Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
#421
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Mike Hunter wrote:
> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
> > A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was that
> > they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea if that
> > is true
> You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is taking
> about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to meet
> CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still building
> to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring down
> the build costs
If auto makers and parts suppliers had to start from scratch, including
all the machinery, how much more would FWD cost compared to RWD?
#422
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Mike Hunter wrote:
> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
> > A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was that
> > they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea if that
> > is true
> You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is taking
> about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to meet
> CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still building
> to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring down
> the build costs
If auto makers and parts suppliers had to start from scratch, including
all the machinery, how much more would FWD cost compared to RWD?
#423
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Mike Hunter wrote:
> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
> > A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was that
> > they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea if that
> > is true
> You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is taking
> about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to meet
> CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still building
> to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring down
> the build costs
If auto makers and parts suppliers had to start from scratch, including
all the machinery, how much more would FWD cost compared to RWD?
#424
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
What do you mean running them down? I simply asked a question, where are
the old Jap cars if they are so superior? I have been saying for a long
time that every manufacture is building good stuff today, both domestic and
import brands. The only real difference among them is style and price. One
need not pay a premium price to get a reliable vehicle today
You perception is not correct. There were as many or more Japanese cars
sold in the US in the sixties than there were cars from Europe, I owned a
few myself.
I have owned many Japanese cars. Where I part company with the import
buyers, who love to come into domestic NGs and say there cars are all junk,
and have us believe Jap cars are superior to domestics, of the same class
and price range. From what I have seen in my years in the business is that
is more myth than fact.
Why else would Honda and Toyota buyers be posting in a GM NG, to say nice
things? LOL
mike hunt
"Nate Nagel" <njnagel@flycast.net> wrote in message
news:eb62510tas@news2.newsguy.com...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> It certainly is a question of longevity. If the Japs cars have always
>> been so much better than American cars, as some would have us believe,
>> why are there few if any Jap car left from 50 or evn 40 years ago?
>> There are plenty of American cars around and running, even many other
>> foreign cars sold in the US from around the world . The evidence says
>> Jap cars are apparently not as superior as the Jap car buyer would like
>> us to believe.
>>
>> mike
>
> because in 1950 or even 1960 Japan wasn't importing cars to the US in any
> appreciable numbers because they were still rebuilding their domestic
> infrastructure. Geez, you're a flaming dumbass sometimes. Don't get me
> wrong, I'm not a big Japanese car fan, but to simply run them down all the
> time is just ignorant. Japanese cars are and have been a viable
> alternative to American cars (and sometimes a better one) for the last 30
> years; unless the American mfgrs. really start competing, they're here to
> stay.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
the old Jap cars if they are so superior? I have been saying for a long
time that every manufacture is building good stuff today, both domestic and
import brands. The only real difference among them is style and price. One
need not pay a premium price to get a reliable vehicle today
You perception is not correct. There were as many or more Japanese cars
sold in the US in the sixties than there were cars from Europe, I owned a
few myself.
I have owned many Japanese cars. Where I part company with the import
buyers, who love to come into domestic NGs and say there cars are all junk,
and have us believe Jap cars are superior to domestics, of the same class
and price range. From what I have seen in my years in the business is that
is more myth than fact.
Why else would Honda and Toyota buyers be posting in a GM NG, to say nice
things? LOL
mike hunt
"Nate Nagel" <njnagel@flycast.net> wrote in message
news:eb62510tas@news2.newsguy.com...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> It certainly is a question of longevity. If the Japs cars have always
>> been so much better than American cars, as some would have us believe,
>> why are there few if any Jap car left from 50 or evn 40 years ago?
>> There are plenty of American cars around and running, even many other
>> foreign cars sold in the US from around the world . The evidence says
>> Jap cars are apparently not as superior as the Jap car buyer would like
>> us to believe.
