Way back in 602, the original Pope Gregory introduced the concept of the seven deadly sins. His text Moralia in Job was designed to help lay people differentiate between venial sins, which could be forgiven through confessions, and capital sins, which are Hell to pay. About a millennium and a half later it looks like the management at Detroit’s Big Two automakers should have paid more attention in their catechism classes. They seem to be harvesting a whole carload of karmic grief for their past corporate indiscretions, and wonder why it’s happening to them. Let’s run down the Big Seven in ascending order of purported theological severity and see how they stack up.
Lust – Year after year, Ford and GM both coveted the title “America’s Best Selling Car” so carnally they dumped cars into the rental and fleet markets to inflate their sales numbers. This succeeded in flooding the market with used cars, trashing resale values and destroying what reputation for quality they might have had. Now their products are associated so strongly with “rental car” and “fleet” many buyers won’t consider buying anything they make.
Gluttony – In an attempt to expand their worldwide empires they both hungrily bought up other companies around the globe, totally oblivious to what it could cost them down the road. As a result Ford keeps pouring piles of money into that black hole called the Premier Auto Group and GM is still reeling from the Fiat fiasco. You can’t post profits very long when your feeding frenzies culminate in flushing billions down the corporate toilet.
Greed – GM is the champion at stretching out product cycles to try to squeeze every dime out of an old design instead of investing money on product development (look up “hoary” in the dictionary and there’s a picture of the Cavalier). Ford puts all their best efforts into designing and producing high profit trucks and SUVs while ignoring and all but abandoning the much lower profit margin vehicles in the passenger car market. In the short term this kept expenditures down and the bottom line up. Today both have milked their cash cows dry and are standing by, watching helplessly as a whole bevy of modern subcompacts come ashore and roll into the awaiting arms of economy-minded consumers.
Sloth – Detroit has gotten lazy over the years. Domestic car makers spend much of their time whining, dragging their corporate feet, and having to be forced into complying with inevitable federal regulations and fuel standards. The manufacturers of imports quietly and industriously go about engineering innovative solutions to meet these requirements. Detroit was once the world leader in automotive technology and innovation. Now they license technology from the Japanese and bring out new models one product cycle behind the rest of the world.
Wrath – Since they seem to be incapable of beating the Japanese nameplates with competitive products consumers actually want to buy, execs from both companies are directing their vituperation towards those who purchase any vehicle not built by them. They’re out making flag-waving speeches and running ad campaigns designed to make anyone who drives anything "foreign" look anti-American and portray them as a threat to the very foundation of the economy. Most consumers see this for what it is – a last-gasp effort of an ailing industry and the backlash may cause more damage than the speech writers ever imagined.
Envy – The Japanese automakers are much better than either GM or Ford at producing and selling what was once Detroit’s bread and butter. Now they realize what they gave away and can’t stand someone else having it. They want it back very badly. But instead of working hard to retake it by producing competitive products, they cry “no fair” and go running to Uncle Sugar for government protection and corporate welfare.
Pride – Hubris reigns in Detroit. For years GM was smug in their belief “as goes General Motors, so goes America.” Ford went around thumping their chests about having the best selling vehicle in the country and resting on their laurels. Both totally ignored the warning signs of impending disaster, thinking they were immune to the basic economic principles of supply and demand. Sadly, both were wrong.
Well, it doesn’t look too good for the gang in Detroit, does it? The troubling part of all this is they won’t own up to their past behavior, confess their mistakes and do the necessary penance. With this much going against them even an Expedition’s worth of Our Fathers and an Escalade full of Hail Marys won’t be enough to bail them out. If they don’t change their ways soon, looks like both may have to spend time in Chapter 11 purgatory.
Or, chapter 7 hell.
While there is unfortunately a lot of truth in what you present, I would like to balance the ledger by pointing out that Ford and GM have also spent billions trying to honour obligations to ex-employees – pensions, medical care, etc. As mature industrial enterprises they have to deal with these obligations and I give them credit for trying to do the right thing. Let’s see how Toyota and Honda handle their obligations when their plants are 30+ years old.
