The American Auto Industry Story-Funny but sad and true

[Justin Leiwig]

A Japanese car company and an American company decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.
On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.
The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action.
Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 7 people steering and 2 people rowing.
Feeling a deeper study was in order; American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.
They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.
Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 2 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.
They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 2 people rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program,' with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rowers. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses. The pension program was trimmed to 'equal the competition' and some of the resultant savings were channeled into morale boosting programs and teamwork posters.
The next year the Japanese won by two miles.
Humiliated, the American management laid-off one rower, halted development of a new canoe, sold all the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses.
The next year, try as he might, the lone designated rower was unable to even finish the race, so he was laid off for unacceptable performance, all canoe equipment was sold and the next year's racing team was out-sourced.
Sadly, this was the end of the American in the race.

[Justin Leiwig]

Here's something else to think about: American automakers have spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of the US , claiming they can't make money paying American wages.
Japanese car makers have spent the last thirty years building plants inside the US.
The last quarter's results: Toyota maked 4 billion in profits while Ford racked up 9 billion in losses. Ford folks are still scratching their heads, and collecting bonuses.
IF THIS WEREN'T SO TRUE IT MIGHT BE FUNNY

[Rod Sheridan]

The news in Canada yesterday was that Toyota opened a new plant in Woodstock Ontario, 1,200 new jobs, 1.1 billion dollar investment (that's Canadian $, it works out to about $25.67 US :D).

Of course the same newscast also indicated that GM was laying off more workers 200km away in Oshawa Ontario.

I'm certanly not much of a business expert, however if Toyota and Honda are doing OK in Ontario, and the "Big Three" aren't, it must be self inflicted on the part of GM/Ford/Chrysler.

I certainly feel for the workers of the Big Three, however now might be the time for some of them to start working for Toyota and Honda in Ontario.


regards, Rod.

[JohnT Fitzgerald]

The issue facing US car manufacturers is very complex.

Outside of the US, many "foreign" company retirees benefit from nationalized health insurance. I doubt some of the "up and coming" countries (e.g. Korea) even offer benefits to retirees. Here in the US, foreign companies have only been here a relatively short time and so don't have as many retirees. The 'Detroit 3' (as they're now called) have far more retirees that have, by contract, benefits such as pensions and health care.

I saw one estimate that anywhere from $1000 to $1500 of the price of every new GM vehicle went to the health benefits of just retirees.

There are also complications in rules imposed on them - they cannot, for instance, bring small/fuel efficient vehicles manufactured overseas back into the US.

Sadly, the "canoe" story above is most likely relevant and only makes matters worse. I wonder how many "steering supervisors" and "steering supereintendents" are in a typical US auto plant.

[mike holden]

Guys,
hate to break up your bashing with a dose of reality, but - the Harbour Report which judges plants based on efficiency has placed Chrysler plants on a par, or slightly better than Toyota for the last two years. GM and Ford are not far behind.
It is legacy costs that are killing the big 3 - pensions and health care. People are living MUCH longer than they used to (not that that is a bad thing) and money that was set aside previously was insufficient for the reality of longer lives.
Note that almost all of the foreign plants, while paying competitive wages, do NOT promise lifetime benefits such as pensions and health care, discounts on vehicles, etc.
The plants are now lean, they used to be overstaffed, but that ended about 10 years ago. They aint perfect, but they are a lot better than they used to be.
Sorry, but you punched my buttons.
Mike

[Dennis Peacock]

A word of warning before this thread gets too far along....we all know the rules. Let's keep this civil.

[Jon Grider]

I grew up in the shadows of Fischer body #1 in Flint, Michigan; home of the famous sit down strike that led to recognition of the union that eventually became the UAW. I have many close relatives and friends that are or were GM employees;not only blue collar,but management people too. I've witnessed up close and personally the havoc that has occurred with the demise of the American automobile industry. IMHO, the problems of this industry can be blamed on several things: !] an incredible lack of foresight caused by the hubris of the Big 3 management. While Toyota, Honda, Kia,etc. were making money on smaller fuel efficient cars,the big 3 pushed F250's and Suburbans because of the higher profit margins. 2] an incredible lack of foresight and hubris by US consumers in thinking cheap gas would always be available and the need to show social status by the size of vehicle we[yes,me included] drove. Again IMHO,the current low gas prices we are seeing today won't last.3] A sometimes unfair perception of inferior quality of Big 3 vehicles.4] The huge burden[as Mike alluded to] of retirement benefits for former employees,and excessive hourly compensation for assembly and production workers AND management alike.5] Our good old bought and paid for US government that changed CAFE standards to accomodate pressure from mgt.and UAW alike to keep the gas guzzling status quo .

There's much blame to be thrown around,and regardless of which direction one wants to throw it,I believe that it would be catastrophic to our economy to not give the automakers public funded help in this dire hour of need. It seems at the least, incongruous that we throw half or three quarters of a trillion bucks at the Citibank and Wall Street silk ties with virtually no accountability, while Dowd , Frank,and crew grill the Big 3 execs for wanting 34 billion. Wall Street shafted us twice, first by careless management of our hard earned retirement savings and investments and again by NOT using the bailout money we gave them to free up much needed credit lines. We as a nation may be able to survive economically the tyranny we've endured at Wall Street's hands, but I don't think we will survive economically the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs if the auto industry goes belly up.

As a relatively newcomer here, I hope I have not crossed any lines of forum decorum, but as an off topic forum, I'm thinking,perhaps incorrectly that opinions would be welcomed and taken as ,well, opinions, open to discussion and agreement or disagreement.

[Matt Ocel]

Once again - Rewind to the late 70's early 80's.

All I read and all I watch is exactly what happened back then.

OH the big three can't compete with the foriegn companies, Americans can make the right types of cars, Americans make gas guzzling cars that fall apart when you drive them off the lot on the way to fill up the tank.

Then what happened?

American car companies responded with vehicles that performed as well as the foriegn vehicles for the next 25 to 30 years.

No dought - We will again... We will figure this out.

Thats what makes America GREAT!


God Bless America.

FYI-Oil just dropped $10 A barrel, they say gas may drop to $1 per gallon
and Honda just dropped their formula one racing sponsorship.$300 million per year due to lower profits.

[Myk Rian]

As a 35 year tradesman of Ford Motor, I made good money for sure, but it is nothing compared to what the automakers pay for outside companies to come into a plant. $60-$120 per hour.
Now that the automakers have gotten rid of most of their trades people through retirements, guess what. They're paying these outside companies to do the work at 2-4 times what we trades people were paid.
That is just plain stupid.
People say auto workers make too much money. Now you know what a load of nonsense that is, don't you?

[Matt Ocel]

As a 35 year tradesman of Ford Motor, I made good money for sure, but it is nothing compared to what the automakers pay for outside companies to come into a plant. $60-$120 per hour.
Now that the automakers have gotten rid of most of their trades people through retirements, guess what. They're paying these outside companies to do the work at 2-4 times what we trades people were paid.
That is just plain stupid.
People say auto workers make too much money. Now you know what a load of nonsense that is, don't you?

Ford motor Company in St. Paul MN is hiring full time labor at 15.00 per hour, no benifits.

