Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
#481
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Scott in Florida wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 22:52:48 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>but don't forget that the GM and Ford executives are also
>>wildely overpaid by world competitive standards and have pension
>>programs for themselves which no mortal can hope to get.
>I think you should study the backgrounds of CEOs and get back to us.
>You might be surprised at their backgrounds....
Among Wagoner of GM, Ford of Ford, and Cho of Toyota, Cho is the most
of an outsider, being a lawyer and an ethnic Korean, because few
Japanese industrialists are lawyers, and ethnic Koreans are treated as
badly in Japan as blacks and Jews were in the U.S. several decades ago.
Cho also has the most production experience, by far.
#482
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Scott in Florida wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 22:52:48 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>but don't forget that the GM and Ford executives are also
>>wildely overpaid by world competitive standards and have pension
>>programs for themselves which no mortal can hope to get.
>I think you should study the backgrounds of CEOs and get back to us.
>You might be surprised at their backgrounds....
Among Wagoner of GM, Ford of Ford, and Cho of Toyota, Cho is the most
of an outsider, being a lawyer and an ethnic Korean, because few
Japanese industrialists are lawyers, and ethnic Koreans are treated as
badly in Japan as blacks and Jews were in the U.S. several decades ago.
Cho also has the most production experience, by far.
#483
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Scott in Florida wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 22:52:48 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>but don't forget that the GM and Ford executives are also
>>wildely overpaid by world competitive standards and have pension
>>programs for themselves which no mortal can hope to get.
>I think you should study the backgrounds of CEOs and get back to us.
>You might be surprised at their backgrounds....
Among Wagoner of GM, Ford of Ford, and Cho of Toyota, Cho is the most
of an outsider, being a lawyer and an ethnic Korean, because few
Japanese industrialists are lawyers, and ethnic Koreans are treated as
badly in Japan as blacks and Jews were in the U.S. several decades ago.
Cho also has the most production experience, by far.
#484
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: FWD / RWD
In article <YPGcnW09q6LwPUXZUSdV9g@ptd.net>,
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
> Few realize
> the cost of building a car like the Lexus versions of Toyotas are only a
> relative few hundreds dollars more, yet the cars sell for many thousands
> more retail.
Kind of like a top end Chev vs the base model EH!
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
> Few realize
> the cost of building a car like the Lexus versions of Toyotas are only a
> relative few hundreds dollars more, yet the cars sell for many thousands
> more retail.
Kind of like a top end Chev vs the base model EH!
#485
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: FWD / RWD
In article <YPGcnW09q6LwPUXZUSdV9g@ptd.net>,
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
> Few realize
> the cost of building a car like the Lexus versions of Toyotas are only a
> relative few hundreds dollars more, yet the cars sell for many thousands
> more retail.
Kind of like a top end Chev vs the base model EH!
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
> Few realize
> the cost of building a car like the Lexus versions of Toyotas are only a
> relative few hundreds dollars more, yet the cars sell for many thousands
> more retail.
Kind of like a top end Chev vs the base model EH!
#486
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: FWD / RWD
In article <YPGcnW09q6LwPUXZUSdV9g@ptd.net>,
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
> Few realize
> the cost of building a car like the Lexus versions of Toyotas are only a
> relative few hundreds dollars more, yet the cars sell for many thousands
> more retail.
Kind of like a top end Chev vs the base model EH!
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
> Few realize
> the cost of building a car like the Lexus versions of Toyotas are only a
> relative few hundreds dollars more, yet the cars sell for many thousands
> more retail.
Kind of like a top end Chev vs the base model EH!
#487
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
rantonrave@mail.com wrote:
> Lee Florack wrote:
>
>
>>do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
>>>dbu. wrote:
>
>
>>>>Their first big step is unloading all the union contracts. They are
>>>>watching Northwest do in their unions. GM will follow. Cut overhead first.
>
>
>>>How will that improve GM management? Would GM sell more
>>>Cobalts/Vues if it wasn't burdened by union contracts?
>
>
>>It won't help management much. However, you cannot ignore the facts
>>about the horrendous burden that extremely high salaries (when
>>compared to value provided), high healthcare costs and ridiculous
>>retirement costs -- all the result of union demands have and
>>continue to be at least one of the major causes of unprofitability.
>>Even if the management teams of Ford and GM could somehow produce
>>some desirable cars anytime soon, the profit margins would still be
>>too low.