SS3: I think using pension/medical care as an example of why Detroit is doing poorly is not a good argument. When a company says it’s going to take care of its employees’ pension and medical care, what they are supposed to do is take some money and put it in a “lock box” and not touch that money except for pensions and medical care for those employees. Generally since companies are much bigger than an individual investor, they can take all of the employees’ money and get better returns on that than an individual, that’s why people used to like pensions: the company could do better than the employee. However Detroit (and many other companies) have in the last few years raided that lock box to fund their money losing empires (or to pad profits to keep the stock prices up). So now they go around whining about how much money they need to pay for those pensions and how we should feel bad for them (or bail them out). But the problem is soley their fault. If they never touched their pension funds, those would still be there for the retired workers and they wouldn’t need to spend a couple of thousand per new car on former workers.
I think the largest are pride (arrogance) and sloth.
We also have not yet come to the day when a Detroit automaker feels any obligation to stand by a product once the warranty runs its course, even when an issue was designed in. I’ve personally experienced this in recent years with a Ford and, currently, a Chrysler.
I recently learned, the hard way, that the chrome-plated alloy wheels on some Chryslers can corrode so badly after 3.5 years (in places you can’t see) that the tires continuously lose pressure. It had never crossed my mind before that a wheel’s lifespan could be so short. Chrysler has “generously” offered to cover 50% of the bloated cost of OEM replacement wheels.
When will they learn that this is a good way to keep losing customers?
The domestic automakers real legacy cost is the deep ill-will held by their customer base. There is broad consensus GM, Ford and Chrysler are incapable of producing relevant, quality products and must be punished for maltreating customers for decades. I can’t imagine the Big-2? revising this perception for a generation or more.
They???re out making flag-waving speeches and running ad campaigns designed to make anyone who drives anything “foreign” look anti-American and portray them as a threat to the very foundation of the economy. Most consumers see this for what it is
Very good point. By now I’m so offended by GM’s and Ford’s brainless agitprop there’s no way I’d support them by buying one of their cars, even with a zero-percent 30-year loan. I only follow this web site out of pure schadenfreude.
You think the Japanese don’t make the same kind of decisions that a GM-Ford-Chrysler makes when they have a product issue? I have a 99 Maxima with a 100K mile extended warranty that started running badly at idle, and mileage dropped to under 20 MPG average, and the dealer kept telling me they couldn’t find anything. After months of continued degradation, I finally took it to an independent garage; they saw issues with 2 ignition coils, but they happened so intermittently they couldn’t get to the source of the problem. However, they found a copy of a Nissan tech bulletin regarding potential coil problems for my model year, among others. Their recommendation, which I followed, was to replace all the coils. Cost me $700. My Nissan dealer could have, should have, known about this and done the replacement, but the last time I brought it to their attention the beast had 97K miles, so maybe they thought they’d wait me out. I bought 2 cars from them and did all my service work with those guys, so a little warranty support on this would’ve been nice. Even offer to split the cost. I’d say they committed the sin of greed.
Cars. Can’t live with them, can’t live without…ah, forget it.
Japan built and continues to build their industry on the foundations of government protection, extreme corporate welfare and limited foreign competition, however.
Ghosn is a hero there and Renault has been trying hard to sell its products into that market – result: 3000 cars sold per year!!! I believe 1948 was the first year of their embargo of American cars.
I’ve come to believe that one of the biggest failures of the big 3 is their dismissal of “entry level” cars to the bottom of the barrel in terms of quality and design. The rationale (such as it is) seems to be “hey, it’s a cheap car. What do you expect?”
The genius of the Japanese is that they realized long ago that if you sell a Camry to a recent college grad today, then in 10 years, he/she will be in the market for that minivan/SUV or luxury sport sedan.
People who spend a lot of money on something (and for most of us, cars are our first “major” purchase) remember when they get less than what they bargained for. They also remember when they get more than what they bargained for. A thirtysomething family man shopping for an upscale luxury car is going to remember that POS Cavalier or Escort he had when he was in his 20’s and forever associate his bad experiences with the manufacturer. That makes it a serious uphill battle to try and get him into a 500 or a Caddy.
OTOH, the same family man who owned an inexpensive Celica or Subaru right out of college, who was pleasantly surprised not only by the clever design and overall quality, is going to be a cinch to sell on a more expensive car by the same manufacturer, because he feels confident that the builder doesn’t make junk.
But the saddest note of all is that the US manufacturers have had 30 years to learn this (rather obvious) lesson and have still failed to do so. This means they have to resort to mindless flag-waving in an attempt to lure back the ever-shrinking number of customers who don’t associate their products with junk (though I have to ponder for a moment the question of why a Mexican-built Ford is somehow “more American” than my Indiana-built Subaru.)
