GM Dealer Challenges the Toyota Tundra's Ads... AS BULL
in [Toyota]
|
From: C. E. White on 22 Mar 2007 08:55 "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:UeTLh.5283$ya1.609(a)news02.roc.ny... > "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message > news:45fffdf2(a)kcnews01... >> >> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:LXRLh.5275$ya1.2331(a)news02.roc.ny... >> >>> I generally avoid companies who've previously sold me products >>> that were intentionally made defective. I violated my rule once >>> with Ford. I won't do it a second time unless they give me the >>> product for free, and pay me a hefty aggravation bonus any time it >>> had what I considered to be a stupid problem. $1000.00 per >>> incident would be about right. >> >> So Toyota has never sold a defective product? How about the >> thousands of prior model Tundras with bad ball joints? Or with >> piston slap prone engines? > > > Every product has a defect now and then. However, you apparently > missed the word "INTENTIONAL". Tell me you saw it, and what you > thought about the presence of the word in my comment. Well you will have to clarify what you consider an "intentional" defect. I am sure no manufacturer includes "intentional defect." The statement itself is an oxymoron. Ed
From: C. E. White on 22 Mar 2007 09:02 "Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant(a)mindspring.net> wrote in message news:3ae003dbpfpg2oj4ok8toptl54hsuro881(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 09:10:30 -0400, "C. E. White" > <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote: > >> >>One more thing - The list price for a stripped F250 V-10 six speed >>automatic is less than the price for a stripped Tundra 5.7L V-8 six >>speed automatic even before the $3000 rebate on the F250 is figured >>in. >> >>Ed >> > > Ford knows what their trucks are worth.... > > It turns out Toyota is worth more if they sell for more. > > People tend to buy the best tool for the job. In a perfect world than might be true. However, here in the real world it isn't, but you probably already knew that. Ed
From: C. E. White on 22 Mar 2007 09:05 "DH" <dh(a)stargate.com> wrote in message news:46016bcc$0$16262$88260bb3(a)free.teranews.com... > "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message > news:45ffddd9$1(a)kcnews01... >> One more thing - The list price for a stripped F250 V-10 six speed >> automatic is less than the price for a stripped Tundra 5.7L V-8 six >> speed automatic even before the $3000 rebate on the F250 is figured >> in. >> >> Ed > > Y'know... I looked up F250 pricing on Edmunds and I was astonished > to find that the V10 option was a mere $600. > > I suppose I should presume that Ford knows what they're doing with > option pricing but that seems awfully low. I can't help but think > that they could make an extra $400 (or more profit) by marking up > that V10 option a bit. I would expect someone looking at the fuel > economy of a V10 can't be anywhere near as much price-sensitive as > they are determined to get a LOT of power. > > Do you think they're leaving money on the table or do you think that > most V10 purchases are simply... "well, as long as you have one in > stock and it's only a few hundred more..."? Actually, I think for most commercial truck buyer, the V-10 is not needed. Unless you are towing very heavy loads in hilly terrain, the 5.4L is more than adequate. And if you are towing very heavy loads in heavy terrain, you need the diesel. Ed
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 22 Mar 2007 09:12 "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message news:46027d59$1(a)kcnews01... > > "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:UeTLh.5283$ya1.609(a)news02.roc.ny... >> "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message >> news:45fffdf2(a)kcnews01... >>> >>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:LXRLh.5275$ya1.2331(a)news02.roc.ny... >>> >>>> I generally avoid companies who've previously sold me products that >>>> were intentionally made defective. I violated my rule once with Ford. I >>>> won't do it a second time unless they give me the product for free, and >>>> pay me a hefty aggravation bonus any time it had what I considered to >>>> be a stupid problem. $1000.00 per incident would be about right. >>> >>> So Toyota has never sold a defective product? How about the thousands of >>> prior model Tundras with bad ball joints? Or with piston slap prone >>> engines? >> >> >> Every product has a defect now and then. However, you apparently missed >> the word "INTENTIONAL". Tell me you saw it, and what you thought about >> the presence of the word in my comment. > > Well you will have to clarify what you consider an "intentional" defect. I > am sure no manufacturer includes "intentional defect." The statement > itself is an oxymoron. > > Ed I wondered when you'd nibble on the bait. I have an acquaintance whose job it is to install & calibrate CNC machining equipment, and train the personnel who will use it. His company sells to the Detroit-3, Toyota, and others. I once asked him why not-very-old Chrysler mini-vans stink like a 30 year old car. His response: Chrysler makes a conscious choice to program larger tolerances for manufacturing the engines and crucial parts. He said it's quite frustrating to be told to program CNC equipment to create far less quality than it's capable of. When he's working at a Toyota plant, things are different. He's got a handful of Japanese engineers following him around, checking on his work, and making sure the equipment is tweaked to its maximum capabilities. His Chrysler experience is similar to the routine at Ford & GM. His explanation was a response to a comment of mine, as a Chrysler mini-van pulled into the parking lot of a lodge where we were both staying with our families: "I wonder how someone goes about ruining an engine so quickly. That van's gotta be what....3 years old?" So, that's intentional. Engineers at the D-3 make a ***CONSCIOUS CHOICE*** to build a sloppy product. They tell my friend "Program the thing per our instructions". They are hesitant to explain why.
From: C. E. White on 22 Mar 2007 09:30
"Whitelightning" <white.lightning2(a)verizon.net> wrote in message news:O1iMh.18070$O_5.17561(a)trnddc03... > > "DH" <dh(a)stargate.com> wrote in message > news:46016bcb$0$16262$88260bb3(a)free.teranews.com... > > If you like the Toyota so much, and love pumping money into japan's > economy, > dont let the door hit you where the sun dont shine on the way out. > > I do notice Toyota aint doing so well in the Nextel series. Waltrip > cant get qualified, > and Dale Jarrett is burning up his provisionals to get on the > track.. > > Whitelightning The Nextel cup has nothing to do with the "real" world. Nothing in those cars has anything to do with a "stock" car in any meaningful way. Ed |