 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / General Car Topics / June 2007Why Toyota is kicking GM's a.s
post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj How did Toyota manage to squeeze the U.S. passenger-car market from the U.S. giant, General Motors? Toyota enjoys much lower labor costs in the United States and benefits from an undervalued yen for cars made in Japan. In the United States, this comes to about $2,500 per vehicle. The entry level and middle level market segments are very sensitive to price and vehicle durability. Toyota has been able to translate its cost advantage into vehicles with higher, more attractive content and longer life than General Motors. Toyota's Camry and Corolla, and derivatives of those cars, have been able to dominate their market spaces -- they set the standard others must follow and they establish the price thresholds. ========== What strategies does Toyota follow to retain its No.1 position in the global market? Toyota is constantly looking for ways to lower costs and improve products. It translates most of the additional profits it earns, over GM, into better product design and additional capacity. At GM, the executives vote themselves bonuses and the union demands more benefits and featherbedding at the first sign of profits. ========== While GM is closing its factories in its native country, how can Toyota open its new plants in North America? It offers customers cars that are less expensive and less trouble to own over the life of the cars. Toyotas don't break as much and perform well. GM vehicles require more repairs and don't age well. ========== How will the native slogan "Wake up America and Buy American" affect the future of Toyota in the U.S. market? Not much. Thanks to big bonuses to executives, outsized fringe benefits for the United Auto Workers union, poor product quality and just plain arrogance, GM and the UAW have lost the loyalty of American car buyers. Americans are not protectionist in their buying habits, and GM executives and the UAW have lost the trust and loyalty of many younger car buyers. > post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj > > How did Toyota manage to squeeze the U.S. passenger-car market from the > U.S. giant, General Motors? Cause they build good cars? Because they were ahead of the Economy cruve 30 years ago? Let's put it this way: I bought a 1974 Corolla 1200 for $2525, with an AM/FM radio and a rear window defroster. One neat little thin I liked was the heater and radio had no dash lights, there was a green piece of plastic with a dome light bulb behind it that lit up the dash, and a little tab on it. When you pulled the tab, it opened the green lens and you had a map light. It was built into the overhang of the dash so you could have the map light on and not upset your view of the road. Simple little thing, but obviously meant a lot since I still remember it after 33 years... It got 38 MPG on the highway, until I changed the tires from Bias-Ply to Michelin Radials. Then it got 38 MPG IN TOWN. The Nova I looked at was $3595, a V8 that got 18 MPG overall. And didn't have a little green maplight. >> post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > And didn't have a little green maplight. Okay, let's compare here. For roughly $1000 less - in 1975 dollars - you got a car with a green map light. You also got a 1200cc four-banger and not a (presumably) 350 V8. If that's what you wanted, then fine. The Corolla was designed for a person looking to move around town. The malibu was designed for people like my dad who wanted to go fast. (We had a '73 Nova at the time.) I don't think "kicking GM's a.s" is the correct term these days. Back in '75 - when I was in first grade - GM have strong competition from Hyundai, Kia, Mitsubishi, Honda, Saab, Mercedes, BMW, and Jaguar. Heck, everytime I turn around I see someone driving a BMW 500-series or a Mercedes SLK. Back then, the only real import competition was from VW, and that was beginning to wane as they slowed produciton on the beetle. I'd be curious what the actual volume - and profit per car/truck - was back then for the Big Three and for Toyota when compared to now.' To put it in pictures, you're comparing this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/ba/1975_Chevelle.jpg to this: http://www.bilhistorie.dk/Billeder/Toyota/Corolla1.JPG Big difference  Signaturek >>> post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj >>> [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > Big difference Thanks for the pic of the Corolla! It is older than the one I had, but that's OK. See my response to someone else. I traded the Corolla for a Nova, and then traded it back...FAST! The Nova was OK, but I liked the Corolla better. $1,000 was a *LOT* of money then. Houses were selling for <$25,000, and I was 17 YO in High School. And you were paying the Japanese to kick your a.s then and you are still paying the Japanese to kick your a.s. You never learn do you. >>>> post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj >>>> [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] > $1,000 was a *LOT* of money then. Houses were selling for <$25,000, and I > was 17 YO in High School. > And you were paying the Japanese to kick your a.s then and you are still > paying the Japanese to kick your a.s. You never learn do you. Actually, I did a long time ago. That's why I pay for Toyotas that don't break down very often and are easy to fix the few occasions they do. Better than paying GM's shareholders so their company can sell me crap. If GM paid as much attention to its *customers* as it did to its shareholders, they wouldn't be in this mess. I have a 20 year old Corolla. The last time it was emissions tested (2001) it was only slightly higher on one parameter than it was when it was a year old. Oh, and it's a GTS (Hachiroku) and a blast to drive. >>>>> post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] >> $1,000 was a *LOT* of money then. Houses were selling for <$25,000, and >> I was 17 YO in High School. >> And you were paying the Japanese to kick your a.s then and you are still >> paying the Japanese to kick your a.s. You never learn do you. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > it was only slightly higher on one parameter than it was when it was a > year old. Oh, and it's a GTS (Hachiroku) and a blast to drive. I once owned an '82 Trans Am back in 2000. It had to be emission tested as well. It passed with flying color's, and barley had any readings at all. Oh, and it was a V8 with t-tops and a serious blast to drive. >>> And you were paying the Japanese to kick your a.s then and you are >>> still paying the Japanese to kick your a.s. You never learn do you. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > well. It passed with flying color's, and barley had any readings at all. > Oh, and it was a V8 with t-tops and a serious blast to drive. Occasionally, GM screws up...and builds a GOOD one... ;) I used to visit friends in Pittsfield MA in the late 70's and through the 80's. In September 1979, when the 80's first came out (and I mean, only a couple WEEKS after the 80's came out) we were driving downtown. Pittsfield has a traffic circle that connects Main street to North and South streets (N & S streets are actually the "main" streets where all the shops and businesses are...). It was a drizzely day, and the roads were slick. We were driving on Main st coming up to the traffic circle when I saw a kid about 17 or so sitting on the curb of the traffic circle with his head in his hands, looking like a condemned man. Behind him was a Brand New 1980 Trans Am, 1/2 up on the traffic circle. With both driver's side tires folded under the car... I would REALLY hate to have been him that day!!! What a waste. And the car had regular plates (not dealer's) so you KNEW Dad was going to be PISSED!!! > On Thu, 17 May 2007 23:46:27 +0000, Woody wrote: > > And you were paying the Japanese to kick your a.s then and you are still [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That's why I pay for Toyotas that don't break down very often and are easy > to fix the few occasions they do. Guess you should consider yourself one of the lucky ones since Toyota recalled more vehicles than they sold in '06. > Better than paying GM's shareholders so their company can sell me crap. If > GM paid as much attention to its *customers* as it did to its > shareholders, they wouldn't be in this mess. Naw, just go ahead and pay Japanese shareholders and let them laugh all the way to the bank. I would predict that their "mess" will happen in the next few years. > I have a 20 year old Corolla. The last time it was emissions tested (2001) > it was only slightly higher on one parameter than it was when it was a [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > > - Show quoted text - On Fri, 25 May 2007 00:36:52 -0700, coachrose13 wrote: >> On Thu, 17 May 2007 23:46:27 +0000, Woody wrote: >> > And you were paying the Japanese to kick your a.s then and you are [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Guess you should consider yourself one of the lucky ones since Toyota > recalled more vehicles than they sold in '06. Toyotas I have had recalled: 1980 Corolla: Improper removal of Cosmoline on rearview mirrors. 