Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fact check: Are American cars really that bad?
CNNMoney ^ | January 26, 2006 | Peter Valdes-Dapena

Posted on 01/26/2006 11:13:00 AM PST by Dan Nunn

With all the bad news coming out of Detroit these days, many have a disarmingly simple suggestion: Ford and General Motors should simply build better cars.

"I read that Ford plans to cut about 30 000 jobs in North America alone," one CNNMoney.com reader wrote. "How about building better cars instead?'

How about that?

A perception of poor quality certainly isn't the only reason Ford and GM cars can have trouble in today's market. But it's a factor.

We looked at J.D. Power and Associates Long-term Dependability Surveys to get a sense of where American cars rank in terms of reliability and how much they've improved. That survey measures the number of problems vehicle owners have after 3 years of ownership.

We also checked with Consumer Reports to see what they thought about GM and Ford's performance in terms of reliability.

The answer is that, overall, GM and Ford cars are not that bad. In fact, depending on which survey you believe, they may even have become pretty good.

The problem is that "pretty good" has become "not quite good enough" in a world where quality standards have been raised so high and which many consumers still have bad memories of General Motors and Ford cars that have failed them in the past.

(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: americancars; automakers; chrysler; detroit; ford; fordmotor; generalmotors; gm
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-196 next last
To: Dan Nunn

Detroit's cars aren't horrible. But compared side-by-side to the competing Toyota, Honda, etc. they often seem "cheap" in appearance.


21 posted on 01/26/2006 11:25:50 AM PST by RockinRight (Attention RNC...we're the party of Reagan, not FDR...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn

Ford actually has a reputation for building extremely safe vehicles. I read somewhere (and it wasn't a Ford advertisement) that the 2006 fleet of Fords ranks at or near the top of the safety rankings in almost every vehicle class.


22 posted on 01/26/2006 11:26:15 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Leave a message with the rain . . . you can find me where the wind blows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dallas59; digger48

Yeah, that jibes with what NPR reported the other day about the Ford restructuring.

I think he said $27/hr; he gave the impression that's pretty standard. Factor in bennies and it's more like $60/hr.


23 posted on 01/26/2006 11:26:37 AM PST by Gefreiter ("Are you drinking 1% because you think you're fat?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: The KG9 Kid

Car & Driver Magazine rated four mid-sized sedans in one of their recent issues (the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Hyundai Sonata, and Ford Fusion). The Fusion came out at #2, close behind the Accord.


24 posted on 01/26/2006 11:28:39 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Leave a message with the rain . . . you can find me where the wind blows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: digger48
Achrysler Transmission plant here, I believe is around $27/hr. with benefits, the cost to the manufacturer is over $57/hr.

That's not bad money for a workforce comprized of high school graduates or less.

25 posted on 01/26/2006 11:29:27 AM PST by Kenton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn
Love my Chevy Monte Carlo 2005. It's runs fast (not THAT fast, but enough for me) and has the BEST ride (quiet and smooth) that I have ever had in an automobile.
26 posted on 01/26/2006 11:29:46 AM PST by Centurion2000 (Governments want to copy all the data on you in existence, but will prosecute you for an mp3 copied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn


My 02 RAM has 80,000 miles and not single mechanical problem. I've bought new tires and that's it.
27 posted on 01/26/2006 11:30:13 AM PST by Dallas59 ((“You love life, while we love death"( Al-Qaeda & Democratic Party))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn

It's not that difficult. Detroit's problems are easy to list, much harder to fix, and lots of blame to go around:

UAW - Squeezing until they killed their own business. Putting unfair pressure on companies for unreasonable demands.

Government - Tax, tax, tax. Hostile business regulations.

Management - Uninspired designs. Not being ahead of the curve in product offerings, instead, lagging the market. Agreeing to unreasonable labor demands. And finally, although quality is better, it's not as good as Honda/Toyota/Nissan. In general, if you buy an American car, you'll have it back to "shake it out". There are annoyance problems. My Bonneville is pretty good, but there were more than a few problems. In general, the Japanese cars are buy and drive. I'm older and cranky. When I buy a new car, I don't want to shake it out. I want to buy and drive.


28 posted on 01/26/2006 11:31:44 AM PST by brownsfan (It's not a war on terror... it's a war with islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbynack
A lot of the problem isn't the quality of the cars; it's the perception of quality.

So the Toyota and Honda resale value being much better than GM and Ford is about perception?

29 posted on 01/26/2006 11:33:38 AM PST by countorlock (But thy strong Hours indignant work'd their wills, And beat me down and marr'd and wasted me,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mbynack

That's exactly what the head of VW said when Morgan Stanley evaluated percieved v. actual quality. VW was percieved as having very high quality, when in fact it was very low. He said he'd rather have his problems than Mercury's (the most under-appreciated brand) because its easier to fix quality than it is the perception of quality.


30 posted on 01/26/2006 11:33:41 AM PST by eraser2005
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

"It's all relative. Toyota and Honda make better, more reliable cars for less money."

Why are so many Toyotas and Hondas priced thousands over the comparable Ford (see Camry v. Fusion or Accord v. Fusion) then?


31 posted on 01/26/2006 11:35:52 AM PST by eraser2005
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn

After 21 years of owning only Japanese cars, I purchased my first American (actually made in Canada) car in 2003. I like it overall, but the build quality is a definite step beneath the cars I owned previously, which were in a lower price category. My experience with the dealer has been somewhat less pleasant/reassuring as well.


32 posted on 01/26/2006 11:36:59 AM PST by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dallas59

I am not sure its a straight across pay for each union local, so it varies.


33 posted on 01/26/2006 11:37:44 AM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Juan Medén

The problem is like a bad marriage. Management is the put-upon husband; the unions the gold-digging wife; the workers the spoiled kids.


34 posted on 01/26/2006 11:38:19 AM PST by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn

Consumer Reports: "Sure, our sample group for our rankings is all of Brown University's associate professors in the
humanities colleges. So they like Volvos and Hondas, so what?"


35 posted on 01/26/2006 11:38:50 AM PST by tumblindice (I miss my Hupmobile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mbynack

Perception is reality. The Japanese brands didn't build their reputation for refined, high-quality cars overnight, nor did the big 3 make their reputation for building crap overnight. Perceptions influence resale values in a big way, so that when I bought a new Accord in 2004 I knew that it would hold its resale value better than just about anything else I could buy.

For me, when I think about it, everytime someone I know has a car that has major, expensive to fix mechanical problems, it's usually an American car. Nobody I know with a Japanese car has had to have an engine or transmission replaced. Honda had a big problem with auto trannies a couple of years ago, though, I know that. The difference is in how they handled the problem. They revised the design to eliminate the problem in the future, instead of continuing to crank a defective design out. For cars that had transmission problems, they fixed them whether in or out of warranty. And they instituted a program to inspect the problem trannies on the rest of the cars that had them, to do replacements or install a retrofit part to prevent the problem, before their customers had problems. This is not representative of how the US car makers have handled similar problems in the past.

And it's not just about reliability. Some people like knowing that they have a cutting-edge engine under the hood, even if it doesn't provide any real benefit from the driver's perspective. Fit and finish, inside and out, count too. Material selection - some materials just look and feel cheap. And then there's human factors - is the dash nicely designed, easy to read? Are the controls laid out in a non-confusing way, and easy to use? How do they feel when you use them. GM had the same left-side turn signal/wiper control/cruise control/headlight stalk for years and year. It was huge and ugly, difficult to use since too many controls were on one stalk, and it felt like you were breaking chicken bones every time you used it.

Maybe all of the above have been addressed, at least on some models. Some of it is obvious and can be seen and felt when you're sitting in the car. But the general distrust of the long-term reliability and durability (which aren't quite the same thing) of American (Ford and GM, and to a lesser extent D-C) cars will take time to overcome. I considered an American car when I bought my last one, but I feared, perhaps without cause, that I might get a lemon. But it's not as if Japanese cars are completely without problems. If the American car makers want to overcome this, and if they have the time and resources to do it, they will have to concentrate on matching the Japanese in quality, durability and innovation (or even beating them - you won't get ahead with a goal of matching your opponent) and keep it up for probably another decade. But this sort of long-term approach to business seems antithetical to US car company management.


36 posted on 01/26/2006 11:38:52 AM PST by -YYZ-
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kenton

That's the problem. With a relative already working there, kids could hire in at 18 and make more than their classmates start out after 4 years of college.

Throw in a spouse who worked a Delco and you have uneducated couples making $100,000 a year, but spending $120K. Everytime there is a slowdown, lay-off, or strike, literally hundreds of people are filing for bankruptcy the first week their pay is interrupted.

They tend to spend what they make when overtime is high, and can't make it when they have to live on 40 hours a week.


37 posted on 01/26/2006 11:39:15 AM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn
My 1988 Mazda 323 ran through just about everything I threw at it and just didn't break (until I smacked it into a minivan). About the only thing other than standard maintenance was a broken exhaust pipe and a radio that sometimes lost one speaker because of some loose circuit.

My 1996 Saturn cost me many times more in repairs - bad brakes in the first year (under warranty), leaky radiator, leaky sun roof, more brake repairs, bad engine mount, bad ignition switch, a few transmission repairs, broken power window coupling, bad alternator and probably a lot more that I don't remember.

Was the 96 Saturn better than some of the 70s crapmobiles? Yes. But it still wasn't as well put together as a Japanese car from almost 10 years earlier.

If you want me to take American cars seriously, then put a five or more year warranty on it. If the cars are built right, it won't cost the company much in covered repairs. That's how Hyundai started to get over their earlier quality reputation. Build better cars and stand behind them.

38 posted on 01/26/2006 11:39:15 AM PST by KarlInOhio (During wartime, some whistles should not be blown. - Orson Scott Card)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Actually, going back to the mid-late 90s, Ford had more 5-star crash ratings than all other manufacturers combined.

I know someone who split a highway guardrail at an estimated 85 mph in their Taurus and ended up in a field(the car was totalled, of course). All three (him, his wife, and their infant) were unscratched. They bought another Taurus the next day.


39 posted on 01/26/2006 11:39:36 AM PST by eraser2005
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: relictele

I've taken 4 different Ford F-250 4X4's over 250,000 miles.


40 posted on 01/26/2006 11:41:16 AM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-196 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson