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
However, buying a small SUV (and I'm no big Toyota fan), you get more refinement, a better ride, tons of power in the V6, and in spite of Toyota's recent troubles - superior reliability.
When we buy things we are paying for reputation as well. Rebadge the Toyota as a Hyundai and the price they can charge goes down many $thousand. Rebadge the Chevy as a Toyota and the price goes up several $thousand.
May be unfair, but reputations are earned over years/decades of experience by the general public. It takes a long time to change them even if the product quality is improving or getting worse. Which is why maintaining quality is so important over the long haul. GM is now finding this out.
The ride with 800 lbs is luxury car like. Without that load is still rides very well. There is no substitute for wheelbase and large diameter tires for ride quality.
Saw truck like mine for lease for $269 a month in yesterday's paper. Not bad for a $33.5k vehicle. When you consider the devaluation of the dollar, the price of a new Silverado has actually dropped in last 10 years. Obama keeps printing money.
Downside is Silverado mpg. DIC on Malibu shows constantly increasing mpg. Avg over last month just went to 27.4 mpg for an avg of 31 mph driving. Car turned 3k miles today. Malibu gets almost double the Silverado mpgs.
What I found:
At the test track, our loaded, four-wheel-drive RAV4 Limited ran to 60 mph in just 7.3 secondshttp://www.edmunds.com/toyota/rav4/2008/testdrivemanual.html
Didn't match the 6 sec being thrown around and wasn't an automatic either.
If there were more people like you, GM sales would be higher. The CTS and Malibu are nice. The Aura was nice. Reputation means a lot to most people with the second most expensive purchase they are likely to make.
Okay, I didn't realize Autotrac was widely available in the 1/2 tons.
The ride with 800 lbs is luxury car like. Without that load is still rides very well. There is no substitute for wheelbase and large diameter tires for ride quality.
I still have to disagree there. I've owned a Suburban and it didn't ride/drive like a luxury car and Suburban's have a coil spring rear suspension. No way a P/U with rear leaf springs is going to drive/ride like a luxury car even with over 140" of wheelbase. I'm not saying the 1/2 ton's have a bad ride, but few BOF vehicles have the suspension control on the road vs a car or car based SUV. To much unsprung weight and heavier duty components to overcome.
When I owned a '00 Suburban, I also owned a '01 Nissan Pathfinder. The v6 Pathfinder drove like a sports sedan compared to the Suburban. It was quicker, more agile, and had a far more refined ride. I wasn't softer, but it was more controlled and responsive.
One thing that really stood out was the 4wd systems. The Nissan was seamless and smooth when the transfercase would automatically send power to the front wheels. Both my Suburban and Expedition are noticeably louder and clunkier in their engagement. On the flip side, the GM and Ford system seemed to transfer torque quicker as I always noticed a bit more of rear slip in the Nissan system prior to sending torque forward, but it was far more smoother when it did. I think my Ford is louder than the GM unit. Between traction/stability control and the auto transfer case, it's far from smooth or quiet with clunks and pops during the transfer of torque forward. It works great, but just sounds like something might break when doing so.
I will say, Ford's Advance Trac/Roll Control works exceptionally well. Even in 2wd mode on snow and ice, I can floor it while turning onto a road w/o issue. I'm impressed with how traction control systems have improved over the years.
Well I'd expect that. Both my Suburban and my Expedition return about the same, 12mpg around town and 15-17 hwy. My Expedition has been a bit better overall, but it has a 6speed trans vs. the 4speed I had in the Suburban.
My responses have been based on the value of a CUV vs pickup. In turned into a debate on the value of a RAV4 vs Silverado, but my responses also equally apply to the Equinox.
Don't get me wrong. Fullsize PU and SUV's have there place, but OTOH, I understand why someone would rather drive something like an Equinox or RAV4 vs a PU. My friend that recently purchased a '10 Equinox traded in an '05 Avalanche and he doesn't miss it one bit.
