Minivans - Domestic or Foreign

jpnewt · February 2006

Are you up on the facts of Foreign cars? Honda in Ohio alone employs around 15,000 people. In North America they spent over $13.6 Billion in supplies (2004). Honda is just not Foreign anymore. Thanks for adding to the Honda family with your Civic.

rorr · February 2006

"Perhaps our new friend also likes to drag race and take highway exit ramps at 85mph...mon!"

LOL! I just KNEW you were lurking in here.......

marine2 · February 2006

Are you up on the facts of Foreign cars? Honda in Ohio alone employs around 15,000 people. In North America they spent over $13.6 Billion in supplies (2004). Honda is just not Foreign anymore. Thanks for adding to the Honda family with your Civic.

Yes I am up on the facts. Foreign makers in this country hire a lot of Americans. They also make a lot of profit from those vehicles. Most of that profit goes back to Japan, Germany, N.Korea and etc. Most does not stay in America and work it way back into the American economy, creating even more jobs not in the automotive field.

Also, very few, if any of your 401-Ks and investments are in their companies, where many are in American companies.Which also helps you and me that are investing or have investments through work in 401-K or pensions.

Check the parts content in American and foreign vehicles. I think you will find more foreign parts in foreign vehicles than in American, which also means more American jobs.

petras2 · February 2006

parts content on my 06 odyssey
just for your info: 70% US/Canada, 20%/ Japan, engine origin-US, transmission origin-Japan, when i checked out the 06 gc, i noticed it was assembled in ontario, canada but i don't remember the parts content percentages...

marine2 · February 2006

Book does not give part content on the Dodge GC, but I'll see if I can find out. It does say the added storage space in those two bins on the Dodge adds up to 12 cu ft of storage space. I am sure that is at least three times as much as what is in that one in front of the Ody's middle seats.

rorr · February 2006

Wrong thread for this (check the News and Views board for "Buying American cars: What does it mean?"), BUT......

"They also make a lot of profit from those vehicles. Most of that profit goes back to Japan, Germany, N.Korea and etc."

Actually, most of the profit stays in the U.S. through plant expansion, American-based R&D studios, various design studios, etc. Just as most of the profit that Ford and GM make through their European subsidiaries stay in Europe.

"Also, very few, if any of your 401-Ks and investments are in their companies, where many are in American companies."

I believe that most of us have SOME latitude about where to place our 401-k funds. Also, Toyota/Honda are publically traded companies here in the U.S. just like the big 2.5. The idea is to put your funds in companies with a strong outlook, not pick companies based on their performance 40 years ago and then try to talk folks into supporting their product out of a sense of patriotism.

"Check the parts content in American and foreign vehicles."

YOU check the parts content. Many of the so-called 'imports' have higher domestic parts content (not just assembly, but the actual source of the parts) than their 'domestic' counterparts. For instance, not only is the Odyssey assembled here in the U.S. (not Canada), but it's engine and transmission are built in Ohio. In fact, when GM started using Honda engines (built in Ohio) rather than GM engines (built in Germany) in the Saturn Vue, the domestic parts content for the Vue went up.

Not only that, but the American companies SUPPLYING parts to the 'imports' built here in the U.S. also ship those same AMERICAN parts overseas for inclusion in the Japanese home market vehicles (example: catalytic converters for Toyotas built in the U.S. are also shipped to Japan).

I'll try to not even get into the fact that a lot of the 'domestics' get credit for parts/labor supplied from Canada (like what goes into the Dodge Caravan) but apparently some folks don't want to give the 'imports' credit for parts/labor sourced from right here in America.

To sum up, Honda is a Global Automotive company with HQ in Japan. Your Caravan was built by DaimlerChrysler, a Global Automotive company with HQ in Germany. The Odyssey was built in AMERICA, with an AMERICAN engine and transmission. Your Caravan was built in Ontario, Canada. So which choice do you think supports more American jobs.

rorr · February 2006

"...parts content on my 06 odyssey...transmission origin-Japan..."