>>
>> mike
>
> because in 1950 or even 1960 Japan wasn't importing cars to the US in any
> appreciable numbers because they were still rebuilding their domestic
> infrastructure. Geez, you're a flaming dumbass sometimes. Don't get me
> wrong, I'm not a big Japanese car fan, but to simply run them down all the
> time is just ignorant. Japanese cars are and have been a viable
> alternative to American cars (and sometimes a better one) for the last 30
> years; unless the American mfgrs. really start competing, they're here to
> stay.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
#425
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
What do you mean running them down? I simply asked a question, where are
the old Jap cars if they are so superior? I have been saying for a long
time that every manufacture is building good stuff today, both domestic and
import brands. The only real difference among them is style and price. One
need not pay a premium price to get a reliable vehicle today
You perception is not correct. There were as many or more Japanese cars
sold in the US in the sixties than there were cars from Europe, I owned a
few myself.
I have owned many Japanese cars. Where I part company with the import
buyers, who love to come into domestic NGs and say there cars are all junk,
and have us believe Jap cars are superior to domestics, of the same class
and price range. From what I have seen in my years in the business is that
is more myth than fact.
Why else would Honda and Toyota buyers be posting in a GM NG, to say nice
things? LOL
mike hunt
"Nate Nagel" <njnagel@flycast.net> wrote in message
news:eb62510tas@news2.newsguy.com...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> It certainly is a question of longevity. If the Japs cars have always
>> been so much better than American cars, as some would have us believe,
>> why are there few if any Jap car left from 50 or evn 40 years ago?
>> There are plenty of American cars around and running, even many other
>> foreign cars sold in the US from around the world . The evidence says
>> Jap cars are apparently not as superior as the Jap car buyer would like
>> us to believe.
>>
>> mike
>
> because in 1950 or even 1960 Japan wasn't importing cars to the US in any
> appreciable numbers because they were still rebuilding their domestic
> infrastructure. Geez, you're a flaming dumbass sometimes. Don't get me
> wrong, I'm not a big Japanese car fan, but to simply run them down all the
> time is just ignorant. Japanese cars are and have been a viable
> alternative to American cars (and sometimes a better one) for the last 30
> years; unless the American mfgrs. really start competing, they're here to
> stay.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
the old Jap cars if they are so superior? I have been saying for a long
time that every manufacture is building good stuff today, both domestic and
import brands. The only real difference among them is style and price. One
need not pay a premium price to get a reliable vehicle today
You perception is not correct. There were as many or more Japanese cars
sold in the US in the sixties than there were cars from Europe, I owned a
few myself.
I have owned many Japanese cars. Where I part company with the import
buyers, who love to come into domestic NGs and say there cars are all junk,
and have us believe Jap cars are superior to domestics, of the same class
and price range. From what I have seen in my years in the business is that
is more myth than fact.
Why else would Honda and Toyota buyers be posting in a GM NG, to say nice
things? LOL
mike hunt
"Nate Nagel" <njnagel@flycast.net> wrote in message
news:eb62510tas@news2.newsguy.com...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> It certainly is a question of longevity. If the Japs cars have always
>> been so much better than American cars, as some would have us believe,
>> why are there few if any Jap car left from 50 or evn 40 years ago?
>> There are plenty of American cars around and running, even many other
>> foreign cars sold in the US from around the world . The evidence says
>> Jap cars are apparently not as superior as the Jap car buyer would like
>> us to believe.
>>
>> mike
>
> because in 1950 or even 1960 Japan wasn't importing cars to the US in any
> appreciable numbers because they were still rebuilding their domestic
> infrastructure. Geez, you're a flaming dumbass sometimes. Don't get me
> wrong, I'm not a big Japanese car fan, but to simply run them down all the
> time is just ignorant. Japanese cars are and have been a viable
> alternative to American cars (and sometimes a better one) for the last 30
> years; unless the American mfgrs. really start competing, they're here to
> stay.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
#426
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
What do you mean running them down? I simply asked a question, where are
the old Jap cars if they are so superior? I have been saying for a long
time that every manufacture is building good stuff today, both domestic and
import brands. The only real difference among them is style and price. One
need not pay a premium price to get a reliable vehicle today
You perception is not correct. There were as many or more Japanese cars
sold in the US in the sixties than there were cars from Europe, I owned a
few myself.
