Gm Problems

My guess is that they are tired of repairing the junk american cars and/or turn away from gas guzzers, and/or prefer higher quality cars that feel better to drive then the american cars.

What I have trouble understanding is how patriotic Americans can buy imports when this is devastating their own car industry. Is it just the value issue? I would have thought that Americans would strongly prefer to buy their own cars and support their own industry, but this is not the case.

So the question is: what goes through the mind of a patriotic American who buys a Corolla or other import? Isn't it disloyal?

My Corolla was built in California with American workers. Most Toyotas (and Hondas) sold in the US are built here. As it turns out, the percent US content of transplant-badged vehicles is not much different than big-3 built vehicles. And it's greater than some.

I've owned several domestic-badged vehicles over the years, and I've paid the price in lack of reliability. I listened to guys like Lee Iacocca on TV ads decades ago tell the public that the quality of American vehicles was just as good as the Japanese. When you lie to the public, the public doesn't forget. I bought my first new Honda Accord in 1988, and I drove it for 157,000 trouble-free miles, then sold it for more than I could have dreamed of selling any domestic-badged car.

Sure, I want what's best for my country. But it's more important for me to look after what's best for myself. If everyone is willing to spend money on inferior products, then the companies making these products have no reason to improve their quality. Detroit is starting to get the message, and has drastically improved their quality over the years. But they lost a lot of momentum in the meantime.

I am sure that you have all read about GM's recent problems. Thier bonds have been downgraded to junk bond status. So have Ford's. GM and Ford seem to be steadily losing market share to Japanese companies. GM and Ford are strongest in the truck and SUV area, which is very worrisome given that those areas are likely to shrink considerably in the next ten years because of higher oil prices. The smaller the vehicle, the more dominant are the imports.

Who would seriously argue that the Neon or the Cavalier is a better car than the Civic or Corolla?

So I think that we can all agree that the American car companies are in a bit of trouble.

I know that our American friends are generally a patriotic group. I would venture to say that Americans are more patriotic about their country than Canadians, Brits, or Austrlians. What I have trouble understanding is how patriotic Americans can buy imports when this is devastating their own car industry. Is it just the value issue? I would have thought that Americans would strongly prefer to buy their own cars and support their own industry, but this is not the case.

So the question is: what goes through the mind of a patriotic American who buys a Corolla or other import? Isn't it disloyal?

I read an interesting article the other day which stated that imports are strongest in the "blue states" and weakest in the "red states." Is it true?

What about the new Toyota and Honda trucks? Will the "Nascar dad" be willing to buy an imported truck? If the Japanese companies can take away this market from the US companies, where does it stop.

that is enough to be considered patriotic.

What I have trouble understanding is how patriotic Americans can buy imports when this is devastating their own car industry. Is it just the value issue? I would have thought that Americans would strongly prefer to buy their own cars and support their own industry, but this is not the case.

So the question is: what goes through the mind of a patriotic American who buys a Corolla or other import? Isn't it disloyal?

This is a great question. Here are my thoughts:

 

My Corolla was built in California with American workers. Most Toyotas (and Hondas) sold in the US are built here. As it turns out, the percent US content of transplant-badged vehicles is not much different than big-3 built vehicles. And it's greater than some.

I've owned several domestic-badged vehicles over the years, and I've paid the price in lack of reliability. I listened to guys like Lee Iacocca on TV ads decades ago tell the public that the quality of American vehicles was just as good as the Japanese. When you lie to the public, the public doesn't forget. I bought my first new Honda Accord in 1988, and I drove it for 157,000 trouble-free miles, then sold it for more than I could have dreamed of selling any domestic-badged car.

Sure, I want what's best for my country. But it's more important for me to look after what's best for myself. If everyone is willing to spend money on inferior products, then the companies making these products have no reason to improve their quality. Detroit is starting to get the message, and has drastically improved their quality over the years. But they lost a lot of momentum in the meantime.

My car was built in California by American workers. Fords Focus (I guess it's in the same class) is built in Mexico. Badges really don't mean anything anymore.

Ford and GMs quality is only part of the problem. The other problem is, that they don't hold any value at all. A cavlier or focus is going to loose about half it's value in just two years.