Interesting. According to this:

http://www.ohio.honda.com/Company/htm.cfm

..the automatic transmission used in the Odyssey is built at the Honda Transmission Manufacturing plant in Russels Point, Ohio.

rorr · February 2006

"It does say the added storage space in those two bins on the Dodge adds up to 12 cu ft of storage space."

Personally, if we had a Dodge, that 12cf of storage space would be occupied by about 13 cf of......stuff. Which means that on those very odd occasions when I DID want to stow the mid row, I'd have to figure out where to put all that....stuff.

Which would probably include about 1/4 pound of stale Cherrios and a box of melted crayons. As it is, I can leave the....stuff...alone in the storage compartment and just remove the mid row seats.

marine2 · February 2006

The big three of American family sedans areand have been for several yearsthe Ford Taurus, Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, in that order of salesuntil now. The 1997 Camry has bumped Taurus for the title of the best-selling car in the United States. If you're surprised that the two import nameplates are considered American family sedans, here's how all three stack up content-wise. The Taurus is built here, and 85% of its content is domestic. Except for its V6 engine, 65% of the Accord is sourced in the United States and is built in Marysville, Ohio. And the Camry, assembled in Georgetown, Kentucky, has 55% American parts, with 30% coming from Japan.

65% without adding a Japanese engine. How much lower would that be counting the engine?

I'll add to your questions as I find them. But the wife will be home soon, so it will probably be tomorrow before I can add more.

dennisctc · February 2006

I love my famiy, but I have plenty of health insurance...what the hay...give me a DVD player, throw in the complete Scoobie Doo and Power Puff Girls DVD series collections...

NO NO NO!!!! Forget Scoobie Doo or Power Puff Girls!!!! How about buying a Bedbugs DVD!! Great new PBS show for 2-6 years old kids www.mybedbugs.com !! It's the next Barney but not as annoyingly sweet and its educational!!! Ohhh I'm also an investor

~

dennisctc · February 2006

I sorta remember reading the Taurus had the lowest US Content vs. Accord or Camry, this was years ago? I currently have a 2006 Taurus (last MY thank god!!) and I just got rid of a 2003 with 62k very troublesome miles....worst car I've ever had! Thank god I didn't have to pay for repairs....$700 for alignment and starter!!!

dennisctc · February 2006

It seems the only people that say those middle row seats are uncomfoortable, are people that don't own stow-n-go seats. Are the as soft as the Honda seats? No. But in 14 months I have owned mine and the four times I have had friends or family in it, no one has ever said they were uncomfortable. I have not read a review of anyone saying they are uncomfortable. So it's nothing but sour grapes people. A way to try and put down a great idea.

You hit the nail right on the head....even after DCX's second gen Stow N Go in 2008, Honda may get their own version out (and you know they're working on it!!)...but then we'll hear how superior the Honda version is regardless.

I've had many friends and family in mine for road trips to Chicago, Toronto and Philly......not a single complaint. My dad thought they were great - nice and firm like a German automobile's seats (BMW?? Maybach? Mercedes?).

jipster · February 2006

Thanks for the tip. My 4 year old just got over wanting to watch "The Wiggles"(gag, cough,). A show about bugs is right up his alley.

bluedevils · February 2006

art, you seem to be inconsistent with your argument. Either safety is your #1 and ONLY factor in a vehicle, which some of your posts seem to imply, or it isn't. In terms of safety, you 'settled' by 'only' buying an Ody minivan when you could have bought something safer.

And your post #1527 seems to indicate that you DO place some importance on factors other than safety.

