: 1) money to throw at R&D, component costs, and quality control procedures and 2) some renegotiated contracts. Don't see it happening anytime soon, but, the quality of a GM/Ford/Chrysler product has very little to do with the abilities of the American worker (or the Mexican/Canadian worker).
To improve, the American mfgrs. need two things: 1) money to throw at R&D, component costs, and quality control procedures and 2) some renegotiated contracts. Don't see it happening anytime soon, but, the quality of a GM/Ford/Chrysler product has very little to do with the abilities of the American worker (or the Mexican/Canadian worker).
Adding to that, one of GM's more serious issues recently was the CVT it sourced from an Austrian manufacturer with a factory in Hungary.
GM's reliability has improved. As has Ford's for that matter. Daimler seems to be investing more in pizzazz than upgrading standards. I understand Daimler management is committed to turning its quality issues around, however.
"...the quality of a GM/Ford/Chrysler product has very little to do with the abilities of the American worker (or the Mexican/Canadian worker)."
I'd like to second that opinion.
There is nothing in the genes of the Japanese workforce (or the American or German or Mexican or Chinese or.....) which dictates whether or not they have the ability to manufacture a quality automobile.
I think that was DOES affect the final product quality are the labor/management practices they operate under. If American workers are working under the SAME labor/management practices in a Toyota plant in the U.S. as their counterparts in Japan, I see absolutely NO reason why the quality of their product should be any worse.
Likewise, I think that if you put Japanese workers under the same labor/management practices as one might find in a typical Domestic plant, I don't think the quality of the final product would be any better.
Last week I spoke with a regional AAA representative who was a master mechanic for over 20 years, and still keeps in touch with various dealers.
He said that Ford has improved the most of almost any manufacturer - foreign or domestic - when it comes to quality. Chrysler has gotten better, but still lags behind Ford and GM.
All of the domestics really improved after 1996, when the OBD-II requirements went into effect.
On the first link I'm not at all sure that the detroiter's want to promote this data very far.
Hmm..
Hyundai is more than 3 times more efficient than the detroiters. ewwww, that's embarrassing.
Thus the thrust of this article and program is 'Lets keep the detroiter-based US auto industry inefficient and uncompetitive???' I don't think this flies well under public scrutiny.
That is true - Honda and Toyota have sold smaller cars. The big three have sold larger cars. They do resist CAFE improvements. I think that the big three are known for selling larger vehicles. However, they do sell some small cars too. My 83 Buick Skyhawk got about 25 to 30 MPG in city driving and upwards of 40 MPG on the highway.
My point was that the big three had a number of years to meet the emmissions standards. This was not something than was dumped on them suddenly and that they had only a few months to come up with engine designs to meet the unexpected standards.
Comments
As for trucks, there was a tariff on them, but I forget how much it was. There was some kind of loophole though, that if they shipped the trucks over here as just a chassis-cab model, and then built the beds here and attached them in the US, it got them around that tariff.
Interestingly, while Japanese vehicles back then were notorious for rusting, with Toyota trucks it was mainly the bed, the component that was made in the good old US of A, which did most of the rusting! The cab and front-end clip usually held together pretty well!
Not as such, but there were "voluntary" import quotas in the mid-80s.
http://www.nissanx.com/old/htdocs/floater.html
It was /is 25%!! on trucks. That is until the new Free Trade agreement with Thailand goes into effect and the Toyota, Nissan and Ford trucks ( diesel ) made there are allowed to come here duty free.
Interestingly, while Japanese vehicles back then were notorious for rusting, with Toyota trucks it was mainly the bed, the component that was made in the good old US of A, which did most of the rusting! The cab and front-end clip usually held together pretty well!
I was in the steel business then. The rusting was due to the use of 'mild' steel as opposed to 'galvanized' steel which is the norm in every vehicle everywhere now. It's the reason you don't see any mid-90's vehicles rusted out now. In fact you can carve your initials in your vehicle and it won't rust through for 5 yrs minimum.
Oh, I still see vehicles that are less than 10 years old that have rust-through. And interestingly, the majority of them seem to be Japanese vehicles. The biggest offenders seem to be the '94-97 Accord and Toyota pickups from that era. I have seen an occasional full-sized GM, Ford, or Dodge pickup.