1985 Corolla GTS: No Recalls to date. 1988 Corolla 4-door: Radio causes static, radio replaced. 1995 Tercel: Radio static on AM band, antenna replaced. 2005 Scion: Wind deflector on sunroof can shatter if hit by a rock. Stronger material installed. Wow! Those a some damn hazardous recalls! Static on the AM?! How will I listen to Rush Limbaugh?!?!?! Want to get into GM recalls? Like fires, wheels falling off, etc. Oh, I forgot one: 1972 Ford Country Squire Station Wagon: Transmission may shift from Park to Reverse at any time without warning. Remedy: Attach a sticker to the dash saying not to leave the car in Park with the motor running. Yeah, that's not too hazardous... Moron. >> Better than paying GM's shareholders so their company can sell me crap. >> If GM paid as much attention to its *customers* as it did to its [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] >> >> - Show quoted text - "Hachiroku ????" coachrose13 wrote: >> On May 18, 12:13 am, Hachiroku ???? <Tru...@AE86.gts> wrote >>> > And you were paying the Japanese to kick your a.s then and you are [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Moron. To be fair, you're not listing them all, but I have to say Toyota's recalls are a) Not usually as deadly as GM/Ford's b) pointed out by Toyota before you even know you have a defect. My 2000 Echo has had 2 recalls. One was for something to do with the brakes (I forget what, but I remember that there was a very slim chance of a minor problem. The other was for the floorboards, which were rusting too quickly. With each of those, I wasn't aware until *they* told me. Many domestic recalls are disputed by the automaker, and blamed on the consumer. Natalie *snipping rest* > Toyotas I have had recalled: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > 2005 Scion: Wind deflector on sunroof can shatter if hit by a rock. > Stronger material installed. ....... > 1972 Ford Country Squire Station Wagon: Transmission may shift from > Park > to Reverse at any time without warning. Remedy: Attach a sticker to > the > dash saying not to leave the car in Park with the motor running. My Mother had that exact car. I just checked the NHTSA database, and there is no such recall for that model. There were recalls for the seat belt anchor point, and for bumper reinforcements, but none for the transmission. I even looked in the NHTSA complaint database. There was not one complaint about that particualr year/model jumping out of reverse. There was no NHTSA investigation of that model either. I know we never got a sticker for my Mothers car. We also never had a problem with the car jumping out of reverse. Maybe you have the year wrong? I do recall that there were Fords where this was alleged to be a problem but I don't remember the year or model. There have also been Dodoges, Chevrolets, etc, where this was alleged to be a problem. I think it is pretty much a column shift related problem. If the shift linkage is imporperly adjusted, the indicator can say one thing and the transmission can actually be in a different gear. I think you are minimizing Toyota recent problems. I think the most significant recent Toyota safety recall recently was the truck ball joint recall. There have been a number of deaths attributed to that problem. Most of the recalls you listed for your cars are not "safety recalls" and therefore they are not in the NHTSA database. These are voluntary recalls (Customer Satisfaction Recalls). You did miss a few for your cars (or at least for cars of the same year and type - possibly your car was not included). According to NHTSA: 1980 Corolla Recall Number: 80V045000 Summary: DUE TO A FAULTY PRESS DIE USED IN MANUFACTURING ALTERNATOR PULLEYS, PULLEYS INSTALLED ON CERTAIN VEHICLES MAY CRACK AND BREAK DURING VEHICLE OPERATION. THE BATTERY WOULD THEN BE CONSTANTLY DRAINED WITHOUT RECHARGING. Consequence: There is no summary currently available Remedy: DEALER WILL REPLACE THE ENGINE ALTERNATOR PULLEYS ON THE INVOLVED VEHICLES WITHOUT CHARGE TO OWNERS. Notes: VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 2OR AND 3TC ENGINES.SYSTEM: ELECTRICAL; ALTERNATOR PULLEY.CONSEQUENCES OF DEFECT: VEHICLE WOULD EVENTUALLY BE RENDERED INOPERABLE BYDRAINING OF THE BATTERY AND, IN THE PRESENCE OF TRAFFIC, AN ACCIDENT COOULDRESULT. ALSO, BROKEN PULLEY PARTS MAY SCATTER AND CAUSE PERSONAL INJURY AT THETIME OF FAILURE. 2005 Scion TC Recall Number: 05V483000 Summary: ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A GLASS WIND DEFLECTOR, THE DEFLECTOR, IF IMPACTED BY A PROJECTILE, SUCH AS ROAD DEBRIS, WHILE DRIVING WITH THE WIND DEFLECTOR IN THE UPWARD-TILTED POSITION AT HIGHWAYS SPEEDS, MAY SHATTER AND SEPARATE FROM THE FRAME. Consequence: PIECES OF THE WIND DEFLECTOR GLASS MAY SEPARATE FROM THE FRAME AND FALL UPON THE VEHICLE OCCUPANTS CAUSING DRIVER DISTRACTION AND/OR INJURY. Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A PROTECTIVE LAMINATE TO THE WIND DEFLECTOR TO PREVENT PIECES OF GLASS FROM SEPARATING FROM THE WIND DEFLECTOR FRAME. THE RECALL BEGAN OCTOBER 27, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-866-707-2466. Notes: TOYOTA RECALL NO. 50S. CUSTOMERS MAY ALSO CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION’S VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), OR GO TO HTTP://WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV. --------- Recall Number: 06V096000 Summary: ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY OF THE AIR BAG INFLATOR, WHICH IS USED IN THE SIDE AIR BAG, THE CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAG, AND THE KNEE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY, SOME INFLATORS WERE PRODUCED WITH AN INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF THE HEATING AGENTS NECESSARY FOR PROPER AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. IN THIS CONDITION, THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE GAS MAY BE INSUFFICIENT TO PROPERLY INFLATE THE AIR BAG WHEN THE SRS SYSTEM IS ACTIVATED DURING A CRASH. Consequence: THIS MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT IN THE INVOLVED SEATING POSITION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH. Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SPECIFIC SRS AIR BAG. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-888-270-9371, SCION AT 1-866-548-1851, OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987. Notes: TOYOTA RECALL NO. 60B AND LEXUS RECALL NO. 6LB. CUSTOMERS MAY CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION'S VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-327-4236 (TTY: 1-800-424-9153); OR GO TO HTTP://WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV. -------------------------- Recall Number: 06V408000 Summary: ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, THE SIDE IMPACT SEAT-BOLSTER AND CURTAIN SIDE AIRBAGS MAY INADVERTENTLY DEPLOY. THIS CONDITION CAN OCCUR IF THE DOOR FOR THAT SIDE OF THE VEHICLE IS CLOSED WITH A HIGH RATE OF FORCE WHILE THE VEHICLE’S IGNITION IS IN THE “ON” POSITION OR WITHIN 90 SECONDS OF TURNING THE IGNITION KEY FROM THE “ON” POSITION TO THE “OFF” POSITION. Consequence: IF THE SIDE IMPACT SEAT-BOLSTER AND CURTAIN SIDE AIRBAGS INADVERTENTLY DEPLOY, THEY COULD CAUSE PERSONAL INJURY IF AN OCCUPANT IS SEATED ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE VEHICLE AS THE DOOR THAT IS CLOSED WITH A HIGH RATE OF FORCE. UNTIL THE REPAIR HAS BEEN PERFORMED, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT A MINIMAL FORCE/SPEED BE USED TO CLOSE THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER DOORS OR CLOSING THE DOORS AFTER 90 SECONDS HAVE ELAPSED FROM TURNING THE IGNITION KEY FROM THE “ON” TO THE “OFF” POSITION. Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE TWO SIDE IMPACT AIRBAG SENSORS AND INSTALL A URETHANE PAD IN THE FRONT DOORS, IF NECESSARY, FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-866-548-1851. Notes: TOYOTA RECALL NO. SSC 60H. CUSTOMERS MAY ALSO CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION’S VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), OR GO TO HTTP://WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV. Of course they might not apply to your vehicle. I think it is not fair to compare Toyota's recall records from the 70's and 80's to the domestic manufacturers. There are three factors that make this unfair: 1) Toyota is obsessive about hiding faults and denying there existence or severity. If you have some time, go to the NHTSA website and read the documents associated with the ball joint recall. Toyota fought that tooth and nail, despite clear evidence of a problem. Even after several deaths were attributed to ball joint failures, Toyota resisted recalling the affected vehicles until NHTSA was on the verge of forcing it. At the last moment they "voluntarily" instituted a safety recall. 2) Before NHTSA will force a recall, they have to have a significant number of complaints. Back in the 70's and 80's the number of Toyotas of any particular type in the US was fraction of the number of most US models. Fewer overall vehicles means fewer chances for a failure to occur and therefore less of a chance that the number of problems will attract enough attention to force NHTSA to take action 3) In the good old days, most Toyotas models were proved out in other markets before coming to the US. The Corollas you had were derivates of relatively old designs. The bugs were long worked out in other markets. Now that Toyota is building more US specific models and selling more cars in the US, they are more exposed to the same sorts of factors that affect the domestic manufacturers. Ed White >> Toyotas I have had recalled: >> [quoted text clipped - 150 lines] > > Ed White Interesting the Ball Jont failure was on US made trucks, with US made ball joints. Hmmmm... Thanks for the recall info on the Scion. Does not apply. And, I *did* get a sticker for my '72 Ford wagon... Got it in the mail with the "recall" notice... > Interesting the Ball Joint failure was on US made trucks, with US > made ball > joints. > > Hmmmm... They are still "Toyotas" aren't they? The bad ball joints were actually manufactured in Japan (Somic Ishikawa Inc., 500, Furukawa-cho, Hamamatsu-City, Shizuoka Pref., 435-8560 Japan). Furthermore, the recall did not just affect US built trucks. Japanese built 4Runners were also involved. And there are significant recall for other Japanese built Toyotas. For instance: "Toyota is recalling 170,856 MY 2004-2006 Prius passenger cars. The intermediate shaft and sliding yoke in the electric power steering system can crack when large forces are applied, and the connection may separate or the sleeve may fracture. This could result in a loss of steering control of the vehicle. Dealers will replace the steering intermediate shaft and inspect the sliding yoke and replace it if necessary. The recall is expected to begin on June 15, 2006. 06V-188" "Toyota is recalling 367,594 MY 2004-2005 Highlander; MY 2006 Highlander HEV; MY 2004-2005 Lexus RX330; and MY 2006 RX400H sport utility vehicles. The two retaining clips for the driver's side forward center console can become loose. If both clips separate from the floor carpet cover, the cover may lean toward the accelerator pedal, causing interference with the accelerator pedal rod. This condition may interfere with the accelerator pedal returning to the idle position increasing the risk of a crash. Dealers will replace the two floor carpet cover retaining clips free of charge. The recall is expected to begin in late July and should be completed by early September 2006. 06V-253" "Toyota is recalling 34,771 MY 2001-2002 Echo and Prius passenger vehicles. Due to improper molding of the resin body of the crankshaft position senor installed on the engine block, engine oil may penetrate the seal and enter the sensor wiring connector. The wire harness connector may not be sufficiently attached to the locking tab of the sensor wiring connector. Engine oil inside the sensor wiring connector could cause expansion due to the heat of the engine and could deform the sensor wiring connector. The connector may become disconnected, which could cause the engine to stall while driving and not be able to be restarted increasing the risk of a crash. Dealers will replace the crankshaft position sensor free of charge. The recall is expected to begin early August 2006. 06V-266" "Toyota is recalling 9,434 MY 2007 FJ Cruiser passenger vehicles equipped with either Bridgestone Dueler or Dunlop Grandtrek tires. There is a possibility that the inner bead of the tire may have been damaged. If the bead is damaged, a bulge may develop on the sidewall of the tire and air may leak from the area of the damaged bead. If the tire loses air pressure it may lead to a loss of vehicle control and increase the possibility of a crash. Dealers will inspect all five tires, including the spare tire, to determine if they are within the affected tire-to-wheel assembly range and replace all involved tires with new tires free of charge. The recall is expected to begin on July 15, 2006. 06V-235" "Toyota is recalling 29,542 MY 2005-2006 Scion tC vehicles. The side impact seat-bolster and curtain side air bags may inadvertently deploy. This condition can occur if the door for that side of the vehicle is closed with a high rate of force while the vehicle's ignition is in the "on" position or within 90 seconds of turning the ignition key from the "on" position to the "off" position. If the side impact seat-bolster and curtain side air bags inadvertently deploy, they could cause personal injury if an occupant is seated on the same side of the vehicle as the door that is closed with a high rate of force. Until the repair has been performed, it is recommended that a minimal force/speed be used to close the driver and passenger doors or closing the doors after 90 seconds have elapsed from turning the ignition key from the "on" to the "off" position. Dealers will replace the two side impact air bag sensors and install a urethane pad in the front doors, if necessary, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin during early November 2006. 06V-408" Again, I am not saying that Toyota has a really bad recall record (although they have been leading the pack in recent years). I am just saying the idea that Toyota has a particularly good recall record is not true. I am sure you are aware of the suspension problems of older Corollas, the rust problems of early Toyotas, etc. Because Toyota was a niche player until recent years, these problems never attracted national attention. Since Toyota has become a major force in the US, they are exposed to the same sort of pressures that have affected the domestic manufacturers for years. > Thanks for the recall info on the Scion. Does not apply. > And, I *did* get a sticker for my '72 Ford wagon... > > Got it in the mail with the "recall" notice... Recall, or "Customer Satisfaction"? Safety recalls should be in the NHTSA database. "Customer Satisfaction Recalls" (I think Ford calls them Customer Satisfaction Programs) would not. I don't remember getting a label and my Mom owned the car for 10 years (bought new in summer of 1972). However, I did find the following reference which suggest we should have gotten a label: "He entered into an agreement with former Transportation Secretary William Coleman, a lawyer who represented Ford, to have the company send a warning to Ford owners. The letter will include a safety warning label which owners are urged to permanently affix to their dashboards. It tells the driver to make sure the gear selector is engaged in park, to set the parking brake fully and to shut off the ignition." Maybe NHTSA purges 20+ year old stuff since I can't find any mention of this in their database. Even the Center for Auto Safety web site no longer mentions this problem (this is a trial lawyer sponsored site and I though they mentioned any possible defect - forever). Ed On May 25, 1:55 pm, "C. E. White" <cewhi...@removemindspring.com> wrote: > "Hachiroku ????" <Tru...