I have owned many Japanese cars. Where I part company with the import
buyers, who love to come into domestic NGs and say there cars are all junk,
and have us believe Jap cars are superior to domestics, of the same class
and price range. From what I have seen in my years in the business is that
is more myth than fact.
Why else would Honda and Toyota buyers be posting in a GM NG, to say nice
things? LOL
mike hunt
"Nate Nagel" <njnagel@flycast.net> wrote in message
news:eb62510tas@news2.newsguy.com...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> It certainly is a question of longevity. If the Japs cars have always
>> been so much better than American cars, as some would have us believe,
>> why are there few if any Jap car left from 50 or evn 40 years ago?
>> There are plenty of American cars around and running, even many other
>> foreign cars sold in the US from around the world . The evidence says
>> Jap cars are apparently not as superior as the Jap car buyer would like
>> us to believe.
>>
>> mike
>
> because in 1950 or even 1960 Japan wasn't importing cars to the US in any
> appreciable numbers because they were still rebuilding their domestic
> infrastructure. Geez, you're a flaming dumbass sometimes. Don't get me
> wrong, I'm not a big Japanese car fan, but to simply run them down all the
> time is just ignorant. Japanese cars are and have been a viable
> alternative to American cars (and sometimes a better one) for the last 30
> years; unless the American mfgrs. really start competing, they're here to
> stay.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
the old Jap cars if they are so superior? I have been saying for a long
time that every manufacture is building good stuff today, both domestic and
import brands. The only real difference among them is style and price. One
need not pay a premium price to get a reliable vehicle today
You perception is not correct. There were as many or more Japanese cars
sold in the US in the sixties than there were cars from Europe, I owned a
few myself.
I have owned many Japanese cars. Where I part company with the import
buyers, who love to come into domestic NGs and say there cars are all junk,
and have us believe Jap cars are superior to domestics, of the same class
and price range. From what I have seen in my years in the business is that
is more myth than fact.
Why else would Honda and Toyota buyers be posting in a GM NG, to say nice
things? LOL
mike hunt
"Nate Nagel" <njnagel@flycast.net> wrote in message
news:eb62510tas@news2.newsguy.com...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> It certainly is a question of longevity. If the Japs cars have always
>> been so much better than American cars, as some would have us believe,
>> why are there few if any Jap car left from 50 or evn 40 years ago?
>> There are plenty of American cars around and running, even many other
>> foreign cars sold in the US from around the world . The evidence says
>> Jap cars are apparently not as superior as the Jap car buyer would like
>> us to believe.
>>
>> mike
>
> because in 1950 or even 1960 Japan wasn't importing cars to the US in any
> appreciable numbers because they were still rebuilding their domestic
> infrastructure. Geez, you're a flaming dumbass sometimes. Don't get me
> wrong, I'm not a big Japanese car fan, but to simply run them down all the
> time is just ignorant. Japanese cars are and have been a viable
> alternative to American cars (and sometimes a better one) for the last 30
> years; unless the American mfgrs. really start competing, they're here to
> stay.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
#427
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
I have not intention of teaching a class in a NG of how FWD and RWD assembly
lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say again you
obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly line if
that is what you believe.
mike hunt
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
news:86d76$44d681b8$47e40e57$8872@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:FuWcnaqkkv1k50vZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on
>> an assembly, I supose
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>
> I believe that because that is what the chief engineers for the Tercel
> and
> Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to
> develop
> FWD cars without a previous history ;-)
>
> I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other
> companies. Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money
> on FWD cars?
> --
>
> Ray O
> (correct punctuation to reply)
>
>> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
>> news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>>>
>>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
>>> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>>
>>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>>> Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to
>>>>>> spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from
>>>>>> RWD,
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles
>>>>>> smaller
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American
>>>>>> wanted.
>>>>
>>>> A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was
>>>> that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea
>>>> if
>>>> that is true.
>>>
>>> At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the
>>> same is not true at Ford.
