: GM to Close 9 Plants, Cut 30,000 jobs



90Brougham350
11-21-05, 03:30 PM
If you haven't already seen the news, take a look.

General Motors Corp. will eliminate 30,000 jobs and close nine North American assembly, stamping and powertrain plants by 2008 as part of an effort to get production in line with demand and position the world's biggest automaker to start making money again after absorbing nearly $4 billion in losses so far this year.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/21/D8E112S80.html

malcolm
11-21-05, 04:08 PM
As far as I am concerned you can thank the likes of Consumer Report magazine for bashing American cars for years and the suckers who bought that crap and thought their little crappy imports were so great. In addition all the freakin bargain hunters who want to buy cheap foreigh crap at the expense of the American worker. We are doomed. China is getting ready to eat America's lunch and the average American dope will just sit back and let it happen.

Lord Cadillac
11-21-05, 04:16 PM
Between GM sitting on it's laurels and the media constantly making it front page news, it's no wonder this is happening...

Playdrv4me
11-21-05, 04:16 PM
As far as I am concerned you can thank the likes of Consumer Report magazine for bashing American cars for years and the suckers who bought that crap and thought their little crappy imports were so great. In addition all the freakin bargain hunters who want to buy cheap foreigh crap at the expense of the American worker. We are doomed. China is getting ready to eat America's lunch and the average American dope will just sit back and let it happen.

Thats the most lobsided argument Ive ever heard. Shoddy craftsmanship, poor management, a bland bread and butter product line and and years of corporate malfeasance are what led us here. If GM had produced the products America needed and wanted when America needed and wanted them, and had supported the products we were already buying better, the outcome would have been very different. Instead of the FEW shining stars we have from GM today, most of them in Cadillac and the truck lines, we should have products equally as impressive from the smallest vehicles to the top of the line. And if you think that Americans are the only ones who bought into korean and chinese idealogies, then you are overlooking the fact that GM themselves have already invested billions in this market and their smallest car, the Aveo, is a direct result of this.

Your basically saying that COMPETITION and affordability destroyed the company. Well without competition the business world would be a true disaster.

It really burns me up when people try to blame the misfortunes of GM and Ford on Foreign Competition. If they had been producing vehicles to compete on an equal level the whole time, the influence of the foreign brands would not have been so great. As it stands now there is alot of cleaning up to do. The Magazines havent helped, but they only spit out what they interpreted as the truth based on the information they were given... and domestic manufacturers advertised in those magazines every bit as much as the foreign ones do.

Kev
11-21-05, 04:32 PM
Thats the most lobsided argument Ive ever heard. Shoddy craftsmanship, poor management, a bland bread and butter product line and and years of corporate malfeasance are what led us here. If GM had produced the products America needed and wanted when America needed and wanted them, and had supported the products we were already buying better, the outcome would have been very different. Instead of the FEW shining stars we have from GM today, most of them in Cadillac and the truck lines, we should have products equally as impressive from the smallest vehicles to the top of the line. And if you think that Americans are the only ones who bought into korean and chinese idealogies, then you are overlooking the fact that GM themselves have already invested billions in this market and their smallest car, the Aveo, is a direct result of this.

Your basically saying that COMPETITION and affordability destroyed the company. Well without competition the business world would be a true disaster.

It really burns me up when people try to blame the misfortunes of GM and Ford on Foreign Competition. If they had been producing vehicles to compete on an equal level the whole time, the influence of the foreign brands would not have been so great. As it stands now there is alot of cleaning up to do. The Magazines havent helped, but they only spit out what they interpreted as the truth based on the information they were given... and domestic manufacturers advertised in those magazines every bit as much as the foreign ones do.Well put.

To summarize; most of the blame lies with GM's complacency and failure to compete.

malcolm
11-21-05, 04:41 PM
Just one man's opinion, no need to get uppity. I could argue that quality began to slip when the flood of imports arrived and the American buyers who were cheap with their money started buying that junk. In case you were not around in those days, the people who bought those early imports didn't have the cash to buy a real man's car. Then Consumer Reports jumped on the bandwagon and buyers who needed a magazine to tell what to buy followed. It was all down hill from there and American car companies never got a fair break since and the momentum shifted. It can come back but the automotive press is still full of import lovers and there is an entire generation of car buyers who have no idea of what it was like when companies like GM Ford and Chrysler ruled the world.

Playdrv4me
11-21-05, 05:04 PM
So because you were always able to afford a certain type of car and the next person could not, it is THEIR fault for purchasing a less expensive alternative that still suited their transportation needs? Sounds to me like thats on the Economy of the time if anything, not on the poor soul who wasnt able to afford the more expensive vehicle.

Dont really see how its fair to blame the little guy who couldnt afford what you could.

Kev
11-21-05, 05:25 PM
Malcolm and Play, you both have valid points. While I don't see the rationale to attribute much blame to car magazines and consumer reports I will share this example that I think ties both your thoughts together;

In 1979 we were still trying to recover from the first dramatic "gas shortage", fuel costs had risen to what we considered unreasonable levels. My friend bought a new car. It was a Dodge Challenger which, if you may recall, was built and imported by Mitsubishi for Dodge. It was a compact with a 2.0 liter (I think) 4 cyl Hemi engine, 5-speed trany, had lots of bells, whistles and goodies inside (many standard features) the likes of which we were not used to seeing in any American cars. This was fairly common for many of the Japanese imports of that era campared to American designed and built cars.

Where GM and most of the others blew it was, they didn't come on line with those features. The imports were easy on the wallet, sure, they were light and not as powerful but they performed pretty well for their size and got much better gas mileage than even the closest Amarican equivalent.

Our American companies missed the moment in my opinion. They've lost a tremendous amount of momentum by not properly reading the signs of the times. Add to that the positive press for the imports, the superior customer service that many of them had (Mazda was very good about customer service) and the fact that if properly maintained, those imports were not as disposable as we thought!

Now on top of all that, Ford was dealing with the suicidal Pintos, Chevy had Chevettes and Monzas that were pitiful in quality and performance, it was bleak.

Our American auto makers have been trying to catch up ever since but it looks like their hearts may not have been in quite the right place.....

Elvis
11-21-05, 05:44 PM
Let's not get the egg confused with the chicken here.

The flood of imports came because oil prices skyrocketed in the 70's. The American manufacturers were too slow coming up with economical vehicles, so people bought the "cheap crap" because it could get over 20 mpg.

Then ten years later people started noticing that American cars made at the same time were in the junkyards, while those little CVCC's, Celicas, and B210's were still running and going strong. The motors were putting in over 200,000 miles without needing a re-build.

I NEVER would have considered buying anything other than American, until I had to spend three days in a borrowed 1987 Acura Legend. There was not an American car on the market that could compete with that car. To get comparable luxury you had to pay $6,000 more. To get comparable economy you had to suffer poor build quality and sacrifice size and space.

So I bought it. Then I bought ANOTHER one. And another, and another.
After some hefty repair bills, my wife dumped her 1980 Buick Regal (with only 60,000 miles) for a brand new 1984 Volvo. In 1997 she got TIRED OF IT and bought a new one. The old one is still running around Memphis with over 300,000 miles on it. Her current Volvo just passed 118,000 miles.

Consumer Reports has too strong a reputation of exhaustive testing and surveying for me to take those comments seriously. I can put you in touch with one of their automotive editors. He's a regular on a baseball forum I visit, and I've never once read anything from him bashing the quality of American-made cars. He's questioned the wisdom behind the SUV boom, he's questioned the CAFE standards, and he's questioned GM's planning, but he's never been anti-American.

Based on some of the horror stories I've read in the STS section of this forum, you must have gotten a "Wednesday car" or else you're extremely lucky. If anybody's making crap these days, it's US, not the Japanese or Germans.

Blame the sloppy uneducated workforce. Blame the labor unions. Blame GM management. Blame us, the disloyal American consumers who refused to accept mediocrity.

But don't blame Consumer Reports, and don't call the imports crap, because they aren't.

Rolex
11-21-05, 05:44 PM
This is a terrible shame to hear. The last 4 vehicles I've personally owned were domestic, 3 of which were GM. They've got some catching up to do to meet the demands of their consumer market. Personally I will continue my pattern of customer loyalty.

ben72227
11-21-05, 06:00 PM
Malcolm, you sound like you don't like Jap cars...

:(

Anyway, its obvious what happened: GM has always designed their cars to last about 3-4 years - the rational is that after three years, the new upgraded model would come out, and nobody would want the old one.

And then, Honda/Toyota/(Datsun/Nissan) came over here, and they built cars that lasted, that spent more time in your garage than in the mechanic's, and that were (generally) cheaper. Not to mention they looked hella good compared to the American boxcars of the 80s (K cars, J bodies, etc.). I mean, the Mazda RX7, Toyota Supra, Datsun 240Z, etc. were affordable cars that LOOKED GOOD.

And even the regular bread and butter cars weren't too shabby either, the Mazda 626 (with its ossilating A/C vents and automatic seatbelts:thumbsup: ), the Toyota's and Hondas.


American cars broke down, they were ugly, they were inefficient, they used stoneage technology (OHV engines:thumbsup:, hell they still force them on Pontiac today...), they were just behind the times.

Of course, there were exceptions - like the Ford Taurus, and the Cadillacs of 1992, the Fox Mustang, etc. but overall, American cars sucked. I mean, why get a Cavalier when you could get a Civic?

And yes, Consumer reports seems biased, because we like American cars, but the fact of the matter, is that they aren't biased, they're just BRUTALLY HONEST. They say things that we don't want to accept, even though we know they're true.