GM has been making boring, uninspired and down right butt ugly cars for some time now. The only good cars are the Corvette and Catty. The rest are pretty lousy.

I do like some American cars, but I can't afford them. I'd be more then happy to own a Dodge Viper I like Jeeps, Mustangs, and Corvetts. They are acually decent cars and hold up better then the American economy car. They also hold real value after you drive them for a few years too.

The main reason I got the Corolla was for build quality. Our last car was a lemon, and I didn't want to take any chances. We generally buy faster cars then a Corolla, but I gave up speed for quality and I'm glad I did. It's a great car and the LE 5sp is acually enjoyable to drive. It just needs some better tires.

I loved my Saturns until the 2000 L series lemon got me to Corolla.

The Saturn dealer was great and run by a member of our church. However, I just got tired of repeated service visits.

The Corollas we bought to replace the Saturns were made in CA by UAW workers.

As someone else mentioned, it's a global economy. I bought a Corolla built in Canada. Toyota has given thousands of jobs to the people of the state where I live so they can build Camrys, Siennas, and Avalons. Toyota also teaches them to build those cars with a sense of pride and a pursuit of excellence that I can only assume is not being taught in the U.S. car company- owned factories. Do I wish Chevy's new Cobalt could compete with the Corolla? Sure. But it can't, and smart people don't buy cars that fall apart. Add to all this the fact that the cars we export to Japan aren't being bought, either. I am not as patriotic as I once was. Maybe the folks at GM and Ford aren't either. There is an old saying, "As GM goes, so goes the country." To say I am concerned about GM and Ford's junk bond status would be an understatement. But I have no plans to trade in my Corolla for a Focus.

GM has been making boring, uninspired and down right butt ugly cars for some time now

Hmm... I like my Corolla but even I'd say its pretty boring, uninspired, and some would say down right ugly... Same goes for the Camry and most of Toyotas other lineup.

Toyota sells cars by being unoffensive. They build cars that aren't especially fast, but can keep you moving, don't drive especially well, but keep you out of trouble, don't stand out, but aren't ugly. Basically they make appliance cars, something you can buy which will get you from A to B without you having to worry about anything. I guess thats what America wants right now.

GM and Ford might have problems but they don't come from building crappy cars. I actually like a lot of their newer offerings... IE the new Cobalt seems to be put together at least as good as my Corolla and it drives nicer. Their problems have more to do with unions, bad management, and all that other crap.

Well, have you seen a new chevy sedan, What is it name? Malibu? Ugliest car I,ve ever seen. I would not even take it for free. Honestly

GM & Other american car companies are lacking behind..

They still use OHV/Pushrod V6s & V8s, 4 speed automatic transmissions, none of them really have automatic climate control etc.

I think every chevy car w/ an automatic is a 4 speed.. everything just seems old and outdated (even the brand new ones, like the impala SS.. 4 speed). They are behind on the times/technology (seriously MB has a 7 speed auto; you'd think they might get a clue).

The main problem is their quality.. I enjoy going to car shows, but you really loose your respect for the american car companies when you look at the poor build quality and body gaps. I walked up a Toyota Avalon, ran my fingers across the decklid, body gaps are exact on both sides, height is the same etc.

Goto a top of the line deville.. look at the back, the left side of the trunk has almost no gap while the right side has 2x the gap size, part of the trunk sits higher, the other part is level, and the paint is less than perfect

So why would you spend $40-50k on a Caddy when you can get a more-bang-for-your-buck Acura TL?

I heard of a bumper sticker that says something like "This car wasn't made with chopsticks"

Well thats fine, but you'll be walking your ###### to work a lot more often than us.

GM needs to stop whoring their platforms around.. they are killing themselves

Good example:

Chevy Trailblazer

GMC Envoy

Saab 9-7X

Buick Rainier

Isuzu Ascender

Oldsmobile Bravada

Like everyone else, I can buy a Corolla and sleep easy knowing that I helped to keep American workers employed in California.

Maybe its cause I am not conventionally patriotic: I think unquestioning loyalty to the government is a disservice to your country.

