Good God GM

GM needs some help!

http://money.cnn.com/index.html?cnn=yes

And before anyone calls me a GM basher, my dad worked as a mechanic there for 16 years so I grew up with Chevy in my blood. But the recent news is sad.

all domestic automakers need some help, especially gm and ford! so much for trucks keeping you afloat.

Yea Gm dealers are not doing so well anymore:(

GM will return to profit by Q3 '06 i'm predicting. The new car lineup is phenominal and prices have been lowered across the board. Once the healthcare costs get analyzed and the union FINALLY agrees to some sort of concessions we'll see a turn around.

GM will return to profit by Q3 '06 i'm predicting. The new car lineup is phenominal and prices have been lowered across the board. Once the healthcare costs get analyzed and the union FINALLY agrees to some sort of concessions we'll see a turn around.


It'll take longer than that to convince import buyers that it's OK to try a domestic again. They didn't lost consumer confidence overnight, and they won't get it back overnight either. I do agree that GM's new cars are very good, and compete well with imports. But by the same token, people who were previously soured on GM and went over to Toyota/Honda/etc. have no incentive to go back and (in their mind) take a risk on GM again. It'll take several years of sterling praise from the media and public to get domestics back on the shopping list for people like that.

It'll take longer than that to convince import buyers that it's OK to try a domestic again. They didn't lost consumer confidence overnight, and they won't get it back overnight either. I do agree that GM's new cars are very good, and compete well with imports. But by the same token, people who were previously soured on GM and went over to Toyota/Honda/etc. have no incentive to go back and (in their mind) take a risk on GM again. It'll take several years of sterling praise from the media and public to get domestics back on the shopping list for people like that.
I agree, but lower prices definitely wont hurt. I'm already trying to convince the GF to ditch the Volvo idea in favor of a new Tahoe :D

I agree, but lower prices definitely wont hurt. I'm already trying to convince the GF to ditch the Volvo idea in favor of a new Tahoe :D


Hehehehe... My fiancee has basically said she won't consider a GM car after bad experiences for her and her friends with them. :(
Although she does like the Solstice. :cool:

Hehehehe... My fiancee has basically said she won't consider a GM car after bad experiences for her and her friends with them. :(
Although she does like the Solstice. :cool:
Yea i think the GF already would have bought a Solstice if it were to come in an auto.

It'll take longer than that to convince import buyers that it's OK to try a domestic again. They didn't lost consumer confidence overnight, and they won't get it back overnight either. I do agree that GM's new cars are very good, and compete well with imports. But by the same token, people who were previously soured on GM and went over to Toyota/Honda/etc. have no incentive to go back and (in their mind) take a risk on GM again. It'll take several years of sterling praise from the media and public to get domestics back on the shopping list for people like that.

You are absolutely right. GM ruined its reputation through many years of pissing off their customer base. There's only two ways they're going to see a speedy recovery of those customers:

#1 - Toyota or Honda starts screwing up their QC badly.
#2 - GM starts putting their warranty where their mouth is and offers a MINIMUM of a standard 6 year 70k mile bumper to bumper warranty. 10 year 100k mile warranty would be even better.


I'm at a complete loss as to why GM doesn't do this. If their products really are as well made as they claim they are then the only thing they'll have to lose is profit on parts and the dealership's shop profits, but isn't that exactly why GM is in the trouble they are in today? Refusing to sacrifice short term profits for long term reputation (and eventually long term profits/market share)? GM is just too damn short sighted and a lot of it has to do with the mindset of modern day stockholders (profits now, not later)

Ouch -- can't dig that kind of change out of the living-room couch! Industry analysts attribute much of GM's woes to the simple fact that the automotive industry has become horribly competitive in recent years. New foreign competitors, wider product lines for all manufacturers, improving quality at all price points. It's tough for the best of them, and GM was arguably not among those "best."

GM seems to be developing better products, but sadly they seem to be always behind the curve. I'm in a Pontiac Solstice press car for a week, and it's a decent car in most respects. But Mazda just came out with a new Miata that's far more refined feeling in almost every way. Admittedly, the new Miata doesn't look as cool as Solstice, but awesome styling only gets an automaker so far. Eventually the customer is going to drive the car -- and it's competition too.

I wish GM the best. But you have to wonder about any business that basically goes from one turnaround plan to another.

__________________
AUTIV (http://www.autiv.com)
Performance-car news, reviews, and history

GM is just too damn short sighted and a lot of it has to do with the mindset of modern day stockholders (profits now, not later)

That's the problem with a lot of companies today. The shareholders will bleed a company dry tomorrow to make a buck today. And none of the CEO's have the balls to tell them that the actions that will make them that buck today may not be the best thing for the long term health of the company.

