GM TRIES TO COPY AA
- Thread starter Bob Owens
- Start date
From what I remember, in the 1970s and 1980s US auto makers were selling crap whereas the Japanese (and Germans) were selling quality vehicles. Once you're burned by buying a crappy car (it is a big $$$ investment / expenditure) you're very likely not to buy the same brand again. This is reason #1 why IMHO USA auto makers are doing so poorly. If I've had bad experiences with a Ford/GM/Chrysler and try a Honda/Toyota and have a no problems, it is going to be difficult to switch to brands.
The second problem is that USA car manufacturer's often don't offer cars that people want. A great example was the Ford Taurus. It was "Car of the Year" from the late 1980's to the mid-1990's if I'm not mistaken. Unfortunately Ford did nothing to make sure the Taurus keeps up with the Camry - well we know what has happenned to Ford vs. Toyota.
Having driven an Opel Astra in Europe, I recommend that you DO NOT buy this automobile (the transmission was terrible, my grandfathers tractor drives better).
Why don't you check the USA-Canada Auto Pact. It's been around since the 1960's and I believe it is still valid today (even with NAFTA in place). That will answer your question as to what % of the parts of your vehicle need to be Made in USA or Made in Canada for your vehicle to not be considered an import.
Since 1997, I have purchased 4 Chevys (Lumina, 2 Impalas, Equinox) and 1 Toyota Avalon. My wife had a Tercel when we were married in '96. The interior in her Tercel was falling apart since new and it needed rings and bearings at 60K. The Avalon was a '00 and that car would not go a month without the check engine light coming on. I got tired real fast paying $500-$700/mo just trying to stay ahead of all the bad sensors in the car. After 2 years, it had to go. I still have the Lumina, 1 Impala, and the Equinox. I traded 1 Impala in because my wife wanted a new car. I had no complaints with it.
Garfield1966
Veteran
I drove an Astra 5 door diesel w/6 speed for 2 weeks in Eastern Europe last year and loved it. Tight suspension, great little car. Got it to 110 with a tail wind on a slight down grade.
The Auto Pac was superseded by NAFTA and I could not really find what I wanted. I guess the main question I am asking is what the difference between a car made here under a foreign name verses a car made in MX but under a US name.
We are turning more and more into an world economy where who made what and where it was made means less and less. The new 787 will be made with components from all over the world. What does that really mean?
skydrol
Advanced
- Oct 19, 2003
- 158
- 58
If my memory serves me correctly the Big 3 corporate leaders made a decision in the late 70's and early 80's to come up "life limited parts" and many folks who purchased a car at this time experienced the car falling apart at 75 thousand miles give or take a few. That is when the foreign builders started gaining market share. They saw the light and started building a better car however they already lost many customers. They do build a good car now i have a Ford i bought in 93 that i am still driving with 148 k on the clock with no major mechanical issues. I bought a Chevy Silverado in 2003 and you should of seen the surprise on my face when i brought it home and discovered it was assembled in Mexico. So i see no difference between buying a Honda assembled in the USA with foreign parts with union workers or a Chevy assembled in Mexico with worldwide parts did i mention my Chevy tranny was Japanese? However this is getting off topic and i feel the UAW should tell management to shove it. 
tech2101
Veteran
Is that the best you can do? How did you get that out of Kev's comment:
"I sure don't think I'm "saving the world" by owning a Subaru...I just want a car that goes when I need it to."
So the kind of car you drive now defines your sexual orientation? I guess your just curious? I think your comment belongs on the Larry Craig thread. Maybe you should solidify your thesis by doing a statiscal model of the gay community and what they drive. When you are done report back here, Mr. Curious. :unsure:
You are quoting an outdated JDPower survey. The latest 3-year reliability survey results were recently released, and were in the news--surprised you didn't hear about it.
The reason they were so newsworthy is that for the very first time since the surveys began, an 'American' brand, Buick, was in a virtual tie for first place with long-time leader Lexus.
