Re: GM is missing the point again
 

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:08:28 -0700, coachrose13@hotmail.com wrote:

>On Jun 9, 12:41 pm, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com>
>wrote:


>
>If God have intended for JD Powers or Consumer Reports to think for
>you, he wouldn't have given you a brain.

Neither JD Power not CR constitute thought. They are information,
data if you will. Thought is the brain's process for interpreting
data.

>All cars built today are
>pretty much equal, and have been for a long time.

Just as you shouldn't confuse data with thought, you shouldn't confuse
unsupported assertions with data. CR data shows that there are big
differences in reliability among the cars on the market.

Unfortunately, CR changed their reporting a couple years ago and it is
now harder to determine exactly what the failure rates are. One
assumes they are not much different from what they were before the
change. Some domestic and German 5-7 year-old cars have 5 or 6
problem areas where failure rates exceed 10% or even 15% per year, not
to mention less than stellar rates in the other areas. There are some
domestics with reliability records which are not terrible and some are
equal to the second tier Japanese manufacturers. 5-7 year-old Toyotas
and Hondas seldom have any area with worse than 5% failure rate. and
many areas have less than 2% failures. With 14 different systems, and
a few years of ownership, this difference really adds up.

>Continue to buy your
>Japanese products,

Yeah, I continually buy one every eleven or twelve years.


> I'll buy my American, which for some reason, does
>not break down nor get recalled at nearly the rate as these "perfect"
>Toyotas do.

This is what is known as the straw man argument. No one claims that
Toyotas or Hondas are perfect.

> (BTW, is it my opinion, or does EVERY NEW GENERATION
>Camary look more ugly than the one before it?)

Yes, it is your opinion. A fact would be that every generation sells
better than the one before it.

Re: GM is missing the point again
 

Gordon McGrew wrote:

>> I'll buy my American, which for some reason, does
>>not break down nor get recalled at nearly the rate as these "perfect"
>>Toyotas do.
>
> This is what is known as the straw man argument. No one claims that
> Toyotas or Hondas are perfect.

Hmmm. Recall rate... I have an 06 Si. No recalls yet, and not a single
service visit. I've never had an American car with that kind of
reliabilty. A few oil changes in 20,000 miles, and a tire rotation.

Yep, that damned Japanese reliability just sucks...

Re: GM is missing the point again
 

Gordon McGrew wrote:

>> I'll buy my American, which for some reason, does
>>not break down nor get recalled at nearly the rate as these "perfect"
>>Toyotas do.
>
> This is what is known as the straw man argument. No one claims that
> Toyotas or Hondas are perfect.

Hmmm. Recall rate... I have an 06 Si. No recalls yet, and not a single
service visit. I've never had an American car with that kind of
reliabilty. A few oil changes in 20,000 miles, and a tire rotation.

Yep, that damned Japanese reliability just sucks...

Re: GM is missing the point again
 

Gordon McGrew wrote:

>> I'll buy my American, which for some reason, does
>>not break down nor get recalled at nearly the rate as these "perfect"
>>Toyotas do.
>
> This is what is known as the straw man argument. No one claims that
> Toyotas or Hondas are perfect.

Hmmm. Recall rate... I have an 06 Si. No recalls yet, and not a single
service visit. I've never had an American car with that kind of
reliabilty. A few oil changes in 20,000 miles, and a tire rotation.

Yep, that damned Japanese reliability just sucks...

Re: GM is still number one
 

On Jun 10, 9:16 pm, ACAR <getoutanp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 10, 6:16 pm, "Mike Hunter" <mikehu...@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
> > Really? My '64 domestic has 165K on the Clock and my, '71 has nearly 300K
> > on the clock. My '83 domestic only has around 100K on the clock, but all
> > three still have their original starters and water pumps. Like I said,
> > todays cars are even better, 200k should be a cake walk if one does the
> > maintenance ;)
>
> > mike
>
> Sure Mike.
> Domestics are great.
> That's why their market share keeps declining.
>
> I've owned cars since the '60s and think you're lying.
> Never replaced a starter? After 40 years of car ownership? That makes
> you the only one.
> My '83 domestic required a water pump replacement under warranty while
> still running the factory coolant. Warranty covered the faulty fuel
> pump, too.
>
> None of my Honda or Toyota cars required as much repair or were as
> costly to maintain as my domestics. Why do you think GM was forced to
> go with a 100K mile powertrain warranty?