Two problems confront Detroit:

1. Allowing bean counters to control product development and engineering.

2. Allowing the reach of marketing to exceed the grasp of the company to design and build a car that actually stands for something

If you want to watch your company go down the toilet, put a beancounter in charge. Beancounters are all about cutting costs, not growing a company. By their very nature, they are conservative and pessimistic and overwrought with the desire to micromanage. They are paid to thing short term, never long term and their reflections about product engineering bear this out. Witness Robert Mcnamra

Second, product deveolpers usually try too hard to creat a car or suv that tries to appease the greates number of people. What ends up happening is an overdesigned, poorly conceived prodcut that ends up appealing to no one. Enter the REBATE game! If you have to PAY someone to buy the product, then youreally don't have a good product to begin with.

Lynn Townsend almost sent Chrysler to Ch11 (he was a beancounter)

Robert Mcnmara lead FOMoCo and the Falcon bears his heavy "finance" stamp. Look how well he ran the Vietnam war.

Roger Smith was also a beancounter, remember the "identicar" issues GM had in the 80's?

The guy to watch today in Detroit is the finance guru who manages to cut 3 cents of cost on a $1.50 part He's the one promoted to Senior VP or something.

Suffice it to say, so long as the current system rewards short term thinking and planning, we'll never be able to produce a solid reliable car like the japanese. Its long term, "stimulating small roots to grow" (From Tachi Ohno toyota production system manual)

fast fact.................one TWo american nameplates from the 60's are still in production today...........the "Vette and the Mustang.

The Corrolla, by contrast, has been produced since 1966. The Civic since '75, the accord, since '76. Look at how many american nameplates have come and gone in that same timeframe. How can you effectively promote a car line when, after a few years, you pull the name, start all over, and throw a massive ad budget behind it, just to move the iron?

GM & Other american car companies are lacking behind..

They still use OHV/Pushrod V6s & V8s, 4 speed automatic transmissions, none of them really have automatic climate control etc.

I think every chevy car w/ an automatic is a 4 speed.. everything just seems old and outdated (even the brand new ones, like the impala SS.. 4 speed). They are behind on the times/technology (seriously MB has a 7 speed auto; you'd think they might get a clue).

The main problem is their quality.. I enjoy going to car shows, but you really loose your respect for the american car companies when you look at the poor build quality and body gaps. I walked up a Toyota Avalon, ran my fingers across the decklid, body gaps are exact on both sides, height is the same etc.

Goto a top of the line deville.. look at the back, the left side of the trunk has almost no gap while the right side has  2x the gap size, part of the trunk sits higher, the other part is level, and the paint is less than perfect

So why would you spend $40-50k on a Caddy when you can get a more-bang-for-your-buck Acura TL?

I heard of a bumper sticker that says something like "This car wasn't made with chopsticks"

Well thats fine, but you'll be walking your ###### to work a lot more often than us.

GM needs to stop whoring their platforms around.. they are killing themselves

Good example:

Chevy Trailblazer

GMC Envoy

Saab 9-7X

Buick Rainier

Isuzu Ascender

Oldsmobile Bravada

Time to play devil's advocate...

Whats wrong with pushrods? They aren't fancy but they are reliable, torquey, and definitely get the job done. The Buick 3.8 dates back to like 1964 but still manages to get fuel economy in the high 20s/low 30s and can put out enough power to compete with some of the latest OHC motors from Japan.

4 speeds? Most Toyota cars are still using them too... I agree that GM needs to lose them, but there is a 6-speed auto that has been in the works for a while and should start appearing this model year. Ford and Chrysler are already selling cars with 5 and 6 spd autos.

And quality... most of that is perception. There may be a gap, but its a lot narrower than it was 10 years ago in the early 90s. If you look at the latest GM, Ford, and Chrysler products they are put togther a lot better than they were even a few years ago.

On the other side, lots would argue that the Japanese quality has been going down. Take my Corolla for example. Its a 2003 and has build quality issues that you would NEVER see on say, a 1995 Corolla. Window trim constantly falling out, rattles, squeeky belts, etc. I've got friends who've had similar problems in newer Civics, Accords, and Camrys as well. The 00+ models are having way more nagging issues than the ones from the mid to late 90s.

So with the domestics greatly improving quality over the last few years and the imports slightly losing it, the gaps are closing.