Personally, if I didn't need the ability to tow over 5k lbs while having 4+ people in the vehicle along with a dog and gear, I'd prefer a nice sedan. A good set of winter tires would be more than enough to get around in Illinois winters.
Wonderful how that works. I don't know it is due to the tariffs or not, but tire prices have definitely gone up. I spent almost $1k on tires today. I'm glad I only have the 17" rims.
My fuel mileage readings from the computer are always optimistic too, so I really want to see what kind a yield I will get from a full tank.
I kind of hate that I spent 900 on new shoes as I've been tossing around the idea of getting something else, leaning toward a domestic. That's why I've been following this forum for a while now. I wish the 2011 Explorer was out, interested in it, even though it's FWD. Pulling hair here and screaming "Why Ford! Why!!!"
Happy motoring on your trip. The wife and I are fixin' to travel 1800 to Maggie Valley, NC. Can't wait.
For whatever reason they inflated mine to 40, door recommendation is 35, so I lowered to 35 psi and it is better, still not as smooth as the original set.
I kind of hate that I spent 900 on new shoes as I've been tossing around the idea of getting something else
I hear ya there. I started looking at new 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton PU, but I just can't bring myself to drive a PU everyday. So while I was debating what to do, I went ahead and splurged on new tires and brake pads all the way around. I have basically forced myself to drive the Expedition for a few more years.
I wish the 2011 Explorer was out, interested in it, even though it's FWD. Pulling hair here and screaming "Why Ford! Why!!!"
Well, if you don't go to far off road and if you don't tow much, then being based on a unibody and FWD platform shouldn't be to big of a deal. The on road performance should be better. It does look sharp though.
Well, aren't some BMW's made here in the United States? And while I don't think any Acuras are, plenty of Hondas are made here in the US. Getting those cars built, sold, and maintained here keeps a lot of people employed. Sure, the profits go back to the parent company, but what is the profit margin on a typical car, anyway? There's still a lot of money to be made by the suppliers, builders, sales and service departments, etc.
Acura RL and Acura TSX are made in Japan
Acura MDX and Acura ZDX is made in Canada
The problem with this "us .vs. them" attitude (please...no offense intended) is that you, as so many others do as well, are looking at (in this case) auto production as a national enterprise, when in fact it is a global enterprise. It was largely a US national enterprise until the 70's, when Europe had finally recovered from WWII and other countries' standards of living were rising (and thereby allowing their citizens to buy autos). Before WWII, auto production numbers were relatively small, but even then, Henry Ford had figured out what was to come.
There is no simple "black and white" answer that anyone can supply in 100 words or less to explain the process in detail. However, due to the sheer volume of production and distribution aspects in the auto industry, global production IS the most efficient way to produce vehicles (from an automaker's standpoint), and every successful auto producer is global today.
Toyota, Honda and Hyundai don't have some big, secret bank vault where they store the $$$ they made by selling products here. The global currency exchange is simply one aspect that could be expanded on in volumes, and yes, its a part of that global process I mentioned above... and one of the reasons why some manufacturers (foreign) have located plants here.
Now, if you want to compare that to, say, toasters, hair dryers, pots & pans, etc. .... then you can certainly make a strong case to support nationalistic production systems and methods.
However, as the product being manufactured becomes more complex, and contains more parts, its inevitible that these types of products will be much more globally oriented in their production process.
The bottom line is, if we are going to play by different rules than elsewhere in the world (and we should in many ways), then our trade policies need to reflect that in order to protect our economy.
How does picking my pocket by raising prices enhance my well being? If you resort to tariffs to make imports more expensive, I'll respond by keeping my cars longer. Then, when I finally have to replace my car, I'll buy used - not new.
Yeah, I'd like to help a guy in Michigan or Indiana keep his job, but not at the expense of my family's standard of living.
