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.
Options

Does America Even Need Its Own Automakers?

145791036

Comments

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    There's really no other explanation for Deroit's massive loss of market share---MASSIVE----effective competition diluted the buyer pool and the market share got divvied up amongst 5-6 Japanese and then South Korean firms, in addition to the emerging and equally formidable European invasion.

    Detroit got "book-ended".

    "ponderous and inefficient" is really much more accurate than just saying "bad". It's not that domestic cars were "bad". They were just a 1960s car being built in the 1980s and that didn't work anymore. True, Detroit made its share of clunkers, but they were playing catch-up and their first efforts were under-developed to say the least.

    By 1990, Detroit could build a 1980 Honda and by 2000 they could build a 1990 Camry. Now in 2007 they are building year 2000--2003 or so Japanese and European cars. So they are catching up but still as always, one step behind.

    Detroit still loses market share, year after year.

    Therefore, you know the end of this story if things don't change.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    By 1990, Detroit could build a 1980 Honda and by 2000 they could build a 1990 Camry. Now in 2007 they are building year 2000--2003 or so Japanese and European cars. So they are catching up but still as always, one step behind.

    Exactly well except for the time line anyway. I think if you cherry picked your domestics you could move all of that up a few years in favor of Detroit. My 1989 Bonneville was way better then any early 80s Honda I ever worked on. On the other side of the coin you had Tempos, Cavilers, and Dynasties from that era as well. In those cases you would probably be better off with the Early 80s Honda.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,671
    Good point about some cars having much better build than others. But the same is true about the foreign jobbies. I recall a coworker commenting about a brand of car where the heaters blew out occasionally. Bad, but it also took the powertrain computer with it. Really bad. Bad design.

    Cars are much closer overall than most foreign HoToy sedan devotees would like to admit. I sat in a Camry with poor interior for the price that was visiting at a friend's house. I'd have to find the Camry drove better and promised 100% reliability (it doesn't) to take it over the LaCrosse, Aura, Focus, etc., as a future purchase.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,733
    oh. i got confused. you seemed to be saying we had a choice other than what was at best buy and circuit city. yes, most small TVs ain't all that great these days and they certainly don't seem to last like the TVs of old ... but if there is no choice, what can you do about it? oddly enough... kind of like the auto industry again. if not for the japanese, we would have no choices today other than crappy rickety tug boats.

    '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

  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I see the Japanese as limiting our choices. Other than Mazda, they don't really make anything exciting and it's reflected by just about all the automakers these days. A world full of Hondas and Toyotas or their clones is like going to Baskin-Robbins and finding out all 31 flavors are vanilla. At least Chevrolet has the Corvette and soon the Camaro, and Ford has the Mustang, and Chrysler has a lot of great cars like the Dodge Viper, Dodge Charger R/T, the Chrysler 300-C SRT8, hopefuller the Challenger, etc.

    I guess if the Japanese manage to finish off our domestic industry, I'll be heading toward Europe for my next ride.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    How can the Japanese be limiting the choices when THEY ARE OFFERING MORE CHOICES. You should seriously read your own post because it's not making any sense at all...

    Nissan offers 350Z and G37
    Honda offers S2000 and NSX

    I'll give you Corvette, Mustang and Viper. Charger R/T and 300C SRT8 are just regular sedans with big V8 attached to it. Nothing fancy about it. Looking forward to the new Camaro and Challenger, as well as Toyota's effort to bring back Celica and Supra.

    Japanese won't be finishing off the domestic auto industry. I see GM is well on their come back trail and will be a formidable competitor to Toyota if they can keep it up. Ford and Chrysler on the other hand need more work IMO but I don't see them going anytime soon. Don't worry lemko, you should be able to buy Buick/Caddy for years to come.

    BTW, just curious, why you rather buy European instead of Japanese?
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I don't see the Japanese impacting more than our US factories. GM has a very profitable manufacturing base in the rest of the World. Instead of getting cars built in North America they may come from China. I understand they are building a great Buick over there.