They got one thing right: http://www.dodge.com/en/challenger/index.html
Dolo: So they’re drawing water from the same 60’s Nostalgia well that produced the new Mustang? Nicely executed, I have to admit, but that’s a pretty small niche market, isn’t it?
Hell, I’m not a young guy (44) but the heydays of the Challenger and the Mustang were both years before my time – I got my driver’s license in 1978 and my first car in 79. Seems to me the primary customers for either car are going to be the aging boomers who couldn’t afford one when they were in their 20’s and are now trying to capture an icon of their youth. While that technique works for a company that makes niche-market toys (Harley Davidson being the best example) it just doesn’t seem to me to be something that is likely to pull Detroit’s collective chestnuts out of the fire, particularly in the era of $3/gallon gas.
Ultimately, this seems to be the automotive equivalent of the Hollywood remakes that have infested movie theaters for the last decade or so. While it may sell, for a little while, sooner or later the dearth of new ideas is going to become apparent and what will Detroit do then?
Well written and for the most part, accurate. I would say that the chase for marketshare is the root of most of their issues because that’s what led to excessive fleet sales, buying other car companies, and extreme discounting. Add to that the quality mistakes of the past which affect the image even though quality, reliability, and durability has closed most of the gap and you have a recipe for disaster. We should not discount the fact that the playing field is not level. Currency manipulation and protectionism do put the Big 3 at a disadvantage. The fact that other global competitors have more socialized medicine also makes a difference. Nobody cares that these companies provide great jobs and benefits including pension in some cases, but certain people will boycott companies that reduce pension benefits to make a statement. What I find amazing is the anti-patriotism that we have in the auto industry and the way the press just rides the Big Three, (often unjustifiably), when it comes to fuel economy and recalls. This has a huge impact. Nobody seems to care about the Big Three until it starts hurting them directly as in the stock market. People don’t realize it, but the issues with the auto industry today are hurting all of us indirectly and need to be addressed. Most of it needs to be taken care of by the companies themselves, but some of the responsibility goes to the federal government. A strong industrial base is important to this country’s future economy and security.
You guys really need to add someone to the staff to balance out your blatant GM and Ford bashing. Face it, American cars aren???t nearly as bad as you ???experts??? think they are and guess what, the foreign jobs aren???t nearly as wonderful as you suggest. Sorry, but you guys are just a little too pretentious for your own good.
these editorials are pretty lopsided. truth is, i hate most american cars. but once in a while one comes along that i really like: the last t-bird convertible for instance, or the ford gt. i like the new stang alright, but there’s something a bit cheap looking about it. caddy’s are nice, but they’re not my style. the rest seems like crap to me. but i think the point has been made. and then some. i give gm credit for going back to the past to regain some of their lost glory. one things almost all modern cars lack is a design that creates an emotional connection with their owner. there was a beauty in the steel curves that for the most part is considerably lacking. and those are the cars that people fall in love with.
I’ll stop bashing American cars when the American car companies stop making vehicles that are crap.
I can honestly say that GM does not make one vehicle that even remotely interests me. Not one. Cheap, ugly interiors, designs that range between outdated and outright ghastly (Pontiac Aztek and just about anything made by Cadillac,) ancient pushrod motors, gigantic gaps between panels, a choice between piss-poor MPG and piss-poor power…oh, and before I forget, a sclerotic dealer network that says “screw you” once you’re out of warranty.
Anybody who wants my money has to earn it. The American companies have shown me that they can do without my money, so I can do without their products. The American car companies have been beating the patriotic drums ever since they started getting their asses kicked by the Japanese way back in the 70’s, and it’s never worked. They enjoyed a brief success during the 90’s because fuel prices fell to record low levels, and Detroit’s response was to “eat, drink, and be merry” even though anybody with an IQ over room temperature knew that sooner or later gas prices would rise again.
Martinjmpr:
You should visit a GM showroom sometime in this century. Based on your comments, you haven’t been in one since about 1995.
I’ve visited some GM showrooms recently. A lot of mediocrity and very few goods cars.