That's the problem with a lot of companies today. The shareholders will bleed a company dry tomorrow to make a buck today. And none of the CEO's have the balls to tell them that the actions that will make them that buck today may not be the best thing for the long term health of the company.I believe this to be true as well. GM is not alone in having to deal with this shareholder mentality. Instant gratification, I want it now!!!

:(

It'll take longer than that to convince import buyers that it's OK to try a domestic again. They didn't lost consumer confidence overnight, and they won't get it back overnight either. I do agree that GM's new cars are very good, and compete well with imports. But by the same token, people who were previously soured on GM and went over to Toyota/Honda/etc. have no incentive to go back and (in their mind) take a risk on GM again. It'll take several years of sterling praise from the media and public to get domestics back on the shopping list for people like that.
Thats exactly right, it'll take much longer than a few months to convince consumers they're good cars again...

As for GM building phenomenal cars thats rubbish...unless they're being compared with the turds they have been producing the last 3 decades. They still do not have the quality that toyota, honda or even nissan has. American car companies can't just build a car as good as the competition, they have to build BETTER than the competition to win back buyers. The fact that they're not yet as good is a bad sign. GM will probably bounce in and out of profitability for a few years. Unless they get serious about building good cars its not going to be good the next decade.

I say, bring the Camaro back and everything will be fine and dandy with GM. :D

That's the problem with a lot of companies today. The shareholders will bleed a company dry tomorrow to make a buck today. And none of the CEO's have the balls to tell them that the actions that will make them that buck today may not be the best thing for the long term health of the company.
Thats not true at all, I'm invested heavily in a variety of companies, myself and most of the people I know would rather have consistent long term results then money today. Its the CEO's and management who's stock options are tied directly with how they do next quarter that really screw up companies.

Toyota is a perfect example of a company that has focused on long term results and the outcome has been fantastic.

As for GM building phenomenal cars thats rubbish...unless they're being compared with the turds they have been producing the last 3 decades. :rolleyes:

Thats exactly right, it'll take much longer than a few months to convince consumers they're good cars again...

As for GM building phenomenal cars thats rubbish...unless they're being compared with the turds they have been producing the last 3 decades. They still do not have the quality that toyota, honda or even nissan has. American car companies can't just build a car as good as the competition, they have to build BETTER than the competition to win back buyers. The fact that they're not yet as good is a bad sign. GM will probably bounce in and out of profitability for a few years. Unless they get serious about building good cars its not going to be good the next decade.
According to JD Powers American cars have averaged better than Japanese cars in dependability over the last 3 years... You're just still falling victim to all the negative media american automakers get.... Toyota has recalls too :)

According to JD Powers American cars have averaged better than Japanese cars in dependability over the last 3 years... You're just still falling victim to all the negative media american automakers get.... Toyota has recalls too :)
Ummm...look at all the factors, both short term and long term dependability. American cars have definately faired better the last 2 or 3 years in short term reliability. Long term reliability (3+ years) they have not...granted the latest cars we obviously dont have the data available to make any firm conclusions. But I can tell you the interior quality and driveline refinement is still subpar for the most part. Especially interior qualities. My wifes 10 year old rav 4 has tighter gaps on the inside than my buddies 06 equinox. While my wife's car admitedly has more rattles and wind noise its got 100,000 miles, where his has about 5000...

American manufacturers have to build a better car if they want to win back buyers.

One more thing, Ford is building good interiors. Better than GM and Chrysler.

According to JD Powers American cars have averaged better than Japanese cars in dependability over the last 3 years... You're just still falling victim to all the negative media american automakers get.... Toyota has recalls too :)

Only car-illiterate people think 'all japanese cars are good'. I'd depend on a GM or Ford LONG before I'd depend on a Mitsubishi, for example.

Honda and Toyota are the big players that GM has to topple. They've done well in JD Power's initial quality surveys, but 90 days is a completely different ball game than, say, 90 months for example. Something that's wrong in the first 90 days is the fault of somebody at the factory. GM does well here (according to JD Power, at least). Where they haven't necessarily proven themselves is long term, where the people at the assembly plant matter very little - long term duraiblity/dependability/quality depends far more on how much the manufacturer cut costs 'under the surface', how well the car was engineered, etc.

And while JD Power is a good source, I don't recommend depending on them soley; I don't recommend depending on one source for information, ever, and this is no exception.

One more thing, Ford is building good interiors. Better than GM and Chrysler.
Are you kidding? Ford interiors are nasty.... The only Ford cars with half descent interiors right now are the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr and those are half DENSO (A.K.A. Toyota) parts. Chrysler IMHO has the best interiors currently, but my GTO is probably one of the best i've ever seen.