[Bryan Rocker]

Lets keep in mind several things here. First of all, the current financial catastrophe has been caused by several bad decision by both the financial industry and consumers alike. The big problems that ALL car manufacturers are going through are the result of many of us not taking out another loan to buy another new car, me included. We are all part of the problem. Since we are concerned for our jobs we are reducing our spending which is making companies like the Big 3 having huge issues and it will ultimately drive some big companies out of business. I was chastised for buying my 4-Runner in 2004 because it wasn't American. I almost bought an explorer then but ALL new Explorers were having severe vibration problems caused by out of balance drive shafts. Instead of fixing the problem once and for all Ford did not do a good job of handling it and it cost them a sale. It was my first foreign car and now that I have had it for almost 5 years I would buy it again. It has yet to go into the shop because it was broken. I have NOT been that lucky with ANY of my previous American made cars. In severe times the companies that make the bold moves will survive, the ones that don't will go under. At this time the ONLY one of the Big 3 I have confidence that it will survive is Ford.

Ok I am off of my soap box.

Bryan

[Karl Brogger]

I have NOT been that lucky with ANY of my previous American made cars.


LOL, I've never had what I would consider good luck with any vehicle I've owned. That being French made, Japanese, German, and spuedo American (Jap drivetrain, American body), or strictly American. They all suck. The Japanese build the best bikes though, cheap, reliable, and they perform. Quick Harley Davidson joke: 93% of all HD's are still on the road, 7% actually made it home.

[Brian Kent]

3 Beefs:

When you are promising retirement benefits, put aside the money as you go, and don't rely on future profits.

Do not under-estimate American innovation. We can build just about anything we put our minds to.

We can build strong, durable, beautiful fuel efficient cars. So let's do it. GM should stop saying "we can't" and just do it!

[Bryan Rocker]

Agreed, just look at what country has the 2 best jet engine manufactures in the WORLD, GE and Pratt and Whitney. Its time for GM decide whether they are going to make a future or fold up their tent and go home......

[Roger Jensen]

We could "out innovate" the rest of the world when we had the best educational system in the world producing the engineers to do it. That isn't the case any more. Our engineering schools are dominated by non-americans, since they are the best performers in math and physics. Much of that talent leaves the US after graduation.

[Lee DeRaud]

When you are promising retirement benefits, put aside the money as you go, and don't rely on future profits.Are you talking about the auto companies or Social Security?

Monkey see, monkey do.

[Ron Dunn]

We can build strong, durable, beautiful fuel efficient cars.

I have no doubt you COULD build fuel efficient cars, but you won't ... because you're still too much in love with big, fat, wallowing, Sahara-thirsty dinosaurs.

Petrol (gasoline) in America is too cheap. That has to change first. Then, perhaps, Americans will build a car that the masses in the rest of the world want to buy.

[Matt Ocel]

I have no doubt you COULD build fuel efficient cars, but you won't ... because you're still too much in love with big, fat, wallowing, Sahara-thirsty dinosaurs.


That right there,
Is the biggest myth out there. With all do respect, you need to do your homework. We do build fuel efficient cars.

[Dennis Peacock]

Alright folks, none of this is "personal". Let's keep this discussion away from each other and talk through this like civilized adults should. If we continue in this direction, the thread will be closed.

[Montgomery Scott]

We may build fuel efficient cars, but they are not all that reliable. After having owned five American vehicles and none of them being great on reliability, my last two purchases were a Honda and a Subaru.

Here at Boeing we've gotten a few engineers displaced from the automotive industry. One was a 30+ year engineer who stated that management hamstrung engineering to design better vehicles and fix known problems because it cost money. As long as this mentality of profits over quality persists I won't buy another American vehicle.

Probably everyone is aware of the fact that, regarding the Pinto design, management decided it was cheaper to pay off lawsuits resulting from deaths than it was to fix the flaw, or the similar problems with their Grand Marquis. Why would anyone want to buy a product from a company so unethical?

[Matt Ocel]

We may build fuel efficient cars, but they are not all that reliable. After having owned five American vehicles and none of them being great on reliability, my last two purchases were a Honda and a Subaru.

Here at Boeing we've gotten a few engineers displaced from the automotive industry. One was a 30+ year engineer who stated that management hamstrung engineering to design better vehicles and fix known problems because it cost money. As long as this mentality of profits over quality persists I won't buy another American vehicle.

Probably everyone is aware of the fact that, regarding the Pinto design, management decided it was cheaper to pay off lawsuits resulting from deaths than it was to fix the flaw, or the similar problems with their Grand Marquis. Why would anyone want to buy a product from a company so unethical?

It takes time to pin point a flaw, you can't do it on speculation. That leads to hasty decisions, which leads to more mistakes. Also, when a flaw is detected, it takes time to make a change in production.
Ford did this by discontinueing the Pinto line.


Maybe its just me, but this is when we Americans need to come together and work as a team to get through this.

[Ben Rafael]

I've owned 2 toyotas, a volvo, a jeep and a Tahoe.
The 2 toyotas rusted out and 1 of them had the transmission go bad at 70,000 miles. Rust in Los Angeles is generally unheard of. The volvo had a ton of problems. I still have the jeep and in the 11 years I've had it it has had only one problem that cost me about $200 to fix. The Tahoe I've had for 1 1/2 years and after 20,000 miles it is problem free. It is the nicest car I've owned.
The toyotas were tin cans IMO. I am not impressed with a car that gets rusted in So calif weather.
I have a friend who is a honda nut, he has never owned any other make. He criticizes american cars. A lot of people(not all) who criticize american cars have either never owned one or drove one. I believe in opinions from people who have owned, not from people using hearsay.
People need to go drive the new Chevys, they are quite nice.

[Robert Parrish]

Retirement cost are a big part on GM's problem. Case in point: my Father is 98 years old and has been receiving a pension from GM since 1978! He worked for Cadillac for 38 years and deserves his rewards. I think GM and the others did not plan on people living that long and a recent study indicated that people may live to a 125 someday soon.

[Karl Brogger]

Alright folks, none of this is "personal". Let's keep this discussion away from each other and talk through this like civilized adults should. If we continue in this direction, the thread will be closed.


What?!







And as far as fuel being too cheap in the US, we don't get taxed as heavily for our petrol products like many other countries. The Netherlands for example about 90% of the cost per gallon is tax, which is at the far end of the spectrum, where as the U.S. is at the other end. The biggest fault with the U.S. automakers, (as far as what they build), we don't use diesel at all. Thanks to enviro-nuts and the lies told by the global warming crowd, my diesel pickup used to get 21-22mpg, now I struggle to get 19mpg with ULSD. Smart thinking, lower emissions, but now the lubricity has been removed from the fuel causing excess wear, and the energy per volume has been reduced so I burn 10% more fuel. For icing on the cake, its more expensive to produce than it should be. I now have to throw a quart of 2cycle oil in each fill for added lubrication, adding another $5 to each fill so my $1200 injection pump doesn't take a crap. Before anyone mentions bio fuels, get real, the stuff gels at 45*.

I say let the big three sink. Welcome to Darwanism in economics. When they fold, someone will buy up the bits and mold it into something that will make money, or they'll go belly up again. There is nothing wrong with that. The people who are employed by those companies, tough cookie, life is rough, deal with it.

[Ben Rafael]

What?!







And as far as fuel being too cheap in the US, we don't get taxed as heavily for our petrol products like many other countries. The Netherlands for example about 90% of the cost per gallon is tax, which is at the far end of the spectrum, where as the U.S. is at the other end. The biggest fault with the U.S. automakers, (as far as what they build), we don't use diesel at all. Thanks to enviro-nuts and the lies told by the global warming crowd, my diesel pickup used to get 21-22mpg, now I struggle to get 19mpg with ULSD. Smart thinking, lower emissions, but now the lubricity has been removed from the fuel causing excess wear, and the energy per volume has been reduced so I burn 10% more fuel. For icing on the cake, its more expensive to produce than it should be. I now have to throw a quart of 2cycle oil in each fill for added lubrication, adding another $5 to each fill so my $1200 injection pump doesn't take a crap. Before anyone mentions bio fuels, get real, the stuff gels at 45*.

