  Mrjoshua Member Username: Mrjoshua Post Number: 689 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 69.208.120.249 |
Why Toyota Won By JAMES P. WOMACK February 13, 2006; Page A16 The Wall Street Journal, op-ed The latest bad news is now in from GM and Ford: 60,000 U.S. and Canadian jobs will go in the next few years, 24 giant factories will close, and North American losses in the billions will continue. Clearly MoTown needs a new approach and it's natural in the car industry to think that the secret must be a killer model -- a Toyota Prius hybrid or some other concept to replace the big pickups and SUVs that floated the American firms for 15 years. Actually, it's not a new car model that's needed. It's a new business model. Toyota is leading the charge against Detroit -- largely from inside the U.S. -- with a fundamentally different approach to business that my MIT research team in the 1990s labeled "lean" enterprise. Compared with these Toyota practices, GM and Ford's approach has five fatal weaknesses:  Prius: Not built by Dilberts. • GM and Ford can't design vehicles that Americans want to pay "Toyota money" for. And this is not a matter of bad bets on product concepts or dumb engineers. It's a matter of Toyota's better engineering system, using simple concepts like chief engineers with real responsibility for products, concurrent and simultaneous engineering practices, and sophisticated knowledge capture methods. The Prius is not the result of a hunch or luck but rather the likely result of a development system that tries out many approaches to every problem, then gets the winning concept to the customer very quickly with low engineering cost, low manufacturing cost, and near perfect quality. (That's not to say that Toyota can't produce a dud -- the first-generation Previa minivan and Tundra pickup stand out -- but the likelihood of producing winners is higher than with traditional development systems.) • GM and Ford are clueless as to how to work with their suppliers. Sometimes they try to crush their bones -- which only works when the suppliers have any profits to squeeze, and few currently do. Then they embrace contentless cooperation that makes everyone feel better briefly but fails to produce lower costs, higher quality, or new and better technology. Toyota, by contrast, is getting brilliant results and lower prices from American suppliers like Delphi while also giving suppliers adequate profit margins. How? By relentlessly analyzing every step in their shared design and production process to take out the waste and put in the quality. • GM and Ford have miasmic management cultures. These turn competent people into Dilberts. By contrast, Toyota does a brilliant job of making one person responsible for every key business process, like the chief engineer overseeing each new model. And it teaches managers how to ask the right questions (rather than give the usual big-boss answers) in order to engage everyone involved in every process to go faster and do a better job with fewer resources. A Dilbert-free environment naturally emerges, but not because everyone has received cultural training to spur teamwork. Rather, if ordinary people -- Dilberts even -- are put in a great business process they become great team players. • GM and Ford cling to their wide range of brands: Chevy, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac, Saab, GMC, and Hummer at GM; Ford, Mercury, Lincoln, Mazda, Jaguar, Volvo, Aston Martin, and Range Rover at Ford. And they still talk about brand revitalization as the way ahead. Yet the most successful car companies in the world -- Toyota and BMW -- have only two or three brands. And this is not an accident. Indeed, it's hard to see how any modern-day car maker can support more than three truly distinctive brands -- a buzzy, "what's new" brand (Scion, Mini); a value-for-money, hassle-free-transportation brand (Toyota); and a distinctive "aspirational" brand for folks who just need something better than the other fellow's (Lexus, BMW). A plethora of brands that can't pull their weight drains management energy and company coffers. • GM and Ford still treat customers as strangers engaged in one-time transactions. Toyota's Lexus, by contrast, has created a new and better customer experience. Customers cheerfully pay more for the car and the service and then come back for more cars because they love the treatment. As Toyota applies its fabled process management to retailing to take out costs, which it is now starting to do at Lexus, customer touch becomes the final weapon in the Toyota arsenal. But note: I haven't mentioned the