Seems to be cancelled out if you follow brand loyalty, and have to dump $25,000 into a new Camry.
I agree with this basic premise and I could rant and rave about the evils of insurance and health care companies, however I’m not sure it applies to Detroit’s problems.
Certainly they work at a competitive disadvantage to socialized economies, but many other US companies are profitable and competitive with foreign companies under the same system. Eliminating the burden of health care costs to the auto industry would be something like corporate welfare. Their numbers would look sunnier and they’d improve relations with the UAW but it wouldn’t force them to improve their management. In a way the ugly health care situation forces them to become better managed, Darwinian in a way.
A basic Camry costs $19,000. Its counterpart at Ford is the Taurus, which costs $21,000. The counterpart at Chevy is the Impala, I believe. That starts at $21,000 as well. In fact, the most expensive model of Camry (XLE) only costs a bit over $22,000. So it seems that you get the lower initial price and the better resale price by buying the Japanese car.
Can’t do that down here … A/C is no considered an option.
Good thing A/C is standard on all Camry models then.
Camry for MSRP $25,000 … admittedly not a basic model. I was going by pricing I saw in lots this past weekend.
In any case, I’m looking at my next car in a strictly utilitarian sense … not as a financial investment.
This is terrible comparison. The Taurus for starters isn’t even being made any more. The Fusion and Malibu are the direct competitors for the Toyota Camry and share almost identical proportions, engines and trim levels. The Impala and Ford 500 are the competion for the Toyota Avalon.
Go here and compare the 2006 Ford Fusion V6 SE and the 2006 Toyota Camry V6 SE.
Camry: $24,065
Fusion: $20,625
Now compare the 2006 Toyota Avalon XL, the 2006 Ford 500 SE FWD and the 2006 Chevy Impala 3LT.
Avalon: $26,625
500: $22,230
Impala: $23,730
There’s simply no argument by which Toyotas or Hondas are comparable in price to Fords and Chevys.
Sorry, forgot to copy in the hyperlink. The site I used was this:
http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/comparison/select.html;_ylt=Ara3RRzVFGaExKBovLoHs4wEc78F
If it’s solely a money-losing PR move, then why is Toyota releasing even more hybrid models? They’ve already added it to the Estima minivan and Crown sedan, as well as to the Lexus RH and GS, and a new hybrid LS is being released late this year. The Prius was more than PR, it was a technological stepping stone. The current models are more powerful and more comfortable than the original, and are improving with each season. GM (and Nissan) simply missed the boat.
And Toyota is a publicly traded company, just like GM, and must answer to shareholders for its actions. Do you think concept of capitalism hasn’t quite caught on yet in Japan?
Sublight, I never said it couldn’t make money, just that it hasn’t. It’s not clear if the upcoming models will be sold at a loss or not and if they’ll recoup development costs anytime soon. In either case my statement is nonetheless true.
I can’t speak for the business environment in Japan, but considering the layoffs, union negotiations, missed revenue projections and bad PR Detroit has been getting purposely creating a loss-leader would have been corporate suicide. I don’t know the specifics but I assume part of this is the cause of the demise of the EV-1, which everyone forgets predated the Prius. Equating the two just because Toyota is publicly held as well is misguided.
I understand that you’re knowingly playing “dueling anecdotes” here, but you skipped over the point of this part of mack’s post.
One reason U.S. automakers are losing sales is that they seem to be very adept at not giving customers what they want. Sure, they give some customers what they want, but they ignore whole segments of the auto buying market.
What year did the Subaru Outback debut? 1995? It was a huge hit from the get-go. Did the American automakers take the hint? No. (To be fair, Honda and Toyota missed the boat on this one, too) Truck-based SUVs and minivans were definitley “hotter” categories, but the car-based Outbacks were selling like hotcakes, and are still selling like hotcakes. You can’t throw a stick in a parking lot around here without hitting a Subie.
Eventually, the U.S. automakers tried to come out with some cars to compete with the Outback, but they showed that the big 3 had somehow completely missed the point of why the Outbacks were so popular. Pontiac Aztek, anyone?
At this point, there are a few more Outback-like vehicles out there, but not many, and none of them are from U.S. makers. In the past two years, I’ve seen two people close to me looking for something like an Outback, and finding remarkably few choices. Both parties didn’t care for Subaru’s admittedly quirky handling, and one of them definitely wanted something more upscale. That person bought a Saab wagon.* The other bought a used Volvo Cross-country. Might they have bought something “American?” They didn’t even have the option.
*Yeah, I know Saab is now owned by Ford.
Was the EV-1 the beginning of a line, or was it an experiment? GM didn’t seem to go back and try to do better.
The Prius was gettting Toyota up the learning curve for hybrids. You don’t do that and make money at the same time. When the development costs get amortized over their entire line of cars, it is going to look a lot more reasonable. When there is a perception that you save money buying one (forget what the real story is) you do fine also. In California a Prius will get you into the carpool lane with one driver. That is worth a lot around here.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned the Saturn. I got one in '93, and another in '97 when my first gave its life to protect my wife. (Some clown ran a red light and hit her right in the driver side door - she spent a few hours in the emergency room, thanks to its construction.) They were both a lot better than the Datsun I used to have. But GM totally screwed it up, labor, styling, reliability, marketing. Damn shame.
No idea, but my guess is that it was a extended concept vehicle. I think they made an effort and found that the technology wasn’t yet feasible to make profitably. It also showed demand wasn’t yet there. I’m guessing they didn’t go back to the well because the business climate had changed to where they couldn’t justify the gamble.
True, GM certainty could have afforded to take the gamble on it, it would have been a difficult sell and it might have left them in an even worse situation than they are now.
I’ve said this before, but my perception (based purely on what cars make it over the Atlantic and what I read about them) is that US carmakers have not willingly made a single innovation that wasn’t forced on them by regulations or competitors in the last half-century at least. Their attitude seems to be “sell the same thing as last year unless the bastards won’t buy it. If they won’t, throw in something (anything) different and call it a new feature”.
Other carmakers seem to actually look at car buyers and make an attempt to deliver what they want - economy, safety, reliability, performance, warranties, whatever. Their attitude comes across more as “what can we add this year to make the customer like it more?”.
Cars nowadays are not some super-special product category - they are just like toasters or TVs or any other generic appliance. If you don’t pay close attention to making stuff that meets customer needs, you are utterly screwed. Whether Big3 cars are “Better value” or “more reliable” or “superior” or whatever is pretty much irrelevant - if they have unpleasant interiors or rude dealers or other flaws that matter to the consumer, they won’t get bought because there are plenty of other alternatives out there to choose from. The Big3 obsession with keeping the production line running 24/7 and only making vehicles with a huge profit margin is a hangover from the prehistoric age of manufacturing - if you saw Samsung or Dell behaving like that you’d think they’d lost their minds.
And US cars tuned to the edge of the envelope? I’d like a cite for that, please. From what I’ve seen they are tuned to minimise the effects of sloppy tolerances - hence engines which are weak for their capacity, terrible handling and bad fuel economy
Man, I was with ya all the way up til your last statement. Yours is a blanket statement based on an emotional assessment there. Displacement on Demand from Dodge and Chevy make some pretty signifcant gains, Supercharging from Ford make for some pretty good performance numbers from smaller displacements, Chevy’s Eco-tec 4 cylinder platform is a stellar performer, and the 505 hp 427 cu. in. LS7 can’t be touched in ANY vehicle for twice the price. (without a gas guzzler tax. How does THAT happen?)
Hp per liter is an irrelevant metric, you might as well mention miles per lb. of tire pressure. HP production is a subject that pretty much ANYONE with enough money has solved.
As far as handling is concerned, that’s a purely subjective assessment, and a nice strawman to debate. You can argue handling in a MINI is better than the handling in a Magnum, but the two vehicles are tuned to different audiences who have different handling desires. Does a Porshce outhandle a Corvette? That depends on the driver, surface, day and phase of the moon, I’d submit. And the differences are so far out on the edge of the envelope that only .01% of the world’s population would be able to determine the difference.
Debate this on interior materials, management techniques, and economics, but I don’t think you can make an arguement fly that American makes are less technologically accomplished.
Two reasons: cupholders and no place to put the purse.
Exactly.
It’s not that I dislike American cars. I had a '93 Escort wagon before I bought the Subaru. My beef is that out of all the marques coming out of Detroit, the small car offerings are so limited. And then when the SUV market turns sour, people start buying smaller cars, and hard times fall on the corporations who do people blame? The unions. Give me a break. Granted they’re not making things easier but unions or not, if US makers aren’t offering it, I’m not buying it.
Bear in mind that I’m not a petrol head and I’m a European, so I’m not only uneducated but coming at this from an environment where a big V8 is going to cost an astronomical amount in fuel and would be expected to put out serious performance as a result - over here a 5.7 litre Chrysler engine that only puts out 340hp is just silly when Audi can get that out of a 4.2L and obtain similar fuel economy despite running 4WD. Similarly, cars are expected to deal with small roads and tight corners without wallowing like paddle-steamers, which is beyond the ability of most US imports.
Cars are obviously built with completely different trade-offs between price/engine capacity/interior volume/suspension stability because they will be operating in different environments, but overall US cars (as far as I have seen, which is not much) prioritise interior volume, low-speed cruising and bump handling much more than japanese or Euro cars - so I would expect the Mini to be much better at going round corners controllably than the Magnum but a lot lumpier, which to me means better handling (but less comfort). And I think a lot more than .01% of drivers can tell the difference between a Porsche and a Corvette when taking a twisty road at speed.
Technical inferiority doesn’t come into it, it’s just a question of what is proritised during the design and manufacturing process - from this side of the pond it seems that handling, efficiency and finish take a back seat to reduced manufacturing cost, ride comfort and ‘portion size’ for want of a better phrase.
Which may make sense for the US, but not for Europe/Japan. And given the current market situation, it looks like it’s not that great for the US marketplace either.
Slightly off topic, but this is why there is no longer a British car industry in any real sense. You buy a mid-70’s Mini as a poor student, and the distributor is placed right against the front grille: every time it rains, the car won’t start. You blank out the grille with a metal shield, and the engine overheats. You pray someone will steal it, and eventually ditch it and buy a Mitsubishi Mirage, which runs like a clock.
Fast forward 15 years, when you have a wife, a kid and a job: are you going to buy a British car, which some people say might work as well as a Japanese car - although you’re still pissed off that you had to spend your beer money during exams just to get to university on time - or are you going to buy a Mazda? People harbour grudges over cars, and I don’t think a lot of car manufacturers have cottoned on yet as to how deep those grudges run, or how long they last.
Your own link has an '06 Taurus model as offer for a comparison, so you may be incorrect in saying the Taurus is not being made anymore. I was getting all of my numbers directly from the manufacturers.