I say let the big three sink. Welcome to Darwanism in economics. When they fold, someone will buy up the bits and mold it into something that will make money, or they'll go belly up again. There is nothing wrong with that. The people who are employed by those companies, tough cookie, life is rough, deal with it.

I agree. Let them fail. Declare bankruptcy, shed bad contracts and divisions and come back stronger. Personally I think they need to be privatized so someone can have an large economic interest in them succeeding, and that same someone will fire managers who are less than competent. That isn't happening today.

[Sean Troy]

If we could only find and re-instill that oneness this country had in the 40's, we could do anything. When I hear stories from friends and family members who were groing up after the depression and how they all pulled together for several years to make this country so great and filled with pride, I know we could do it again without having to have a world war to get it started. It would take a real leader to get it started . I'm not sure any side of the political world has that one person yet? I still have hope :) We are America !

[Frank Hagan]

The Detroit companies do have higher labor costs, primarily not in what they are actually paying their workers but in benefits, etc. Rough figures, because I heard this on a radio program, but the burdened cost of an employee in the southern auto plants is around $35 an hour, while its $70 in Detroit.

The workers aren't getting that much, of course, but the pension contribution, health care costs, and unemployment fund (that promises some workers up to 95% of their wage if laid off) raise the calculation of the hourly wage.

GM is about half the size it was a few years ago; they had started on an aggressive restructuring 5 or 6 years ago. There is still a ton of waste in any corporation that size, and the business contraction may force them to wring more out of it. I don't know if they still have private chefs for the C-suite anymore, but the people earning millions every year could pay for their own lunch. Those kinds of reductions are mainly symbolic, but it was incredibly embarrassing for the three top guys to be sitting there asking for money from the taxpayers when they flew to DC on private jets.

Chrysler may have to be absorbed by GM (Nardelli, the current head of Chrysler, is a moron ... I couldn't believe that the one man who in the whole universe could stop Home Depot's advance by his ineptitude landed the job at Chrysler!) But I just think there's too much at stake for the rest of the economy ... that's you and me ... to allow the entire industry to fail because some bankers in NYC decided to screw up the loan business.

[Ben Rafael]

If we could only find and re-instill that oneness this country had in the 40's, we could do anything. When I hear stories from friends and family members who were groing up after the depression and how they all pulled together for several years to make this country so great and filled with pride, I know we could do it again without having to have a world war to get it started. It would take a real leader to get it started . I'm not sure any side of the political world has that one person yet? I still have hope :) We are America !

The problem is that we have entities that are doing and promoting the exact opposite.

[Justin Leiwig]

Guys,
hate to break up your bashing with a dose of reality, but - the Harbour Report which judges plants based on efficiency has placed Chrysler plants on a par, or slightly better than Toyota for the last two years. GM and Ford are not far behind.

Your statement is the main myth that the UAW likes to push. The problem with the harbour report is that it doesn't dive deep enough. The harbour report only reports efficiency at the end of the line.


It is worth noting that Toyota fabricates and assembles a greater percentage of its vehicle parts with its own employees, while the Detroit Three purchase many modules and subassemblies from suppliers, thus saving labor. Toyota also has retained nearly all its employees even in plants that experienced lower production. In contrast, GM, Ford and Chrysler have used buyouts and layoffs to reduce labor costs.


This quote directly from the Harbour report even addresses the main weakness of the report. The big 3 consoldate and lay off or outsource to make their efficiency look better. Toyota just improves.

I did a study of the Toyota plant in Georgetown KY and it is really amazing. Toyota pays better than the Big 3 for 90% of the jobs they have on the production floor. They also have more charitable giving among their employees and employees are generally happier at their plants than their domestic counterparts.

This is in part to empowerment. Last year 15 Toyota employees were rewarded with new Toyota cars for suggestions that led to cost savings and improvements. Every worker on the assembly line also has the power to shut down the line if they see something that isn't right. They then will go back and fix every single car sometimes shutting down the line for hours and loosing millions of dollars at a time to make sure that their quality remains high.

Now for my political statement. I think the government should bail out the big three...then install toyota engineers to run the joints. I'd bet the farm that the loans would get repaid. At least Mulaly had the guts to admit that the past 30 years the philosophy of the big 3 has been "if we build it they will buy it"

[Matt Ocel]

If we could only find and re-instill that oneness this country had in the 40's, we could do anything. When I hear stories from friends and family members who were groing up after the depression and how they all pulled together for several years to make this country so great and filled with pride, I know we could do it again without having to have a world war to get it started. It would take a real leader to get it started . I'm not sure any side of the political world has that one person yet? I still have hope :) We are America !

I second that!

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

The overall costs they foreign makers incur tend to be lower than US makers save maybe for the German and Swiss manufacturers.

However, it is my understanding that their home governments see them ad vital to national security and subsidize them heavily.

I wish the US makers would try a line that was competitive with what I get from BMW. Nothing in the US made lines come close. I mean nothing.

[Ben Rafael]

Kia is opening a site in west point georgia. They will be paying their workers there about $14 per hour plus "typical" benefits. The benefits should cost Kia about another $3 per hour. How in the world can UAW contract automakers compete against this?

[Rod Sheridan]

Hi Ben, as a Canadian I don't have any familiarity with whether the Kia wage offer would be considered good, or what typical benefits might be.

Could you elaborate please?

Thanks, Rod.

[Neal Clayton]

gm and ford are a perfect example of why "made in the usa" doesn't mean anything anymore.

they actually sell inferior cars here compared to what they offer under the same brand name in south america and europe in the case of a few models.

i will never own another detriot made vehicle.


That right there,
Is the biggest myth out there. With all do respect, you need to do your homework. We do build fuel efficient cars.

ford replaced the late 80s/early 90s model F250 diesel truck, then made with an international harvester drivetrain that got 20-21 miles a gallon and would easily last 750k to 1 mil miles, with a new engine that gets 13 miles per gallon and is much more delicate, everyone i know who has one has had it in the shop within the first 100k.

and there is still no 6 cylinder diesel option available from any of the detroit manufacturers, unless you live in brazil, there you can get one that's better than the equivalent gas model here. you can't go there and buy one and bring it here without paying a 25% tariff, which was put in place to? ...protect the gasoline pickup truck market in the states from vastly superior offerings from overseas made by toyota, isuzu, etc.

detroit has been utterly defeated by the japanese and euro manufacturers. without that effective ban on truck imports and minivan sales to taxi services, we'd be having this conversation years ago.

why do you think the foreign manufacturers started building plants here? to complete the conquest, and be there to pick up the extra profit when gas prices eventually drove detroit under. that's the only way they get around detroit's truck tariff.

[Ben Rafael]

Hi Ben, as a Canadian I don't have any familiarity with whether the Kia wage offer would be considered good, or what typical benefits might be.

Could you elaborate please?

Thanks, Rod.

Health ins, 1 or 2 wks vacation, 5 to 10 sick days, 401(k) retirement plan.

$14 per hour is awful in California, I do not know if it is good in Georgia. The people in Westpoint seem happy about it though.

