Chasing Camry: Chevy asks dealers to put a Camry in the showroom to sell Malibus

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marlin @ May 17 2007, 06:51 AM) [snapback]444088[/snapback]</div>

Shouldn't you count GMC in there?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ May 17 2007, 02:13 PM) [snapback]444425[/snapback]</div>

Haha true that! As a GMC owner I can't stand having to replace my burnt out bulbs. I even tried to swtich to LEDs.

 

Hello Malorn and everyone,

Interesting discussion going on here, but I want to ask Malorn to address something specific that many posters have mentioned - the quality of the cars being produced today.

I ask this because I have owned both foreign and domestic vehicles over the past 25 years, and from my own personal experience the US manufacturers don't measure up to their asian counterparts from the standpoint of the quality, value and reliability of the product. In fairness, I think domestic vehicles have improved since the 80's, but IMO they are not the equal of their asian counterparts.

Since you are a salesman, how do you specifically address the concerns about the lack of quality in US cars that so many in this thread have brought up?

I think this concern is a significant part of why the US auto industry has lost the 100,000 workers you have mentioned. To make it simple: Build quality and you'll be successful, build crap and you'll lose business. It looks like GM, Ford, et al have been losing business, as you continually lament.

Please forgive me here - I don't mean to inflame by my words above, but it does seem that whenever someone asks questions that relate to specific concerns, you go into "car salesman mode" and avoid answering the question.

On a related note, do you have any inside info on when the Volt will be ready for sale? I for one would love to take it for a test drive.

Thanks,
cc B)

 

The Big 3 have done their share to displace workers from the USA when they started buying parts from foreign countries. I don't know how much of my 2000 Intrigue originates in the USA but I know it is not 100% as I can see "Canada" stamped on the tail light lenses. Based on my last experience GM employees are either unwilling or unable to design and build a quality (IMO) product. If they have lost their jobs because of it, I'm sorry, but I don't feel the least bit sorry for them. I don't recall seeing a local content sticker on my Prius but I did look for one on a 2007 and am happy to report that it stated 100% Japan. This means (to me) that there are no cr@p American parts in the car so things should last longer.

The high mounted brake light was supposed to reduce rear end collisions. It probably did for some time. DRL are supposed to make oncoming traffic more visible. I place both in a "safety marketing" category. Something that makes you feel good but doesn't do much. In the AAA driving course I took the instructor said that DRL were being phased out because they weren't effective and people were forgetting to turn on their headlights. Considering how well ( <_< ) the headlight system works in my Intrigue I'm glad Toyota didn't put DRL in my Prius.

The auto industry has vastly more content from the USA in its products than the computer industry has in theirs. I doubt one can find even one component in a current computer that is made in the USA.

When was the last car assembled in the USA with 100% made in USA parts? The manufacturers started the flow out of the country and now some want to blame the consumer for it.

 

I dont think its the american product or the american worker, its those decision makers that decides part A $4, part B $4.50, Part B is built from better materials and overall a better product with no doubts, but the decision gets made to buy part A because they can save $1 million if it is a common bulk part in a number of vehicles, now multiply this type of savings over every part in your car. Now you have a car made from all low bidder parts riddled with problems. Short term profit like this leads to (CEO Bonuses) and long term disaster because there is only so long that someone will put up with sub par products or services.
If they want to sell cars liks that they should at least pass along the savings.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ May 17 2007, 05:31 PM) [snapback]444438[/snapback]</div>

Ah, yes. Honesty. Ok, Malorn, you want honesty, you got it. You compared Toyota to Chevy. Great! Let's look at Toyota Motor Corporation vs. General Motors, based on models sold within the U.S.:
Toyota Motor Corporation (includes Lexus and Scion):
Cars: 15 total, 3 available with an optional hybrid powertrain, 1 sold with a hybrid drivetrain only.
Trucks/Vans/SUVs/Crossovers: 12 total, 2 available with an optional hybrid drivetrain
General Motors Corporation (includes Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Saturn, Hummer, Saab, and Cadillac):
Cars: 30 total, 1 available with an optional hybrid drivetrain.
Trucks/Vans/SUVs/Crossovers: 33 total, 2 available with an optional hybrid drivetrain.