>>> --
>>>
>>> Ray O
>>> (correct punctuation to reply)
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say again you
obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly line if
that is what you believe.
mike hunt
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
news:86d76$44d681b8$47e40e57$8872@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:FuWcnaqkkv1k50vZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on
>> an assembly, I supose
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>
> I believe that because that is what the chief engineers for the Tercel
> and
> Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to
> develop
> FWD cars without a previous history ;-)
>
> I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other
> companies. Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money
> on FWD cars?
> --
>
> Ray O
> (correct punctuation to reply)
>
>> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
>> news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>>>
>>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
>>> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>>
>>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>>> Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to
>>>>>> spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from
>>>>>> RWD,
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles
>>>>>> smaller
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American
>>>>>> wanted.
>>>>
>>>> A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was
>>>> that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea
>>>> if
>>>> that is true.
>>>
>>> At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the
>>> same is not true at Ford.
>>> --
>>>
>>> Ray O
>>> (correct punctuation to reply)
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
#428
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
I have not intention of teaching a class in a NG of how FWD and RWD assembly
lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say again you
obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly line if
that is what you believe.
mike hunt
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
news:86d76$44d681b8$47e40e57$8872@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:FuWcnaqkkv1k50vZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on
>> an assembly, I supose
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>
> I believe that because that is what the chief engineers for the Tercel
> and
> Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to
> develop
> FWD cars without a previous history ;-)
>
> I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other
> companies. Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money
> on FWD cars?
> --
>
> Ray O
> (correct punctuation to reply)
>
>> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
>> news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>>>
>>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
>>> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>>
>>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>>> Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to
>>>>>> spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from
>>>>>> RWD,
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles
>>>>>> smaller
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American
>>>>>> wanted.
>>>>
>>>> A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was
>>>> that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea
>>>> if
>>>> that is true.
>>>
>>> At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the
>>> same is not true at Ford.
>>> --
>>>
>>> Ray O
>>> (correct punctuation to reply)
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say again you
obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly line if
that is what you believe.
mike hunt
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
news:86d76$44d681b8$47e40e57$8872@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:FuWcnaqkkv1k50vZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on
>> an assembly, I supose
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>
> I believe that because that is what the chief engineers for the Tercel
> and
> Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to
> develop
> FWD cars without a previous history ;-)
>
> I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other
> companies. Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money
> on FWD cars?
> --
>
> Ray O
> (correct punctuation to reply)
>
>> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
>> news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>>>
>>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
>>> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>>
>>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>>> Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to
>>>>>> spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from
>>>>>> RWD,
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles
>>>>>> smaller
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American
>>>>>> wanted.
>>>>
>>>> A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was
>>>> that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea
>>>> if
>>>> that is true.
>>>
>>> At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the
>>> same is not true at Ford.
>>> --
>>>
>>> Ray O
>>> (correct punctuation to reply)
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
#429
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
I have not intention of teaching a class in a NG of how FWD and RWD assembly
lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say again you
obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly line if
that is what you believe.
mike hunt
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
news:86d76$44d681b8$47e40e57$8872@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:FuWcnaqkkv1k50vZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on
>> an assembly, I supose
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>
> I believe that because that is what the chief engineers for the Tercel
> and
> Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to
> develop
> FWD cars without a previous history ;-)
>
> I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other
> companies. Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money
> on FWD cars?
> --
>
> Ray O
> (correct punctuation to reply)
>
>> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
>> news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>>>
>>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
>>> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>>
>>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>>> Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to
>>>>>> spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from
>>>>>> RWD,
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles
>>>>>> smaller
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American
>>>>>> wanted.
>>>>
>>>> A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was
>>>> that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea
>>>> if
>>>> that is true.
>>>
>>> At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the
>>> same is not true at Ford.
>>> --
>>>
>>> Ray O
>>> (correct punctuation to reply)
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say again you
obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly line if
that is what you believe.
mike hunt
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
news:86d76$44d681b8$47e40e57$8872@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:FuWcnaqkkv1k50vZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on
>> an assembly, I supose
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>
> I believe that because that is what the chief engineers for the Tercel
> and
> Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to
> develop
> FWD cars without a previous history ;-)
>
> I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other
> companies. Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money
> on FWD cars?