Have you ridden in (or pushed) a '88 Corsica or Lumina lately :lol:
Or what about a Pontiac Grand Am of around the same year...that's why people have a bad taste in their mouth about GM cars.

Ummm...look at all the factors, both short term and long term dependability. American cars have definately faired better the last 2 or 3 years in short term reliability. Long term reliability (3+ years) they have not...granted the latest cars we obviously dont have the data available to make any firm conclusions. But I can tell you the interior quality and driveline refinement is still subpar for the most part. Especially interior qualities. My wifes 10 year old rav 4 has tighter gaps on the inside than my buddies 06 equinox. While my wife's car admitedly has more rattles and wind noise its got 100,000 miles, where his has about 5000...

American manufacturers have to build a better car if they want to win back buyers.
But your wife's 10 year old RAV4 also has gerbils on a wheel instead of an engine and a trans thats lucky to survive 80k miles let alone 100k.

Are you kidding? Ford interiors are nasty.... The only Ford cars with half descent interiors right now are the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr and those are half DENSO (A.K.A. Toyota) parts. Chrysler IMHO has the best interiors currently, but my GTO is probably one of the best i've ever seen.
I'm not talking about what it looks like I'm talking about quality. Ford is using better interior parts than GM and Chrysler...do I care for the looks? Only on the 3 you mentioned...but the other cars have quality interiors.

Chrysler has decent looking interiors but the quality is horrid. In the 15 or so magnums, chargers, and 300's I've been in the overall fit and finish has been mediocre at best and sometimes downright poor.

If GM wants to do well it has to build GOOD cars that are specialized.
Here are the problems I most often here people complain about:

1) Bland exterior styling
2) Crappy interiors
3) Bad reliability (this, as we know, is more of a carry on from the old days.. but is still part of public perception).

The main thing is, GM has to make cars that it wants to stand out for it to change its perception. Seems like GM likes to make cars that are OKAY.... okay doesnt get the higher end customers.

Are you kidding? Ford interiors are nasty.... The only Ford cars with half descent interiors right now are the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr and those are half DENSO (A.K.A. Toyota) parts. Chrysler IMHO has the best interiors currently, but my GTO is probably one of the best i've ever seen.

I hate the new K-chassis Chrysler interiors... they look like they all look very similar and look like they came out of the Dodge Ram! (which is fine for a truck but not for a car!)

GM's GMT-800 Tahoe/Escalade/etc interior looked and felt cheap as hell (painted hollow plastic dash? come on!) but I must say my father in law's 04 Tahoe LT has far fewer squeeks and rattles than their 03 Expedition EB (which is less than 2 weeks away from being replaced by the Toyota Seqoia they have had on order). So the Expedition's interior, to me, looks nicer, but has not held up as well.

The GMT-900s seem to be poised to change that; they not only look nicer but will probably still hold up better than the Expedition. Then again I think Ford's only a year or two away from redesigning the Expedition again, aren't they?

But your wife's 10 year old RAV4 also has gerbils on a wheel instead of an engine and a trans thats lucky to survive 80k miles let alone 100k.
What?

What does power or lack ther of have to do with quality?

The motor has been pretty good, we had one problem with the car, an ignition module that went bad. Thats it, no other problems at all and for 100k miles thats great if you ask me. The module was 82 bucks and it took me about an hour to put it in. Not bad for 10 years of ownership. The engine and 5 speed manual are still going strong, the only disappointment I have with the car is the gas mileage which is about 23 or 24 on the hwy.

Have you ridden in (or pushed) a '88 Corsica or Lumina lately :lol:
Or what about a Pontiac Grand Am of around the same year...that's why people have a bad taste in their mouth about GM cars.

My first car was an '89 Grand Am. What a pile of sh*t.

I personally have lost faith in GM and won't be buying from them again unless they really turn things around. I must also admit that I've been impressed with Chrysler in the last couple of years.

Honda has been losing market share the last year. Toyota is the company that is kicking the most ass lately. Nissan continuers to have excellent profits also.

GM definately needs a big warranty to draw back scared consumers who got a total GM terd in the past. Their interiors are still not up to par, but I really do like a few of the new cars coming out from GM. I wish they went more crazy with the styling liek Chrysler did, and damn was it the right thing to do!!..... and better interiors even though there is an improvement lately. Their new SUV's are too wierd looking and too much like the previous versions. But the interiors look pretty damh good from the pics.

I hate the new K-chassis Chrysler interiors... they look like they all look very similar and look like they came out of the Dodge Ram! (which is fine for a truck but not for a car!)