Now, the majority of them are NOT rusty, and they have come a long way since the "good old days". Oh, now that I think about it, the rocker panel on the driver's side of my buddy's '98 Tracker was rusting. It wasn't all the way through, but it had a long, narrow, 6-7 inch spot where I'm sure if you beat on it enough with a screwdriver, it would have punched through. I had never noticed it until just the other weekend, when he cleaned it up real good just before trading it in on a new Xterra.
As for the "carving your initials" thing, here's something kinda odd. My 1985 Silverado has most of the paint on the floor of the bed scraped away, through the primer, and down to the bare metal. Yet it just won't rust! But then it IS rusting around the rocker panels, lower edges of the doors, etc. I guess it's just a matter of where moisture and dirt collect, and never dry out. I had thougt about painting the bed of the truck, but since it's not rusting, I figured why bother...it'll just get scraped up again!
All the americans have to do is build a good safe vehicle that gets good fuel mileage. Some are beginning to build safe cars, but they had to be forced into doing so. None are building cars that get good MPG. Something like an average of 30 MPG. Not 30 on the highway but one that averages 30 mpg. They claim good mileage but it isn't so.
Europe has better vehicles because of their deisels. The Americans are still stuck on racing, racing and more racing. They don't care if their cars only avergae 12 to 16 mpg.
Must be more mild steel?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Of course Japan knew any WTO appeal would have been met with a US challenge against its Kiertsu system, agricultural barriers and barriers against US microchips and computers at the time.
currency issues by the Fed
Modern US monetary policy at best favors the large investment banks. It has never been implemented to protect manufacturers.
The stock markets soared for 20 yrs;
Housing and housing prices soared for 20 yrs;
Imports were effectively priced out of this market for 20 yrs;
The purchase of American assets by foreign investors was encouraged thereby driving up values;
Investment in America ( transplants ) was encouraged which in turn employed more Americans;
Whoa!!! that's a little far fetched, but since were stretching, what I'd really want is for all the underachievers at GM to just shoot themselves in the head, and lock themselves in a room so as to not waste medical expenses or treatment trying to save their lives.
Does not make logical sense and is certainly not supported by the evidence.
First, interest rates were low because inflation was low.
Second, the booming economy allowed mass purchases of US and imported items. Which the people did, in droves.
Third, and as a result of two, the US has been in trade deficit or near it for the last 20 years.
The purchase of American assets by foreign investors was encouraged thereby driving up values;
Lower interest rates would encourage US acquisitions abroad. Foreign investors would be more tied to whatever their own interest rates were (in Japan at the same time, the rates were almost zero, when one considers the willingness of the Japanese government to clean up bad debt).
Investment in America ( transplants ) was encouraged which in turn employed more Americans;
Again, US interest rates would have played more an indirect roll in foriegn investment. The booming consumer markets attracted foriegn interest, but issues such as difficult labor issues in Europe and shrinking labor pool in Japan, higher energy and regulatory costs and shipping charges for big ticket items all drove foreign investment in the US - and increasingly Northern Mexico and Southern Canada.
When Subaru broke off from GM, they discontinued OnStar. Didn't need it.
-juice
American manufacturers are trying to re-capture the glory of the early 70s muscle cars, we see the GTO, GT500H, Hemis all over the place, and a new Camaro on the way.
But...with oil prices hitting highs, are they pigeon-holed in this V8 segment? Because if they are, and a lot of customers want something fuel efficient, are they perhaps avoiding the Ford/Chevy/Dodge stores altogether?
You say Chevy, people think Small Block. You say Dodge/Chrysler, it's Hemi. Ford? Well, you don't exactly think Mod V8 but stay with me. :P
Any how, it just seems like they are trying to rekindle the glory days when gas was cheap and noone was even worried about oil supply.
Is that thinking outdated? For the mainstream, I mean. There will always be an enthusiast niche for V8s, but most people are just shopping for efficient commuter cars. Are the former Big 3 simply missing this boat?
Conversely, you say Honda and people think VTEC. You say Toyota and nowadays people think hybrid (HSD). They certainly have the advantage in terms of image when gas prices are the first thing on your mind.
-juice
I just hope this decade doesn't finish off with 4-cylinder Mustangs, V-8 Camaros putting out a max of 170 hp, and the Charger nameplate getting thrown on some little foreign job!
Of course Japan knew any WTO appeal would have been met with a US challenge against its Kiertsu system, agricultural barriers and barriers against US microchips and computers at the time.
