Re: GM still out sells Honda
 

snip

> If buyers really want small underpowered vehicles as you suggest, what do
> you think is the reason that every import brands vehicles got bigger and
> more powerful over the past ten years. The fact is they are ALL bigger and
> more powerful, with more new trucks and SUVs than small cars. Todays
> Civic a bigger car than any other Civic.

snip

I am speculating but the reason why cars get bigger might be the
manufacturers' way to lure buyers to stay with them. You are happy with your
car but you may find you could use a little more space and use a few more
ponies. 3-4 years down the road, your car is bigger and more powerful so,
you decide that you want the same car. 3-4 more years, same thing.
In the meantime, the manufacturer builds a new model, smaller than the one
you had. The same car will eventually get bigger and more powerfull. The
wheel keeps turning.

Re: GM still out sells Honda
 

snip

> If buyers really want small underpowered vehicles as you suggest, what do
> you think is the reason that every import brands vehicles got bigger and
> more powerful over the past ten years. The fact is they are ALL bigger and
> more powerful, with more new trucks and SUVs than small cars. Todays
> Civic a bigger car than any other Civic.

snip

I am speculating but the reason why cars get bigger might be the
manufacturers' way to lure buyers to stay with them. You are happy with your
car but you may find you could use a little more space and use a few more
ponies. 3-4 years down the road, your car is bigger and more powerful so,
you decide that you want the same car. 3-4 more years, same thing.
In the meantime, the manufacturer builds a new model, smaller than the one
you had. The same car will eventually get bigger and more powerfull. The
wheel keeps turning.

Re: GM still out sells Honda
 

snip

> If buyers really want small underpowered vehicles as you suggest, what do
> you think is the reason that every import brands vehicles got bigger and
> more powerful over the past ten years. The fact is they are ALL bigger and
> more powerful, with more new trucks and SUVs than small cars. Todays
> Civic a bigger car than any other Civic.

snip

I am speculating but the reason why cars get bigger might be the
manufacturers' way to lure buyers to stay with them. You are happy with your
car but you may find you could use a little more space and use a few more
ponies. 3-4 years down the road, your car is bigger and more powerful so,
you decide that you want the same car. 3-4 more years, same thing.
In the meantime, the manufacturer builds a new model, smaller than the one
you had. The same car will eventually get bigger and more powerfull. The
wheel keeps turning.

Re: GM still outsells Honda
 

Mike Hunter wrote:

>
> "N8N" <njnagel@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1154653572.621516.98080@75g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> >
> > Mike Hunter wrote:
> >
> >> You have no idea what you are talking about. Fleet buyers do a far
> >> better
> >> job of maintaining their vehicles than the average owner. How may
> >> owners
> >> do you know that do things like changes brake fluid do pressure tests
> >> monthly, take off door panels to lubricate window actuators, take apart
> >> and
> >> clean electrical connectors etc?
> >>
> >> To a corporate fleet a vehicle is a 'tool' needed to run their business.
> >> Down time costs money. They generally keep them in service for five
> >> years
> >> or 300K WOF, because of federal deprecation tax laws. Many keep them
> >> even
> >> longer.
>
> >> To government fleets, maintenance is primary as well. To a police
> >> officer his patrol car is as important as his weapon, it has to work
> >> properly or it could cost him his life One state police department that
> >> we
> >> serviced, has Jeeps Cherokees from the eighties, with over 200k on the
> >> clock
> >> and still in tip top shape, in use in mountainous parts of the state.\
>
> >> The only high volume buyers that don't care about their cars are most of
> >> the
> >> rental car companies. Top fluids and get it back on the road. The
> >> difference is to a rental car company vehicles are NOT a tool, but their
> >> product that they get rid off in a year or less.
> >
> > IME the fleet services treat the cars exactly like rental cars. When
> > they are turned in at 70K miles they are just about smack wore out
> > (well at least the Impalas the company that services the company that I
> > work for uses are!) >
> > nate
> >
> At least you prefaced your post as your opinion because that is all it is,
> an opinion based on your particular experience. The facts are as I
> presented them, but you are free to believe whatever you chose.
>
> mike hunt
>

IME = "In My Experience" not Opinion. Opinion begins with an "O." It
is a fact that MY fleet vehicle will be turned in at 70K miles, and it
is a fact that the only maintenance it gets is an oil change every 7K
miles and whatever extra service that I personally request.

nate

Re: GM still outsells Honda
 

Mike Hunter wrote:

