You're the one who is insane. GM and Ford have laid off workers so they can have them assembled in other countries. They take advantage of the lower cost so they can compensate themselves with bigger bonuses and stock options while laying off blue collar workers.
GM and Ford do sell more than Toyotas. So what? That does not make them better vehicles. McDonalds sells more food than any 5-star restaurants. Does that mean that their food is better? Only lunatics believe so.
Study after study show that Toyotas have better reliability than GM and Ford. Only those with single-digit IQ's deny that.
Apparently more buyers think the vehicles sold by GM, Ford and Chrysler, in the same price range think so, that is why they buy more of them.
Are the folks that are willing to pay $10 for a burger in one of those
5-Star restaurants, as smart a buyer as the guy that buys one from McDonalds for $1? When it comes to vehicles more buyers realize they need not spend so much more for an import that is in the real world no better? LOL
All manufactures offer rebates and other incentives, those offered by Toyota currently on 2006 models, are higher than on some similar GM and Ford models. You are saying the Camry is the number one selling car therefore more buyers must think it is the best buy for their money, in that respect you are correct. You reference is to individual brand names, GM sells more cars then Toyota but with different brand names, therefore they must be better in the minds of those that buy them.
Why it OK to say Toyota and Honda have the best cars because they sell more but not to say GM, Ford and Chrysler are the better because they sell more in total than Toyota or Honda? Conversely, using that logic, the Civic is the best small car to most buyers, since they buy more of them. The Camry is the best mid size car, to most buyers, since they buy more of them. Buick sells the most full size cars so they must be the best. The Escape is the best small SUV, to most buyers, since they buy more of them. The Explorer has been the best mid size SUV, to most buyers, since they buy more of them. The Chevy Suburban is the best large SUV, to most buyers, since they buy more of them. Dodge must sell the best full size van for most buyers, since they buy more of them. The Ford Econoline must be the best full size van, to most buyers, since they buy more of them. The Ford F Series is the best line of light truck, to most buyers, since they buy more of them. The Ford F150 is the best individual truck, to most buyers, since they buy more of them, more than any single vehicle on the market today and has been for nearly 30 years. The best selling car, the Camry does not even sell at half the rate of the F150.
If you do not believe you will spend at least 20% more to drive home an import, I would suggest you actually go out in the real world and get comparable total drive home prices on the same size and equipped domestic and imports then get back to us
I'm sure he'll find a way to use those stats to try and convince us that the reason that the rapid depreciation, fire-sale tactics and lower used car prices are absolute proof that GM/Ford/Chrysler cars are indeed better.
I know, I know it means the exact opposite, but he'll try....
I've done that several times. My conclusion? You're flat out wrong. Throw in the added benefit of better reliability with the import and it's an even better bargain.
Mike, You made some great points. One of the main reasons that GM sells so many cars in America is related to the price of many of the models. For example, if a person planned to buy a new car and only made about $25,000 per year--that person would probably buy a GM Metro LSI instead of a Honda Civic. However, that same person would probably have preferred to buy the Honda Civic. It's for these same reasons that Walmart is number 1 in their field. Jason
I like to address a subject in general terms and not get personal but you must be like me, I have owned eight since I switched from imports to domestics in 1999, but if what you say is true then you should know what I said is true as well. Unless of course if you don't shop more than one brand. I did that with Lexus until I got smart and shopped around and found I could drive home a domestic for over 20K less. In fact when I bought my first domestic, which proved to be just as good as the Lexus' I had been buying, with the money I saved I bought a second vehicle from the same dealer
That my be your opinion but you can't prove it by me. I have never owned an import that was any more reliable or better then what I now buy and I am paying a lot less to drive them home.
