Detroit auto makers try some new tricks

"n5hsr" ...

ROFL - Bitter? Oh, a tad...

You know what, sales is a sleazy business, no matter what it is. They're
always trying to hook you into something you don't need, by trying to
convince you that you can't live without it, or that you'll miss out.

My son works for a large electronics corporation, that rhymes with "Chest
Pie."
He used to be in computer sales, now he's on something that rhymes with the
"Peek Odd" ;-) When he was selling puters, he said they didn't make their
money from the computer's sale (they usually sold them below wholesale
price) - it's the other extraneous shit that makes them the bucks! For
instance, with his employee discount, he can buy Ethernet cable, that
normally costs $20 retail, for $1.50! What a markup!

Natalie

 

"Steve" ...

My engines have never burned up, but you didn't say what type of domestic
vehicles you've had. Even I would buy large domestic vehicles, as I've said
many times.

It's the "low-end" economy domestics that gave many I knew of lots of grief.

Most consumers can't afford those monster-sized vehicles, so they *have* to
try to get their money's worth from cheaper vehicles.

Natalie

 

First of all, the sludge thing is quite old. You guys need a new mantra.

Secondly, "it was the owner's fault" is the *domestic* car makers slogan.

Natalie

 

I was a department mangager in a then-growing Southern discount chain about
25 years ago. I used to try to get customers to buy more stuff, not because
it was good for me, but oftimes what they were doing was going to be not as
good. I sold paint, among other things. I used to try to get people
painting to do the prep work, so the paint job would last. I tried to make
sure they had what they needed to do the job. Brushes, masking tape,
remover. Sometimes primer, depending on the job. Drop cloths, what have
you. I hate sleazy, greasy salesmen.

Charles of Schaumburg

 

yeah. That's right. That's why Honda spent FIVE YEARS selling Odysseys
at list price plus. That's why GM has ABANDONED the minivan market,
period--and told the world so.

Face it: the Americans made their mark selling big, rwd, body-on-frame
vehicles. When it came to changing that, to selling small, efficient,
front-drive vehicles, the Americans fell flat on their faces. Still do.

The Americans turned on the marketing machine to solve their problem:
they convinced stupid people that the "SUV" was the way to go. This
allowed them to continue to build and sell big, rwd, body-on-frame
vehicles that they knew how to build and sell.

That they were selling this to the former station wagon market, and that
they abandoned the station wagon--well, that's the hand they'd rather
you not look at. Just like a magician, they want you to look at the
other hand, the one holding the leather-clad truck.

So Suzy Stupidmom is convinced that she needs a full-size truck with a
built-on cap and leather seats to transport her Precious to daycare.

When the world can no longer support that model, what will the American
carmakers do?

They can **** off and die.

 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" ...

I still see quite a few of them on the road, though hubby swore them off
because they were just too "middle-class" for him, whatever that means. I
think he just doesn't like the cliche.

Right, but the only way to rebound in that market, which is probably most of
the vehicles sold, they simply *have* to think outside those lines.

We never bought into the SUV thing - hubby considered a king-cab type
vehicle, but decided it was just not practical for a then-growing family of
four. He still may get a truck when the kids are out of the house. (he'd go
domestic for that)

Yeah - that was quite a fiasco. Wal-Mart sells the cheapest gas in this
area, and if you buy it with a gift card, you get another 3 cents per gallon
off of the already rock-bottom price (probably because they figure if they
get you in the store to buy the card, you'll pick up something else)

I don't know that it's the moms that bought the big trucks. I seldom see
women driving those. Minivans I see are almost always driven by women.

I hope they get with the program.

So, no slack at all...



Natalie

 

I don't think any car company, whether American, Japanese, German, or
Korean, cares about customers very much, but some companies have a lot
more money to spend on customers than others do, and it's probably
safer to bet on them.

Because not everybody learns from their mistakes? The American car
makers' slide didn't start just a few years ago but has been brewing
for 15-20 years.

 

That expression has been revised. It's now " fool me once, shame on —
shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." (I'm a fan of
George Bush, but that was still funny, and embarrassing. I guess the
Who helped with the re-write of the cliché.)

Bill of Farmville

 

That's a perfect example of proper use of a double negative. I hate it
when people say you can't use double negatives.