GM's GMT-800 Tahoe/Escalade/etc interior looked and felt cheap as hell (painted hollow plastic dash? come on!) but I must say my father in law's 04 Tahoe LT has far fewer squeeks and rattles than their 03 Expedition EB (which is less than 2 weeks away from being replaced by the Toyota Seqoia they have had on order). So the Expedition's interior, to me, looks nicer, but has not held up as well.

The GMT-900s seem to be poised to change that; they not only look nicer but will probably still hold up better than the Expedition. Then again I think Ford's only a year or two away from redesigning the Expedition again, aren't they?

Thats exactly right...

In the 10 or 11 magnums, chargers and 300's I have been in/looked at 4 or 5 of them had loose fitting parts on the dash. It was ridiculous

But your wife's 10 year old RAV4 also has gerbils on a wheel instead of an engine and a trans thats lucky to survive 80k miles let alone 100k.

gerbils?

Let's see...

1996 Toyota Rav4: 2500 pounds, only motor available produced 120hp/130tq
1998 Chevy Tracker: 2550 pounds, only motor available produced 95hp/99tq

(couldn't find info on the 96 tracker, if it even existed, so I gave GM the benefit of comparing a 2 year newer model).

Yeah... Toyota sure was the underpowered choice.

Hmm...what sits in my driveway (or has in the past year anyhow).
2004 Chevrolet Trailblazer.
2002 Chevrolet Cavalier.
1994 Chevrolet Camaro.
1986 Chevrolet 3500.
1971 GMC C10.
1969 GMC C10.
1951 GMC 1/2 Ton.

I'd say we are pretty well gonna stick with them regardless of their woes.
Heck - even the '02 Cavalier is a decent car. I bought it for my wife when she was finishing up her nursing school, and it has been an excellent vehicle.

Their are definitely other cars I like, but I have had good fortune with my GM's. I like some Acura's (Honda, I know), Lexus IS300, several BMW's, and a couple of Volvo's. But, I live in a place that is still pretty rural, and about 3 miles from my house they are trying to develop it so hard so fast with all this "buy buy buy" mentality stuff. I am going to do what I can to support the country I enjoy living in by buying a non-imported vehicle - and instead of just supporting the "buy buy buy" support the working man. :cool:

I've driven a Toyota for a few years. Didn't have any recalls so I didn't spend that much time at a dealer. Which means less of a chance of a bad dealership experience, or them ****ing up the car. I read so much about the bad GM dealers, I am really reluctant to go to one, until I meet someone that works for one.

Someone needs to make a website for dealership review. Where people can type in the name/address of the dealership and rate their experience. Maybe Chris/Jason could do this, so we could then PM the member on here that made the good/bad comment and talk to them about it before we decide to make a purchase from that dealer.

Ford has a horrible safety record of the older f-150's sucking at front crash tests, and explorers having the tires blow off and killing people...then having Ford drag their feet to correct the problem, costing a few innocent lives. I like their Mustang, and their performance cars, but I don't think I could ever buy a Ford as a family car.

that was a weird move.... :shrug:

Ummm...look at all the factors, both short term and long term dependability. American cars have definately faired better the last 2 or 3 years in short term reliability. Long term reliability (3+ years) they have not...granted the latest cars we obviously dont have the data available to make any firm conclusions. But I can tell you the interior quality and driveline refinement is still subpar for the most part. Especially interior qualities. My wifes 10 year old rav 4 has tighter gaps on the inside than my buddies 06 equinox. While my wife's car admitedly has more rattles and wind noise its got 100,000 miles, where his has about 5000...

American manufacturers have to build a better car if they want to win back buyers.

Actually, Japanese cars have traditionally been made to be perfect as possible in the short term, at the expense of long term reliability. American cars have traditionally been reliable long term, but were put together as cheaply as possible. That's what created the entire "Japanese cars are quality-American cars are junk" mentality with the public. They see a near perfectly made Japanese car, then see an American car with uneven gaps and cheap materials. Perception is reality.

Japan has higher taxes and fees on cars as they get older, in order to keep people buying new cars and the industry moving. There comes a point where it's cheaper to buy a new car than to keep an older one. In addition to taxes, you had to replace timing belts (where we use longer lasting chains) at 50K miles, water pumps at not much higher, and most other components either crapped out or rusted out in timeframes much shorter than our cars here.

Japan has had to improve their cars for the long term since we in the US run our cars more miles than anyone else in the world, and tend to keep them longer. Everyone knows of someone who's Honda timing belt broke and destroyed the engine, but when was the last time you heard of an American built engine breaking a timing chain? (also betcha you's have far more "issues" with a '93 Supra or RX7 than you would a 93 Camaro or Mustang ;) ).