>
> "N8N" <njnagel@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1154653572.621516.98080@75g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> >
> > Mike Hunter wrote:
> >
> >> You have no idea what you are talking about. Fleet buyers do a far
> >> better
> >> job of maintaining their vehicles than the average owner. How may
> >> owners
> >> do you know that do things like changes brake fluid do pressure tests
> >> monthly, take off door panels to lubricate window actuators, take apart
> >> and
> >> clean electrical connectors etc?
> >>
> >> To a corporate fleet a vehicle is a 'tool' needed to run their business.
> >> Down time costs money. They generally keep them in service for five
> >> years
> >> or 300K WOF, because of federal deprecation tax laws. Many keep them
> >> even
> >> longer.
>
> >> To government fleets, maintenance is primary as well. To a police
> >> officer his patrol car is as important as his weapon, it has to work
> >> properly or it could cost him his life One state police department that
> >> we
> >> serviced, has Jeeps Cherokees from the eighties, with over 200k on the
> >> clock
> >> and still in tip top shape, in use in mountainous parts of the state.\
>
> >> The only high volume buyers that don't care about their cars are most of
> >> the
> >> rental car companies. Top fluids and get it back on the road. The
> >> difference is to a rental car company vehicles are NOT a tool, but their
> >> product that they get rid off in a year or less.
> >
> > IME the fleet services treat the cars exactly like rental cars. When
> > they are turned in at 70K miles they are just about smack wore out
> > (well at least the Impalas the company that services the company that I
> > work for uses are!) >
> > nate
> >
> At least you prefaced your post as your opinion because that is all it is,
> an opinion based on your particular experience. The facts are as I
> presented them, but you are free to believe whatever you chose.
>
> mike hunt
>

IME = "In My Experience" not Opinion. Opinion begins with an "O." It
is a fact that MY fleet vehicle will be turned in at 70K miles, and it
is a fact that the only maintenance it gets is an oil change every 7K
miles and whatever extra service that I personally request.

nate

Re: GM still outsells Honda
 

Mike Hunter wrote:

>
> "N8N" <njnagel@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1154653572.621516.98080@75g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> >
> > Mike Hunter wrote:
> >
> >> You have no idea what you are talking about. Fleet buyers do a far
> >> better
> >> job of maintaining their vehicles than the average owner. How may
> >> owners
> >> do you know that do things like changes brake fluid do pressure tests
> >> monthly, take off door panels to lubricate window actuators, take apart
> >> and
> >> clean electrical connectors etc?
> >>
> >> To a corporate fleet a vehicle is a 'tool' needed to run their business.
> >> Down time costs money. They generally keep them in service for five
> >> years
> >> or 300K WOF, because of federal deprecation tax laws. Many keep them
> >> even
> >> longer.
>
> >> To government fleets, maintenance is primary as well. To a police
> >> officer his patrol car is as important as his weapon, it has to work
> >> properly or it could cost him his life One state police department that
> >> we
> >> serviced, has Jeeps Cherokees from the eighties, with over 200k on the
> >> clock
> >> and still in tip top shape, in use in mountainous parts of the state.\
>
> >> The only high volume buyers that don't care about their cars are most of
> >> the
> >> rental car companies. Top fluids and get it back on the road. The
> >> difference is to a rental car company vehicles are NOT a tool, but their
> >> product that they get rid off in a year or less.
> >
> > IME the fleet services treat the cars exactly like rental cars. When
> > they are turned in at 70K miles they are just about smack wore out
> > (well at least the Impalas the company that services the company that I
> > work for uses are!) >
> > nate
> >
> At least you prefaced your post as your opinion because that is all it is,
> an opinion based on your particular experience. The facts are as I
> presented them, but you are free to believe whatever you chose.
>
> mike hunt
>

IME = "In My Experience" not Opinion. Opinion begins with an "O." It
is a fact that MY fleet vehicle will be turned in at 70K miles, and it
is a fact that the only maintenance it gets is an oil change every 7K
miles and whatever extra service that I personally request.

nate

Re: GM still outsell Honda
 

Mike Hunter wrote:
> That is true a recall simply means they have discover a problem and are
> offering to fix it for free. However Ford has sold many million more
> vehicles than Toyota, for the past eight years, and Ford is not under
> indictment for trying to hide things for those eight years, as is the case
> with Toyota
>
>
> mike hunt


Ford is a funny company to hold up as an example of citizenship here Mike.

How about the long battle with California over defective throttle
modules. California courts finally forced Ford to do a recall.

http://www.yourlawyer.com/articles/read/8735

Then there is the similar situation with the Volvo division of Ford and
their electronic throttle module fiasco, also finally resulting in a
recall after years of legal pressure:

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosins...uto-170127.htm

Then of course you have the exploding Ford Police Interceptor problem,
the old exploding Pintos, etc. Oh yeah, and the flipping Explorer
fiasco where Ford and Firestone formed a circular firing squad to assign
blame, after denying for years that there was any problem at all.

