Printable View
When they saw the writing on the wall, they got rid of the foreign brands they had acquired (Land Rover, and etc.). They've also reduced their stake in Mazda to free up some cash. And of course they only have their three domestic brands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuckervill
I don't know what difference it makes, but they've kept on cranking out low frills Rangers while everyone else went to bigger "compact" trucks.
Actually a lot of their new cars are being marketed as being as reliable as a Honda or Toyota and from what I see and hear, they are not far off the mark. I think Ford was able to move more quickly than GMC or Chrysler - they saw the writing on the wall and made the changes needed to keep themselves afloat. They turned down any aid from the government, and seem to be doing well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuckervill
Well, in Europe when people buy eco friendly cars (like the smaller fords) the governments give them discounts on the car. So lately Ford sells well in Europe.
Brands like chrysler just don't sell in Europe. Why? Well we pay 7,6 dollars per gallon gasoline ...
I was just listening to a GM worker who was interviewed on NPR this morning. He said that he was sad that the factory that he'd worked in for the past 30-something years was closing and that he'd always imagined that his children would work there one day. He said that he partially blamed the executives but that he also blamed his friends and neighbors. He said it wasn't right that they'd be collecting a GM pension but buying non-GM cars like Toyotas and Hondas.
I was listening to this as I was sitting in my Toyota (after having been a Jeep buyer most of my life) and I had to laugh. If any American company could have offered me what I got when I bought my Matrix 5 years ago, I would have been happy to buy it. We are no prophets - but 5 years ago we traded in our gas-guzzling Jeep Unlimited for the Matrix and I'm so glad we did. 75K miles later, it's still running beautifully and I'm proud to recommend our dealer to anyone who asks because they provide amazing service and pricing. Who can say that about an american car company?
It's really too bad that it's come to this, but people seem to be so slow to change unless forced to. I'm sorry for all those people who are losing jobs and suffering, but this change is necessary. This economy is bloated. Things need to scale back and if that has to start with car companies, ultimately, it's probably a good thing even if it's going to be painful getting to that point.
Canada has a lot of factories that while not GM owned supply the Big 3 automakers with parts. There would be a catastrophic domino effect were any or all of the Big 3 American automakers were to suddenly and irreversibly collapse. Ripples would go through the entire American and Canadian economies.Quote:
Originally Posted by shootingstar
I heard an analysis on the radio last night. I think I was listening to Marketplace. The analyst suggested that GM et al. are probably not going to be around 10 or 20 years from now. But the bailout will allow people to transition out of the the business slowly, hopefully preventing an utter catastrophe.
My current Honda has 80K miles and I feel like she's just getting broken in. I traded my last Honda after 140K problem-free miles (I even still had the original clutch) and I'm sure I could have gotten many, many more.Quote:
Originally Posted by GLC1968
I, too, have sympathy... but I also have sympathy for all the folks who've struggled in our society. Sold my car two years ago Saturday, tho' I did appreciate the rental that got me up the mountain to lil' brothers wedding Saturday.
Cockamamie consumerism ... don't know where it will go. I, too, have cut back ... tho' somehow I have not gotten a garden in, as I did last year. Fortuantely our farmer's market will have sprouted ones and it doesnt' hurt to support those local folks - perhaps creating our own micro-economies (oh, yes, I haven't been in a wal-mart in rather a while, either) and enjoying living slower ...
Me too, with a couple exceptions:Quote:
Originally Posted by andtckrtoo
- Ford's quality has been decent
- Buick may be boring (because of infrequent model changes), but as a result their quality has been outstanding (and I believe they're one of the biggest selling brands in China).
Here's a comparison, excluding tires, Last Year:
- I spent about $700 in maintenance on my '97 Lexus with 150,000 miles
- I spent a few hundred $ on Silver's '98 Toyota Siena with 140,000 miles
- I spent about $2,000 on SilverDaughter's '95 Jeep with 120,000 miles (that was previously owned and maintained by Silver's engineer uncle...)
I'm part of a generation that Detroit totally lost due to quality issues in the 70's and 80's.
Technically I guess I own a GM car. We have a Saturn, but from 1997, so way before they were officially rolled back into GM. I love my car. It's been reliable and low maintenance the entire time we've owned it. Would I buy another.... probably not.... they've stopped making them in Tennessee (moved the factory to Mexico in 07), stopped using plastic body panels and basically turned them into just another GM.... Most of the reasons we bought the car in the first place are gone.
If I had to buy another car tomorrow I'd probably look at Smart (though it is seriously disappointing that you cannot get the 80 mpg diesel version here) or Volkswagon. Until American manufacturers catch up and make safe, attractive small cars that get good gas mileage they will likely continue to suffer.