We here have had to improve superficial things such as interior materials, closer and even gaps between panels, and rattles resulting of natural settling of materials over time. All of this is superficial stuff, but as you see in previous posts on this thread by certain people, this is what passes for quality over actual problems with the car or how the car is screwed together.

In a way it's telling because if the only thing left for the industry to do is use better grained plastics in the interior and tighten up some dashboard gaps, then combined with the already better J.D.Power quality ratings, the industry is doing very well in this area.

If GM wants to do well it has to build GOOD cars that are specialized.
Here are the problems I most often here people complain about:

1) Bland exterior styling


See, this is what I don't understand about import guys who criticize the Domestics. How can anyone in their right mind drive a Toyota Camry and say "you know, those cars from the American Big 3 are just so darn boring to look at." I mean really.....:rolleyes: I could name a dozen vehicles with more inspiring/interesting designs than anything at Toyota and Honda, from GM divisions alone.

GM starts putting their warranty where their mouth is and offers a MINIMUM of a standard 6 year 70k mile bumper to bumper warranty. 10 year 100k mile warranty would be even better.

I can see where this could help public perception of quality, but in practice I don't see it as much of an incentive. I have purchased GM products almost exclusively for the last 30 years and I would estimate at least 50% of the time my problem is addressed by dealer service department as "normal operation/cannot duplicate." You have to fight tooth and nail to get them to even acknowledge a defect in the first place, then it takes three trips to get it fixed properly (if at all). And if you're lucky, they won't break/scratch/screw-up something else totally unrelated in the process. Warranties are only as good as those executing the repairs and my 30 years of experience is not at all favorable.

See, this is what I don't understand about import guys who criticize the Domestics. How can anyone in their right mind drive a Toyota Camry and say "you know, those cars from the American Big 3 are just so darn boring to look at." I mean really..... I could name a dozen vehicles with more inspiring/interesting designs than anything at Toyota and Honda, from GM divisions alone.

You are totally missing the bigger picture. If GM builds and equally bland ass car as say Honda (which they are still doing now), most consumers will choose Honda just for the fact of their past reliability compared to GM.

Now if GM can make a car that catches peoples attention, then it might be enough to surpass the boring ass Honda and the past quality proglems GM had.

GM needs to outbuild the competition. They are just not doing it. They still use the Japs as a benchmarkt to meet, not exceed in my opinion.

In that respect, cars are sometimes like the way us men perceive and pick out women.

Sometimes we like a fast and fun woman; we realize that she may not be the most dependable and we wouldn't want to live with her for the rest of our lives, but it's fun while it lasts.

Other times we just need to security of a bland but practical and dependable woman who makes life better in many ways even if she's not the most exciting person out there.

But nobody wants a woman that's unexciting AND undependable.

I read threads like this...those who have nothing to loose telling GM what's wrong with GM and what they have to do to be competitive and I can’t help but think about my experiences.

My family was a GM family and I remember them all. Our only mistake with a Ford car was a 1972 Ford LTD…it was a piece of crap and was quickly replaced by a 1970 Coupe DeVille. Other than that one mistake, we owned a ’56 BellAire, a ’63 Bonneville, a ’67 Delta 88, a ’69 Delta 88, then the LDT then various Cadillacs (at which point I was on my own). It was no surprise then than when it came time to buy my own first car, I turned to GM (oh…I forgot to mention my Uncle’s ’66 GTO tri-power; candy red with a white interior…God what a beautiful car).

Anyway, I put down $400 on a 1973 Firebird Formula 400 (Navaho orange with a white vinyl interior; my next two cars being a ’76 Trans Am (50th anniversary “Black/Gold special edition) and then a ’79 Black/Gold Special Edition Trans Am WS6 (both with tan vinyl interiors).

By the time I was on my third Firebird, I could tell you when the water pump was going to fail, when the transmission needed to be re-built and just about every other issue that was likely to come up and you know what? I couldn’t have cared less how often I had to deal with problems like that.

I loved those cars; as much as you can love a car…if the engines needed to be replaced every 10,000 miles I don’t think it would have made a difference to me; I’d have still bought and driven and loved them.

That’s why today, when I don’t even own a Camaro or Firebird, I connect with sites like this.

What’s the answer to GM’s problems? Well, in my “outsider’s opinion with nothing to loose; it’s finding a way to tap into that kind of passion for the vehicles they produce.

Actually, Japanese cars have traditionally been made to be perfect as possible in the short term, at the expense of long term reliability. American cars have traditionally been reliable long term, but were put together as cheaply as possible. That's what created the entire "Japanese cars are quality-American cars are junk" mentality with the public. They see a near perfectly made Japanese car, then see an American car with uneven gaps and cheap materials. Perception is reality.


This is a joke of a paragraph...you dont think Honda? Toyota or Nissan are reliable cars for the long term? They are MUCH more reliable than american cars, not only mechanically but asthetically as well. Fewer rattles, fewer interior pieces fall apart, parts last longer, its really not even close. American cars have been a joke for almost 3 decades. The Japanese build better cars especially for the long term...the only real exception to this was the trucks we built here, but now with Honda and Nissan ramping up their truck programs we'll see how long that lasts. Toyota has been a long time builder of trucks that are more reliable and cheaper to maintain than American trucks so one *** company has had us beat on that front for 20+ years.

Actually, to use Nissan in the same sentence as Toyota and Honda is ridiculous. Nissan is not a Japanese car company, they are French. Their quality isn't close to that of the Domestics, much less Toyota and Honda.

That they get a free ride, based on the fact that their "name" is Japanese, just makes me sick.

If you want to see the true definition of a horrible interior........... just go to your local Nissan dealership.

is not a Japanese car company, they are French

Well the Frenchies have the most profitable car company in the world, even if you hate their interiors.

This is a joke of a paragraph...you dont think Honda? Toyota or Nissan are reliable cars for the long term? They are MUCH more reliable than american cars, not only mechanically but asthetically as well. Fewer rattles, fewer interior pieces fall apart, parts last longer, its really not even close. American cars have been a joke for almost 3 decades. The Japanese build better cars especially for the long term...the only real exception to this was the trucks we built here, but now with Honda and Nissan ramping up their truck programs we'll see how long that lasts. Toyota has been a long time builder of trucks that are more reliable and cheaper to maintain than American trucks so one *** company has had us beat on that front for 20+ years.


I have to disagree with you. In the first 5 years of a cars life, I would expect a Japanese car to hold up better than an American car in terms of rattles and things. However, have you ever looked at a 80's Honda compared to a similar 80's GM car? The GM is much more likely to still have it's pieces in proper place in my experience. I've never seen a honda or toyota from the 80's that isn't rusting out, either the clock or radio doesn't work, window motors don't work, power locks don't work, etc etc.

I think Guion makes a very good point personally, but it's obviously determinded by your frame of reference.(I don't know many people who care about maintaining cars, and even 80's GM and Ford cars hold up better than japanese cars of the same period with the same crappy maintenance)

Actually, to use Nissan in the same sentence as Toyota and Honda is ridiculous. Nissan is not a Japanese car company, they are French. Their quality isn't close to that of the Domestics, much less Toyota and Honda.

That they get a free ride, based on the fact that their "name" is Japanese, just makes me sick.

If you want to see the true definition of a horrible interior........... just go to your local Nissan dealership.


Their European HQ is in France, but they are most definitely a Japanese company.

And if you think they're producing poor interiors, then I don't think you've been in a Nissan lately. :shrug: I rode in a friends Maxima recently, and it was very nice. And the G35 is frickin' sweet, as is it's sibling the 350Z. :cool:

Actually, to use Nissan in the same sentence as Toyota and Honda is ridiculous. Nissan is not a Japanese car company, they are French. Their quality isn't close to that of the Domestics, much less Toyota and Honda.

That they get a free ride, based on the fact that their "name" is Japanese, just makes me sick.

If you want to see the true definition of a horrible interior........... just go to your local Nissan dealership.

Nissan is not French. They own a part of Renault and Renault owns a part of them (essentially they own minority shares of each other for the purpose of sharing some ideas, kind of a smaller scale version of how Ford owns a portion of Mazda but not all of it).

However, I agree that Nissan's quality control hasn't been nearly as good in the last 5 years as it was in the 10 years or so before that, BUT,

Nissan is still better than the big 3 and nissan is the worst of the *** Big 3.

Also 80s american cars were junk compared with 80s *** cars...any car 20 years old if its had just one bad owner can screw it up...but my grandpa had a 83 el camino compared with my high school buddies 85 nissan the el camino was a pile....

What domestic sedan would you pick over a v-6, m6 Honda accord (for around the same amount of cash?)

Renault owns 44% of Nissan (controlling interest), whereas Nissan owns only 15% of Renault. That is why a frenchman was sent to run Nissan and not the other way around. Additionally there is only one chief executive for the "Renault-Nissan Alliance."

Renault owns 44% of Nissan (controlling interest), whereas Nissan owns only 15% of Renault. That is why a frenchman was sent to run Nissan and not the other way around. Additionally there is only one chief executive for the "Renault-Nissan Alliance."


Carlos Ghosn isn't a Frenchman. He's Lebanese.