[Matt Ocel]

gm and ford are a perfect example of why "made in the usa" doesn't mean anything anymore.

they actually sell inferior cars here compared to what they offer under the same brand name in south america and europe in the case of a few models.

i will never own another detriot made vehicle.



ford replaced the late 80s/early 90s model F250 diesel truck, then made with an international harvester drivetrain that got 20-21 miles a gallon and would easily last 750k to 1 mil miles, with a new engine that gets 13 miles per gallon and is much more delicate, everyone i know who has one has had it in the shop within the first 100k.

and there is still no 6 cylinder diesel option available from any of the detroit manufacturers, unless you live in brazil, there you can get one that's better than the equivalent gas model here. you can't go there and buy one and bring it here without paying a 25% tariff, which was put in place to? ...protect the gasoline pickup truck market in the states from vastly superior offerings from overseas made by toyota, isuzu, etc.

detroit has been utterly defeated by the japanese and euro manufacturers. without that effective ban on truck imports and minivan sales to taxi services, we'd be having this conversation years ago.

why do you think the foreign manufacturers started building plants here? to complete the conquest, and be there to pick up the extra profit when gas prices eventually drove detroit under. that's the only way they get around detroit's truck tariff.

I will respect Dennis Peacock's request.

[Ron Dunn]

What is your definition of "fuel efficiency"?

In Australia we don't consider a vehicle to be fuel efficient until it gets well in excess of 26mpg (US gallons), and popular car sales are petrol vehicles that get around 30mpg (US) and 40pmg for diesel.

Couldn't agree more with the comments about diesel. Great, efficient fuel. I can't wait to see if vehicles like the diesel VW Tiguan sell well in the US, and if diesel-electric hybrids start to take off in urban markets.

[Matt Ocel]

What is your definition of "fuel efficiency"?

In Australia we don't consider a vehicle to be fuel efficient until it gets well in excess of 26mpg (US gallons), and popular car sales are petrol vehicles that get around 30mpg (US) and 40pmg for diesel.

Couldn't agree more with the comments about diesel. Great, efficient fuel. I can't wait to see if vehicles like the diesel VW Tiguan sell well in the US, and if diesel-electric hybrids start to take off in urban markets.


Anyone of these -
http://www.kbb.com/kbb/Research/NewCars/Default.aspx?selectedmpgminimum=30&trid=3&psid=1-84-4163-187-6333-1&gclid=CP2-49f_rJcCFRpknAodsQqPjw

[Ron Dunn]

Matt, there's a difference between how that table measures fuel efficiency, and the method used in the rest of the world.

That table appears to suggest that a fuel efficient vehicle is anything which achieves a HIGHWAY fuel consumption of more than 30mpg. The rest of the world uses an averaging standard, which would rule out most of the vehicles on that table.

Looking for a vehicle we have in common around the world, a Toyota Camry scores very highly on that table. In Australia a Camry is a borderline vehicle for fuel efficiency. Europeans would consider it quite inefficient.

Only Americans believe that average American cars are fuel efficient, which is partly why automotive imports to America (including domestic manufacture of non-American cars) far outweigh your exports.

[Frank Hagan]

Kia is opening a site in west point georgia. They will be paying their workers there about $14 per hour plus "typical" benefits. The benefits should cost Kia about another $3 per hour. How in the world can UAW contract automakers compete against this?

Benefits and taxes will be more than $3 per hour. Usually, you use an adder of 25 to 50% above the wage you pay. The employer's match on social security is $1.05 on $14 per hour (probably more ... I just did 7.5% and I think the rate is something like 7.85%). The health care insurance cost averaged $12,100 per employee in 2007 (for an employee and three dependents), and companies typically pay about 75 - 80% of that; that's $4.65 per hour right there ($12,100 / 2080 hours * .80). You have $5.70 added on, more than a third, with just two of the common benefits American workers have. And that's not including vacation, sick days, employer matching of 401k, worker's compensation contributions, etc.

[Justin Leiwig]

Kia is opening a site in west point georgia. They will be paying their workers there about $14 per hour plus "typical" benefits. The benefits should cost Kia about another $3 per hour. How in the world can UAW contract automakers compete against this?

Easy..Hire people in at $14 an hour. No reason to pay more for an assembly line job. It's not an overly skilled job assembling vehicles. The Japanese have a term for their auto assembly. It is Pakyoke or something to that effect and means idiot proof. They set up their line so things only go in one way or asssemble one way. So easy...a cave man could do it :D

There is no reason a guy should be paid $32 bucks an hour to screw a dash into a car for 8 hours a day at a GM plant. They don't have a right to have it better than anyone else trying to make a buck. For too long they had it too good. Strike when they wanted more and more and more. I can't tell you how many times the local plants around here threatened to strike...and as of Dec 23 it will be shut down. It's Karma coming back to bite them in the butt if you ask me.

Around here $14 is pretty darn good for not having anything but a high school diploma starting out in the job world. Then again..here in Ohio houses don't cost $100 sq ft like they do out your way.

[Matt Ocel]

Matt, there's a difference between how that table measures fuel efficiency, and the method used in the rest of the world.

That table appears to suggest that a fuel efficient vehicle is anything which achieves a HIGHWAY fuel consumption of more than 30mpg. The rest of the world uses an averaging standard, which would rule out most of the vehicles on that table.

Looking for a vehicle we have in common around the world, a Toyota Camry scores very highly on that table. In Australia a Camry is a borderline vehicle for fuel efficiency. Europeans would consider it quite inefficient.

Only Americans believe that average American cars are fuel efficient, which is partly why automotive imports to America (including domestic manufacture of non-American cars) far outweigh your exports.


Hmmm -
A Toyota Camry "borderline" and "Quite" inefficient?

[Ron Dunn]

That's what I mean, Matt ... different perceptions of fuel efficiency. :)

[Neal Clayton]

Hmmm -
A Toyota Camry "borderline" and "Quite" inefficient?

see the top gear episode where they got 40mpg out of an audi sports car as an example.

i have a mercedes e class which gets 36. without all of the extra electronics and the huge alternator that they require, it would probably be 38-40.

these are not compact economy cars.

ford in fact sells a 4 cylinder diesel focus in the UK that gets above 50.

turbo charged diesels represent an immediate 10% reduction in fossil fuel use assuming you make it all from fossil oil. when you supplement it with vegetable oils, the gap widens considerably.

that's the solution that the europeans have created for their fuel shortage problems, and the solution that detroit and houston have paid washington to keep the US public unaware of.

like i said, if not for detroit's socialistic 25% tariff on trucks, we'd all have had this discussion years ago, and would all be driving to the lumberyard in a toyota hilux.

[Dave Lehnert]

I own a 1997 Ford F150 with 75,000 miles and the engine blew up this week. $4,000 to fix. Has always been well maintained. Known problem but Ford did nothing about it.
I have a relative that had a Toyota with 310,000 miles when he sold it on e-bay for $2,000.
Now I (we taxpayers) will have to bail out that very company so they can continue to make cars.

Do I need to say what I am thinking my next purchase will be??

[Neal Clayton]

i just bought a toyota truck about 6 months ago myself, come on in the water's fine ;).

the previous one i had before that was also a ford. no major problems, but always the 'little things' that broke. cheap electronics were usually the culprit. it was rare for a winter to go by that i didn't lose a sensor, or a fan motor, or other such thing, all on a vehicle with less than 100k miles.

never again.

i just wish toyota would sell a 6 cylinder diesel hilux here.