@AE86.gts> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 168 lines] > > Ed White Yes, but you are missing the whole point. Toyota's are perfect. They have not flaws, not matter how small. They are perfect. They do not tear up. EVER, On Sat, 26 May 2007 23:39:56 -0700, coachrose13 wrote: >> Now that Toyota is building more US specific models and selling more >> cars in the US, they are more exposed to the same sorts of factors that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > not flaws, not matter how small. They are perfect. They do not tear up. > EVER, Who ever said that? It's just that usually I can fix what does break in my back yard with simple tools. Ever try changing the spark plugs in a '78 Olds? No cheating, now...I mean WITHOUT unbolting the engine and using a hoist! > On Fri, 25 May 2007 00:36:52 -0700, coachrose13 wrote: > >> On Thu, 17 May 2007 23:46:27 +0000, Woody wrote: [quoted text clipped - 123 lines] > > - Show quoted text - 1972??????????? Ford?????????????????? Pinto???????????? Moron????????????????????????????????? On Sat, 26 May 2007 23:35:31 -0700, coachrose13 wrote: >> On Fri, 25 May 2007 00:36:52 -0700, coachrose13 wrote: >> >> On Thu, 17 May 2007 23:46:27 +0000, Woody wrote: [quoted text clipped - 128 lines] > 1972??????????? Ford?????????????????? Pinto???????????? > Moron????????????????????????????????? Did I type too fast for you? It wasn't a Pinto...it was a Full-Sized Land Barge station wagon. Pintos suck. So do Vegas. Detroit has a good idea; those kars could have been real Import fighters, and they go and build two of the worst cars ever to come off American assembly lines... They looked good, too, esp the Vega. "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message > Pintos suck. So do Vegas. Detroit has a good idea; those kars could have > been real Import fighters, and they go and build two of the worst cars > ever to come off American assembly lines... > > They looked good, too, esp the Vega. My brother had a Vega, bought new in '74 IIRC. In '76 I drove it cross country for him. It was too much for the car and started using oil after than. He unloaded it in about six months with very few miles, but one cross country trip in five or six days was too much. SignatureEd http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/ >> Pintos suck. So do Vegas. Detroit has a good idea; those kars could have >> been real Import fighters, and they go and build two of the worst cars [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > than. He unloaded it in about six months with very few miles, but one > cross country trip in five or six days was too much. It's unfortunate, because if they had made them properly they would have been COOL cars! I saw one the other day in town. The bright orange color. Looks pretty good with all the blue smoke coming out of the tailpipe! (But hey, the thing was still RUNNING and looked mint! It just runs on oil, not gas! ;) > My brother had a Vega, bought new in '74 IIRC. In '76 I drove it cross > country for him. It was too much for the car and started using oil after > than. He unloaded it in about six months with very few miles, but one cross > country trip in five or six days was too much. Ah yes, one of GM's cost saving ideas. No need to put an iron sleeve into the cylinder of the aluminum block, just use a magic treatment on the aluminum and call it good. Didn't work. http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/bv/vega.htm Late in the Vega's life GM was actually putting sleeves into customer cars when they started smoking for no money. I remember, because it was done to my mother's Vega in the late 1970s. msnbc.com readers voted the Vega the worst car of all time. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10139923/ One of GM's problems is that they have released so many nightmare vehicles on their customers over the years. Many of those customers joined the never again club. The Corvair fiasco, the Vega, the "diesel" of the late 70s, the Caddy 4-6-8 which was a good idea released before it's time, the high failure rate early FWD automatic transmissions, the intake gasket leaking self-destructing 60 degree V-6 problems which lasted over a decade, the minivans which started falling apart not long after the warranty was up and so on. Many potential customers now see no reason to give GM yet another chance. >> My brother had a Vega, bought new in '74 IIRC. In '76 I drove it cross >> country for him. It was too much for the car and started using oil [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > warranty was up and so on. Many potential customers now see no reason to > give GM yet another chance. While I agree with everything you say (and, I worked for the company that developed the V8-6-4 electronics), GM has had a few bright, shining spots. One of these is the 3800 engine used primarily in Buicks. The perfect balance between size, economy and power. And a reliable engine to boot. Some of their transmissions are top notch. They have had some real nice, eye pleasing designs, my favorites being a lot of the Pontiacs and Buicks. The only reason I didn't buy a Buick once was because the switch gear in the cockpit felt like it was going to fall apart. A lot of their interiors are comfy and good for long trips. Yeah, I like my Jap cars, I have always liked quirky looking foreign cars, but it was the build quality and reliability that sold me. I've had other foreign cars that were pieces of crap; I'll NEVER buy another VW! I was willing to give GM a chance with the HHR. I play bass and need something to haul my gear, and was looking for something that would be cool to drive to work, too. Since I always like the Panel Vans, the HHR was a good idea. It was way too underpowered. If ever something was screaming for a V6, this is it. Too bad...if the thing could have gotten out of it's own way they would have made a sale...all the right equipment, the right color, good sound system... Even the switch gear felt good! ;) >> My brother had a Vega, bought new in '74 IIRC. In '76 I drove it >> cross country for him. It was too much for the car and started [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/bv/vega.htm Yet Porsche and Mercedes use this same technique and no one seems to complain. I suspect GM made the mistake of trying to take a new technique straight to market on a high volume car. > Late in the Vega's life GM was actually putting sleeves into > customer cars when they started smoking for no money. I remember, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > falling apart not long after the warranty was up and so on. Many > potential customers now see no reason to give GM yet another chance. I don't know about most of these bad ideas except for the Corvair. I never owned one, but a couple of close friends did and they loved them. I think the Covair's biggest problem was the people who bought them. Traditional Chevrolet owners that bought Covairs were not used to handling characteristics of the car. They were definitely prone to oversteer if you got them out of shape. Traditional rear wheel drive Chevies would just plow straight ahead if you exceeded the handling capabilities of the car. In the same situation, a Corvair was likely to spin out. I went to high school with a girl that drove a Corvair. Her Dad put sand bags in the front "trunk" so that the car would handle "right." I never understood why Corvairs get picked on, and old VW Bugs got praised. Anything bad you can say about a Corvair you can say twice about a VW Bug. I actually saw a guy turn one of those over in a parking lot. He was just laying circles, and the car just rolled over. Ed > > Ah yes, one of GM's cost saving ideas. No need to put an iron > > sleeve into the cylinder of the aluminum block, just use a magic [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > customer cars when they started smoking for no money. I remember, > > because it was done to my mother's Vega in the late 1970s. Didn't the original aluminum block Vega engine weigh 50 lbs. more than the iron block engine originally proposed for the car? On May 29, 9:20 am, do_not_spam...