creaky factories, vast pension obligations, and cranky unions that commentators on the current situation seem obsessed with. In fact, Ford and GM's factories are now good enough to compete in terms of labor productivity and quality. They just can't support employees with no work in "job banks" and unsustainable pension and healthcare benefits for retirees as the companies continue to shrink. Union and management both know this, yet no accommodation has been reached on these issues because their conversation has broken down. With zero confidence that management knows what it is doing, a union will try to get what it can now rather than look at the long term. In consequence, unless GM and Ford soon present a plausible path to a brighter future -- combining a better business model with significant short-term pain during the transition -- there may be no long term. There is no mystery about the lean business model. All of the elements are operating in this country every day at Toyota and at many other American companies in a range of industries. What is mysterious is why GM and Ford can't embrace it. And what is dismaying is how many of their employees are likely to suffer if they don't. But finally, what is reassuring for the country is that if GM and Ford can't fix their problems, they will simply be replaced by new players in America, led by Toyota, who can. Mr. Womack is president of the Lean Enterprise Institute and is the author, with Daniel T. Jones, of "Lean Solutions: How Companies and Customers Can Create Value and Wealth Together" (Free Press, 2005). | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1212 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
entitlement and denial. | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 336 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.221.79.80 |
Excellent article | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 47 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
This will be the year that Toyota first overtakes GM. Three years ago, it was in 4th place and within one year it knocked both Ford and Chrysler down a peg. BTW, Toyota's US workers recently were awarded bonuses for last year which exceeded $10,000. | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 2043 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 130.132.177.245 |
This article contrasts nicely with many of those blame UAW first arguments made on recent GM and Ford threads. Mr.J, thanks for sharing the article (tho ya really should respect WSJ's copyright and post a link and edited highlights for those without WSJ access, it doesn't take very much longer than cutting and pasting the entire thing: it keeps Mr. Lowell out of potential trouble and it respects the property rights of the WSJ.). | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1213 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
It hardly contrasts, the author is just repeating what every other person who does not wear union blinders has been saying. | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 2046 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 130.132.177.245 |
-sj-, you actually read the article at the top of this thread with comprehension and sincerely reached that conclusion? wow. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 3072 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 67.160.138.107 |
Over the course of industrial American history, one company dominates the wage scales and working conditions. With the demise of General (Generous) Motors, that compnay is now Wal-Mart. The average full-timer at Wal-Mart makes $10.11 per hour of work. That's $10.11 X 2080 hrs.= $21,028.80. Wal-Mart has a cafeteria of health plans ranging from worker premiums of $19 to $150 per month. There are some stock options, 401K plans, and they pay the usual govt. mandated insurances. Much has been written about their poor working conditions, law suits, off-clock work, lack of overtime, unpaid lunch breaks, workers on Medicade, etc. But they are the Gold Standard right now. Toyota is able to use and train this same workforce, pay the real competitive wages and benefits, and succeed in a foreign country. Remember the Wal-Mart factor, ugly as it is, in the discussion. They have 1.7 million employees. Thanks. jjaba. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1214 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
Yes I did. Infact this one paragraph highlights what many have said for years but are viewed as anti-union. entitlement and denial are once again running wild and how many second chances are they going to get.
