Interesting read on American cars and trucks......
Thread Starter
ALMIGHTY MEMBER
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 2,298
From: Detroit, MI USA
Interesting read on American cars and trucks......
.........and I'm sure a few will have 'opposing' points of view...........
From the Pittsburgh Post Gazette........
By Roger Simmermaker (Commentary)
Dec. 19, 2006
Ford and General Motors have taken turns besting the Toyota Camry in quality surveys for the past two years, but if you talk to many Americans – especially the ones who would never consider supporting home-based auto companies – you'd never know it.
Last year, the Chevrolet Impala beat the Camry in initial quality, according to J.D. Power & Associates. And Consumer Reports just announced that both the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan scored higher than both the Camry and the Honda Accord this year.
Even as GM and Ford have accumulated award after award on vehicle quality, you'd almost never know about such quality gains made by American companies.
There's also the mythical perception that foreign automakers produce the most fuel efficient cars and that Detroit only makes gas-guzzlers when the truth is that all automakers – including Toyota, Honda and Hyundai-Kia alike – have allowed fuel economy to slide in the past 20 years since they all now sell bigger trucks and more SUVs.
Perhaps the biggest perception problem is that American automobile companies GM and Ford – Chrysler is now German-owned – squander all their money on plants overseas and foreign automakers build their factories in the United States. Foreign car lovers will surely point to Kia's plans to build its first-ever U.S. plant in Georgia, but they probably won't mention that they received $400 million in tax giveaways to do it, which translates into $160,000 per job.
Among the many benefits for the foreign-owned company, your tax dollars are going to be used for road improvements surrounding the complex, complete with flower beds and other beautification features. Hey, as long as we're going to allow states to bid for private jobs with our public tax dollars, we might as well make it look good, right?
And the foreign car lovers will probably also not tell you (or maybe they just don't know or don't want you to know) that GM and Ford pour more money into existing American facilities than foreign automakers spend on new plants, usually with little or no tax breaks. GM has already spent more than $500 million upgrading two transmission plants this year, and has spent nearly a billion dollars over the last decade, for example, for facility upgrades in Texas.
And what do GM and Ford get for making their existing plants more efficient? It isn't tax breaks. Instead, they get accusations of not being "competitive" enough! Maybe here I should also mention that the average domestic parts content for Kia is 3 percent, while the average domestic parts content of Ford and GM is 78 percent and 74 percent, respectively. This means that buying a U.S.-assembled (or even foreign-assembled, for that matter) GM or Ford supports more American jobs than a U.S.-assembled car or truck with a foreign nameplate.
Fortunately for our benefit, the United States remains the overall global leader in research and development, and a big reason for that is that American automakers. According to the Level Field Institute, U.S. car companies invest $16 billion in research and development annually, outpacing any other industry one could name.
Admittedly, the Level Field Institute counts German-owned DaimlerChrysler as an American automaker, so Ford and GM's combined R&D contribution to America is closer to around $12 billion. But who's counting, right? Certainly not the American auto-bashing media.
Japanese companies do employ 3,600 American workers in R&D, but that still leaves the foreign competition behind in the dust staring at American rear bumpers – 3,600 sounds like a big number until you realize that 65,000 Americans work in R&D facilities in the state of Michigan alone. In fact, two of the top four R&D spending companies in America as reported by the Wall Street Journal are – you guessed it – Ford and GM. The other two are also American companies: Pfizer and Microsoft.
Ford has recently made headlines as the American automaker with the most challenges to its future, but these challenges certainly are not because they "aren't making cars people want to buy." Toyota did outsell Ford in July, but since then, Ford has reclaimed the No. 2 spot.
GM has the highest market share, increasing over 2 percentage points from a year ago, so it apparently can't be accused of not making cars people want to buy either. Ford sales also are up in Europe, and Ford doubled its sales in China, where GM has the highest market share of any automaker.
GM also reported a 3.9 percent rise in August vehicle sales despite high gas prices and a supposedly slowing economy. And even though Toyota reported record sales that month, it couldn't match the non-record setting sales volume of Ford. GM's sales rose 17 percent in October from the year-ago month and Ford sales rose 8 percent the same period.