I told part of this story in an earlier post, but back in the early
80's, when I had a Chevrolet Citation, I complained loudly to the dealer
and the regional GM rep that there was a serious problem with the brakes
- after I had, on 2 occasions gone thru a red light *backwards* because
I made a not-even-moderately-hard stop in the rain when the yellow light
caught me. The regional rep (a retired NASCAR driver) actually told me
that that sort of thing only happens because people don't know how to
drive. I told him that when GM starts providing high speed driving
school training with the purchase of the car, I would believe that. A
year later, NHTSA recalled the cars after several people were killed due
to rear brakes locking up (by that time, I had figured out what the fix
was and implemented it on my car).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

*and with just as much sarcasm, and just as stupid*

Yeah - if it's on Google or Wikipedia, it *can't* be true!

Give me a break.

*You can't turn stupid off*

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

I'll buy that. Let's see - who buys SUV's? Hillary, Jesse, ...

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

I'd go further and say that "initial quality" is utterly meaningless. It
just tells if the car is prettily assembled, and whether or not it
rattles. So what? A car can rattle but not fail for half a million
miles. It can also have crooked door seams, but who cares so long as the
engine tolerances are superb.


As far as first-year model buying, it helps to know some of the history
of the company and its design process and other products. A "new
drivetrain" that is actually based on an older engine design usually
carries almost no risk. One of the best vehicles I've ever owned is my
wife's 1993 (first year) LH with a 3.5L (first year) engine. But the 3.5
is based on the 3.3/3.8 block which was designed by Bill Weertman's
(designer of the slant-6, LA series v8, and B/RB series big-block) group
back before he retired, so its been utterly bulletproof for 244,000
miles and still going.

 

Wickeddoll® wrote:


You DO know that the Sebring (except for the convertible) is a JAPANESE
car, don't you? Designed and built by Mitsubishi. The Sebring
Convertible is a Chrysler JA chassis, same as the 4-door Cirrus and Stratus.

Oh please. ALL of the car manufacturers generally claim that only
INTERNALLY LUBRICATED components are part of the powertrain. I agree
that its silly, but they all do it.

 

Wickeddoll® wrote:

Chrysler (including Dodge, Plymouth, and Eagle) midsize and full-size
sedans.

ALL "low-end" cars are questionable. That's why they're "low-end."

Monster-sized? Only my '66 Polara counts as "monster sized." I don't own
a Durago or Ram 3500 (or I could say Tundra, Sequoyah, etc.) after all.

 

But not really proven to be fixed.... all the more reason to keep
pointing it out.

And don't get me wrong- Chrysler has a sludge-prone engine too (the 2.7L
v6) But at least they have documented engineering changes that address
the problem, and seem to have corrected it even when maintenance is poor.

 

But Chrysler still dominates it, as it has done since inventing the
segment in 1994.

Horse shit. Don't equate "American" with "Cadillac." The last
body-on-frame Dodge or Plymouth was built in 1959. The last
body-on-frame Chrysler product was the 1967 Imperial, all the others
having transitioned to unibody in '60.

Yeah. Right. That's really funny since both GM and Chrysler had a full
range of front-drives nearly 10 years before toyota quit trying to sell
rear-wheel-drive "economy" cars.

 

Well Toyota sure picked up on it quickly. There are some things Toyota
would be better off not copying.

Interestingly, I was listening to Car Talk on NPR this past weekend -
the "Tappet Brothers" even mentioned sludge prone engines when
diagnosing a Toyota that smoked on start-up (I thought they all did
that - at least the ones owned by my neighbors all do - I thought it
was a Toyota feature).

When I look out of my apartment window, I see the space where one of
my former neighbors used to park his Camry. He is gone but the oil
slick that POS left is still with us. Just another reminder that
Toyotas aren't the perfect vehicles that some people seem to think
they are. On the other hand, my SO's 2007 RAV4 is approaching it's one
year anniversary and it has been perfect - it doesn't even smoke on
start-up (but then my 10 month old Fusion which has more miles on the
odometer has been just as perfect).

Ed

 

Excepting trucks and SUVs of course.

I am not sure what you mean by a full range of FWDs. Oldsmobile sold
the Tornado, a large FWD car starting in 1966 (1966 model) and the "X
Cars" starting in 1980 (1980 models). Chrysler sold the Omni and
Horizons starting in 1978. The "K"cars showed up in 1980 (1981
models). Why are you leaving out Ford? The Fiesta, sold in the US
starting in 1977 (1978 Model) was also FWD. The US Escort was a FWD
car introduced in 1980 (1981 Model). Interestingly, Ford had plans to
do a small FWD car for the US in the early 60's but Lee Iacocca killed
that because he felt it would not sell in the US.

Ed

 

"Bill Putney" ...

Um, thanks?

My God - bottom line over lives. Whether they care or not, they should have
realized the consequences of their inaction.

Natalie

 

I don't have a wife, but a rather strapping, handsome husband, so this isn't
my quote.

*snip*

Natalie