Toyota to raise prices out of consideration for U.S. car makers

GM was the single largest corporation in the world. If I recall, there are currently about 1M retirees that GM covers. I would be surprised if Toyota's numbers are anywhere close, but I cannot say for a fact.

To be sure.

OR even keeping up with traffic it appears. LOL

mike hunt

Merritt Mullen wrote:

Don't worry. He's lying anyway. He's not getting those gas mileages as I know people who have those cars. They don't get nearly that. It's more like 21mpg for the Lincoln and 20mpg for the Mustang. Both figures are mixed highway and city.

Considering what a piece of garbage Lincolns are, there's no way to get a good deal on them.

You keep saying that the Ford 500 is a better car than the Camry. Well the 4-cyl Camry has about the same performance the 500 with better gas mileage to boot.

Speaking of which, how are the Ford 500 sales? Bad days for Ford aren't they? Interesting how the Camry is selling more than ever. It seems that the general public disagrees with your assessment.

That may be your opinion but that is all it is. You never owned a new Lincoln LS. My Lincolns have been just as reliable as my Lexus LSs were and I can buy the Lincoln LS for a lot less money LOL

mike hunt

Viper killer wrote:

I never said the 500 was 'better.' What I have always said is the only real difference in vehicles today is style and price. The 500 is bigger than the Avalon yet it only costs around the same as a Camry. As to 500 sales vis a v the Camry the Camry sells more than the 500, but the 500 didn't have a rebate and it is not in the same mid size class as the Camry, the 500 is a large car.

mike hunt

Viper killer wrote:

While it may be difficult to resolve which is "better," there are a few significant differences and those differences are interesting. I used Edmunds to compare a 4-cylinger Camry LE to a 500 SE.

- The 500 lists for $2000 or so more than the Camry (I'm comparing the 500 SE to the Camry LE).

- The Camry's turning radius is 34.8 ft and the 500's turning radius is 40 ft. A 40 ft turning radius strikes me as almost a sure sign of a Ford product. I bought an Aerostar some years ago and the first time I went to park it, I ended up in the space beyond the one I was aiming for. I was astonished at the crappy turning radius. I've heard the Fairmonts had incredibly bad turning radiuses - from a former owner.

- The 500 is 11 in longer and 3 in wider so, in that sense, yes, it's a bigger car but, as far as I'm concerned, bigger on the outside is never an advantage; it's more room taken up in your garage and harder to park. Interior space is what matters and, by the numbers, the Camry has just about the same amount of headroom, legroom, etc (the 500 wins a category or two and the Camry wins a category or two) as the bigger 500.

- Toyota rates the Camry to tow 2000 lbs. The 500 is rated for just 1000 lbs.

- Except the trunk, the 500's trunk is 4.3 cu ft bigger, at 21 cu ft vs the Camry's 16.7 cu ft.

- The weight-to-power ratio is 18.0 lbs/hp for the 500 vs 19.8 lbs/hp for the Camry, we can expect somewhat better performance from the 500. However, the Camry has an engine with variable valve timing and I wouldn't be surprised to find it has a significantly broader torque curve than the 500, maybe broad enough to erase the 500's overall hp advantage. The Camry does reach peak torque at lower RPMs than the 500. At least Ford gave this car a DOHC engine, vs the pushrod motor they usually sell.

- EPA fuel economy for the 500 is 21/29 and 24/34 for the Camry.

If Ford is really holding firm on 500 pricing (you have told us there are no rebates), I can get a more readily parkable car with nearly identical passenger comfort and nearly equal overall performance for $2000 less if I buy the Camry. I'll also get significantly better fuel economy, an engine that will probably cost a little less to maintain and the ability to tow a bigger trailer. The only significant loss if I buy the Camry is 4.3 cu ft of trunkspace. I could easily live with that. In fact, with my $2,000 savings, I could buy a little trailer and a hitch and have more cargo capacity than the 500 and still have $1200 or more left over.

By the way, I see the 500 is equipped with a 6-speed automatic. Is that a new design of transmission? I don't know that I'd buy a Ford transmission in it's first or second model year. Both my brother and I have been stranded on vacations by Ford transmission failures (in Fords that weren't particularly old - 3 years). We're not eager to repeat the experience. Come to think of it, is that DOHC 3.0L V6 engine new this year, too?