Of course, American cars have gotten better, And Consumer Reports has reflected this; they recommened the STS, CTS, and the Escalade this year (I think...) in the '06 CR Buying Guide. But, although they've gotten better, they're still behind Jap cars. They're introducing 10 year old-technology in their new cars, and the Japs are 10 years ahead. It sucks, but...What can you do? When you have incompetent leadership, like Bill Ford or Roger Smith or Rick Wagoner, what can you do?

ANother thing, that play pointed out, is that GM doesn't know what they consumers want. I mean, we want a Pony car, and GM is putting out things like the HHR and giving brands like Pontiac a minivan. Now, why would you want to buy a sports car from a company that also makes a (mediocre BTY) minivan?

Krashed989
11-21-05, 06:08 PM
Well GM is just making one stupid decision after another aren't they. What's the point of this? To raise the prices of their "on sale" cars? Why the hell don't they just raise the F-ing prices then, without sending so many people to the poor house. Their cars aren't selling not because they're making too many of them, but because people aren't liking what they see compared to what the other companies are offering. Them lowering the prices just proved to the consumers eyes that, yes, they are built cheaply. So they just move on to the next car that looks like there was some quality put into the design, and that car just happens to not be made by them. The other thing that they are doing is slapping a huge engine in practically every model. Although I personally like the power and everything, there are many people that are in the buyers market now for just simple economy cars, and GM lacks on that section of the sales department. They also need to vary their product more. Each section of the company is borrowing models from other sections of the company, and that makes the whole selection, just plain bland. My mom was looking at buying the escalade EXT, well that was untill she saw that she could get the exact same thing for thousands of dollars less if she just bought an avalanch, and she did. They are being very lazy with designing new models, and they need to realize that it's hurting them.

What's going to happen next?

Kev
11-21-05, 06:20 PM
They’ve got some major hemorrhaging for sure, trouble is, they’re trying to stop it with a band aide. Closing plants and lowering prices will give a limited and temporary boost to cash flow but the mid and long term consequences will be fatal if they don’t take proper steps. The negative publicity and outcry from the plant closures and loss of jobs is going to hurt them for sure.

Face it. The American public in general is greedy and selfish. If you lower the price enough we will buy it. The fiscal bottom line is the bottom line for the private citizen as well as the corporate board.

The question is, is it too little too late?

And

Will they make the right choices with the limited opportunity that they have?

Playdrv4me
11-21-05, 06:29 PM
It definitely does appear bleak. The only hope is some solid leadership as some on this board have pointed out several times to come in and rudder the ship toward the right direction, which will take time.

I said this along time ago... but we need our own Carlos Ghosn for GM. :(

Elvis
11-21-05, 06:36 PM
Something we need to remember here, GM knew these bad numbers were coming more than two quarters ago.

The fire sale they held over the summer was to help cut their losses and clean out inventory that would NEVER have sold AFTER the bad numbers came out.

We act surprised over things like today's announcements. If GM's management was surprised about having to resort to something like these layoffs, they should all be fired. They very likely had this plan in place a year ago.

Kev
11-21-05, 06:47 PM
Something we need to remember here, GM knew these bad numbers were coming more than two quarters ago.

The fire sale they held over the summer was to help cut their losses and clean out inventory that would NEVER have sold AFTER the bad numbers came out.

We act surprised over things like today's announcements. If GM's management was surprised about having to resort to something like these layoffs, they should all be fired. They very likely had this plan in place a year ago.Good points Elvis. In fact, going along with some of the things Katshot was saying about unions, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if this was part of a strategic plan to cut the union out altogether so that they could re-organize manufacturing here with their own set of labor rates and conditions or outsource internationally as so many other corporations have done.

Of course, that does not address their lackluster designs, quality and other issues brought up here.

Night Wolf
11-21-05, 06:58 PM
Let's not get the egg confused with the chicken here.
The flood of imports came because oil prices skyrocketed in the 70's. The American manufacturers were too slow coming up with economical vehicles, so people bought the "cheap crap" because it could get over 20 mpg.
Then ten years later people started noticing that American cars made at the same time were in the junkyards, while those little CVCC's, Celicas, and B210's were still running and going strong. The motors were putting in over 200,000 miles without needing a re-build.
I NEVER would have considered buying anything other than American, until I had to spend three days in a borrowed 1987 Acura Legend. There was not an American car on the market that could compete with that car. To get comparable luxury you had to pay $6,000 more. To get comparable economy you had to suffer poor build quality and sacrifice size and space.
So I bought it. Then I bought ANOTHER one. And another, and another.
After some hefty repair bills, my wife dumped her 1980 Buick Regal (with only 60,000 miles) for a brand new 1984 Volvo. In 1997 she got TIRED OF IT and bought a new one. The old one is still running around Memphis with over 300,000 miles on it. Her current Volvo just passed 118,000 miles.
Consumer Reports has too strong a reputation of exhaustive testing and surveying for me to take those comments seriously. I can put you in touch with one of their automotive editors. He's a regular on a baseball forum I visit, and I've never once read anything from him bashing the quality of American-made cars. He's questioned the wisdom behind the SUV boom, he's questioned the CAFE standards, and he's questioned GM's planning, but he's never been anti-American.
Based on some of the horror stories I've read in the STS section of this forum, you must have gotten a "Wednesday car" or else you're extremely lucky. If anybody's making crap these days, it's US, not the Japanese or Germans.
Blame the sloppy uneducated workforce. Blame the labor unions. Blame GM management. Blame us, the disloyal American consumers who refused to accept mediocrity.
But don't blame Consumer Reports, and don't call the imports crap, because they aren't.

ok... heres a question.....

if the imports of the 70's were so good... and they were around 10 years after they were made....

where are they now?

Back in NY cars rusted out quick... yet there was a beat '77 DeVille driving around and a couple older Mercurys. The only imports were a couple old VW buses... which were cool.

Down here in FL, I have yet to see any import from the 70's with the exception of a Datsun 280Z at a car show.... yet so far in the last month I have seen about 2 dozen 70's era cars being used as *daily drivers* There is nothing like pulling up to a stop light and an old beat up '72 Buick Skylark pulls up next to you... bent bumper/fender (probably from totalling a Honda) some rust, exhaust leak... but a nice gurgle.... I just look and it puts a smile on my face... people are still driving them. Same goes for early 70's Malibu's and there are 2 kinda beat '78 Coupe DeVilles around. A nice older Merc... and others....

if they were so bad... I don't see how after 35 years, they would simply still be driving around... hell, my '79 DeVille... I'd trust that thing to go across the country, really.... that is from the "dark ages" though I use it as a daily driver and there is not a single problem.

I don't get it.

malcolm
11-21-05, 07:20 PM
I see I have an unpopular opinion. If GM built the world's worst car, and apparently many here think they do, and priced it below the imports they would sell thousands. It's all about getting a bargain. As a comparison around here, northern NJ, you can no longer go to the neighborhood hardware store and buy a screw, nut or washer or some other little item. You have to go to Lowes or Home Depot and buy a bag full of crappy screws that more than likely will either snap or the slot for the srcew driver will be half formed. Now whose fault is that? The little neighborhood hardware store owner? Should he be blamed for not keeping up? It's driven by the American consumer who can't resist a bargain and as sure as the malls and warehouse stores killed downtown shopping across America, this love of imports will continue to destroy the American economy. While the imports were establishing their brands did they have to deal with union wages, health care for employees, EPA regulations, retirement plans or Corporate income tax? Unfair advantage on an uneven playing field and now it's GM's fault? It's every American's fault. In my humble and unpopular opinion.

ben72227
11-21-05, 07:21 PM
ok... heres a question.....

if the imports of the 70's were so good... and they were around 10 years after they were made....

where are they now?

Back in NY cars rusted out quick... yet there was a beat '77 DeVille driving around and a couple older Mercurys. The only imports were a couple old VW buses... which were cool.

Down here in FL, I have yet to see any import from the 70's with the exception of a Datsun 280Z at a car show.... yet so far in the last month I have seen about 2 dozen 70's era cars being used as *daily drivers* There is nothing like pulling up to a stop light and an old beat up '72 Buick Skylark pulls up next to you... bent bumper/fender (probably from totalling a Honda) some rust, exhaust leak... but a nice gurgle.... I just look and it puts a smile on my face... people are still driving them. Same goes for early 70's Malibu's and there are 2 kinda beat '78 Coupe DeVilles around. A nice older Merc... and others....

if they were so bad... I don't see how after 35 years, they would simply still be driving around... hell, my '79 DeVille... I'd trust that thing to go across the country, really.... that is from the "dark ages" though I use it as a daily driver and there is not a single problem.

I don't get it.

Because American cars were still dominant in the 70s. Jap cars didn't really start to take over until about when Lexus came out. When Lexus came out, that's when they really started to take over. By 2000, they had completely taken over. You see, there are plenty of old imports from the 70s (I see old Celicas, Civics and Corollas all the time) its just that back then, the Japs didn't have nearly as many cars on the US roads yet and they didn't have nearly the amount of product then either.

That's the thing, GM has TONS of cars, and the Japs maybe have 3-4 cars max in their whole lineup. BUT, it works for them, because its better to have 10 GREAT cars, than to have 40 Mediocre vehicles...

Night Wolf
11-21-05, 07:31 PM
Anyway, its obvious what happened: GM has always designed their cars to last about 3-4 years - the rational is that after three years, the new upgraded model would come out, and nobody would want the old one.



