Find Reviews by Make:
As US automakers get cozier with their Chinese counterparts, the quality of PRC-produced cars has become a topic of debate/concern. And for good reason. According to Daily Report, a recent customer satisfaction survey in China shows that 77 percent of new car owners reported problems. The report, which would make JD Power's mob weep (or salivate), revealed 338 problems for every 100 vehicles across the industry. China has no equivalent to our Consumer Product Safety Commission, so the only way consumers there have to learn about hazardous products is word-of-mouth. This is not the kind of culture you'd naturally associate with building safe, reliable vehicles for the U.S. market, Just sayin'.
…meh…I’ve had a parts car for just about every other car i have owned. If they sell these cars as cheap as they say they will then just buy two and you’ll be fine.
I mean it makes sense to have a parts car for a brand new car right?
By the way, I am opening up a shop to service any of these Chineese cars and am taking names NOW of people who will (not might) need my services.
The issue, cgraham, is not about having a few parts fall off or stop working. It’s about being in a minor (by US standards) accident and having your legs crushed or amputated by the engine entering the passenger compartment.
Chinese cars are safer than the alternative (hanging from the side of a bus?); and there’s no “people shortage”, either; their shoddy construction won’t mean much to a buyer who has no basis for comparison. As for US consumption…
China has no equivalent to our Consumer Product Safety Commission, so the only way consumers there have to learn about hazardous products is word-of-mouth.
Sounds like a libertarian’s wet dream.
I agree with the author, but Chinese cars are coming to the United States, and soon, even if they’re not going to be sold under their own brands right away. Check out China Cars to Come into the States Through Some Side Doors, and you’ll see it won’t be long.
Now as to when we’ll see Chinese brands here in the U.S., that’s up for speculation. A couple of Chinese manufacurers (Brilliance, Changfeng – story HERE) have made some ambitious statements about when they’ll be here under their own brands, but then nothing more is heard from them as the previously-promised date of launch gets closer.
B Moore – Autosavant.net
Sure, they’re coming, but will people actually buy them? With the blanket negativity recently concerning stuff made in China, I see this being a very hard sell. Yugo would probably have it easier.
Comments about Chinese built cars remind me of comments made about Hyundai and Korean cars when they first hit our shores.
We should not dismiss the resolve of the Chinese to improve in order to meet market demands.
beken, I understand your point but Hyundai is still trying to shake the stigma that accompanied their terrible entry into the North American market. Sure their cars are head and shoulders above what they WERE but they don’t run in the same league as Honda for this paticular reason. well maybe not just that one reason but Honda has the world convinced that they have a flawless product where Hyundai grew into a reliable company. The Chinese cars, for their own good, must be able to hit the ground running, and keep running without problems if they are to suceed.
Sounds like a libertarian’s wet dream.
It is, and if the government stays out of it, it may be a good way to test that if the market actually demands safe cars, they’ll get safer. But of course some nanny state will step in and ruin this experiment
/Libertarian
if the government stays out of it, it may be a good way to test that if the market actually demands safe cars, they’ll get safer.
Too bad about the thousands killed or maimed by the defective products in the years it takes for consumers to work out which cars are unsafe in an environment where media is most likely bought off by manufacturers’ advertising, and years more for The Magical Market to favor the safe products and weed out the unsafe.
But of course some nanny state will step in and ruin this experiment
The US “experimented” with this lack of regulation, and we ended up with child labor, 60-hour work weeks, tainted meat, and ultimately, the Great Depression. That’s a lot of broken test tubes in the laboratory.
Fortunately, the public responded with labor laws and the FDA, among other things, plus Upton Sinclair (not Sinclair Lewis, apologies for the misstatement) gave us a pretty good novel to read in the form of The Jungle. (Don’t like unions? You can thank the robber barons for inspiring their formation.)
Today, we’re paying the price for all this regulation. We have cleaner air than we used to, far fewer traffic fatalities per mile driven and have been forced to endure the longest period of widespread prosperity known in human history. Call me crazy, but I’m glad that they called off the experiment.
PCH, good points
However, I beileve it was Upton Sinclair who gave us The Jungle. Ironically, he was a bit of a socialist and anarchist. The question still remains, even if the public demands it, who is going to bother making it better. If no one makes a better horse cart, then all the demand in the world won’t matter. Hell, people want fuel efficient cars. Doesn’t seem to be an issue for any of the “American” car companies.
I agree with miked. China would be an excellent place to conduct this experiment.
However, I beileve it was Upton Sinclair who gave us The Jungle.
You are correct, it was Upton Sinclair. (Brain freeze on my part, that’s what I get for multitasking. I’ve fixed it above to prevent any confusion that I may have caused as a result.)