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > Ah yes, one of GM's cost saving ideas. No need to put an iron > > > sleeve into the cylinder of the aluminum block, just use a magic [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I think it weighed more than the cast iron Chevette engine, the cast iron 1600cc Pinto Engine, and the 2000cc German built cast iron Pinto engine. As I recall the aluminum block was not used for lightness, it was used becasue of ease of manufacturing. The block was die cast with an open deck - no sand molds were used. The cast iron head was needed to stiffen the deck-less block. I think it was a good idea rushed into production without adequate development. I believe the excessive wear was not completely due to the linerless block. I believe the blocks tended to deform more than cast iron blocks. Becasue of the deformation they tended to wear unevenly, which lead to excessive oil consumption. Overheating a Vega engine meant sure death. Nobody eveer seems to remember Toyota's from the same era (early 70's) were prone to blown head gaskets, that they often ate timming chains, and suffered from excessive oil consumption - not to mention they rusted like crazy. Ed > Nobody eveer seems to remember Toyota's from the same era (early 70's) > were prone to blown head gaskets, that they often ate timming chains, and > suffered from excessive oil consumption - not to mention they rusted like > crazy. Never had either problem, nor did my friends that had Toys. > Pintos suck. So do Vegas. Detroit has a good idea; those kars could > have > been real Import fighters, and they go and build two of the worst > cars > ever to come off American assembly lines... Did you ever own a Pinto? We had two in my family. After my first year in college I bought a 1972 three door from the local Ford dealer. For the next three years I drove it back and forth to college, to summer jobs, and autocrossed it at least 12 times a year. During that time the only failure was a bad starter. And the only reason the starter failed was because I bought a tank of gas that was at least 50% water. I kept thinking I could just put enough dry gas in the car that I could get the water out. I couldn't. Every time you hit a bump or went around a sharp curve, more water would end up in the carburetor and the car would sputter and stall. When this happened I'd grind on the starter till the car got going. I finally had to take the tank off. I emptied it into a big trash can. I let the water settle, and then skimmed off enough gas to get the car to the gas station. Unfortunately by then the starter was in bad shape. Fortunately it was still under warranty. I liked my Pinto so much, my Parents bought one for my older Sister to drive (Hmmm... I had to buy my own...). I drove mine till I graduated from college and sold it to my Parents, who gave it to my younger Sister. She drove it for another three years - at which point I bought it back to use as a commuter car. The lack of A/C finally convinced me to sell it. My older sister drove the other Pinto for 7 years. Ironically, I bought that one from Her to use temporarily because my only other car at the time was in a wreck. I drove it for several months while I fixed the other car (a Jensen-Healey) and then sold it to a co-worker. Three of his kids used the car for another 5 years. I think it was the only Ford he every owned. But even he would tell you it was one tough car. Oh by the way - the wreck that damaged my Jensen-Healey was a chain collision. A Pontiac shoved my J-H into a Corolla. I drove away. The Corolla was totaled. My Sister replaced her Pinto with a Honda Accord. It was totaled when a Mustang collided with the Accord (not her fault). The Mustang drove away with minor damage, the Accord went to the junk yard. Ed >> Pintos suck. So do Vegas. Detroit has a good idea; those kars could have >> been real Import fighters, and they go and build two of the worst cars [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > temporarily because my only other car at the time was in a wreck. I drove > it for several months while I fixed the other car (a Jensen-Healey) I know a girl named Johnson-Healy. I used to play bass for her once in a while when she'd get gigs. BTW, was it a AWD model? Impressive stories about the Pintos. I haven't seen it this year, but there was one in my hometown that looked and ran mint. Need I tell you it's an old woman that must have bought it new? > and then sold it to a co-worker. Three of his kids used the car for > another 5 years. I think it was the only Ford he every owned. But even [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ed > I know a girl named Johnson-Healy. I used to play bass for her once in a > while when she'd get gigs. > > BTW, was it a AWD model? You must be thinking of the Jensen FF. That was a large British built, Chrysler powered sedan / convertible with AWD (there were also RWD Jensen sedans and convertibles). The Jensen-Healey was a two seat sport car, a little larger than an MGB, and a lot roomier than a TR-6. The suspension parts were mostly English Vauxhall parts and it was powered by a 2.0L twin cam Lotus 4 cylinder engine. I actually owned two, a 1974 and a 1975. I loved the cars, but they were not the most reliable vehicles I have owned. The engine was the weakest part. It leaked oil from very orifice, the valves were a pain to adjust and refused to stay adjusted. The US version used Stromberg Carbs - the emmision control version, which were also difficult to adjust. And then there was the fuel system, many Jensen-Healey burned up because the owers used the gasohol of the early 80s. This would literally melt the tee between the carbs, and the resulting fuel leak was sure to get a fire started. There was also a hardtop version of the car, the Jensen GT. See http://www.british-steel.org/ . The Jensen-Healey was the last gasp of the British sports car industry. I wish I still had one.....well sometimes, but then sometimes I wish I has a Triumph Stag too. > Impressive stories about the Pintos. I haven't seen it this year, but > there was one in my hometown that looked and ran mint. Need I tell you > it's an old woman that must have bought it new? When they were new (1971, 1972) Pintos were very competitive autocross competitors. They also did relatively well in the SCCA show room stock races of the time. Later models got heavier (5 mph bumpers, more options) and, at least in my opinion, the 2.3L Lima 4 cylinder was not as good as the 2.0L German 4 cylinder (although the 2.3L had some design advatages). In later years they even sold 2.8L V-6s in Pintos, but by then they had too much "road hugging weight." I recently saw one of the Pinto cruising wagons for sale on the local Craig's list. The body looked great. I almost bought it with the intention of shoving in a more modern engine. But I decided that was a bad idea. Ed > You must be thinking of the Jensen FF. That was a large British built, > Chrysler powered sedan / convertible with AWD (there were also RWD Jensen > sedans and convertibles). The Jensen-Healey was a two seat sport car Damn, of course! I have a pic from one I saw in Amherst around here somewhere. I saw someone paint a silver-blue one some awful, non-original red a couple years ago. The paint job was OK, needed sanding and buffing, but the owner didn't care. He wanted it red. He's owned the car since the 70's, and is in his 70's himself, and I guess doesn't realize the value of the car... > I actually owned two, a 1974 and a 1975. I > loved the cars, but they were not the most reliable vehicles I have owned. Anything to do with Lucas, the Prince of Darkness? >> I actually owned two, a 1974 and a 1975. I >> loved the cars, but they were not the most reliable vehicles I have >> owned. > > Anything to do with Lucas, the Prince of Darkness? Ironically my 1974 came with a Delco alternator which failed. The d@#$ thing looked just like a US Delco alternator but none of the parts were interchangeable. My replacement was a Lucas (bought used). They were also used on the cars from the factory. The Lucas never failed as long as I owned the car. The electric fuel pump was one of those British things with points, so naturally it was a pain. I replaced it with a US made pump and a regulator. The rest of the electrical stuff was fine. When I owned the car, I had a parts book that listed the OEM manufacturer and P/N (Ford, Vauxhall, Lotus, etc). Very handy. Ed >> I actually owned two, a 1974 and a 1975. I >> loved the cars, but they were not the most reliable vehicles I have >> owned. > > Anything to do with Lucas, the Prince of Darkness? I've heard the stories. My brother owned a 66 MG Midget. ("Why do the British drink warm beer?" "Lucas also makes refrigerators.") Charles of Schaumburg >>> I actually owned two, a 1974 and a 1975. I >>> loved the cars, but they were not the most reliable vehicles I have [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Charles of Schaumburg HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! >>> post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj >>> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > Hyundai, Kia, Mitsubishi, Honda, Saab, Mercedes, BMW, and Jaguar. Heck, > everytime I turn around I see someone driving a BMW 500-series or a Back in 1975 the Hyundai, Kia wasnt even around to be competitive in the US. The Mitsubishi may have just began to start to show up but they were not any real competition. The only japanese cars beginning to hit our shores back then was Toyota, Honda and Datsun/ Nissan. The only reason people began to look at those cars was because of the gas crunch and no other reason. >> I don't think "kicking GM's a.s" is the correct term these