Mercury and Lincoln were also in the top five, and all three outranked both Toyota and Honda--although Honda also scored well--#5, IIRC.
Both GM and Ford did quite well, with all or most of their brands scoring above average. Chrysler fared poorly, however, with only the Chrysler brand scoring close to average, and Jeep at or near the bottom.
Incorrect. As you say, Opel is a GM brand. The Opel Astra will be marketed as a Saturn, replacing the Ion. It is being assembled in the US, at the Saturn plant in TN.
the whole 'American/foreign' question is so irrelavant anymore. I used to own two GM vehicles. One was assembled in Canada, the other in Mexico.
I now own, and am delighted with, a vehicle with a GM badge (Pontiac) that is assembled on the same assembly line in Fremont, CA, as an almost identical Toyota model.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
Back to the topic....
Perhaps GM wouldn't be in such an uncompetitive position if it weren't picking up the entire tab for retiree and current employee health care. It's a great plan, but it also means that somewhere between 5% and 10% of the sticker price of their cars goes directly into paying for employee and retiree health care. That doesn't leave a whole lot of profit margin....
When you buy a Toyota, Honda, or VW, they've got considerably lower health care expenses, which in turn allows them to either lower their prices, make more money, pour more into research and development, or some combination of all three.
(and no, I don't drive a foreign car, I drive a Jeep made in Toledo, OH)
Perhaps GM wouldn't be in such an uncompetitive position if it weren't picking up the entire tab for retiree and current employee health care. It's a great plan, but it also means that somewhere between 5% and 10% of the sticker price of their cars goes directly into paying for employee and retiree health care. That doesn't leave a whole lot of profit margin....
When you buy a Toyota, Honda, or VW, they've got considerably lower health care expenses, which in turn allows them to either lower their prices, make more money, pour more into research and development, or some combination of all three.
(and no, I don't drive a foreign car, I drive a Jeep made in Toledo, OH)
They have settled. Lots of buyouts of senior employees to get them off the books. Retirement medical to be handled by a trust.
Also, reduced pay for new hires. Sound familiar? I know. Lets throw the future employees under the bus as long as I keep what I have. Some things never change.
When I shop for a new vehicle, I shop all the models in the class. What I find is without exception, when the equipment is the same, the domestic is usually priced lower, about 3 to 5K. With the new agreement, they should be priced even better. Take a look at the popular import badged brands these days. There have been many quality issues with them. They have been riding on their good reputation for so long that they are now having problems with quality.
I've see much written about the legacy expenses in many companies, but the only way I've seen to deal with this (from an executive perspective, of course) is to eliminate the expense, leaving many high and dry who were counting on promises being kept by their employer after retirement. Of course, the executives get to keep their plunder and freebies flowing, but the workers can go to hell.
Of course - the foreign automakers in the USA don't have these expenses, yet, They simply haven't been here long enough for retiree costs to accrue as with the older automakers or other established businesses, for that matter. Had your examples of Toyota, etc. been in the USA making cars for the same length of time the (not so)big three have, there may have been some legacy costs amongst them also.
Executive compensation is another sore point. The European counterparts (part of this global community we're supposedly a part of) look upon what the USA execs get paid as ludicrous. Our blessed elite pass this off as "market rates", but they create their own "market" to manipulate with the collusion of their respective boards of directors. If this type of manipulation were to happen on Wall Street (and it has), the SEC would (should?) have more than a few of these devils up on charges as they have done with many "market makers" in the exchanges during the last year. There seems to be, however, an unspoken rule of immunity amongst these thieves; i. e., "protect my yuppie a$$ and I'll protect yours."
Only my opinions - your thoughts, eolesen ?
Kev3188
Veteran
That's quite a red herring you threw there...
...And I thought I was in "thread drift country"
Kev3188
Veteran
Exactly. This is why there are 2 Japanese cars in my driveway instead of US brands....
Dead on again. Even with improved reliability, US automakers (the ones at the top, not the UAW folks) seem to always be one step behind, making the changing of people's mind that much harder of a sell.
Similar threads