[Frank Hagan]

The problem with the European diesels (as well as the Japanese) is that they don't meet the California (and soon, EPA) smog rules for NOx emissions. BMW has just now started selling diesels in California, but to do it they have a urea-injection system that requires the urea (ammonia) to be refilled at every oil change. If you let it go too long, the car won't run. The VW diesel coming soon has a similar system, although my brother tells me it will have a larger store of urea to use and won't require replacement every 5,000 miles.

Automakers don't want to produce a car that can't be sold in all 50 states (especially with the prospect that other states will adopt the California rules).

BTW - the European cars never test as well under our EPA testing as they do in Europe, so you can't take the MPG figures from Europe and assume they are the same here. VW recently complained about it, but the new EPA mileage ratings reflect what you actually can get (my Prius has an EPA rating of 45 MPG now, and I get an average of 50.2).

Diesel and bio-diesel blends are great ideas, but no car manufacturer recommends more than 20% biodiesel (and most limit it to 5%). Until the manufacturers accept the ASTM rated biodiesel in higher percentages, biodiesel is not a viable alternative.

[Ben Rafael]

Around here $14 is pretty darn good for not having anything but a high school diploma starting out in the job world. Then again..here in Ohio houses don't cost $100 sq ft like they do out your way.

$100 per sq ft? That would be a down payment. In bad neighborhoods houses can easily cost $300 per sq ft.

[Ben Rafael]

Benefits and taxes will be more than $3 per hour. Usually, you use an adder of 25 to 50% above the wage you pay. The employer's match on social security is $1.05 on $14 per hour (probably more ... I just did 7.5% and I think the rate is something like 7.85%). The health care insurance cost averaged $12,100 per employee in 2007 (for an employee and three dependents), and companies typically pay about 75 - 80% of that; that's $4.65 per hour right there ($12,100 / 2080 hours * .80). You have $5.70 added on, more than a third, with just two of the common benefits American workers have. And that's not including vacation, sick days, employer matching of 401k, worker's compensation contributions, etc.

I just posted what I read and it didn't include the SS match. Regardless, it is still over $50 less per hour than UAW requirements.

[Bryan Rocker]

$100 per sq ft? That would be a down payment. In bad neighborhoods houses can easily cost $300 per sq ft.


I live here in Ohio, just moved from Beavercreek to Maineville and I can tell you that there are lots of house around here over $100 a ft. Its all about location. Yes there are a ton of cheap houses in Dayton, but I wouldn't live there. When I moved into Beavercreek I bought my house as a fix-ur-upper and it ran $85 a ft with updated houses running $100 a foot and this was in 2005. The house I just bought down here in Maineville ran me just under $100 a ft. Just keep in mind your mileage may vary......

[Ben Rafael]

I live here in Ohio, just moved from Beavercreek to Maineville and I can tell you that there are lots of house around here over $100 a ft. Its all about location. Yes there are a ton of cheap houses in Dayton, but I wouldn't live there. When I moved into Beavercreek I bought my house as a fix-ur-upper and it ran $85 a ft with updated houses running $100 a foot and this was in 2005. The house I just bought down here in Maineville ran me just under $100 a ft. Just keep in mind your mileage may vary......

Construction costs for homes here are typically $200 per ft or more. Might have dropped since this economy has weakened.

[Frank Hagan]

I just posted what I read and it didn't include the SS match. Regardless, it is still over $50 less per hour than UAW requirements.

Right, I think that the Detroit autoworkers have something like a $70 per hour "burdened cost" when they calculate the benefits (healthcare), taxes, unemployment coverage and pension payments. And it only gets worse; if they shrink to the point where they lay off half their workers, that $70 per hour rises to something like $140 an hour because the fixed cost of providing those benefits to retirees remains and is spread out over less workers.

No matter what, the worker gets screwed. The executives will still walk away with millions in severance, but the worker (and the retiree) will get nothing. Its easy to say that the workers benefited from their union representation all these years, but its hard to say that when they are out of a job and the pension plan they had relied on is suddenly gone.

[Ron Dunn]

How do these pension plans work?

In Australia we have two levels of retirement funding. The first is a pension, funded and paid by the Federal government. It keeps you alive, just.

The second level is called Superannuation. This is a joint contribution from employee and employer, held in one of the independent superannuation funds.

A fund can lose money, but nothing that happens to the employer after the employee's resignation or retirement affects their income.

Of course, we also have a national health care system called Medicare that provides basic hospital and medical coverage, which is usually supplemented by private health insurance. That helps with the retirement situation.

Are pensions in the US tied to the worker's previous employer/s?

[Neal Clayton]

How do these pension plans work?

In Australia we have two levels of retirement funding. The first is a pension, funded and paid by the Federal government. It keeps you alive, just.

The second level is called Superannuation. This is a joint contribution from employee and employer, held in one of the independent superannuation funds.

A fund can lose money, but nothing that happens to the employer after the employee's resignation or retirement affects their income.

Of course, we also have a national health care system called Medicare that provides basic hospital and medical coverage, which is usually supplemented by private health insurance. That helps with the retirement situation.

Are pensions in the US tied to the worker's previous employer/s?

we have basically the same things, only with different names. the only difference is our version of superannuation is private and controlled by the employee, with some limits on when they can do things with it. that's what fuels our stock market. millions upon millions have their retirement accounts in private/corporate run investment funds.

the catch is they are only allowed to modify their investments at set times each year. so the people who were stuck in the stock market when the crash came around were just that, stuck. they lost half of their retirement. private pensions are rare in the US, mostly reserved to government and union employees. most have been replaced with the above mentioned employee-controlled private retirement accounts.

the employee can choose to cash out the retirement account, they'll have to pay back taxes on any returns plus a 10% penalty if they choose to do so before retirement age. that's what wall street fears, and why these stock market crashes are taken so seriously here. if the markets get bad enough for individuals to take their retirement accounts out of the markets, that will be a huge loss in capital that wall street can't replace.

if you leave your job the retirement account goes with you.

[Brian Elfert]

Kia is opening a site in west point georgia. They will be paying their workers there about $14 per hour plus "typical" benefits. The benefits should cost Kia about another $3 per hour. How in the world can UAW contract automakers compete against this?

One questions is what is included as "benefits"? The UAW costs of $70 per hour probably includes the FICA, unemployment tax, and other taxes the automaker pays to keep an employee on the payroll.

$3 an hour for even health insurance alone isn't much. Is vacation in the $3 per hour? The employer's portion of family healthcare would probably exceed $3 an hour.

My employer says it costs on average $19,000 a year per employee for benefits and other expenses besides salary or wages. We do still get a pension of some sort, but nobody would say our benefits are terribly generous. Our health care is nothing to brag about as we will for 2009 pay 20% of the premium plus 20% of all costs and a $500 deductible (more for families) and the maximum out of pocket doubled.

[Ron Dunn]

Thanks for that, Neal ... but can you shed some light on the comments earlier in this thread about retired auto workers losing things like medical cover if their previous employer goes bust?

[Brian Elfert]

ford replaced the late 80s/early 90s model F250 diesel truck, then made with an international harvester drivetrain that got 20-21 miles a gallon and would easily last 750k to 1 mil miles, with a new engine that gets 13 miles per gallon and is much more delicate, everyone i know who has one has had it in the shop within the first 100k.


The ford diesel engine is still made by Navistar, the new name for IH. Ford has used IH/Navistar for all of their pickup diesel engines from day one.

The EPA keeps forcing new regulations on diesel engines which is why the engines keep changing. Pretty much every diesel engine has lost MPG with the latest regs, but Ford seems to have fared worse than others.