Yes sir, Ford is a very model of doing the right thing when they
"discover a problem and are offering to fix it for free".

It also interesting that when Toyota announces recalls you declare it to
be a disaster but when Ford does so they are just being good boys and girls.

John

Re: GM still outsell Honda
 

Mike Hunter wrote:
> That is true a recall simply means they have discover a problem and are
> offering to fix it for free. However Ford has sold many million more
> vehicles than Toyota, for the past eight years, and Ford is not under
> indictment for trying to hide things for those eight years, as is the case
> with Toyota
>
>
> mike hunt


Ford is a funny company to hold up as an example of citizenship here Mike.

How about the long battle with California over defective throttle
modules. California courts finally forced Ford to do a recall.

http://www.yourlawyer.com/articles/read/8735

Then there is the similar situation with the Volvo division of Ford and
their electronic throttle module fiasco, also finally resulting in a
recall after years of legal pressure:

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosins...uto-170127.htm

Then of course you have the exploding Ford Police Interceptor problem,
the old exploding Pintos, etc. Oh yeah, and the flipping Explorer
fiasco where Ford and Firestone formed a circular firing squad to assign
blame, after denying for years that there was any problem at all.

Yes sir, Ford is a very model of doing the right thing when they
"discover a problem and are offering to fix it for free".

It also interesting that when Toyota announces recalls you declare it to
be a disaster but when Ford does so they are just being good boys and girls.

John

Re: GM still outsell Honda
 

Mike Hunter wrote:
> That is true a recall simply means they have discover a problem and are
> offering to fix it for free. However Ford has sold many million more
> vehicles than Toyota, for the past eight years, and Ford is not under
> indictment for trying to hide things for those eight years, as is the case
> with Toyota
>
>
> mike hunt


Ford is a funny company to hold up as an example of citizenship here Mike.

How about the long battle with California over defective throttle
modules. California courts finally forced Ford to do a recall.

http://www.yourlawyer.com/articles/read/8735

Then there is the similar situation with the Volvo division of Ford and
their electronic throttle module fiasco, also finally resulting in a
recall after years of legal pressure:

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosins...uto-170127.htm

Then of course you have the exploding Ford Police Interceptor problem,
the old exploding Pintos, etc. Oh yeah, and the flipping Explorer
fiasco where Ford and Firestone formed a circular firing squad to assign
blame, after denying for years that there was any problem at all.

Yes sir, Ford is a very model of doing the right thing when they
"discover a problem and are offering to fix it for free".

It also interesting that when Toyota announces recalls you declare it to
be a disaster but when Ford does so they are just being good boys and girls.

John

Re: GM U.S. July sales down 19.5 percent, Honda up 10.2%
 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:8AidnRJVQepspk_ZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> As I said before you are entitle to your opinion but that does not mean it
> is the most valid. When I owned my fleet service business we serviced
> thousand of vehicles monthly, of nearly every brand you can name. With
> our meticulous service, as recorded in the records we accumulated, we saw
> little discernable differences on average among the vehicles on the market
> today. The only real difference is style and price and one need not spend
> at lot more money to buy a good dependable vehicle. Just a note, the
> manufacture with the most vehicles recalled so far for 2006 is Toyota. ;)

Ford

Re: GM U.S. July sales down 19.5 percent, Honda up 10.2%
 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:8AidnRJVQepspk_ZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> As I said before you are entitle to your opinion but that does not mean it
> is the most valid. When I owned my fleet service business we serviced
> thousand of vehicles monthly, of nearly every brand you can name. With
> our meticulous service, as recorded in the records we accumulated, we saw
> little discernable differences on average among the vehicles on the market
> today. The only real difference is style and price and one need not spend
> at lot more money to buy a good dependable vehicle. Just a note, the
> manufacture with the most vehicles recalled so far for 2006 is Toyota. ;)

Ford

Re: GM U.S. July sales down 19.5 percent, Honda up 10.2%
 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:8AidnRJVQepspk_ZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> As I said before you are entitle to your opinion but that does not mean it
> is the most valid. When I owned my fleet service business we serviced
> thousand of vehicles monthly, of nearly every brand you can name. With
> our meticulous service, as recorded in the records we accumulated, we saw
> little discernable differences on average among the vehicles on the market
> today. The only real difference is style and price and one need not spend
> at lot more money to buy a good dependable vehicle. Just a note, the
> manufacture with the most vehicles recalled so far for 2006 is Toyota. ;)

Ford

Re: GM still out sells Honda
 

On Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:09:42 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>You avoided the questions.......again What makes you believe the 'fuel(s)
>of the future' will be less expensive than gasoline?

