Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Does America Even Need Its Own Automakers?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The SS is a GREAT driving little car, and will beat the pants off any foreign car in its price and size class.
However, the styling is very bland and the marketing and promotion non-existent.
so there you have it in a nutshell.
That's just a statistical projection... ...as opposed to your own idle speculations.
If someone can explain any OTHER plausible (please, no conspiracy theories) reason why Big Three market share keeps going down, fire away, I'm listening!
Contrary to your opinion, the typical american consumer actually is an idiot, but that is not the explanation for their car purchase decisions.
The explanation is partly just what I have already said, that they (like you) vastly over estimate the significance of reliability differences. They look at CR, see Honda and Toyota at the top of the lists, and go buy one after (maybe) driving it slowly around the block. In addition, another factor has been that the American companies were ignoring cars and collecting massive profits from the American consumer by selling them SUVs and trucks (there's one piece of clear evidence of their idiocy, right there...paying inflated prices for trucks and trucks that were converted to glorified station wagons).
In last April's CR, they have a chart showing all makes, except Mercedes-Benz, Cadillac, Hummer, and Land Rover are within +/- 50% of average reliability. Given that, in another place in that issue, one can read that "maintenance and repair makes up 4 percent of ownership costs on average over five years", I'd call the differences insignificant since maintenance and repair is an insignificant cost.
In yet another spot, they have a graph showing problems per 100 vehicles. At 3 years this shows a range of something like 25 to 50 "problems" per 100 vehicles...or stated another way the range is from 0.25 to 0.5 problems per vehicle. A range of 1/4 of a problem seems pretty insignificant to me. This range grows to a difference of all of about 3/4 of a problem per vehicle at 10 years. (and don't forget the 10 year old vehicles were built in 1998 and do not reflect the reductions in the reliablity gap that have occured since then)
Another thing that graph shows is that the reliability gap between Ford and GM may be as large as that between Ford and Honda. The funny thing is almost no one has this perception. Isn't it interesting that no one can seem to detect this reliability gap between GM and Ford, while everyone is so certain of the gap between Ford and Honda.
American consumers ARE idiots and they vastly OVERestimate the quality of foreign cars and they haven't a CLUE what they are buying or why. They are cattle, mindless sheep, vast hordes of aimless drones writing checks for Toyotas.
FINE! For the sake of argument, I AGREE!
But so what?
Detroit is still toast, regardless.
If they didn't lose the reality war, they still lost the perception war, and that's just as bad, no?
Memories are long. It took 30 years for the poor reputations of the D3 to develop. Nobody knows how TODAYs Malibu will do at 150K miles, or in 8 years. It will take at least a decade to rebuild that reputation even if the vehicles are all excellent starting today. Which is why Ford's differences don't register yet with the public.
Now we have such impressive Cadillacs as the CTS-V, a 190 mph uber-sedan costing $20K less than any comparable European offering.
But the question STILL remains. Will this car, or any Cadillac, make it through the warranty period unscathed? Will parts fall off it? Will it look like crap in 8 years?
All unanswerable questions at this point...but...BUT....questions that buyers are asking NOW.
I agree----I think Ford has the best chance of survival, based on current perceptions of being the better product of the "Big Three".
If they didn't lose the reality war, they still lost the perception war, and that's just as bad, no?
Oh, I think they did lose the reality war, it is just that reality is no longer what it was.
I don't know if they are toast or not, my guesses would be: "yes" for Chrysler, "no" for Ford, and "maybe" for GM.
Over at Honda, for example, the Si versions of the Civic get all of the publicity, but it's the LX and EX versions that are paying the bills. Because the EX and LX versions don't remind one of a rental car.
did that backfire?
I could see Ford doing that though, especially with the 2010 Fusion. The Malibu might have been able to hold its own against the Camcordima, think what the 2010 Fusion will do. :shades:
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yep! My first new car - a Ford Escort an interference time-belt at 13.5K miles. I had a 2 year old Taurus with paint worn off the rocker-panels. I had a Mustang that gulped oil.
I had a Dodge and Jeep that had all sorts of electrical issues and crazy gages.
My most reliable domestic vehicles were GM. The fit and finish, and materials were poor, but they always ran.
Would I buy another D3 vehicle? Yes. But it had better be LESS $ (>10%) than a comparable higher reputation make, for me to take that risk. If the prices are the same, why would I take a higher risk.
And that is a big problem for Detroit, their costs are ~10% higher, but we will only buy their products if they cost less than similar products from Honda or Toyota.
Plus it is not like they are putting anything of value into the product for that extra 10% in costs, it just goes to "legacy costs".
Is that for real! Wow.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
" the CTS-V, with its supercharged 6.2-liter LSA engine, has achieved SAE-certified peak output of 556 horsepower (415 kW) at 6100 rpm and 551 lb.-ft. (747 Nm) of torque at 3800 rpm.
CTS-V accelerates from 0-60 mph in 3.9 seconds. CTS-V covers the quarter-mile in 12 seconds at 118 mph. These acceleration times are believed to be the fastest for any V-8-powered sedan currently in production."
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/story/index.aspx?id=835109
There has been some discussion on here about how it will take time for people to adjust, if the new reality is that American makes are just about as reliable as Toyota and Honda. Obviously most people eventually realized Toyota was no longer selling crap, at some point. But, I imagine there were some people, who in, say, 1985 or 1990 would still say something like "Toyota is garbage, I bought one in the 60s and that brand new car would not even start in winter".
Also I think it's not just reliability that drives people to buy a certain car over another. A new car purchase is a complex mixture of emotion, aesthetics, prejudice, status, perception, and some solid research.
If patriotism were the last refuge for American automakers, that's not going to work.
It takes at least 20 years for a product to dig itself out of a bad reputation I think---something like that.
Excellent point. Many people will sacrifice one quality if another is excellent. For example:
Toyotas are boring but they are very reliable, so people give up some passion for the reliability.
VW is not reliable at all but their cars have great interiors and drive very well, so people tolerate the reliability issues. VW residuals are higher than average even with the well-known dealer and reliability issues.
I know that when I had my Audi A4 it had some reliability problems and it was expensive to fix. But I LOVED that car because it drove as smooth as butter and had a beautiful interior.
Although the US makes have been improving, in the past they were basically big and cheap which was their advantage. The interiors were ugly and many of the cars had very coarse engines. While cheaper to fix they were not very reliable.
If you did say one of those quick "word association" tests on Americans, you might get something like this:
"HYBRID" = "prius"
HANDLING = "bwm" "porsche"
RELIABLE = "toyota"
They most likely would not answer "focus" / "buick" / "cadillac"
event though those three are reasonably good cars these days.
Looks like it's going to give them a blip though:
"Seeing the domestic automakers' recent struggle has ignited a heightened sense of patriotism among some American car shoppers," says Kelley Blue Book analyst Jack Nerad. "People are pulling for the Big Three to survive and thrive."
Car Buyers May Buy American! (CNBC)
People love to wave the flag but when you ask them to actually sacrifice something concrete...well, that's another story.
We'll see what all that means in a few months.
That's all well and good but is this a case of being willing to buy their cars or just wanting OTHER people to buy them?
Personally, it would take super deep discounting to get me in one. Not just from a resale perspective (or the fact that there are only 3 vehicles in all of GM that I take interest in), but the lack of warranty coverage and trained service folks with the proper equipment on a new car is the problem.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Quality ratings vary by GM model but Cadillac and Buick do better than Pontiac and Chevrolet. (from "better than average" to "average", but alas, none are "among the best"
Ford and Chrysler are still 'average'.
Lexus is 5-star all the way across, and Toyota right behind them.
These ratings are what people look at.
But it doesn't matter so much what WE think, what matters is that many car buyers put a lot of faith in these ratings.
Bottom line, many Americans do not have faith in American cars for a historical reason.
OUR taxpayer money going to help them survive so they can increase European imports. Stop the blood flow. Give money to companies for building in the USA!
I agree, stop Toyota from bringing all those hybrids in from Japan...
How's that TCH treating you these days?
I came within a hair of getting a CTS because of the offer GM had for people with leased vehicles. Unfortunately my lease was outside their window.
