GM, Ford, Chrysler vs. Toyota, Nissan, Honda production

This is prolly a circumstance that the Oshawa, Canada plant, which builds the Marque leading Regal, also builds the nearly forgotten Grand Prix. This plant has been advertised (in Canada, at least) as the plant with the least problems in the entire Western hemisphere.

Vuarra

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur. (That which is said in Latin sounds profound.)

In message , Huw writes

The latest "Which" magazine has slated just about all the German cars with MB fairing the worst.

This is the issue with the sensational "German brands lose their shine" cover page? Not worth the paper it is written on! This sensationalism is based on an apparently very poor showing from the Audi TT and a deterioration in the just released E class compared to the well sorted prior model [surprise surprise]. In fact all car models from all makers seem to be very reliable but it is no surprise to find the Japanese vehicles all at the top end of a crowded reliability scale.

Huw

You haven't been keeping up much, have you? Reports within the past year from both Consumer Reports and JD Power (as well as informal ones by Motor Trend and others) reveal that German quality has slipped to or below American levels. YEOWCH! Mercedes is the worst offender, with most of their cars getting black marks (1s and 2s out of 5) at CR. They've slipped below GM, which is on the rise. As is Hyundai. Mercedes has always been overrated, second-rate crap to BMW in every way anyway. Inferior engines, inferior suspensions (ride and handling), inferior steering feel, inferior styling, inferior pricing, inferior resale value. Across the board. And they try to compensate for all this by endowing their lineup with bigger engines. What an American solution. Now that Mercedes can't build their cars to Chevy Cavalier standards, their prestige will surely go down as it deserved to years ago.

How about 4-wheel steering (1988 Honda Prelude and Mazda MX-6)? Active suspensions (1990 Q45)? The first CVT (1983 Subaru Justy)? Being the first ones to make valve timing work, and the ONLY ones to make the rotary engine work, where GM and others have failed? HYBRIDS (auto catch phrase of the decade and the likely future basis of all cars)? Laugh that.

build fine cars,

tiny. The biggest

from their

tolerances.

MX-6)?

Wrong-- Try Mercedes Benz in 1903

Try mid 80's Cadillac with the air ride system. Or even earlier with the Lincolns built in the 30's

Based on a COMET Snowmobile clutch, yep high tech there. How about this type of transmission was patented in the U.S. by Adiel Y. Dodge in 1935, patent number 2,164,504. Lots of them around on snowmobiles and that started in the US real early.

ONLY ones to make the rotary engine

Valve timing was developed in the 1800's on early engines, If you mean VVT then Honda is the first to offer it on a showroom vehicle BUT it was developed by Ford back in the late 80's they just didn't need it at the time. As for Wankel engines they were developed in GERMANY in 1873 and in

future basis of all cars)?

How about this hybrid a 1913 Oldsmobile, it had a small gas engine running a generator that powered the electric motors at the wheels with large batteries that were also kept charged by regenerative braking as well as the generator.

You are confusing the Japanese love for cool sounding gadgets with true innovations. Not one of those ideas was a Japanese invention. They may have refined the ideas and actually produced them in large numbers, but how useful are any of them?

Four wheel steeering - patent applications at least as far back as 1907 Active suspension - Citroen from the 60's CVT - DAF from the 50's (now part of Volvo, which is part of Ford) Variable Valve Timing - Demonstrated no later than 1934 by Buggatti and probably much earlier Rotary Engine -German invention, sold by NSU (now part of VW) for years before Mazda

Hybrids - nothing was invented here, the idea is decades old

As far as I am concerned not one of the ideas in the list is much more than a marketing ploy to sell stuff to techno lovers. Japanese manufuacturers love to build gadgets. Admittedly many of these gadgets sell. And the Japanese are superb at refining and miniturizing things. However, this is more a statement of management direction than engineering ability.

Ed

They also have a knack of picking the best ideas from others and developing them until they're actually usable and reasonably reliable. That's something that we here in the US could stand to do... Not to mention the build precision thing... that's not insignificant.

True dat. If Packard (or any other US mfgr. for that matter) had listened to Deming instead of just riding the post-WW2 buying wave things might have been completely different.

nate

The ideas may be old, but so what? Anyone can THINK of an invention. The point is, the Japanese were the first ones to make any of those ideas actually feasible. Which implies technical competence. So does Honda's consistent record-breaking of HP-per-liter with their engines. And record-breaking of ULEV standards. As for their usefulness, every single one of those helps vehicle efficiency or drivability, and hybrids are critical since the world is expected to run out of gas around 2050.

If that's true, why aren't they around now? Cadillac also invented the V8-6-4, which let the engine run on 6 or 4 cylinders, and it was so reliable that it sometimes ran on none at all.

"Didn't need it"? Yeah right. It's useful and it's techno, so if they could have made it work, they would have. Certainly by now. Like I said, the rotary wasn't invented by Japan, but only Mazda has made it work properly. I don't know if you guys are overlooking the fact that the Western world got into this car thing a half-century earlier. So of course the discoveries will go to them, but isn't mastery more important?

So how come they're having so much trouble developing hybrids now? Their first systems, which are about to come out on their trucks (8 years after the Prius' debut), will reportedly be much less effective.

Crunchy Cookie wrote:

Breaking what records? Any fool with a turbocharger and a few days can get more output per liter than the typical Honda 4 cylinder. VTEC is nothing more than a marketing ploy. Honda builds nice cars, but come on, if you want to go fast not one Honda would rank first on your list. The closest is the S2000 and an ancient technology Z28 could run them into the ground. 2003 Ford Mustang Cobras can crush them and still cost less. What is the point in all the cool variable valve timing is all it does is add cost? Why spend thousands on a hideously complicated four 2 liter four cylinder when a pushrod V-8 can crush it? Also, Ford has vehicles that use pushrod V-6s that are ULEV rated. So what is the big advantage for Honda there? Do you honestly thing spending $100 of dollars on variable vale timing for an engine that mostly putts around town is a worthwhile way to spend the Customer's money?

Four wheel steering is pretty much worthless. Do the Japanese brands you mentioned even still offer it? Wankel engines ae cool and even have their niche, but they are just not as fuel efficient as convention piston engines. Ford and GM were both making preparations to start mass production of Wankels when the first gas crisis hit in the 70's. The inherent fuel inefficiency of the Wankel caused them to kill production plans. Only Mazda has continued to produce Wankels and they only use it in certain niche markets. I like the idea of active suspension, but it is expensive and not all that useful to most consumers. Over the years German, English, American, and Japanese car makers have offered different incarnations of the basic idea. It might sell a few high end cars, but for most of us, it is hard to beat the price/performance combination offered by convention springs and shocks. Hybrids are the latest techno-geek fad. Will they work? Of course. Are they cost effective - no. Instead of one power plant, you are buying two, plus a control system to allow them to work together. The cost of the various hybrids reflect this. You end up paying more for the hybrid than you would for an equivalent regular vehicle and the incremental increase in gas it would use. So why are the Japanese building them? For marketing reasons. It looks good and a certain number of people buy them because it makes them feel good about themselves. Also, the government is promoting them because they have to be seen doing something. This is particularly true in California where the government looks particularly stupid for pushing the introduction of electric vehicles.

Ed

Oh gimme a freaking BREAK.

Horsepower per liter means NOTHING. Less than nothing. Its a non-issue, except for bragging rights in glossy advertising. It means nothing in terms of efficiency. It usually has NEGATIVE implications in terms of reliability and driveability. There's nothing I need less than an engine that I must wind out to 8500 RPM just to keep up with traffic in my commute to work. Its another one of those things that gets the automotive press all hot and steamy, but is absolutely meaningless in the real world, except in the rarefied air of racing rules where there's some displacement limit. Here's a hint- there IS no displacement limit on street cars, so using displacement to improve efficiency, reliability, and driveability is a GOOD thing. Even if it doesn't yield "horsepower per liter" bragging rights.

Just mention one Honda with such steering, one Infinity or Nissan with active suspension and a Subaru with CVT.

They really started with valve lift, not timing...

I believe that one could mention success and disaster stories about each and every manufacturer.

It remains to be seen if hybrids will go the way of 4-wheel steering, Waenkel or mainstream...

BTW, I'd never group each and every Japanese manufacturer in the same group of innovators or makers of fine cars...

I have bought a 1999 GMC Jimmy (brand new) and I have had to:

- replace the rear main seal

- replace the oil cooler lines (three times)

- re-glue the outside door cladding

- replace the wheel hubs+ bearings (3 of them)

- replace the seat back handle

- replace the head gasket

- then another oil leak: I was told the rear main seal was leaking again as well as the manifold intake. Just when I was pondering what to do about this, the engine blows (I have put in a new engine) after less than four years and 110,000 kms.

- replaced the turn signal (around CDN$500)

- noise in the dashboard: it appears that an engine mount is bad

So, now, what brand should I consider next ? Hmmm, amybe another GM ?

Air suspension or not, they don't seem to execute it very well. Lincoln and Cadillac are both criticized for offering a both an inferior ride and inferior handling (on the models you mentioned, as well as on the LS and CTS), especially compared to Lexus and BMW, if not all luxury imports.