I won’t cover ground that is already debated here, so I will focis on the R&D side of things. The lack of R&D prowess is not liited to the auto industry. I have worked for two other companies, both have either eliminated R&D, or cut it back to nothing. All efforts are for the moment, not the future. Since they have cut so many employees, when business comes, they need all hands on deck to deal with it. Do they hire more to free up R&D? no. All hours had to be applied to a project that made money. This is evident on a lot of car designs. The new Impala: I like it, but it seems to have just caught up with the last Accord. Not overstepped it like a new design should.
Martinjmpr,
Come on, man — The Corvette is a knockout.
A Solstice just passed me on my way to lunch — a red one. Gorgeous. Breahtaking, actually.
Any new Cadillac is pretty sweet (Well… the Vs…)
Chrysler’s 300C/Dodge Magnum-Chargers are homeruns.
The Mustang GT is a good deal, and Ford’s Freestyle is the best people hauler on the road.
Plus, all three big boys make fantastic full-size trucks.
Perfect? No — But saying that not a single vehicle interests you is the same as blindly saying “Buy American.”
Cpt T: I was in a GM showroom (Chevy) last month. Mildly interested in the HHR, since I thought it was an interesting design concept (and I’ve always loved panel trucks.) One look at the interior quickly reinforced my previous opinions of everything GM. Cheap materials, poor quality seat, in fact, the whole thing seemed to scream “cheep cheep” from every pore. Plus it’s tiny on the inside. Hey, I dig the ’40’s styling, but 149hp in a 4,000lb vehicle? A 3500lb Subaru Legacy gets a 173hp motor and AWD besides. A Honda Element is smaller on the outside, bigger on the inside, and is also available with AWD.
Too many of the American Car defenders here are missing the point. It’s not that American cars are objectively bad. It’s that the competition is objectively better.
Do any of you who read TTAC think that GM and Ford will ever return to their former glory ?
A better question…..do any of you envision a visit to a GM or Ford dealership in 3 years to see the latest in ubercool rides designed to beat the pants off …….anybody ?
You see, the accident occurred last year, and we’re all just slowing down to see the mess, saying “if only they would have………”
Lets boldly move on.
Jonny: I’ll repeat: Not a single GM vehicle interests me. Note the subjective orientation. Your mileage may vary.
Sports cars? Don’t need ’em. I’ve got a motorcycle that can smoke anything on 4 wheels that costs less than $100,000.
Caddys? Sorry, I’m not ready for the retirement home yet, and all the Led Zeppelin songs in the catalog can’t make Cadillac hip. (Maybe they should try the Grateful Dead. It would be like that Don Henley song.) Plus the “angry alien” look isn’t my thing.
Dodge Magnum/Chrysler 300? I give them points for originality, but a V-8 powered gas hog isn’t even close to being on my radar.
Mustang GT? Ditto the above. Points for style but I’m not even remotely interested. Maybe when I get to the point where I can own 3 or 4 cars and put them on like different suits of clothing, I’d take a look, but that’s a long way off. Right now a car has to do a little bit of everything to please me.
Freestyle? I haven’t driven one but to me they’re ugly as hell. Hmmm…what an original idea, make a ruggedized AWD family wagon…where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, the Subaru Outback I currently drive! The one good thing I’ll say about the Freestyle (and the HHR, for that matter) is that they seem to be among the few vehicles out there that understand a flat load deck is a good thing on an all-purpose vehicle.
And as for the full-sized trucks, (a) I’m not interested in gas guzzlers, and (b) with Toyota and Nissan nipping at their heels, I wonder how much longer domestic full-sized trucks will remain “fantastic.” From their track record over the past 30 years, I’d say “not much longer.”
Also, at the risk of being pedantic, Jonny, I said not one vehicle from GM interested me. The Fords and Chryslers you mentioned obviously don’t fall into that category. For that matter, if I had absolutely no need of cargo space, I’d be seriously interested in a Jeep Wrangler, which seems to be one of the few American vehicles that people get really passionate about.
Martinjmpr,
Again, your knowledge of GM really seems confined to 1995.
The Z06 can smoke basically any car costing more than $100,000 — your bike included.
And the fact that you are not interested in a Z06, well, I’m glad we have female readers.
-Jonny-
Re Montess:
Sure, it’s true that a lot of American cars are pretty decent appliances, and their frequency of repair is now better than most European cars. But in the world of appliances, do any of them compete with Toyota and Honda appliances? And in the world of car lust, do more than one hand’s worth compete with the Europeans?