days. Back in >> '75 - when I was in first grade - GM have strong competition from [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > people began to look at those cars was because of the gas crunch and no > other reason. BZZZZT! Wrong! We bought our first Toyota in 1972, before the oil 'crisis'. Any more guesses? We traded a...NOVA for it! Because the Nova had gotten bigger over the years and my Mom wasn't comfortable driving it. And, again, the Corona had a lot more features and was $1,000 less... On Sat, 19 May 2007 02:00:16 GMT, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote: >BZZZZT! Wrong! We bought our first Toyota in 1972, before the oil 'crisis'. My parents traded a Ford Gran Torino for a Corolla. I remember the big deal over a 5 speed transmission! >>BZZZZT! Wrong! We bought our first Toyota in 1972, before the oil >>'crisis'. > > My parents traded a Ford Gran Torino for a Corolla. > > I remember the big deal over a 5 speed transmission! Wow! That's a atretch! The Gran Torino was a good sized car! On Sat, 19 May 2007 15:41:19 GMT, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote: >Wow! That's a atretch! The Gran Torino was a good sized car! It was a 302 powered boat. <G> We had a Corolla wagon with 3 kids. All of us learned to drive in the Corolla, too. I can't believe the clutch survived. >>Wow! That's a atretch! The Gran Torino was a good sized car! >> > It was a 302 powered boat. <G> > > We had a Corolla wagon with 3 kids. All of us learned to drive in the > Corolla, too. I can't believe the clutch survived. My GTS has 259,000 on it, taught two wives to drive 5-speed with it, and it STILL has the original clutch! And, I downshift to boot! >>>Wow! That's a atretch! The Gran Torino was a good sized car! >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And, I downshift to boot! Yep it is amazing what people were buying to save gas back then. >>> On Sat, 19 May 2007 15:41:19 GMT, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno@AE86.gts> >>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >> > Yep it is amazing what people were buying to save gas back then. Yup...too bad only a few thousand of us could get them! Here; have an education on me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_AE86 http://www.pbase.com/mr_16v/hachiroku_pics http://www.4age.net/ >>> BZZZZT! Wrong! We bought our first Toyota in 1972, before the oil >>> 'crisis'. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Wow! That's a atretch! The Gran Torino was a good sized car! I can beat that. I had a friend whose parents traded in a 1971 Cadillac Sedan de Ville for a 1976 Ford Pinto Squire station wagon (V6)!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>> On Sat, 19 May 2007 02:00:16 GMT, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno@AE86.gts> >>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Sedan de Ville for a 1976 Ford Pinto Squire station wagon > (V6)!!!!!!!!!!!!! I had a friend that had a Pinto wagon, 4 cyl and a 4 speed. Actually a decent little wagon. But at 7 years old it was fairly beat, but it just kept running. The only Pinto I ever drove had some kind of fuel/carb problem and couldn't get over 45 on the highway with your foot on the floor. Now, the '88 'Monza' a friend had, with a V8...! Who the hell ever put an 85 MPH Speedo in THAT?!?!?! On Sun, 20 May 2007 02:29:06 GMT, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote: >Now, the '88 'Monza' a friend had, with a V8...! >Who the hell ever put an 85 MPH Speedo in THAT?!?!?! I remember those! GM was getting into IMSA. >>Now, the '88 'Monza' a friend had, with a V8...! Who the hell ever put an >>85 MPH Speedo in THAT?!?!?! >> > I remember those! > > GM was getting into IMSA. I misspoke...it was a '78. But, if you remember the car...*I* sure as hell do! I think it was a 305, but in a car that smell...Woooo-Hoooo! That thing was FAST. And it really didn't do too badly on gas. No mileage leader, but having such a big motor in such a small car meant it didn't have to spend a lot of HP to move the car around. >>> I don't think "kicking GM's a.s" is the correct term these days. Back in >>> '75 - when I was in first grade - GM have strong competition from [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > years and my Mom wasn't comfortable driving it. And, again, the Corona had > a lot more features and was $1,000 less... Like I said they were just starting to show up. How many dealers were there in the US then...10? Most people in 72 never even heard of a Toyota. >>>> I don't think "kicking GM's a.s" is the correct term these days. Back >>>> in '75 - when I was in first grade - GM have strong competition from [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Like I said they were just starting to show up. How many dealers were > there in the US then...10? Most people in 72 never even heard of a Toyota. And that made it even better. I'm usially ahead of the curve. Was then, and am now... >>>> I don't think "kicking GM's a.s" is the correct term these days. Back >>>> in [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Like I said they were just starting to show up. How many dealers were > there in the US then...10? Most people in 72 never even heard of a Toyota. We bought a used 1972 TE12LKA Carina in 1974. Somebody had bought it new and traded up. Charles of Schaumburg >>>> post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj >>>> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > people began to look at those cars was because of the gas crunch and no > other reason. They may have come for the economy, but they stayed for the build. Detroit hadn't changed that much since we bought our 62 Corvair that had to be refloored twice. That had to have the turn signal repaired at least 3 times. That had to have the valves ground twice. We had looked at 1973 American cars. Figured that in order to get one big enough for the family, we'd have to get one of those PLUG-UGLY 4 door Malibus. The paint wassn't any better than the Corvair. Two years later we spotted this Toyota on the used car lot. We fit a lot better in the 72 Carina than the 73 Malibu. The fit, finish, and paint quality were light years better. That's why Toyota is kicking GM's butt. Charles of Schaumburg > They may have come for the economy, but they stayed for the build. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > That's why Toyota is kicking GM's butt. Ummmmmm.... you needed a car big enough to fit the family, you couldn't fit the family into the Malibu, but you could nicely fit it into the Toyota? The Toyotas of the early 70's were reliable basic transportation, but to say that the fit and finish and the paint quality were better than anything from Detroit at the time is more than just a stretch, it's a complete misrepresentation. One might even consider it to be a distorted recollection of the old days. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net > > They may have come for the economy, but they stayed for the build. > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > - Show quoted text - No, you are wrong. Japanse cars have always been perfect! >> post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj >> >> How did Toyota manage to squeeze the U.S. passenger-car market from the >> U.S. giant, General Motors? >Cause they build good cars? Because they were ahead of the Economy cruve >30 years ago? >Let's put it this way: I bought a 1974 Corolla 1200 for $2525, with an >AM/FM radio and a rear window defroster. One neat little thin I liked was [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >little thing, but obviously meant a lot since I still remember it after 33 >years... >It got 38 MPG on the highway, until I changed the tires from Bias-Ply to >Michelin Radials. Then it got 38 MPG IN TOWN. >The Nova I looked at was $3595, a V8 that got 18 MPG overall. >And didn't have a little green maplight. That's a nice story. However, did you ever drive a Nova with a 350 V8? I did, and it was the most fun I ever had. No, it didn't have a little green map light, but it did have a great roar and great acceleration. I would have been lucky to get 18 MPG, but back then gas was cheap. The Nova was probably one of the best and most reliable cars built by GM through the 70s. Both the 6cyl and 8cyl were good engines. > >> post-gazette.comhttp://snipurl.com/1l0sj > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > The Nova was probably one of the best and most reliable cars built > by GM through the 70s. Both the 6cyl and 8cyl were good engines.