This article covers why they can not compete and what needs to happen. And as long as it is use vs them instead us vs. the world nothing will get accomplished. (Message edited by _sj_ on February 13, 2006) | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 2048 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 128.36.108.81 |
_sj_ imo you are misreading the article. The article describes "five fatal weaknesses" to F and GM's b-model. None of these has anything to do with union excesses. The paragraph you mention is written as counterpoint to the entire gist of the article and of course the concluding two sentences of that paragraph re-establish the initial point of the article itself. The onus is on management ... | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1215 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
The onus is on both. And you are misreading it. The problem lies with both. The companies unwillingness to change and the union greed are guarenteeing that there will be no long term. Pay close attention to this first sentence:
The author is not absolving either party. They are placing blame on both which is what I and many others have been doing. This is not a one sided problem. | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 913 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 64.142.86.133 |
The game is not over. It never will be. Thinking it was got GM into the situation it sits in today. Thinking Toyota is immune to doing the same thing 50 years now is just as naive as believing they "won" today. (Message edited by Jerome81 on February 14, 2006) | ||
Crash_nyc Member Username: Crash_nyc Post Number: 518 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 24.193.39.60 |
"GM and Ford are clueless as to how to work with their suppliers. Sometimes they try to crush their bones -- which only works when the suppliers have any profits to squeeze..." Two friends of mine (husband and wife) work for DuPont in Troy, and develop auto paint for GM, their #1 paint client. GM has squeezed DuPont to the point of layoffs. She's about to lose her job any day now, and even as a senior paint chemist, he fears that his job won't last more than another 6 months. They're now faced with with the reality of having to up-root and move out-of-state for jobs in a non-auto-related industry. | ||
Ericdfan Member Username: Ericdfan Post Number: 103 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 68.41.117.60 |
you forgot to mention Saturn as a GM brand, which makes it even more bloated | ||
Ericdfan Member Username: Ericdfan Post Number: 104 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 68.41.117.60 |
or rather the article did. | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 2049 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 130.132.177.245 |
_sj_, you may think that the problem lies with both, you may even be correct, however that is not, imo, the point of this article. Our interpretations on this differ, so be it. I'd like to hear from some others what they think ... hello track75 you out there, yoohoo? | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2219 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 12.75.21.224 |
Yoohoo back, rustic. You know this is my kind of thread.  Womack cites five major problem areas: 1. Product development process 2. Bad supplier relations 3. The miasmic culture 4. Too many brands 5. Poor customer experience 1. I agree with most of his criticisms of the product development process. 2. I completely agree with his supplier comments. 3. IMO he’s really exaggerating the differences in cultures, but there certainly is a difference. 4. Yes, but his idea of at most three brands makes more sense when building up from one (Toyota) than when you have some level of positive brand image with >3 (GM). 5. Lexus does a great job of customer handling, true, but so does Cadillac. Lincoln and Buick also do a pretty good job. Toyota isn’t much different from Ford, Chevy, or Pontiac, and it’s far worse than Saturn. This is probably his weakest point. Generally the high-line makes of any manufacturer, Asian, European or domestic, offer excellent customer service and the lower-priced makes don’t (Saturn being a singular exception). Toyota’s famed lean production system is just a part of the reason for Toyota’s success. Womack makes an excellent and often overlooked point about the importance of Toyota’s business process systems. He makes it seem like it wouldn't be that hard to adopt, but it doesn’t work unless the entire company is aligned properly. If some business processes/functions/department s are Toyota-like and others aren’t it just won’t work. Getting them all to align to work together in harmony at the same time is very, very difficult. Few companies have really done it. Toyota wouldn’t be on the top of the heap with no real challengers if other auto companies could easily adopt the system, since all have studied it in depth for years. In fact, Toyota is willing to allow competitors to tour their facilities and talk to their managers since they know how hard it would be for a competitor to really duplicate it. GM, for example, has been sending managers and engineers through the NUMMI plant in Fremont, CA (GM/Toyota JV) for 20 years, trying to pollinate the organization with Toyota systems. It doesn’t seem to have worked. The toughest challenge in the corporate world is to radically change the cultural bedrock of a huge organization that acquired its current culture over many decades and via much success. Imagine trying