So, art, which way is it gonna be?

bighondafan · February 2006

Why don't Ford and GM just give up on the minivan market. They are trying to compeat with segment leaders Chrysler, Honda and Toyota. They need to give it up as a lost cause and stick to builing products they know they can sell. Or at least they hope they can sell. GM has 4 minivans in it's 8 divisions. Do they need 4? No, they should seriously consider leaving that segment of the market as Ford has wisely decided to do.

marine2 · February 2006

The Dodge GC says it has 83% Canadian and American content. They don't break it down and it is assembled in Canada. That could be broken down soon as they are now going to also build them in Missouri

artgpo · February 2006

I bought the Olds because it was a great buy. After purchasing the Olds I became aware of its dismal IIHS crash test results. Stability control was not offered nor was head curtain airbags. As you might have noticed, I kept that van a short 36 months before trading it for the Odyssey with all the safety bells and whistles. My priorities are safety, comfort, reliability and performance. I am now a much more careful shopper.

rorr · February 2006

WAAAAAAY off topic but still interesting....

"The Taurus is built here, and 85% of its content is domestic."

That's nice, except the Taurus is being replaced by the Ford Fusion. Which is being built in Mexico. And based on Mazda mechanicals. If you think the Fusion will retain that 85% domestic content, you're deluding yourself.

"Except for its V6 engine, 65% of the Accord is sourced in the United States and is built in Marysville, Ohio."

I'm not clear on what you're saying (my fault). 65% of the Accord (without the engine) is domestically sourced? That's terrific! Which means that when you include the AMERICAN PRODUCED Honda engine (Honda builds engines in Ohio as well), that would mean the domestic content would go UP when you count the engine.

"And the Camry, assembled in Georgetown, Kentucky, has 55% American parts, with 30% coming from Japan."

I think you are missing the gist of my earlier post. The domestic content of the Japanese brands (particularly Honda and Toyota) is INCREASING year by year. Toyota by themselves has over 600 different AMERICAN suppliers supplying parts for the vehicles they build in the U.S. And as I pointed out earlier, some of these American produced parts go overseas for vehicles in other markets.

Yet at the same time that the 'import' brands are opening new plants and expanding existing plants IN THE U.S., the 'domestic' nameplates are CLOSING plants in the U.S. to open new plants in Mexico.

To get back (somewhat) on topic - folks should buy a minivan based on what THEIR priorities are. If easily stowable mid and 3rd row seats, and lots of bang for the buck are a high priority, then the DCX vans are terrific. If you place a higher priority on driver involvement and want all the latest safety advances then the Ody would be a good choice. If you want extremely high quality and comfort in a very nice van, the Sienna is a good pick. The point being, one should choose a minivan based on the intrinsic qualities of the vehicle itself, and not on what country is represented by that $0.50 hunk of plastic glued to the tailgate.

marine2 · February 2006

"Except for its V6 engine, 65% of the Accord is sourced in the United States and is built in Marysville, Ohio."

I'm not clear on what you're saying (my fault). 65% of the Accord (without the engine) is domestically sourced? That's terrific! Which means that when you include the AMERICAN PRODUCED Honda engine (Honda builds engines in Ohio as well), that would mean the domestic content would go UP when you count the engine.

Many auto companies build engines here and still bring in engines from abroad. One type of engine isn't good for all types of cars. The way it is worded, the only way I see you can take it, is that the engine is not built here for that car. If it was, they would surly have added it to the percentage, to bring up American content.

Yet at the same time that the 'import' brands are opening new plants and expanding existing plants IN THE U.S., the 'domestic' nameplates are CLOSING plants in the U.S. to open new plants in Mexico.

That's a big problem for American manufactures. They are strapped with older plants, older workers, high pension plans and higher health care costs. To compete, they have to close many American plants and build in Mexico.

Foreign auto makers get big tax and land buying discounts from states when they build a plant here. That plant is also more automated than older American plants, which means they need less workers.Then they are able to hire younger workers and that helps them get cheaper medical insurance rates. They are also not saddled with the pension plans American companies have, or the higher wages American companies have, because their workers are younger and have not worked their way up the seniority ladder yet.That gives them a huge advantage on profits and research and development costs over American companies.
But with that huge advantage, it's not shown in the price you and I have to pay for that vehicle.