Not to mention universal retirement - wouldn't it be ironic if the Big 3 CEOs lead the way to universal health coverage in the US?

It won't be ironic at all. After the big stink and divisiveness created over the Clinton health plan many think tanks were quietly reporting that within

10 years 70% of the plan would be in effect anyway regardless of the party in power. The economic realities of costs of retirement and health care and the global business climate will have voters of both parties clamoring for help as not only the poor but the middle, working class get dumped. jb

Define "own."

GM owns approximately 20% of Suzuki and Fuji Heavy Industries (Isuzu). Ford owns 33% of Mazda. DiamlerChrysler owns 85% of Fuso (Mitsubishi Fuso Truck and Bus Corporation) and 34% of Mitsubishi Motors. Clearly Fuso is "owned" by DiamlerChrysler. Ford effectively controls Mazada. GM effectively controls Isuzu (not sure about Suzuki though). DiamlerChrysler does not appear to control Mitsubishi in the same way Ford controls Mazda...I wonder why?

Ed

fuji heavy industries makes subarus along with fuji photographic products. hence, the subie with the saab makeover.

GM also has a large piece of Suzuki but they build the cars in the former Daewoo plants in Korea. Ford has a large piece of Mazda but they can not own the company. Ford also had a big piece of the Japanese electrical company that developed the hybrid system for the Escape and the Prius but could not buy the company even though would like to. Toyota bought the company.

mike hunt

SoCalMike wrote:

i was under the impression toyota designed the system wholly on their own, and licensed the technology to ford.

?? Sure about that? Details?

That is what Toyota likes you to think. Aisin Seiki Co., Ltd. (aka Aisin AW and/or one of the many affiliated companies) primarily developed the technology. Toyota liked it so much, they bought a chunk of the company (well actually they bought chunks of both Aisin Seiki and Aisin Seiki' Aisin Warner subsiduary - all way yoo complicated for me to understand). For whatever reason, Toyota likes to obsscure the origins of the technology. Aisin's annual report makes numerous references to supplying hybrid technology for Ford's Escape, but never mentions supplying similar technology for the Prius. In its annual report, Toyota's only refence to its ownership stake in Aisin is "Entities comprising a significant portion of Toyota?s investment in affiliated companies include Denso Corporation; Aioi Insurance Co., Ltd.; Toyota Industries Corporation; Toyota Tsusho Corporation; and Aisin Seiki Co., Ltd." Figure out what that means.... As far as I can tell Toyota owns about 25% of Aisin Seiki Co., Ltd and 40% or so of Aisin AW (so does this mean that Toyota really owns 55% of Aisin AW - 40% directly, plus 25% of the 60% Aisin Seiki owns????).

If you want to try to figure out who is sleeping with whom,

is funreading. Other references:

If foreign companies cannot own companies in Japan, how come DiamlerChrysler owns 85% of Fuso? And I don't think Ford ever owned a significant percentage Aisin (or Aisin-Warner, or Aisin AW, or any of the other names the company and it subsidiaries use). Ford has and does buy parts from the various Aisin subsidiaries (including Escape Hybrid parts and 6 speed automatic transmissions for the Five Hundred / Freestyle). You are right about Toyota buying a chunk (or chunks) of Aisin Seiki / Aisin AW / whatever to secure the hybrid technology. The actual percentage owned by Toyota is difficult to determine because Aisin and Toyota subsidiaries are interwoven on many different levels. This is typical of Japanese companies and their suppliers. I think something like 70% of Aisin production goes to Toyota, so whether Toyota owns a controlling interest or not, I am sure Aisin listens when Toyota speaks.

Ed

Toyota has had its relationship with Aisin for at least 40 years, well before the advent of hybrid technology.

Not so. It was a Japanese company working in concert with Volvo, Toyo Togyo, and Toyota. Ford gained full access when they bought Volvo. Each company licensed each others patents to avoid the need for cross licensing. The system in the Escape and the Prius, while based on the same technology, are difference in application. Search "Automotive News" for the particulars

mike hunt

SoCalMike wrote:

Some background... Toyo Kogyo (not Togyo) was the predecessor to what is known today as Mazda. I do not know about the particulars of Ford access to hybrid technology, but it looks like Ford's interest in Volvo and Mazda would get the the access. Nissan's access to hybrid technology will come from Toyota.