And for all the talk about the lack of fuel efficiency of American automakers, it seems three-fourths of all automakers failed to meet Europe's improved fuel-efficiency standards intended to cut carbon-dioxide emissions. Japanese and German automakers topped the list of the study's worst performers, but according to an environmental group's study, GM's Opel division and Ford both "come out well."
In closing, I'll leave some encouraging numbers for those of us who actually like to root for and support the home team. The J.D. Power 2006 Vehicle Dependability Survey reports that Mercury, Buick and Cadillac (in that order) grabbed the No. 2, 3 and 4 spots to beat Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW and everyone else (except Lexus) in having the least number of problems per 100 vehicles.
Perhaps someday the American media will give GM and Ford the credit they deserve. And once they do, perception among the majority of the American public will rightfully change. GM and Ford aren't only doing what they should to make gains in the American market to deserve American consumer loyalty; they're also doing what they should to make gains in the markets of China, Europe and across most of the rest of the globe.
From the Pittsburgh Post Gazette........
By Roger Simmermaker (Commentary)
Dec. 19, 2006
Ford and General Motors have taken turns besting the Toyota Camry in quality surveys for the past two years, but if you talk to many Americans – especially the ones who would never consider supporting home-based auto companies – you'd never know it.
Last year, the Chevrolet Impala beat the Camry in initial quality, according to J.D. Power & Associates. And Consumer Reports just announced that both the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan scored higher than both the Camry and the Honda Accord this year.
Even as GM and Ford have accumulated award after award on vehicle quality, you'd almost never know about such quality gains made by American companies.
There's also the mythical perception that foreign automakers produce the most fuel efficient cars and that Detroit only makes gas-guzzlers when the truth is that all automakers – including Toyota, Honda and Hyundai-Kia alike – have allowed fuel economy to slide in the past 20 years since they all now sell bigger trucks and more SUVs.
Perhaps the biggest perception problem is that American automobile companies GM and Ford – Chrysler is now German-owned – squander all their money on plants overseas and foreign automakers build their factories in the United States. Foreign car lovers will surely point to Kia's plans to build its first-ever U.S. plant in Georgia, but they probably won't mention that they received $400 million in tax giveaways to do it, which translates into $160,000 per job.
Among the many benefits for the foreign-owned company, your tax dollars are going to be used for road improvements surrounding the complex, complete with flower beds and other beautification features. Hey, as long as we're going to allow states to bid for private jobs with our public tax dollars, we might as well make it look good, right?
And the foreign car lovers will probably also not tell you (or maybe they just don't know or don't want you to know) that GM and Ford pour more money into existing American facilities than foreign automakers spend on new plants, usually with little or no tax breaks. GM has already spent more than $500 million upgrading two transmission plants this year, and has spent nearly a billion dollars over the last decade, for example, for facility upgrades in Texas.
And what do GM and Ford get for making their existing plants more efficient? It isn't tax breaks. Instead, they get accusations of not being "competitive" enough! Maybe here I should also mention that the average domestic parts content for Kia is 3 percent, while the average domestic parts content of Ford and GM is 78 percent and 74 percent, respectively. This means that buying a U.S.-assembled (or even foreign-assembled, for that matter) GM or Ford supports more American jobs than a U.S.-assembled car or truck with a foreign nameplate.
Fortunately for our benefit, the United States remains the overall global leader in research and development, and a big reason for that is that American automakers. According to the Level Field Institute, U.S. car companies invest $16 billion in research and development annually, outpacing any other industry one could name.
Admittedly, the Level Field Institute counts German-owned DaimlerChrysler as an American automaker, so Ford and GM's combined R&D contribution to America is closer to around $12 billion. But who's counting, right? Certainly not the American auto-bashing media.
Japanese companies do employ 3,600 American workers in R&D, but that still leaves the foreign competition behind in the dust staring at American rear bumpers – 3,600 sounds like a big number until you realize that 65,000 Americans work in R&D facilities in the state of Michigan alone. In fact, two of the top four R&D spending companies in America as reported by the Wall Street Journal are – you guessed it – Ford and GM. The other two are also American companies: Pfizer and Microsoft.