As I stated before, much of that profit will work it's way back to Japan, Germany, N.Korea and etc. and not help build more jobs here. Which eventually effects us all.

marine2 · February 2006

"Labor unions have been blamed for many of Detroits woes, but some of the finest plants, such as GMs state-of-the-art Cadillac factory in Lansing, employ union workers. It could vie for first place, along with nonunion plants such as Hondas Marysville-East Liberty complex in Ohio; and Nissan Motor Co.s ultraflexible new plant in Canton, Miss."

jipster · February 2006

"My priorities are saftey, comfort, reliability and performance"

I think that's what most minivan owners priorities are.
But, you've been dancing around the question of do you want the safest family vehilce on the market?(that isn't a Mack truck or an Abrams tank).There ARE safer family vehicles on the market that meet your criteria.
Because if do not have the absolute safest family vehilce on the market...aren't you putting your family at unnessesary risk...or more risk? Ya see where we're trying to go with this art? Can you empathize at all??

thegraduate · February 2006

I think this is going a little bit too far...If someone wants the safest vehicle, but wants a minivan at bare minimum, logic would say he will buy what he finds to be the safest minivan. Art bought the Odyssey because it has superior safety qualities. It's not hard to figure out.

artgpo · February 2006

Thank you, I could not have said it better myself.

There is no absolutely, 100% fool proof, without defects van on the road. Even if I had a Mack truck I could get hit by a bigger KW. My Odyssey, with all its modern safety advances, is still prone to severe damage if it is hit at the wrong angle or too high a speed.

In its class of minivans I chose Odyssey for its outstanding standard safety features. Even the vaunted Sienna still has VSC as an option whereas it is not even offered on the DCX vans.

Some of you like DVD RES in your van, I do not. Some of you prefer a NAV system, I do not. You like chocolate I like rum raisin. This goes on and on.

jipster · February 2006

If the man had answered the question in the first place,instead of answering it like a politician, we wouldn't be here. "Logic" would say if saftey is the most important priority(as art clearly posted that it was)then why not buy the safest family vehilce on the market? If art can say he cares more about his familys saftey than someone who doesn't choose VSC and side curtain airbags...then someone who has a safer family vehilce can say the same thing about him.

A smarter way to have phrased it would be "I bought the Honda Odyssey because it is one of the safest minivans on the market" or "I chose the Ody because I believe it to be safer than the DGC". NOT, " I chose the Ody because if I chose something else it would be like murdering my family if we were to get into an accident"

I do apologise to our host, and fellow members, for hopelessly pursuing a straight answer...which I now realize would not happen in a million years.
So, agree...let's move on.

jipster · February 2006

Agree...good nonflaming post. Why couldn't you have said that in the first place? Though chocolate is much better than rum rasin. :P

rorr · February 2006

To continue the off-topic theme....

"Foreign auto makers get big tax and land buying discounts from states when they build a plant here."

And domestic auto makers don't? Do you honestly think the states discriminate against the domestics by offering tax breaks ONLY to the imports?

"That plant is also more automated than older American plants, which means they need less workers."

So, in other words, we're supposed to SUPPORT obsolecense?

"Then they are able to hire younger workers and that helps them get cheaper medical insurance rates."

Why don't the domestics hire younger workers? Why should this labor pool be open only to the imports?

"They are also not saddled with the pension plans American companies have, or the higher wages American companies have, because their workers are younger and have not worked their way up the seniority ladder yet."

Hmmmm, sounds like you're trying real hard to NOT mention the fact that the domestics were/are saddled with Union labor and contracts which bled the domestics dry. And yes, they are not saddled with UAW contracts. You're right; that's a huge advantage for the imports.

"That gives them a huge advantage on profits and research and development costs over American companies."

Yes. So, should you and I SUPPORT a system which doesn't added intrinsic value to the vehicle (UAW contracts sucking the lifeblood out of the domestics) or support a system whereby some of the profit goes into making future products better?