I don't believe that one bit. That means a 2002 GM car is going to be falling apart? As I stated above, I drive my '79 DeVille around daily... hell, my '89 Oldsmobile with 131k miles that i paid $500 is a daily driver, that car has not a single issue besides underbody rust... which any daily driver NY car that is 17 years have..... 17 years.... a 17 y/o GM car that was never treated special or have really low miles, still be a daily driver. I do not have a single quality control issue with that, or any of my cars.



And then, Honda/Toyota/(Datsun/Nissan) came over here, and they built cars that lasted, that spent more time in your garage than in the mechanic's, and that were (generally) cheaper. Not to mention they looked hella good compared to the American boxcars of the 80s (K cars, J bodies, etc.). I mean, the Mazda RX7, Toyota Supra, Datsun 240Z, etc. were affordable cars that LOOKED GOOD.


built cars that lasted? how about built cars that rusted out? ANY import from the 70's and 80's is plaqued with serious rust issues... back int he 70's you'd be lucky if your new Honda lasted 3 years. You are comparing mega-cheap econo cars (K and J) to some high end imports.... how about we compare the RX-7, Supra and 240Z to say.... oh a Buick Grand National or a Ford Mustang 5.0? now all of a sudden they look like junk and their performance is even worse. The 80's was a bad decade for all cars... but to me atleast there were some pretty nice cars form the Big 3, even if performance was low.


And even the regular bread and butter cars weren't too shabby either, the Mazda 626 (with its ossilating A/C vents and automatic seatbelts ), the Toyota's and Hondas.

yeah they were nice until you crashed into a full size GM/Ford/Chrysler RWD boat... now you are dead and the Delta 88 needs a new front bumper.



American cars broke down, they were ugly, they were inefficient, they used stoneage technology (OHV engines, hell they still force them on Pontiac today...), they were just behind the times.


thats all realitive, I think the first gen RX-7 and Supra is ugly, there isn't a single import from the 70's or 80's that I like at all.... except the 70's Toyota Land Cruisers... those were just cool.

Stoneage technology? you mean OHC right? OHV? but OHC is OLDER then OHV... so how is OHV...I am lots....

I will choose an OHV engine over OHC/DOHC *ANY* day. They are far superior IMO.



Of course, there were exceptions - like the Ford Taurus, and the Cadillacs of 1992, the Fox Mustang, etc. but overall, American cars sucked. I mean, why get a Cavalier when you could get a Civic?


Because you could get a 3.1L V6 and a convertible in the Cavalier.



And yes, Consumer reports seems biased, because we like American cars, but the fact of the matter, is that they aren't biased, they're just BRUTALLY HONEST. They say things that we don't want to accept, even though we know they're true.


yeah.... no... they are BRUTALLY BIASED.


Of course, American cars have gotten better, And Consumer Reports has reflected this; they recommened the STS, CTS, and the Escalade this year (I think...) in the '06 CR Buying Guide. But, although they've gotten better, they're still behind Jap cars. They're introducing 10 year old-technology in their new cars, and the Japs are 10 years ahead. It sucks, but...What can you do? When you have incompetent leadership, like Bill Ford or Roger Smith or Rick Wagoner, what can you do?


10 year old technology Japs are 10 years ahead... what?

I *HOPE* you are not talking about VVT.

Did you know the first Cadillac in 1904 had variable intake valve timing....WOHA.... I guess its the Japs that are behind... come on now.

I'll tell ya one thing... VVT is only used on the imports 4 and 6 bangers because they offer NO low end torque at all! they NEED the VVT to try and gain that back. Why is GM picking up VVT? because of debates like this "GM is old tech" *that is that Motor Trend and Consumer Reports tell you* a DOHC VVT engine is no better then a simple pushrod. GM isn't behind anybody.

the C5 Z06 had 405hp and would get 20mpg around town and 30mpg on the highway and run 12's all day in the 1/4.... *from an old tech pushrod* Where is Japan now? You know where they are? building 2.0L turbo charged high revving DOHC 4bangers that get *LESS* fuel milage then a NA V8 Corvette... while making about half the power.... come on, who is REALLY behind the times now? Hell the C6 Z06 has 505hp and runs 11.5s@128mph in the 1/4, fuel mileage figures can't be off that much from the C5.... so it'll e interesting to see what this will get.


ANother thing, that play pointed out, is that GM doesn't know what they consumers want. I mean, we want a Pony car, and GM is putting out things like the HHR and giving brands like Pontiac a minivan. Now, why would you want to buy a sports car from a company that also makes a (mediocre BTY) minivan?

Pontiac has had a minivan for awhile now.

BTW Pontiac brought back the GTO 2 years ago.

Pontiac is coming out with the Solstice.... 2 seater, RWD convertible, manual... yeah its a 4banger, but next year it'll become supercharged putting out 260hp or so..... whats Honda have? the S2000? good luck revving that toy up to 8,000RPM to get moving.

The new Pontiac G6..... have you seen the Coupes? you can get the GT with the 3900 V6 (yup, sweet pushrod) and a 6spd manual...... I guess this is a boring car too.

Ford scored a HUGE hit with the new Mustang..... Honda dosn't have anything anywhere near it.

Chrysler is putting the Hemi into everything... their full size family sedan (300C) is running low 14's/high 13's in the 1/4 mile.

Where was GM in the 90's? what about our Cadillac Northstar? Where was Honda's limp-home mode? run out of coolant, 4 cylinders shut down, engine lives and you get home. Cadillac had 295hp in 1993.... Honda had.... 180? Oldsmobile was doing great in the 90's dosn't it SUCK GM had to kill them despite Olds in its final year with the Alero (Grand Am) Shilloette (Venture) and Bravada (Blazer) STILL sold more then Saab, Saturn and Isuzu.... *combined* The Oldsmobile Aurora? that was a kickass car, the 2nd gen Aurora is soo nice. The Oldsmobile Intrigue was a very nice advanced car and you could get 2 amazing engines... the 3.5L DOHC Shortstar or the 3800 Series II.

Thats another thing, the 3800 Series II s/c is a BEAST of an engine... IMO far better then what Honda has to offer.

you want to REALLY talk about GM beating Honda at their own game....

how about the Quad4 of the 80's? yeah they are known for headgaskets... but it was the same situation as the early N*... lack of maintenace.

in 1989 GM had 160/180/190hp versions of the Quad4. They were DOHC. the 160hp was the base version, 180hp was high output, and 190hp was the rare W41 used in the Cutlass 442. All these could be had with a 5spd manual. All of these actually had some low end torque... about 160ft-lbs across the line of all 3 versions... more then Honda.

Honda didn't get 190hp until what? 1994 in the Prelude? and even then, it was a low volume car.

So really, WHAT does GM have to keep up with?

How about the Pontiac Fiero? What about the Oldsmobile Toronado with the touch screen computer inside the car to run radio, climate control, navigation, calender, system monitor on the car etc.... come on now, this stuff was amazing that the imports simply didn't have.

I can go on and on... but really the fact is, GM's quality was never as bad as people make it out to be, and GM has NO catching up to do at all. in fact it's Honda that has to catch up how? they don't have a single V8. They build a joke they call a Ridgeline and try to market here as a real tough truck... real trucks are not unibody with low torque transversly mounted V6 and AWD.... come on now.

Night Wolf
11-21-05, 07:34 PM
How come Toyota's automatic transmission problem in the late 90's got NO media attention at all?

How about Nissan's current 2.5L 4banger that often fails before 30k miles and alot of dealers refuse warrantee work? the pre-cat breaks off and gets sucked into the engine thus ruining it, Nissan knows it yet does nothing.

Both of these you hear NOTHING about... if this was GM it'd be all over the news... forget Iraq or war... we wanna hear GM's problems!

BTW why is 2-valve pushrod "old tech" better then DOHC? This is a great read.

http://www.v6performance.net/forums/showthread.php?t=27941

malcolm
11-21-05, 07:41 PM
Because American cars were still dominant in the 70s. Jap cars didn't really start to take over until about when Lexus came out. When Lexus came out, that's when they really started to take over. By 2000, they had completely taken over. You see, there are plenty of old imports from the 70s (I see old Celicas, Civics and Corollas all the time) its just that back then, the Japs didn't have nearly as many cars on the US roads yet and they didn't have nearly the amount of product then either.

That's the thing, GM has TONS of cars, and the Japs maybe have 3-4 cars max in their whole lineup. BUT, it works for them, because its better to have 10 GREAT cars, than to have 40 Mediocre vehicles...

Lexus is a very recent entry into the US market. By 1976 a company called Datsun had already sold 2 million Schit boxes in the US. All the automotive press just loved the little death traps.

Night Wolf
11-21-05, 07:43 PM
Because American cars were still dominant in the 70s. Jap cars didn't really start to take over until about when Lexus came out. When Lexus came out, that's when they really started to take over. By 2000, they had completely taken over. You see, there are plenty of old imports from the 70s (I see old Celicas, Civics and Corollas all the time) its just that back then, the Japs didn't have nearly as many cars on the US roads yet and they didn't have nearly the amount of product then either.

That's the thing, GM has TONS of cars, and the Japs maybe have 3-4 cars max in their whole lineup. BUT, it works for them, because its better to have 10 GREAT cars, than to have 40 Mediocre vehicles...

Yes I ralize for every 70's import there are lots more domestics.

but how come in NY, the trip down and in FL, where cars live forever...

*I DON'T SEE A SINGLE 70'S IMPORT*

Thats what I am saying... in NY, on the way down and here in FL, they are all over... hell I go to a tech school and *2* kids have 1966 Mustangs in really nice shape... daily drivers!