    I am more worried about the impact on our economy when everyone works part time for Toyota and Walmart. The NLRB needs to put some teeth in the labor laws concerning part time workers without benefits. If these companies were forced to pay part of the health care and offer retirement after 90 days, it may level the playing field a bit.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    imidazol97: . The Japanese makers built econoboxes with the minimum of parts and options. The US makers (wrongly) didn't build econoboxes. Americans bought them in the early 80s, late 70s, for their economy. Power steering. Nah. Power brakes. Nah. Radio. Maybe. Size. Nah. Don't need it for one person. Good gas mileage. Yes. Auto transmission. Nah.

    The domestics did build "econoboxes" - the Chevy Vega/Pontiac Astre, Ford Pinto/Mercury Bobcat and Chevy Chevette.

    In the early 1970s, GM and Ford were touting the Vega and Pinto as their answer to the Japanese competition - the Datsun 210 and 510, and Toyota Corolla and Corona. By 1976, as the failure of the Vega was glaringly apparent, GM touted the Chevette as the newest import fighter.

    The Vega and the Pinto were just as stripped down as their Japanese counterparts, and they still broke down more often.

    The problems with the Vega weren't with the accessories. The problems were with the drivetrain and early rustout of the body.

    The problem wasn't that the domestics weren't competing with the Japanese. The problem was that they were initially competing with lousy product, and as they downsized their bigger vehicles in the late 1970s, problems started to crop up in those vehicles, too.

    imidazol97: But with more options come more chances for failure. The Japanese did well with keeping failures to a minimum.

    Again, the failures weren't just with optional accessories on Detroit cars. The Japanese did not feature drivetrains as disaster-prone as the Oldsmobile Diesel, Cadillac V4-6-8, Cadillac HT4100, Ford 3.8 V-6 or GM 3.4 ohc V-6.

    Even the Buick V-6 that is so reliable today wasn't all that great when GM initially revived it after buying back the tooling from AMC (Jeep Division) in the mid-1970s.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    The problems with the Vega weren't with the accessories. The problems were with the drivetrain and early rustout of the body.

    My impression of the early japanese cars was that the drivetrains lasted but they were rust-mobiles. As a HS and College student in the late 70s and 80s, it seemed to me that the typical student car, that was a japanese make, was a total rust bucket. I had several late '60s Chevys, in those days, which had some rust but not to the extent that the japanese cars seemed to.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    On the lamentations over the supposed durability of manufactured products these days, the thing that seems to be overlooked is the price. For example, if I look at a new washing machine today the price will be about the same or less than I paid 10 years ago. I think this is the case for any major appliance.

    In the case of TVs, computers, and other electronics price will less and quality (not to be confused with durability) will be better.

    My mom bought one of the early Amana microwaves for about $500 in the 70s ($500 in the 70s would be like spending maybe $1200 today) and while the thing lasted forever (about 30 years), it was replaced with one that cost about $50.
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,386
    "midazol97: . The Japanese makers built econoboxes with the minimum of parts and options. The US makers (wrongly) didn't build econoboxes. Americans bought them in the early 80s, late 70s, for their economy. Power steering. Nah. Power brakes. Nah. Radio. Maybe. Size. Nah. Don't need it for one person. Good gas mileage. Yes. Auto transmission. Nah."

    I had meant to respond to this when it was first posted. My first Accord was a 1980. It indeed had power steering and brakes. Radio? Yep. AM/FM cassette standard (as were the power steering, power brakes and air conditioning which was a first for me at that point).

    It could haul 4 people around. To be fair of they were tall people you had to be selective about who sat where. Trunk? I drove around the country with it and had loads of room.

    The only thing you mention that it didn't have was an automatic and that was not because it wasn't available. It was because I didn't want one.