But the net effect of the "voluntary" restraints was the same as a tariff - the price of Japanese automobiles was driven up when compared to competitive domestic vehicles. What really matters is whether it was legally challenged, and, if I recall correctly, it wasn't.
Because the supply of Japanese cars - particularly Toyotas, Hondas and Nissans - was restricted by the quotas, dealers could demand full sticker (remember that domestics were offering incentives even in the 1980s) and even add what were known as "dealer markups."
-juice
Because the supply of Japanese cars - particularly Toyotas, Hondas and Nissans - was restricted by the quotas, dealers could demand full sticker (remember that domestics were offering incentives even in the 1980s) and even add what were known as "dealer markups."
I do not disagree with any of this.
My quarrel above was with a poster who had repeated the false, yet oft repeated, claim that the US government stepped in to legally shield US automobile manufacturing. Other than the Chrylser loans, which were repaid in full with interest, it never happened.
On the other hand, state subsidies to transplants making factories in the US provided tremendous government assistance to the foreign makes.
I guess it's just an inherent advantage that some of the import brands have. They started out here by selling small cars, that's their image and their heritage.
Fuel efficiency will only become more and more important, so they have the inside lane in this race.
-juice
If big trucks and SUVs weren't so danged popular, GM would probably start getting more credits as well.
Isn't BMW the manufacturer that usually gets fined the most in this country for failing to meet the CAFE regs?
And while the transplants have received state subsidies for new plants, so have the domestics when they remodel or revamp existing ones.
GM, Ford and Chrysler are quite adept at obtaining tax breaks or incentives for plant renovations. And when the domestics build a new plant (the Toledo Jeep plant that was the subject of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the legality of government tax breaks, or GM's Lansing Cadillac plant, to name two recent examples), they receive subsidies, too.
If people are against state governments providing assistance to ALL manufacturers - fine, I'm against it, too. But the foreign transplants aren't the only ones that have benefited from this practice.
But premium brands can more easily absorb those, they just pass them on to consumers, who happily pay for the extra performance.
Chevy shoppers aren't really the same as your average BMW or Porsche shopper, though. Well, maybe Corvette shoppers, but not most people that visit a Chevy dealer.
-juice
Lower interest rates affect the currency since that is where large companies and banks park their excess funds/investment.
Basic example:
You are in country E with an interest rate of 8% and a currency unit 'E'.
I am in country U with an interest rate of 8% and a currency unit '$'.
Presently our currencies are in balance 1 E = 1 $.
We each have lots of excess funds to invest somewhere. It doesn't matter where we put our excess funds since your interest rates are the same as mine.
Now my country overnight reduces our interest rates to 3%. YAHOOOO!!! Housing and the stock markets go ballistic. All the credit card debt is now cheaper. Everyone in my country is ecstatic!!! Except me!!
I have all these excess funds to invest and overnight I just lost 5% in intererst which is 62.5% of my income. I am now going to look elsewhere to park my '$' such as in your banks with the 8% interest rates. The only problem is that I own billions of '$' and now I have to buy billions of your 'E' in order to make deposits in your banks. When I and all my friends with extra money decide to dump our '$' to buy your 'E' it drives down the value of the '$' and increases the value of the 'E'. Now our ratio's are not 1 E = 1 $ but something like 1 E = 1.25 $.
Before the currency adjustment an auto cost 10,000E in your country and 10,000$ in my country. Equilibrium.
Now, inside our respective countries the prices are the same 10,000E and 10,000$ but if I want to buy one of your vehicles from E then I have to take 12,500 of my $ to buy 10,000 of your E. Your products seem to be 25% more expensive in my view since my currency has deteriorated in relation to yours.
OTOH if you want to buy a 10,000$ vehicle in my country 'U' then you only have to take 8,000E out of your account exchange it for 10,000$ and buy a 'U' vehicle. To you it seems if I am offering you a 2,000E discount.
This encourages the sales of my products ( exports )and discourages the sales of your products ( imports ).
Similar examples: at 1E = 1.25$
10,000 acres at 100$/acre costs me 1,000,000$ to buy.
10,000 acres at 100$/acre costs you only 800,000E to buy.
When interest rate decreases make a currency weak ( such as the US$ now is ) then everything in our country is on sale at a discount. Land, buildings, companies, products, labor, everything.
Throughout the low interest period of the late 80s and 90s, the dollar was strong against the major currencies.