I have yet to see a *single* 70's import besides that Datsun at the car show I mentioned... it isn't rocket science.

Alot of the 90's Lexus is better then Cadillac is meda and marketing... what makes a 1996 Seville STS that much better then whatever Lexus has? You know one thing? Cadillac spent nearly NO money or time marketing the Northstar... come on, a full size, classy luxury car that can do the 1/4 in 14.5 seconds?!? *IN 1993!* Lexus didn't have that... and therefore Cadillac dropped back and back as the old mans car... if GM even advertised and got the public to know the beast of a car they already had.. it would have been different.

what happened around 2000?

GM finally started doing that.

They had to kill the Seville/Eldorado/DeVille in the process.. .but they came out with the Escalade, a huge hit even in its 1st gen rebadged GMC version.... once the CTS came out it was a complete 180... look in the news, Cadillac is the biggest hit, you don't hear a damn thing about Lexus... all these new models from Cadillac and the V series... while I don't like the name thing, they completly changed the brand image around.

About weeding down on cars, I agree... and the platform sharing has got to get toned down a little bit... but GM needs to smarten up, last time they decided to tone down *THEY GOT RID OF OLDSMOBILE* idiots! why would you do something like that! Besides Cadillac, Olds is my favorite car brand... instead of dumping Isuzu, Saturn or Saab, they dumped Oldsmobile.... that is just BS....

ugh... now I am gonna get started on the Olds thing.... better stop now.

Night Wolf
11-21-05, 07:50 PM
Lexus is a very recent entry into the US market. By 1976 a company called Datsun had already sold 2 million Schit boxes in the US. All the automotive press just loved the little death traps.

ya know... you gotta hear the stories my father tells about those sub compacts driving around in the 70's

stories of 70's Cadillacs, Mercurys and Oldsmobiles just simply plowing thru them like nothing... it was, as you said, a death trap.

One story was his high school g/f sister, she was in a car her father bought her brand new... a 1978 Honda Civic, it was her and 2 friends... 2 in the front and 1 in the back, the driver was drinking about around a turn crossed the double yellow and hit a 1975 Oldsmobile Cutlass head on.... he said the bumper on the Cutlass cought the front of the Civic, it completly twisted the car in half, the person in the back wasn't wearing a seat belt and went thru the windsheild died instantly, both fron passengers were wearing seat belts, the g/f sister in the front passenger seat died at the hospital, and the drunk driver is the only one that survived with major injuries.

The driver of the cutlass walked out of the car, then later drove it home.

If I was around in the 70's there is no way in hell I would put myself in a tin can.... I don't care if the damn thing got 20mpg, you were just asking to get killed.

Gas was recently up to $4/gallon... what was I doing? driving my '79 DeVille.... with all the Aveo's and Prius's around, atleast I know I am going to live if somebody crashes into me. Gas is down to $2/gallon now... guess what, I am still driving the '79 DeVille and now everyone that bought their Earth-saving hybrids are probably kicking theirself in the ass because they just spent a whole bunch of money on a car they didn't need.

Kev
11-21-05, 08:14 PM
Night Wolf > "Can I go on?! Can I go on?! Haayyy!!!!" :green: :band:

"Hep meh! Mercy!"

Elvis
11-21-05, 08:26 PM
Someone who owned a Cadillac around that time tended to take better care of it. They could also afford a garage, which dramatically cut down on the rust.

Mr. B210 treated his car like dog poop, ragged it out, didn't do maintenance, just ran the piss out of it. But the damn thing wouldn't die.

And no, they have no value as a classic. They are for utilitarian purposes only. They have no soul. They are "Mister Roboto." Very few people NICKNAMED their imports.

American cars had a soul. They were designed to appeal to us aesthetically as well as for their power and security. But they sucked from a durability standpoint, and they got horrible gas mileage.

Night Wolf
11-21-05, 09:07 PM
I can agree with that about the classics and soul thing..... but basically a beat up '72 Skylark has more soul and personality then even a mint 70's RX-7 or Supra? I mean... for me such a Skylark is just something to stare at... but to the average person...

But what is bad about durbility?

Cadillac had the 472/500... can't kill them.

Chevy, Olds, Pontiac Buick had the 350, 400 and 455.... these were strong engines.

Chevy also had the 250 I-6..... hell of an engine

Lincoln had the 400 and 460.... strong.

Ford used the 302... all you had to do was put a quart of oil a day in it, and it was happy.

Chrysler had the 318, 360, 413 etc.....

lets not forget the Slant-6.... that thing never died

All the V8's had no issue... so where was all the problems?

or was it from the econo cars... the OHC in the Vega, or the Pinto etc...?

Jesda
11-21-05, 10:01 PM
GM transaction prices are low because of the 80s. Thanks, Roger Smith!

ben72227
11-21-05, 10:01 PM
Well Rick, this will take a while. You overloaded me with that mega-post. You also lost me when you tried to compare Honda to Cadillac:thumbsup: That's when I knew you were desperate. But let me try to argue your points:


I don't believe that one bit. That means a 2002 GM car is going to be falling apart? As I stated above, I drive my '79 DeVille around daily... hell, my '89 Oldsmobile with 131k miles that i paid $500 is a daily driver, that car has not a single issue besides underbody rust... which any daily driver NY car that is 17 years have..... 17 years.... a 17 y/o GM car that was never treated special or have really low miles, still be a daily driver. I do not have a single quality control issue with that, or any of my cars.

Like I said, new GM cars are fine. Its the older BREAD AND BUTTER cars that didn't last. Your Cavaliers, your Novas, etc. Of course a Premium Cadillac or premium Olds will still be running; they were built well. They didn't have problems like exploding gas tanks (i.e Ford Pinto, another American econocar) - I was talking about econocars here...



Stoneage technology? you mean OHC right? OHV? but OHC is OLDER then OHV... so how is OHV...I am lots....

I will choose an OHV engine over OHC/DOHC *ANY* day. They are far superior IMO.

Because it was HONDA that took OHC and modernized it - they made VTEC for christs sake. Sure Cadillac may have had it 100 years ago, but they sure as hell weren't using it in Fuel Injected, DOHC engines. If I remember correctly, when VTEC came out, Cadillac was using the lame ass 4.5's....VTEC is as close to pure efficiency as you can get without having a camless engine. Besides, if it was so mediocre, then tell me why everyone else copied off of Honda and introduced Variable Valve Timing on their engines too???

Aslo, while the Japs are advancing engine technology - *USING HYBRIDS* - GM refused to use hybrids; Bob Lutz said they were impractical, nobody would take them seriously. Well, GUESS WHAT? GM WAS WRONG. Hybrids are big, and ONCE AGAIN, guess who's playing CATCH UP? GM is. They're having to rush hybrids out next year, because they bet their WHOLE budget on redesigned SUVs. And guess what? SUVs are going out of style. People don't want to pay that much for gas anymore, and ONCE AGAIN, Japan looks like the good guy, because THEY'RE THE ONES that have the hybrids. Let's see GM have a hybrid V6 that has 300 HP and gets over 30MPG in the city??? Don't think so...But Toyota has one for Lexus...And that, Rick, is why GM sucks.-


GM isn't behind anybody.

the C5 Z06 had 405hp and would get 20mpg around town and 30mpg on the highway and run 12's all day in the 1/4.... *from an old tech pushrod* Where is Japan now? You know where they are? building 2.0L turbo charged high revving DOHC 4bangers that get *LESS* fuel milage then a NA V8 Corvette... while making about half the power.... come on, who is REALLY behind the times now? Hell the C6 Z06 has 505hp and runs 11.5s@128mph in the 1/4, fuel mileage figures can't be off that much from the C5.... so it'll e interesting to see what this will get.

Yeah yeah, tell somebody who cares. When Honda was developing the perfect I4 engine in the 80s, it was GM who was building crap engines like the V8-6-4, the Olds Diesel, etc.

And like I told Randy_W, don't bring the LS7 into this; none of us can afford it (a Z06 costs well over $60,000), so it doesn't matter how great it is...We're stuck with GM pushrod V6s like the 3500 and the 3900...


Pontiac has had a minivan for awhile now.

BTW Pontiac brought back the GTO 2 years ago.

Pontiac is coming out with the Solstice.... 2 seater, RWD convertible, manual... yeah its a 4banger, but next year it'll become supercharged putting out 260hp or so..... whats Honda have? the S2000? good luck revving that toy up to 8,000RPM to get moving.

The new Pontiac G6..... have you seen the Coupes? you can get the GT with the 3900 V6 (yup, sweet pushrod) and a 6spd manual...... I guess this is a boring car too.

Ford scored a HUGE hit with the new Mustang..... Honda dosn't have anything anywhere near it.

Chrysler is putting the Hemi into everything... their full size family sedan (300C) is running low 14's/high 13's in the 1/4 mile.

Where was GM in the 90's? what about our Cadillac Northstar? Where was Honda's limp-home mode? run out of coolant, 4 cylinders shut down, engine lives and you get home. Cadillac had 295hp in 1993.... Honda had.... 180? Oldsmobile was doing great in the 90's dosn't it SUCK GM had to kill them despite Olds in its final year with the Alero (Grand Am) Shilloette (Venture) and Bravada (Blazer) STILL sold more then Saab, Saturn and Isuzu.... *combined* The Oldsmobile Aurora? that was a kickass car, the 2nd gen Aurora is soo nice. The Oldsmobile Intrigue was a very nice advanced car and you could get 2 amazing engines... the 3.5L DOHC Shortstar or the 3800 Series II.

