 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / GMC Cars / January 2006Buy a Toyota or GM
My wife & I are looking at minivans. We can get some real good prices on a GM cars. Having said that, a new Toyota Sienna is about $2-3K more than a Saturn Relay minivan. That really made me think again. I tend to think, or want to believe, that GM's quality is very good. A good amount of warranty issues are from poor maintenance. Would you go for the GM (Saturn Relay or Chevy Uplander) or a Yota Sienna ? IMHO GM is huting because 20 -25 years ago, when my age group was buying their first cars GM, Ford etc made some real junk. Ugly and poorly assembled. I believe that the build quality is good but they have not hit the mark for me. I bought an Acura Integra in 91 and there was no GM car that remotely appealled to me. The closest American option was a Ford Probe. Almost bought one but the warranty excluded pulling a trailer, like my Hobie Cat. > My wife & I are looking at minivans. We can get some real good prices on a > GM cars. Having said that, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Almost bought one but the warranty excluded pulling a trailer, like my Hobie > Cat. Most of what you say is reasonable with the exception of the warranty point. A good amount of warranty issues do not stem from poor maintenance. Most warranty claims stem from either known problem areas or fluke failures. Maintenance isn't going to do anything for those.  Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net > My wife & I are looking at minivans. We can get some real good prices > on a GM cars. Having said that, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Would you go for the GM (Saturn Relay or Chevy Uplander) or a Yota > Sienna ? The new Sienna is not one of the better cars Toyota has put out in recent memory. Take a look at the reviews below I linked on it, sort them by the lowest and you'll see consistent problems...poor mileage and run flat tires being the most common. The new Saturn Vue is a nice vehicle IMHO. IIRC it has a Honda drivetrain. Decent interior too. http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/toyota_sienna_ 2005/4242/model_user_reviews.html > The new Sienna is not one of the better cars Toyota has put out in recent > memory. Take a look at the reviews below I linked on it, sort them by the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/toyota_sienna_ > 2005/4242/model_user_reviews.html Runflats are a horrible idea for family vehicles for sure. John > My wife & I are looking at minivans. We can get some real good prices on a > GM cars. Having said that, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > amount of warranty issues are from > poor maintenance. The Sienna so far out-classes the GM vans as to make it not even a contest. Also, the Toyota will hold it's resale value much better than the Saturn, so unless you plan to run the vehicle into the ground you will get most, if not all, of the price premium back on the other end. John Somebody must like the GM vans, GM sells a lot more vans than Toyota. So does Dodge for that matter mike hunt >> My wife & I are looking at minivans. We can get some real good prices on >> a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > John > Somebody must like the GM vans, GM sells a lot more vans than Toyota. So > does Dodge for that matter Lower prices! > > Somebody must like the GM vans, GM sells a lot more vans than Toyota. So > > does Dodge for that matter > > Lower prices! Lower prices! Better quality! Better styling! What more can you ask? When I was in retail the most important question a customer would ask before signing on the bottom line was always 'How much is my monthly payment?' LOL mike hunt >> > Somebody must like the GM vans, GM sells a lot more vans than Toyota. >> > So [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Lower prices! Better quality! Better styling! What more can you ask? > When I was in retail the most important question a customer would ask before > signing on the bottom line was always 'How much is my monthly payment?' LOL > > mike hunt Mike, as a banker, that's the same question I keep hearing too. The same goes for home mortgages. Some people would like to think otherwise but I took many a sale from other dealers and other brands for as little as $10 a month, even among deals from one of our other stores Why anyone thinks a buyer will pay 20% to 30% more to buy a summarily sized and equipped car to get a particular brand in beyond my experience. LOL mike hunt >> When I was in retail the most important question a customer would ask >> before [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Mike, as a banker, that's the same question I keep hearing too. The > same goes for home mortgages. > Some people would like to think otherwise but I took many a sale from other > dealers and other brands for as little as $10 a month, even among deals from [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > mike hunt You're right Mike - money talks! <lol> Look at what the Korean cars are doing to the Japanese brands among foreign car buyers in the US. Hyundai is fourth in foreign car sales behind Nissan. LOL mike hunt >> Some people would like to think otherwise but I took many a sale from >> other [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You're right Mike - money talks! <lol> and don't forget GM and the dex-coolant gasket leaks into the engine... why would you buy a GM...? their poor quality rotors, and brake pads, plus the gasket leaks with dex-coolant. and their poor quality night lights. >> > Somebody must like the GM vans, GM sells a lot more vans than Toyota. So >> > does Dodge for that matter >> >> Lower prices! > >Lower prices! Better quality! Better styling! What more can you ask? > and don't forget GM and the dex-coolant gasket leaks into the > engine... Mostly they leak *outside* of the engine. > why would you buy a GM...? Predictable 200,000 miles is a good reason to start with. > their poor quality rotors, Not really any worse than most OEM rotors. How many miles do you expect to get out of a set of rotors? I replace OEM rotors with aftermarket at the first brake job, but my GM rotors have consistently gone ~40,000 miles. You consider that to be inadequate? > and > brake pads, plus the gasket leaks with dex-coolant. You already used that one up. Sorry - no double dipping. > and their poor quality night lights. I'll give you this much on the lights - they could be better. I would not call them poor quality though. I'd put them about on a par with most of what comes from the manufacturers these days. Some are great. My daughter's '98 Malibu has the best headlights I've ever seen - anywhere. Go figure - on a Malibu. My '03 Grand Am is what I'd call... uninspiring. Not bad, but sure as hell not great. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net > and don't forget GM and the dex-coolant gasket leaks into the > engine... why would you buy a GM...? their poor quality rotors, and > brake pads, plus the gasket leaks with dex-coolant. > and their poor quality night lights. Jake, It is Dex-Cool, not Dex-coolant. You look like a bigger idiot (if that's possible) every time you post. Dave Today, I checked out both the Saturn Relay and the Toyota Sienna. The numbers are in and they both cost roughly the same. I can get 0.0% on a leftover '05 Relay(or $3500 cash back w/ financing). The Yota has 3.9% financing on an '06, about the same for an '06 Relay. Hmmm, proven resale v.s. crappy resale. I think that the fixed price no haggle thing is now hurting Saturn. Oh yea, the Sienna has side airbags on all three rows standard whereas the Saturn only has second row on highly optioned models. I have two kids and why have it up front when none in the back ? Sorry GM, gotta do better. > > My wife & I are looking at minivans. We can get some real good prices on a > > GM cars. Having said that, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > John > Today, I checked out both the Saturn Relay and the Toyota Sienna. The > numbers are in and they both cost roughly the same. I can get 0.0% on a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Sorry GM, gotta do better. At the same price it is an easy choice and GM looses the battle. If you must buy a GM van, I would get the Buick if only because it has a longer warranty (starting in '06) than do the Chevy, Pontiac & Saturn. John > > Today, I checked out both the Saturn Relay and the Toyota Sienna. The > > numbers are in and they both cost roughly the same. I can get 0.0% on a [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > John But the Sienna is such an ugly, ugly, bland, vanilla looking machine. Has the automotive world come down to making sacrifices such as this for some people? Choosing blandness over good looks for perceived resale value? Man, I'd hate to see the wives of Howard and John, if this is what they base their decisions on! I'd rather have a trophy car/wife with lower value when I'm done with her! <lol> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder or shareholder never know What is an ugly car is the one that does not sell What do you mean by that statement, Toyotas ugly cars sell pretty well. Not nearly as well as GM, Ford or Chrysler sell their cars but Toyota is selling about a million cars a year now, nearly as many a year as Ford sells F150s ;) mike hunt > Beauty is in the eye of the beholder or shareholder never know > What is an ugly car is the one that does not sell Toyota is growing Either people do not find their products ugly or they accept them just because they are better Who cares about ugly if they are nice to the kids gosinn@gmail.com wrote in news:1136137250.649602.217290 @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com: > Toyota is growing > > Either people do not find their products ugly or they accept them just > because they are better > > Who cares about ugly if they are nice to the kids Heck, most Japanese cars are built in the USA anyway. And as much as I'd like to support US autoworkers, the local GM plant isn't hiring! You have to know the right folks to get into one of the cushy $30/hour jobs at GM. But the GM snobs do contribute a lot to the local economy, but so do the workers here in the USA who work for Honda, Toyota, Mitsubishi, etc.. The Japanese and US economies are so closely tied. Be aware of Chinese cars though! Damn things will be flooding the market soon, and the poor folks will be buying them. It's hard to tell a person making $6 to $8 an hour to buy American or Japanese, when they can buy a brand new Chinese economy car for $6000-$7000 (or $100/monthly on a 60 month note)! They might can go down to JD Byrider and get a Chevy Lumina with 80,000 miles for $6000 ($10,000 with finance fees), but a brand new car has so much more appeal. > Heck, most USA >Japanese cars are built in the USA Canada and Mexico > anyway. And as much as > I'd like to support US autoworkers, the local GM plant isn't hiring! > You have to know the right folks to get into one of the cushy $30/hour > jobs at GM. But the GM snobs do contribute a lot to the local economy, > but so do the workers here in the USA who work for Honda, Toyota, > Mitsubishi, etc.. who are hiring. > The Japanese and US economies are so closely tied. > Be aware of Chinese cars though! Damn things will be flooding the > market soon, and the poor folks will be buying them. It's hard to tell > a person making $6 to $8 an hour to buy American or Japanese, when they > can buy a brand new Chinese economy car for $6000-$7000 (or $100/monthly > on a 60 month note)! GM will probably be selling Chinese Cars as they are now selling Korean cars. Toyota is building a plant in China, as we speak, to make cars and trucks to ship to the US. ;) mike hunt >> Heck, most > USA [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > GM will probably be selling Chinese Cars as they are now selling Korean > cars. > Toyota is building a plant in China, as we speak, to make cars and trucks to > ship to the US. ;) Probably with a GM badge! Better do a bit more research if you believe that 'most Japanese cars are made in the US.' The fact is most are imported and, except for those made in the GM/Toyota plant and some of Hondas cars, the majority are merely assemble in the US of mostly imported parts. Look at the first number of the VIN, '4' and '5' are only US assembled. Those with a '1' are the only ones built in the US of mostly American parts. mike hunt > gosinn@gmail.com wrote in news:1136137250.649602.217290 > @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Heck, most Japanese cars are built in the USA anyway. > Better do a bit more research if you believe that 'most Japanese cars are > made in the US.' The fact is most are imported and, except for those made [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > mike hunt My '03 Honda Accord VIN number starts with a "1" and as I recall the window sticker showed over 70% US content with the transmission being the one major component imported from Japan. The engine was built in the US. Honda sells t Which is more "American", a Ford Fusion built in Mexico on a Mazda platform or a Honda Accord built in the US based on a Honda California design ? It is getting very hard to tell. GM is closing factories in the US while ramping up engine production in China. Maybe the Chinese 3.5L will have fewer problems than the US 3.4L V-6 ????? It is also a little funny that the Chevrolet Equinox uses the China built V-6 while it's sister vehicle the Saturn Vue gets a Honda USA built V-6. John > GM is closing factories in the US while ramping up engine production > in China. Maybe the Chinese 3.5L will have fewer problems than the US > 3.4L V-6 ????? If the Chinese made 3.5 has fewer problems than the 3.4 it's not because of better manufacturing quality in China but because the 3.5 is a better designed engine. > > GM is closing factories in the US while ramping up engine production > > in China. Maybe the Chinese 3.5L will have fewer problems than the US [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > better manufacturing quality in China but because the 3.5 is a better > designed engine. I'll be kind of surprised if it does since the 3.4 really does not have a lot of problems. Nor does the 3.1, or the 3.8. Notwithstanding the intake gasket issue these motors all run pretty problem free. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net As I said in my post, Honda is the ONLY foreign manufacture to actually makes cars like the Accord in the US of mostly American parts. You are correct about the Fusion, but Ford builds at least 80% of the vehicles it sells in the US, in the US. The big difference is Japanese corporation do not pay US corporate income taxes on the profits earned on the cars it sells in the US while GM and Ford do, even on the ones they build in Mexico. mike hunt >> Better do a bit more research if you believe that 'most Japanese cars are >> made in the US.' The fact is most are imported and, except for those [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > John > Maybe the Chinese 3.5L will have fewer problems than the US 3.4L > V-6 ????? That Chinese engine will Wok. > The fact is most are imported and, except for those made > in the GM/Toyota plant and some of Hondas cars, the majority are merely > assemble in the US of mostly imported parts. Not true of Toyota and Honda for starters. That may be your opinion but the facts prove otherwise. Indeed many Honda models have a '1,' made in the US of at least 70% America parts, most Toyotas assembled today in the US have a '5,' assembled in the US of less than 40% American parts. I.E. the Camry and the Tundra mike hunt >> The fact is most are imported and, except for those made >> in the GM/Toyota plant and some of Hondas cars, the majority are merely >> assemble in the US of mostly imported parts. > Not true of Toyota and Honda for starters. Well folks, thanks for the lively conversation. We bought a Sienna. Same price or less than a GM minivan. Side airbags standard all around, not on GM. 6 year powertrain warranty, not GM. High resale value, not GM. I am in full agreement that there is a quality perception issue with GM. There new products are up to par. It is assembled in Indiana with 85% American componets and 10% Japanese. How about GM, Chinese 3.5 V-6 engines ? > That may be your opinion but the facts prove otherwise. Indeed many Honda > models have a '1,' made in the US of at least 70% America parts, most [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >> assemble in the US of mostly imported parts. > > Not true of Toyota and Honda for starters. > Well folks, thanks for the lively conversation. > > We bought a Sienna. Same price or less than a GM minivan. We all make mistakes Howard. No need to apologize. We assumed you'd decide to take the cheap route. You made it clear that looks and style weren't important to you. That's when it became clear that you'd opt for the Sienna. Ugh! > Side airbags I've posted a link to some interesting feedback about those side airbags you boast about. I hope you're sitting when you read it! > standard all around, not on GM. 6 year powertrain warranty, not GM. Ummm, Howard, there's a reason for the need for that 6 year warranty. Didn't anyone tell you about that? > High > resale value, not GM. In Japan perhaps. Not here though. Buying a Sienna is a bit like buying a Lada in the old days. > I am in full agreement that there is a quality > perception issue with GM. There new products are up to par. It is assembled > in Indiana with 85% American componets and 10% Japanese. How about GM, > Chinese 3.5 V-6 engines ? Howard, they're waiting for you over at alt.autos.toyota. You can look forward to many years of posting with them, trying to find solutions to all your problems. Good Luck and enjoy the Sienna experience! To get you prepared for your adventures, I'll post a few informative links to owner feedback: Here's a link to an ongoing report from a Sienna owner: http://philip.greenspun.com/materialism/cars/sienna Here's another interesting site Howard: http://www.carsurvey.org/viewcomments_review_52713.html And another: http://www.mycarsucks.com/rants/toyota/2004_toyota_sienna.htm And some interesting owner reviews: http://www.carreview.com/cat/automobiles/minivans/toyota/PRD_212_1530crx.aspx And everyone's favorite "EdmundsdotCom" : http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.ef15db9/1624 Yep, you got what you paid for Howard. Enjoy your new friends over at the Toyota forum. They're going to be hearing lots from you. ;-) Buy A Robot And Save America Cost ignorance of the logistics, the supply chain and manufacturing can sink a company--and even a nation. There is endless talk of how low Chinese wages can save your company, and that could be true. But there has been almost no talk of how industrial robotic technology, which is getting better every day, can save your company--especially with prices dropping as they are. Close to 15,000 industrial robots, worth more than $900 million, have been purchased in North America. These figures are on track to double--then double again--at which point the U.S. might catch up with Japan. This would decrease the need to outsource many manufacturing and distribution jobs to China. Industrial robots can't speak English or Chinese, but they can communicate very well with their controllers--something they do 24/7, with no vacations and no health care. They don't receive a pension after they're retired, either. Instead, they get recycled or remanufactured and go to work again. The average wage for a U.S. warehouse or distribution worker is around $15 per hour (plus benefits). The average wage for this same work in China is about $3 per hour. The average wage for a skilled UAW U.S. automobile worker is $25 to $30 per hour, plus the staggering costs of health care coverage and retirement. The average cost per hour to operate an industrial robot is, "30 cents per hour," according to Ron Potter, director of robotic technologies of Factory Automation Systems. Even if this figure is doubled to 60 cents and includes a vision system, a software package and yearly maintenance, it is still only one-fifth the cost per hour of a Chinese laborer. It is more like one-fiftieth as costly as a General Motors assembler. Is it possible that GM, Ford Motor and a host of other U.S. manufacturers, distribution-center operators and warehouse managers should look more closely at industrial robots? There is, of course, an initial purchase and installation cost (approximately $60,000), but this can be amortized in a few years. After that, the cash flow is impressive. Moreover, many of the tools a robot needs, such as end effectors (grippers for instance), have to be matched in their costs against tools used by manual labor. Some 45% of the robots that have been purchased in North America in 2005 have been materials-handling robots. In the logistics domain for instance, industrial robots can deliver consistent quality in demanding applications, such as mixed-load palletizing. In a distribution or manufacturing center, this may involve individual pallets that must each be stacked with a variety of products in a specific way. Robots do this well, consistently and economically, according to Kevin Kozuszek, a manager for Kuka Robotics. The advantages are not merely in higher productivity but in significantly reduced labor costs and increased quality control. In 2000, an individual robot cost one-fifth what it would have cost in 1990. The prices continue to drop, and some manufacturers and distributors have gotten the message. According to Donald Vincent, the director of the Robot Industry Association, North American manufacturers have "increased their purchases by 30% as of the third-quarter 2005 over 2004." snip > Buy A Robot And Save America > Industrial robots can't speak English or Chinese, but they can communicate >very well with their controllers--something they do 24/7, with no vacations >and no health care. They don't receive a pension after they're retired, >either. Instead, they get recycled or remanufactured and go to work again. Another thing robots don't do - they don't buy cars. > The average wage for a U.S. warehouse or distribution worker is around $15 >per