Where did I say I believed that in the first place? I think you are
confused (again).

I don't even know which "fuels" you are even talking about. I know
that one "fuel" is already cheaper - electricity. Not too practical
for cars (although it might work for some people), but it works pretty
well for commuter trains. I also understand that EtOH from sugar cane
is at least competitive if not actually cheaper than petroleum fuels
in Brazil.

Hydrogen is a sham. If anyone doubted that before, they must realize
that now that Bush is promoting it.

>
>If buyers really want small underpowered vehicles as you suggest, what do
>you think is the reason that every import brands vehicles got bigger and
>more powerful over the past ten years.

Did I say the want small underpowered cars? No, they want vehicles
that are bigger inside than an Excursion, faster than a Lamborghini,
easier to park than a Segway, as agile as a Mini, and burn fuel like a
Vespa.

Here is what I actually said:

>>Size and power are always a compromise between
>> needs/desires of the buyer for capacity, price, fuel economy,
>> maneuverability and other factors.

Here is my prediction:

With high prices and short supplies of fuel (and possibly CO2
restrictions) ahead, Suburbans will become niche vehicles for people
who need to transport >6 people all the time. The engine will become
anemic, because these buyers won't care about acceleration but will
care about fuel economy. The vehicles will gradually become more
car-like because the heavy duty frame and off-road capability will be
readily sacrificed for greater fuel economy.

The SUV will evolve into stylistic treatment on a car - basically a
macho station wagon. What few "real" SUVs remain will be niche
vehicles with tiny sales numbers.

>The fact is they are ALL bigger and
>more powerful, with more new trucks and SUVs than small cars.

And they are doing a lot better with them than GM and Ford.

When fuel was cheap, the compromise (see above) favored size and power
over fuel economy (especially since technology was improving mechanic
al efficiency to minimize the penalty.) Now that fuel is no longer
cheap, the trend will reverse. Actually, it already has. Sales of
truck-based SUVs peaked in 2001.

> Todays Civic
>a bigger car than any other Civic.

Fit is the new Civic.


>
>
>mike hunt
>
>
>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:3fb5d2dt30pqhcuqbf5ll80hnsffvqnkng@4ax.com.. .
>> On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 13:56:52 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>We are all entitled to our opinions I guess. What makes you believe the
>>>'fuel(s) of the future' will be less expensive than
>>>gasoline? Hydrogen is currently around $20 a gallon
>>>
>>>I've been in all three sides of the automotive business for a long time
>>>and
>>>in the real world people buy what they want. History repeatedly tells us
>>>what they ALWAYS want is their vehicles to be bigger and more powerful.
>>
>> Horse . Size and power are always a compromise between
>> needs/desires of the buyer for capacity, price, fuel economy,
>> maneuverability and other factors. Otherwise we would all be driving
>> cars the size of the Queen Mary by now.
>

Re: GM still out sells Honda
 

On Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:09:42 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>You avoided the questions.......again What makes you believe the 'fuel(s)
>of the future' will be less expensive than gasoline?

Where did I say I believed that in the first place? I think you are
confused (again).

I don't even know which "fuels" you are even talking about. I know
that one "fuel" is already cheaper - electricity. Not too practical
for cars (although it might work for some people), but it works pretty
well for commuter trains. I also understand that EtOH from sugar cane
is at least competitive if not actually cheaper than petroleum fuels
in Brazil.

Hydrogen is a sham. If anyone doubted that before, they must realize
that now that Bush is promoting it.

>
>If buyers really want small underpowered vehicles as you suggest, what do
>you think is the reason that every import brands vehicles got bigger and
>more powerful over the past ten years.

Did I say the want small underpowered cars? No, they want vehicles
that are bigger inside than an Excursion, faster than a Lamborghini,
easier to park than a Segway, as agile as a Mini, and burn fuel like a
Vespa.

Here is what I actually said:

>>Size and power are always a compromise between
>> needs/desires of the buyer for capacity, price, fuel economy,
>> maneuverability and other factors.

Here is my prediction:

With high prices and short supplies of fuel (and possibly CO2
restrictions) ahead, Suburbans will become niche vehicles for people
who need to transport >6 people all the time. The engine will become
anemic, because these buyers won't care about acceleration but will
care about fuel economy. The vehicles will gradually become more
car-like because the heavy duty frame and off-road capability will be
readily sacrificed for greater fuel economy.