    I think there is a lot of revisionist history about what we early adopters of Japanese cars "had to put up with."
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I really don't like the new styling direction Lexus has been going. I kind of liked it when Lexus was copying the last generation Mercedes S-Class. Back in the day, the Mercedes S-Class was the car I'd choose in lieu of a Cadillac, that is until M-B's reliability went into the toilet. The old Lexus LS was kind of like getting an S-Class without all the hassle.

    Infiniti? Their styling is just weird and alien. They look like it they were designed by extra-terrestrials.

    Acura? Would've liked the RL if it had a V-8.

    I hear Mercedes is starting to get its act together and I'm looking forward to many great products from them after close to a ten-year stumble.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Bet that old Amana microwave felt more like a small safe. You could probably tear that modern-day $50 job apart with your bare hands.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I bought a loaded for the day 1978 Accord hatchback. The dealer never was able to make the cruise work. Constant cooling problems from day one. Engine blew up at 60k+ miles. Traded it on a used 85 Escort in 1986. The Escort was a great car that was much less expensive to maintain than the Honda. It served as driver training car for both my teenagers. Was wrecked by my ex-wife at 108k miles. No car should have to survive what that Escort survived. I do not think any Japanese car in 1985 would compare on any level. In that price range.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I really don't like the new styling direction Lexus has been going

    Agree!
    My wife's 1990 LS400 Mercedes "S" Class knock-off is rock solid, even today. It has not been cheap to keep in tip top shape. Nothing in the Lexus line since is as good looking. I could maybe see owning the LS460, just do not want any more low slung cars to crawl in and out of.

    I wonder if Lexus will ever build their luxo barges in the USA.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Being a geezer-like witness to the Japanese invasion, I can assure you that the Japanese cars of say the early 1980s were so much better in content, reliability and performance than most American cars that an American car salesman often contemplated ritual suicide. He was stuck with obsolete and unattractive product (go look at a series of photos of 1980-85 American sedans...the bread and butter portion of the market share I mean).

    Those were very VERY painful years for American car dealers, and the attrition rate was brutal.

    The first Honda Accord got rave reviews in the press...absolute raves...the buzz was tremendous at the time. Ditto the 1990 Lexus 400LS, the Miata, the BMW 325, the Benz W126 series. Cars like this came down like hammer blows on the domestic competition. There was no "comparison" in product. The domestics were a distant second.

    Most new American models introduced in the mid 80s went like this:

    First the media said: "The All New Import Fighter from GM!"

    or

    "Ford Fights Back in the Eurosedan Market!"

    Then after 6 months in the field, these "import fighters" dropped off the radar, bedeviled with problems and disappointments and recalls and unhappy owners.

    Time and time again this is how I remember it. Promise--Reality---Disappointment.

    Now of course a 1980 Accord it looks humble to us now, and really, so does a '55 Chevy. But to a '48 Chevy owner of the time, a '55 Chevy was a gift from heaven. To someone who suffered with Pintos and Vegas and the disastrous Citation, a 1980s era Accord was a very appealing choice.

    And so it went. Relative to each other, the import was a much more compelling choice...not to EVERYONE...but a sizable chunk of what was once the Big Three's market share.

    Now it doesn't seem so dramatic a difference between import and domestic. But back then it was dramatic. Many American cars were the subject of ridicule.

    It was not pretty for anyone associated with the domestic car business in whatever capacity.
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,386
    Funny thing. Cruise was one thing mine didn't come with. I had an aftermarket cruise put in (another first)which worked fine.

    It its later days (past 100K) I had rust problems and the drivers seat started wearing but I got 167K on it and I've matched but not exceeded that number yet. (My 87 Maxima wagon easily got past that point but at 167K I sold it to a coworker because I had convertible fever.
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Subjective experiences are SO interesting! I inherited an Escort for a while, a 1988 model, and I thought it was a pretty pathetic piece of engineering. The "concept" was great, the car a failure IMO. And this a very cherry, low mileae car.

    Compared to a friend's Cressida at the time, it felt like something built in the hobby shop at State Prison. Once they started using Mazda engines in the Escort, it was a way better car IMO.