Ford has recently made headlines as the American automaker with the most challenges to its future, but these challenges certainly are not because they "aren't making cars people want to buy." Toyota did outsell Ford in July, but since then, Ford has reclaimed the No. 2 spot.
GM has the highest market share, increasing over 2 percentage points from a year ago, so it apparently can't be accused of not making cars people want to buy either. Ford sales also are up in Europe, and Ford doubled its sales in China, where GM has the highest market share of any automaker.
GM also reported a 3.9 percent rise in August vehicle sales despite high gas prices and a supposedly slowing economy. And even though Toyota reported record sales that month, it couldn't match the non-record setting sales volume of Ford. GM's sales rose 17 percent in October from the year-ago month and Ford sales rose 8 percent the same period.
And for all the talk about the lack of fuel efficiency of American automakers, it seems three-fourths of all automakers failed to meet Europe's improved fuel-efficiency standards intended to cut carbon-dioxide emissions. Japanese and German automakers topped the list of the study's worst performers, but according to an environmental group's study, GM's Opel division and Ford both "come out well."
In closing, I'll leave some encouraging numbers for those of us who actually like to root for and support the home team. The J.D. Power 2006 Vehicle Dependability Survey reports that Mercury, Buick and Cadillac (in that order) grabbed the No. 2, 3 and 4 spots to beat Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW and everyone else (except Lexus) in having the least number of problems per 100 vehicles.
Perhaps someday the American media will give GM and Ford the credit they deserve. And once they do, perception among the majority of the American public will rightfully change. GM and Ford aren't only doing what they should to make gains in the American market to deserve American consumer loyalty; they're also doing what they should to make gains in the markets of China, Europe and across most of the rest of the globe.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
To which there are a whole lot of people with their fingers in their ears proclaiming "Not gonna listen!"
I honestly don't think GM and Ford go nearly far enough promoting the quality of their vehicles. It isn't enough to say you won some award for quality....mention who the other competitors for it were....drive the point home.
I honestly don't think GM and Ford go nearly far enough promoting the quality of their vehicles. It isn't enough to say you won some award for quality....mention who the other competitors for it were....drive the point home.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 236
From: West Salem,IL
To which there are a whole lot of people with their fingers in their ears proclaiming "Not gonna listen!"
I honestly don't think GM and Ford go nearly far enough promoting the quality of their vehicles. It isn't enough to say you won some award for quality....mention who the other competitors for it were....drive the point home.
I honestly don't think GM and Ford go nearly far enough promoting the quality of their vehicles. It isn't enough to say you won some award for quality....mention who the other competitors for it were....drive the point home.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
I thought I’d comment on a few statements made in the article…call it a dissenting opinion if you wish.
THE AMERICAN AUTO-BASHING MEDIA:
I say that’s pure bovine scatology until someone can actually prove it.
Clearly, every individual journalists (inside or outside the automotive press) have their biases and some are anti-domestic just as some are pro-domestic but to paint all media with one broad brush as if there is some vast conspiracy to denigrate the domestic auto industry is an incredibly far-reaching assertion. Likewise, the assertion should be backed-up with equally far-reaching and substantial evidence or it needs to be summarily rejected.
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
Let’s face it; GM and Ford ARE spending huge sums of capital money in overseas expansion; especially in China while many “foreign” manufacturers are expanding facilities and/or building brand new facilities here in the U.S. It’s not unreasonable if people take notice of that. However, I haven’t seen any indication that people think GM and Ford are “squandering their money overseas”.
Likewise, they are modernizing many of their plants in the U.S. and spending a ton of money to do so; I’m glad they are. However, that does not negate the also positive impact of jobs (both direct and ancillary) brought to a community when a Toyota or a Honda or a Kia builds a new plant where such investment never existed before.
TAX INCENTIVES:
The use of tax and other incentives by government entities to woo manufacturing facilities is often cited as if it is somehow “unfair” to the domestics – that’s simply a red hearing.