I agree totally with Mr. S' last statement. The last American car I had was in 1980. Since then I've had a Mazda, Subaru, Toyota, Volvo, and BMW. I had the Volvo for 9 years, with only one major repair thingy, that was covered by a warranty. The reason I got rid of it was well, some 90 year old guy crashed into my DH while he was driving it, but also, it was before you could get AWD in their models. I would have kept that car forever, but once we moved here, I needed the AWD. I would say the best car I had, mechanically was the Toyota Fourunner. However, I was sick of SUVs/mini vans/wagons, so after 6 years I traded it for the BMW sedan. When I got that car six years ago, I had very little choice of smaller sedans with AWD. I wanted to go back to a Japanese car, but my only choice was a Subaru, which I didn't like at all. My car gets OK mileage, nothing great, but I love it. I will probably keep it for 2-3 more years, and then who knows. I hope Toyota comes out with a small sedan with AWD, so I can get what I want and get up my driveway in the winter.
I don't feel bad for GM at all. Yes, I feel badly for people losing their jobs, but everyone should have seen the writing on the wall. Our world has changed and today, there are very few jobs you can get, that pay the money/benefits they were making, without higher education of some kind. The guy who said he "thought his kids would be working there," is an example of what I mean. What kid, today, can graduate from high school and think they are going to get that kind of job? Of course, in the end, it's the leaders' fault that they were not visionary enough to start designing low mileage, small cars when they needed to. When I think of GM, I think of my grandfather, who bough a new Buick or Chevy every 2 years. Ugh!
I was driving to work this morning and snickering to myself. I took our 'farm truck' because DH needed the car.
It's a 1987 Dodge Dakota and it's got 194K miles on it. Runs like a champ. We bought it last summer for $1K, put maybe $100 in random parts into it, and we've used this truck for some serious heavy duty work (well heavier than a small pickup like this should do) and it's doing extremely well.
GM sucks at making cars (for the most part) but they sure know how to build a truck.
It makes me think that if the American public hadn't gotten so greedy and into the 'bigger is better' mindset, then GM wouldn't be half as bad off. I never understood why people who lived in the American south needed big huge 4X4 SUV's (unless for work/farm). Why do soccer mom's need SUV's when station wagons worked as well? This auto industry mess isn't solely the responsiblity of the automakers - the public sent them down this stupid road and then, when gas got expensive, demanded something that they couldn't deliver. If people had thought about conservation long before it hurt their bank accounts, things might have been different.
I think the fault lies in both places. Yes, the car manufacturers sold people what people wanted. However, the car manufacturers never thought about the fact that people might not always want the same thing...The writing was on the wall a long time ago that demand for SUV's wouldn't stay as high when gas prices went up. Which we all knew they would.Quote:
Originally Posted by GLC1968
We have a Volvo, a VW and a Honda. The Honda is the only one I would buy again (our Volvo is awesome, but they are not as safe now that they're owned by Ford). The VW has had problem after problem after problem. I've averaged more than 1k a year in repair bills on it (not under warranty), I've had it since it was new, and it's always been dealer maintained.
CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA_in_NC
Yes, absolutely. They could have at least been working on creating a 'mix' of cars to meet both needs or for the eventual transition. But, they make a lot more money on an SUV than they do on a car - so business/stockholders dictate that the bulk of their business needed to be SUV's. It would be the rare, ballsy buisiness man (who would risk his job), to say in the face of huge profits "hang on people, we need to scale back and make more of the smaller, more efficient, less profitable cars just 'in case' the price of gas exceeds $3.50 a gallon in the next year." Hind sight is 20/20, right?
Again, I'm not letting them off the hook - they made their bed and now they have to lie in it...but it's actually quite easy to see how it happened. And again, if the American public would have learned to start conserving BEFORE they had to due to prices, then a lot of this would have been avoided.
one of the more ironic aspects of this conversations is that American auto makers sell cars to Europe. but they're not the same cars they sell us!
they sell smaller more efficient cars to Europeans and sell the gas hogs to us.
here's one of them:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...9060491065.htm
The 65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can't Have
Ford's Fiesta ECOnetic gets an astonishing 65 mpg, but the carmaker can't afford to sell it in the U.S.
http://images.businessweek.com/story..._mz_ecocar.jpg
The ECOnetic will go on sale in Europe in November
By David Kiley
This Issue
magazine cover
September 15, 2008
If ever there was a car made for the times, this would seem to be it: a sporty subcompact that seats five, offers a navigation system, and gets a whopping 65 miles to the gallon. Oh yes, and the car is made by Ford Motor (F), known widely for lumbering gas hogs.
Of course all this is really a secondary conversation to the car-reliant culture as a whole. Gas hogs would be a lot less objectionable if no one needed or wanted to drive more than a couple of days a month.