You brought up the Deville, but that is basically a car from 1998. The newer GMs ARE improving, its just taking a while for them to update their lineup because it is so huge. Take a look at the 06 DTS, its a big improvement in build quality. Likewise the Cavalier vs Cobalt, Regal vs Lacrosse, Lesabre vs Lucerne, 00-05 Impala vs 06 Impala, etc. Ford isn't doing too bad either, the 500 has an almost VW like interior, along with the new trucks and the upcoming Fusion.

I'm not saying that GM and the domestics are perfect, but I were to go out and buy a car today I definitely wouldn't have the same worries about buying a 2005 GM as I would have if it were say, 1985... or even 1995. They've improved enough to let me give them another chance.

I'm not saying that GM and the domestics are perfect, but I were to go out and buy a car today I definitely wouldn't have the same worries about buying a 2005 GM as I would have if it were say, 1985... or even 1995. They've improved enough to let me give them another chance.

I also believe ford isn't nearly in as much trouble as GM. They have a decent lineup, make competitive small cars (regardless of what some will say, the focus is a rather good car) and seem to have some will to innovate.

If you believe in Consumer Reports, it is always striking that the "best" list includes mainly Japanese cars, and the worst list mainly big three cars.

Is the reduction in quality of Japanese cars due to the fact that they are now made in North America? Would you rather have a Japanese built Corolla or one built at NIMBY or Cambridge, Ontario?

Well I don't "believe" in Consumer Reports... Don't need to.

I generally go with what I experience myself, either my own cars or ones that I see, ride in, or drive on a regular basis (friends, work, etc). Why go by the experience of some unknown person who sent in a survey card to a magazine when I can go by what I see with my own eyes.

I work in a garage so I see a wide spectrum of cars from different manufacturers in different states of disrepair.

If you work in a garage, then you know much more than I do. So what cars would you buy with your own money, and which ones would you avoid?

What's NIMBI? Do you mean NUMMI, in California? I must admit I was pleased my Corolla came from Ontario. I've had no issues with it, while the Cali-built cars had a recall almost immediately.

If you work in a garage, then you know much more than I do. So what cars would you buy with your own money, and which ones would you avoid?

Not many cars these days are inherently bad, the main difference is that some are more vunerable to neglect than others. IE, a Honda Civic or Corolla will last longer if you never change the oil in it than a 2.4 Cavalier would, just because the 2.4 is more vunerable to that type of neglect, but, if you take care of the engine properly it will last just as long as the Honda and Corolla.

Theres no specific cars right now that I'd really avoid, since I believe any car will be a good car if you take care of it properly, as long as you research it before hand and make sure it doesn't have any specific well know issues (ie headgaskets blowing on early Ford 3.8s, though there aren't as many issues like that in the last few years). One general rule I'd always stick by is to avoid the first year of production on any car, just because there is no information out there on any inherent problems that specific model may have.

Basically, with my money, I'd buy any car without a bad history, which suits my needs and I enjoy driving/owning. Personally I'd be willing to trade off some reliability for enjoyability, I don't mind paying a little more for maintenence if the cars pros make it worth the money.

I don't have time now for a more well thought-out reply, but I'll sum up my thinking by saying that as an American, as long as I have the choice to buy something of higher quality, I will always do so. When the Big Three make cars as good as Toyota, Honda, Nissan, or Suburu, I'll start buying them again. However, Big 3 cars are all trash by comparison.

One more thing -- we've got to come to the realization that the big SUV's have gotta go. Anyone owning/driving one should be taxed into the poorhouse.

I don't have time now for a more well thought-out reply, but I'll sum up my thinking by saying that as an American, as long as I have the choice to buy something of higher quality, I will always do so. When the Big Three make cars as good as Toyota, Honda, Nissan, or Suburu, I'll start buying them again. However, Big 3 cars are all trash by comparison.

One more thing -- we've got to come to the realization that the big SUV's have gotta go. Anyone owning/driving one should be taxed into the poorhouse.

Just because something is from Japan, doesn't automaticly put it in the quality department. Nissan pretty much went bankrupt and was helped by Renault. So, Nissan isn't the same company as it used to be. I will never buy a Nissan/Infinity for the rest of my life.

The big three isn't all trash. The problem is, that every car made, isn't as well thought out as another. They make enough okay or even bad stuff, that it outweighs the good cars made. They make way too many cars.