>
>
> You're still too much a GM apologist because I've seen a case study
> showing that if GM had Toyota's production efficiency - without any
> changes in its labor cost structure, GM would have been profitable
> every year. That's not to say that labor, health care, and pension
> costs are huge burdens, but even if those costs were zero GM would
> still be losing market share and producing bad designs that look like
> more like furniture or boom boxes than like motor vehicles.
Can you point us to that case study?
Matt
> Lee Florack wrote:
>
>
>>do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
>>>dbu. wrote:
>
>
>>>>Their first big step is unloading all the union contracts. They are
>>>>watching Northwest do in their unions. GM will follow. Cut overhead first.
>
>
>>>How will that improve GM management? Would GM sell more
>>>Cobalts/Vues if it wasn't burdened by union contracts?
>
>
>>It won't help management much. However, you cannot ignore the facts
>>about the horrendous burden that extremely high salaries (when
>>compared to value provided), high healthcare costs and ridiculous
>>retirement costs -- all the result of union demands have and
>>continue to be at least one of the major causes of unprofitability.
>>Even if the management teams of Ford and GM could somehow produce
>>some desirable cars anytime soon, the profit margins would still be
>>too low.
>
>
> You're still too much a GM apologist because I've seen a case study
> showing that if GM had Toyota's production efficiency - without any
> changes in its labor cost structure, GM would have been profitable
> every year. That's not to say that labor, health care, and pension
> costs are huge burdens, but even if those costs were zero GM would
> still be losing market share and producing bad designs that look like
> more like furniture or boom boxes than like motor vehicles.
Can you point us to that case study?
Matt
#488
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
rantonrave@mail.com wrote:
> Lee Florack wrote:
>
>
>>do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
>>>dbu. wrote:
>
>
>>>>Their first big step is unloading all the union contracts. They are
>>>>watching Northwest do in their unions. GM will follow. Cut overhead first.
>
>
>>>How will that improve GM management? Would GM sell more
>>>Cobalts/Vues if it wasn't burdened by union contracts?
>
>
>>It won't help management much. However, you cannot ignore the facts
>>about the horrendous burden that extremely high salaries (when
>>compared to value provided), high healthcare costs and ridiculous
>>retirement costs -- all the result of union demands have and
>>continue to be at least one of the major causes of unprofitability.
>>Even if the management teams of Ford and GM could somehow produce
>>some desirable cars anytime soon, the profit margins would still be
>>too low.
>
>
> You're still too much a GM apologist because I've seen a case study
> showing that if GM had Toyota's production efficiency - without any
> changes in its labor cost structure, GM would have been profitable
> every year. That's not to say that labor, health care, and pension
> costs are huge burdens, but even if those costs were zero GM would
> still be losing market share and producing bad designs that look like
> more like furniture or boom boxes than like motor vehicles.
Can you point us to that case study?
Matt
> Lee Florack wrote:
>
>
>>do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
>>>dbu. wrote:
>
>
>>>>Their first big step is unloading all the union contracts. They are
>>>>watching Northwest do in their unions. GM will follow. Cut overhead first.
>
>
>>>How will that improve GM management? Would GM sell more
>>>Cobalts/Vues if it wasn't burdened by union contracts?
>
>
>>It won't help management much. However, you cannot ignore the facts
>>about the horrendous burden that extremely high salaries (when
>>compared to value provided), high healthcare costs and ridiculous
>>retirement costs -- all the result of union demands have and
>>continue to be at least one of the major causes of unprofitability.
>>Even if the management teams of Ford and GM could somehow produce
>>some desirable cars anytime soon, the profit margins would still be
>>too low.
>
>
> You're still too much a GM apologist because I've seen a case study
> showing that if GM had Toyota's production efficiency - without any
> changes in its labor cost structure, GM would have been profitable
> every year. That's not to say that labor, health care, and pension
> costs are huge burdens, but even if those costs were zero GM would
> still be losing market share and producing bad designs that look like
> more like furniture or boom boxes than like motor vehicles.
Can you point us to that case study?
Matt
#489
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
rantonrave@mail.com wrote:
> Lee Florack wrote:
>
>
>>do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
>>>dbu. wrote:
>
>
>>>>Their first big step is unloading all the union contracts. They are
>>>>watching Northwest do in their unions. GM will follow. Cut overhead first.
>
>
>>>How will that improve GM management? Would GM sell more
>>>Cobalts/Vues if it wasn't burdened by union contracts?
>
>
>>It won't help management much. However, you cannot ignore the facts
>>about the horrendous burden that extremely high salaries (when
>>compared to value provided), high healthcare costs and ridiculous
>>retirement costs -- all the result of union demands have and
>>continue to be at least one of the major causes of unprofitability.