I have fond memories from my childhood (’50s, 60s) of brands called Chevrolet, Pontiac, Olds, and Buick, and seeing these chariots at car shows tugs on my heart strings like old Beach Boys songs. None of these exist anymore.
Ford’s Stylefree a good people mover? Try telling that to the minivan crowd. Stylefree is a bit smaller on the inside, carries 1 less person (7 max vs. 8), has a weaker engine, doesn’t get any better fuel mileage, and interestingly isn’t available with Volvo’s antiroll ESC. Power sliding doors come in handy when you’ve got a newborn in a bulky child seat, too.
Martinjmpr hit the nail squarely on the head. The reason that the Japanese are so successful today is because they out GMed GM.
Years ago GM came up with a brilliant formula. Sell the young person a decent quality, entry-level(cheap) car(Chevy). When their position in life improves, they’ll be back for a Pontiac and then an Olds or Caddy.
During the 1970’s GM, as well as Ford and Chrysler, decided that they didn’t need to do anything for the boomers. The WWII generation was in it’s prime earning years and this is where GM concentrated it’s efforts.
The Japanese and Europeans set their sites on the boomers. The young adults of the 1970s who bought Datsuns and Toyotas are in their prime earning years now and they’re buying Lexus and Infinity. Meanwhile GM’s customers are dying at the rate of 1,500/day. Soon the last of the WWII gen will be gone and so will GM.
Martinjmpr: You look but do not see. HHR interior may not match up to the best of Toyota or Honda (lord I love that new Civic interior) but it doesn’t scream “cheep cheep” (sic) from every pore”. The review here wasn’t 4-star by any means, but did have some good things to say about it.
Oh, by the way, the curb weight of the HHR is 3155 lbs., not 4000… But, hell, why deal in facts?
And your perception really underscores one of the big problems GM has in marketing right now. Even when they build world class products, (and they do in some segments), people just refuse to believe it. It’s not that different than the late 70’s, when sales of GM sedans under 300,000 units was considered failure. I distinctly remember my first ride in a Honda Accord, in 1979. Here was this little car, I was programmed to hate because it was built in Japan. But it was quick, and it handled, and it was fun to drive. I dismissed it anyway, bought myself my first car, a 1980 Chevy Citation, “The First Chevy of the ’80’s”. What a nightmare. The tide was already turning then, and it still took another 10 years for the Japanese makers to truly challenge the domestics (my next car was an Audi Coupe GT).
But, if the pendulum starts swinging the other way, how would you know? Actually, it is, and you are missing it. (…sure wish it would move faster, though)
Cpt T: You’re right, I was looking at the gross weight, not the net. Shame on me for not checking.
As to the rest of your comments, the interior is a matter of taste, but that’s kind of the point, isn’t it? Like it or not, Honda and Toyota have set the standard and if GM can’t live up to it, that’s not my problem, it’s theirs. I will freely admit that my bias against American vehicles (especially GM) is not 100% rational, but every time I try to find something decent with an American nameplate, I’m disappointed, either by clumsy, cheap design, or by pitiful fuel economy (which may not be important to you but it is to me) or by an overall attitude that seems to scream “we don’t care.”
Detroit pissed away a reputation that it took two generations to build, and that reputation is not going to come back with an ad campaign that says “Buy American Cars: They don’t suck as much as they used to.” If the US marques can’t convince people like me that there’s a reason I should come back into their showrooms, then they deserve to go belly up (and keep in mind I looked at that HHR despite my deep aversion to all things GM.)
Here’s an idea: If the big 3 (or any one of the big 3) really think they have solved their reliability problems (which I don’t believe for a second), then let them put their money where their mouths are: Sell their vehicles with a 100,000 mile bumper-to-bumper warranty. The warranty need not be automatically transferable (I think this is what Hyundai did, correct?) but it will go a long way towards showing potential buyers (i.e., me) that they honestly believe in their vehicles and are not just out for a fast buck today and to hell with tomorrow.
If they’re not willing to do that, then it must mean they know their vehicles will fall apart before that. And if they don’t have confidence in their products, why should I?
Now some might say “hey, no fair, Toyota and Honda don’t offer a 100k warranty!” to which I reply, so what? Toyota and Honda don’t need to offer a 100,000 mile warranty because everybody knows that if you take care of them, a Toyota or Honda will last well beyond 100k (aside from the occasional lemon, which you get in any car line.) Many of the other import lines have similar reputations, earned the hard way by providing a decent vehicle with built-in longevity (My Outback wagon, for example, just turned over 112k and is still running strong.)