hour (plus benefits). The average wage for this same work in China is >about $3 per hour. The average wage for a skilled UAW U.S. automobile worker >is $25 to $30 per hour, plus the staggering costs of health care coverage >and retirement. I was just looking at a new AWD Chev Equinox and on the window next to the window sticker it said in big bold letters "06 Equinox an AMERICAN REVOLUTION". Next to this was the required window sticker which said that the engine was made in China and the transmission and drive components were made in Japan. There might be a revolution going on at Chev but it isn't "American". It's interesting how corporate GM can go all over the world for the cheapest parts and labor but their workers in Flint are pretty much limited to the local Flint labor market totally dominated, of course, by GM. There may be a global labor market for GM but there is no such thing for the average production worker whither he is in China or Michigan. The difference between a robot and a worker? One is a machine and the other is a human being. It's as simple as that. > I was just looking at a new AWD Chev Equinox and on the window next to > the window sticker it said in big bold letters "06 Equinox an [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > were made in Japan. There might be a revolution going on at Chev but > it isn't "American". Interesting indeed that so little of the Equinox is actually a US made product. It seems that GM, Ford and Chrysler are all going out of their way to alienate what remains of their core repeat customers, the "Buy American" crowd. Toyota, Honda, Hyundai and others are all investing in the US by building factories and engineering centers here while GM & Ford shut down US facilities and open new ones elsewhere. John Honda is the ONLY foreign manufacture who is actually making vehicle in the US of American parts. ALL of the others are only assembling vehicles in the US, of mostly imported parts. Why is OK for American consumes to buy from foreign manufactures to take advantage of things made in low wage countries, but not OK for manufactures to do likewise? Mike Hunt >> I was just looking at a new AWD Chev Equinox and on the window next to >> the window sticker it said in big bold letters "06 Equinox an [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > John > Honda is the ONLY foreign manufacture who is actually making vehicle in the > US of American parts. ALL of the others are only assembling vehicles in the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Mike Hunt I don't have a problem with it, but the practice does call into question the basis of any remaining Buy American sentiment on the part of consumers. Toyota is close behind Honda in establishing US production bases for their North American market engine and transmission manufacturing. "Toyota Motor Corp., the world's second-largest automaker, said it will spend $120 million and hire 150 more workers to boost production of transmissions at a West Virginia factory to support North American sales growth. The Buffalo, West Virginia, plant will produce an additional 240,000 automatic transmissions starting in 2007, Toyota said in a statement today. The expansion is the fifth for the factory, which opened in 1998. The plant will have more than 1,150 workers and total investment of $920 million with this move, the company said." (http://www.usajobs.org/viewarticle.jsp?articleuid=11156435466011027493607) Interestingly enough, one of the big issues with a potential Delphi strike is that Delphi has become a significant US supplier to the Asian transplant factories and could loose a lot of business long term if a big production disruption happens. Like it or not, it is a worldwide marketplace now and the major corporations are really trans-national in nature and practice. Their ties to original home countries become ever more tenuous. John That is true enough but my response was in reply to those that suggest the vehicles Toyota has for sale in the US today, are made in the US. That is factually not true as I pointed out. Personally I could not care less where Americans choose to spend their money. As for me I believe, as do the people in Japan, that is better for me to support domestic tax paying corporations and the millions of workers in my own country. I will no longer, as I did many many times in the past, buy cars not made in the US or by a domestic company. Domestics too will have to out source to low age counties for parts if they are to compete in this growing market. Unfortunate domestics will need to lower their wages and benefits down to the level of those worker in the import brands assembly plants as well. All in all the American worker looses in the end by his ever growing habit of buying foreign products. I wonder how many of the guys in the NG will loose their jobs, or benefits, when the Americans that buy their product or service loose their job? I know people who work for Honda in Ohio, they are not happy with the way they are treated by Honda. Rumors of joining a union are on the rise among the workers there. mike hunt >> Honda is the ONLY foreign manufacture who is actually making vehicle in >> the US of American parts. ALL of the others are only assembling vehicles [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > John > I wonder how many of the guys in the NG will > loose their jobs, or benefits, when the Americans that buy their product or > service loose their job? Although I'm in Canada I also like to buy a local product, but local to me is defined as NAFTA and if it's one of the big 3 so much the better. However I'm now finding the designs of the big 3 are not what I desire. So my current choice is not the big 3. Fortunately my current 11 yr old NAFTA produced car (Chrysler Concord), actually assembled in Canada with parts from all 3 NAFTA countries is good for more use and I love it's handling with good fuel mileage and adequate performance for me. So I'm waiting out the big 3, however if my now almost valueless car starts failing I may have no choice but to buy outside the big 3. > The average wage for a U.S. warehouse or distribution worker is around $15 > per hour (plus benefits). The average wage for this same work in China is [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > hour," according to Ron Potter, director of robotic technologies of Factory > Automation Systems. You have discovered the secret The japs have discovered this a long time ago They need a lot less people to build the cars as well have a lot less quality problems because of this The same is true for a lot of other things than cars It is really interesting that the arguments against robots that they are taking jobs from real people were the same arguments by the same ignoramouses as those against bulldosers and such in the past Robots can go into dangerous environments like mines The real truth is that robots will i the future make all our lives better and take away the need for repetitive boring jobs Interestingly enough then factories dominated by robots are much more tidy and clean than the same operated by humans The robots stick to the work at hand and are not playing around with politics or social events The main issue is the ownership of the robots the distribution of the welth they create The unions have to realize that if GM does not put in robots that takes away work from its union workers all their workers will lose their