GM or Toyota
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: Corolla steering problems
Next: {BS} FOX News using Gore's book to measure snowfall in front of Gore's house...
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 11 Feb 2010 22:38 On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:28:50 -0800, jim beam wrote: >> And, besides this, the people have different tastes. In the US, for >> years people have liked big boat-type cars. In Europe, people have >> preferred smaller, more nimble cars. For example, Olds was advertising >> that it had the first 4-wheel independent suspension car made in the US >> in 1987 or 1988. The Peugeot 504 on which I learned to drive had >> four-wheel indpendent suspension 13 years earlier. > > vw have been 4-wheel independent since the 30's. those french citroen > 2cv's were in the 40's. Citroen had a LOT of innovations.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 11 Feb 2010 22:40 On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:56:32 -0500, IYM wrote: > Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: >> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:08:38 -0500, clare wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:03:57 -0500, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:13:48 -0500, Mike Hunter wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> That is largest number of different types of vehicles, as well as the >>>>> highest total number, ever recalled by ANY other vehicle manufacturer >>>>> in history according the AP story. >>>> >>>> Bullshit. Ford had a recall of 12M vehicles for exploding cruise >>>> controls. >>>> >>>> >>> You need to look at the total number of vehicles each company had on >>> the road at the time of the recalls, and the number involved. >>> >>> The percentage of Toyotas on the road subject to recall, even with the >>> MASSIVE recalls currently under way, are significantly lower than the >>> percentage of either Ford or GM over the years. >> >> You're preaching to the chior. Over the years GM Ford and Chysler have >> recalled millions and millions of vehicles for even more serious issues >> than this; Ford even got away with issuing dashboard stickers for >> transmissions that could slip from Park to Reverse. > > > OMG! I remember that! But it wasn't that they would slip into > reverse...I had a '76 Ford Granada with a automatic tranny that when you > put it in park it occasionally wouldn't engage fully in the tranny, but on > the column it was fine. The first time I discovered this, I had parked it > on a very slight incline, got out of the car and started to walk away and > then I heard "tick-tick-tick-tick..." getting progressively faster and > looked to see the car rolling away! Had to run after it, unlock it while > moving and jump in to hit the brake...Glad there was nothing around! lol > Thier fix at the time was to issue a letter that said that this might > happen and you should use the parking brake to prevent it from > happening... lmao! NO car companies would not get away with that now, but > Ford is a much different and better company now than in the 70's....and > you have to remember too - Recalls were a "growing" evolution of car > manufacturers and Gov'ts during that time. Back in the 60's 50's, 40's - > There were no recalls...Things that happened on cars were considered > "quirks" and owners were much more involved in the maintenance and fix of > the cars than they are today's consumers, who demand 100% perfection all > the time - no mistakes. So to say that "they got away with..." when you > are referencing anything before, oh say around 1980 is kind of unfair. > In fact, wasn't it the whole Ford Pinto gas tank thing in the 70's that > really got the Gov't involved and the whole ball rolling on recalls and > manufacturer's responsibility? All true. What galls me is the people attacking TOyota and overlooking some of these magnificent recalls from American companies, like recalls are something new.
From: jim beam on 11 Feb 2010 22:46 On 02/11/2010 05:59 PM, clare(a)snyder.on.ca wrote: > On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:28:50 -0800, jim beam<me(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >> On 02/10/2010 06:16 PM, dr_jeff wrote: >>> Hachiroku ???? wrote: >>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:46:16 +0000, Clive wrote: >>>> >>>>> In message<4b72d99c$0$18644$ce5e7886(a)news-radius.ptd.net>, Mike Hunter >>>>> <Mikehunt2(a)lycos.?.invalid> writes >>>>>> I guess the Toyota loyalist are worried they may get injured or >>>>>> killed at >>>>>> worst and the retail value of their cars will plummet at best. >>>>> Or perhaps it's just that they're global with a car that passes the >>>>> criteria of all governments whereas for instance the EU is very >>>>> strict on >>>>> what cars can be sold in it's area, which is why firms like Ford and GM >>>>> have to make a totally different product for the EU. >>>> >>>> That why they don't sell US designed cars there? >>>> >>>> The UK version of the Escort was pretty close to the US version. >>>> OTOH, GM had to buy Vauxhaul to get an 'in' in European markets. >>>> I've heard they're junk, too... >>> >>> A large part of why there are different cars for different markets is >>> that the markets have different needs. The Japanese and European markets >>> have fuel that is like 3 or 4 times higher than the price of fuel in the >>> US. SO fuel economy is more important than in the US. In addition, both >>> Europe and Japan are much more interested in fuel economy than we are in >>> the US. In both markets, there is less room for cars, so smaller cars >>> are more useful. >>> >>> And, besides this, the people have different tastes. In the US, for >>> years people have liked big boat-type cars. In Europe, people have >>> preferred smaller, more nimble cars. For example, Olds was advertising >>> that it had the first 4-wheel independent suspension car made in the US >>> in 1987 or 1988. The Peugeot 504 on which I learned to drive had >>> four-wheel indpendent suspension 13 years earlier. >> >> vw have been 4-wheel independent since the 30's. those french citroen >> 2cv's were in the 40's. the fiat 500 was independent in the 50's. it's >> basically only detroit garbage that is /still/ being sold with >> horse-and-cart solid axles. >> >> > > And only a VERY few of even them. Basically the truck based stuff and > the Mustang. well, the "truck based stuff" includes suv's, and they used to be 50% of the market. then you have all the taxi's, highway patrol vehicles, and all that larger stuff like the camaro, impala, etc. there really is no excuse. >>> >>> And the emissions and safety requirements are different, too. >>> >>> Jeff >
From: jr92 on 12 Feb 2010 00:04 On Feb 11, 1:41 pm, "C. E. White" <cewhi...(a)mindspring.com> wrote: > "Tom W. Butts" <c...(a)cob.com> wrote in messagenews:4b734861.3680734(a)news.eternal-september.org... > > > On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:18:50 -0800 (PST), Mudflap > > <hall.richar...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>The worst part is I haven't seen the price of toyotas plummet yet. > > >>As soon as the tacomas are worth the same as rangers and canyons, > >>i'm > >>buying a used one. unless the new values plummet too! > > > Thanks I'll pass. Didn't like Toyotas before the recall, don't like > > 'em now. Their trucks have always been a joke. > > > BTW, I heard on the news that Kelly Bluebook has revised many Toyota > > prices downward as demand plummets. > > Well, that may actually make them a good buy! My biggest complaint > about Toyotas is that they are over priced compared to other vehicles > that are similar in quality and performance. In my opinion Toyota has > enjoyed an undeserved reputation for exceptional quality for several > years. I don't think Toyota builds bad vehicles any more than other > main line manufacturers, but I don't think they build exceptionally > good vehicles either. As a friend of mine said, Toyotas are > extra-ordinary, not extraordinary.... > > Ed You probably are more correct in your assessment than most of us who post here, C.E.!
From: jr92 on 12 Feb 2010 00:19
On Feb 11, 10:40 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:56:32 -0500, IYM wrote: > > Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote: > >> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:08:38 -0500, clare wrote: > > >>> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:03:57 -0500, Hachiroku ???? <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> > >>> wrote: > > >>>> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:13:48 -0500, Mike Hunter wrote: > > >>>>> That is largest number of different types of vehicles, as well as the > >>>>> highest total number, ever recalled by ANY other vehicle manufacturer > >>>>> in history according the AP story. > > >>>> Bullshit. Ford had a recall of 12M vehicles for exploding cruise > >>>> controls. > > >>> You need to look at the total number of vehicles each company had on > >>> the road at the time of the recalls, and the number involved. > > >>> The percentage of Toyotas on the road subject to recall, even with the > >>> MASSIVE recalls currently under way, are significantly lower than the > >>> percentage of either Ford or GM over the years. > > >> You're preaching to the chior. Over the years GM Ford and Chysler have > >> recalled millions and millions of vehicles for even more serious issues > >> than this; Ford even got away with issuing dashboard stickers for > >> transmissions that could slip from Park to Reverse. > > > OMG! I remember that! But it wasn't that they would slip into > > reverse...I had a '76 Ford Granada with a automatic tranny that when you > > put it in park it occasionally wouldn't engage fully in the tranny, but on > > the column it was fine. The first time I discovered this, I had parked it > > on a very slight incline, got out of the car and started to walk away and > > then I heard "tick-tick-tick-tick..." getting progressively faster and > > looked to see the car rolling away! Had to run after it, unlock it while > > moving and jump in to hit the brake...Glad there was nothing around! lol > > Thier fix at the time was to issue a letter that said that this might > > happen and you should use the parking brake to prevent it from > > happening... lmao! NO car companies would not get away with that now, but > > Ford is a much different and better company now than in the 70's....and > > you have to remember too - Recalls were a "growing" evolution of car > > manufacturers and Gov'ts during that time. Back in the 60's 50's, 40's - > > There were no recalls...Things that happened on cars were considered > > "quirks" and owners were much more involved in the maintenance and fix of > > the cars than they are today's consumers, who demand 100% perfection all > > the time - no mistakes. So to say that "they got away with..." when you > > are referencing anything before, oh say around 1980 is kind of unfair. > > In fact, wasn't it the whole Ford Pinto gas tank thing in the 70's that > > really got the Gov't involved and the whole ball rolling on recalls and > > manufacturer's responsibility? > > All true. What galls me is the people attacking TOyota and overlooking > some of these magnificent recalls from American companies, like recalls > are something new.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Recalls are by far nothing new. I remember when the likes of USA Today would front-page ANY recall GM or Ford had, no matter how insignicant it would be as far as safety or reliability was concerned. The big thing is the total number of recalls the Toyotas are having today. It's totally in the tens of millions over the past few years, and like a snowball rolling downhill, growing on an almost daily basis. You can whitewash it any way you want, they have major issues to deal with. And, unlike the tire pressure monitor, or dome light malfunction, or heaven forbid, the leaking gasket recalls GM had in the 80's and 90's, Toyota has REAL safety and relibility issues. Sludging engines. Rusting suspensions. Throttles sticking wide open. Braking issues. If you feel that Toyota is being unfairly attacked, then you know exactly how I feel about the way GM has been attacked for the past 25-30 years. Now, just compare the things on which the GM and Toyota were attacked. |