I've said it before & I'll say it again: if you want me to buy your products, figure out I want. Then offer it to me at a price that I'm willing to pay. Don't mug me with tariffs because you're too lazy & too incompetent to get my business honestly. That's cowardly.
But Americans need to buck up a bit too. I think we've let political correctness and an out of control legal system go too far. The courts seem to be taking over the other branches of government and looking for any trumped up legal excuse to throw out any law that doesn't agree with their personal preferences and interpretations, even though they aren't our elected representatives. The primary credentials for appointing judges these days seem to be an Ivy League diploma and their personal political positions (moderates need not apply). How do you keep a country united when so many of its citizens become totally self centered? People demand the government cut costs, but only as long as it doesn't affect their personal interest or entitlements. Too many ciitizens have become totally unrealistic - give me more, but cut taxes. Too many people spend way over their heads and then turn around and blame the government or society for their own reckless or stupid behavior. Yes I invested all of my kid's college fund in equities, didn't diversify because I wanted the highest potential return, but it didn't work out so make me whole again. Who can I sue? We cowtow to everyone's culture and preferences except the ones that go back to our nation's founding. English doesn't have to be your first language anymore (and they'll sue if you try to make it that way) and its alright to celebrate any religious holiday or customs except for Christian ones (sing a Christmas carol at a school play and get sued, but go ahead and recognize or perform anything else). Then there's the example both parties in Washington set for everyone - basically lie, cheat, argue, blame and refuse to compromise - forget the country's best interest and focus solely on your supporters and their politcal payola. Its more important to beat the other guy or stand up totally on princples than accomplish anything that might help the greater good (and better for their own personal pocketbook as well). I don't get all this China hysteria being whipped up in Washington. They won't ever need to invade because we are well on our way to dividing ourselves so far that we'll collapse if we don't wake up soon.
It is possible that your friends company was paying more in labor than they could afford. Just as possible that they were doing just fine but discovered they could be more profitable by sending the work elsewhere
While the people buying their product or services may not have been UAW workers, they may have been working for Honda, Kia, BMW or one of the many other manufacturers that have moved here from their home countries.
Consider this: Company "A" manufactures a product, and it sells fairly well. Lets call it "Levy". Their jackets have been selling for $60+ in the USA. They move their manufacturing to China. That puts a lot of american workers out of work.
Their jackets still sell for $60+ and Chinese workers are building them. They say they had to do that to stay competitive. They are competing against say "Wrangler" that sells for $20. Yet they still demand $60 even though they are paying a lot less for production.
How does that increase their sales and help anyone other than Levy Corporate?
Rather than tariffs on foreign goods, maybe we need to need to tax Levy for goods that are made elsewhere and shipped back here.
Kip
Sounds like more stock value and dividends for me.
This should also include parts that are shipped here for assembly.
Telling us a vehicle for example is American but is assembled in Mexico or Canada is goofy.
Personally, I felt there was a lot of competition among the Big Three (Four, if you count AMC) and I also remember that early Japanese cars were tinny, rustprone and a nightmare when problems did occur, parts-wise, but they seem to get a memory "free pass" from a lot of folks on that.
Tariffs are just a sneaky way of transferring money from one group of Americans - consumers - to another group - employees of companies that can't be bothered to figure out how to build something that I want at a price that I'm willing to pay.
Just how will impoverishing the 1st group help the 2nd group?
Tariffs also have a long, unhappy history of either not working or making things worse. The most vivid example of this is the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which dramatically deepened & lengthened the Great Depression.
Can you come up with a solution that doesn't entail heavy-handed income redistribution?
Personally, I felt there was a lot of competition among the Big Three (Four, if you count AMC)
And a great many of us wanted more than this.
and I also remember that early Japanese cars were tinny, rustprone and a nightmare when problems did occur, parts-wise, but they seem to get a memory "free pass" from a lot of folks on that.
