Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:26:55 -0400, 127.0.0.1 <jd@cs.com> wrote:
>not so, society doesn't pay one cent for anything that I do
Sure we do... You have a stroke from eating five cheeseburgers a day
and become a vegetable at 40 then our tax dollars will have to support
you at some point. Even if you are ungodly rich and can afford 30
more years of care society pays because we loose your contributions.
So... only green beans from now on.
Steve B.
>not so, society doesn't pay one cent for anything that I do
Sure we do... You have a stroke from eating five cheeseburgers a day
and become a vegetable at 40 then our tax dollars will have to support
you at some point. Even if you are ungodly rich and can afford 30
more years of care society pays because we loose your contributions.
So... only green beans from now on.
Steve B.
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
In article <b411569f.0406231339.7f5cdf0e@posting.google.com >,
George <_george@excite.com> wrote:
>Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
>By Andrew Colton
>ABCNEWS.com
>
>F O R T L A U D E R D A L E, Fla., June 23, 2004— Hyundai Motor
>Company admits that its most popular vehicle has a serious airbag flaw
>that it doesn't know how to fix.
>
> The problem, in the company's 2004 Elantra, is a sensor system
>intended to prevent the airbag from deploying while a child sits in
>the front seat. But it's also preventing the airbag from activating
>for adults who weigh less than roughly 150 pounds and don't position
>themselves in the center of the chair.
>
It is called the "Supplemental Restraint System" for a resaon, fasten your
seat belt if you are worried about the bag not deploying. The passenger
side dashboard has been padded for decades and seatbelts save lives.
The whole problem stems from the heroic effort needed to save the life of
a 90th centile male who refuses to buckle up. Even though I am probably
at least a ninetyeth centile male (6'4", 260 pounds), I still say "Let them
die".
George <_george@excite.com> wrote:
>Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
>By Andrew Colton
>ABCNEWS.com
>
>F O R T L A U D E R D A L E, Fla., June 23, 2004— Hyundai Motor
>Company admits that its most popular vehicle has a serious airbag flaw
>that it doesn't know how to fix.
>
> The problem, in the company's 2004 Elantra, is a sensor system
>intended to prevent the airbag from deploying while a child sits in
>the front seat. But it's also preventing the airbag from activating
>for adults who weigh less than roughly 150 pounds and don't position
>themselves in the center of the chair.
>
It is called the "Supplemental Restraint System" for a resaon, fasten your
seat belt if you are worried about the bag not deploying. The passenger
side dashboard has been padded for decades and seatbelts save lives.
The whole problem stems from the heroic effort needed to save the life of
a 90th centile male who refuses to buckle up. Even though I am probably
at least a ninetyeth centile male (6'4", 260 pounds), I still say "Let them
die".
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
In article <7c6pd09lnvn201mrclf56fabr643op4ruf@4ax.com>,
Steve B. <this is not my real address@.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 12:15:30 GMT, Brian Nystrom
><brian.nystrom@att.net> wrote:
>
>>Ben wrote:
>
>>That's exactly the point, but people still refuse to wear belts, perhaps
>>even moreso when they have airbags, despite the warnings that come with
>>every car. The stupidity of the American public never ceases to amaze me.
>
>I don't understand why anyone, other than their family, cares if they
>are wearing a seatbelt. I think it is stupid to be in a car without a
>seatbelt on but it is your body and your life. Why do I get to decide
>that you have to wear a seatbelt?
>
> Steve B.
Because you getting killed may increase my insurance premium, if an
insurance company paid a benefit. Also, if you are not killed, you may
be on some form of social assistance, which raises my taxes. Personally,
I like the idea of benefits and social assistance (it might be me, or my
family that needs them), but I want the costs to be kept down.
Before you come down on me for suggesting mandatory insurance, consider how
happy you will be if I slam into your car, and my insurer cuts you a cheque,
when the other scenario is you try to get your costs from me personally,
but due to student debts, among other things, I have none to give you.
Steve B. <this is not my real address@.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 12:15:30 GMT, Brian Nystrom
><brian.nystrom@att.net> wrote:
>
>>Ben wrote:
>
>>That's exactly the point, but people still refuse to wear belts, perhaps
>>even moreso when they have airbags, despite the warnings that come with
>>every car. The stupidity of the American public never ceases to amaze me.
