Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

minimax

macrumors 6502
Feb 9, 2005
351
0
aloofman said:
OK, that was kind of long-winded. :rolleyes:

But thanks for the answer, much appreciated and it corresponds to my suspicions...a shame really for some first quality brands (VW, Audi, Volvo which I think deserve a much wider audience)

Oh and
Volvo for the people who prize safety and shun style
was certainly the case for a long long time, but have you seen their recent designs? Totally amazing, first class designers at work :eek:
 

cheekyspanky

macrumors 6502a
Jan 21, 2004
633
1
South Bucks, UK
Abercrombieboy said:
Mark my words...this car is going to be a hit just like the 1986 Taurus was... True, this time it does not seem so radical, but imagine a domestic car that gets good fuel economy, looks nice, has a great price, has great driving dynamics and is built with quality materials. Ford is getting the idea with the Fusion.

The American Fusion looks like an updated Ford Mondeo (which is just about ready to be replaced!) Looks okay, but nothing particularly exciting about it.
 

Attachments

  • fusion.jpg
    fusion.jpg
    27.1 KB · Views: 56
  • mondeo.jpg
    mondeo.jpg
    15.1 KB · Views: 57

aloofman

macrumors 68020
Dec 17, 2002
2,206
3
Socal
minimax said:
But thanks for the answer, much appreciated and it corresponds to my suspicions...a shame really for some first quality brands (VW, Audi, Volvo which I think deserve a much wider audience)

Oh and
was certainly the case for a long long time, but have you seen their recent designs? Totally amazing, first class designers at work :eek:

I think Volvo has really had an aesthetic turnaround and the cars they sell in the US have been transformed from boxy to conservative. :p

Audi has its fans here and is considered right below BMW and Mercedes among European luxury brands. I think recently its strong resemblance to VW models has hurt it some because quite a few people just buy the cheaper VW version instead.

VW had a bit of renaissance in the late 1990s with the Passat and Jetta, but the Passat has had reliability issues of late. I test-drove a Passat when I was car shopping in 2001-02 and really liked the handling, ride, and power. But the seat was uncomfortable, the instrument panel incomprehensible, and it cost $2000-3000 more than the comparable Camry and Accord models. There's just no way that a Passat is worth $2000 more than a Camry or Accord, unless you like the purple dash lights and air conditioning vent in the glove compartment.
 

Monsanto-Man

macrumors newbie
Oct 19, 2005
11
0
Oh Yeah...

1.27 million-vehicle Toyota recall is Japan's largest1.27 million-vehicle Toyota recall is Japan's largest

Toyota's recall covers 17 car models, including its popular Corolla sedans and Vitz compact models, because of a defective headlight switch caused by a design problem, Toyota said on its Web site. All vehicles involved were produced between May 2000 and September 2002, the company said.

The recall exceeded the previous record in 1996, when Japan's second-largest automaker, Nissan Motor Co., recalled 1.04 million cars in Japan. (AP)

Foreign Products (cars) come from Foreign Companies which lead to ""Foreign"" Profits. When will we learn...
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
minimax said:
Sounds like an incredible gap in the market...why is no one jumping into it? do Americans have something against european cars?
Once you taste european you never wanna go-go back :D

I'd love to get my hands on a Volvo S40, just love EVERYTHING about this little sucker (especially the 5-cylinder 2.4 :cool: )

The price gap seems to be the main problem. Even though Lexus sells the most amount of luxury vehicles in the US, most other luxury brands are European.

When it comes to the daily driver though, VW is the only one that comes to mind.

Volvo is owned by Ford, which doesn't mean that they are bad. But the name seems to carry a premium. Same with Jaguar and RR.

European car manufacturers, for the most part, cater to the high end of the market. Which doesn't do much for me. I have a sporty small car, and a Limited 4x4 Toyota Tacoma.

As far as I know, there is no European car that directly competes with the Camry/Accord who have traded off as being the best selling car in America for over a decade. The Jetta and the Passat are good looking cars, but cannot compete when it comes to reliability.

To a certain extent, I think that American and European car manufacturers are just starting to take Asian manufacturers seriously.

Monsanto-Man said:
1.27 million-vehicle Toyota recall is Japan's largest1.27 million-vehicle Toyota recall is Japan's largest

Toyota's recall covers 17 car models, including its popular Corolla sedans and Vitz compact models, because of a defective headlight switch caused by a design problem, Toyota said on its Web site. All vehicles involved were produced between May 2000 and September 2002, the company said.