I personally don’t like to see government play this game but regardless of how one feels about the issue in general, it is the game being played today and it’s being played to garner all sorts of business and sports investment in a community…it has nothing to do with communities offering incentives to a “Honda” plant and not a “GM” plant; it has everything to do with communities trying to bring capital investment and jobs to an area that doesn’t currently have those jobs and facilities.
I’m sure if GM wanted to build a new plant in Mississippi (or any other community that didn’t have the facility) they could get a good deal of incentives (just as, I’m sure, GM got when it built its Saturn plant in Spring Hill, Tennessee). GM/Ford may not be getting many incentives for the capital investment they are making in their existing plants but that is not a foreign vs. domestic issue nor is it unfair.
“Incentives” is not a domestic vs. non-domestic issue and to try and paint it that way is disingenuous.
QUALITY:
There is no doubt that both GM and Ford have made considerable strides in quality but I don’t believe its “unfair” for people to still be skeptical nor is it all the fault of the “biased media”.
The reputation for quality of the foreign nameplates was earned over decades. Likewise, GM’s and Ford’s reputation for poorer quality was earned over many, many years…those perceptions will not be erased quickly no matter how various manufacturers are painted by the media.
I keep up with the IQS and VDS reports but I still have doubts about the domestics and I believe those doubts are well founded. I admit a lot of my doubt is based on personal experience but that is true of most people who aren’t quite willing to buy into the new GM quality scores.
My last F-body was a 2000 Z28…this was a car already well into its production life cycle when one would have thought that most known issues would have been addressed yet in the fist two years and 15,000 miles, I had a number of problems (many of which have been well documented on this board by a variety of fourth generation owners). Some of the more irritating problems included…
1. a bad power window motor
2. an alternator/charging/electrical issue that was apparently well known and was an issue for all the time I owned the car
4. cracked and worn out leather seating surface (driver)
5. hole in the carpet under the pedals
6. a molded piece (that formed the arm rest in the back seat) that never fit and would constantly pop out of place over any bump
7. constant rattles and just a general feeling that the car simply wasn’t “solid”
These and other problems caused my Z28 to need several trips to the dealer including a couple of multiple day/overnight stays while some issues I just had to "live with". Now, let me say that the experience with my 2000 Z28 was a significant improvement to most of the other GM vehicles I’ve owned prior to my Z28 but not what I would call reassuring.
In contrast, my 350Z which I’ve now also owned for two years and have just about 15,000 miles on it still has an interior that looks brand new, has excellent fit and finish inside and out, has never been in the shop for anything other than its scheduled maintenance and hasn’t give me one single problem so far. It stills feels as solid and well put together as the day I drove it off the lot and should any of you think I pamper it compared to my Z28, I actively autocrossed both vehicles.
I guess all I’m saying here is that while GM and Ford do appear to have made and are making significant strides in quality; it’s going to take many years to erase a well-earned reputation. That may be unpleasant but it is the reality.
NA PARTS CONTENT:
Interesting how the author cites Kia as its example of a NA vs. non-NA parts content to GM/Ford. To the best of my knowledge, Kia, at present, imports all if its vehicles into the U.S. If so, it shouldn’t come as any great shock to anyone that Kia has a very low NA parts content. I can only wonder why the author didn’t make the comparison between vehicles built in the U.S.?
Might I suggest that if that comparison had been made, the gap between a U.S. built Toyota (for example) and a U.S. built Chevrolet would be a lot closer to each other than the author would probably be comfortable documenting.
Ok…I’m done for now.
THE AMERICAN AUTO-BASHING MEDIA:
I say that’s pure bovine scatology until someone can actually prove it.
Clearly, every individual journalists (inside or outside the automotive press) have their biases and some are anti-domestic just as some are pro-domestic but to paint all media with one broad brush as if there is some vast conspiracy to denigrate the domestic auto industry is an incredibly far-reaching assertion. Likewise, the assertion should be backed-up with equally far-reaching and substantial evidence or it needs to be summarily rejected.
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
Let’s face it; GM and Ford ARE spending huge sums of capital money in overseas expansion; especially in China while many “foreign” manufacturers are expanding facilities and/or building brand new facilities here in the U.S. It’s not unreasonable if people take notice of that. However, I haven’t seen any indication that people think GM and Ford are “squandering their money overseas”.