    BTW, my friend still has that Cressida, in daily use!

    Visiting Host
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    Using Mazda mechanicals to make a better car was a good strategy for Ford. People complained that it wasn't a "real Ford," but to people outside of sites like this (i.e., the real world), that didn't matter.

    They saw the blue oval on the grille, knew that it was sold at a Ford dealer and that it gave good service. Thus, Ford ultimately benefited.

    Ford is using the same idea with the Fusion, which is earning good reviews and appears to be quite reliable.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    You cannot compare a Cressida to an Escort. The Cressida was the best car Toyota ever built. It was dropped so they could sell the Lexus ES250 Camry knockoff POC.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Well I guess then all we could say in absolute fairness about that is that if Toyotas and Hondas were POC, then American cars were worse POC, because American bought Toyotas and Hondas like crazy. They are where they are in the automotive market for a reason you know, unless the rewards for producing crap is tremendous success---which kinda doesn't make sense ???

    Nice thing about a relatively free and highly competitive market is that everyone ends up just where they deserve.

    Don't know if that applies to Microsoft however --LOL!
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,733
    your personal preference on styling does not an argument make, however. You claimed the Japanese limited choices and offered nothing exciting. That was countered with several cars that ARE in fact different and exciting. You may not think they are pretty, but lots of folks don't think the upcoming camaro or challenger are pretty, either.

    The situation you described (meaning bland and indifferent) would be the case IF toyota and honda stopped producing all of their fringe vehicles and built solely camrys/corollas/accords/civics. They obviously offer much more than that, regardless of the small numbers they sell in. So I think that just proves the point that they are interested in making more than just appliances.

    '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

  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    I sat in a new M45 yesterday, first one I had a chance to really look at, and that car was stunning.

    Dark blue outside with a cream/parchment leather inside.

    REAL cherry wood with a matte finish on top. None of this too shiny plastic looking wood that might be real but you can never tell because of all the lacquer. I didn't get to drive it but if it drives like a slightly bigger more comfortable G35 then it would be a great, great car. I like the different styling as well since the Germans/Bangel have force stupid fender flares, flame surfacing and bulbous front and rear ends on the rest of that segment.

    Give me something different any day be it a conservative Jag sedan or a more edgy Infinity.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Bet that old Amana microwave felt more like a small safe.

    Oh yeah, it was a tank.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,926
    Do sell crap. They both specialize in the low end /cheap electronics arena... sort of like Costco and WalMart do. I wish Best Buy and Circuit City stayed midlevel, like they were 10 to 20 years ago. Especially Circuit City, they've really gone down market.

    However, the very best electronics are still made in Japan. Denon... for example, a high end company makes a low line of electronics that a lot of retailers now sell, these are mainly made in China. Their high end stuff, that Tweeter used to sell in CA, was mostly made in Japan.

    Sony still makes bulletproof TV's and monitors. That is their bread and butter.
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    I thought the last-gen Cressida should have been sold as a Lexus ES instead of a Toyota. Rumor is that the Yote will do just that with the next ES.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    unless the rewards for producing crap is tremendous success---which kinda doesn't make sense ???

    Many times cheaper sells as does a perception of more bang for the buck. That was my reason for buying the 1964 Land Cruiser. I felt I was getting more of a machine for less than the competition. Which at that time was the Datsun Patrol and Jeep.

    That was not the case because of poor quality materials used in the Toyota engine.

    I know you will not change from your position on Japanese superiority in vehicles, nor I on GM building the best trucks. Mexican stand-off! Cinco
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I always thought the strongest suit for domestic cars was "bang for the buck". You got a LOT of Buick in the 1980s for your $$$. What you didn't get was quality, but you got quantity, and that was just fine for many people. It's not unlike going to restaurants that have big portions of non-gourmet food.

    You get what you pay for, in food or cars I think. Even in 2007, it seems to work the same.

    Yes, Americans did make the best pickup trucks in the 80s and 90s, you'll get no argument from me about that. And that probably saved their butt, too.