So, you were saying about how Toyota is getting away with gas-guzzling vehicles? Most of GM's 33 models are gigantic land yachts and get absolutely terrible gas mileage.

Personally, I hope GM does change their lineup and begins adopting more and more hybrid powertrains. I hope they take a cue from Toyota and clean up their act. As for right now, though, I'm banking on Toyota advancing today's automobile into what it will eventually become - a clean, electric automobile.

 

Malorn

For some reason it won't let me reply to your post so I'll have to cut and paste.

You admit that GM hasn't design and marketed a car specifically for the Japanese market but complain that the Japanese don't buy American cars. To answer your question, yes the Japanese would try even in the face of a hostile government. Honda and the other Japanese motorcycle manufacturers did this in the 1980's when Congress passes a law to put huge import fees on motorcycles over 700cc. The idea was to protect Harley from superior Japanese competition. The Japanese came back by sleeving their bikes down to 700cc's. When Congress put import fees on foreign assembled cars, the Japanese moved their production here.

You act like it's no big deal that Toyota builds the Camry and Corolla in the US.

2006 Best Selling Cars:
1) Camry - More than 75% US content
2) Corolla - More than 75% US content
3) Accord - More than 75% US content
4) Civic - More than 75 % US content
5) Impala - Less than 75% US content

It is no small matter that Toyota and Honda choose to build vehicles in the US.

"From Malorn's Post"
Again you want to talk about the exceptions to the rule. I know toyota has spread those rumors and stories around for years and is living by the "if you tell a lie long enough and often enough is it still a lie?" Let me ask you what is the content of your Prius?(3%) How about the average Lexus?(2%) What about the R&D costs not even considered in the content? What about the profits? What about the taxes? Are you telling me that Toyota is American? Are you telling me that Toyota selling 2.5 million vehicles in the US last year was beneficial to the US economy?

The bottom line is this:

Toyota employs less than 40,000 workers in the United States. In the last 18 months alone GM, Ford and Chrysler have let go more than 100,000 workers. That does not include all of the suppliers and other folks who lost there jobs, incomes, retirements and health care, that number is generally between 1 to 1 and 1.5 to one(roughly the same number of people lost their jobs as live in Orlando, Florida. You can make your case about the Prius and the gas mileage but the rest of it is all bullshit. Tell me why no one(media) questions that toyota ad where they fly into a new Toyota plant(built in what used to be a cornfield, with in many case subsidies from US government municiplaities) and infers they are creating jobs and helping the economy. They tout the opening of their 8th plant or something like that. GM has 10 plants just in Ohio. "End Malorn's Post"

No Toyota is not American, but they build cars here and create jobs here. Your basic stance is that for every 1 job Toyota brings, the big 2 and their supplies loose 2-3. That may be, global competition is tough but it is still better for Toyota to build their cars here than in Japan, Korea, Mexico, Brazil, or Canada. I dispute your claim that for every Ford or GM job you loose a supplier job. The cars are still being made, the parts are still needed. The difference is that the part supplier ships to Toyota instead of GM.

I find it hilarious that you even bring up tax breaks from local and state government to place a plant. Like GM and Ford don't get the same treatment. GM just good a real sweat deal to put a new casting facility in my home town of Saginaw, MI. The city doesn't get direct taxes from the company but they get jobs that bring other businesses that bring taxes.

Toyota also needs less workers because they the have highly automated factories. My company spends millions each year in automation to increase efficiency and productivity. We assembly about 300 parts into a transmission every 45 seconds using only 11 direct line employees.