to change the culture of the federal bureaucracy, for example. Virtually impossible. I’m trying to think of a good example of a large corporation that successfully changed their culture and management systems. There must be some but I’m drawing a blank. Rustic, I know you’re interested in the degree to which management is to blame vs. the union and you think that management ought to shoulder a lot of the blame. I actually agree. I do however think the hand they’ve been dealt over the last several decades mitigates a portion of their degree of blame. Even the most brilliant managers might not have had much success in returning GM or Ford to something akin to the glory days of the 50’s and 60’s, and GM and Ford have have too many execs who weren't up to the job. | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 2052 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 130.132.177.245 |
Track75, I appreciate your comments. Glad to hear the cultural miasma ain't as bad as it looks from the outside. Actually I don't particularly buy into the whole lean production mantra the author champions. (I know this is heterodox but I think we discussed this once before so ...) IMO Toyota's success in NA is based in large part on a reactionary model -- HOW they are able to do it is less relevant than WHAT they do. If Toyota DOES wipe out the domestics THEY will have to alter what they do. If the domestics become hollow brands Toyota won't be able to re-engineer versions of domestic successes (Sienna, Tundra, etc) and engage in niche counter marketting (Prius). They will wind up pooping out Avalon after Camry after Avalon after Camry and once American consumers take their blinders off those are nuthin special, just dull cars no different than say an Olds Cutlass fill-in-the-blank from 10 or 20 years ago except with a nominally better rep ... the Hundais (or more likely their Chinese successors) will eat their lunch. In fact they probably are right now, I'll bet that Hundai's customer base is more likely former Toyota owners than former Chevy owners. But anyway, imo what is interesting is how the author frames his argument, that the domestics are in deep trouble beyond their chicken and egg union problems. Track75, many times in our various conversations about the biz world you try to get me to empathize with managment. Let me flip it on you. Put yerself in labor's shoes. Given the state of the domestic auto biz as you describe, mgmt's track record, and the apparent low likelihood of management turning things around long term cw their sucessful competitors, what possible reason is there for the UAW to respect and trust management to the point where they make significant concessions? IF the domestics ARE in their death throes as is possibly the case, what is the appropriate exit strategy for labor to follow? Should they make significant concessions to companies that are gonna die anyway? Remember you are on the UAW side of the table, you represent the current workers and THEIR interests ... whaddaya do? btw Track75 things MIGHT not be THAT bad, as to big companies sucesfully undergoing phase transformations, well lets see offa the top of my head ... GE did it famously under Welsch (actually started by his predecessor whose name escapes me). IBM has done it TWICE most recently in the last decade or so (the jury is still out on that one tho) and of course at the dawn of the computer age. F did it post war when it adopted modern management practices over its quirky entrenched homebrew methods. So who knows ... Yay Detroit, Yay USA! Maybe there is hope. (The big defense contractors with their frequent mergers shake things up and prune the deadwood on a regular basis tho that isn't a good example to follow unless ya imagine Toyota buying Ford, keeping the F150 and maybe the Mustang and gutting the rest of the company so we'd better drop that one, yikes!) | ||
Lghart Member Username: Lghart Post Number: 96 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 69.203.21.20 |
jjaba has hit it on the head, and any manufacturing in the USA going forward will be heading towards Walmart wages. I'm not a big union backer, but I wonder what young people in 15-20 years will think about unions in the future as their wages become a fraction of what their parents/grandparents once were. I see a second historic round of the union movement in the next generation, but it will definitely be less focused on one industry but spread across what's left in the service sector. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 58 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Competent, educated people don't need to rely on unions. They get hired on merit or start their own businesses. In any event, firms will tend to shy away from a pro-union state like Michigan - all other things being equal. There's a web site that I stumbled upon yesterday that apparently is quite anti-union, but not necessarily anti-labor: UnionFacts.com "Union leaders have abused the trust of their members. They've misspent member dues and harmed the very same people they promise to protect. In 2005 alone, federal racketeering investigations resulted in 196 convictions against union officials and employees and $187 million in fines. Union tactics -- including deception and intimidation during organizing campaigns, strikes that hurt members more than they help, spending mandatory union dues on radical political agendas, and the use of anti-democratic voting practices -- are long overdue for exposure. The Center for Union Facts has gathered a wealth of information about the size, scope, political activities, and criminal activity of the labor movement in the United States of America. Welcome to UnionFacts.com." | ||