Renault owns 44% of Nissan (controlling interest), whereas Nissan owns only 15% of Renault. That is why a frenchman was sent to run Nissan and not the other way around. Additionally there is only one chief executive for the "Renault-Nissan Alliance."

A 'Frenchman' does not run Nissan, and:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051125/AUTO01/511250411/1148 Renault owns 44 percent of Nissan, while Nissan owns 50 percent of Renault

Actually, to use Nissan in the same sentence as Toyota and Honda is ridiculous. Nissan is not a Japanese car company, they are French. Their quality isn't close to that of the Domestics, much less Toyota and Honda.

That they get a free ride, based on the fact that their "name" is Japanese, just makes me sick.

If you want to see the true definition of a horrible interior........... just go to your local Nissan dealership.

Ok...I can't quite let that swipe at Nissan go without mentioning a couple of things.

Ownership:
In 1999 Renault paid $5.4 billion for a controlling stake in Nissan (a 44% share and Nissan owns 50% of Renault). I would submit that to say Nissan today is either Japanese or French is too narrow of a statement especially since the CEO is a Brazilian-born Lebanese citizen

Quality:
From an earlier post of mine…
-----------------------------------------------------
Yes…Nissan has had some “quality” issues and they’ve addressed/are addressing them. They aren’t perfect and I don’t believe I’ve heard anyone say they or any other manufacturer is. However, the issues you are referring to are based on surveys done within the first 6, 12, and 18 months after Nissan built an entirely new plant in Mississippi (launching five new vehicles there) and re-designed about 80% of its factory in Tennessee launching five new models there as well; two of which had never been built in the US before and all of that happened in a three year period.

Do you have any concept of what the equivalent change at GM would be…do you think they might have a few issues to resolve??? Perhaps GM and Ford’s biggest problem is that they wouldn’t have the guts to try it or even know how to make it happen if they did want to try it.
-----------------------------------------------------

Personal Experience:

The leather seats of my 2000 Z28 (which I purchased new) began to crack within the fist year I had it. Now…I’m not a small guy and I do put a lot of wear and tear on the seat but I’ve never had that happen in any other car I’ve ever owned and I’ve owned several with leather interiors.

By the time the car was two years old, the carpet on the driver's side had worn through to the floor-board (that's never happened to me before in even the cheapest econo-box I've ever owned).

The driver’s side door panel became permanently “dented’ at the point I used to rest my elbow when driving.

The carpet covered cardboard around the back seats never quite “fit” right and would always come out from under the plastic pieces designed to form the boundry between the rear seats, carpet and the body of the car. Finally, let’s not forget the “hump”.

Now…I loved my Z28 but frankly, it had its problems when it came to the interior.

So...I’m not sure I’d start throwing stones at Nissan lest someone throw them back! :D

Actually, to use Nissan in the same sentence as Toyota and Honda is ridiculous. Nissan is not a Japanese car company, they are French. Their quality isn't close to that of the Domestics, much less Toyota and Honda.

That they get a free ride, based on the fact that their "name" is Japanese, just makes me sick.

If you want to see the true definition of a horrible interior........... just go to your local Nissan dealership.


You really don't know much unless its Ford related do you? I'm not quite sure why you keep posting incorrect information like this.

Actually, to use Nissan in the same sentence as Toyota and Honda is ridiculous. Nissan is not a Japanese car company, they are French. Their quality isn't close to that of the Domestics, much less Toyota and Honda.

That they get a free ride, based on the fact that their "name" is Japanese, just makes me sick.

If you want to see the true definition of a horrible interior........... just go to your local Nissan dealership.
:bow: :bow:

You guys are correct, Ghosn was merely the son of Lebanese parents born in Brazil but educated in France, and is in fact a french citizen. I'd say he is more French than Japanese. But even if you do not want to concede that point, he was the number 2 man at Renault when he was sent to save Nissan.

For whatever reason, the Renault webpage regarding their alliance does not say that Nissan increased it's stake from more than 15%

http://www.renault.com/renault_com/en/main/10_GROUPE_RENAULT/60_Acteur_mondial/10_Alliance_Renault-Nissan/10_Fondements/

You guys are correct, Ghosn was merely the son of Lebanese parents born in Brazil but educated in France, and is in fact a french citizen. I'd say he is more French than Japanese. But even if you do not want to concede that point, he was the number 2 man at Renault when he was sent to save Nissan.

For whatever reason, the Renault webpage regarding their alliance does not say that Nissan increased it's stake from more than 15%

http://www.renault.com/renault_com/en/main/10_GROUPE_RENAULT/60_Acteur_mondial/10_Alliance_Renault-Nissan/10_Fondements/

He is still also a Lebanese citizen and was even considerd as a possible presidential cantidate in Lebanon a couple of years ago according to a Businessweek article.