[Chuck Thoits]

So is it that we as consumers don't want fuel efficient cars/trucks?
Big oil does not want us to have fuel efficient cars/trucks?
Or the environmentalist don't want us to have them?
I have heard people say that the fuel efficient cars don't have any power.
I have heard that the EPA keeps the efficiency down with there standards.
And I have heard that the big three are in the pockets of big oil. Kinda like the Tucker the car was made to good so they rubbed him out.
One other thing. How long would the $14,415,914.00 (that the CEO of GM made in 2007) last if it was used to pay for the retirement plans? A year maybe 2 just guessing. Here is just a side thought. If the labor that a worker is doing is earning the boss a pay check of that size, is not his efforts worth at least 1% of his bosses pay?

[Frank Hagan]

Chuck, Americans voted with their checkbooks over the last few years: we want big, powerful vehicles. Part of the reason is that we have a big country to drive around in, and none of our smaller vehicles are rated to pull trailers. When I was a kid, any sedan or station wagon could pull a boat or tent camper. Now, only big SUVs and trucks can; no American made sedan can pull a trailer.

So a guy with two kids who wants to take them hunting or fishing has to have either a truck or a SUV to tow. Most people can't afford to buy several vehicles, so they get one that can do everything they need it to do.

We're mad at GM, Ford and Chrysler because we think they should have "seen this coming" and built a bunch of econo-boxes that we wouldn't buy, just so they could have them ready for when we decided gas mileage really was important. When gas rose to $4 a gallon, we were shocked that the automakers weren't ready with high mileage vehicles. But they were giving us exactly what we wanted to buy, and it takes them about 3 years to bring a car to production.

[Karl Brogger]

Considering the skill set required to bolt a seat into a car, and the corresponding income, I should be making alot more. ALOT more! Sometimes I use nails, screws, theres even glue involved.

Unions were founded to keep employers from taking advantage of the employees. Who's protecting the employers now?

If someone makes an electric car that can go 600 miles on a charge, function in the winter, and tow 26k lbs, I'll be all over it.

[Lee DeRaud]

One other thing. How long would the $14,415,914.00 (that the CEO of GM made in 2007) last if it was used to pay for the retirement plans? A year maybe 2 just guessing.I don't know the exact number, but I expect it's measured in days or weeks, not years.

[Neal Clayton]

Thanks for that, Neal ... but can you shed some light on the comments earlier in this thread about retired auto workers losing things like medical cover if their previous employer goes bust?

in the case of medical coverage, if you leave your job or your job goes away, you can keep your medical coverage at the rate the employer was paying for 18 months (the plan is called COBRA), but you pay the full premium. after that you have to find your own.


The ford diesel engine is still made by Navistar, the new name for IH. Ford has used IH/Navistar for all of their pickup diesel engines from day one.

The EPA keeps forcing new regulations on diesel engines which is why the engines keep changing. Pretty much every diesel engine has lost MPG with the latest regs, but Ford seems to have fared worse than others.

the difference being the old 6.9s were an existing, proven unit, they were in production from the late 70s, ford took them as-is in the early 80s, and didn't feel the need to re-design them until what, 2004? the only thing that changed about those engines from the 70s models was a turbo and some injection refinements. the 7.3 was just a bigger 6.9.

the 6.0s and 6.4s were the first engines that ford was in on the design for from day one...and we see how that turned out. lawsuits, tens of millions in warranty claims, recalls galore, etc.

ironically, the difference between ford and GM in this respect is when the time came for the redesign to meet those EPA standards, ford attempted to emulate mercedes, albeit very badly. cummins doesn't suffer from the same issues that ford did, since they just skipped the BS and bought parts from bosch directly.

what was that about made in the usa? oh yeah, it's a joke, that's what.

[Karl Brogger]

the 6.0s and 6.4s were the first engines that ford was in on the design for from day one...and we see how that turned out. lawsuits, tens of millions in warranty claims, recalls galore, etc.


The new Ford diesels are definatly crap.
The new generation Chevy diesel is crap. So were the old ones for that matter
The new version of the Cummins in the Dodge is crap

Ford is the only one though that has had serious mechanical problems with the engine its self. The other problems that all three have had has been with the emissions stuff in the exhaust systems. Everything is failing. I would not buy a diesel pickup built after 2005. One of my friends just sold a early 90's Dodge pickup with a Cummins in it. I wish I would have known that he was selling it, when I need to replace my pickup I'd new pickup and swap the engine in. The 12V Cummins needs fuel going to it to run, thats it. Everything is mechanical.

You can't even get a decent gas engine anymore. GM, Ford, Dodge have all cancelled their big gassers. Sure you got 7mpg with Chev's 8.1L, but it always got that. Trailer, no trailer, uphill, downhill.

[Ron Dunn]

7mpg? Are we talking a semi-trailer?

7mpg in a family vehicle borders on immorality.

[Clifford Mescher]

Here's something else to think about: American automakers have spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of the US , claiming they can't make money paying American wages.
Japanese car makers have spent the last thirty years building plants inside the US.
The last quarter's results: Toyota maked 4 billion in profits while Ford racked up 9 billion in losses. Ford folks are still scratching their heads, and collecting bonuses.
IF THIS WEREN'T SO TRUE IT MIGHT BE FUNNY
Will somebody tell me why we are bailing them out. Alot of americans don't want their cars and the ones they do sell, lose money. So what is the sense? Tell me they won't come back with their tin cups again.*sigh* Clifford

[Matt Meiser]

I doubt too many people buy a 1-ton dually diesel truck for a family vehicle. My next door neighbor has one (actually two, he didn't get rid of the old one when he got the new one, instead keeping it to use as a work truck around his horse ranch to replace his 20-some year old F150.) It gets used to pull a large 5th wheel horse trailer hundreds of miles per week.

Fuel economy in general has fallen on cars in the US from 10-15 years ago. The decline is a result of increased weight (due to conveniences consumers demanded and safety features consumers and the government demanded) and ever-tightening emissions regulations which reduce pollutants coming out the tailpipe but use more fuel. One of those items is the 100,000 mile tune up interval. Someone in the know told me it would have been cheaper to perform a 50,000 mile tuneup at no charge to the consumer than the engineering to meet the standard. Plus the consumer lost again in lower fuel economy. Take a look at the fuel economy of a Geo Metro. That car would never be allowed to be sold today. Take a look at the SmartCar. Only a couple MPG more for a car 1/2 the size of a Civic/Cobalt/Focus/etc.

With regard to diesels, they had to be redesigned. The EPA mandated it. Whether the designs were successful or not is another story. It was a huge deal for diesel engine manufacturers. Also, I asked someone in the know why Ford didn't bring the European diesels to the US. The answer is that a diesel made in Europe will not meet the US emissions requirements. This was about a year ago. He told me about the urea injection systems but he told me at the time the EPA wasn't allowing them because it relied on the consumer to do something to keep emissions up. Also, Ford had a 6-cylinder diesel under development for the F150, but canceled it when they first started restructuring early this decade.

BTW, when you compare fuel economy between the UK and US, make sure you are converting between imperial and US gallons. A friend and I did this a few months back and the results were rather surprising--in that the advertised MPGs were very similar for gas/petrol.

On another note, think about where the country would have been 67 years ago today without the domestic auto industry (and the domestic airplane industry, the domestic tool industry and a lot more domestic industries.) If, God forbid, we are in that situation again, are we going to have the transplants build tanks and planes?