"As I stated before, much of that profit will work it's way back to Japan, Germany, N.Korea and etc. and not help build more jobs here."

As the domestic content of the 'imports' increases (that's American produced parts by American companies), those American companies grow. And add jobs. Toyota alone utilizes in excess of 600 different American suppliers for parts in Toyota vehicles. In addition, the R&D and design costs for many of these 'imports' are incurred here in the U.S. since these costs are for cars designed SPECIFICALY FOR the U.S. market. Where do you think all the R&D and design costs were spent for the development of the U.S. market Odyssey?

Also, where do you think the 'import' brands get the money for all their new plants and plant expansions? That would be profit which is spent HERE. You want proof?

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=109241

In short, Toyota posted a 3rd quarter net profit (that's worldwide net profit) of $3.3B with an operating profit of $1.1B for North American operations.

I'll repeat: operating profit of $1.1B for N.A.

At the same time, Toyota is on track to invest $11.8B in plants and equipment for their fiscal year ending 3/31. That's an increase of 29% from the $9.1B they invested last year. Sounds to me like they are spending their profit here in the U.S.

bluedevils · February 2006

that's exactly what I've been driving at.

jipster, I enjoy your posts. Not because you drive the same vehicles that I drive, but because you are a logical thinker and a reasonable person and you do not over-aggressively trumpet the virtues of your own vehicles while badmouthing the competition.

jipster · February 2006

Thanks bluedevils. I must agree with your post ... you make some very fine points.

Claires(host)...now...about that raise I've been talking about.

rorr · February 2006

"Claires(host)...now...about that raise I've been talking about."

I'm sure that Edmunds could see fit to pay you 25% more than they're paying you now..... :P

thegraduate · February 2006

Is there a clearly defined "safest" vehicle out there? Some might say an Excursion....biggest and heaviest, but more likely to roll over than a Camry...etc...

My opinion is that there is no SAFEST car, as you want art to point out.

jipster · February 2006

"I'm sure that Edmunds could see fit to pay you 25% more than they're paying you now..."(minus the emotorcon giving me the rasberry)

Ummm...yes. Zero times 25% is zero...thats why I REALLY need Claires to give me that raise. :sick:

jipster · February 2006

Sorry gratuate...but you wanted to move on from this topic and I agreed. So, lets move on. :shades:

rorr · February 2006

Well gee, based on that info, they could probably give you a 30% raise.....

marine2 · February 2006

I'll try answering this and let it be the last post on the subject.

And domestic auto makers don't? Do you honestly think the states discriminate against the domestics by offering tax breaks ONLY to the imports?

No, states would give domestics the same tax breaks. But do you think the American companies have the money to build a lot of new plants when they are closing so many down?

Why don't the domestics hire younger workers? Why should this labor pool be open only to the imports?

What are they to do with the workers they have, fire them all? Of course if they were able to build new plants the labor would be much younger.

Hmmmm, sounds like you're trying real hard to NOT mention the fact that the domestics were/are saddled with Union labor and contracts which bled the domestics dry. And yes, they are not saddled with UAW contracts. You're right; that's a huge advantage for the imports.

Your right, I am glad you can see one of the problems

Yes. So, should you and I SUPPORT a system which doesn't added intrinsic value to the vehicle (UAW contracts sucking the lifeblood out of the domestics) or support a system whereby some of the profit goes into making future products better?

I think if we better supported the domestics, they would be able to add these things and make a better product.

As the domestic content of the 'imports' increases (that's American produced parts by American companies), those American companies grow. And add jobs. Toyota alone utilizes in excess of 600 different American suppliers for parts in Toyota vehicles. In addition, the R&D and design costs for many of these 'imports' are incurred here in the U.S. since these costs are for cars designed SPECIFICALY FOR the U.S. market. Where do you think all the R&D and design costs were spent for the development of the U.S. market Odyssey?