    I must respectfully disagree, about Toyota engines, though, having taken some of them apart and put them back together. The quality inside those engines (e.g., the 22R) was outstanding in machining, craftsmanship and metallurgy. My biggest complaint was Japanese carburetors in those days---very difficult to rebuild or get "right" if they went off. But that's not the same as engine quality.

    visiting host
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,671
    >They are where they are in the automotive market for a reason you know, unless the rewards for producing crap is tremendous success

    I'm not clear on your message. Overall are you trying to say you don't like the domestic car makers?

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,733
    i couldn't agree more. the 22R(E) was one of the most durable gas engines EVER built, IMHO. I think that engine is probably the biggest contributing factor to Toyota's famed reputation for "million mile cars."

    If only the rest of the vehicle didn't rust to the ground around it. ;)

    '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

  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I agree. The Cressida was perhaps Toyota's best product of the time. I see it as the proto-Lexus. My Uncle Macy had one. He called it the "Japanese Mercedes."
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Like the idea of cherry wood, but not a matte finish. It would look too much like somebody merely stained a piece of pine. I like those glossy, sleek finishes. Throw in some splashes of brightwork while you're at it.

    Dark blue outside with a cream interior? That's the color combo of my girlfriend's LaCrosse. Looks sharp.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The only two Toyota engines I am familiar with is the Land cruiser 6 cylinder in 1964 & the 4 cylinder in the 1994 Toyota PU. The LC 6 cylinder had soft metal in the valves and did not hold up. The fiber timing gear was prone to failure as well. When I replaced those parts with Chevy components the engine was much more reliable. The 1994 Toyota PU did not handle teenage abuse as well as my 1990 Chevy 3/4 ton PU. I agree on the 80s & 90s Domestic trucks. I am not thrilled with the newer trucks from any manufacturer. All too tinny for me. I want heavy chrome bumpers. No cheapo plastic to fade in the sun.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Heck I KNOW you got a lot of bang for your buck with a 1980s Buick. I saw a nice 1985 LeSabre at Carlisle and it was exactly the kind of car I wish was still built today. Despite being the not-as-good FWD car, my 1988 Park Avenue is still here and everything still works. I also had a 1987 Chevrolet Caprice Classic - a very solid car with excellent fuel economy for such a large car. As far as I'm concerned, I wish GM still built those excellent RWD B and C Body cars.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    If you're into cars that are the size and weight of an Avalon, have the interior space and comfort of a Corolla, and the drivetrain refinement of a 4-cylinder S-10, then the 1987 Regal is the car for you. :sick:
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I wish GM still built those excellent RWD B and C Body cars.

    Well, Ford is still selling the Crown Vic and its variants, if your goal is a car with a low cost per ton.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481


    It's got nothing to do with like or dislike. The numbers are the numbers.

    Either the Big Three lost tremendous market share or they didn't. You can look it up and declare it right or wrong.

    Visiting Host
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    GM selling Allison for $5.6 billion (Yahoo News)

    Allison "makes transmissions for commercial trucks, buses and military vehicles." (emphasis added).

    The new owners are US and Canadian investment firms.

    I'm renewing my "So, who do we farm out the tank and HumVee production to?" comments in light of this news.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Oh, I'm sure our very dear friends the Chinese would be more than happy to build all our weapons systems.
  • fezofezo Member Posts: 10,386
    And with Allison Transmission in private hands they will no doubt get the opportunity to do so.
    2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Here's a funnier one - I gave a girl a ride to work in my Cadillac Seville STS and she didn't even know GM built Cadillacs. In fact, she thought Cadillac was a foreign make!