- Hide quoted text - Did you forget they also offered a 153 cid four cylinder engine in the original Chevrolet Nova? It was more or less 2/3's of a Chevy 6. It was last offered in 1970. In the late 60's almost nobody cared about fuel economy. I doubt if 5% of Nova were ordered with this engine. I've never seen one myself. Ed It is the same today. Toyotas best selling car in not their most fuel efficient. Only those on the bottom of the economic scale consider fuel economy at the primary reason to buy a particular vehicle. Even at $3 a gallon, gas consumption in the US is up over 2% more than a year ago and over 15% greater than when gas was $2 a gallon. mike >> >> post-gazette.comhttp://snipurl.com/1l0sj >> >> >> How did Toyota manage to squeeze the U.S. passenger-car market from >> >> the >> >> U.S. giant, General Motors? >> However, did you ever drive a Nova with a 350 V8? I did, and it >> was the most fun I ever had. No, it didn't have a little green [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Ed >>> post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj >>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > The Nova was probably one of the best and most reliable cars built by GM > through the 70s. Both the 6cyl and 8cyl were good engines. The Corolla was in a minor 'one car' (ooops!) fender bender, and while the Toyota garage was repairing it, they loaned me a '73 SS 350 (far as I can tell, all the SS did was add the SS letters. No gauges, no four speed; near as I can tell it was a Nova 350 with SS badges). I traded cars with them. I kept the Nova for 5 or six weeks, and when gas hit $0.75 a gallon, I traded it back! Luckily, they went for it and gave me my Corolla back! BS! Nobody will 'give you your car back' after you traded it. mike > I kept the Nova for 5 or six weeks, and when gas hit $0.75 a gallon, I > traded it back! Luckily, they went for it and gave me my Corolla back! > BS! Nobody will 'give you your car back' after you traded it. > > mike In 50 years, we bought over a dozen cars from them. Yeah, they gave me the car back. And then sold me, personally 4 more. >> I kept the Nova for 5 or six weeks, and when gas hit $0.75 a gallon, I >> traded it back! Luckily, they went for it and gave me my Corolla back! Once again I say BS! Nobody will 'give you your car back' after you traded it. All taxes, transfer fees, commissions. insurance coverage costs etc., must be paid on every transaction or the dealership is committing fraud. mike >> BS! Nobody will 'give you your car back' after you traded it. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>> I kept the Nova for 5 or six weeks, and when gas hit $0.75 a gallon, I >>> traded it back! Luckily, they went for it and gave me my Corolla back! > Once again I say BS! Nobody will 'give you your car back' after you traded > it. All taxes, transfer fees, commissions. insurance coverage costs etc., [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>>> I kept the Nova for 5 or six weeks, and when gas hit $0.75 a gallon, I >>>> traded it back! Luckily, they went for it and gave me my Corolla back! A good dealer will take a hit for a good customer. There just isn't many good dealers! If one listens to Toyotas ads, they say 'number one car BRAND name in the US. As with many of Toyotas ads, while true in what they say, they are disingenuous and deceptive. Actually GM sells more cars in the US than does Toyota but they have several different names on the grill. The most deceiving,, are Toyotas Tundra ads. Tundra 'changing everything.' That is true in reference to prior Tundras, but not in referance to GM, Ford or Dodge trucks. What the new Tundra does for Toyota, is bring their full size truck closer to what the domestic have been offering in their trucks for many years. Toyota touts fuel economy, but GM sells more models that get 30 MPG, or more, than does Toyota ;) mike > post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj > > How did Toyota manage to squeeze the U.S. passenger-car market from the > U.S. giant, General Motors? According to Vash: >Let's put it this way: I bought a 1974 Corolla 1200 for $2525, with an >AM/FM radio and a rear window defroster. >more crap snipped< I actually drove one of those cars, a model a few years earlier. All I remember was you red-lined the engine in first gear at about 15 mph! It was only marginally better than a kid's pedal car. While you are plugging Toyotas, why don't you tell the public they all have timing belts with non free-running engines (interference engines). That means, if and when the timing belt breaks or skips, your engine is ruined completely because the pistons will strike the opened valves. What you have are holed pistons and/or bent valves, meaning a complete teardown and overhaul. Figure on at least $4,000 when that $20 timing belt goes. Most American cars do not have that fine Toyota feature. "George Orwell" ... > post-gazette.com http://snipurl.com/1l0sj > > How did Toyota manage to squeeze the U.S. passenger-car market from the > U.S. giant, General Motors? *snip* > Toyota is constantly looking for ways to lower costs and improve > products. It translates most of the additional profits it earns, over > GM, into better product design and additional capacity. At GM, the > executives vote themselves bonuses and the union demands more benefits > and featherbedding at the first sign of profits. This is the saddest thing of all, because it screwed the workers much more than it did the consumer. > ========== > While GM is closing its factories in its native country, how can Toyota [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > well. GM vehicles require more repairs and don't age well. > ========== It's not fair to say they all break down more. There are some good GM vehicles, but as far as I know, no really good low-mileage ones. > How will the native slogan "Wake up America and Buy American" affect > the future of Toyota in the U.S. market? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > executives and the UAW have lost the trust and loyalty of many younger > car buyers. Yup - too bad. Really, I'm sorry for that, because the executives who screwed things up are still set for life. Natalie "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message > Toyota enjoys much lower labor costs in the United States and benefits > from an undervalued yen for cars made in Japan. In the United States, > this comes to about $2,500 per vehicle. Blah, blah, blah... Toyota has the perception of being higher quality, and we pay higher prices for it. They service what they sell, build a hell of a good car,and stand behind it. GM lost the war. They may still persevere, but not if they continue the way they are going. > "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in > message [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > prices > for it. The import word here is "perception." > They service what they sell, build a hell of a good car,and stand behind > it. Then why do Toyota dealer get such poor opinion survey ratings? > GM lost the war. They may still persevere, but not if they continue the > way > they are going. It was my impression that GMs product line was improving. The press generally rates the new Silverado ahead of the new Tundra. The Impala appears to be a good buy. Cadillac seems to have completely turned it's image around. They seem to have figured out what to do with Saturn. GM is confident that the new Malibu will be well received. It seems to me the biggest weakness is the small car segment. Not sure what they are going to do there, but I don't think that segment is particularly profitable for anyone -even Toyota. I wouldn't write GM off just yet. Ed > > "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in > > message [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > The import word here is "perception." Indeed. Perception is as good as truth, over the short haul. > > They service what they sell, build a hell of a good car,and stand behind > > it. > > Then why do Toyota dealer get such poor opinion survey ratings? They dont. Toyota dealers have a high satisfaction rating > > GM lost the war. They may still persevere, but not if they continue the > > way > > they are going. > > It was my impression that GMs product line was improving. > > I wouldn't write GM off just yet. Neither do I, Ed. They screwed the buying public for years before the public began to respond. Now that they are building better cars, it is going to take a while before people can trust them again..Assuming, of course, that they can avoid bankrupcy. Nothing would please me more than that they would reestablish themselves as a company worthy of respect. Even the lowest of whores can regain