Likewise, they are modernizing many of their plants in the U.S. and spending a ton of money to do so; I’m glad they are. However, that does not negate the also positive impact of jobs (both direct and ancillary) brought to a community when a Toyota or a Honda or a Kia builds a new plant where such investment never existed before.
TAX INCENTIVES:
The use of tax and other incentives by government entities to woo manufacturing facilities is often cited as if it is somehow “unfair” to the domestics – that’s simply a red hearing.
I personally don’t like to see government play this game but regardless of how one feels about the issue in general, it is the game being played today and it’s being played to garner all sorts of business and sports investment in a community…it has nothing to do with communities offering incentives to a “Honda” plant and not a “GM” plant; it has everything to do with communities trying to bring capital investment and jobs to an area that doesn’t currently have those jobs and facilities.
I’m sure if GM wanted to build a new plant in Mississippi (or any other community that didn’t have the facility) they could get a good deal of incentives (just as, I’m sure, GM got when it built its Saturn plant in Spring Hill, Tennessee). GM/Ford may not be getting many incentives for the capital investment they are making in their existing plants but that is not a foreign vs. domestic issue nor is it unfair.
“Incentives” is not a domestic vs. non-domestic issue and to try and paint it that way is disingenuous.
QUALITY:
There is no doubt that both GM and Ford have made considerable strides in quality but I don’t believe its “unfair” for people to still be skeptical nor is it all the fault of the “biased media”.
The reputation for quality of the foreign nameplates was earned over decades. Likewise, GM’s and Ford’s reputation for poorer quality was earned over many, many years…those perceptions will not be erased quickly no matter how various manufacturers are painted by the media.
I keep up with the IQS and VDS reports but I still have doubts about the domestics and I believe those doubts are well founded. I admit a lot of my doubt is based on personal experience but that is true of most people who aren’t quite willing to buy into the new GM quality scores.
My last F-body was a 2000 Z28…this was a car already well into its production life cycle when one would have thought that most known issues would have been addressed yet in the fist two years and 15,000 miles, I had a number of problems (many of which have been well documented on this board by a variety of fourth generation owners). Some of the more irritating problems included…
1. a bad power window motor
2. an alternator/charging/electrical issue that was apparently well known and was an issue for all the time I owned the car
4. cracked and worn out leather seating surface (driver)
5. hole in the carpet under the pedals
6. a molded piece (that formed the arm rest in the back seat) that never fit and would constantly pop out of place over any bump
7. constant rattles and just a general feeling that the car simply wasn’t “solid”
These and other problems caused my Z28 to need several trips to the dealer including a couple of multiple day/overnight stays while some issues I just had to "live with". Now, let me say that the experience with my 2000 Z28 was a significant improvement to most of the other GM vehicles I’ve owned prior to my Z28 but not what I would call reassuring.
In contrast, my 350Z which I’ve now also owned for two years and have just about 15,000 miles on it still has an interior that looks brand new, has excellent fit and finish inside and out, has never been in the shop for anything other than its scheduled maintenance and hasn’t give me one single problem so far. It stills feels as solid and well put together as the day I drove it off the lot and should any of you think I pamper it compared to my Z28, I actively autocrossed both vehicles.
I guess all I’m saying here is that while GM and Ford do appear to have made and are making significant strides in quality; it’s going to take many years to erase a well-earned reputation. That may be unpleasant but it is the reality.
NA PARTS CONTENT:
Interesting how the author cites Kia as its example of a NA vs. non-NA parts content to GM/Ford. To the best of my knowledge, Kia, at present, imports all if its vehicles into the U.S. If so, it shouldn’t come as any great shock to anyone that Kia has a very low NA parts content. I can only wonder why the author didn’t make the comparison between vehicles built in the U.S.?
Might I suggest that if that comparison had been made, the gap between a U.S. built Toyota (for example) and a U.S. built Chevrolet would be a lot closer to each other than the author would probably be comfortable documenting.
Ok…I’m done for now.
Last edited by Robert_Nashville; Dec 20, 2006 at 05:14 PM.