Thats another thing, the 3800 Series II s/c is a BEAST of an engine... IMO far better then what Honda has to offer.

you want to REALLY talk about GM beating Honda at their own game....

how about the Quad4 of the 80's? yeah they are known for headgaskets... but it was the same situation as the early N*... lack of maintenace.

in 1989 GM had 160/180/190hp versions of the Quad4. They were DOHC. the 160hp was the base version, 180hp was high output, and 190hp was the rare W41 used in the Cutlass 442. All these could be had with a 5spd manual. All of these actually had some low end torque... about 160ft-lbs across the line of all 3 versions... more then Honda.

Honda didn't get 190hp until what? 1994 in the Prelude? and even then, it was a low volume car.

So really, WHAT does GM have to keep up with?

How about the Pontiac Fiero? What about the Oldsmobile Toronado with the touch screen computer inside the car to run radio, climate control, navigation, calender, system monitor on the car etc.... come on now, this stuff was amazing that the imports simply didn't have.

I can go on and on... but really the fact is, GM's quality was never as bad as people make it out to be, and GM has NO catching up to do at all. in fact it's Honda that has to catch up how? they don't have a single V8. They build a joke they call a Ridgeline and try to market here as a real tough truck... real trucks are not unibody with low torque transversly mounted V6 and AWD.... come on now.

Yeah, and the minivan completly destroyed their reputation as a serious Sports car company.

The GTO is a joke. It's nothing more than a half-assed attempt to compete with the Mustang using a 7 year old AUSTRALIAN design, noticed how GM didn't even try to make their OWN muscle car, they had to import one that Holden made in Australia, and BTY, who the hell would pay $30,000 for a car that looks like the redesigned SUNFIRE!

The Pontiac G6 is fine, but nothing more. It's mediocre at best, and rather than try to beat the competition, GM offered something that was sub par with the competion. The interior looks like a typical GM one too...

Once again, only a truly desperate man would compare Honda to Cadillac. You're talking about a V8 engine in a $40,000 car versus a 4 banger in a $12,000 car. Besides, Honda's don't NEED limp home mode, because they DON'T BREAK DOWN. I mean, they're Japanese for christs sake - they don't break down.:histeric:

ANd HOnda doesn't NEED A V8, because that's not the kind of cars they build...Econocars do fine with V6s, and I4s. Besides, Honda has a good V6.:thumbsup: I mean, Honda doesn't build a V8 because they're applying the Mercy rule to GM. If Honda had a V8, well GM just couldn't compete at all anymore:D

ben72227
11-21-05, 10:12 PM
I can agree with that about the classics and soul thing..... but basically a beat up '72 Skylark has more soul and personality then even a mint 70's RX-7 or Supra? I mean... for me such a Skylark is just something to stare at... but to the average person...

But what is bad about durbility?

Cadillac had the 472/500... can't kill them.

Chevy, Olds, Pontiac Buick had the 350, 400 and 455.... these were strong engines.

Chevy also had the 250 I-6..... hell of an engine

Lincoln had the 400 and 460.... strong.

Ford used the 302... all you had to do was put a quart of oil a day in it, and it was happy.

Chrysler had the 318, 360, 413 etc.....

lets not forget the Slant-6.... that thing never died

All the V8's had no issue... so where was all the problems?

or was it from the econo cars... the OHC in the Vega, or the Pinto etc...?

Nightwolf, you make good points, but I see you overlook much. Those are good GM engines, but lets see you talk about the bad ones??? Like the Diesel 350 that was so terrible, the owners filed a class action lawsuit against GM to FORCE them to replace them...Or the V8-6-4, that was such a disaster, that it forced Cadillac to rush the HT 4100 into production (a V8, by the way, that pretty much sucks ass)...;)

I'm not saying that Jap cars have always been great. Yes, they used to have terrible safety ratings, yes they were ugly, etc.

BUT, it was GM who got lazy, who got complacent, and started building crap cars. It was the JAPS who worked their asses off to make the BEST DAMN CAR THEY COULD MAKE. Eventually they got so confident that they even started making luxury cars (Lexus, Infinity, Acura) and GUESS WHAT???

THEY MADE SOME DAMN FINE LUXURY CARS. Now, I would never buy a lexus, because I don't like Lexus stying, but you can't argue that Lexus makes the most reliable car available. They're rated number one by CR, JD Power, pretty much EVERYBODY;)

And yes, Cadillac is getting better all the time, but what about the other GM brands? What about Saturn? What about Chevy? Don't tell me the Monte Carlo is worthy competition to the Mustang...Don't tell me the Cobalt could take on a Civic or Mazda3. Don't tell me the Impala is better than a Camry.

You see, instead of trying to be better than the competition, GM has tried to play CATCH UP with the competition. Japan leads in the auto industry...America follows, and its GM's fault. (P.S., the Germans lead sometimes too:p )

Playdrv4me
11-21-05, 11:59 PM
The Germans just plain dont care what the rest of the world is up to. :p lol.

Playdrv4me
11-22-05, 12:05 AM
BTW... I thought the official word from the Unions was pretty funny... and about as brutally honest as you can get...

" It is not the jobs that are the problem... No one wants GM's cars!"

ben72227
11-22-05, 12:19 AM
Its the Unions and GM's fault. Those union guys are getting paid TOO MUCH for uneducated high school graduates. Some of them are making damn near six figure salaries - to put a car together, AND they get insurance and pensions. It's no wonder GM can't afford UAW...AND, nobody wants GM cars unless they come with a rebate:histeric:

Jesda
11-22-05, 12:33 AM
Then there's the oddity of union workers getting paid even if they arent working.

10secvette
11-22-05, 12:54 AM
How come nobody wants to buy their (gm) cars?????? I don't see Honda or Toyota on the verge of filing bankruptcy...... You seem to have the same mentality as g.m.'s excec's.


I don't believe that one bit. That means a 2002 GM car is going to be falling apart? As I stated above, I drive my '79 DeVille around daily... hell, my '89 Oldsmobile with 131k miles that i paid $500 is a daily driver, that car has not a single issue besides underbody rust... which any daily driver NY car that is 17 years have..... 17 years.... a 17 y/o GM car that was never treated special or have really low miles, still be a daily driver. I do not have a single quality control issue with that, or any of my cars.



built cars that lasted? how about built cars that rusted out? ANY import from the 70's and 80's is plaqued with serious rust issues... back int he 70's you'd be lucky if your new Honda lasted 3 years. You are comparing mega-cheap econo cars (K and J) to some high end imports.... how about we compare the RX-7, Supra and 240Z to say.... oh a Buick Grand National or a Ford Mustang 5.0? now all of a sudden they look like junk and their performance is even worse. The 80's was a bad decade for all cars... but to me atleast there were some pretty nice cars form the Big 3, even if performance was low.



yeah they were nice until you crashed into a full size GM/Ford/Chrysler RWD boat... now you are dead and the Delta 88 needs a new front bumper.



thats all realitive, I think the first gen RX-7 and Supra is ugly, there isn't a single import from the 70's or 80's that I like at all.... except the 70's Toyota Land Cruisers... those were just cool.

Stoneage technology? you mean OHC right? OHV? but OHC is OLDER then OHV... so how is OHV...I am lots....

I will choose an OHV engine over OHC/DOHC *ANY* day. They are far superior IMO.



Because you could get a 3.1L V6 and a convertible in the Cavalier.



yeah.... no... they are BRUTALLY BIASED.



10 year old technology Japs are 10 years ahead... what?

I *HOPE* you are not talking about VVT.

Did you know the first Cadillac in 1904 had variable intake valve timing....WOHA.... I guess its the Japs that are behind... come on now.

I'll tell ya one thing... VVT is only used on the imports 4 and 6 bangers because they offer NO low end torque at all! they NEED the VVT to try and gain that back. Why is GM picking up VVT? because of debates like this "GM is old tech" *that is that Motor Trend and Consumer Reports tell you* a DOHC VVT engine is no better then a simple pushrod. GM isn't behind anybody.

the C5 Z06 had 405hp and would get 20mpg around town and 30mpg on the highway and run 12's all day in the 1/4.... *from an old tech pushrod* Where is Japan now? You know where they are? building 2.0L turbo charged high revving DOHC 4bangers that get *LESS* fuel milage then a NA V8 Corvette... while making about half the power.... come on, who is REALLY behind the times now? Hell the C6 Z06 has 505hp and runs 11.5s@128mph in the 1/4, fuel mileage figures can't be off that much from the C5.... so it'll e interesting to see what this will get.



Pontiac has had a minivan for awhile now.

BTW Pontiac brought back the GTO 2 years ago.

Pontiac is coming out with the Solstice.... 2 seater, RWD convertible, manual... yeah its a 4banger, but next year it'll become supercharged putting out 260hp or so..... whats Honda have? the S2000? good luck revving that toy up to 8,000RPM to get moving.

The new Pontiac G6..... have you seen the Coupes? you can get the GT with the 3900 V6 (yup, sweet pushrod) and a 6spd manual...... I guess this is a boring car too.

Ford scored a HUGE hit with the new Mustang..... Honda dosn't have anything anywhere near it.

Chrysler is putting the Hemi into everything... their full size family sedan (300C) is running low 14's/high 13's in the 1/4 mile.