That compares to GM where they paid my former company to design and build an automated assembly machine to assembly an engine mount and then paid the guy that used to assembly the engine mount by hand to run the machine in manual mode. When I asked why they said the machine would give better quality and they couldn't get rid of the guy because he would just go into the jobs bank. (For those of those not familiar with the UAW "Jobs Bank" its were GM pays the employee most of their salary to sit at home for years when they are no longer needed) Oh, and the guy's base pay was $15 / hour more than mine.

Why does GM pay Bob Lutz more than Toyota pays their entire executive board? After all Toyota have been making Billions and GM has been loosing billions.

Toyota is not to blame for GM's failures. GM is to blame and the blame goes from top to bottom, executive to line worker. And those 100K UAW workers got a really sweat deal to quit.

I have another good question for you. It seem those in the auto industry seem to have the "BUY AMERICAN" slogan down pat when it comes to cars, but have the blinders on to everything else.

Where was your TV made? Computer? Camera? DVD? Radio? Kitchen Knives? Dishes? Furniture? Carpet? Shoes? Pants?, Shirts? Food? Do you only fly with airlines that use Boeing planes?

I see a lot of American made cars with UAW stickers at the local Wal-mart when I visit my parents in Saginaw. Wal-Mart buys 85 to 90% of their product from south-east Asia, mainly China. If fact if you count Wal-Mart as a country they would be in the top 10 for trade deficits.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ May 17 2007, 08:53 PM) [snapback]444581[/snapback]</div>

I will accept the fact GM and Ford have made many mis-steps over the last 30 years. But to discount how this country is being sytematically targeted by countries where the corportations are pseudo-partners in all of it. You rattled off several industries which in most cases were started here and now have been decimated. I suppose each of those industries was just the victim of bad management. Do you still not see a pattern here? How about artificial manipulation of currencies, dumping below cost to wipe out competition, government underwriting of transport costs, government underwriting of shipping and even capital costs. You don;t have to search very hard to find all kinds of examples of this.

There is an economic war going on out there and every one knows it except the american consumer.

As for Wal-mart, i will not step foot in one. Nothing is worse for the average american in the long-run than Wal-marts business plan.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ May 17 2007, 10:28 PM) [snapback]444590[/snapback]</div>

I agree that we are screwing ourselves, but it's not the competitions fault. GM at this very moment is spending billions building new plants in China. They are exporting American design and engineering knowledge in exchange for cheap labor. How long before the Chinese don't need us anymore? Do you blame the Chinese government for letting us set up shop and build their industry? We don't have a trade deficit with China, we have a trade deficit with multi-national companies that set up shop in China. The problem is the benefit is short term, we are training our future competitors.

You speak of decimated industries, I'll use furniture as an example. I currently live in a town that was full of furniture plants. Now there is only one left, Berkline. They are moving the plant to China, just like they moved their other plant and all the other companies. They are still around, they just don't make product in the US anymore. Pretty soon those Chinese executives and engineers they've trained will start their own company and put Berkline out of business.

In the past 15 years all of the American owned companies in town have been replaced by foreign owned companies. You may have heard of a few of them Toyoda, Mahle, Kawasaki, Yanmar. Why is it that they can still make money using American labor but for some reason American companies cant?

The difference is the the Japanese companies aren't run by CEO's that get tens of millions of dollars to do anything to make this quarter look better than the last at the expense of the future of the company. The line workers aren't making $25-$30 per hour either, more like $10 to $15 which is still pretty good for only a high school education and a job that takes about a day to learn.

We agree on Wal-Mart.

I don't wish the demise of the US auto industry, but I'm not going to buy a car that doesn't meet my needs. You admit that GM doesn't have a vehicle that gets a combined 35 mpg. Neither does Ford or DCX. GM did but they discontinuedl both the Metro and Prizm in 2002. The figure was my minimum standard and ruled out all the domestics. After all, as my signature shows, I have a 2002 VW that gets an actual 45 mpg, why should I lower my standards 5 years later? Vehicles should be getting better, not falling behind. Maybe in 2010 -2012 when we are ready to replace the VW, GM will have something available.

