American Cars. Well, yuk

General Discussion
41

I live in southeast MI. However, I am puzzled about your use of the term “American” car. What is an American car? Is it a vehicle made by a company with headquarters in the United States that depends on revenue from foreign markets and sales to keep it solvent? Is it a vehicle assembled in the US with union labor using parts made in a foreign country? Is it a car assembled in a foreign country with parts made in the United States? Is is a vehicle assembled in the US with non-union labor that has corporate headquarters in a foreign country? Perhaps if you can identify which vehicle you are referring to that is assembled in the United States from parts made in the United States, from raw materials produced and refined in the United States, by citizens of the United States who work for a company founded by and incorporated in the United States we could help you solve the American car dilemma.

However, if you think that an action (or inaction) that irreversably collapses the American industrial infrastructure is good for you personally, go right ahead and advocate doing nothing.

42

I am sorry, but quality control is what makes some cars better than others. This is ultimately conditioned by greed and lack of qualified workers. People just do not take pride on what they do anymore and some are there just for the paycheck. I remember when Mazda started to be build here, I went to a dealer and his selling point was to compare the previous year car with the brand new and the way its back bumper was crooked. Same thing on years past when you had to know if the car was made on Friday or Monday to avoid it. This will take time to fix, making more and working less is not the way. Maybe some of this guys will do better in another line of work.

43

I grew up around the Great lakes and am aware of the importance of the car industry to that region. The posters refer to American car companies as GM, Ford and Chrysler, the firms headquartered in the US and of US origin. These happen to be the companies that have all made the same management and product mistakes and have agreed to too fat union contracts in the past. As I write this their presidents are with congress, hat in hand asking for more money to tide them over.

So far NOT A WORD ABOUT NECESSARY RESTRUCTURING to make them globally competitive, and no word abut opening up the union contracts. Lee Iacoocca did all these when he resurrected Chrysler to make it survive.

Republican congressmen are publicly stating that a band aid solution ($25Billion with no strings attached) will not work and are asking for voluntary restructuring or have the companies seek protection under Chapter 11 which will allow them to do all that is necessay to be viable. The next week or so will be very interesting. All three companies will collapse early next year if nothing is done and they keep going the way they are.

Obama will need till the end of February to make any executive contribution to this problem. By then the compnies will be in Chapter 11, according to industry experts.

The US steel industry, and IBM went through similar major revamps a few years back. I previuosly referred to the demise of the native British car industry, which stuck its head in the sand, did not listen to outside advice, and just disappeared. BMW bought the remnants for 1.2 Billion Pounds and after throwing up their hands, sold it a few years later (after selling Land Rover and Jaguar to Ford) for a symbolic 12 Pounds!!

Since you live in Michigan you will no doubt know what has happened to mother industries; steel, construction equipment, appliances, etc. All these have resructured themselves extensively, or gone out of business.

44

There’s a very interesting six-part article in Money magazine’s website today about the six problems facing the US auto industry. It looks to me as though Ford is best positioned to survive. They seem pretty lukewarm to the idea of a bailout, because if there is no bailout, they’re easily the most-likely to survive.

And, guess what? They are heavily influenced by a Japanese company, Mazda. I own a 1996 Maxima and a 2002 Escape, and I think they’re about even in terms of assembly quality… But when Mazda got involved with the Escape/Tribute project, I believe I read they insisted on changes to the bottom-end of the engine.

Even at that, because I made a mistake, I had to change an engine in the Escape. I will never change plugs on these cars again. It’s not my job.

Ford won’t buy GM’s or Chrysler’s assets at this point, because they’ll probably be available soon enough at a lower price. The vultures are circling. GM owns many worthless assets (Hummer, for one; my personal feeling on Hummer is, “May that division die a thousand hideous deaths.”), and some valuable ones (the Corvette, maybe the Silverado, maybe some Saturns… And that’s about all I can think of).