There were many reasons for this, primarily because the US stock market was doing so well.
The dollar only recently started to weaken. This may make some of what you say germane to the here and now. It does not make anything germane to what was happening 10 years ago.
There were many reasons for this, primarily because the US stock market was doing so well.
The dollar only recently started to weaken. This may make some of what you say germane to the here and now. It does not make anything germane to what was happening 10 years ago.
Your view is off by some decades. This link from the St Louis Federal Reserve Bank shows that in relation to the Yen the Dollar was 3 times stronger back in the 70's than it is now. Twice as strong in the 80's than it is now.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/EXJPUS.txt
In the late 70's / early 80's rates here were as high as 20% Prime!! The Fed under Greenspan made a concerted effort to bring them down to under 4% early this century. You can see from the chart what happened to the value of the Dollar vs the Yen. In the 70's it could buy 300+ Yen now it can only buy ~120 Yen. This decrease in value is directly related to the planned slide of the $ vs the other currencies.
Here is the link on Prime Rates from the St Louis Fed from 1955 onward. Note the peak in the 'low interest' 80's.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/PRIME.txt
BTW, Europe and Japan hate the Fed for this. It makes their respective products much more expensive.
The dollar has not recently begun to slide it's been going on intentionally for nearly 40 yrs. Actually with the recent spike in interest rates here the dollar is stronger and more attractive vs the other currencies.
I lived through all this and was doing business here, in Europe, Japan and Asia during this entire period. It was my daily job to know what was happening.
After WWII and the bad years of the 1950s, the Yen was hugely undervalued coming up into the 1970s. With the rebirth of the Japanese economy, the weakening of the Soviet threat and following the Kennedy Round of Gatt and other unilateral negotations, the Japanese took internal measures to bring their currency closer to where it should be.
As the Economist and other independent financial services consistently show, the Yen even today is most likely undervalued by around 10%.
BTW, Europe and Japan hate the Fed for this. It makes their respective products much more expensive.
So to get Europe and Japan to love the US we should over value our currency? How many years in the last 20 has the US run a trade surplus with either Japan or Europe? Japanese and European complaints about US currency manipulation ring hollow.
The dollar has not recently begun to slide it's been going on intentionally for nearly 40 yrs. Actually with the recent spike in interest rates here the dollar is stronger and more attractive vs the other currencies.
No it is not. I've been following the currency for the last few years. The Yen, which had been staying stubbornly around 117 (and even over 120 for a stretch) was at 109 today.
The Euro was around 1.10 in 2002. It was at .78 a few minutes ago.
at -40 metal would act the same he would have had dents.
In the lower 48, where well over 95% of the US populace live, 4 weeks worth of below -40 would be record material.
Where I live they spray calicum chloride in the summer and uria and salted sand/gravel in the winter, just about any break in the finish well lead to rust/corrosion in about a year, the calcium chloride will even eat into aluminum/alloy rims.
The data is in the two Fed Reserve links. It's not my history its just the facts.
If you are looking at the last few years your view is too narrow. Go back 30-40 yrs when this issue first came up. That's when the decision first was made by the Europeans and the Asians to invest in the US.
It was simply too expensive to pay Japanese/German workers to build expensive cars then transport them and pay duty on them when US workers could be employed to build them 'at a discount', land could be bought 'at a discount', machinery and factories could be bought 'at a discount' simply because the US currency was dropping like a rock due to low interest rates.
I think you have your terminology mixed up therefore your understanding also.
Yes the Euro was 1.10 to the dollar in 2002 ( it was about the same back in the mid-90's when the Euro first came into existance ) while now it's 0.78 to the dollar. What this means is that the US dollar is about 30% weaker than it was in 2002.
In 2002 you could buy 110 Euro's with $100. Today you can only buy 78 Euro's with $100.
This is due mainly to the difference in interest rates between the US and Europe. The US rates are significantly lower than in Europe. US products are more attractive and European products are 30% more expensive than they were in 2002.
Thanks
The data is in the two Fed Reserve links. It's not my history its just the facts.
If you are looking at the last few years your view is too narrow. Go back 30-40 yrs when this issue first came up. That's when the decision first was made by the Europeans and the Asians to invest in the US.
Your argument, to the extent I follow your posts, is the change in the value of currency was simply the result of the US Fed manipulating interest rates.