>
>I don't understand why anyone, other than their family, cares if they
>are wearing a seatbelt. I think it is stupid to be in a car without a
>seatbelt on but it is your body and your life. Why do I get to decide
>that you have to wear a seatbelt?
>
> Steve B.
Because you getting killed may increase my insurance premium, if an
insurance company paid a benefit. Also, if you are not killed, you may
be on some form of social assistance, which raises my taxes. Personally,
I like the idea of benefits and social assistance (it might be me, or my
family that needs them), but I want the costs to be kept down.
Before you come down on me for suggesting mandatory insurance, consider how
happy you will be if I slam into your car, and my insurer cuts you a cheque,
when the other scenario is you try to get your costs from me personally,
but due to student debts, among other things, I have none to give you.
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 14:29:31 +0000 (UTC), rlbell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
(Richard Bell) wrote:
>Because you getting killed may increase my insurance premium, if an
>insurance company paid a benefit. Also, if you are not killed, you may
>be on some form of social assistance, which raises my taxes. Personally,
>I like the idea of benefits and social assistance (it might be me, or my
>family that needs them), but I want the costs to be kept down.
And you having a cheeseburger may increase my insurance premiums. Do
we need a law regulating how many cheeseburgers you can have?
>
>Before you come down on me for suggesting mandatory insurance, consider how
>happy you will be if I slam into your car, and my insurer cuts you a cheque,
>when the other scenario is you try to get your costs from me personally,
>but due to student debts, among other things, I have none to give you.
Mandatory insurance make sense. If I screw up and hit your car then
you should be made whole again. I can understand any situation where
my action can cause damage to you and some here have made a good point
that by not wearing a seatbelt I might loose control of the car in a
situation where I would not loose control of the car were I belted in.
Thats an excellent point. I just can't buy in to all the "for your
own good" stuff.
**Disclaimer - As I have already mentioned I think any person would be
crazy to ride in a car without fastening their seat belt.
Steve B.
(Richard Bell) wrote:
>Because you getting killed may increase my insurance premium, if an
>insurance company paid a benefit. Also, if you are not killed, you may
>be on some form of social assistance, which raises my taxes. Personally,
>I like the idea of benefits and social assistance (it might be me, or my
>family that needs them), but I want the costs to be kept down.
And you having a cheeseburger may increase my insurance premiums. Do
we need a law regulating how many cheeseburgers you can have?
>
>Before you come down on me for suggesting mandatory insurance, consider how
>happy you will be if I slam into your car, and my insurer cuts you a cheque,
>when the other scenario is you try to get your costs from me personally,
>but due to student debts, among other things, I have none to give you.
Mandatory insurance make sense. If I screw up and hit your car then
you should be made whole again. I can understand any situation where
my action can cause damage to you and some here have made a good point
that by not wearing a seatbelt I might loose control of the car in a
situation where I would not loose control of the car were I belted in.
Thats an excellent point. I just can't buy in to all the "for your
own good" stuff.
**Disclaimer - As I have already mentioned I think any person would be
crazy to ride in a car without fastening their seat belt.
Steve B.
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 17:32:43 GMT, Steve B. <this is not my real
address@.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 14:29:31 +0000 (UTC), rlbell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
>(Richard Bell) wrote:
>
>>Because you getting killed may increase my insurance premium, if an
>>insurance company paid a benefit. Also, if you are not killed, you may
>>be on some form of social assistance, which raises my taxes. Personally,
>>I like the idea of benefits and social assistance (it might be me, or my
>>family that needs them), but I want the costs to be kept down.
>
>And you having a cheeseburger may increase my insurance premiums. Do
>we need a law regulating how many cheeseburgers you can have?
bullshit, what data are you relying on for this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of the current email spam attacks my email account is not included,
reply via the newsgroups or ask for a valid email address.
address@.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 14:29:31 +0000 (UTC), rlbell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
>(Richard Bell) wrote:
>
>>Because you getting killed may increase my insurance premium, if an
>>insurance company paid a benefit. Also, if you are not killed, you may
>>be on some form of social assistance, which raises my taxes. Personally,
>>I like the idea of benefits and social assistance (it might be me, or my
>>family that needs them), but I want the costs to be kept down.
>
>And you having a cheeseburger may increase my insurance premiums. Do
>we need a law regulating how many cheeseburgers you can have?
bullshit, what data are you relying on for this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of the current email spam attacks my email account is not included,
reply via the newsgroups or ask for a valid email address.
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406240039020.15951@alumni.engin.um ich.edu>,
dastern@engin.umich.edu says...
> They were designed to be the primary restraint when the reluctant US
> > public could not be coerced into using seat belts and the government was
> > too spineless to mandate them.
>
> The above is mostly correct. Airbags as implemented in North America are
> indeed designed as primary restraints for exactly the reason you state:
>
>
That's not what the NHTSA website says:
Safety belts should always be worn, even when riding in vehicles
equipped with air bags. Air bags are designed to work with safety belts,
not alone. Air bags, when not used with safety belts, have a fatality-
reducing effectiveness rate of only 12 percent.14
cut and pasted from:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/inju.../buasbteens03/
Jeannie
--
To reply to me, remove *spamenot* from address.
dastern@engin.umich.edu says...
> They were designed to be the primary restraint when the reluctant US
> > public could not be coerced into using seat belts and the government was
> > too spineless to mandate them.
>
> The above is mostly correct. Airbags as implemented in North America are
> indeed designed as primary restraints for exactly the reason you state:
>
>
That's not what the NHTSA website says:
Safety belts should always be worn, even when riding in vehicles
equipped with air bags. Air bags are designed to work with safety belts,
not alone. Air bags, when not used with safety belts, have a fatality-
reducing effectiveness rate of only 12 percent.14
cut and pasted from:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/inju.../buasbteens03/
Jeannie
--
To reply to me, remove *spamenot* from address.
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
In article <MPG.1b47bea0429720e19896d1@News.Individual.NET> , jean and bill wrote:
> In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406240039020.15951@alumni.engin.um ich.edu>,
> dastern@engin.umich.edu says...
>> They were designed to be the primary restraint when the reluctant US
>> > public could not be coerced into using seat belts and the government was
>> > too spineless to mandate them.
>>
>> The above is mostly correct. Airbags as implemented in North America are
>> indeed designed as primary restraints for exactly the reason you state:
>>
>>
> That's not what the NHTSA website says:
>
> Safety belts should always be worn, even when riding in vehicles
> equipped with air bags. Air bags are designed to work with safety belts,
> not alone. Air bags, when not used with safety belts, have a fatality-
> reducing effectiveness rate of only 12 percent.14
>
> cut and pasted from:
> http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/inju.../buasbteens03/
There is public relations, and there is reality. The reality is that
US spec airbags are more powerful than they should be. This is because
of the passive restraint requirements daniel mentioned.
The above is a very carefully worded statement that is the truth but
gives a different impression. Sure, they were designed to work with
seatbelts. They simply fail to mention they were also designed to work
without seat belts.
> In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406240039020.15951@alumni.engin.um ich.edu>,
> dastern@engin.umich.edu says...
>> They were designed to be the primary restraint when the reluctant US
>> > public could not be coerced into using seat belts and the government was
>> > too spineless to mandate them.
>>
>> The above is mostly correct. Airbags as implemented in North America are
>> indeed designed as primary restraints for exactly the reason you state:
>>
>>
> That's not what the NHTSA website says:
>
> Safety belts should always be worn, even when riding in vehicles
> equipped with air bags. Air bags are designed to work with safety belts,
> not alone. Air bags, when not used with safety belts, have a fatality-
> reducing effectiveness rate of only 12 percent.14
>
> cut and pasted from:
> http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/inju.../buasbteens03/
There is public relations, and there is reality. The reality is that
US spec airbags are more powerful than they should be. This is because
of the passive restraint requirements daniel mentioned.
The above is a very carefully worded statement that is the truth but
gives a different impression. Sure, they were designed to work with
seatbelts. They simply fail to mention they were also designed to work
without seat belts.
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
In article <cvvqd05eqq3cgt3pl0oh33ro15m03utq13@4ax.com>,
Steve B. <this is not my real address@.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:26:55 -0400, 127.0.0.1 <jd@cs.com> wrote:
>
>
> >not so, society doesn't pay one cent for anything that I do
>
> Sure we do... You have a stroke from eating five cheeseburgers a day
> and become a vegetable at 40 then our tax dollars will have to support
> you at some point. Even if you are ungodly rich and can afford 30
> more years of care society pays because we loose your contributions.
> So... only green beans from now on.
>
> Steve B.
You can't tell the difference between eating cheeseburgers for years and
having a vehicular collision without restraint or protection? To
you those two things are one and the same; the results of each activity
as statistically certain as the other?
And yet you still have a drivers license?
Why not go a little further and claim that just being alive is even MORE
dangerous than being unrestrained and unprotected in a high-speed
collision? After all, fully 100% of living people die.
Steve B. <this is not my real address@.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:26:55 -0400, 127.0.0.1 <jd@cs.com> wrote:
>
>
> >not so, society doesn't pay one cent for anything that I do
>
> Sure we do... You have a stroke from eating five cheeseburgers a day
> and become a vegetable at 40 then our tax dollars will have to support
> you at some point. Even if you are ungodly rich and can afford 30
> more years of care society pays because we loose your contributions.
> So... only green beans from now on.
>
> Steve B.
You can't tell the difference between eating cheeseburgers for years and
having a vehicular collision without restraint or protection? To
you those two things are one and the same; the results of each activity
as statistically certain as the other?
And yet you still have a drivers license?
Why not go a little further and claim that just being alive is even MORE
dangerous than being unrestrained and unprotected in a high-speed
collision? After all, fully 100% of living people die.
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<GgaDc.157283$3x.69367@attbi_s54>...
> >>>>
> >>>>because society has to pay for the after effects of non usage of the
> >>>>seat belt
>
> >>>Society doesn't "have" to pay.
>
> i just called all the county hospitals in LA, and told them to stop care
> and immediately discharge any indigent patients they have that were in
> an auto accident without a seatbelt.
>
> they said theyll get back to me on that one.
The were too busy helping folks who got busted in the head with
police flashlights.
> >>>>
> >>>>because society has to pay for the after effects of non usage of the
> >>>>seat belt
>
> >>>Society doesn't "have" to pay.
>
> i just called all the county hospitals in LA, and told them to stop care
> and immediately discharge any indigent patients they have that were in
> an auto accident without a seatbelt.
>
> they said theyll get back to me on that one.
The were too busy helping folks who got busted in the head with
police flashlights.
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004, jean and bill wrote:
>> Airbags as implemented in North America are
>> indeed designed as primary restraints
> That's not what the NHTSA website says:
OK, you found the PR. Now go read the actual requirements for US airbags
contained in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 and you'll see that
the reality doesn't match the PR BS.
-DS
>> Airbags as implemented in North America are
>> indeed designed as primary restraints
> That's not what the NHTSA website says:
OK, you found the PR. Now go read the actual requirements for US airbags
contained in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 and you'll see that
the reality doesn't match the PR BS.
-DS
#71
Guest
Posts: n/a
2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire (Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem)
2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire
http://news.japantoday.com/e/?conten...at=2&id=303561
_george@excite.com (George) wrote in message news:<b411569f.0406231339.7f5cdf0e@posting.google. com>...
> Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
> By Andrew Colton
> ABCNEWS.com
>
> F O R T L A U D E R D A L E, Fla., June 23, 2004? Hyundai Motor
> Company admits that its most popular vehicle has a serious airbag flaw
> that it doesn't know how to fix.
>
> The problem, in the company's 2004 Elantra, is a sensor system
> intended to prevent the airbag from deploying while a child sits in
> the front seat. But it's also preventing the airbag from activating
> for adults who weigh less than roughly 150 pounds and don't position
> themselves in the center of the chair.
>
> "I'm worried. I'm seriously concerned that this isn't a safe car,"
> said Charlotte Kramer, 28, a hairdresser from Fort Lauderdale who
> purchased her 2004 Elantra late last year. "It's a risk every time
> someone sits in the car as to whether their passenger side airbag is
> going to be activated or not."
>
> Kramer became concerned when she saw a warning light appear on her
> dashboard that read: "Passenger Airbag Off." The light stayed on when
> an adult weighing less than 150 pounds sat in the passenger seat
> off-center ? meaning that the airbag would not deploy for the
> passenger in the event of an accident.
>
> Kramer sought help at the dealership where she purchased the car. But
> she was told there's no way to fix the problem, which could mean the
> airbag would not have deployed in an accident.
>
> Mike Anson, a Hyundai spokesman, said the only thing passengers not
> heavy enough to activate the airbag can do now is sit somewhere else.
>
> "Either move to the back seat or move to another Hyundai vehicle," he
> said.
>
> Complicated Instructions
>
> In a technical service bulletin obtained by ABC News, Hyundai advises
> service technicians to tell customers to try the following in an
> attempt to activate the airbag: "Turn the vehicle off, place the seat
> back in the full upright position, sit upright in the seat, centered
> on the seat cushion, with legs comfortably extended. Restart the
> vehicle and have the person remain in this position for about 30
> seconds."
>
> Agreeing that the instructions may be a bit too much for many
> customers to remember, Anson suggested that new customers take his
> company's cars for a long test drive before making a purchase.
>
> "Before you buy the vehicle, put the people in the front passenger who
> will be in there to make sure they're compatible," he said. "That way
> you won't have a problem."
>
> The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which now requires
> some new cars to use a sensor system for passenger-side airbags, is
> investigating Hyundai's problem and response. They said they need to
> investigate more before determining whether there's a need for a
> recall of the vehicles.
>
> Hyundai said it has sold 50,000 2004 Elantras.
http://news.japantoday.com/e/?conten...at=2&id=303561
_george@excite.com (George) wrote in message news:<b411569f.0406231339.7f5cdf0e@posting.google. com>...
> Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem
> By Andrew Colton
> ABCNEWS.com
>
> F O R T L A U D E R D A L E, Fla., June 23, 2004? Hyundai Motor
> Company admits that its most popular vehicle has a serious airbag flaw
> that it doesn't know how to fix.
>
> The problem, in the company's 2004 Elantra, is a sensor system
> intended to prevent the airbag from deploying while a child sits in
> the front seat. But it's also preventing the airbag from activating
> for adults who weigh less than roughly 150 pounds and don't position
> themselves in the center of the chair.
>
> "I'm worried. I'm seriously concerned that this isn't a safe car,"
> said Charlotte Kramer, 28, a hairdresser from Fort Lauderdale who
> purchased her 2004 Elantra late last year. "It's a risk every time
> someone sits in the car as to whether their passenger side airbag is
> going to be activated or not."
>
> Kramer became concerned when she saw a warning light appear on her
> dashboard that read: "Passenger Airbag Off." The light stayed on when
> an adult weighing less than 150 pounds sat in the passenger seat
> off-center ? meaning that the airbag would not deploy for the
> passenger in the event of an accident.
>
> Kramer sought help at the dealership where she purchased the car. But
> she was told there's no way to fix the problem, which could mean the
> airbag would not have deployed in an accident.
>
> Mike Anson, a Hyundai spokesman, said the only thing passengers not
> heavy enough to activate the airbag can do now is sit somewhere else.
>
> "Either move to the back seat or move to another Hyundai vehicle," he
> said.
>
> Complicated Instructions
>
> In a technical service bulletin obtained by ABC News, Hyundai advises
> service technicians to tell customers to try the following in an
> attempt to activate the airbag: "Turn the vehicle off, place the seat
> back in the full upright position, sit upright in the seat, centered
> on the seat cushion, with legs comfortably extended. Restart the
> vehicle and have the person remain in this position for about 30
> seconds."
>
> Agreeing that the instructions may be a bit too much for many
> customers to remember, Anson suggested that new customers take his
> company's cars for a long test drive before making a purchase.
>
> "Before you buy the vehicle, put the people in the front passenger who
> will be in there to make sure they're compatible," he said. "That way
> you won't have a problem."
>
> The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which now requires
> some new cars to use a sensor system for passenger-side airbags, is
> investigating Hyundai's problem and response. They said they need to
> investigate more before determining whether there's a need for a
> recall of the vehicles.
>
> Hyundai said it has sold 50,000 2004 Elantras.
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire (Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem)
"min10012" <min10012@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4b73f353.0406270344.5d700985@posting.google.c om...
> 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire
> http://news.japantoday.com/e/?conten...at=2&id=303561
>
It didn't say what engines caught fire. Are they engines used on vehicles
sold in North America? If so, what vehicles in North America have these
engines, and why are they catching fire? -Dave
#73
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire (Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem)
"min10012" <min10012@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4b73f353.0406270344.5d700985@posting.google.c om...
> 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire
> http://news.japantoday.com/e/?conten...at=2&id=303561
So why is this newsworthy?
There are vehicles whose engines catch fire all over the world. Here in
Harris County alone I am sure there must be more than 2 per year.
If one considers these two vehicles as a percentage of all Mitsu ingines
sold, is that indicative of a wide problem?
--
Wayne Moses,
2002 Hyundai Elantra GT
http://egt.gwebworks.com
#74
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire (Re: HyundaiAdmits Major Airbag Problem)
min10012 wrote:
> 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire
> http://news.japantoday.com/e/?conten...at=2&id=303561
neither car is sold in america.
mitsu is going up in flames, though. theyre the weakest of the japanese
automakers and have the fugliest cars. since the takeover,
daimler/chrysler broke most ties to them.
theyre even stooping to hyundai-style warranties, too.
#75
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire (Re: Hyundai Admits Major Airbag Problem)
SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<S8JDc.120235$HG.88762@attbi_s53>...
> min10012 wrote:
>
> > 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire
> > http://news.japantoday.com/e/?conten...at=2&id=303561
>
> neither car is sold in america.
>
> mitsu is going up in flames, though. theyre the weakest of the japanese
> automakers and have the fugliest cars. since the takeover,
> daimler/chrysler broke most ties to them.
That's loosely stated, but more or less accurate. D/C got a $180
million refund on its investment in Mitsubishi Fuso, has refused to
make any additional investments, and is contemplating further
lawsuits. Their approach has not helped the $4.3-billion bailout from
other sources that is in the works. Assuming the bailout still goes
through, D/C's stake will be diluted from 37 percent to some 23
percent, buyout specialist Phoenix Capital will own some 40 percent,
and Mitsubishi will still be some $6 billion in debt and losing $2
billion a year, more or less.
D/C will also be divesting its 10% stake in Hyundai. Those whose taste
runs to boardroom gossip see the collapse of D/C's Asian investments
as the handwriting on the wall for Schrempp.
> theyre even stooping to hyundai-style warranties, too.
A Southern California Mitsubishi dealer was quoted to the effect that
their marketing is in total collapse: they can't give cars away. The
US situation may still be an improvement on Mitsubishi's troubles in
the Japanese domestic market, where sales are down 56%, 56,000
customer complaints have been reopened, some 540,000 Mitsubishi Fuso
buses and trucks are being recalled (and all 1.3 million in service
are being inspected), and police are investigating the possibility
that 13 accidents were caused by defects.
--
Chris Green
> min10012 wrote:
>
> > 2 more Mitsubishi Motors vehicle engines catch fire
> > http://news.japantoday.com/e/?conten...at=2&id=303561
>
> neither car is sold in america.
>
> mitsu is going up in flames, though. theyre the weakest of the japanese
> automakers and have the fugliest cars. since the takeover,
> daimler/chrysler broke most ties to them.
That's loosely stated, but more or less accurate. D/C got a $180
million refund on its investment in Mitsubishi Fuso, has refused to
make any additional investments, and is contemplating further
lawsuits. Their approach has not helped the $4.3-billion bailout from
other sources that is in the works. Assuming the bailout still goes
through, D/C's stake will be diluted from 37 percent to some 23
percent, buyout specialist Phoenix Capital will own some 40 percent,
and Mitsubishi will still be some $6 billion in debt and losing $2
billion a year, more or less.
D/C will also be divesting its 10% stake in Hyundai. Those whose taste
runs to boardroom gossip see the collapse of D/C's Asian investments
as the handwriting on the wall for Schrempp.
> theyre even stooping to hyundai-style warranties, too.
A Southern California Mitsubishi dealer was quoted to the effect that
their marketing is in total collapse: they can't give cars away. The
US situation may still be an improvement on Mitsubishi's troubles in
the Japanese domestic market, where sales are down 56%, 56,000
customer complaints have been reopened, some 540,000 Mitsubishi Fuso
buses and trucks are being recalled (and all 1.3 million in service
are being inspected), and police are investigating the possibility
that 13 accidents were caused by defects.
--
Chris Green