Here is my turn around plan for GM:
* Put a 100K mile bumper to bumper warranty on every vehicle. You say the quality in there so prove it. Buy back your reputation. It has been working great for Hyundia and Kia.
* Drop all of the brands except Chevy and Cadillac. All the other companies seem to be able to do just fine with only a base and a luxury brand. Why make 7 versions of the Trailblazer?
* Bring labor cost into check by finally taking on the UAW.
* Mix up the model line. Peak oil is here, fuel efficiency is the future. Stop fighting it and lead.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ May 17 2007, 11:33 PM) [snapback]444620[/snapback]</div>

So, when are you going to work for GM? :lol:

Seriously, though, I have to agree with you. That's the best plan right there. GM had no problem giving Oldsmobile the axe; I think instead of shutting down production plants, converting half of them to Chevrolet and the other half to Cadillac would be the the best way to go.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ozyran @ May 17 2007, 09:50 PM) [snapback]444580[/snapback]</div>

If you really want to do it honestly, you would note that every GMC branded vehicle has a twin in the Chevy line, with the exception of a different front grill and possibly different interior styling. So, if you count up the actually different vehicles (not just differently branded) you would find that your numbers change significantly. Pontiac, Saturn, Cadillac, and Saab all add car models that are not in the Chevy line. However, for the most part, the trucks, SUVs, crossovers across GM's brands are all just rebranded versions of each other.

The same is true to some degree for Toyota, specifically the Highlander and it's Lexus twin.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ May 17 2007, 10:33 PM) [snapback]444620[/snapback]</div>

I agree with you on most of your points but we have the trump card to play in all of this, The US IS the world market. They (China, Japan etc) need us, but we have been duped into thinking somehow we need them, our government is a combination of on the dole, incoherent, or so elitist that they don't care. This could change overnight and in my opinion it will, but probably as a result of economic catastrophe.
These industries move overseas because there is a concerted plan involving foreign companies and their governements to conquer industries. All it would take would a politician with the balls to take on this mess. The problem is at this point in may end up in outright war after we figure out thta we have been collectively in an economic war for years.

 

Oh, ozyran ~ there you go, twisting the truth.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ozyran @ May 17 2007, 08:50 PM) [snapback]444580[/snapback]</div>

Gigantic land yachts compared to the comparable Toyota? The only GM vehicle that to date Toyota does not try to compete head-to head with is the Suburban, Yukon XL and Escalade ESV. The rest all have a Toyota competitor which in most cases gets worse mpg. All you have to do is a tiny bit of research to find that out. Again a blanket statement about GM vehicles relative to toyota (do you happen to write for the NY Times? :lol: ) that is easily proven absolutely false.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ May 18 2007, 12:01 PM) [snapback]444899[/snapback]</div>

That's a bit elitist of you. The US WAS the world economy. The EU now is the largest economy in the world, the US is the second, Japan is 3rd, followed by China in 4th. In recent years the EU has had faster economic growth, lower inflation, and the Euro is rapidly strengthening against the dollar. Don't forget this is all with them accepting comparatively poor new countries into the EU in the last decade. How would US numbers look if Central America suddenly became part of the US?

From the US State Department:
The 25-nation European Union (EU), with 460 million residents, is the world’s largest economic area. EU aggregate GDP was $12.86 trillion in 2004, and per capita GDP averaged $28,000, with wide divergences across member states. Buoyed by a robust global expansion, with growth over 5%, EU GDP expanded 2.5% in 2004. EU GDP growth slowed to around 1.6% for 2005, but is projected to strengthen to 2.1% in 2006.