>>Even if the management teams of Ford and GM could somehow produce
>>some desirable cars anytime soon, the profit margins would still be
>>too low.
>
>
> You're still too much a GM apologist because I've seen a case study
> showing that if GM had Toyota's production efficiency - without any
> changes in its labor cost structure, GM would have been profitable
> every year. That's not to say that labor, health care, and pension
> costs are huge burdens, but even if those costs were zero GM would
> still be losing market share and producing bad designs that look like
> more like furniture or boom boxes than like motor vehicles.
Can you point us to that case study?
Matt
> Lee Florack wrote:
>
>
>>do_not_spam_me@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
>>>dbu. wrote:
>
>
>>>>Their first big step is unloading all the union contracts. They are
>>>>watching Northwest do in their unions. GM will follow. Cut overhead first.
>
>
>>>How will that improve GM management? Would GM sell more
>>>Cobalts/Vues if it wasn't burdened by union contracts?
>
>
>>It won't help management much. However, you cannot ignore the facts
>>about the horrendous burden that extremely high salaries (when
>>compared to value provided), high healthcare costs and ridiculous
>>retirement costs -- all the result of union demands have and
>>continue to be at least one of the major causes of unprofitability.
>>Even if the management teams of Ford and GM could somehow produce
>>some desirable cars anytime soon, the profit margins would still be
>>too low.
>
>
> You're still too much a GM apologist because I've seen a case study
> showing that if GM had Toyota's production efficiency - without any
> changes in its labor cost structure, GM would have been profitable
> every year. That's not to say that labor, health care, and pension
> costs are huge burdens, but even if those costs were zero GM would
> still be losing market share and producing bad designs that look like
> more like furniture or boom boxes than like motor vehicles.
Can you point us to that case study?
Matt
#490
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
You are entitled to your opinion, no mater how convoluted it may be.
However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when new.
One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as well.
You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is built
by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating its
total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and includes all
of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label, is more that
70%.
The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and therefore
only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in the US,
regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny in the
Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5' indicating a US
content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content label indication
mike hunt
"Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> 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
>>
>
> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a *large*
> base of former customers that did buy from American car companies and got
> thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and they have
> very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers of the
> domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider looking at
> a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative. Detroit's
> chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>
However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when new.
One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as well.
You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is built
by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating its
total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and includes all
of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label, is more that
70%.
The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and therefore
only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in the US,
regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny in the
Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5' indicating a US
content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content label indication
mike hunt
"Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> 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
>>
>
> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a *large*
> base of former customers that did buy from American car companies and got
> thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and they have
> very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers of the
> domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider looking at
> a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative. Detroit's
> chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>
#491
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
You are entitled to your opinion, no mater how convoluted it may be.
However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when new.
One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as well.
You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is built
by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating its
total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and includes all
of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label, is more that
70%.
The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and therefore
only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in the US,
regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny in the
Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5' indicating a US
content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content label indication
mike hunt
"Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> 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
>>
>
> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a *large*
> base of former customers that did buy from American car companies and got
> thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and they have
> very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers of the
> domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider looking at
> a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative. Detroit's
> chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>
However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when new.
One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as well.
You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is built
by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating its
total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and includes all
of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label, is more that
70%.
The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and therefore
only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in the US,
regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny in the
Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5' indicating a US
content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content label indication
mike hunt
"Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> 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
>>
>
> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a *large*
> base of former customers that did buy from American car companies and got
> thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and they have
> very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers of the
> domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider looking at
> a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative. Detroit's
> chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>
#492
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
You are entitled to your opinion, no mater how convoluted it may be.
However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when new.
One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as well.
You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is built
by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating its
total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and includes all
of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label, is more that
70%.
The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and therefore
only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in the US,
regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny in the
Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5' indicating a US
content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content label indication
mike hunt
"Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> 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
>>
>
> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a *large*
> base of former customers that did buy from American car companies and got
> thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and they have
> very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers of the
> domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider looking at
> a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative. Detroit's
> chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>
However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when new.
One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as well.
You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is built
by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating its
total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and includes all
of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label, is more that
70%.
The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and therefore
only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in the US,
regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny in the
Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5' indicating a US
content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content label indication
mike hunt
"Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> 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
>>
>
> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a *large*
> base of former customers that did buy from American car companies and got
> thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and they have
> very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers of the
> domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider looking at
> a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative. Detroit's
> chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>
#493
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:HlOdnc0jd5TQmUfZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> You are entitled to your opinion, no mater how convoluted it may be.