Dove7 Member Username: Dove7 Post Number: 1970 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 24.5.195.127 |
rustic? I've been reading your post and your trying to start an argument with _sj_. Denial is a mutha. There is alot of truth in what has been written. I have family that works in the Fremont plant. The work ethics and Toyota philosophy is there. Deny if you want. you can come up with these so called theories on what will happen to Toyota if they become number one. You don't know what this company is going to do. Face facts. GM amd Ford have been butt fucking customers for a long time now. Last semester I took a Marketing class. Ask my instructor his expeirence with a American car. He never looked back. And alot of what was written in that article was also echoed by my instructor. Unions and health plans are one thing, but cars and quality is another. Health care and Unions had nothing to do with Ford and GM's poor sales last year. Chrysler did damn good. Toyota did good and Honda had both car and truck of the year. Go ahead and co-sign for the big 2 while they continue to bankrupt their way out of the door. Time magazine has a damn good report. Or is it Forbes? Anywho, the front page is in all black with white text, giving a grim and dark look to GM. Ask my uncle about Toyota hear in the bay area and he'll tell you different from what you think and not what you know. Ask my mother who has 37 years and going at GM and she'll tell you what time it REALLY is...Her first issue is cars and giving the customer what they want. Common sense. | ||
Dove7 Member Username: Dove7 Post Number: 1971 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 24.5.195.127 |
since that is.. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1219 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
And at a price the consumer wants. Which the Big 2 have done a piss poor job at doing. | ||
Patrick Member Username: Patrick Post Number: 3245 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 65.222.10.3 |
Where I can get stats on the % of US versus Japanese made parts in certain automobiles? When you look on the sticker of a car, it gives the percentage of parts made in the US and other countries. People always use the “it’s built in the USA” excuse when talking about Toyota. But is it? It is assembled here but where do the majority of parts come from? | ||
Dove7 Member Username: Dove7 Post Number: 1978 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 24.5.195.127 |
Yeah that built in the U.S. shit don't fly with me. It's not about the parts coming from here, but knowing how to use the part the right way. | ||
Patrick Member Username: Patrick Post Number: 3246 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 65.222.10.3 |
I will be the first to admit that I was pleasantly surprised at the quality of various Honda products I have driven. I was utterly disappointed by the ride quality and overall design of several Toyota products including the Tacoma, Corolla, and Camry. All three strike me as absolute crap. Sure, Ford and GM make their fair share, and when they do, the media nails them. When Toyota makes a shoddy product (yes, admit it, some are) the media doesn’t say shit. | ||
Dove7 Member Username: Dove7 Post Number: 1979 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 24.5.195.127 |
Patrick, i'm not a fan when it comes to the car design coming from Toyota. As a matter of fact I told a worker the samething. BUT, me not liking their design is a matter of what my taste is and has nothing to do what and how others view their car designs. Perhaps it is the riding results that is overshawdowing the look of the car. What is effective is working for them. Bottomline, looks don't mean jack if you don't have the performance to back it up. Speaking of Honda. The 1990's Honda Accords, I have one, are the highest stolen cars here because they are one of the most reliable cars that ame out of the 90's. The car still holds it's value. That may confirm your surprise. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 3086 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 67.160.138.107 |
Ok, tis time to vote. Does The Forum endorse purchasing new cars Made in USA with foreign nameplates? jjaba assumes nobody on a Detroit Forum would ever buy a foreign made vehicle, ever. jjaba, proud owner of two Oldsmoblies in his garage. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 905 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.222.11.226 |
I'll buy anything that gets over 35 mpg average. I don't care if it was made on Mars by Venusians. MPG is ALL that matters. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 3088 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 67.160.138.107 |
jjaba always goes for the mag wheels. Nothing else matters. Do you expect jjaba to look like a schmuck driving stock wheels? jjaba. | ||
Deputy Member Username: Deputy Post Number: 84 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 63.115.132.100 |
Jjaba, Never would I buy a foreign auto. I think there are American Alternatives to foreign vehicles. I am supporting my family, friends and neighbors who rely on the auto industry for jobs. If these people lose their jobs then the MI economy is hit and others lose their jobs and before long I could be looking for work. Deputy - Buying American for altruistic AND selfish reasons. | ||