I think it is enlightening to realize that the Big Three designed
their cars to need repair frequently from the very beginning, while
the Japanese had the exact opposite approach and designed their cars
for durabililty from the very beginning. Hence the vast difference in
quality between the two. In recent years, this gap has indeed
dwindled for two reasons: the Americans have been forced by economics
of sale to improve quality, and the Japanese have taken on some of the
American way of thinking and have begun designing some of their
components to fail after a predetermined length of time or duration of
use. This allows future revenue in repairs and service. One
example: Honda designed their Odyssey with a condensor without any
protection from chips or stones from the road and has gotten back a
huge windfall with the repairs, but the rest of the vehicle is
absolutely top-notch. Another example: GM changed their horrible
minivan and small truck vehicle platform to a new one as seen in the
Envoy and Canyon etc... which is of top-notch quality and durability
but it took them so many years because they were reaping huge
windfalls from the downstream repairs of the old units.
So, in a nutshell, Mike is partly right and partly wrong. I buy
Hondas because I like the chassis designs and of course the engine
reliability is legendary. But so are the Toyotas, but I don't buy
them because I think they are plain ugly, the whole line of them from
the Corolla to the Tundra.

Re: GM is still number one
 

On Jun 10, 9:16 pm, ACAR <getoutanp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 10, 6:16 pm, "Mike Hunter" <mikehu...@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
> > Really? My '64 domestic has 165K on the Clock and my, '71 has nearly 300K
> > on the clock. My '83 domestic only has around 100K on the clock, but all
> > three still have their original starters and water pumps. Like I said,
> > todays cars are even better, 200k should be a cake walk if one does the
> > maintenance ;)
>
> > mike
>
> Sure Mike.
> Domestics are great.
> That's why their market share keeps declining.
>
> I've owned cars since the '60s and think you're lying.
> Never replaced a starter? After 40 years of car ownership? That makes
> you the only one.
> My '83 domestic required a water pump replacement under warranty while
> still running the factory coolant. Warranty covered the faulty fuel
> pump, too.
>
> None of my Honda or Toyota cars required as much repair or were as
> costly to maintain as my domestics. Why do you think GM was forced to
> go with a 100K mile powertrain warranty?

I think it is enlightening to realize that the Big Three designed
their cars to need repair frequently from the very beginning, while
the Japanese had the exact opposite approach and designed their cars
for durabililty from the very beginning. Hence the vast difference in
quality between the two. In recent years, this gap has indeed
dwindled for two reasons: the Americans have been forced by economics
of sale to improve quality, and the Japanese have taken on some of the
American way of thinking and have begun designing some of their
components to fail after a predetermined length of time or duration of
use. This allows future revenue in repairs and service. One
example: Honda designed their Odyssey with a condensor without any
protection from chips or stones from the road and has gotten back a
huge windfall with the repairs, but the rest of the vehicle is
absolutely top-notch. Another example: GM changed their horrible
minivan and small truck vehicle platform to a new one as seen in the
Envoy and Canyon etc... which is of top-notch quality and durability
but it took them so many years because they were reaping huge
windfalls from the downstream repairs of the old units.
So, in a nutshell, Mike is partly right and partly wrong. I buy
Hondas because I like the chassis designs and of course the engine
reliability is legendary. But so are the Toyotas, but I don't buy
them because I think they are plain ugly, the whole line of them from
the Corolla to the Tundra.

Re: GM is still number one
 

On Jun 10, 9:16 pm, ACAR <getoutanp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 10, 6:16 pm, "Mike Hunter" <mikehu...@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
> > Really? My '64 domestic has 165K on the Clock and my, '71 has nearly 300K
> > on the clock. My '83 domestic only has around 100K on the clock, but all
> > three still have their original starters and water pumps. Like I said,
> > todays cars are even better, 200k should be a cake walk if one does the
> > maintenance ;)
>
> > mike
>
> Sure Mike.
> Domestics are great.
> That's why their market share keeps declining.
>
> I've owned cars since the '60s and think you're lying.
> Never replaced a starter? After 40 years of car ownership? That makes
> you the only one.
> My '83 domestic required a water pump replacement under warranty while
> still running the factory coolant. Warranty covered the faulty fuel
> pump, too.
>
> None of my Honda or Toyota cars required as much repair or were as
> costly to maintain as my domestics. Why do you think GM was forced to
> go with a 100K mile powertrain warranty?

I think it is enlightening to realize that the Big Three designed
their cars to need repair frequently from the very beginning, while
the Japanese had the exact opposite approach and designed their cars
for durabililty from the very beginning. Hence the vast difference in
quality between the two. In recent years, this gap has indeed
dwindled for two reasons: the Americans have been forced by economics
of sale to improve quality, and the Japanese have taken on some of the
American way of thinking and have begun designing some of their
components to fail after a predetermined length of time or duration of
use. This allows future revenue in repairs and service. One
example: Honda designed their Odyssey with a condensor without any
protection from chips or stones from the road and has gotten back a
huge windfall with the repairs, but the rest of the vehicle is
absolutely top-notch. Another example: GM changed their horrible
minivan and small truck vehicle platform to a new one as seen in the
Envoy and Canyon etc... which is of top-notch quality and durability
but it took them so many years because they were reaping huge
windfalls from the downstream repairs of the old units.
So, in a nutshell, Mike is partly right and partly wrong. I buy
Hondas because I like the chassis designs and of course the engine
reliability is legendary. But so are the Toyotas, but I don't buy
them because I think they are plain ugly, the whole line of them from
the Corolla to the Tundra.