[Jon Grider]

I doubt too many people buy a 1-ton dually diesel truck for a family vehicle. My next door neighbor has one (actually two, he didn't get rid of the old one when he got the new one, instead keeping it to use as a work truck around his horse ranch to replace his 20-some year old F150.) It gets used to pull a large 5th wheel horse trailer hundreds of miles per week.

Fuel economy in general has fallen on cars in the US from 10-15 years ago. The decline is a result of increased weight (due to conveniences consumers demanded and safety features consumers and the government demanded) and ever-tightening emissions regulations which reduce pollutants coming out the tailpipe but use more fuel. One of those items is the 100,000 mile tune up interval. Someone in the know told me it would have been cheaper to perform a 50,000 mile tuneup at no charge to the consumer than the engineering to meet the standard. Plus the consumer lost again in lower fuel economy. Take a look at the fuel economy of a Geo Metro. That car would never be allowed to be sold today. Take a look at the SmartCar. Only a couple MPG more for a car 1/2 the size of a Civic/Cobalt/Focus/etc.

With regard to diesels, they had to be redesigned. The EPA mandated it. Whether the designs were successful or not is another story. It was a huge deal for diesel engine manufacturers. Also, I asked someone in the know why Ford didn't bring the European diesels to the US. The answer is that a diesel made in Europe will not meet the US emissions requirements. This was about a year ago. He told me about the urea injection systems but he told me at the time the EPA wasn't allowing them because it relied on the consumer to do something to keep emissions up. Also, Ford had a 6-cylinder diesel under development for the F150, but canceled it when they first started restructuring early this decade.

BTW, when you compare fuel economy between the UK and US, make sure you are converting between imperial and US gallons. A friend and I did this a few months back and the results were rather surprising--in that the advertised MPGs were very similar for gas/petrol.

On another note, think about where the country would have been 67 years ago today without the domestic auto industry (and the domestic airplane industry, the domestic tool industry and a lot more domestic industries.) If, God forbid, we are in that situation again, are we going to have the transplants build tanks and planes?


Wouldn't that be ironic and tragic if the weapons we needed to fight an enemy were made by,gasp,the enemy? The concept of abandoning our manufacturing base scares the crud out of me.

[Justin Leiwig]

Wouldn't that be ironic and tragic if the weapons we needed to fight an enemy were made by,gasp,the enemy? The concept of abandoning our manufacturing base scares the crud out of me.

Isn't that how 85% of the world is? All using US or Russian weapons sometimes to fight with the US or Russians?

[Jim Barrett]

"The Japanese have a term for their auto assembly. It is Pakyoke or something to that effect and means idiot proof."

The term is "poka-yoke" which means "mistake proofing" in Japaneese. The idea of poka-yoke is to design the product and process so it is impossible to make mistakes or they are easily deteceted when mistakes do occur, i.e., your microwave won't start if the door is open.

The concept of foolproofing was first developed in the 1960s by Shigeo Shingo ,who worked for Toyota Motors in Japan.

Jim

[Justin Leiwig]

"The Japanese have a term for their auto assembly. It is Pakyoke or something to that effect and means idiot proof."

The term is "poka-yoke" which means "mistake proofing" in Japaneese. The idea of poka-yoke is to design the product and process so it is impossible to make mistakes or they are easily deteceted when mistakes do occur, i.e., your microwave won't start if the door is open.

The concept of foolproofing was first developed in the 1960s by Shigeo Shingo ,who worked for Toyota Motors in Japan.

Jim

Thanks for clearing that up. It's been quite a while since I studied it in my JIT production classes. :o

[Montgomery Scott]

Interesting article on the Ford production line in Brazil. Too bad the UAW stands in the way of progress.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070822/AUTO01/708220407/0/special

[Jon Grider]

Isn't that how 85% of the world is? All using US or Russian weapons sometimes to fight with the US or Russians?


Prolly is, but if'n I'd had my druthers,I'd prefer the rest of the world being dependent on us for weapons rather than the other way around.

[Pat Germain]

Wouldn't that be ironic and tragic if the weapons we needed to fight an enemy were made by,gasp,the enemy? The concept of abandoning our manufacturing base scares the crud out of me.

The vast majority of defense manufacturing is done by companies like Lockheed, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and General dynamics.

American General manufactures the HUM-V. I don't think they're actually part of GM.

Although, the armored presidential limousine is a GM product...

I personally wanted to support the big three. Yet, they burned me. My last new car purchase was a Volkswagen. It's five years old and drives as good as it did new.

The Plymouth I bought in 1991 was shot and worthless after five years. The tranny went out twice in those five years.

Less than a year after leaving the dealer, I had to remove all the front brake components from my wife's '97 Jeep Cherokee and throw them away. Chrysler refused to acknowledge there was even a problem even though the calipers were completely frozen. The aftermarket brakes are still going strong to this day. (Pads have been replaced.) The gas gauge hasn't worked since 1998. Chrysler issued a recall, but my Cherokee was never included.

No more new US cars for me. No more. I'm patriotic but I won't support bad products and bad behavior.

Chevy has a new "hybrid" Impala. It gets a whole 2 MPG more than the non-hybrid. And it costs over $3,000 more. This is progress?

[Frank Hagan]

Chevy has a new "hybrid" Impala. It gets a whole 2 MPG more than the non-hybrid. And it costs over $3,000 more. This is progress?

I'm a hybrid fan (I own a Prius), but the larger hybrids just don't make sense to me. Unless the new EPA mileage did to them what it did to the Prius. they overcompensated for the old ratings (65 MPG) by changing the test, but it made it much worse. The new EPA test for the Prius has the mileage at about 45 MPG, but everyone I know who owns one is getting over 50 MPG in every day driving. My average has been over 50 MPG over the last 15 tank fulls.

So it might be that the bigger hybrids get 10% better mileage than the EPA estimates. But that still doesn't "pay" for a $3,000 adder. Electric cars and hybrids work with small, light commuter cars, not SUVs.

[Brian Kent]

Are you talking about the auto companies or Social Security?

Monkey see, monkey do.

Good one Lee!

[Brian Kent]

How about if Lie Nielsen makes some outstanding reproductions of the best cars ever made, with quality so high we could pass them on tho our grand-children?

Then Rob Lee could come out with a new, improved version that ends up being a new classic.

Then we could decide between two totally amazing car lines made in America and Canada.

[Ben Rafael]

How about if Lie Nielsen makes some outstanding reproductions of the best cars ever made, with quality so high we could pass them on tho our grand-children?

Then Rob Lee could come out with a new, improved version that ends up being a new classic.

Then we could decide between two totally amazing car lines made in America and Canada.

The problem is that they would be made out of iron and weigh over 50,000 lbs. Shipping alone would make them too pricey.

[Pat Germain]

I'm a hybrid fan (I own a Prius), but the larger hybrids just don't make sense to me. Unless the new EPA mileage did to them what it did to the Prius. they overcompensated for the old ratings (65 MPG) by changing the test, but it made it much worse. The new EPA test for the Prius has the mileage at about 45 MPG, but everyone I know who owns one is getting over 50 MPG in every day driving. My average has been over 50 MPG over the last 15 tank fulls.

So it might be that the bigger hybrids get 10% better mileage than the EPA estimates. But that still doesn't "pay" for a $3,000 adder. Electric cars and hybrids work with small, light commuter cars, not SUVs.

I think the main problem with the Impala hybrid is that it isn't really a hybrid. It has an electric motor which aids acceleration and the engine shuts itself off when the car is stopped. Doesn't the Prius, for example, actually run on electric-only power sometimes?