In fact, coming out of WWII, European and Japanese currencies were near worthless. The situation was not good for the global economy. As a result, the major Western economies took significant efforts on many fronts to bring currencies closer to the economic reality in the various nations.
Your original suggestion that the currencies came in line simply as a result of the US Fed manipulating interest rates to save the US at the expense of Europe and Japan is simply not true.
I think you have your terminology mixed up therefore your understanding also.
Yes the Euro was 1.10 to the dollar in 2002 ( it was about the same back in the mid-90's when the Euro first came into existance ) while now it's 0.78 to the dollar. What this means is that the US dollar is about 30% weaker than it was in 2002.
Exactly. That is what I am saying above. In spite of higher interest rates now from where they were in the late 90s and early 00s, the dollar is weaker.
This is due mainly to the difference in interest rates between the US and Europe. The US rates are significantly lower than in Europe. US products are more attractive and European products are 30% more expensive than they were in 2002.
US interest rates are higher now than they have been in the past few years. The Euro is trending up, not down.
Interest rates are only one factor in a currency's strength. Other factors include the public markets and other investment opportunities, the political stability of the country, and investment opportunities elsewhere.
The Yen has also strengthened against the dollar - albeit not as dramatically as the Euro - yet Japan has moved its very low interest rates nary a bit.
Economics forums are down the block on your left
American build other things well, cars aren't one of the things we build well.
Since 1995 ALL the Avalons have been built in KY. For 10+ years there has been nary a peep about any quality issues!!!
Outside of a few isolated incidents like the 160 units your statement is just inaccurate. Are the Japan-built better than the KY-built. This is just a matter of personal opinion. There is nothing at all to indicate if it is fact.
10 yrs of problem-free Avalon production would disprove your point. 20+ years of the Camry being ranked No 1 in terms of reliability demolishes your feeling.
Personally after 4 Camry's and 500,000+ miles on them since 1989 I can assure you that quality/reliability is of no concern.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion but it's not based in facts.
Quality has all to do with specifications of supplied parts and, of course, assembly techniques and quality control procedures. Something the 'Japanese' mfgrs. have excelled at for a number of years regardless of nationality of the worker. The American cars lag in quality because they don't do these things as well along with some influence by the unions (policies that provide limited rewards for productivity or quality).
To improve, the American mfgrs. need two things: 1) money to throw at R&D, component costs, and quality control procedures and 2) some renegotiated contracts. Don't see it happening anytime soon, but, the quality of a GM/Ford/Chrysler product has very little to do with the abilities of the American worker (or the Mexican/Canadian worker).
Adding to that, one of GM's more serious issues recently was the CVT it sourced from an Austrian manufacturer with a factory in Hungary.
GM's reliability has improved. As has Ford's for that matter. Daimler seems to be investing more in pizzazz than upgrading standards. I understand Daimler management is committed to turning its quality issues around, however.
I'd like to second that opinion.
There is nothing in the genes of the Japanese workforce (or the American or German or Mexican or Chinese or.....) which dictates whether or not they have the ability to manufacture a quality automobile.
I think that was DOES affect the final product quality are the labor/management practices they operate under. If American workers are working under the SAME labor/management practices in a Toyota plant in the U.S. as their counterparts in Japan, I see absolutely NO reason why the quality of their product should be any worse.
Likewise, I think that if you put Japanese workers under the same labor/management practices as one might find in a typical Domestic plant, I don't think the quality of the final product would be any better.
He said that Ford has improved the most of almost any manufacturer - foreign or domestic - when it comes to quality. Chrysler has gotten better, but still lags behind Ford and GM.
All of the domestics really improved after 1996, when the OBD-II requirements went into effect.
JD Powers surveys put GM as a brand slightly ahead of Ford, however.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060512/BUSINESS01/605120320/10- 14
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060512/AUTO01/605120414/1148-
Hmm..
Hyundai is more than 3 times more efficient than the detroiters. ewwww, that's embarrassing.
Thus the thrust of this article and program is 'Lets keep the detroiter-based US auto industry inefficient and uncompetitive???' I don't think this flies well under public scrutiny.
My point was that the big three had a number of years to meet the emmissions standards. This was not something than was dumped on them suddenly and that they had only a few months to come up with engine designs to meet the unexpected standards.
I do like the quote from GM about wanting only to compete on the merits. Good to see them shying away from flag waving.