I think I showed in a few models that right now, American companies have quite a bit more in domestic parts than imports. Yes, imports can buy more domestic parts here, but they also have an unwritten responsibility to keep jobs in their home countries and I don't think your going to see them buy as many parts here as domestics do.

Wouldn't it be even nicer if domestic had enough profit to spend on more R/D and be able to come out with better vehicles? I mean we are Americans, wouldn't most want to support American companies if they could?

While you seem to have figures of how much Toyota spends here on R/D and how many factories they are buying parts from, I noticed you have no figures on how much they send back to Japan to help the Japanese economy.

Also, where do you think the 'import' brands get the money for all their new plants and plant expansions? That would be profit which is spent HERE. You want proof?

I agree, but I ask again, how much is not spent here and sent back to their country that helps no one here. Americans could spend the same amount as imports on expansion and new plants if the playing field was level and have billions left to help the American economy.

In short, Toyota posted a 3rd quarter net profit (that's worldwide net profit) of $3.3B with an operating profit of $1.1B for North American operations.

They should be able to. They have newer automated plants which require less workers. Some don't have to pay union wages, they have younger workers which makes payroll smaller, insurance cheaper, no pension plans to pay out on or medical to pay for retired workers. Now how much cheaper do you think they can build a vehicle for, compared to domestics? With all that extra profit and being able to make cheaper cars, are you paying less for it when you buy it? No, your paying thousands more. So they are not passing any savings back to the consumer and sending billions back to their country to make more jobs there.

I'm finished with this subject.

Claires · February 2006

let's get back the real issues in minivan shopping (you know... debating whether minivans should be equated with luxury autos and extolling the virtues of various seating options).

If you want to talk about American vs. Foreign, take it here, please:

Buying American Cars: What Does It Mean?

Claires · February 2006

I tripled your salary just last week.

cpsdarren · February 2006

"Is there a clearly defined "safest" vehicle out there? Some might say an Excursion....biggest and heaviest, but more likely to roll over than a Camry...etc... "

For 2004-2006 MY vehicles, there is a website that uses published data to combine factors like the NHTSA crash tests, IIHS crash tests, weight and rollover risk into a single factor comparable across all vehicle classes and weights. Unlike other attempts to produce such a rating by various publications, this one references all its sources and the formulas are made public.

Of course, it doesn't include some crash avoidance features like emergency handling and braking. Those are very important, too, but much more subjective. It's also hard to say what mix of crash avoidance features with crash protection features is the right one, of course.

http://www.informedforlife.org

You may not agree with the published studies they used to weight the individual factors, but at least it isn't biased by subjective measurements or interpretations. Granted, vehicles that do not have results for a particular test are given an "average" rating as a placeholder. This may be better or worse than they will actually perform, but the site includes a nice calculator that lets you enter your own data to see the results if you speculate on the blanks, if you wish.

rorr · February 2006

"I tripled your salary just last week."

HEY! Waitaminute!

You only doubled mine!

rorr · February 2006

Interesting link.

It appears that for both the '05 and '06 models, the Nissan Quest w/ side airbags had the highest ratings amoung minivans with the Honda Odyssey close behind. In fact, for '06, the overall rankings for all vehicles had the Acura RL 1st, the Nissan Quest 2nd, the Volvo S80 in 3rd, and the Honda Odyssey in 4th.

The Toyota Sienna w/ airbags/ESC ranked 18th.

The highest ranking DCX van was the Chysler T&C SWB w/ airbags......ranked 96th. :sick:

tamu2002 · February 2006

"The imports build plants hire people and spend their money here in the US."

That's a commonly used argument. I say "so what?" Is Toyota gonna spend all the $1.1 B profit (at the expense of the domestics) on US soil? For every US supplier Toyota grabs, how many GM suppliers do you think were forced to shut down. The imports are gradually REPLACING the American automakers, which results in a NET loss of jobs. Imagine a world where there's no more GM, Ford or DCX and all the US auto workers work in Japanese-built plants here in the States. Do you want to see that happen? It's coming. Is that a good thing for this country? If the 3rd world war broke out and we ended up fighting Japan again, who is gonna build the Abram tanks that Art was thinking about purchasing

?