Of course, in order for any warranty to be worth the paper it’s printed on, I’d have to believe that the company that inked the warranty was going to be around to honor it – and that may be the sticking point. Still, I can’t believe that a 100k warranty (which, let’s face it, not that many drivers would actually use) would cost GM and Ford any more than the crazy discounts and financing offers are costing them now.
Gotta back up Martinjmpr here.
We are currently in the market for a family-mobile, and like Martinjmpr, NOTHING from GM or Ford interests us. NOTHING. We don’t want an underpowered, gas-sucking, butt-ugly, quality-challenged minivan. We don’t want to spend $100 a week on gas to feed a bloated yacht-like Republican-carrying SUV. We don’t want to deal with service depts. that do all but use automatic weapons to prevent warranty work.
We want a decent-sized people-mover we can throw baby gear into, travel across country without spending most of our vacation money on gas, not worry about breaking down, and we want to do all that in style.
Name one GM or Ford vehicle that gives us all that. The Corvette’s nice, but a baby stroller takes up the passenger seat. The Mustang is, well, at least selling well (but to whom, I just don’t know. talk about cheap interior). Except for HHR’s 50-cent interior, it’s a direct copy of my PT Cruiser.
So we’re shopping Suburu. Honda. Toyota. Volkswagen. Audi. Volvo (yes, I know it’s owned by Ford. But it’s still somehow retained its character.)
Let GM and Ford suffer without me and my hard-earned cash. It’s their own damn faults.
Speed42,
Keep your eyes here tomorrow. The Ford Freestyle is the car you want.
Trust me.
Martinjmpr: Actually, while we’re on the topic of the need for American cars to actually be better than the Japanese, not just close to as good, I say they need a 12/120k warranty.
Actually, I’ve said that for a really long time. Besides, as was mentioned, they need people who are PASSIONATE in senior management & exec positions. Oh sure, Rabid Rick n his gang are passionate, just not about cars. He cares about making money (his salary) and keeping his job.
If GM is on a Death Watch right now, they desperately need a few well placed high-voltage electrodes.
I have to say this was the most imaginative, best piece on cars I’ve seen in a long time. Kudos to Frank Williams.
Chadillac, Even a 12 year 120,000 mile warrantee won’t do GM or Ford any good. What point is a useless piece of paper like that when the equally useless 3 year 36,000 mile warrantee is just as ignored by the dealers? But, you hit the nail squarely on the head when you said that GM and Ford need people with passion to run them. Not bean counters.
Reminds me of a local Mercedes-Benz dealer. My wife’s best friend wanted a car, so I found her a few online locally. We drove 15 miles to see a used Chevrolet Prizm (essentially a Toyota Corolla with lower resale value because it has a Chevrolet bow-tie badge) at the Benz dealer. It was Saturday, so the dealership’s owner came out to see us. (Amazing. He could not get “help” to work on a Saturday. Maybe rich people can just take time during the week, don’t have to work regular hours, and go look at cars – I suspect this is the truth).
The owner of the dealership said in conversation “I don’t even like cars.”
Wow.
Do you think that if ever I become wealthy AND stupid enough to aspire to a Mercedes instead of a Lexus (not likely on either count), I’d go to him to buy?
Thanks, Glenn!
My uncle had a rented (I hope) new HHR in the driveway a couple days ago. It DOES scream cheap cheap from every orifice. Compare it too the interior of an element. I thought the element was terrible until I took a ride in one. That thing is like a huge living room on the inside. And the stain resistant material has a great feel to it.
Has anyone seen one of these in person? http://www.lincoln.com/zephyr/photogallery_exterior.asp
They look really, really good in person, but not so great in pictures. Strange.
Martinjmpr:
‘Like it or not, Honda and Toyota have set the standard and if GM can???t live up to it, that???s not my problem, it???s theirs.’
Yup.
“I will freely admit that my bias against American vehicles (especially GM) is not 100% rational, but every time I try to find something decent with an American nameplate, I???m disappointed, either by clumsy, cheap design, or by pitiful fuel economy (which may not be important to you but it is to me) or by an overall attitude that seems to scream ???we don???t care.”