> --
>
> Ray O
> (correct punctuation to reply)
>
>> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
>> news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353@msgid.meganewsse rvers.com...
>>>
>>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
>>> news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>>
>>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>>> Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to
>>>>>> spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from
>>>>>> RWD,
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles
>>>>>> smaller
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American
>>>>>> wanted.
>>>>
>>>> A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was
>>>> that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea
>>>> if
>>>> that is true.
>>>
>>> At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the
>>> same is not true at Ford.
>>> --
>>>
>>> Ray O
>>> (correct punctuation to reply)
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
#430
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Do your own research. I don't do homework for my own grand children. CAFE
for cars is 27.5 MPG not 30 MPG. Hint; Gas Guzzler Tax
mike hunt
"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5gbdd29r37j9unrpae7r4hj8i6532dj4o1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 19:30:06 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>You believe that because you know nothing about how CAFE rules are
>>applied,
>>I suppose.
>>
>>
>>mike
>
> Perhaps you could point me to the website for those 30mpg RRs and
> Ferraris?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:klocd21lot1mpdeovm1rgvvmgs8uaufsgm@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is
>>>>taking
>>>>about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to
>>>>meet
>>>>CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still
>>>>building
>>>>to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring
>>>>down
>>>>the build costs
>>>>
>>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>> It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below
>>> cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has
>>> to do with it.
>>>
>>> Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on
>>> small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to
>>> hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers
>>> but they are still allowed to sell cars here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
for cars is 27.5 MPG not 30 MPG. Hint; Gas Guzzler Tax
mike hunt
"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5gbdd29r37j9unrpae7r4hj8i6532dj4o1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 19:30:06 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>You believe that because you know nothing about how CAFE rules are
>>applied,
>>I suppose.
>>
>>
>>mike
>
> Perhaps you could point me to the website for those 30mpg RRs and
> Ferraris?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:klocd21lot1mpdeovm1rgvvmgs8uaufsgm@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is
>>>>taking
>>>>about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to
>>>>meet
>>>>CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still
>>>>building
>>>>to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring
>>>>down
>>>>the build costs
>>>>
>>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>> It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below
>>> cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has
>>> to do with it.
>>>
>>> Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on
>>> small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to
>>> hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers
>>> but they are still allowed to sell cars here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
#431
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Do your own research. I don't do homework for my own grand children. CAFE
for cars is 27.5 MPG not 30 MPG. Hint; Gas Guzzler Tax
mike hunt
"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5gbdd29r37j9unrpae7r4hj8i6532dj4o1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 19:30:06 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>You believe that because you know nothing about how CAFE rules are
>>applied,
>>I suppose.
>>
>>
>>mike
>
> Perhaps you could point me to the website for those 30mpg RRs and
> Ferraris?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:klocd21lot1mpdeovm1rgvvmgs8uaufsgm@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is
>>>>taking
>>>>about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to
>>>>meet
>>>>CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still
>>>>building
>>>>to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring
>>>>down
>>>>the build costs
>>>>
>>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>> It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below
>>> cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has
>>> to do with it.
>>>
>>> Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on
>>> small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to
>>> hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers
>>> but they are still allowed to sell cars here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
for cars is 27.5 MPG not 30 MPG. Hint; Gas Guzzler Tax
mike hunt
"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5gbdd29r37j9unrpae7r4hj8i6532dj4o1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 19:30:06 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>You believe that because you know nothing about how CAFE rules are
>>applied,
>>I suppose.
>>
>>
>>mike
>
> Perhaps you could point me to the website for those 30mpg RRs and
> Ferraris?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:klocd21lot1mpdeovm1rgvvmgs8uaufsgm@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is
>>>>taking
>>>>about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to
>>>>meet
>>>>CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still
>>>>building
>>>>to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring
>>>>down
>>>>the build costs
>>>>
>>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>> It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below
>>> cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has
>>> to do with it.