Where was GM in the 90's? what about our Cadillac Northstar? Where was Honda's limp-home mode? run out of coolant, 4 cylinders shut down, engine lives and you get home. Cadillac had 295hp in 1993.... Honda had.... 180? Oldsmobile was doing great in the 90's dosn't it SUCK GM had to kill them despite Olds in its final year with the Alero (Grand Am) Shilloette (Venture) and Bravada (Blazer) STILL sold more then Saab, Saturn and Isuzu.... *combined* The Oldsmobile Aurora? that was a kickass car, the 2nd gen Aurora is soo nice. The Oldsmobile Intrigue was a very nice advanced car and you could get 2 amazing engines... the 3.5L DOHC Shortstar or the 3800 Series II.

Thats another thing, the 3800 Series II s/c is a BEAST of an engine... IMO far better then what Honda has to offer.

you want to REALLY talk about GM beating Honda at their own game....

how about the Quad4 of the 80's? yeah they are known for headgaskets... but it was the same situation as the early N*... lack of maintenace.

in 1989 GM had 160/180/190hp versions of the Quad4. They were DOHC. the 160hp was the base version, 180hp was high output, and 190hp was the rare W41 used in the Cutlass 442. All these could be had with a 5spd manual. All of these actually had some low end torque... about 160ft-lbs across the line of all 3 versions... more then Honda.

Honda didn't get 190hp until what? 1994 in the Prelude? and even then, it was a low volume car.

So really, WHAT does GM have to keep up with?

How about the Pontiac Fiero? What about the Oldsmobile Toronado with the touch screen computer inside the car to run radio, climate control, navigation, calender, system monitor on the car etc.... come on now, this stuff was amazing that the imports simply didn't have.

I can go on and on... but really the fact is, GM's quality was never as bad as people make it out to be, and GM has NO catching up to do at all. in fact it's Honda that has to catch up how? they don't have a single V8. They build a joke they call a Ridgeline and try to market here as a real tough truck... real trucks are not unibody with low torque transversly mounted V6 and AWD.... come on now.

ben72227
11-22-05, 01:52 AM
Rick seems to think that GM is the end all be all when it comes to auto makers.

But they're not. That's why GM could very well end up bankrupt this year, and the Japanese auto makers are raking in the profits. I asked my dad (who just bought a Honda CR-V) why he didn't even look at what GM was offering...He responded that he didn't need to; that while GM *could* be a good buy, he *knew* that Honda was a garunteed bet. Their engines are nearly flawless, their build quality is excellent, and his last Honda (an Accord) never had to go to the shop for anything other than scheduled maintainence. As he told me, "Why take a chance when you have a sure bet?" It would be different if GM had an irresistable product (like Ford did with the New Mustang). But GM's compact SUV's were nothing special, and the one thing that he might have gotten (a Pontiac Vibe) is really just a Toyota Matrix with GM badging all over it. It's like they said Rick, even GM knows that the Japs make better cars, they've turned to them to make a lot of "American" products...:(

Night Wolf
11-22-05, 06:52 AM
Like I said, new GM cars are fine. Its the older BREAD AND BUTTER cars that didn't last. Your Cavaliers, your Novas, etc. Of course a Premium Cadillac or premium Olds will still be running; they were built well. They didn't have problems like exploding gas tanks (i.e Ford Pinto, another American econocar) - I was talking about econocars here...


I dunno... I gotta disagree, I see loads of 80's Cavilers, Cutlass (FWD) and other econo cars.... the old 2.2L 4 baner and had the whole series of 60* Chevy V6's are pretty tough.


Because it was HONDA that took OHC and modernized it - they made VTEC for christs sake. Sure Cadillac may have had it 100 years ago, but they sure as hell weren't using it in Fuel Injected, DOHC engines. If I remember correctly, when VTEC came out, Cadillac was using the lame ass 4.5's....VTEC is as close to pure efficiency as you can get without having a camless engine. Besides, if it was so mediocre, then tell me why everyone else copied off of Honda and introduced Variable Valve Timing on their engines too???


Honda didn't invent variable valve timing, they simply were of the first to use it in wide production. The lame ass 4.5 is a fine engine. While Honda was just coming out with their DOHC V-tec engines, GM already had a 2.3L 190hp/165ft-lbs torque DOHC 4banger... that actually had a decent amount of low-end torque. Hows that?

Tell you why everyone is using it? Because the general car-buying public is STUPID. All they care about is having something better then their neighbor. When there neighbor comes home and is like, oh, my Honda has 16 valves and V-tec and DOHC... and its 4 cylinders... well, they don't know what any of that means, so then the other stupid neighbor is like.... oh.... well, I don't know how many "valves" I have, it dosn't say... but I do have SFI or something.... so then Mr. dumbass #2 and all his buddys (about 80% of consumers of cars) cry that they don't have all this stuff. So to stay competative, GM puts that crap in their engines. Notice, however... it is to stay competative not because of performance or durability issues... but because STUPID people want to think its better, so the mass public changes, and GM offers it.

I am comparing Cadillac to Honda.... what do you want me to compare it to? Acura? Oh yeah... Acra son't make engines... every engine is a Honda engine.... thats ok for Honda to put an Accord V6 into a $40,000 Acrua, but just TRY to let GM put a Chevy V8 into a Cadillac... all hell breaks loose.

The origanal questions were reguarding Honda, so that it what I am comparing it to, Honda as a motor company, not the cars themself.

Honda NEEDS VVT for simple reason... like I said it is used to try and gain back all the massive amounts of lost low end torque. GM simple dosn't need that because while pushrods may not be the best top end, they are amazing for low end torque, where people will use the engine the most. Basically, V-tec was an attempt to get their high revving DOHC 4 bangers some power where GM's pushrods were already making power there.


Aslo, while the Japs are advancing engine technology - *USING HYBRIDS* - GM refused to use hybrids; Bob Lutz said they were impractical, nobody would take them seriously. Well, GUESS WHAT? GM WAS WRONG. Hybrids are big, and ONCE AGAIN, guess who's playing CATCH UP? GM is. They're having to rush hybrids out next year, because they bet their WHOLE budget on redesigned SUVs. And guess what? SUVs are going out of style. People don't want to pay that much for gas anymore, and ONCE AGAIN, Japan looks like the good guy, because THEY'RE THE ONES that have the hybrids. Let's see GM have a hybrid V6 that has 300 HP and gets over 30MPG in the city??? Don't think so...But Toyota has one for Lexus...And that, Rick, is why GM sucks.-



There is a simple explination to this.

Hybrids are nothing more then a stepping stone.

Their downfall is they still use IC engines.

GM is dumping all its money into Hydrogen fuel cells... an alternative fuel sorce.... I give GM alot of credit for this. People are jumping on the Hybrid bandwagon, but honestly, they aren't what they are hyped up to be at all. I don't see why GM should have to make it just because Honda makes it.

Have you read reviews? People with the Prius are getting about 34mpg instead of the 52mpg it claims?!? This goes for all hybrids.

Plus, hybrids only work in theory in stop and go traffic... what about highway? not that little 1.6L is struggling to keep the car going.

I'll tell ya one thing, if I want a fuel efficent car, its going to be a turbo diesel... VW TDI please.

Once hydrogen fuel cells come out, and GM has a huge line of cars backing it and ready to go.... then Honda and Toyota have "old tech" hybrids that still use "gas engines" WHO is going to be ahead of who?

If you are looking at the next 5 years, then yeah, you can say Honda/Toyota is ahead... look at the enxt 20 years and you'll see Honda/Toyota are far behind.


Yeah yeah, tell somebody who cares. When Honda was developing the perfect I4 engine in the 80s, it was GM who was building crap engines like the V8-6-4, the Olds Diesel, etc.

LOL! I just gave a perfect example of a huge V8 producing far more power, and getting nearly the same milage as a tiny 4 banger... and you say tell someone who cares?!?

The Olds diesel and V8-6-4 were crap because of lack of maintenace and neglect from owners... how about every Honda/Toyota/Nissan owner never change that wonderful timing belt in their little interference engine? then when they all self destruct at 80,000 miles, we'll blame it on the guys that made it.... COME ON now... it is just like saying the Northstar is crap because people didn't change the coolant.

If honda pioneered VVT, GM pioneered displacement on demand... GM has it now again, so does Chrysler... where is Honda? oh.... playing catch up... thats right.


And like I told Randy_W, don't bring the LS7 into this; none of us can afford it (a Z06 costs well over $60,000), so it doesn't matter how great it is...We're stuck with GM pushrod V6s like the 3500 and the 3900...


lol, I give an example, then asked not to bring it in?

What is wrong with the 3500 and 3900?!? GM knows there are alot of people who choose pushrods over OHC... What is wrong with the 3900? it has VVT... you should be happy.... GM is making VVT on pushrod cars... Honda isn't. the 3900 is 240hp @ 6,000RPM... yeah, pretty crappy to me (sarcastic) but it actually has torque:

Torque 241 lb.-ft @ 2800 rpm

Honda can't TOUCH that at all... that much torque at that low of an RPM... PLEASE tell me WHY the 3900 is a shitty engine?!?


The GTO is a joke. It's nothing more than a half-assed attempt to compete with the Mustang using a 7 year old AUSTRALIAN design, noticed how GM didn't even try to make their OWN muscle car, they had to import one that Holden made in Australia, and BTY, who the hell would pay $30,000 for a car that looks like the redesigned SUNFIRE!

Actually, of all the people that I know that own it, they love it. They love the laid back styling, so they can have a really nice and really fast car that dosn't scream boy racer. Much like the origanal GTO, it is taking the same route of going with a ho-hum car but making it something that big CEO's and executives can drive to work in... you wont see then driving to work in a Subaru STi.