Chrysler cars are getting Mercedes platforms with American mussle under the hood for a very good price. More then I'm going to pay, but for the performance and luxury our of a 300C, the price is good.

Our car is still in the shop from being hit. At this point, we've driven more miles on a rental then our own car. Anyway, we were giving a Camery as a rental car and after about a week, we were called and told the car had sold. They asked us to bring it in and they would upgrade us. We ended up getting a Jeep laredo. It was either that or a Pontiac grand prix. We went with the Jeep. I gotta say, fit and finsih is pretty good. What really blew me away was the fact that the windows didn't leak air at 70MPH. In short, I really wouldn't mind owning one. With the 3.7V6, it gets 16/22 MPG. I wouldn't want to drive it every day, but it was awsome when we went on a trip. Even our dog loved it.

The reason SUVs are not taxed on the gas guzzler tax is because of a loop hole that was ment for farmers. They acually need large trucks. The fix is pretty simple tho. If you can't prove that you own a farm or a buisness, then a buyer should have to pay the gas guzzler tax.

I used to be hardcore in to import cars, but latly, the quality can go both ways. I'm acually looking to replace a old CRX with a barly used v6 mustang this year. I've been reading up on them for months, and they don't break. Ford did have problems with blown head gaskets on the 93-95ish 3.8s, but Ford also gave owners a 100K warranty on the problem too. The new 3.8s have better cooling passages in the block and a duel layer metal head gasket. Owners are getting well over 200K miles out of them. That isn't trash at all.

rant over

I don't have time now for a more well thought-out reply, but I'll sum up my thinking by saying that as an American, as long as I have the choice to buy something of higher quality, I will always do so.  When the Big Three make cars as good as Toyota, Honda, Nissan, or Suburu, I'll start buying them again.  However, Big 3 cars are all trash by comparison. 

One more thing -- we've got to come to the realization that the big SUV's have gotta go.  Anyone owning/driving one should be taxed into the poorhouse.

I don't especially like big SUVs, but if you start punishing people for buying what they want and can afford you won't be much of an American anymore. Thats what they did in East Germany. Everyone drove a Trabant and if you didn't like it, too bad.

Govt involvement can't change what people WANT. In the 70s people wanted big, body on frame V8 RWD sedans like the Caprice, Cutlass, LTD, etc. Then Govt regulation and CAFE killed all those... so what to people want now? Big, body on frame V8 RWD trucks that don't apply under the same standards as cars.

You have to make people WANT something different before they will buy something different. Not everyone wants to be stuffed into an econobox and all the taxes in the world wont change that.

GM is working on full hybrid full size SUVs so soon maybe those people will be able to have their cake and eat it too.

One more thing -- we've got to come to the realization that the big SUV's have gotta go. Anyone owning/driving one should be taxed into the poorhouse.

Who say I won't buy Ford or GM? I have a Taurus SES right in my garage.

It used to be a Hertz car, got it at the end of 2001 with 13k miles for only $13k. Well below the wholesale book $15k price. Good deal, but scary how the domestics lose value. I paid $13k for my corolla when it was new, now I can afford a 3.0V6 midsize for the same price.

To be honest, the quality was still not there, tranny was leaking in warranty, tranny range sensor went bad, brown coolant problem, warpped rotors, and now sagging spring in the rear. My corolla that is 6 years older did much better than that and only had tranny seal leaking. Oh, the seat is more comfortable in the corolla too.

I don't know how they are in 2005, but I think they better do better when I am buying a new car next time if they want my business, I want all those problem on my Taurus FIXED.

One more thing -- we've got to come to the realization that the big SUV's have gotta go.  Anyone owning/driving one should be taxed into the poorhouse.

I disagree. Supply and demand should (and will) take care of that. The last thing we need is a bunch of bureaucrats dictating what consumers should buy.