>>>
>>> Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on
>>> small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to
>>> hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers
>>> but they are still allowed to sell cars here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
#432
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Do your own research. I don't do homework for my own grand children. CAFE
for cars is 27.5 MPG not 30 MPG. Hint; Gas Guzzler Tax
mike hunt
"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5gbdd29r37j9unrpae7r4hj8i6532dj4o1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 19:30:06 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>You believe that because you know nothing about how CAFE rules are
>>applied,
>>I suppose.
>>
>>
>>mike
>
> Perhaps you could point me to the website for those 30mpg RRs and
> Ferraris?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:klocd21lot1mpdeovm1rgvvmgs8uaufsgm@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is
>>>>taking
>>>>about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to
>>>>meet
>>>>CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still
>>>>building
>>>>to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring
>>>>down
>>>>the build costs
>>>>
>>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>> It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below
>>> cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has
>>> to do with it.
>>>
>>> Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on
>>> small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to
>>> hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers
>>> but they are still allowed to sell cars here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
for cars is 27.5 MPG not 30 MPG. Hint; Gas Guzzler Tax
mike hunt
"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5gbdd29r37j9unrpae7r4hj8i6532dj4o1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 19:30:06 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>You believe that because you know nothing about how CAFE rules are
>>applied,
>>I suppose.
>>
>>
>>mike
>
> Perhaps you could point me to the website for those 30mpg RRs and
> Ferraris?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:klocd21lot1mpdeovm1rgvvmgs8uaufsgm@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is
>>>>taking
>>>>about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to
>>>>meet
>>>>CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still
>>>>building
>>>>to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring
>>>>down
>>>>the build costs
>>>>
>>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>> It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below
>>> cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has
>>> to do with it.
>>>
>>> Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on
>>> small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to
>>> hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers
>>> but they are still allowed to sell cars here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
#433
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:hjmdnXBdYcsK1krZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>I have not intention of teaching a class in a NG of how FWD and RWD
>assembly lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say
>again you obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an
>assembly line if that is what you believe.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
I do not profess to be an expert on how assembly lines are operated, I only
assume that the design engineers I spoke with had some expertise in that
area.
Toyota uses the same assembly lines for FWD and RWD, at least back in the
fall of 1985, when I saw RWD Corolla Hatchbacks coming down the same line as
FWD Celicas at Tahara. Before then, I was not aware that it was practical
to assemble not only different driveline configurations, but different
models on the same line.
Why do FWD vehicles cost more to assemble than RWD vehicles?
--
Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)
#434
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:hjmdnXBdYcsK1krZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>I have not intention of teaching a class in a NG of how FWD and RWD
>assembly lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say
>again you obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an
>assembly line if that is what you believe.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
I do not profess to be an expert on how assembly lines are operated, I only
assume that the design engineers I spoke with had some expertise in that
area.
Toyota uses the same assembly lines for FWD and RWD, at least back in the
fall of 1985, when I saw RWD Corolla Hatchbacks coming down the same line as
FWD Celicas at Tahara. Before then, I was not aware that it was practical
to assemble not only different driveline configurations, but different
models on the same line.
Why do FWD vehicles cost more to assemble than RWD vehicles?
--
Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)
#435
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:hjmdnXBdYcsK1krZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>I have not intention of teaching a class in a NG of how FWD and RWD
>assembly lines must be operated, no matter the brand. I'll simply say
>again you obviously know nothing about how vehicles are built on an
>assembly line if that is what you believe.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
I do not profess to be an expert on how assembly lines are operated, I only
assume that the design engineers I spoke with had some expertise in that
area.
Toyota uses the same assembly lines for FWD and RWD, at least back in the
fall of 1985, when I saw RWD Corolla Hatchbacks coming down the same line as
FWD Celicas at Tahara. Before then, I was not aware that it was practical
to assemble not only different driveline configurations, but different
models on the same line.
Why do FWD vehicles cost more to assemble than RWD vehicles?
--
Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)