The Pontiac G6 is fine, but nothing more. It's mediocre at best, and rather than try to beat the competition, GM offered something that was sub par with the competion. The interior looks like a typical GM one too...


The G6 is a hell of a car. People are getting it to run a 15.0 @ 95mph completly stock... not too bad from an "old tech" midsize.

Check out all the pictures of this guys car.... this is an auto but you can get a *6* speed manual.... hell of a car IMO, I'd take it over an Accord.

http://www.g6ownersclub.com/forum/showthread.php?t=479

NO Honda engine has low-end torque. GM has low-end torque, high revving HP.... everything. Honda has 1 design and stays with it.... that gets boring.

I gotta get going to class now.... love this debate :)

Night Wolf
11-22-05, 07:16 AM
Tell me how, in everyday normal driving, DOHC is better then pushrod? When are you going to use high-revving hp more then low end torque?

Another thing, about the 5spd autos and GM needing to catch it.

imports *NEED* 5spd autos to stay competavie with GM!

Ever see the FDR on any of those 4 or 6 cylinders... compact, midsize.. whatever?

yeah, its like 4.11.......4.11!

So because of that, the revs go up quick, these little DOHC 4 bangers NEED to stay in the upper rev band enable to make any power... but then what? well, the gear revs out sooner... then you are stuck on the highway turning over at 4,000RPM... so what do they do? they add yet another gear to bring the revs down on the highway.

Same goes for BMW, they like their high revving hp too.

Meanwhile, GM's V6's actually produce low end torque (as proved by the new 3900) so with a 4spd, they are perfectly fine, it can wind the gear out longer.

Again, it goes back to the whole "ooo mine has more then yours, its better" or "It's Honda... its gotta be good!" and this logic goes into Motor Trend and Consumer reports, then STUPID people that buy... consumer reports to decide on a car believe this, and go buy Honda because thats what they are told to do.

Read the artical I linked to in the thread I made about pushrod engines, I think I even posted it here... it puts the situation in clear and simple writing. DOHC, high revving hp and lots of gears are NOT the answer.

hardrockcamaro@mac.c
11-22-05, 07:41 AM
Wow, a few good points on here.

Firstly, you don't see many old Japanese cars even over here. Mainly because the parts are very expensive so it's just not cost effective to keep them going. Yes they may last a little longer without needing anything, but when they do it hits your wallet a lot harder than an old Ford.

The reliability and build quality of Japanese cars is perception and urban myth. The engines are more reliable than average, but the build quality of the car itself is not so good. The panels are thinner (I pressed my finger against the front fender of a Nissan and the whole panel flexed massively). Plus the electrics aren't great. I have a couple of friends with Accords and the power windows keep packing up.

Someone said Hybrds were the hot thing. IS that really the case in the USA? Over here you don't see many hybrid Prius's and that's with our gas prices. Hybrids over here are bring sold at a loss of £5,000 per car, and in 5-7 years when the batteries need replacing it's gonna cost upwards of £5,000 for the work (something they don't advertise).

Over here hybrids are pointless. Largely due to the fact that a lot of people run Diesels. Ford have a very fine Diesel engine in both the Focus and the larger Mondeo. They generate huge amounts of torque and all the young guys are now buying them for that shove in the back feeling and the fact that you can chip them for even more power. A friend of mine has one with 187BHP and 306lb/ft of Torque. It drives very similar to a 305TPI Camaro and runs a 16.3 1/4. Not bad when you consider it does between 32mpg (that's US) in the city and 48mpg on the highway.

Randy_W
11-22-05, 08:10 AM
And like I told Randy_W, don't bring the LS7 into this; none of us can afford it (a Z06 costs well over $60,000), so it doesn't matter how great it is...We're stuck with GM pushrod V6s like the 3500 and the 3900...



Since you guys insist on dragging me into this, listen VERY VERY CLOSELY, to what I say on this. Most of you are too young to remember the so called "Import Revolution" of the 1970's.
There is one reason and one reason only that imports from Nippon got a foot hold in this country. It wasn't mpg, though that played a small roll, it damn sure wasn't quality, when's the last time you saw an '86 Japo anything driven daily? The bodies rusted right off them!
I'm not saying they don't build good cars now, but that is not what got them into this market.
They were in this market from the 1950's into the 1970's with very little success.
They became successful when the Government of Japan got on board and subsidized them to the hilt! They could then start to build slightly bigger cars with more content and sell them at ridiculously cheap Prices. Most Japanese cars were sold at or near true cost, from the late 1970's until the early 1990's. The burden of this was borne by the Japanese worker and tax payer. The workers were shamed into working 70-80 hours a week for 40 hours pay, instead of taking a vacation, the were expected to give the 'company' two weeks free every year! The 'company' was considered more important than family was. This is the method the Nipponese used to take control of our auto industry, the Koreans used the same tactics once they figured it out, that is the Korean companies the Japanese didn't already buy.
This is what the Japanese did to our steele industry as well. It was all illegal and still is, but our government failed to act with the one lone exception being the motorcycle market, when Japan tried and nearly succeded at killing Harley Davidson, the gov't stepped in with temporary tariffs on all import bikes over 750cc. They cried foul but built 700 cc bikes and HD recovered and now is very strong! We failed to help protect our auto and steele industry from illegal 'dumping' and now we pay the price! A lot of you are not old enough to remember this going on, I am.
This doesn't excuse poor quality and slow market response, but those are overcomeable. I hope it's not too late. None of you, whether your Japanese fans or not, will benefit from the third world economy we are headed to when all our manufacturing jobs are gone!

PS; Ben 17 is a great age, but you're in no position to tell me what to bring into a converation, be it the LS7 or most anything else. Remember being old means I've seen three times as much life as you have. I know when I was your age I thought all 'old guys' were stupid, uninformed and generally not with it, too. I'm not being a smartass or trying to put you down, I just want you to appreciate the small amount of wisdom that comes with age.;)

FSU_Noles
11-22-05, 09:16 AM
Yes GM has some issues with labor, heathcare and a changing market - that is nothing new. Every car manufacturer has been through similar issues in the US. I could go off on a diatribe here about unions but I think that has probably been covered.

Bear in mind that there are several issues that often get overlooked.

The Japanese industrial complex was completely rebuilt in the late 40's and early 50's. So while GM, Ford and Chrysler were trying to catch up and retool old plants after years of war production, the Japanese were working with state-of-the-art (for the time) equipment. Also there is a cultural difference in the way Americans work versus the Japanese (didn't you see Gung Ho).

When WWII ended there were multitudes of workers that returned to the industrial cities and found work through the Auto Unions. Figure many of those people worked their 30 years or so and started collecting pensions around 1980. Add that with the fact that American car companies have a lineage back to the early 1900's and they have been paying pensions and health plans for 70 years - versus Japanese companies paying for 20 years.

I could also go into trade inbalances, tariffs, etc etc... but won't.

As for the car mags, I do believe there is a bias towards "euros" and "imports" thanks to a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals who think that bashing American cars makes them seem more enlightened.

The problem is that imports have become the standard by which American cars are judged and it used to be the other way around.


In the end didn't most people on Cadillacowners.com buy a GM? If they are such horrendous vehicles why do we all have them??

malcolm
11-22-05, 09:31 AM
Randy, you hit the nail on the head. Thanks from another old guy who was there and remembers. Wait till China gets through with us, the average wage there is about 40 cents an hour and if we allow their cars into the US no manufacturer US or otherwise will stand a chance.

Jesda
11-22-05, 11:18 AM
Here's one compelling reason why Toyota's market share grew:
http://www.bytbil.com/images/mellstorsas/TGH169-1000.jpg

Night Wolf
11-22-05, 11:43 AM
Wow, a few good points on here.

Firstly, you don't see many old Japanese cars even over here. Mainly because the parts are very expensive so it's just not cost effective to keep them going. Yes they may last a little longer without needing anything, but when they do it hits your wallet a lot harder than an old Ford.

The reliability and build quality of Japanese cars is perception and urban myth. The engines are more reliable than average, but the build quality of the car itself is not so good. The panels are thinner (I pressed my finger against the front fender of a Nissan and the whole panel flexed massively). Plus the electrics aren't great. I have a couple of friends with Accords and the power windows keep packing up.

Someone said Hybrds were the hot thing. IS that really the case in the USA? Over here you don't see many hybrid Prius's and that's with our gas prices. Hybrids over here are bring sold at a loss of £5,000 per car, and in 5-7 years when the batteries need replacing it's gonna cost upwards of £5,000 for the work (something they don't advertise).

Over here hybrids are pointless. Largely due to the fact that a lot of people run Diesels. Ford have a very fine Diesel engine in both the Focus and the larger Mondeo. They generate huge amounts of torque and all the young guys are now buying them for that shove in the back feeling and the fact that you can chip them for even more power. A friend of mine has one with 187BHP and 306lb/ft of Torque. It drives very similar to a 305TPI Camaro and runs a 16.3 1/4. Not bad when you consider it does between 32mpg (that's US) in the city and 48mpg on the highway.

Thank you :)

Night Wolf
11-22-05, 11:50 AM
Yey for Randy!

I was never a fan of the Beretta.... but how exactly is, say a Corola or Civic better then a Berretta? you could get a V6 in the Beretta too.

An no, the Berettea is NOT in competion to the Camry/Accord... the Beretta was a lower class.