From the Chicago Tribune (4/2/06 Sect 12, p8) Truck Rebate Guide:
Pickups Ford F150 $2,500 - 3,500 Ford F series $2,500 GM Avalanche $4,000 GM Silverado $500 - 2,500 Toyota Tundra $1,500 Honda Ridgeline $1,000
Huge SUVs Ford Excursion ('05) $3,000 Ford Expedition $5,000 GM Suburban $5,000 GM Tahoe ('06) $5,000 GM Tahoe ('07) Financing Toyota Land Cruiser None Toyota Sequoia $2,000 Hummer H2 Financing
Large SUVs Ford Explorer $2,000 - 3,000 GM Trailblazer $1,000 (SS finance only) Toyota Highlander $600 (hybrid finance only) Toyota 4Runner $1,000 Honda Pilot None
Small SUVs Ford Escape $2,000 - 3,000 ($0 - 500 hybrid) Ford Freestyle $1,000 - 1,500 GM Equinox Financing Honda Element Financing Honda CRV None Toyota RAV4 None
Cash rebates always have an alternative financing option of uncertain value.
The Sunday Tribune alternates trucks and cars weekly on its Rebate Guide so I don't have the Car Guide this week. Generally GM and Ford cars have much higher rebates than Toyota and Honda.
Fully 25% of GM vehicles are sold to fleet buyers at prices below even what the dealers pay. The Japanese companies don't offer those discounts because they don't have tons of excess capacity. So, in the minds of a lot of those who buy them, better means it's real cheap and I don't have to drive it.
GM sells a lot of cars because they have to sell a lot or their unit price skyrockets due to their fixed costs. Like everyone else, GM aims for a price and volume that will maximize profit. In GM's case, the best they could do in 2005 was a $8.5B...oops, $10.5B loss. If their cars were really "better" they could charge enough to make a profit.
BTW, if GM had paid absolutely nothing for health care in 2005, they still would have lost over $5B.
And people are willing to pay enough that Honda and Toyota make a good profit.
But GM has to discount them so heavily that they are losing money on them. (Are any Japanese cars classified as "full size?")
But not so good that Ford doesn't have to give a $2,000 to $3,000 rebate on them.
31% fewer in March than a year ago.
Are there any Japanese competitors in this segment? With gas up to $3 again, I think GM and Ford are going to have this niche to themselves for as long as they want it.
Again, no Japanese competitors.
I thought Dodge had the best full size van.
Ford probably makes a profit on these, even with the $3,000 rebate. But with more serious competition form Japan and $3 gas, even that may change.
You don't go to many 5-star restaurants, do you Mikey?
Is the guy eating at the 5-star restaurant smarter than the guy eating at McDonalds? Well, on the average he is probably earning five to ten times as much so I would be inclined to say yes.
Sometimes it pays to spend a little more. For instance, my 1978 Toyota Hilux still runs great. It has the original motor and transmission and they haven't been rebuilt either. How many domestic vehicles that old can you say that about? If the domestic auto companies could come up with something as dependable as the 20R/22re, they'd quit making it to force people into buying more often. The Ford I-6 is an example.
Here's something else to chew on. One of my 4runners had the head gasket go out at 90,000 miles. It trashed the engine completely. They had a recall on the gaskets, but it was out warranty. What do you think GM would do in this case? I'll tell you what Toyota did, they replaced the engine for the grand total of $0.00. So now the 4runner is approaching
300,000 miles, I figure it's ok to spend a little more on Toyota.
It boils down to this: If you don't mind having to buy again a 175,000 miles and you want to keep Mexican workers employed while lining execs pocket, buy GM. And good luck with you ABS system that should have been recalled long ago. Oh, I almost forgot, don't let anyone sidewipe you in your truck either because you'll see alot more flames than this post.
I have one, a 1971 Pinto that I bought in 1970 for around $1885. It currently has nearly 300K on the clock. Looks and runs great. The drive train is all original, except I had to replace the clutch at 210K. I wish the 75 Celica, that cost me around 5K, had held up as well. ;)
Hello, That reminds me of the problem that I had with a 1986 mini-pickup (Dodge RAM-50) that I purchased "new" from a Chrysler dealership. It had an auto. transmission. The carbuator was replaced three different times (for free) while it was under warranty. It was obvious that it was a factory defect. After the warranty ran out, the service manager refused to replace the carbuator for free. The service manager knew that it was a factory defect but refused to refused to replace the carbuator for free. It was the last vehicle that I ever purchased from an American car company. I was not shocked when Chrysler was taken over by Mercedes. I certainly hope that they are now treating customers much better at the local Chrysler dealership. Jason
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.