No one said anyone needed a rotary; we're just talking about technical achievements here, and how Mazda has been the only one to make it work. I read a report once how GM spent $50 million on it and gave up because they failed. In any case, rotaries are useful, in sports cars. The downsides are crappy gas mileage and mandatory meticulous maintenance. The upsides are smoothness, an exciting "feel", a reputation of reliability (if maintained properly), and light weight. The RX-8 scales in at just under 3,000 pounds, compared to a 3,300+ f***ss like Nissan's 350Z. Then again, there's the also-light S2000, but that's the exception.

Why are you getting into business relations? If you think BUYING successful car companies is a bigger achievement than being one, then your sources of pride amuse me. Your facts are also faulty: Honda and Toyota are completely independent. Nissan is about 40% owned by Renault (sound American to you?). Mitsubishi is 1/3rd Chrysler, Mazda is 1/3rd Ford, Subaru is 20% GM. Isuzu and Suzuki are parly GM too but those companies are lame so who cares.

Nobody? Try looking at sales figures for the Civic Hybrid and the Prius. And check back in a year, when the tally is available for the 2004 Prius, which is now a mid-size car at the exact same price point as the last one. It's like buying a 4-cylinder Camry and getting a hybrid for free. And if nobody wants the damn things, why are Ford and GM suddenly scrambling to rush hybrids to market?

Breaking the records I just mentioned: the HP-per-liter record and the cleanliness (ULEV/SULEV/etc.) record. Those are pretty much the only relevant records worth breaking, aside from the longevity record, which they have basically always held. I think they also broke the redline record with the S2000 (9,000 RPM) but that might be wrong. Yes, any fool with a turbocharger can max output out to infinity. Turbocharging is the easy route. The only thing easier than turbocharging is building a BIGGER engine. What kind of a contest is seeing which company can stuff the biggest engine that can fit into a car? Seems a bit silly, does it not?

Apparently, GM doesn't find it worthless, as they offer it on the GMC Sierra. Yours for only $40,000.

The Insight is a dumb car, but ever since the Prius and Civic Hybrid came out, that hasn't necessarily been true: several years of driving (5-10?) would compensate the initial loss. And with the new Prius, it's fully false. Now, $20,000 gets you the space and performance of a 4-cylinder mid-size car, the best example, of course, being the Camry. A Camry LE costs right around $20,000, so the hybrid powertrain is almost free.

Amen to that, our government sucks.

Well this one has an easy answer - GM and Ford and whoever are building hybrids for exactly the same reason that every company that get slap four wheels on a frame is now building SUVs - because they think people will buy them. It has nothing to do with whether hybrids are actually beneficial. It has everything to do with people thinking they are beneficial and wanting one. Which is exactly the same reason people buy SUVs.

Ed

It doesn't seem any siller than seeing who can build the smallest engine or even the engine with the highest power output per liter. I am interested in the final results. If a 7 liter V-10 fits the Customers needs better than a 9000 rpm 2 liter engine, why would you care?

It's a marketing gimmick just like it was when the Japanese offered it. I have yet to talk to anyone who actually uses a truck as a true work vehicle that thought it was worth the added cost. A freind who pulls a cattle trailer actaully refused to buy a truck that had it becasue it made backing the trailer more difficult (despite what the cool TV ads show).

According to Edmunds : 2004 2004 4 Cyl Pirus Camry Automatic TMV $20,510 $18,185 Front Head Room: 39.1 in. 39.2 in. Front Hip Room: 51.0 in. 54.4 in. Front Shoulder Room: 55.3 in. 57.5 in. Rear Head Room: 37.1 in. 38.3 in. Rear Shoulder Room: 52.2 in. 56.7 in. Rear Hip Room: 51.0 in. 54.1 in. Front Leg Room: 41.9 in. 41.6 in. Rear Leg Room: 38.6 in. 37.8 in. Luggage Capacity: 16.1 cu. ft. 16.7 cu. ft. Maximum Seating: 5 5 EPA City/Highway 50? 23 / 32 mpg (I'd estimate 25 combined)

So for around $2,300 you get a slightly smaller car that gets a lot better gas mileage. At $2.00 a gallon, $2,300 can buy you 1,150 gallons of gas. This is enough to drive the Camry around 30,000 miles. You'd have to drive the Pirus 60,000 miles before you saved enough to pay for the difference in cost with the gas savings, assuming the maintenance costs were the same. Seems like a marginal advantage to me. I certainly wouldn't buy the Pirus for the marginal fuel savings. I definitely would stay away from it becasue it is butt ugly - but that is just my opinion.

Ed