If you want to see some entertaining reading regarding German reliability, do a web search for “Porsche Boxster rear main seal”. That is some horrifying reading.

One more thing: I’m not sure why a Chinese company hasn’t rushed in to buy GM.

But what we have in the US today is the same problem we’re seeing in many industries: Too much capacity. In the long run, I feel that the economy is better shedding capacity. Ford’s sales will skyrocket if GM closes its doors. Not all former GM workers will get jobs at Ford, but a lot will. What I’ve heard is killing the domestic carmakers is the most boring subject I can think of: Retirement plans.

I can barely type “retirement plans” without falling aslee… zzzzzzzzzz.

No, couldn’t do it.

45

Good observations! I believe Tata of India, which bought Jaguar and Land Rover from Ford, is interested in buying Hummer. When Chrysler bought American Motors from Renault (who could not make it work), they were mainly interested in the Jeep brand. The rest soon faded away. Similarly whoever buys Chrysler will dumpt the cars and retain the minivan and the Jeeps, and perhaps the RamTrucks.

No matter what happens, we are looking at massive job losses when the industry makes the needed painful adjustment. That has happened to other industries, and as long as US built cars are not a great export item, and foreign manufacturers keep making inroads, the rust belt employment will continue to plummet.

I spent 5 yhears overseas, and when I came back home in 2004, and that time since there have been 10 new fereign car dealerships(incuding BMW and Mercedes) extablished in my immediate area. Not a single new US one.

Agree that Ford has the best chance, and Mulally who did the tough things at Boeing, does not feel he owes anybody anything, so he is prepared to make tough cuts. Ford’s quality and product mix is also leading the pack now.

46

Most people don’t own cars more than on-third as long, so what difference does your unprovable assertion make? We’re not talking about 1993 cars, we’re talking about new or nearly new ones.

47

Read it again. You don’t seem to have read the post.

48

“The US steel industry, and IBM went through similar major revamps a few years back.”

Different times. Those workers could find jobs. I did and most everone I know in the steel mill did when our mill was shut down. Finding jobs today will be difficult if not impossible, especially in the northern midwest where so many assets are located.

49

If jobs are scarce then it would be better to provide social assiatance and free retraining and reloaction rather than keep a sick company alive. The Italian government tried this with Fiat and Alitalia and the French company Alsthom incurred masive losses before they finally restructured. Good capitalism allows inefficient industries to go under, but provides a safety net for displaced employees.

50

Maybe some of you can help me with this.

Help with what? Do you have a question?

Just encase I have guessed your question:

  • US cars are not better or worse than non-US cars.
  • The help Detroit needs is complex and a proper answer will also be complex. It involves both Union and Management problems as well as vision problems of the whole industry.

Note: Don’t forget that if they go bankrupt, I don’t believe the warranties will be valid. Something to think about.

51

The entire debate between US cars vs non is shrouded in ambiguity and make the discussion nonsense. We profess loyalty to GM, Ford and Chrysler marquee in name only. Having said that, GM, Ford, and Chrysler are just as capable of producing quality cars but choose to market their cars differently, increasing their profit share of the after market parts…Delco etc.

There is much to be said for a less expensive Ford Taurus v. Camry that is to be kept less than 5 years with the idea that a newer car maybe safer with newer features than a 10 year old car that will return maximum value.
For those frequent traders, for this and other reasons, GM, Ford and Chrysler may find a nitch.

GM builds one hell-of-a tank, Ford outstanding tractors, and Chrysler military trucks. They are all capable.

52

I’ve got two Benz’s over twenty years old and over 300k miles on them as our family daily drivers. Both cars are very well maintained and are on the original engine and trannys. Tell me how that is NOT a good long term value car.

I suppose in that twenty year period for two cars we could of bought eight other brand cars and driven them for five years each and then traded? What exactly is your definition of long term value?

53

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/auto_shows/2008_geneva_auto_show_auto_shows/production_debuts/2009_ford_fiesta_auto_shows

A Fiesta where no one would be ashamed to drive it here in the states?