    You got to be kidding me ? :surprise:

    -Rocky
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    What a question. Why not ask: Does America need Jobs?
    If I were Toyota, I would stop renting the giant ship and I'd just put the car factory in America. That way I'd use American energy to make my cars. I'd use American raw materials. I'd pollute America with my processes and factories. I'd use American workers but I wouldn't let them unionize and there'd be no pensions. The workers would not be doing the jobs that paid the best and almost none of the design decision jobs would be in America. I'd farm America for profit and send those profits back to the upper eschelon workers in my Toyota corporation, and the Toyota stockholders in Japan. I'd even invite all my Japanese suppliers over to America to set up shop there too. I'd tell them about the cheap labor and raw materials. I'd explain the benefit of no more shipping or import tarriffs to get their product to America. I'd tell them the benefit of consuming America's energy and polluting America for a benefit that went mostly to wealthy Japanese business owners like ourselves. Then to top it off, I'd mention that all the American magazines considered anything we made or put our name on as superior and sought after, and constantly told the gullible Americans so, and that a vast majority of them believed it.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Wow! I couldn't have said it any better myself. I wonder if the Japanese executives are a lot like the character Khan on "King of the Hill" who sees all Americans as "stupid hillbilly rednecks." Geeze, America as a place for cheap labor and raw materials. Sounds a lot like a colony to me. Isn't this the kind of thing we fought against over 200 years ago?
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Geeze, America as a place for cheap labor and raw materials. Sounds a lot like a colony to me. Isn't this the kind of thing we fought against over 200 years ago?

    Not even a little bit. From an economic perspective, that particular war (and the next few after it) were fought to overturn onerous trade restrictions. The United States has always had the raw materials, and for a long time obtained the cheap labor through immigration (both internal and external). Post-World War I xenophobia shut off the cheap labor supply, and unionism made the existing labor increasingly expensive. That untenable situation gradually unwound after the 1960s, but improved transportation and communication in the last few decades made it easier to send the work to the cheap labor rather than bring the cheap labor to the work (hence outsourcing).
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Sure America needs jobs but America also needs to face the bare facts.

    Italy has a similar kind of problem. They can't make their corporations large enough to compete in a world market.

    America can't make their cars good/cheap enough to compete in a world market.

    So whaddya gonna do? Trade restrictions will only instigate retaliation. Downsizing American auto companies will only make them less effective in the long run.

    Either the Big Three has to radically alter their vision of car making or they should re-train and re-structure before they are Hudson, Packard and Pierce Arrow all over again.

    Maybe they could become the Clean Car Company of the world? Specialists in that area? Or go strictly commercial and abandon passenger cars? We are, after all, very GOOD at construction equipment, trucks, weapons, etc.
  • jkinzeljkinzel Member Posts: 735
    There is an extreme danger in not having our own auto makers.
    While some might not think so, we are living in a relatively calm world right now. However, that could change overnight.
    With religious differences and some political instability throughout the world, we could be faced with having to fend for ourselves and without the infrastructure to produce what we need; we are pretty much a sitting duck.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I wonder just how fast we could gear up after another Pearl Harbor attack? I think with the current anti business, anti industry mindset in Washington and states like CA it would be real difficult to build up our factories before we are annihilated. We will not have the luxury of time we had in 1940. ICBMs are much faster than Japanese Zeros.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    "Or go strictly commercial and abandon passenger cars? We are, after all, very GOOD at construction equipment, trucks, weapons, etc."

    This echoes my thoughts exactly. When even the Japanese companies begin to talk about how hard it is to make money on small cars and the domestics don't seem to be able to profit off ANY car production, it seems like skipping out of cars entirely might not be the worst idea in the world.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    ICBMs are much faster than Japanese Zeros.

    If ICBMs are coming our way then it really doesn't matter how strong an auto industry we have, or had...
  • jkinzeljkinzel Member Posts: 735
    ICBMs are much faster than Japanese Zeros.

    It may not be war heads; it might be disease, famine, it could be some countries refuse to deal with us. It could be any number of reasons that exclude nuclear weapons.
    If you let you country get weak enough, someone over run you.
    Still, is it wise to let you country get in a position that it cannot sustain its self if for whatever reason we are cut off from the rest of the world? Never a good idea.
This discussion has been closed.