Not sure what this has to do with tariffs or why you're bringing it up, but we've been buying Japanese since '74 & have yet to experience what you're describing. Now German cars from that era were highly problematic - having owned a '78 VW Rabbit & an '80 Audi, I can attest to that - but you don't seem to be interested in criticizing the Germans. Why is that?
Well, when I graduated in 1974 I had a friend with a new '74 Vega and another who bought a new Corolla. Guess which one was rustprone and a nightmare compared to the other?
I am tired of hearing complaints about "redistribution"...since this whole Pandora's Box was opened and really came into effect, the socio-economic gap has been exploding. That's income redistribution too, although it seems few have the guts to admit it.
Oh, boy, here comes the 'racism' angle! Always seems to come up on any forum where "Buying American" versus foreign is discussed.
I would not buy a German make either. But I think logical people would agree that it is not the German auto industry that has helped to decimate the domestic industry. Well, OK, at the top end, but nothing like the Japanese or Korean industry.
I guess I'm old enough to remember about/care about WWII. And before twenty folks post that they know a Medal of Honor winner or POW that now only buys Japanese or German, all I can say is, that's OK...just not for me.
I'm of German descent on both sides, BTW, and I think German behavior of only less than fifteen years before my birth was hideous.
I guess the difference is, I won't sit here and say Vegas were good cars. However, I do know people who bought more than one, and traded one on another (although with perception what it is, no one would admit that today!). But I've yet to hear one person say a single negative thing about any Japanese car, pre-'80. I do remember Honda CVCC engine problems, Honda front fender rust (premature), Toyota front fender rust (no inner fenders, just like Vegas), service and parts headaches, at least in the small town I grew up in.
As I always say, some balance is a good thing.
I don't know why it's so chic to give 'the other guys' all kinds of leeway and knock everything in our own country. Surely one doesn't have to be considered jingoist to want things the best for our own country and people, first. Sometimes it's not all about what's best for me any given second.
Perhaps it looks biased toward the Japanese back then because the US makes were truly worse (certainly the smaller cars). And that is what started the decline of the US nameplates.
Sounds like more stock value and dividends for me.
If this is an isolated case you are probably right, at least short term. Longer term Levy competitors will do the same thing. If the offshore is Asia there is a good chance any proprietary advantages Levy has will be quickly compromised and it won't be long before discounters are selling comparable product at a fraction of the price causing your stock price to drop absent some exceptional marketing strategy. There really isn't near as much consumer market yet in the third world despite the media hype. The growth percentages are huge because the base is still relatively small which is probably really the primary driver to China and Yuan valuation.
However, this off shoring is happening on a large scale. The US doesn't seem to have any industrial policy to combat it while our schools keep dumbing down to be politically correct and avoid litigation. Our politicians are engaged in constant combat holding back any compromises or cooperation to help resolve the matter. Republicans keep talking tax cuts and Democrats tariffs, but honestly neither approach is going to do it. Basically, Bernancke is on his own walking that fine line between sufficiently easing to encourage growth while not falling into potentially further damaging deflation or rampant Carter era inflation. Brace yourselves though, because longer term the primary way out of our muck of debt is to weaken the currency and let inflation rise. I mean C'mon, do you really think Europe is that much better than our situation causing their currencies to be so much higher than the US dollar?
I think the biggest problem is that we, as a country and as individuals, have greatly over extended ourselves and now expect a quick bounce back. The previous banking/S&L debacle under Bush #1 had a rather quick end only because of the technology revolution. I don't see anything like that on our current horizon and revolutionary change like that doesn't happen too frequently historically. We've got to let the markets work it out. Artificial stimulus is well intentioned, but often just ends up prolonging the agony. For example, the housing markets just need to find their natural balance points through foreclosure and pricing. Meanwhile, we've been in Vietnam II for something like 10 years sucking away our cash. We can't afford to keep being the world's policeman while the rest of the world puts more of their money and resources into their respective economies. Plus, these actions draw far more ire than praise around the globe further hurting our competitiveness. Washington and Wall Street need to start putting their heads together focusing on our economic future, and we need to use our tax dollars in our country instead of overseas. Most importantly we need some industrial policy and planning on how we compete going forward, and unfortunately tariffs aren't a magic bullet and aren't going to accomplish all that much despite the political blabber.