> However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
> import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when
> new. One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as
> well.
>
> You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
> includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
> label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is
> built by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating
> its total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and
> includes all of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label,
> is more that 70%.
>
> The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
> content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and
> therefore only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in
> the US, regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny
> in the Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5'
> indicating a US content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content
> label indication
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
>> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
>> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
>> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a
>> *large* base of former customers that did buy from American car companies
>> and got thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and
>> they have very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers
>> of the domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider
>> looking at a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative.
>> Detroit's chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>>
>
>
Basic geography for you Mike-you must have gone to public school-is that
North American is not the same as "American". "American" means the 50 US
states and the assorted territories and possessions. Do try to get
"American" right in the future and the Mustang has fewer American parts than
Toyota Sienna so Ford's claim(s) for an American car are just as false as
their chances for continued existence as an independent car company-see link
below:
http://tinyurl.com/lvfda
or
http://online.wsj.com/public/article...f_main_tff_top
#494
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:HlOdnc0jd5TQmUfZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> You are entitled to your opinion, no mater how convoluted it may be.
> However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
> import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when
> new. One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as
> well.
>
> You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
> includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
> label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is
> built by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating
> its total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and
> includes all of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label,
> is more that 70%.
>
> The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
> content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and
> therefore only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in
> the US, regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny
> in the Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5'
> indicating a US content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content
> label indication
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
>> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
>> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
>> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a
>> *large* base of former customers that did buy from American car companies
>> and got thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and
>> they have very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers
>> of the domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider
>> looking at a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative.
>> Detroit's chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>>
>
>
Basic geography for you Mike-you must have gone to public school-is that
North American is not the same as "American". "American" means the 50 US
states and the assorted territories and possessions. Do try to get
"American" right in the future and the Mustang has fewer American parts than
Toyota Sienna so Ford's claim(s) for an American car are just as false as
their chances for continued existence as an independent car company-see link
below:
http://tinyurl.com/lvfda
or
http://online.wsj.com/public/article...f_main_tff_top
#495
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Where did all the old Japs car go?
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:HlOdnc0jd5TQmUfZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> You are entitled to your opinion, no mater how convoluted it may be.
> However the domestics I now buy are just as good, or better, than any
> import I have ever owned and I spend a lot less to drive them home when
> new. One sees a lot of Japanese cars and trucks in domestic used lots as
> well.
>
> You are confusing North America parts with US parts, North America parts
> includes Canada and Mexico. My 2007 Mustang GT convertible has a parts
> label that says the north American parts content is 80%, the tranny is
> built by Ford in France. The first number of the VIN is a '1' indicating
> its total US content, as defined by the Department of Commerce and
> includes all of the things listed in the disclaimer on the NA parts label,
> is more that 70%.
>
> The Sienna has a '4' as the first number of the VIN which means it US
> content is above 40% but less than 70%, as defined by the DOC, and
> therefore only assembled in the US of mostly imported parts not made in
> the US, regardless of the NA parts label indication. The engine and tranny
> in the Sienna are made in Japan. Teh Camry and Tundra have a '5'
> indicating a US content of less than 40% regardless of the NA content
> label indication
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:12di7vi8i8qnm99@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:7z6dnasT2KHB10rZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>> Face it Mike, Toyota builds a van, Sienna, that has more "American" parts
>> than the Ford Mustang-yes I have the link. The so called domestic car
>> companies build a *lot* of cars/trucks in Mexico and Canada and these are
>> vehicles made by others, not our folks. The domestics also have a
>> *large* base of former customers that did buy from American car companies
>> and got thoroughly screwed by the products and poor customer service and
>> they have very, very, very long memories. Those screwed former customers
>> of the domestic car companies, me among them, would not even consider
>> looking at a Detroit offering before exhausting every other alternative.
>> Detroit's chickens have come home to roost and good riddance to them.
>>
>
>
Basic geography for you Mike-you must have gone to public school-is that
North American is not the same as "American". "American" means the 50 US
states and the assorted territories and possessions. Do try to get
"American" right in the future and the Mustang has fewer American parts than
Toyota Sienna so Ford's claim(s) for an American car are just as false as
their chances for continued existence as an independent car company-see link
below:
http://tinyurl.com/lvfda
or
http://online.wsj.com/public/article...f_main_tff_top