Yes, he was the No. 2 man at Renault when he was sent to Nisan as CEO; now he is CEO of both Renault and Nissan.

I think you are correct, however, in 2002 Nissan took a 15% share of Renault

You really don't know much unless its Ford related do you? I'm not quite sure why you keep posting incorrect information like this.

Well thats a nice generalization, now isn't it. I know some about quite a few things.......... alot about some things............ and not much about most things. Pretty much like everyone else.

Fine, let me elaborate. Renault holds a controlling stake of Nissan, to the tune of 44%. Renault is a french company. When Renault rescued Nissan, in 1999, Nissan was on the verge of bankruptcy.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2004/nf20040101_1918_db053.htm

Now maybe its just me, but most people consider that Ford owns Mazda, yet they only hold a controlling stake, at 33%. Thus, when I said that Nissan was a French company, it is because they are majority owned by a French company. I would have thought that you could figure that out.

If Nissan currently owns 15% or 50% of Renault, than this is probably a byproduct of how much Nissan is currently worth, vs what they were worth in 1999 (not much).

I have a hard time understanding how someone can truly think that Nissans have nice interiors. The Altimas interior is on par with a Cobalt. The Maximas is not close to an Accords. The Infinitis are decent......... and they should be, based on their price point.

Boy, I guess I really opened a can of worms by not bowing down to the Nissan alter.

PS, GM and Ford are my primary points of interest. However, I do read about pretty much all manufacturers, and test drive many cars to get a hands on experience. I have never claimed to be all knowing, and if you don't like what I write, don't read it. BTW, Nissan's recent quality, as confirmed by Threxx, has not been the greatest. They used to be very high quality vehicles, and I used to like them alot. I like the way the Altima looks (exterior) and love the engine. The car sucks (torque steer and light steering). I used to love the 240/260/280Z and liked the 300ZX twin turbo......... but just have not warmed to the 350Z. I do like the G35's, and find them to be one of the most attractive near luxury cars on the road.

Nissan is not a Japanese car company, they are French.

Later...
Fine, let me elaborate.


Sorry but your previous statement was that of a very definite nature; you weren't leaving out any details, you flat out said Nissan is not Japanese, they are French. Period.

That's far from Renault owning a minority (not sure why you keep saying majority) share of Nissan and Nissan in turn owns a 15 or 50% (depending on your source, I guess) share of Renault.

Nice attempt at back pedaling, though.:p

Later...
"That's far from Renault owning a minority (not sure why you keep saying majority) share of Nissan..."

To be truly precise, at 44%, Renault owns a controlling share of Nissan which is why Renault had the authority to send Carlos Ghosn to take over as CEO.

Later...



Sorry but your previous statement was that of a very definite nature; you weren't leaving out any details, you flat out said Nissan is not Japanese, they are French. Period.

That's far from Renault owning a minority (not sure why you keep saying majority) share of Nissan and Nissan in turn owns a 15 or 50% (depending on your source, I guess) share of Renault.

Nice attempt at back pedaling, though.:p

At first I was being simplistic, and got slammed for it. Thus, I had to elaborate. No backpedaling involved.

Nissan did not own any of Renault, when Renault took a controlling interest of Nissan (in 1999). What they have done since then, I don't really know, and there appears to be quite a bit of conflicting reports. Thus, it doesn't look like anyone else knows either. In 1999, Nissan was in no shape to buy an interest in anything........... much less themselves.

I will repeat. People consider that Ford owns Mazda, and yet they only own a controlling interest, at 33%. Thus, by that same example, one could say that Renault owns Nissan.

I'm sorry if you didn't like the way I worded things. That sounds like your problem, not mine. Or, are you a Nissan worshipper also????

BTW, Ghosn has a very similar way of operating an automotive business.......... to Jac Nasser.

I don't think you will find any sources saying Nissan owns more than 15% of Renault except that one crappy article that came from who knows where. The best shareholder info is always found at the corporate site. For example, when people come on here spouting off that Porsche is owned by Audi-VW, a quick link to the Porsche corporate site can dismiss that myth.

I will repeat. People consider that Ford owns Mazda, and yet they only own a controlling interest, at 33%. Thus, by that same example, one could say that Renault owns Nissan.




So do you then consider Mazda an American car company? ;)

So do you then consider Mazda an American car company? ;)
Mazda and Ford are basically the same

Mazda and Ford are basically the same

Yet there are many who would consider a person "un-American" if he bought a Mazda while concurrently having no problem if he buys a Ford. :)