The recall exceeded the previous record in 1996, when Japan's second-largest automaker, Nissan Motor Co., recalled 1.04 million cars in Japan. (AP)

Foreign Products (cars) come from Foreign Companies which lead to ""Foreign"" Profits. When will we learn...

In their favor, they do their recalls voluntarily, and average far fewer recalls than Ford or GM do. For every one Toyota recall, multiple GM or Ford recalls can be found, so it's not a good point to try and make.
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
15,719
1,893
Lard
minimax said:
Bloody yanks...buy all the good stuff :mad:

Volvo and Jaguar have both improved since Ford bought them. Pity Saab and Lotus hadn't improved after GM bought them. It's going to be interesting when everything is done and there are 2 or 3 car companies.
 

SharksFan22

macrumors regular
Dec 29, 2003
177
35
Bay Area, CA
aloofman said:
There are a lot of regional factors at work though. Here in California and in the DC-to-Boston corridor, European cars are very common and the bulk of their US sales are concentrated there. But go to Wyoming or Kansas and you'll hardly see any.

More than you know. :) When I had my BMW X5 4.4i, I drove it from California to Denver and it performed GREAT at 100+ mph. Of course, when I stopped in some town in Wyoming with a population around 65 people for gas, the attendent asked me "What the he** kind of car is that?!?!". He'd never seen a BMW, let alone an X5. We get spoiled here in California.
 

cheekyspanky

macrumors 6502a
Jan 21, 2004
633
1
South Bucks, UK
bousozoku said:
Volvo and Jaguar have both improved since Ford bought them. Pity Saab and Lotus hadn't improved after GM bought them. It's going to be interesting when everything is done and there are 2 or 3 car companies.

Doesn't Proton own Lotus?
 

decksnap

macrumors 68040
Apr 11, 2003
3,075
84
SharksFan22 said:
More than you know. :) When I had my BMW X5 4.4i, I drove it from California to Denver and it performed GREAT at 100+ mph. Of course, when I stopped in some town in Wyoming with a population around 65 people for gas, the attendent asked me "What the he** kind of car is that?!?!". He'd never seen a BMW, let alone an X5. We get spoiled here in California.


Hmmm... I guess I'll believe you, but you'd pretty much have to not own a TV to have never seen a BMW. As far as I can tell, while more American cars and of course pick-up trucks are sold in rural areas, It's not like these people are ignorant of what's out there.

Volkwagon. Every twenty-something with a limited budget and a yearning for yuppie-dom buys a Jetta. They have clearly made the transition from hippie in the 80s to yuppie in the 90s, although they no longer have the same reliability, and are by no means luxury cars, meaning it's the would-be yuppies, (yuppies without money) that are buying them.

It's too bad, because they don't look bad, but I wouldn't be caught dead driving one.
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
15,719
1,893
Lard
cheekyspanky said:
Doesn't Proton own Lotus?

Yes, they do. Imagine that the largest car company in the world sold lovely Lotus to a small Malaysian company because they just didn't understand how things worked and couldn't stop meddling until things stopped working.

Thank goodness Lotus is still alive...and TVR...and Jaguar...and many car makers in England. British Leyland was almost the end for some of the most memorable names in automotive history...Maxi (no, not that one), Princess (no, not that one either)...sorry, I don't know what got into me. :p
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
minimax said:
Sounds like an incredible gap in the market...why is no one jumping into it? do Americans have something against european cars?
Once you taste european you never wanna go-go back :D

I'd love to get my hands on a Volvo S40, just love EVERYTHING about this little sucker (especially the 5-cylinder 2.4 :cool: )

I like European cars as well. The styling is great, and the performance usually matches.

I would really like to see them compete over here as well.

The more car companies that continue to exist the better. There are a lack of really good small cars in the market that can compete with the Civic or RSX when it comes to performance, or the Corolla when it comes to simple utility.
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Aug 10, 2004
2,708
3
bousozoku said:
That's great. Buick has been touting that it has the best GM quality. My mum's friend and her new husband recently bought the new Buick SUV for $30,000+. They took a trip and about 1000 miles from home, the engine failed in such a way that it was going to take 3 weeks to repair it. After much discussion about wanting a brand new vehicle instead of repaired, they were given a loaner vehicle and drove home. They received their SUV once again and, in less than a week, the engine died.

You are the lucky one.

my 2 cents...

My company got me a buick Rendevous and at 2000 miles it sounds like the chipmunks under the hood are getting tired. The mirrors are so big I can't see in front or to the left or right.

I want quality cars built by americans, if that means a Honda badge (my personal fav) than so be it. It is a global economy, GM owns a lot of Toyota (or it did, not sure now) and many of the so called Japanese car companies and American car companies are really integrated. GM has been sending jobs to Canada and Mexico to the point that I think of them as an import more than domestic.

I want competition and I want some kickass cafe increases. I used to drive (still own it, have a new company car now) an '89 honda CRX HF. 16 yrs old, 260,000 miles (put a rebuilt engine in at 200,000 miles) and it gets 46-50 mpg. Heck that is a 16 yr old car, old tech, and it kicks tail!!

I don't like the plastic or material quality of most GM/Ford cars, I have eyed the Ford 500 a few times, but I get wised up fast and don't go look. I want the competition, I want GM/Ford to succeed, but will not buy one in the near future for the reasons I have stated.

ps The Unions ought to give concessions based on mgmt rif, and concessions. bloat is out of control on both fronts.
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
15,719
1,893
Lard
stubeeef said:
my 2 cents...
...
I don't like the plastic or material quality of most GM/Ford cars, I have eyed the Ford 500 a few times, but I get wised up fast and don't go look. I want the competition, I want GM/Ford to succeed, but will not buy one in the near future for the reasons I have stated.

ps The Unions ought to give concessions based on mgmt rif, and concessions. bloat is out of control on both fronts.

I agree with u.

There should be concessions and I thought GM got rid of a lot of the middle management years ago that was causing red tape. Of course, paying someone $25 per hour + benefits to sweep the floor isn't conducive to making money on an economy car, is it? I'd bet that the administration makes bonuses whether the company does well or not.

When I've been to the annual auto shows here, I've been impressed with how nice the Ford and Chrysler interiors look and feel and how poor the GM interiors look and feel. It's one thing to see cheaper work in a $16,000 car but for $30,000, it had better look and feel good.
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/23/A01-358226.htm

Ford Motor Co. has worked hard to improve the quality of its cars and trucks, but the ghosts of past mistakes continue to haunt the automaker's bottom line.
As Ford reported a $284 million third-quarter net loss last week, it disclosed that its quality-related costs have increased by $500 million this year over the first nine months of 2004.
Those costs climbed $200 million in the third quarter alone, and the number would have been higher if the automaker had not received a $240 million settlement from Bridgestone Firestone North American Tire LLC related to the recall of 20 million defective tires in 2000 and 2001.
The rising quality costs stem largely from increased warranty expenses for 2004 models, including a trouble-plagued diesel engine for heavy-duty trucks.
"Our costs are up this year," Ford Chief Financial Officer Don Leclair said in a conference call Thursday. "They are up in large part because of the issues we had with the 2004 models."
Leclair said other factors contributed to the increase as well. Ford set aside too much money to cover warranty costs last year and added some of those funds back to its balance sheet in 2004 -- making for a tough comparison with 2005 numbers.
Vehicle quality became a major issue for Ford in 2000 when it was plagued by recalls and rising warranty costs. Ford President and Chief Operating Officer Jim Padilla has since led a companywide effort to improve vehicle quality. But the costly problems associated with 2004 model vehicles show the company's efforts have not been completely successful, one analyst said.
"Ford's been inching up -- not down" in terms of warranty costs, said Ronald Tadross, auto analyst for Banc of America Securities.
"This doesn't gel with the quality initiatives and progress Ford claims to have made," he added in a research report late last week.
Tadross said he suspects poor supplier relations are to blame for many of the problems. He said Ford has outsourced too many of its parts, giving the automaker less control over quality.
Last month, Ford announced a major restructuring of its supply base aimed at dramatically reducing the number of suppliers that support its products and developing more collaborative relationships with those it keeps.
Under the plan, Ford will select suppliers that have demonstrated an ability to meet cost, quality and other targets.
Like other automakers, Ford requires that suppliers share warranty expenses in some instances.
Padilla expressed concern about warranty and other quality-related costs earlier this year.
In May, he addressed the issue in an online question-and-answer session with employees, according to a transcript obtained at the time by The Detroit News.
"Globally, our quality performance and improvement has not been satisfactory," Padilla said. "This applies to virtually all brands in all geographic regions. Our competitors are now moving faster than Ford to improve their quality and we need to TURN THIS AROUND NOW."
Padilla also addressed how lagging quality was hurting Ford's bottom line.
"The cost of poor quality is the single largest waste in our business," he stated.
"We need to make major strides in reducing our warranty repairs per thousand, cost per repair and things gone wrong."
Ford said it has now turned the corner and put its quality issues in the rearview mirror.
Leclair said quality costs are "headed in the right direction" and promised improvement in the fourth quarter and beyond.
"Our quality has been improving on our vehicles in the field, and our financial statements tend to lag that a little bit," Leclair said. "The issues are behind us now, in terms of current production. They have been for some time. The fixes are in place, and we've taken steps to help our customers along the way as we work through this."
At the beginning of this year, Ford set an internal goal of improving its showing in a key benchmark for quality -- J.D. Power & Associates' annual initial quality study. But the 2005 report out last spring showed the company's performance was essentially flat.
Ford's quality costs have been affected by problems involving the popular 6.0-liter Powerstroke diesel engine, which was introduced in 2003. It powers big trucks such as the Ford F-250 and F-550.
"The biggest issues we've had for 2004 were the diesel engines," said Jerry Reynolds, whose Prestige Ford in Garland, Texas, is one of the nation's highest volume Ford dealers. "We were spending a lot of money trying to fix them."
Reynolds said it took Ford some time to find the flaw, which turned out to be a problem with fuel injectors -- a component produced by an outside supplier. However, he said Ford took good care of customers whose trucks were affected by the glitch, giving some full-size pickups as loaners and covering some monthly payments.
"I was proud of how they stepped up," Reynolds said, adding that he has had no problems with the newer models.
While Ford does not publicly break down its quality costs by vehicle, it confirmed that the Powerstroke engine problems were a factor in its cost performance. Ford spokeswoman Angie Kozleski said that these problems, and other issues that took a toll on third-quarter earnings, are in the past.
"Bottom line: We have improved," Kozleski said. "(And) we will not be satisfied until we are No. 1."

Let's hope they mean it.
 

Jon'sLightBulbs

macrumors 6502a
Jan 31, 2005
524
0
Chicago
I really like what Ford has done with Mustang and Fusion.

Now, I don't want to sound insensitive to union members, but very few consumers, myself included, consider how well auto workers are being treated when we buy a vehicle. We're only end users, and all we care about is recieving a nice car.

Nobody cares about how high your union health costs are.

Now I must leave, before half of Chicago tackles me to the ground...
 

DakotaGuy

macrumors 601
Jan 14, 2002
4,226
3,791
South Dakota, USA
Bill Ford speaks out.

Here is the best corporate ad I have seen in some time come out of Ford. If he projects this image and has the goods to back it up down the line Ford will be successful in the future. I like Bill Ford, he is one of my favorite CEO's right behind Steve Jobs. It should be playing on tv soon...but here is a sneak peek behind Ford's new commitment to innovation...

http://us.tnpv.net/2005/FRD200510/Ford_Commercial_01.mpg
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
Abercrombieboy said:
Here is the best corporate ad I have seen in some time come out of Ford. If he projects this image and has the goods to back it up down the line Ford will be successful in the future. I like Bill Ford, he is one of my favorite CEO's right behind Steve Jobs. It should be playing on tv soon...but here is a sneak peek behind Ford's new commitment to innovation...

http://us.tnpv.net/2005/FRD200510/Ford_Commercial_01.mpg

It doesn't really mean a thing until they achieve what they are selling. If the image is not relevant to the product, consumers eventually learn better. That is the problem.

Introducing a Hybrid Escape years after Toyota introduced their hybrids is not innovation, it's reacting to the lead a more focused companying is pioneering, and has succeeded with.

The Mustang is still old technology, that rehashes old styling. While I like the styling, it is hardly innovative.

Bill Ford has a long way to go before he proves himself to be more clever than the original Ford who was truly an innovative pioneer.

Has Bill Ford surpassed the invention of the assembly line yet? That is an example of what great innovation is. And an example of what Ford was, which lead it to become a market leader.
 

Jon'sLightBulbs

macrumors 6502a
Jan 31, 2005
524
0
Chicago
Xtremehkr said:
Introducing a Hybrid Escape years after Toyota introduced their hybrids is not innovation, it's reacting to the lead a more focused companying is pioneering, and has succeeded with.

Failed analogy! Honda came out with the Insight hybrid first in 2000. Toyota then followed suit with the Prius in 2001. Toyota "followed" Honda, the real "pioneer," and became successful off of the innovation of another company! Hondas Insight continued to languish. Of course, Ford can take marketshare of this recently created market (hybrids) just as easily as Toyota did.

The Mustang is still old technology, that rehashes old styling. While I like the styling, it is hardly innovative.

Their innovation was sticking a ridiculously torquey motor into a near- economy car. The horsepower/dollar rating in that car is still unbeaten.

Has Bill Ford surpassed the invention of the assembly line yet? That is an example of what great innovation is. And an example of what Ford was, which lead it to become a market leader.

Sorry, bud, but there has been no "innovation" since the internal combustion engine was first created. Every single manufacturer touted as a "leader in technological innovation" has rehashed the same, exact principle - transferring heat into mechanical energy by burning fuel. This new fangled hybrid still runs on the same principle.

Yes, Mercedes, your the viscosity of the dampening fluid inside your shock absorbers is electromagnetically variable according to road imperfections measured every thousandth of a second. Yes, BMW, your steering ratio is variable according to speed. But you're both still running on the same (darn) internal combustion principle promulgated a hundred years ago.

And Ford is no different. Folks, we're selling cars not based upon superior innovation as the principle motivator, but upon brand equity. Let's be realistic.
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
Jon'sLightBulbs said:
Failed analogy! Honda came out with the Insight hybrid first in 2000. Toyota then followed suit with the Prius in 2001. Toyota "followed" Honda, the real "pioneer," and became successful off of the innovation of another company! Hondas Insight continued to languish. Of course, Ford can take marketshare of this recently created market (hybrids) just as easily as Toyota did.

Toyota introduced the Prius to Japan in 1997. It does not excuse Ford for not introducing the Hybrid first in any market. Toyota made the Hybrid product the succeeded, Honda followed with the Civic and the Accord. Toyota leads the Hybrid market. Ford, with a total of one late introduction to the Hybrid market, continues to follow. Ford could take share when they offer a better product, true enough.


Their innovation was sticking a ridiculously torquey motor into a near- economy car. The horsepower/dollar rating in that car is still unbeaten.

Sticking to something is innovative? While it may be that, it does not mean that it is the best product. What are you referring to anyway?


Sorry, bud, but there has been no "innovation" since the internal combustion engine was first created. Every single manufacturer touted as a "leader in technological innovation" has rehashed the same, exact principle - transferring heat into mechanical energy by burning fuel. This new fangled hybrid still runs on the same principle.

Yes, Mercedes, your the viscosity of the dampening fluid inside your shock absorbers is electromagnetically variable according to road imperfections measured every thousandth of a second. Yes, BMW, your steering ratio is variable according to speed. But you're both still running on the same (darn) internal combustion principle promulgated a hundred years ago.

And Ford is no different. Folks, we're selling cars not based upon superior innovation as the principle motivator, but upon brand equity. Let's be realistic.

Not every innovation is tied to the development of the combustion engine. Ford developing the assembly line was a great innovation that virtually every car company has since adapted. Every car company in fact, which don't use an assembly these days?
 

Jon'sLightBulbs

macrumors 6502a
Jan 31, 2005
524
0
Chicago
1. The Mustang led the way in 67, not today. 2. Not every innovation is tied to the internal combustion engine. Right. But that engine is the lynchpin of automotive design, and it hasn't changed in a century. Every other change in technology is completely peripheral. I'm really not an expert in the development of car manufacturing methods historically, but I hope you'd agree that a change in manufacturing philosophy and process is not a change substantively.

The point is, I don't see hybrids as useful innovation. They're really just change for the sake of change. Observed hybrid mileage isn't significantly better than diesel mileage. Yet hybrids require the installation of a parallel system of propulsion in addition to the gas engine. Why add an electric motor and battery when diesels get substantially the same mileage?
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
Jon'sLightBulbs said:
The point is, I don't see hybrids as useful innovation. They're really just change for the sake of change. Observed hybrid mileage isn't significantly better than diesel mileage. Yet hybrids require the installation of a parallel system of propulsion in addition to the gas engine. Why add an electric motor and battery when diesels get substantially the same mileage?

Many people disagree. Stretching limited resources cannot be a bad idea. Time will tell.
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
BTW, Hybrids have been selling like hot cakes for years. Check the numbers, it is a growth industry.
 

Skareb

macrumors member
Oct 24, 2005
88
0
Adelaide
Xtremehkr said:
Ok, time for GM and Ford to start making a comeback
That would imply that they had some desire to develop fuel efficient/hybrid cars (including small displacement turbo diesels, see the new VW Golf @ 4.5L/100km, but with 200bhp (147kW))

If only they would have turned the 4500GT into a production model
super%20sports.jpg

This 1990 concept car was powered by a 40valve 4.5L V8.

Cheers
Jordan
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.