jobs and not just some of them because the japs are using robots The japs have discovered this a long time ago In japan the population decreased last year and they are not worried because they are relying on the robots in the future no need to increase the population it is much better to let the current population get better benefits Interestingly enough those using illegal immigrants or sending work off to china etc are going to lose against those who use robots It is basically the same situation that caused the civil war between the north and the south all over again the illegals and union workers being the slaves and the robots being the industrialized north Why would you pay someone to take box after box and put it in a bigger box, move it to another location if you can have a machine do it for you a. pay someone s to move the boxes s can only work between 9 and 5 s needs holidays s may get sick s may go on strike s costs $p per hour s ruins x boxes a month s needs light to see the boxes s needs the correct temperature s needs healthy environment s needs entertainment b. get a robot r to move the boxes r can work 24 hours a day r needs no holidays r may not get sick but needs proper maintenance r does not go on strike r costs $p/100 per hour r ruins x/1000 boxes a month r needs no light to see the boxes r needs no special temperature r needs no healthy environment r needs no entertainment You ahve not been in a modern stamping/assembly plant, obvioudly. Every manufacture building vehicles today in the US uses robots for the majority of pre assembly line production. Primary because OSHA and EPA regulations. LOL mike hunt >> The average wage for a U.S. warehouse or distribution worker is around >> $15 [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > The real truth is that robots will i the future make all our lives > better and take away the need for repetitive boring jobs > But the Sienna is such an ugly, ugly, bland, vanilla looking machine. > Has the automotive world come down to making sacrifices such as this > for some people? Choosing blandness over good looks for perceived > resale value? Man, I'd hate to see the wives of Howard and John, if > this is what they base their decisions on! I'd rather have a trophy > car/wife with lower value when I'm done with her! <lol> Are you saying that you think the current GM minivans are good looking? John > Are you saying that you think the current GM minivans are good looking? > > John John, they are absolutely drop-dead gorgeous compared to the hideous Sienna! <lol> > Man, I'd hate to see the wives of Howard and John, if > this is what they base their decisions on! I'd rather have a trophy > car/wife with lower value when I'm done with her! <lol> I hope you have a good looking expensive divorce attorney as well. > > Man, I'd hate to see the wives of Howard and John, if > > this is what they base their decisions on! I'd rather have a trophy > > car/wife with lower value when I'm done with her! <lol> > > I hope you have a good looking expensive divorce attorney as well. That pretty much confirms my hunch John. Some people will accept bland and ugly to save a buck. ;-) You have to lighten up John and enjoy life a little. Learn to live with a few flaws. Beauty always has a few pimples from time-to-time. I am a little sour with GM, admittedly. They have had a number of problems with engines, and earlier with transmissions, and have not really been too quick to step up to the plate and make good on them. Toyota has a pretty good reputation as a company. Toyota has had some engine problems in the recent past which they claim came from poor maintenance. Whatever you buy, change your oil and filter religiously, and maintain your tranny. I personally may not buy another GM in the near future. I can only hope they will get their act together soon. I wouldnt advise you to get either one. I hate mini vans and SUVs. They are a big nuisance on the road and parked. When in a parking lot I go out of my way not to park next to one because you cant see around them when backing out, its like trying to look around a brick wall. And the annoying thing is when I park they arent there yet when I come out of the store what in the hell do you think has parked next to me? Yeh a damn mini van or SUV. And then going down the road being behind one is a pain in the a.s. Or if they are behind you for some reason the drivers think its ok to tail gate just because they can see over top of you. Then you have the perverts who like to pull up to you at the stop lights and peer down into cars trying to be nosey and see what they can see. Yep vans an SUVs I hate them. Get a car and forget about the perversion of driving a mini van. I actually think they should all be rounded up and set fire to. > My wife & I are looking at minivans. We can get some real good prices on a > GM cars. Having said that, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Almost bought one but the warranty excluded pulling a trailer, like my Hobie > Cat. > I wouldnt advise you to get either one. I hate mini vans and SUVs. I do too...for myself, that is. I think the original poster would do well with either the Sienna or a GM mini-van. It's likely that the Sienna would hold up better (it's a Toyota) and the Toyota (and Honda model) are certainly much higher rated by CR than the GM mini-vans. But initial cost should not be ignored. The important thing, though is too get a mini-van (or SUV) and not a car. I don't understand why anyone would buy a car. Cars are such a pain in the butt to deal with in parking lots. You can barely see some of them, they are so small, and if you happen to roll over one it makes that disgusting noise like when you squash a cockroach. Yuck. And I don't care what the tire companies say about how tough their tires are, go over enough cars and eventually you will damage your tires. And they are not cheap to replace, either. Cars. What a damned nuisance. I hate 'em. Ought to be illegal. No one should buy them. Besides, everyone knows that people who buy them have tiny private parts. Big is good. >I wouldnt advise you to get either one. I hate mini vans and SUVs. They are > a big nuisance on the road and parked. When in a parking lot I go out of [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > Hobie >> Cat. > I wouldnt advise you to get either one. I hate mini vans and SUVs. They are > a big nuisance on the road and parked. When in a parking lot I go out of my [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > Hobie > > Cat. SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up unneccesary road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they should be collected scrapped and melted down and remade into cars. > SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up unneccesary > road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they should be collected > scrapped and melted down and remade into cars. The dam things are always in the way. At intersections, in front of you, they block a safe view. The high ones should have a foot or two chopped off of them. I love it when they can't park in a low entry parking garage. <:) > > SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up unneccesary > > road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they should be collected [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I love it when they can't park in a low entry parking garage. > <:) Many