 

Personally, GM lost my family's business in around 1984. My father bought a brand new 1983 Olsmobile Cutlass Supreme in the winter of '82. It was a beautiful car. Unfortunately, he made the mistake of buying the DIESEL one. The diesel engine just made too much torque for the automatic transmission, and even though my mother drove the car very gingerly it kept breaking torque converters. GM replaced the first two under warranty, but on the third they refused (the car was still under warranty). My father called the GM head office in Detroit, and after haggling with him on the phone for awhile THEY HUNG UP ON HIM! Dad took some yellow construction paper, cut out two huge lemons, and wrote a message on them advising anyone who was thinking of a new GM car to call him first. He put the lemons on each door, and parked it in front of the Oldsmobile dealership...and there it stayed. We lived in a small town at the time, and my dad cost the GM guys alot of local business. Doing something like that is nothing unusual nowadays (I still see lemon-covered minivans at the local Chrylser dealership), but in 1983 it was quite avante-garde! My parents then bought a big Mercury Grand Marquis wagon, which served us well for the next five years. Then they bought an '86 Camry, which they traded in later for the bigger '88 Camry. No more GM cars for me.

Chrysler also lost me in the 1980's. I was about 10 when the first generation minivan came out, and I remember all of the problems they had. In fact, I remember a door handle coming off in my hand when I got into my friend's parents' '85-ish Caravan. If a scrawny ten-year-old boy can break off a door handle, then there are problems. I remember baseball practice being cancelled a few times because the coach's minivan wouldn't start. What a bunch of junk. And I don't think Chrysler has improved all that much. I was at a Chrysler dealership about 8 years ago, and saw a new Sebring convertible being taken off of the delivery truck. As I was admiring the car, I noticed that the paint on the trim around the convertible top was already starting to crack and peel...the car just came off of the truck for Christ's sake! I see late-models Sebrings and the like that are already smoking. Personally, I can't see how anyone could spend $80-90 thousand dollars for a Viper...after all, it is STILL a Chrysler product. Paying nearly $100 grand for a new Dodge is just plain dumb...I don't care how cool they are. Jesus, go buy a Porsche.

Ford has not been too bad to us. My mother traded that '88 Camry in for a '92 Crown Victoria, and it has been a pretty good car for her. She got it in 1993 as an ex-Hertz rental car, with about 22k. It has around 170k on it now, and has given her little trouble. I know, because every time she has car trouble she calls me! I had an '87 Mercury Lynx XR3 (same as Escort GT), and it was a pretty good little car. I currently have a '94 Mazda B-4000 4WD (it is basically a Ranger), and it has been a good truck. If I had to pick one of the Big Three, I would definitely pick Ford over GM or Chrysler.

As others have said here, Japanese qualty control is slipping. All of the posts here describing problems with Corollas that are only 3-4 years old are proof of this. Often, people are posting with problems on BRAND NEW Corollas, and Toyota seems a little less than eager to deal with them. This is something that would have been unheard of 10-15 years ago. Remember that when Consumer Reports issues it's "reliablility ratings" on new cars, they are just looking at how reliable the older cars are from that same manufacturer and going from there. As such, they tend to be a little behind the curve on reliability. We are learning here on this forum that just because the 1995 Corollas were relatively problem-free does not mean that the 2005s are. Personally, I think that the Japanese are doing now what the American companies did in the 1970's...letting quality slip while floating on their good reputations. The "American" cars are getting better, but it may be too little, too late.

I agree with those who say that GM and Ford and Chrysler try so hard to please nearly everyone with their products that they wind up making cars that please no one. Chrysler keeps putting '60's musclecar badges on sedans (300 series) and trucks (Daytona). What are they trying to accomplish with this!? The younger buyers have no idea of the historical significance of these names (so it is wasted on them), and the older people who remember them are appalled that the DAYTONA is now a hugger-orange TRUCK! What's next, a new 'Cuda MINIVAN?

And what about the Pontiac Azetec? Jesus, what WERE THEY THINKING with that one?!? The Aztec has to be the ugliest vehicle in the history of the world. Ford had it's Edsel in 1958, and now in 2001 GM has had theirs. Let's hope they learn from it, becuase as an American I would really prefer to drive an American car. But I am not stupid, and until they make one that is decent I will continue buying foreign. There are some bright spots...Ford's 2005 Mustang is for all intents and purposes a 1969 Mustang (one of the best looking cars they ever made, IMHO) , and at least GM had the sense to make the new GTO a coupe (and from what I hear, it's a ripper). All is not lost, but the US makers have a ways to go. Regards, Aaron