Jesda
11-22-05, 11:55 AM
The Beretta was a poorly built unreliable pile of garbage. Head gaskets, bad paint, bad components, crappy interior, crummy drive, questionable, electrics, etc etc. The Civic and Corolla of the same vintage were easily a decade ahead in build quality. People dont hate GM by accident. GM slipped up and shafted the consumer AND the American worker through poor management, greed, and short-term business decisions.

Playdrv4me
11-22-05, 01:44 PM
Dont forget its sister car, the Corsica.

Granted, the Ford alternative at that time was worse... Tempo and Topaz.

DBA-One
11-22-05, 03:09 PM
My friend bought a new car. It was a Dodge Challenger which, if you may recall, was built and imported by Mitsubishi for Dodge.

I haven't thought about those in years. My dad always had 'Vettes but he wanted something cheap on gas and bought a brand new one of those. It was a neat car in the day.

ben72227
11-22-05, 05:46 PM
PS; Ben 17 is a great age, but you're in no position to tell me what to bring into a converation, be it the LS7 or most anything else. Remember being old means I've seen three times as much life as you have. I know when I was your age I thought all 'old guys' were stupid, uninformed and generally not with it, too. I'm not being a smartass or trying to put you down, I just want you to appreciate the small amount of wisdom that comes with age.;)

I didn't mean to be disrespectful grandpa, but you're the one who tried to upstage me with an LS7 debate:D. The LS7 is a phenomenal engine, but like I said before, it doesn't belong in this debate about econo-engines. I could bring in a Audi W12 and say how great it is, but it doesn't matter, because it costs too damn much.:histeric:

Randy_W
11-22-05, 09:00 PM
I didn't mean to be disrespectful grandpa, but you're the one who tried to upstage me with an LS7 debate:D. The LS7 is a phenomenal engine, but like I said before, it doesn't belong in this debate about econo-engines. I could bring in a Audi W12 and say how great it is, but it doesn't matter, because it costs too damn much.:histeric:

:cool2:

noahsdad
11-23-05, 06:10 AM
The line of argument on this post is PRECISELY why GM and Ford are in such trouble. Too many people are aiming at the wrong target. While the familiar debate over who makes better cars is entertaining, it has little to do with why GM is in such trouble today.

If you want to understand why American car makers are failing, read "The End of Detroit" by Michele Maynard. It's an excellent study by a reporter who has covered the auto industry in Detroit for years.

If you don't want to read it, here's the short version:

1) Unions have buried American car makers in costs they cannot afford. Today, 1200 to 1800 dollars of the sticker price of Ford and GM cars goes to cover what are called "Legacy Costs." That is, retirement and health care benefits for workers who are no longer productive for the company. The foreign automakers have no such costs. In addition, currently employed line workers make on average triple the wages of their counterparts in the Japanese and Korean factories. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a union buster. They had their place once, but in the current environment, the wheels are gonna fall off the gravy train one way or another.

2) Because the biggest bubble of baby boomers is just now reaching retirement age, the next 20-30 years will show a steady decline in the number of buyers for new cars. Combine this with the fact that cars generally last longer, and the fact that Japanese and Korean manufacturers have built several mammoth assembly plants in the United States, and it doesn't take a mathematician to figure out there is a huge overcapacity of production capability. Keep in mind the Asian markets have just gone through a recession lasting almost 20 years. They cannot stay in business without the USA. The car makers understand that the only way to insure long term survival is to shrink and consolidate. That's why Chrysler sold out to Daimler.

3) Japanese and Korean auto plants take no crap from workers. They pay people well and expect a good job in return. If you screw up, you're out, and there's a hundred people waiting in line for your job. In the American plants, you can do whatever you want (including never showing up for work) and you cannot be fired. Talk to anybody who has worked on the assembly line. Drugs and drinking are rampant, oversight is almost non-existent. It literally takes months, even years to remove a non-productive worker from the line in an American auto plant.

4) Because they must face the stockholders wrath, American manufacturers work on a reactive stance. Billions of dollars go into R & D to produce a single new model, and management rarely approves a design based on predicted trends. They wait for trends to develop, then release half-assed cars thrown together in a hurry, usually just behind the curve. Think about it. When's the last time Detroit produced ANYTHING that created a market, or released an innovation before you knew you needed it? The most noteworthy models they can produce are little more than rehashed retro designs of prior successes (Chevy HHR and SSR, Ford Thunderbird and Mustang, PT Cruiser, etc.). The Japanese and Koreans are proactive and willing to gamble - plus leaner and faster at producing 'gotta have' cars of good quality.

Despite all this, don't start playing taps over GM yet. I'm old enough to have seen this company reinvent itself a number of times. Everything you're reading about in the papers today has been in the works for years. The plant closings and layoffs might be accellerated somewhat to boost the stock price in the short term, but here in Michigan, none of this comes as a surprise. It's gonna get ugly in my home state, and the AFL-CIO is gonna scream bloody murder, but my money is on seeing a better, stronger domestic car industry emerge from what is now a very dark tunnel.

Night Wolf
11-23-05, 06:34 AM
:thumbsup: Great post!

I just disagree on one thing... thats the part about imports designing new and fresh cars etc....

When was the last time anything new or market-changing came out of Honda/Nissan/Toyota? Only thing I can think of right now is Toyota's hybrid drive....

Really... its GM/Ford/Chrysler that is doing all the innovation.... the Honda/Nissan/Toyota just seem to get by with perceived logic that they are automatically better, while they do have good products, and they do excel in areas... I would hardly say they are fresh and changing up the market....

what happened the last time Honda decided to think outside its box of regular passenger cars? We get bastard children like the Element and Ridgeline.

noahsdad
11-23-05, 10:32 AM
Agreed. It's no secret the Japanese and Koreans are not innovators or inventors. However they are masters at taking existing technology and improving it to within an inch of perfection. What is the Camry after all, if not a near perfectly executed Taurus?

They are also willing to take risks (the Element and Ridgeline are perfect examples), and if they fail, they are lean enough to absorb the hit and try again. The last time an American manufacturer took a gamble was Lee Iacocca and the minivan.

It's interesting that this thread is taking place in a Cadillac forum, though. Cadillac is the only division of GM that is gambling. They've essentially abandoned the luxury liner image (and a ton of customers) and have taken aim at the upper end of the graying baby boom bubble with smaller, edgier, performance oriented lineup. Wish I could afford one.

90Brougham350
11-23-05, 10:52 AM
Agreed. It's no secret the Japanese and Koreans are not innovators or inventors. However they are masters at taking existing technology and improving it to within an inch of perfection. What is the Camry after all, if not a near perfectly executed Taurus?

Couldn't agree more. But American customers aren't screaming for beautiful unique designs from Japan, they're hooked on the test-drive when the interior panels don't have 1/2 inch gaps or the center console doesn't rattle over every bump.


They are also willing to take risks (the Element and Ridgeline are perfect examples), and if they fail, they are lean enough to absorb the hit and try again. The last time an American manufacturer took a gamble was Lee Iacocca and the minivan.

Risks, however, the Japanese know how to do their marketing research. Honda realized there was a niche for the Ridgeline which no-one was filling, and designed a vehicle very carefully they knew would fill it. Same with the Element.


Wish I could afford one.
Some day, buddy, some day we'll all have a V in the garage!

Night Wolf
11-23-05, 12:36 PM
Couldn't agree more. But American customers aren't screaming for beautiful unique designs from Japan, they're hooked on the test-drive when the interior panels don't have 1/2 inch gaps or the center console doesn't rattle over every bump.

ya know.... This is another thing I like to argue....

NONE of my cars... not my 27 year old daily driver Cadillac, my 131k mile Oldsmobile thats been in at least 6 accidents, or the '93 Coupe.... hae a SINGLE rattle on the interior.... the '79 DeVille is riding a chassis designed around 1973, both the Olds and the '93 DeVille are riding chassis designed around 1980....

Gaps in my cars are to a minimal... everything feels tight, even over rough roads there is not a rattle, dink or noise.....

Although, OTOH, my fathers '99 Grand Prix... I hate that interior.... compared to my old Cadillac the materials are crappy... plastic, there are gaps, and the consol, dash and something else does rattle.... more so after he *drove over* a deer.

So maybe cars like my fathers GP is what we have an issue with? I can personally say I do not like the fit and finish, or the feel of the interior at all.. I do't like the seats either.

But ya know.... its all realitive.... the center consol on my friends '01 Jetta 1.8T rattles... and that car is small, so you leg is right against the consol and stuff..... Actually between the '98 Jetta automatic my friend first drove, his '94 Jetta 5spd that he got, and now his '01 Jetta 1.8T 5spd.... I can ramble off a host of issues wrong with VW.... but I do like the car alot (he kinda got me into it)

Everyone has their good and the bad... I was in 90's Toyota's and Honda's that rattle inside.... but wait... we'll pretend that isn't happening because its a Honda, its the best you can get......not.

hardrockcamaro@mac.c
11-23-05, 12:46 PM
Interesting.

I have just ordered that book from Amazon along with "Rivethead : Tales from the Assembly Line"


I disagree about innovation coming from Japan in terms of aesthetic design though. The Japanese only copy and perfect. But everyone's definition of "perfect" is different and for me they're bland to look at (inside and out) with acres of horrible dark grey plastic and the engines while smooth need working hard (and I'm saying that from the point of view of someone used to 4cyl engines).

I'm convinced on the engine reliability, I'm just not so sure about the electrics and bolting together. Panels are very thin (to save weight) and when you look behind the dashboard (eg the Subaryu Imprezza) your jaw would hit the floor with regards to quality, and not in a good way!

Image and public perception is what drives the market though.