At a cruise I took my '63 Lark Daytona to the other night, there was a bone-stock red '72 Vega Kammback wagon there. I think it looked great, mostly because you never see them anymore. It had a stock engine (not sure if the original one), and had the Custom Interior which included cloth Camaro bucket seats. I know the Pinto was a better car long-term, but the Vega looked cooler I think.
I am really digressing I guess and this particular post probably belongs in the classic car forum.
My friend bought a '74 Vega GT, brand new, after HS graduation with all the money he had saved working for 2 years at Mickey D's. Within 2 years he had not just rust, but HOLES around his windshield and rear hatch window (this is in So Calif where there is no snow). He continued to drive the car, telling me jokingly that "I'm going to drive this until it becomes a convertible". I kept driving my old used '66 bug (which had no rust). His Vega finally died at 55K miles with corrosion in the engine cylinders causing coolant to leak into the cylinders. He told me he would never buy another GM car.
I got rid of that '66 bug in 1992 with 235K miles on it.
But that's not because of any tenderheartedness on the part of the German auto industry, which would have been only too happy to stomp its American competition into the dirt. It's largely because the sharp devaluation of the dollar vis-a-vis the deutschemark in the 70s & again in the 80s made the German autoworker the highest paid blue collar worker in the world from a U.S. dollar perspective. Thus, the Germans can only compete at the top end.
Perhaps we should learn something from this.
If, as I was told many years ago, the loss of one Cadillac sale to BMW or Mercedes hurts GM's bottom line as much as the loss of a half-dozen Chevy sales to Toyota or Hyundai, then you're guilty of inconsistency if you don't criticize the Germans as much as you do the Asians.
I think the passing of time has a way of making us exaggerate the good in things and the bad in others.
This is the first time I've heard that statement.
Say whatever you want. He and I carpooled to UCLA together in 75-77. He had holes on his car at that time. And I saw other Vegas in SoCal with the same problem. Perhaps there were only certain batches of metal that had the problem, so that some '74 Vegas were better and some weren't?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/40/1973_Chevy_Vega_GT_ad.jpg
Don't know if this exact ratio still holds, but I'd be surprised if it doesn't. Cadillac was GM's golden goose back in the day.
Didn't you start this conversation when you asserted that 70s Japanese cars were rust-prone & troublesome? Then you shouldn't be terribly put out when someone else brings up the topic of the late, unlamented Vega.
Thanks jimbres.
Contrary to uplanderguy's opinions, I disagree that the Japanese makes were inferior in the 1970's. Given that the only segment they competed in was small cars, what were the choices? Let's see, we had:
Pinto
Vega
Gremlin (the US makes)
Corolla
Honda CVCC
Datsun 510
While all cars were inferior to today's, of the above models IMHO the Japanese vehicles were far superior to the US competition. And apparently the market agreed, since that was the begining of substantial market share capture of the US car market by foreign makes. You don't usually win market share by offering inferior vehicles.
By the way, the reason the Japanese makes got into the larger car segment was the "voluntary quotas" protectionism of the US makes in the 1980's. Because the Japanese makes could only import x vehicles per year, they upcontented their vehicles as well as built bigger vehicles (Cressida, Datsun 810, etc.) so that the profit per vehicle would be greater. They also began building US assembly plants to provide domestically produced vehicles.
The US makers' protectionism, ostensibly used to "help" the US makers, was in fact counterproductive and hastened their demise. Which shows why if you want to win a war against competitors, build a better product -- don't try to use false distortions like quotas, tariffs, etc.