The SUV will evolve into stylistic treatment on a car - basically a
macho station wagon. What few "real" SUVs remain will be niche
vehicles with tiny sales numbers.

>The fact is they are ALL bigger and
>more powerful, with more new trucks and SUVs than small cars.

And they are doing a lot better with them than GM and Ford.

When fuel was cheap, the compromise (see above) favored size and power
over fuel economy (especially since technology was improving mechanic
al efficiency to minimize the penalty.) Now that fuel is no longer
cheap, the trend will reverse. Actually, it already has. Sales of
truck-based SUVs peaked in 2001.

> Todays Civic
>a bigger car than any other Civic.

Fit is the new Civic.


>
>
>mike hunt
>
>
>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:3fb5d2dt30pqhcuqbf5ll80hnsffvqnkng@4ax.com.. .
>> On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 13:56:52 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>We are all entitled to our opinions I guess. What makes you believe the
>>>'fuel(s) of the future' will be less expensive than
>>>gasoline? Hydrogen is currently around $20 a gallon
>>>
>>>I've been in all three sides of the automotive business for a long time
>>>and
>>>in the real world people buy what they want. History repeatedly tells us
>>>what they ALWAYS want is their vehicles to be bigger and more powerful.
>>
>> Horse . Size and power are always a compromise between
>> needs/desires of the buyer for capacity, price, fuel economy,
>> maneuverability and other factors. Otherwise we would all be driving
>> cars the size of the Queen Mary by now.
>

Re: GM still out sells Honda
 

On Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:09:42 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>You avoided the questions.......again What makes you believe the 'fuel(s)
>of the future' will be less expensive than gasoline?

Where did I say I believed that in the first place? I think you are
confused (again).

I don't even know which "fuels" you are even talking about. I know
that one "fuel" is already cheaper - electricity. Not too practical
for cars (although it might work for some people), but it works pretty
well for commuter trains. I also understand that EtOH from sugar cane
is at least competitive if not actually cheaper than petroleum fuels
in Brazil.

Hydrogen is a sham. If anyone doubted that before, they must realize
that now that Bush is promoting it.

>
>If buyers really want small underpowered vehicles as you suggest, what do
>you think is the reason that every import brands vehicles got bigger and
>more powerful over the past ten years.

Did I say the want small underpowered cars? No, they want vehicles
that are bigger inside than an Excursion, faster than a Lamborghini,
easier to park than a Segway, as agile as a Mini, and burn fuel like a
Vespa.

Here is what I actually said:

>>Size and power are always a compromise between
>> needs/desires of the buyer for capacity, price, fuel economy,
>> maneuverability and other factors.

Here is my prediction:

With high prices and short supplies of fuel (and possibly CO2
restrictions) ahead, Suburbans will become niche vehicles for people
who need to transport >6 people all the time. The engine will become
anemic, because these buyers won't care about acceleration but will
care about fuel economy. The vehicles will gradually become more
car-like because the heavy duty frame and off-road capability will be
readily sacrificed for greater fuel economy.

The SUV will evolve into stylistic treatment on a car - basically a
macho station wagon. What few "real" SUVs remain will be niche
vehicles with tiny sales numbers.

>The fact is they are ALL bigger and
>more powerful, with more new trucks and SUVs than small cars.

And they are doing a lot better with them than GM and Ford.

When fuel was cheap, the compromise (see above) favored size and power
over fuel economy (especially since technology was improving mechanic
al efficiency to minimize the penalty.) Now that fuel is no longer
cheap, the trend will reverse. Actually, it already has. Sales of
truck-based SUVs peaked in 2001.

> Todays Civic
>a bigger car than any other Civic.

Fit is the new Civic.


>
>
>mike hunt
>
>
>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:3fb5d2dt30pqhcuqbf5ll80hnsffvqnkng@4ax.com.. .
>> On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 13:56:52 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>We are all entitled to our opinions I guess. What makes you believe the
>>>'fuel(s) of the future' will be less expensive than
>>>gasoline? Hydrogen is currently around $20 a gallon
>>>
>>>I've been in all three sides of the automotive business for a long time
>>>and
>>>in the real world people buy what they want. History repeatedly tells us
>>>what they ALWAYS want is their vehicles to be bigger and more powerful.
>>
>> Horse . Size and power are always a compromise between
>> needs/desires of the buyer for capacity, price, fuel economy,
>> maneuverability and other factors. Otherwise we would all be driving
>> cars the size of the Queen Mary by now.
>