Not trying to make excuses for the domestics, but making it sound like there's no difference in buying domestics or imports defies logic.

cpsdarren · February 2006

"The highest ranking DCX van was the Chysler T&C SWB w/ airbags......ranked 96th"

Overall ranking is not so important as the risk rating. Even at 96th overall, the risk factor was still better than average. As a class, minivans do quite well. Granted, this is somewhat theoretical, but many of the studies used do correlate these factors to real world fatality statistics.

Pure fatality statistics are not as useful because they have a large element of driver profile in them. Keeping that in mind, here's another take:

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/RNotes/2006/809979.pdf

rorr · February 2006

"Imagine a world where there's no more GM, Ford or DCX and all the US auto workers work in Japanese-built plants here in the States."

Still off topic but....

All of these companies are global companies. All of these companies compete on a global basis. The failure of GM, or Ford, or DCX will NOT occur simply because they lose market share solely in America. Should these GLOBAL companies fail it will be because they couldn't compete on the GLOBAL market.

Ford/GM also compete against Toyota/Honda in Europe. In Europe, they are ALL 'import' brands. So ask yourself: how does Ford/GM compete against Toyota/Honda in Europe? How SHOULD they compete? They can't appeal to someone's sense of 'patriotism' - they must actually compete with their product. Do you think they CAN'T compete?

Why can't they do that in the U.S.?

Example - the European Ford Focus matches up EXTREMELY well with the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla. In the U.S., one of the biggest areas where the 'imports' hammer the 'domestics' is in the small car class. So why doesn't Ford sell the current version of the Focus in America? Why do they STILL sell the previous generation here rather than the edition which is competitive (and in many ways superior to) the 'imports'?

My last comment on this issue in this thread (I promise ClaireS!):

The domestics should compete with the imports PURELY on the strengths of their product. Period. To say that one should buy domestic due to some sense of 'patriotism' is akin (IMO) to saying that Americans CAN'T compete purely on the strength of our product and that we MUST appeal to 'patriotism'. It's like admitting, "well, we can make a car that's NEARLY as good as the imports, but you should buy ours instead because it's good for the country".

No.

We CAN compete; we CAN build a better product; and I refuse to let the domestics continue to skate along offering mediocre product that is NEARLY as good but which we should support anyway for the 'good of the country'.

artgpo · February 2006

For the second year in a row the 2006 Honda Odyssey is Motorweek's pick for minivan of the year.

jchan2 · February 2006

And one of Car And Driver's 5 Best Trucks.

jipster · February 2006

For the second year in a row the 2006 Mazda MPV is Jipster's pick for minivan of the year. :surprise:

With that raise I just got from Claires(host)...I'd say my pick carries more weight/prestige than Motorweek's. :P

dennisctc · February 2006

Kia Sedona

artgpo · February 2006

The Kia dealer I pass daily (where we bought our Sportage) has about 20 of the new vans. The Enterprise Car Rental place across from the delear has a Sedona in the fleet.

tamu2002 · February 2006

My argument was on the consequencies of buying domestic vs import. How and whether the domestics can compete with the imports is irrelevant to my point. Again not trying to excuse GM/Ford, just trying to point out that it's not a good thing for the US to see them perish.

hansienna · February 2006

Jipsters 2006 pick for Best Minivan of the year is also the "Best Minivan Posting" of the year.

edgecomb · February 2006

I'm looking for a used minivan that I can put 3 car seats in the second row does anyone have any ideas. I know the newer sienna and odyssey have that third seat in the middle row option but it's out of our price range. We have about 15k. Please let me know if you have any ideas, we need at least a 7 passenger. Thanks!

Minivans - Domestic or Foreign

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles