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 ...
"My wife and I bought a Hyundai Santa Fe last spring and I admit I was impressed with the fit and finish and especially that the manufacturer was willing to back it with a 100,000 mile warranty."
This is such a key issue, I was wondering if somebody was going to mention Hyundai in this thread. It's not just quality in a car that matters, it's quality to cost ratio, which a good warranty can be a big part of. Take Hyundai's low, low prices into account and there's a reason they are selling more cars in America than ever before.
I don't think it's really matters so much if Detroit's autos are as good as imports at this point, people take awhile to get over what happened in the past. My sister, for example, owned a 1984 Chevy Cavalier, a very ugly, simple, little car, but it lasted and lasted, and in fact, is still in operation under new ownership. Not too long ago she bought a mid 90s Cavalier, much nicer on the inside, looks better, however, with way less mileage it's been quite problematic compared to the old one car.
There are so many other factors too, gas mileage, value-over-time, styling. I really think us conservatives have a tendency to blame the media for everything, but I've never picked up on any strong anti-American car bias, or a pro-import bias from the media. The liberal, pro-Asia conspiracy alluded to above just seems like a cop-out to me. American cars, in my opinion (with the exception of trucks and SUVs) have been quite ugly for a long time, and anybody who was moderately well off and wanted an attractive car was going to spring for a much sexier looking car from Europe for just a bit more, and those of us who are poor, think a lot about things like cost, gas mileage, and how many times we're going to have to take the damn thing in to the shop before 100,000 miles. So really, yes, there are a lot of good cars being made in America right now, but it's too little, too late, and why can't they give better warranties?
Hans
P.S. Speaking of Hemi's, I would really love to have one of those Dodge Magnum station wagons with the V8 Hemi in it. Dodge actually managed to make a station wagon look awesome, which is a feat in and of itself!
I wouldn't buy a Chrysler product at all, nor a GM or Ford vehicle with less than a V-8 in it. That limits it to trucks, the Mustang, and the 'Vette. I don't want a vette, I drive a Tahoe and might get a mustang at some point. But if I'm buying my wife a car, it won't be domestic.
I have a Ford with 140,000 miles. It's a great car.
Perhaps not, but I do loath the constant sleazy salesmen. They seem to have never learned that we KNOW how much the dealer paid and we KNOW their efforts to snow us that 0% is not for us is so they can have their "interest cookie" which is pure profit to them.
Ford's licoln division is playing catch up. Their cars resemble their 1970's interios with a serious lack of cup holders and engin power. (I want the hot rod lincoln in EVERY lincoln not a revamped merkur falure.)
Its perception and supply and demand - in order to keep the union workers producing something and not just getting full pay for doing nothing, Ford and GM sell large numbers to fleets, which means a large supply of 1 year old vehicles.
That's why when you compare the depreciation curves on my 97 Taurus and 98 Camry, the Taurus drops off much faster the first year, but its curve flattens out quickly. Now the difference in value is $2k. The difference in purchase price was $4k (camry was more expensive). So the Taurus is ahead in cost there by $2k. Factor in repairs, and the Ford has cost $4k less, and it is the older vehicle.
Isnt your 88 323 bascially a Ford Probe?
I wish american car manufacturers would build better cars. Our Ford Explorer starting falling apart with a little over 100K miles on it in spite of excellent maintenance. Our Lexus RX300 has 108K on it and has never had anything but routine maintenance done to it. Our BMW has 110K and other than a fuel pump that went bad it has just had regular maintenance. Until the US automakers deal with the union issue and stop relying on old engine technology they are never going to be able to compete with the likes of Toyota, Honda or Audi, BMW or Mercedez on the high end
I haven't owned a car in 20+ years. But I rent frequently and I can tell you that American cars are superior in ride and handling. The worst -- WORST! -- car I've driven in the last 10 years was a BMW. Horrible little thing to drive.
"93 Silverado...It's in Mexico someplace"
Woops. Dare I ask? If its in Mexico, heck it might be back here by now :)
"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)."
Your Mazda 323 was essentially a re-badged Ford Escort.
I'm sure part of it is. The resale value is driven by supply and demand and if the buyer percieves that Honda or Toyota is a better value it drives the demand up on the foreign cars.
I'm not saying that all of the problem is perception, but a lot of the perceptions are based on experiences from 15 or 20 years ago that might not be valid anymore.
Exactly. We just bought a 2004 Chevy Trailblazer last week (not my choice). When looking into new cars, I was not impressed with the warranties on Americans cars. If Ford doesn't trust their cars beyond 3 years or 38,000 miles, why should I?
Good example since my wife and I have a 99 Taurus. By the way it's our favorite car ever. Bad milage though. We picked the Taurus because of some of the very things you mention. There are a zillion of them on the road which gave us lot of choices. We ended up with a salvation title with the works for only 4000 bucks. It was a risk and so far it has been a really good gamble.
It's interesting to ponder resale value on camry vs Taurus vs Harley. There is a big value factor though. Harley stays valuable because of a lot of factors that are hard to translate to cars.
Trucks and SUV's are good.
Most American cars and Mini vans have are not and their is a reason Toyota and Honda are desireable in that area.
I think that the MX-6 was essentially the same as the Ford Probe.
No, but it is a Ford Escort.....
Well, Howard, still got that can of Lysol in your pocket?
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.