By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I'm not sure..
What if, the threshhold for making a recall is moved higher and higher all the time as vehciles become more complex and the public demands more and more. While yes there might be a numerically greater amount of recalls, it may that the 'triggers' might be hyper-sensitive ever since the Firestorm/Exploder fiasco. No manufacturer wants to be in that situation. Those that give legal and public relations guidance to the top management strongly recommend to recall everything even if it only might cause a problem.
Most of the problems involved airbags that didn't fire properly (usually too late, although in one case -- Suzuki Verona -- the wiring was reversed): see here. Other problems involved fuel leaks.
Ford has always relied heavily on 1) pickups/SUVs and 2) big family sedans. Pickup/SUV sales are slowing with increased gas prices. They updated their Taurus line for a number of years; downsizing it and adding the SHO to keep it at the top of car sales, but somewhere along the line the quality and innovation lagged behind. Another point is that the older US executives are out of tune with the market.A few years back, GM wanted to ditch GMAC, which was the only profitable division at the time, and Saturn, whose sales were jsut starting to soar, to concentrate on Cadillac, which had an average buyer age of 64 years old, and Buick. They finally decided to scrap Oldsmobile right as it came out with some cars that appealed to younger buyers. The cars were selling so well that they keep it going for a couple extra years.
US automakers used to be tops in innovation although usually slower than foreign automakers to adopt the resulting technology (like fuel injection) into production cars. They didn't need to because there wasn't as much competition. One recent example is the EV-1, GMs electric car. It was a lease-only vehicle designed to meet the new zero emmisions regs in CA. Management decided to shut this project down immediately when the regs were changed; they just considered it a necessary evil to meet zero emmissions requirements in California rather than a potential future product. Despite lessees clammering to buy the cars, GM refused to sell them. They scrapped every single EV-1. Today, there is much more competition and you need to have a more broad ranging lineup to compete. You can't jut rely on the old standbys. Look how many Prius's Toyota is now selling. This was originally designed to start off with low production and to morph into a hot seller a few years down the road. Now Toyota is making a killing. Where are Ford and GM? They are concentrating on E85 which uses expensive ethanol rather than getting better gas mileage. Their is no sign that the ethanol production in this country will expand rapidly enough to reduce its cost. There is a benefit to the country by reducing gas imports, but no benefit to the consumer. No benefit to the consumer equals no great consumer demand = loss of sales to Toyota and Handa , who have products that are in high demand.
The US auto industry needs to react to all of the consumers, not just on what the execs like.
Toyota outsold Ford for two simple reasons. GM's quality stinks and so does Ford's. Perhaps Ford and GM have miraculously fixed their quality since 2003 (the last time I owned a Ford F-150 and a GM vehicle). But I sure ain't gonna buy another Ford or GM until they have 6 year 100,000 mile comprehensive warranty or Consumer Reports list 7 straight years of good writeups across their model lines. That puts me at 2010. You can do as you wish. End of story.
Leading technological companies such as Motorola, Boeing, Abbott, Palm are all in the Midwest.
One recent example is the EV-1, GMs electric car. It was a lease-only vehicle designed to meet the new zero emmisions regs in CA. Management decided to shut this project down immediately when the regs were changed; they just considered it a necessary evil to meet zero emmissions requirements in California rather than a potential future product. Despite lessees clammering to buy the cars, GM refused to sell them. They scrapped every single EV-1.
It is not an example of anything. The EV-1 is an all electric car that cost far more to make than could have ever been recovered on the market. I am not aware of any other regular production all electric cars on the market even today.
Where are Ford and GM? They are concentrating on E85 which uses expensive ethanol rather than getting better gas mileage. Their is no sign that the ethanol production in this country will expand rapidly enough to reduce its cost.
First, a conservative Midwest company is pretty close to a breakthrough in profitably converting animal waste (manure) into alternative fuel at a cost per barrel less than oil sells at present. This could be a big break for E85. (n.b.: The process works on people waste as well, if there were a way to get it without all the other things people throw into the sewers)
Second, GM has the Hybrid Vue on the market right now, to be followed by the dual phase hybrid system it developed with Daimler and BMW. The dual phase actually leap frogs what Toy is doing.
Ford has a hybrid Escape. Like most hybrids save the Prius, the Escape does not sell well, even though it reviewed well. Not sure a huge leap into hybrids would have made all that much sense.
So let me see, you spit out some points with no research, but when I suggest they are weak I am blinded.
Your personal issues do not make your points that of an expert.
You really need to learn to leave the attitude at the door. End of story.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You are right that there is a market for the old tried and true products/names like Taurus. Many parts of the country are big on loyalty and reliability (perceived and/or real). The Taurus, however, used to be the number one selling vehicle in the country. Now it is not even in the top 10 for 2005. Most if not all of those old Taurus sales would have transfer to the 500 over if Ford had simply named the 500 'Taurus' instead, because a lot of it is just name recognition. Ford has lost the young market (except for the Mustang) and thus will not have a good base for loyalty sales in the future
JD Power 2005 auto sales figure
1. Ford F-Series 901,463
2. Chevrolet Silverado 705,891
3. Toyota Camry 433,703
4. Dodge Ram 400,543
5. Honda Accord 369,293
6. Honda Civic 308,415
7. Nissan Altima 255,371
8. Chevrolet Impala 246,481
9. Chevrolet Malibu 245,861
10.Chevrolet TrailBlazer 244,150
Not one Ford in the bunch, except the F series. Sales of F series (and all other large trucks) will not increase. Ford better rethink their strategy.
Forgive me, but given the above, I can't see the "logic" of excusing Toyota for mounting recalls, while hammering GM and Ford for the same."
Toyota's officials have also publicly apologized repeatedly, at least three separate times now including the apology to the commerce ministry in Japan. They have taken steps to counteract any repeat of this pattern in the future.
I know I am a fan of the Japanese models, but I would be intrigued to see the chairman of GM or Ford ever publicly apologize to the press in this manner for excessive recalls or what-have-you.
I know this isn't the recall thread, but I should repeat remarks I made a while back in a different thread: with all the carmakers squeezing their suppliers so mercilessly in this age of cost-cutting, we are bound to see recalls just become more widespread. For instance the Tundra recall is for poorly manufactured wheel bearings, the Ford recall right now is for poorly manufactured cruise control units that set cars on fire (13 so far, I believe).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
GM's full page 'Road to Redemption' ads were not enough for you? They not only ran in all the buff magazines, but in large, (and very expensive) two page layouts in the WSJ and NYT.
The Toy apology to the commerce ministry in Japan came in response to uncovered evidence that Toy execs had been deliberately withholding evidence for years. (and this from a government that bankrolled Toy's lucrative hybrid r&d).
That gets your attention. Full page national US ads do not.
That is the point I have been making here. Not that GM is now ahead of Toy. But rather, the Toy fans on these boards on the one hand use one standard against GM, then ignore the standard for GM.
Plus, American executives are undoubtedly warned by corporate counsel to avoid this type of public statement, as they are afraid that it could be used against the company in a lawsuit.
Also note that the GM "Road to Redemption" ads were more generalized. GM didn't say, "Sorry that the transmission in your 1995 Model X was defective." It was more along the lines of a generalized mea culpa for past sins.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with you on the whole recall thing. But citing an ad campaign designed to get people to forget about crappy cars is not quite the evidence I would use to follow up that point.
The executives accepted the responsibility and apologized.
Regarding the "Road to Redemption," it said something like "30 years ago, we made great cars. 20 years ago, they weren't so great." Generalized, as grbeck says.
Jamie Kitman, writing in Automobile, commented (I'm paraphrasing), "I've experienced enough GM cars to know one of those statements is a flat-out lie."
How?
US companies communicate to the market through advertisement. They have been doing so almost continously since the turn of the 19th Century.
I don't see how saying I'm sorry to the government makes a better act of contrition than an ad campaign admitting a lost eye on quality and promising to get it right.
It's on par with Joe Isuzu giving his word on something.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060816/AUTO01/608160398/1148-
I have no problem with your position provided you agree it appears on face value at least to be no better or worse than someone at Toyota calling a government official and saying I'm sorry.
My point is that neither side has done all that much on the issue. It is hard to say one is better than the other.
Lutz is as pro-GM as a guy could get (and so he should be, in his job). If he and Wagoner were to call a press conference and apologize to the American public for 25 years of vehicles with lax quality standards and poor reliability, I would eat my hat. And my socks. And...probably drop dead from shock.
Ditto Billy Ford.
As far as the topic of this thread, the general consensus in the press seems to be that the public will give Toyota at least two strikes before calling them out, given the amount of time they have taken to build their rep. So as long as they get their act together BUT QUICK, their sales should continue to rise. Ford is very disorganized right now - the only concrete plans they have seem to be reducing production capacity by 25% in the next few years. I can easily see Toyota staying ahead of Ford from now on.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Ford wanted more profit per vehicle and that's why Ford did what it did. I think it was a mistake. If you let Toyota sell Camry to someone, Toyota will go a step ahead and sell Tundra to his or her spouse and Scion to his or her children. Five Hundred or Fusion are not bad - they are just too little too late.
In my opinion, Ford should focus on redesigning Mustang, Escape and Focus as often as it can to prevent Toyota from stealing more car/ small SUV lovers from Ford. Also, Ford needs to come up with good plans to improve quality and resale value.
It may just get it. After that, it needs to figure out a way to bring the Euro spec Focus to the US, and not just as a limited dealer Mazda3 and Volvo S40.
If it does both of these well, it can go far to recapturing lost market share and stabilizing.
The interior looks nicer as well.
Ford opted not to update its North American facilities to make the new Focus here, apparently in order to allow Mazda3 and Volvo S40 (which are both based on the Euro Focus platform) to appear more upmarket.
In 2010, the American Focus will once again share a platform with its European cousin. It will, however, be the next-generation European Focus, not the current one.
I would like to see this rolled up a few years. Can't happen soon enough for Ford.
Ford maintains the current Euro Focus is too expensive to sell here. (It's the old "Americans won't pay too much for a small car.") Yet we do get the Mazda3 -- and it sells.
Ford itself is predicting only 120K sales annually of the Edge, and they're mum on the sales numbers of the sibling Lincoln MKX. So this vehicle isn't likely to pull Ford out of the dumps.
The problems are too much road noise and subpar interior fit-and-finish. These problems show that Ford's cost-cutting efforts are too obvious in certain areas.
The basics of the current Focus platform are still good; the car isn't hopelessly outdated. Ford needs to sweat the details and update the styling. The 2008 rework will supposedly address these issues, and carry the car until the all-new 2010 model debuts.
It is no secret that much of the market reacts more to fit and finish issues than driving dynamics.
Ford has a product that is close to being a player in the small car market segment that is seeing the most action these days. I hope '08 sees this happen.
You will probably be surprised in April when the third rollout of the 2007 is completed that none of the detroiter's trucks matches up to the new DoubleCab Tundra in size or performance.
Heck the Double Cab Tundra now is bigger than the F150 and it will be the middle model this time next year. With the announced 5.7L it will be the beast of the road.
The big improvement that occured across all product lines at the same time all across the world was the use of hot dipped Galvanized steel ( HDG ) or Galavannealed steel or Electrogalvanized steel. All three are different methods of adding a zinc coating to the base metal to act as an sacrificial coating to minimized the effect of rusting.
By 1990 there was some on every vehicle in the US market. By 2000 it was the basic steel used on all vehicles. Rusting disappeared as a problem on all vehicles by that time.
"Today we are announcing the North American production in the fourth quarter will be cut by 21 percent. This action, difficult as it is, reflects an assessment of the marketplace that is conservative and more aligned with the shift in customer demand.
As you know, an unprecedented spike in galoline prices during the second quarter impacted our product lineup more than that of our competitors because of the long-standing success of our truck and SUVs."
I am certain it will be all over tomorrow's auto news.
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060821/SUB/60819026/1078/ne- wsletter02&refsect=newsletter02
The domestics COMBINED make less than 1/3 of all the retail sales here. I knew it was low, but I didn't know it was that low. The owner of Galpin Ford, one of the state's biggest and oldest Ford dealers and fiercely pro-Ford (I used to live not far from the dealership, would see the billboards and the newspaper ads all the time), has just caved in and bought a Honda franchise. So far, he is doubling his initial estimates of sales, and will have to ask for a larger allocation from Honda as he is going to run short of cars in August!
Toyota made more than 1/4 of all retail sales in the state in the first half of the year. By contrast, GM made 14%. The only three domestic models in the top ten for sales are (not surprisingly) the F-series, the Silverado, and the Tahoe. I expect Tahoe to fall off that list by the end of the year, with the gas prices as they are.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
One of the biggest increases for Toyota was the Tacoma. I'm not too surprised; it's great in its segment, Toyota has a lot of loyalty here, and trucks are still popular but the full sized ones are just too big for many people.
Lots of big SUVs too. It's not all about Toyota's small cars right now; it's about their small cars 20 years ago. When the Corolla and Civic were worlds better than any domestic commuter car, people bought them, loved them, and now that it's time for something bigger they're sticking to their brands.
If that's true, then the domestics are going to keep sliding because their small, first-car offerings were substandard and even now are arguably not good enough to inspire loyalty.