54

Nice car! If the quality and reliability hold up, this may be a winner to compete with Toyota and Honda. Finally we have a US world car that can be economically built in different countries with a minimum of regional variations.

55

That’s another reason I think Ford is in a better spot than GM. The Fiesta, Focus, Fusion, Mustang, Ranger and F-150 are all pretty good vehicles.

When I was growing up, we just accepted that if you had to have a large pickup, it was going to be slow. It would be basic (cloth interiors), hard-riding, slow-handling, and very reliable and useful. Now, people want it to accelerate like a Corvette, handle like a Porsche, be as comfortable as a Lincoln, and as useful as ever, and the result is expensive and complex vehicles that end up being overkill and get terrible mileage.

I don’t know why people can’t accept the original idea of what a pickup truck is. Can you even buy an F-150 with an I-6 and a manual, with cloth and optional A/C?

Ford has its share of mistakes. I think the new Flex is one of them. 4,700 lbs… Why?? Because they like the Big Scion look, near as I can tell.

Right now, Ford realizes it’s racing a lion, and it doesn’t have to outrun the lion, it only has to outrun the other two competitors in the race. For now, at least, that’s true. The Flex looks to me like loading up on rocks in the pockets, though. They lowered their own long-run odds with that one.

56

I wouldn’t be caught dead in that.
Front wheel drive? no thanks
Small displacement N/A gas 4 banger? yuck
Diesel in a car? Nope, we’ve been down that road before

And what about price? Why would I spend $20k on an economy car when I can a bigger or better performing car for the same price? Furthermore, even if I wanted an econobox, I could by a Focus for about $7k less. The idea of a “premium” small car may fly in Europe, but in the States it’s absurd.

57

I disagree completely. Small “premium” cars have historically done quite well. Small BMWs, small Acuras, small Hondas, Minis, etc.

To me, they’re reasonable “fun” cars to have in a time of economic downturns. If you can have fun for $20k or fun for $40k, in times like these, you should strive to get the cheaper car.

In re-assessing my own needs (family of four), I now realize that I don’t need a V6 Accord; a Civic is adequate for my needs. If Honda ONLY made the TL for its 4-door sedan buyers, even they’d been in deep trouble right now.

Ford needs the Fiesta. Excellent first-car (but I’d probably opt for a Civic, if it was me).

58

you know, in the last 15 years, I’ve generally held that the qualitative difference between an american car and a foreign car had little to do with the quality of the build or parts. american cars are, in general, very well built. they are horribly designed, and the difference that most people tend to get stuck on is purely one of design.

american cars appeal to a certain aesthetic, and each variety of foreign car appeals to different aesthetics. what always struck me as odd about the american car companies was that they seemed dead set on competing for one particular demographic, with one particular aesthetic, rather than branching off and going after different ones. look at any of the big 3, and each of those companies has several makes, each of which appears to have a variant of each kind of car. the overlap is stunning, and rather stupid. you want to have coverage, but this is ridiculous.

in a way, the question really becomes; is the aesthetic worth it to you? would you pay extra for design that allows you to travel rather than forcing you to drive the car? does this car say I’m compensating for something? I’ve had american cars and foreign, and my problems with them tended more towards “can I read the spedometer” or “can I reach/read the radio/clock” in those cases, the foreign car tended to win out.

59

Also…dealership. I own Toyotas, but would rather drive a Ford or GM if the dealership was closer, better to deal with etc. Have always felt they were just as important. In our area, dealerships that provide the best (and cost effective) after sale service, sell the most cars. Being a rural state, proximity is important.

60

Also…I would argue that the one of the best long term values in vehicles is found in the purchase of a Ford Ranger. I have owned Toyota trucks for years, and my outlay over time incl. purchase price is always greater than my brother’s ugly Rangers, an accountant by trade who buys everything with long term value in mind.