I understand GM offering different schemes, but here I am willing to buy a Cadillac and they are offering an extra $4000 to current GM owners. I'm not about to go in an buy a car that I know my neighbor can buy for $4000 less. I understand loyalty but I'm just not going to take a deal like that. If they are hurting then why get choosy about who you sell to?
As a replacement for the TCH I looked at the CTS (too small in the back seat) and even the STS before I got the HH but they wouldn't deal on my TCH. Toyota treated me well on the discount and trade value for the HH. However I have my lease expiring on the Expedition in Novemeber and have not decided what I'll do there. But a third vehicle in the family fleet would keep me from piling up so many miles on any one and I'd feel more comfortable keeping them longer term; thus considering a third vehicle, like a Prius or a CTS (go figure). We currently rack up about 50,000 miles a year of personal use driving. I hate to split that between two vehicles (my lease is for 19,500 miles per year).
Listen up GM. You had a buyer wanting one but he walked away.
As you know I'm not anti foreign as I have a Toyota_Japanese made, and a Ford. But I don't see Chrysler adding Fiat to the brand just to make themselve eligible for bail out money that will be spent of the same cars they are making right now.
American need industry, not just the car industry. Perhaps Obama will do a few things that I just can't bring myself to agree with as a matter of principle as a conservative (socially and fiscallly) Republican. Unfortunately we have only two real political parties and you have to chose sides. I'd actually consider myself a moderate compared to the two sides that draw attention.
We need to support capitalism as a nation, but we need to fight the "enemy" with the same tactics they use. If that means supporting the industry, we should have started doing it years ago, but with some input as to how the money is spent. But I do think globally and want to buy the best product. I just don't know why everything I buy says "made in China", including my wife's new Japanese Nikon camera.
It was a point and shoot for my wife. It was their top of the line P&S (approx $400 list). I don't know where they make the dslr's but it did surprise me.
Seriouslt. Did they expect me to buy knowing that someone else is going to get a better deal
However, if American manufacturers want me to be patrotic and buy American then they need to produce an American car. If a large % of GM and Ford cars are made outside our border then why should I support them? Chrysler doesn't need to import Fiats, it needs to build an economical line of cars or get out of the business. How is it Toyota can make Camry's in Kentucky? Why didn't they go to Canada or Mexico?
I know this is a simplistic view, but I've seen too many people with "Buy American" over the years on their Pickups and Sedans that were not made in America. The line between Toyota and GM / Japan and American is disappearing.
Simple answer, "UAW". They are not subjected to the Union that would rather bring the company to their knees. The UAW would rather run the domestics out of the country than give an inch on their very repressive contracts. It would be nice to have someone that works for Honda, BMW, MB, Nissan, Hyundai or Toyota chime in here and give us your views on working for the imports. They are producing cars many times that are more "Made in America" than a lot of the domestics. And without a doubt higher in quality much of the time.
Domestic automakers have little to no long-term commitment to "Made in USA", and who can blame them? But that's why I am always puzzled by the domestic fans who scream "Buy American" - all the domestic automaker jobs are headed for foreign shores in the long term. Toyota and Honda car-building jobs aren't. Even VW is planning to build more manufacturing capacity inside the U.S. As will other European automakers in the years to come, I'm sure, once we get out of the current recession (could be a few years!).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Of course, America would have been crazy to allow that, so the plants in America were the compromise to placate the international community (and avoid retribution abroad) while saving the American auto industry from complete destruction.
All in all, it was a good plan, although it merely forestalled the inevitable. Detroit, given generous breathing room, with the intervention of the government referee coming into the ring to allow Detroit a very "long count" to recover off its knees, ---nonetheless, Detroit still had a run of bad cars, bad luck, and too little improvement too late.
Also you have to consider the American consumers' role in all this. They went right on buying Japanese cars made in America in larger and larger numbers---so they voted with their checkbooks against Detroit's "made in America" products and for Japan's "made in America" products.
Ironically it allowed car buyers to be semi-patriotic and still get what they wanted.
Certainly not everyone agrees with me, but I am suggesting that historically, the 1980s--1990s will be viewed in the future as the most successful, fully-conscious consumer boycott of American products in our economic history.
We, the people, punished Detroit when they refused to mend their ways. They took us for granted and we rebelled.