poor drivers drive SUV's and Van's merely as a means of self protection from their poor driving habits. Others buy them to alleviate their feelings low self esteem and inferiority. Yet others buy them as a weapon. But methinks most of them buy them for their utilitarian nature. > > > SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up unneccesary > > > road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they should be collected [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > a weapon. But methinks most of them buy them for their utilitarian > nature. You are so true, many drive them because of small penises or small breast sizes. Seems like it would be cheaper to get breasts implants for $5-6k as opposed to spending 20-40k on an oversized vehicle. > You are so true, many drive them because of small penises or small breast > sizes. Seems like it would be cheaper to get breasts implants for $5-6k as > opposed to spending 20-40k on an oversized vehicle. LMAO! You may have something there. I've never heard of anyone getting killed after being hit by a bad driver's small boobs or penis! The same can't be said for being hit by their SUV or van. > > > > SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up > unneccesary [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > You are so true, many drive them because of small penises or small breast > sizes. And many conplain about them for the same reasons. Dave > Many poor drivers drive SUV's and Van's merely as a means of self > protection from their poor driving habits. Others buy them to alleviate > their feelings low self esteem and inferiority. Yet others buy them as > a weapon. But methinks most of them buy them for their utilitarian > nature. You are probably right, although I know a few who buy large SUVs for their safety. One of these, a lady, has driven off snowy roads a few times and she has been rear ended a few times because she drives so slow and wimpy. > You are probably right, although I know a few who buy large SUVs for > their safety. > One of these, a lady, has driven off snowy roads a few times and she > has been rear ended a few times because she drives so slow and wimpy. The most recent studies seem to indicate that the safety issue of being wrapped inside more steel, attributed to SUV's, is negated by their higher likelihood to roll over in even minor collisions. This was just mentioned again today on the early morning news. >> > SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up >> > unneccesary road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > buy them as a weapon. But methinks most of them buy them for their > utilitarian nature. A few years back, a lady driving an SUV (Escalade I think) and yep talking on a cell phone was too distracted to stop at a red light and thus rear ended a stopped Honda Civic (who was waiting for the red light) at about 50 mph, killing 2 innocent children in the back seat. 5000 pounds at 50mph versus a 2000 pound car. Physics. If the lady were in a 2000 pound car herself (instead of a huge SUV), the kids would have survived, most likely. Tonight on my way home, a Chevy Tahoe was trying to make a left turn from the right lane. He had missed the left turning lane altogether, and was sitting in the regular forward lane and was thus impeding the traffic trying to go straight (light was green). But he couldn't turn left because there was a huge slew of traffic already in the left turning lane who weren't going to let this jackball in. Did he simply go straight and then turn around somewhere up the road? No. He waited there half a minute until the left turning lane was almost empty, then he made a left turn and almost crashed into a car that was turning left fromt he left turn lane. All the while there was a backup of cars wanting to go straight (and they had a green light), who were stuck behind this piece of fecal material. Everyone was honking. When he was finally out of the way (after making an illegal left turn), the light turned red, trapping us in a long cycle at that busy intersection. Kinda makes you understand why there are murders on the highways. Road rage? Or is it road revenge? Or justice? > >> > SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up > >> > unneccesary road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > Kinda makes you understand why there are murders on the highways. Road > rage? Or is it road revenge? Or justice? You seem to have a very selective memory. Why not tell us about some of the idiots driving cars that you see everyday? Or are you blind to them because they don't fit in to your SUV bashing attitude. Dave >>> > SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up >>> > unneccesary road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > Kinda makes you understand why there are murders on the highways. Road > rage? Or is it road revenge? Or justice? What if the person in the Honda had been driving a safe car? I saw a Honda rear ended by a Bonneville and the front wheels of the Bonneville were sitting in the Honda's rear seat. After the tow trucks pulled them part the Bonneville was driven to the side of the road, the Honda was drug onto a flatbed and the rest of its pieces tossed on top. Both were ~2000lb front wheel drive cars. I saw another small Honda rear ended by a small Toyota truck, the Toyota truck would could have driven all the way over but the driver stopped and put it in reverse and backed off. The Honda cut off the Toyota. Another one I was stuck on a 35mph street a few cars back from an intersection to a small side street and was stopped because the line of cars from a large intersetion were stopped at a red light and traffic was backed up that far. A guy in a little Honda came through the gap from the side street, didn't look at traffic coming the other way and was hit by a small Chevy Blazer. The Blazer driver hit the brakes and we heard the tires screech a bit and he hit the Honda in the passenger door. The Honda was thrown off the street and into a yard, landed on its wheels but the passenger door where was hitting the driver in the right arm, there was nothing left of the passenger seat. The Blazer had a bent bumper in the center, didn't even break the plastic grill. It was the old body style 2 door S10 blazer which weighed less than 2000 lbs (my 4x4 s10 truck was only 1500). Imagine if there had been passengers in those Hondas. It doesn't matter the weight of the other vehicle a Honda will loose, I won't ride in one myself. How about the little Honda that passed me on the highway, BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ! as it slowly creeped by me in the left lane, cut in front of me then slowed down 10mph so I had to swerve around to keep from hitting him. For every bad SUV driver stories as you can come up I can give you two small car bad driver stories. Like the silver Honda that always parks in the same row as me and is never straight between the lines, if people can park full size SUV's straight between the lines, why do Hondas have to have one tire on the line? This isn't a deliberate park crooked because I think my car is a sports car its a normal every dad coffin that lots of people drive to work and back because they vale gas more than their life. > It > was the old body style 2 door S10 blazer which weighed less than 2000 lbs > (my 4x4 s10 truck was only 1500). 1500kg maybe, but not 1500 lbs. Seems to me the Blazer has hovered around 3500-3800 lbs forever. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net > > It > > was the old body style 2 door S10 blazer which weighed less than 2000 lbs [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Seems to me the Blazer has hovered around 3500-3800 lbs forever. So true. I noticed the big error in the weights quoted, but felt it just indicated the accuracy (?) of the story. By the way the original VW Beattle weighted 1,600 lbs. The 1970-4 Datsun 510 weighted 2,000 lbs.- I had them. >> > It >> > was the old body style 2 door S10 blazer which weighed less than 2000 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > By the way the original VW Beattle weighted 1,600 lbs. > The 1970-4 Datsun 510 weighted 2,000 lbs.- I had them. I'll have to go check the door sticker again but it seems to me my s10 was around 1500. > What if the person in the Honda had been driving a safe car? > I saw a Honda rear ended by a Bonneville and the front wheels of the > Bonneville were sitting in the Honda's rear seat. After the tow trucks > pulled them part the Bonneville was driven to the side of the road, the > Honda was drug onto a flatbed and the rest of its pieces tossed on top. > Both were ~2000lb front wheel drive cars. Must have been a Honda Civic with the short rear. All such designs are unsafe in the rear when rear ended, regardless of the make. I believe GM sells a car like the Civic; probably built in Asia. >> What if the person in the Honda had been driving a safe car? >> I saw a Honda rear ended by a Bonneville and the front wheels of the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the make. I believe GM sells a car like the Civic; probably built in > Asia. The only one of the three I described that was the real short was the one hit in the passenger door. The one rear ended by the Bonneville was a regular 4 door with a truck and a fairly new model as well. The truck was laying on the other side of the highway and was one of the parts they threw on the truck after they drug the rest of the car on. Highway was shut down the whole time so I had nothing else to do but sit there and watch. > A few years back, a lady driving an SUV (Escalade I think) and yep > talking on a cell phone was too distracted to stop at a red light and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > were in a 2000 pound car herself (instead of a huge SUV), the kids would > have survived, most likely. That's true, but what the big SUV people don't realize is that they are in more single vehicle accidents (going off the road) and the death rate is high. Generally they corner poorly and have little crush zone. Now that there are so many large SUVs, about 50% around here, they are frequently crashing into one another. The results are terrible, all are usually killed. One of the advantages of keeping my oldie Concord is the fairly large crush zones at each end. It's that crush zone that absorbs the crash and saves the occupants. A stiff block of steel is no protection when hitting a solid object such as a tree or lamp post. The nuts driving many of these large SUVs often follow far too close. When I can't let them ahead I usually leave more room in front of me so there is enough stopping space for both of is. If the road is quite curved and dry pavement I sometimes gradually speed up on each curve to the left and quickly shake them off. My they often hate that, because I've seen them almost lose it on the curves trying to keep on my bumper, which is quite impossible given my car's terrific cornering ability. Eventually when they catch and pass on a straight I have a laugh as they often shake their fist at me; for leading them astray I assume. > > SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up unneccesary > > road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they should be collected [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I love it when they can't park in a low entry parking garage. > <:) I love it too when they fly around and pull into a low ceiling garage entrance and the whole top roof and windshield gets smashed in. All because they are speeding like mainiacs thinking they are behind the wheel of a sports car and not paying attention because either they are on their cell phones or to busy with unruly kids who need to be dropped off at soccer practice. Spam Hater <iHate@spam.net> wrote in news:iHate-441240.23103601012006 @news.telus.net: >> SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up unneccesary >> road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they should be collected [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I love it when they can't park in a low entry parking garage. > <:) My wife and I were trying to park at a Costco. We went down the one-way aisle and were delayed by some bitch in the proverbial SUV (an Acura car based SUV) and she was in fact talking on a cell phone (it was pressed in between her cheek and shoulder). It took sooo long for her to pull out of the space and exit because she was coming out of the space the WRONG way! The parking spaces are angled at like a 70 degree angle, and she was trying to manuever this thing out of the space the WRONG way while gabbing on the phone! She'd move the wheel a bit, pull backwards a ways, then move the wheel some more. The whole stupid maneuver was complicated by her continual cell phone use. If she weren't talking on the cell phone A: she probably would have realized she was coming out of the space wrong and B. the maneuver wouldn't have taken so long. So when she finally did manage to get pulled out (and now facing the wrong way on one way aisle), I had to drive to the side so she'd have room to pass me (these aisles are one way single lane). I opened the window and proudly displayed my middle finger to her. And I honked. She gave me a nasty look, probably oblivious to her own stupidity. Oh, she never did get off the cellphone! Time to get my high blood pressure medicine refilled. While on the subject of cell phones, why does every a.shole think he's some VIP, like the President of the United States, who has to have a constant open communications link? At restaurants, there are many a.sholes who rudely answer their cell phones while eating. It's rude to their companions and to other diners. Then there are the a.sholes in movie theaters who think if they talk in a "hushed" tone, then they won't bother anyone! My blood pressure is rising. While on the subject of cell phones, why does every a.shole > think he's some VIP, like the President of the United States, who has to > have a constant open communications link? I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum. Try as I may, I can't understand the enticement of cell phones, especially for guys my age (40's and climbing...). I've been asked why I don't have a cell. Why the hell would I voluntarily pay for my own ball and chain? Driving time, being out of the house / office, is MY time. Any annoying noise-making device that threatened that little bit of peace & quiet would be dealt with decisively. Unless I'm on the <expletive> clock, earning money, no intrusion is welcome, let alone paid for out of pocket. Jeez... At restaurants, there are > many a.sholes who rudely answer their cell phones while eating. It's > rude to their companions and to other diners. Then there are the > a.sholes in movie theaters who think if they talk in a "hushed" tone, > then they won't bother anyone! My blood pressure is rising. Spam Hater <i...@spam.net> wrote in news:iHate-441240.23103601012006 @news.telus.net: > > While on the subject of cell phones, why does every a.shole > > think he's some VIP, like the President of the United States, who has to [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > a.sholes in movie theaters who think if they talk in a "hushed" tone, > > then they won't bother anyone! My blood pressure is rising. I'm with you all the way on this. Hell, even elementary school kids are chatting on their cells on the way to school. It's absurd really. Too many people are caught up with what they naievely view as their own self importance. It's really a problem of low self-esteem and they have the mistaken perception that the cellphone makes them look important. Sad really. > While on the subject of cell phones, why does every a.shole > think he's some VIP, like the President of the United States, who has to > have a constant open communications link? In supermarkets while dodging cell phoning shoppers I couldn't help but overhear a few conservations. All I ever heard was trash talk, like: "I'm now buying xxx, what are you doing?" Perhaps spouse at home was guiding the shopper! <:) >> While on the subject of cell phones, why does every a.shole >> think he's some VIP, like the President of the United States, who has [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "I'm now buying xxx, what are you doing?" > Perhaps spouse at home was guiding the shopper! <:) There are many, many knuckleheads out there who are in serious need of having their cell phones forcibly rammed up their a.ses. Yesterday, at the post office (I just needed stamps), a young lady was at the only open window, shipping about 5 items to 5 different addresses. The stupid bitch postal clerk, instead of telling the lady to pack her own items over on the table off to the side so she can help other customers, was actually helping the lady pack the items! 5 items. The postal clerk was wrapping the stuff in bubble wrap, putting peanut pack in the box, and taping boxes, the whole bit. Then the young lady's cell phone rings, and she actually answers it! She's gabbing on the cell phone while the postal clerk is wrapping HER stuff! I was livid. I rudely told the clerk to get me a book of stamps and that this isn't a full service "pack and ship" place like Mail Boxes, etc.. I was pissed. The clerk actually said to me: "well she was here first!" So I said, "yeah, but she should wrap her own items!" All the while, the lady was still gabbing on the cell phone (rude bitch). Time to grease up the cell phone. Alas American do not want to buy small cars. If they did more small cars would be sold and the small cars that are available would not be getting bigger with every model change. There are plenty of small cars offered by the imports and domestics but even the greatest growth in Toyota total sales, over the past five years, has been in SUVs and trucks not cars. Look at Honda they have tried to make a 'truck' out of the Accord in an effort to get some of the growing truck revenue ;) mike hunt >> SUV and Mini Van owners should be taxed more for taking up unneccesary >> road space. They shouldnt be burned though, they should be collected [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I love it when they can't park in a low entry parking garage. > <:) > Alas American do not want to buy small cars. If they did more small cars > would be sold and the small cars that are available would not be getting [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > mike hunt Nothing wrong with big cars, but SUVs and Mini vans have to go...there is just know place for them. > > Alas American do not want to buy small cars. If they did more small cars > > would be sold and the small cars that are available would not be getting [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Nothing wrong with big cars, but SUVs and Mini vans have to go...there is > just know place for them. Go ahead.....hold your breath. Dave Can we assume you do not have a wife and four or five children? LOL mike hunt >> > Alas American do not want to buy small cars. If they did more small > cars [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Dave > Alas American do not want to buy small cars. If they did more small cars > would be sold and the small cars that are available would not be getting > bigger with every model change. Unfortunately that's true. Now I'm interested in a smaller sized wagon. Not many around, the vans and SUVs have killed them. So it may have to be VW or Subaru. >>Alas American do not want to buy small cars. If they did more small cars >>would be sold and the small cars that are available would not be getting [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and SUVs have killed them. > So it may have to be VW or Subaru. Check out the Pontiac Vibe, or the Toyora Matrix (same car) I have one and it is the best car I've owned. It's classified as a wagon, but looks sportier that a typical wagon. It's based on the Toyota Corolla, so it has a good pedigree. John > Check out the Pontiac Vibe, or the Toyora Matrix (same car) I have one > and it is the best car I've owned. It's classified as a wagon, but looks > sportier that a typical wagon. It's based on the Toyota Corolla, so it > has a good pedigree. Good suggestion I have, but too little trunk space and neither Vobe or Matrix hold a full sized spare, a definite requirement for my long distance driving in sometimes remote country on slippery and snowy roads. The Corolla sedan does appear to have wheel well room for a full sized spare. If the longer Corolla was produced as a wagon, that may do it. By the way if your suggestions did meet my needs I'd definitely not buy the Vibe. Better chance to get proper maintenance at the Toyota dealer, than at a GM dealer where there are limited staff knowledgeable on Toyota designs. > IMHO GM is huting because 20 -25 years ago, when my age group was buying > their first cars GM, Ford etc made some real junk. Ugly and poorly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Almost bought one but the warranty excluded pulling a trailer, like my Hobie > Cat. I have found Chrysler quality increasing continually since the 80s. My wife's 2001 V6 Sybring must be extremely good, no quality maintenance problems at all- 100% prefect. One can not begin to compare the vehicles sold by ANY manufacture today, foreign or domestic with those they each made ten, or even five, years ago. Every manufacture is building high quality vehicles today that will easily last to 200K or more given the proper maintenance. The only real difference among them is style and price, period. mike hunt >> IMHO GM is huting because 20 -25 years ago, when my age group was buying >> their first cars GM, Ford etc made some real junk. Ugly and poorly [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > My wife's 2001 V6 Sybring must be extremely good, no quality maintenance > problems at all- 100% prefect. > One can not begin to compare the vehicles sold by ANY manufacture today, > foreign or domestic with those they each made ten, or even five, years ago. > Every manufacture is building high quality vehicles today that will easily > last to 200K or more given the proper maintenance. The only real difference > among them is style and price, period. Correct. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.