He was more than a bit of a socialist, he was a stark raving socialist. The Jungle was meant to be a call to a socialist state (something that I’m glad did not happen), but it did lead to the FDA and a safer food supply, which were good things.
There is a reason why the Chinese can get away with putting ethylene glycol into their food, but American companies cannot. When given half a chance, many an industrialist would sell his own mother down the river if he could make $0.50 doing it. I’m glad that they make products for us to buy, but they are not our friends. Trust, but verify.
Thanks for the correction.
“But of course some nanny state will step in and ruin this experiment”
The experiment with contaminated pet food was great. How do Americans know they don’t want their pets poised unless we try it?
My dog was poisoned. I thoroughly enjoyed taking him to the vet. Where the hell do I sign up for class action?
PCH101: The Great Depression wasn’t caused by a lack of regulation or lack of government interference in the economy. Probably, quite the opposite. It was caused by an omission of implementing regulations, bad economic theory implemented in regulations and legislation, a consumer confidence crises, and just plain bad luck. The net effect was to contract GDP in real terms and bring massive deflation to the economy. The side effects were runs on banks, unemployment and low economic growth for about 15 years.
E.g., as monetary stock contracted (banks allowed people to remove deposits faster than then could receive cash from creditors) the Fed didn’t meet its obligation to supply more currency and in a fractional reserve system banks called loans and asset prices deflated as people sold assets at substantial losses. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act taxed imports and effectively taxed exports as other countries retaliated with reciprocal tariffs; causing the value of inventories to deflate to accommodate the cost of the tariffs on imports and exports. Consumers had no faith that their personal prospects would improve any time soon so they withheld consumer spending and further deflation occurred. The plain bad luck was a drought that simultaneously pushed people from farms into cities while increasing the cost of food staples. The net effect was to expand the size of the workforce while manufacturers and service industries were contracting their employment roles to manage reduced consumer demand.
The current economic conditions are because regulation has diminished over the intervening 70+ years from the socialist experiments of the 30’s, 60’s and 70’s. The Fed has removed itself from trying to manage employment levels and most kinds of regulation except for enforcing good lending practices, bank reserve policy, and maintaining a policy of steady price levels. The Congress has reduced regulation especially as related to consumer demand (e.g., taxes) and successive Congress have minimized the introduction of new regulation. Lastly, people are confident in their personal prospects; and despite China’s nascent ascendancy, the US consumer still drives the majority of the worldwide economy.
There is an easy free-market way for importers of Chinese goods to fully account for their presumably ‘bad’ quality. Consumers should demand that importers and retailers have sufficient assets to insure their product quality from bad performance and early end-of-life.
Consumers are pretty savvy; and if you are stupid enough to climb into a rusting deathtrap; who am I to tell you that you won’t survive a collision with my nice German car?
The Great Depression wasn’t caused by a lack of regulation or lack of government interference in the economy. Probably, quite the opposite.
Keep believing that if you’d like, but do a quick review of the following:
-Count the number of economic depressions experienced by the US prior to 1929
-Count the number since
-Compare
(Hint: The number following 1929 will be zero. The other number will be several above that.)
as monetary stock contracted (banks allowed people to remove deposits faster than then could receive cash from creditors) the Fed didn’t meet its obligation to supply more currency and in a fractional reserve system banks called loans and asset prices deflated as people sold assets at substantial losses.
Of course it didn’t. Until 1933, the US was on the gold standard. A country on a gold standard can’t control its money supply; the only way that it could be increased would be to get more gold. (That’s why FDR took the US off of the gold standard in 1933. Without that, no Milton Friedman-style monetarism would have been possible.
The current economic conditions are because regulation has diminished over the intervening 70+ years from the socialist experiments of the 30’s, 60’s and 70’s.
The US post-war industrial boom and rise of consumerism was made possible largely by all of the infrastructure handed over to major manufacturers such as GM and Ford, thanks to WWII. Once the war was over, the government didn’t come back and tear down the factories; instead, they were used for consumer goods. So let’s give some credit where it’s due, namely the feds for allowing the sword factories to be turned back to producing plowshares after VJ day.
There is an easy free-market way for importers of Chinese goods to fully account for their presumably ‘bad’ quality. Consumers should demand that importers and retailers have sufficient assets to insure their product quality from bad performance and early end-of-life.
Please, step back and consider how far deep into the realm of the theoretical and fantastic that statement was.
I don’t think that checking the balance sheet of pet food manufacturers is going to bring back any of the dogs killed by Chinese Free-Market Brand Dog Food. We don’t need dead kids in American streets because some cutthroat free marketeer decided that short-term gain was important than the long-term lifespan of American citizens.
The US remains a powerful economy thanks to a bit of balance in the system. It has worked a lot better since 1929 than prior to it, and I’m happy to keep it that way.