This is where you need to be careful, maybe not be 100% rational (car purchases shouldn’t be), but where you can make rational judgments, do it. I’ll pick on fuel economy here, lets compare V6 versions of Camry and Impala for ’06 model year. Both make 210HP. Impala is a bigger car, and has more room. But Camry EPA rating is 21/29, Impala is 21/31. Plus, the Impala engine runs on E85. Gotta admit Impala is superior, not competitive. You also gotta admit that Camry is raising the bar big time for ’07, HP bump to 268, with better fuel mileage. Hope the domestics are up to that challenge. But it’s a closer fight than most folks want to admit.
Let’s look at full size pickups, Silverado vs. Tundra, and compare each brand’s most fuel efficient V8 offerings. Once again, Silverado is bigger and heavier, and has more HP (295 vs. 271) and torque (335 vs. 313), but mileage ratings are better for Silverado (16/21 vs. 16/19). Once again, the Silverado will run on E85 as well. And the all new Silverado, coming out this fall, will have cylinder deactivation as well as flex fuel capability. Toyota better come with their A-game, else that plant in San Antonio is going to a $1billlion pile of “oh shit”. Oh, but I forget, America has conceded market to Toyota. Thankfully, GM hasn’t yet.
And i know, these examples were carefully picked out, and there are other comparisons that are, well, let’s say, not so favorable….. Minivans come immediately to mind. And mid size SUV’s riding on full frames….oops, those aren’t particularly compeititive anymore, are they? (Durango and Explorer are as screwed as Trailblazer/Envoy…..) And, IMO, these examples point out the real problem, that the pundits here have (rather dramatically) brought to light, that GM just doesn’t have the $$ and resources to keep the product line fresh enough from top to bottom to remain competitive in North America. Yup, there’s a lot of truth to the “too many models, too many brands” perception. But I think people are being a bit naive if the believe that GM isn’t aware that the market is changing towards smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles, and decided to redesign the full size trucks instead of building hybrids because they are a bunch of monkeys playing in trash cans. Even in a shrinking market, full size trucks is where the profits are for GM, and making the drop in sales come out of their competitors hides, in the segment where the company is most profitable makes sense to me.
“Detroit pissed away a reputation that it took two generations to build, and that reputation is not going to come back with an ad campaign that says ???Buy American Cars: They don???t suck as much as they used to.???
Well said. And very true. I’m also worried here that the reality is lagging the perception. I’ve looked at Consumer Reports data on reliability, and if you take it on face value, the side of the road should be littered with Chevys and Fords. But that is all based on consumer surveys, and with all due respect to the CR folks, who put a lot of work into those, I’d like to see something a bit less subjective.
But the big warranty is a good tactic to reclaim consumer sentiment, probably costs less than last years incentives (don’t know about this years, though), and would even be a tactic to push costs down the road (the claims wouldn’t start coming in until several years from now, when, presumably, the turnarounds have succeeded and GM is wallowing in buckets of dough). Maybe there is some pucker factor involved based on how the vehicles are performing in development durability cycles.
Howdy Cap’n! I have a reply to this:
“I???ll pick on fuel economy here, lets compare V6 versions of Camry and Impala for ???06 model year. Both make 210HP. Impala is a bigger car, and has more room. But Camry EPA rating is 21/29, Impala is 21/31. Plus, the Impala engine runs on E85. Gotta admit Impala is superior, not competitive. You also gotta admit that Camry is raising the bar big time for ???07, HP bump to 268, with better fuel mileage. Hope the domestics are up to that challenge. But it???s a closer fight than most folks want to admit”
The impala is a brand new design. It caught up with old design of the camry. New tech (gasp) puts the Camry way in teh lead again. Chevy going to follow? No. All of their new engines are new blocks (3.9 ie) with new tech that put out the same old numbers. Chevy does manage to get good mileage with these powertrains, and I congratulate that. But you know chevy has a 10 year design lag. The camry just negated chevy’s ‘match’, and will probably be on the 3rd engine design from this point on before chevy has another debut. Unless they change their ways.
Actually, the Impala was a reskin and new interior, but basic structure is the same as when it came out in ’00. And that old 3.8L pushrod mill in the older versions got 10 less HP, MORE torque, and got 20/30. And probably cost 2/3 of what any 4V DOHC Toyota V6 costs to build.