[Brian Kent]

The problem is that they would be made out of iron and weigh over 50,000 lbs. Shipping alone would make them too pricey.

How much for the bronze with A2 tires?

[Belinda Barfield]

I just had to share this . . .



MEDICAL OPINIONS OF THE FINANCIAL BAILOUT


The Allergists voted to scratch it, and the Dermatologists advised not
to make any rash moves.

The Gastroenterologists had sort of a gut feeling about it, but the
Neurologists thought the Administration had a lot of nerve, and the
Obstetricians felt they were all laboring under a misconception.

The Ophthalmologists considered the idea shortsighted; the
Pathologists yelled, 'Over my dead body!' while the Pediatricians said, 'Oh, Grow up!'

The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, the Radiologists
could see right through it, and the Surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing.

The Internists thought it was a bitter pill to swallow, and the
Plastic Surgeons said, 'This puts a whole new face on the matter.'

The Podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the Urologists felt
the scheme wouldn't hold water.

The Anesthesiologists though the whole idea was a gas, and the
Cardiologists didn't have the heart to say no.

In the end, the Proctologists left the decision up to some butts in Washington.:D

[Pat Germain]

I knew we'd get to Proctologist eventually! :p

[Clifford Mescher]

Big celebration in the union hall tonight. Looks like the bill to fill the tin cups has passed. * sigh* Clifford

[Brian Elfert]

the 6.0s and 6.4s were the first engines that ford was in on the design for from day one...and we see how that turned out. lawsuits, tens of millions in warranty claims, recalls galore, etc.
what was that about made in the usa? oh yeah, it's a joke, that's what.

The 6.0 and 6.4 Ford diesel engines are still made by Navistar although the International trucks using the same engine seem to fare better. The IH versions are also lower HP and torque which probably helps.

I agree the 6.0 engine is junk and the 6.4 isn't much better, but I don't agree it is all Ford's fault. The same manufacturer (IH/Navistar) made the 6.9 and 7.3 and they are generally well regarded engines.

There have been rumors for several years that Ford will sever ties with Navistar and release a diesel of its own for the 2010 EPA regs. Ford is sick of warranty expense from the Navistar engines and has sued Navistar to recover warranty expenses.

[Walt Nicholson]

We all have opinions generally based on our personal experience with a product. It is interesting to compare the comments with the national stats which pop up from a lot of different places when you google recalls, reliability, etc. Consumer reports talks about how Toyota's quality in going downhill fast, while 93% of Fords product line is in the upper sections for reliability. Toyota was #2 in the nation last year for the most recalls just behind Volkswagen and lead the pack with the most recalls in the first quarter of 08. 58% of the top 17 most recalled vehicles were imports last year which has to be some kind of first. I have owned a lot of "Detroit Junk" over the years but it appears things are changing. I hope all the big 3 make it for the sake of the workers and the related suppliers. I know the imports provide lots of jobs that help the economy but the "big money" from profits go home to the parent companies "over there" and I would like to see it all stay right here. I know if I get to the point of buying another new one (just bought my lottery ticket) I will certainly take a hard look at what the domestics have to offer.

[Dave Lehnert]

Big celebration in the union hall tonight. Looks like the bill to fill the tin cups has passed. * sigh* Clifford

They way I understand it. It passed the house but does not have a prayer to pass the the full Senate

[Pat Germain]

We all have opinions generally based on our personal experience with a product. It is interesting to compare the comments with the national stats which pop up from a lot of different places when you google recalls, reliability, etc. Consumer reports talks about how Toyota's quality in going downhill fast, while 93% of Fords product line is in the upper sections for reliability. Toyota was #2 in the nation last year for the most recalls just behind Volkswagen and lead the pack with the most recalls in the first quarter of 08. 58% of the top 17 most recalled vehicles were imports last year which has to be some kind of first. I have owned a lot of "Detroit Junk" over the years but it appears things are changing. I hope all the big 3 make it for the sake of the workers and the related suppliers. I know the imports provide lots of jobs that help the economy but the "big money" from profits go home to the parent companies "over there" and I would like to see it all stay right here. I know if I get to the point of buying another new one (just bought my lottery ticket) I will certainly take a hard look at what the domestics have to offer.

As always, the Devil is in the details. As I understand it, most of the Toyota recalls were minor issues which they've already overcome. Yet, the Detroit recalls were things like failing brakes, fire risks and separating tie rod ends.

Most of the Volkswagen recalls were for defective coil packs and bad brake light switches.

It's like those JD Power surveys. If you look at how they were done, you'll find they did things like ask the buyers as they were pulling out of the dealer lot with their new car. Well, yeah. At that point, the buyer is going to be pretty satisfied.

How the dealer treats customers is also a big deal. When a dealer refuses to acknowledge an obvious problem, it's infuriating. Nobody does this more than Chrysler.

- "Yes, I know your Durango won't start when there's the slightest hint of rain. But there's no problem with your vehicle."

- "Yes, your Jeep was recalled for a defective gasoline gauge. But it only applies to vehicles manufactured in May and yours was manufactured in June."

- "Yes, there was a recall for defective brake components. But it only applies to people who live north of Balitmore and you're in Virginia."

- "Yes, I see the paint is peeling away on your Plymouth, but that's from acid rain."

:rolleyes:

It does appear reliability is improving; especially among Fords. I hope this trend continues. But the manufacturers had better start working with their dealers for better customer satisfaction!

[Brian Kent]

General Motors is the world's top-selling automaker.

Ford's net profit for 2011 was over $20 Billion.

Chrysler just made its first profit since 1997.

What a difference.

[Myk Rian]

And the US automakers never did move their factories out of the country.

[Larry Edgerton]

I wish the US makers would try a line that was competitive with what I get from BMW. Nothing in the US made lines come close. I mean nothing.

Really?

I have owned many BMW"S, and although they are fine cars, they break just like anything else with a twist. The cost of repairs is rediculous!

Line your little Bimmer up against a CTS-V and see what happens.......

Larry

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Hey folks.......you are replying to posts that in some cases are over 3 years old and if look closely you will notice some of the respondents have had their memberships revoked.

[Van Huskey]

Really?

I have owned many BMW"S, and although they are fine cars, they break just like anything else with a twist. The cost of repairs is rediculous!

Line your little Bimmer up against a CTS-V and see what happens.......

Larry

I tell you what, meet me at Lime Rock or Laguna Seca with a CTS-V and you can see what the rear of a BMW looks like, lap after lap. The V series is a sledge hammer the M series is a scapel. Very similar analogy to the Vettes and the 911s. Cadillac is getting more and more of the equation right but they are shooting at a moving target.

Ken I think everyone knows it is an old thread, Brian was pointing out the music didn't die in the motor cities. But, I think your point was keep it civil and no politics, which is indeed proper, but celebrating the biggest manufacturing base in the US should be something we are all happy about.

[Larry Edgerton]

How about if Lie Nielsen makes some outstanding reproductions of the best cars ever made, with quality so high we could pass them on tho our grand-children?

Then Rob Lee could come out with a new, improved version that ends up being a new classic.

Then we could decide between two totally amazing car lines made in America and Canada.

YES!!!! Sign me up for a Lie Nielson Volvo 240 wagon!

I like the way you think......

Larry

[Brian Kent]

Ken, I agree with you about keeping this civil. I had spotted this old thread while searching for who knows what. I am just glad that the US auto industry is alive and well. I am not intending political statements, but just happy and surprised by the big three all showing profits.