From the International Monetary Fund (In trillions of USD / % of World GDP):
EU GDP: 14.5 (30%)
US GDP: 13.2 (28%)
Japan: 4.4 (9%)
China: 2.6 (5.5%)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ May 18 2007, 01:00 PM) [snapback]444955[/snapback]</div>

Ok, Chevrolet full-size 2wd and 4wd both had a 20 mpg highway rating.
GMC full-size SUVs were also rated at 20 mpg
(on a side note, the H3, although being smaller, having a lower displacement engine, 3 fewer cylinders, and weighing less, also managed only 20 mpg...the same as a Suburban?)
Lexus had a best highway mileage of 19 mpg
Toyota had a best rating of 18mpg

However, when displacement goes up, MPG goes down. And Toyota doesn't offer a 6.0L V-8 in any of their SUVs.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marlin @ May 18 2007, 08:23 AM) [snapback]444757[/snapback]</div>

I was going with what's actually offered, and it was a total of all the different models. I was going with what's actually offered, including re-badged platforms, not just the core vehicle itself. For Toyota I included Toyota, Lexus, and Scion; for GM I included Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Saturn, Hummer, Saab, and Cadillac. Re-badged, not re-badged, etc; just because a Tahoe and an E are built on the same platform doesn't mean that a Tahoe sitting next to an Envoy counts as one vehicle. Just the same as the Hybrid Highlander and Lexus RXh 400h sitting side-by-side do not count as one vehicle.

And if we want to go that route, then why is it that the Suburban and Yukon are rated, but the Hummer H2 isn't? You want to talk about cheating CAFE? What about the Silverado/Sierra 3500 models? Or the HD Chevy Suburban 2500 model? Or the Hummer H1? Why don't they get rated?!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ozyran @ May 18 2007, 01:51 PM) [snapback]445185[/snapback]</div>

Again, on the quality/dependability issue...

If I HAD to choose from the above, I would much rather have an SUV I felt wouldn't be in shop every other weekend that got 18 or 19MPG (Toyota/Lexus) over having a maintenance-heavy 20MPG vehicle (Chevy/GMC/...). I also don't miss the high depreciation that happens to accompany the domestic models when it comes time to trade in for the new Toyota :lol:

cc B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ May 18 2007, 02:00 PM) [snapback]444955[/snapback]</div>

So you just basically made the point that GM has more gigantic land yachts, since all of the ones you mentioned are larger than the Toyota offerings. Nice try though.

Toyota is a automobile car company and sells a wide range of vehicles. What is the comparison of the avg mpg of Toyota versus GM? Face it, you aren't convincing anyone with your Toyota is the evil auto company speech.

EDIT: I found the CAFE for 2006

domestic passenger--GM 29.2 Toyota 34.7
imported passenger--GM 30.2 Toyota 34.6
light truck--GM 21.7 Toyota 23.6

Pretty clear who makes more fuel efficient vehicles. And this is with the mostly bogus Flex-fuel adjustment that GM takes advantage of.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marlin @ May 17 2007, 06:51 AM) [snapback]444088[/snapback]</div>

The number of models is irrelevant. The number of trucks, SUVs, Crossovers and vans sold is. What percentage of Toyota's sales is in the light truck category? What percentage of GM's, Ford's and Chrysler's are?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(micheal @ May 18 2007, 05:11 PM) [snapback]445265[/snapback]</div>

Show me the link. Show me who's are getting more fuel efficient as a whole and who's are getting less fuel efficient?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ May 18 2007, 12:46 PM) [snapback]445005[/snapback]</div>

Nobody even comes remotely close to allowning imports the way the US does. We are the market.

 

Hi All,

Well. I think the situation is for every Job that the Big 2 shut down in the US, its 2 jobs that they start up in China and at less money than the one worker in the US. And the Japanese are impacted by that competion both in China, Europe and in their home market.

This was one of the reasons that Toyota did the Prius. The Prius monetizes their excellence which allowed them to be able to continue manufacture in Japan.

The Chevy Aveo is the case in point. Its made in Korea, at cheaper labor rates than Japan. The Aveo's and Hyundai's are the specific targets of the Prius. This was talked about in "..the Car that Shook the World" book. Toyota management did not want to let the company slip into an assembler of parts designed and made in China and Korea. And the only way was to provide value for the extra money.

In many respects, the US is the new UK, and Japan is the new US. And China is the new Japan and Korea combined.