respect. I hope GM can attain virtue again... | > > "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in | > > message [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] | as a company worthy of respect. Even the lowest of whores can regain | respect. I hope GM can attain virtue again... Me too! I'd love to see them rebound. But until they do, I'm sticking with "rice-burners" Natalie >> Then why do Toyota dealer get such poor opinion survey ratings? > > They dont. Toyota dealers have a high satisfaction rating See: http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2003058 http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2004065 http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2005092 http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2006119 From http://wardsdealer.com/ar/auto_ouch_feeling/index.html : "It seems like there is nothing but good news for Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc. as it enjoys strong sales and high profits. But behind that is what Toyota executive Mike Musich calls "the not so good news." "The dark side is that Toyota dealerships routinely rank at the bottom of customer satisfaction surveys for sales and service. "Customers are saying our cars are as good as they can get, but they are also saying, 'I'm not a happy customer,'" because of treatment at the dealership level, Musich says." From http://tinyurl.com/2sla8n : "The customer's husband suspected that the salesman refused to sell his wife a car because he was afraid of receiving a poor customer service survey from them. It turns out that he may be on to something, if what our tipster says is true. He claims that his roommate used to be a CSR for a Toyota dealership and it was the roommate's job to make sure the customer either did not fill our the survey or filled our paper surveys so the answers could be changed or poor reviews thrown out." Ed > "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in > message [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > GM lost the war. GM is losing the battle, but the war will never be over. Like everything else in life, this battleground will have continued ups and downs forever. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net >> "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in >> message [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > GM is losing the battle, but the war will never be over. Like everything > else in life, this battleground will have continued ups and downs forever. GM is currently planning some B-17 sorties to bomb the Toyota facturies in japan this summer. | >> "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in | >> message [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] | GM is currently planning some B-17 sorties to bomb the Toyota facturies in | japan this summer. Bombing the Japanese didn't stop us from buying their cars. Natalie > | >> "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in > | >> message [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Bombing the Japanese didn't stop us from buying their cars. The Japanese attacking us apparently doesn't mean much to some either. "80 Knight" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message > The Japanese attacking us apparently doesn't mean much to some either. Are you talking about the successful economics of modern day Japan, or their day of infamy in 1941? We gave them a heck of a defeat back then. It wasnt brag, just fact. If we want to win economically, it will again have to be no brag, just fact. > "80 Knight" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message >> The Japanese attacking us apparently doesn't mean much to some either. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > If we want to win economically, it will again have to be no brag, just > fact. Well it looks like another war is on, all traitors will be rewarded with a brand new Toyota. >> "80 Knight" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message >>> The Japanese attacking us apparently doesn't mean much to some either. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Well it looks like another war is on, all traitors will be rewarded with a > brand new Toyota. Where do I sign up? >>> "80 Knight" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message >>>> The Japanese attacking us apparently doesn't mean much to some either. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Where do I sign up? Really. Bet Mr 80Knight owned a VW Beetle in his past, too. The Brainwashed over in the GM forum don't get it. Why people bought Model T's in the early 1920's, VW's in the 60's and started buying Toyotas in the 1970's is something GM and its cohorts will never understand. We celebrate the absence of fancy options. WE DON'T WANT THEM. We want a basic machine that will get up, go and keep going. GM has always had a structure where you often had to get certain options packages to get stuff you wanted, but you got stuff you didn't want, too. For instance, when I bought my S-10 in 1995, I wanted a 5 speed, so I had to get the 2.2 engine and the short cab. Had I wanted the 4.3 engine, I would have had to get the longer cab and an auto tranny, which added so much weight that the performance was actually worse than my little 2.2. And in order to get the 4.3 that actually had any get up and go, I would have had to pay over 20,000, when the base S-10 with the 5 speed actually cost just over 10,000. We had similar problems trying to buy a new Chevy in 1973, so GM is still practicing its same old tricks. Charles of Schaumburg > GM has always had a structure where you often had to get certain options > packages to get stuff you wanted, but you got stuff you didn't want, too. Actually, back in the 60's and the early 70's you could order a la carte. So, if you wanted this and not that, you could fill out an option sheet and the General would actually BUILD a car to your specs! But, when the Toyotas and Nissans started really catching on in the mid 70's, that option was not available. There was no ability to send a Build Sheet to Japan, build the car and then send it to the dealer that ordered it. So, they came up with 'packages', different groups of options that a customer could 'order'. When the order went in, then the car was located in the system and routed to the dealer, or done through a dealer swap. Ford, Chrysler and The General realized two things: that this was a more cost effective way of building cars, and that they could bundle higher priced options with lower priced options, thereby making more $$$ per car. So they adopted the Japanese 'package' system and we all got stuck... It actually is a more cost effective way to build cars, but of course they used it as a way to make more money. Gotta keep the shareholders happy! >> GM has always had a structure where you often had to get certain options >> packages to get stuff you wanted, but you got stuff you didn't want, too. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > It actually is a more cost effective way to build cars, but of course they > used it as a way to make more money. Gotta keep the shareholders happy! Shareholders aren't going to be very happy when GM starts swimming like a dead guppy, at the top of the bowl, belly up. Their shares will be worth a lot less than they paid for them and dividends will evaporate. Predatory tactics may last for a short while. The difference between the Toyota packages and GM packages is that Toyota seems to be more tuned to what people really want. I notice the 07 Corolla does not come with a 1.6 engine or the 3 speed Auto tranny any more. Most people, even as far back as the AE10x Corolla era bought the AE109s, with the 1.8 engine and the overdrive transmission. They also got better mileage than the AE104's with the 1.6 engine and no overdrive but a 'taller' differential ratio. The AE104's were more the way GM would build a car, and indeed, I think most of the Geo Prisms were 1.6 with only the 3 speed auto. Charles of Schaumburg >>>> "80 Knight" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message >>>>> The Japanese attacking us apparently doesn't mean much to some either. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Really. Bet Mr 80Knight owned a VW Beetle in his past, too. Nope. > The Brainwashed over in the GM forum don't get it. Why people bought > Model T's in the early 1920's, VW's in the 60's and started buying Toyotas > in the 1970's is something GM and its cohorts will never understand. We > celebrate the absence of fancy options. WE DON'T WANT THEM. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message