It’s a closer fight than YOU want to admit.
dolo54:
Actually, I’ve seen plenty of Zeph…oops, MKZ’s in person. I still think they look odd in person, too. But that’s just me.
i am not in denail about the imapla. I have already stated that I like them. Are you bragging that it costs 2/3 less to build the old engine? Is that supposed to be somehting to brag about? Camry is eating the Impala's lunch! For the record, I don't even like the camry. If GM wants to stay as the bargain car company, then that is fine for this design. But time and again they want to say they are equals. with 10 year design cycles that never beat the leaders, how can they be equals with competition on 5 year cycles? Right now, I would buy an impala because it is such a good deal. but i have no delusions that these engines are the best GM can put out.Now I really like the 5.3 option, due to the grunt factor, but its not a mileage car, its a fun car. so dont just take criticism of the car as me being a hater, i can complain about any car, as none are perfect.
Cpt T: You may be surprised to hear this, but my last vehicle was American: A Ford Ranger pickup. I bought it new in '99 and traded it for a Subaru when the Ranger hit about 93k. I actually had only one very minor problem with the Ranger, and that was fixed under warranty. Of course, I deliberately selected the most basic model, 2wd, manual transmission, no power windows or doors, so there were fewer opportunities for something to go wrong. While MPG was adequate (19-24, real world), it wasn't stellar, especially for a 2wd truck. Real-world MPG figures for the 4wd version were in the neighborhood of 13-18, which is pitiful for a small truck – I think the F150 4×4 can do at least that, and it has a V-8. The small (flex-fuel) V-6 put out a measly 150hp, meanwhile Toyota got that much HP from their less-thirsty 4-cyl. While it was a decent vehicle at the time (and only the second vehicle I've ever bought brand new) if I had to do it over again, I'd have gotten a second-hand Toyota for the same price and probably kept it until it had at least 150,000 on the odometer. Besides a 100k warranty, one thing the American companies could do to put themselves back on the radar of car buyers is to offer something the competition won't: Small TDi diesels. A 1.9 or 2.4l TDi can get decent mileage and still offer enough power for most buyers (especially in a truck, where drivers aren't expecting lightning accelleration anyway.) And your premise that it's a "close fight" between the imports and GM and Ford? I'm not buying it. Every time I turn on the TV or radio it seems I'm hearing about this or that "super sale" or "0% financing" or "employee pricing." How the hell are the American companies going to stay in business if they sell their products at or under cost? Plus, as Robert has pointed out in his GM Death Watch series, all the constant discounts cheapen the reputation, not to mention the resale value, of the brand. Chevy and Ford, then, have become the cars people buy because they can't afford anything better. Somehow I don't think that's going to be enough to pull them back from the brink of bankruptcy.
Detroit shows me nothing. Come on, get with the program. These people have not figured out since the 70's what the deal is. They have had 30+ years to get up to speed. But they havent. Why? Because like so many American businesses they are focused on the short term results. They dont do whats right for the company instead they are busy focusing on short term profits. Well the chicken has come home to roost once again. People keep focusing on metrics whether a Chevy Impala is equivalent on paper to a Camry or Accord. Here is an easy test. Go look at a Camry or Accord and than go look at the Chevy. Just from the look of the interior its not going to cut it. Never mind whats under the hood. Also at this time both Toyota and Honda have reputations as bullet proof cars. And Consumer Reports with their surveys adds fuel to the fire. As far as technology I am not seeing it either. Take the Corvette. Sure they have this fire breathing Z06 with a big block engine in it. Its pretty much the same big block engine they have always made. Where are the freakin modern engines? Same with all their other cars. Besides that how many of these things are they going to sell? This is a niche vehicle. Same with all these retro muscle cars. I got my license long after the muscle car people. My very first car was a muscle car (Ford Mustang) and it was the biggest piece of crap rolling. That car nearly bankrupted me. I have not owned a domestic car since than. Just German and Japanese and I wont be owning any time soon either. One last item we keep hearing about rampant corporate welfarism overseas, that they dont have pension obligations, blah, blah. Have you looked recently how much detroit has NOT paid in corporate income taxes. Thats a form of subsidy as well. Never mind all the goverment contracts they get and than piss the money away. Go cry for me Argentina. I dont want to hear about the whining that they cant be competitive because of their pension and medical obligations. To freakin bad. If a corporation provides no value to the society other than to make money than why is the society giving them perks? Detroits problem is not the employees but rather the executives who run them into the ground.