Ray1936 Member Username: Ray1936 Post Number: 278 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 207.200.116.139 |
Been a Ford owner since 1954 except for one Plymouth around 1970 or so. No mag wheels, though, but I do dope my tires when I wash the car. Bomb Pearl Harbor, will you? I've shown you!! | ||
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz Post Number: 142 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 68.2.191.57 |
My Mustang GT saved my life. We will never part. | ||
Huggybear Member Username: Huggybear Post Number: 144 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 192.217.12.254 |
Cars don't get stolen for their resale value as complete vehicles. If anything, this points to scarce or expensive parts for old Accords. | ||
Huggybear Member Username: Huggybear Post Number: 145 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 192.217.12.254 |
From the perspective of Michigan's welfare, this is a false dichotomy. If it is not built, designed, headquartered, sourced or engineered in Michigan, there is no difference between Huntsville and Hokkaido - because the money takes a one-way trip out. | ||
Dove7 Member Username: Dove7 Post Number: 1985 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 24.5.195.127 |
HuggyBear wrote:Cars don't get stolen for their resale value as complete vehicles. If anything, this points to scarce or expensive parts for old Accords. Didn't state the cars get stolen because they hold their value. The value came up because the car isn't a break down car. That is one of the reasons why the car is a hot car. The theft part has nothing to do with expensive parts but only scare parts because the car isn't a car that you see often in a junkyard, which goes back to my first point, the car holds it's value because it is a reliable car. Honda Accords have from owners that I know and heard from have over 200,000 miles with never breakdown still going strong. My Accord has almost 200,000 and hasn't died on me at all. | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 919 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 64.142.86.133 |
I don't know the truth to this, but if it happens, Ford just may change the world again. http://www.leftlanenews.com/20 06/02/14/report-fords-top-secr et-60mpg-f-150/ http://www.newtechspy.com/arti cles06/hydraulichybrid.html http://www.iags.org/n033104t3. htm | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 65 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Ford uses (and has to pay licensing fees to) Toyota's hybrid technology. This is due to Ford's inability to develop its own hybrids in a timely manner. Therefore, Toyota will always have a competitive advantage over Ford - no added royalties or legacy costs. So, does Ford really have a better idea? Toyota can always trump Ford, which it will most certainly do. Another thought: Who would want to buy a used hybrid when its terribly expensive battery requires replacement? Hopefully, by then there will be cheaper or better alternatives. (Message edited by livernoisyard on February 16, 2006) | ||
Huggybear Member Username: Huggybear Post Number: 146 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 68.251.25.213 |
The revolution in hybrids is not coming from Toyota, but the system that GM, DC and BMW are starting to market right now - a dual-mode system that is simple, cheap, transparent, easy to fix, and can be installed in virtually any drivetrain. Most of the system fits into the space taken up by a standard starter/alternator. This system takes some of the load off the gas engine from dead stops and regenerates from braking. Its overall function is similar to the Prius system. While the GM/BMW systems might "only" cause a 20-25% increase in fuel economy (rather than 30-40%), they are easier to engineer into cars and incur little or no financial penalty to the end user. Of course, with the Prius having a two-cylinder, 1L engine, you have to wonder how much of its mileage is really attributable to hybridization rather than being a light car with a small engine (take a look at what small, non-hybrid cars are starting to get). Toyota has great products and even better PR, but it cannot rewrite the laws of physics, particularly the laws of conservation of energy: hybrids run on their gas engines most of the time. Of course, ask yourself this one: if hybrids are so popular, why did the Honda Civic hybrid (a much nicer-looking, more normal-looking car than the Prius, with only marginally lower fuel mileage) have to go to incentives (rebates) last year? So is there really a market for this stuff or do people buy Priuses as fashion statements? Is hybridization even an economically-worthwhile technology for other manufacturers to pursue? If you want an interesting discussion on how Priuses are actually put together, check out the newspaper article from a couple of weeks ago on automakers' reverse-engineering facilities. The account was it was a very labor intensive (and expensive) car to build. If this is true, and the engineering builds in tons of human labor, the price may never come down much. Livernoisyard, in terms of reliability in everyone's hybrids, it is a question. There have already been two recalls on the Prius - one related to software and one related to the gas tank (or bladder). These are both "showstopper" problems in terms of the car running. And I am curious about the battery technology on all hybrids - since environmentally-friendly battery technologies have recharge lives much too limited to use in a car that is constantly charging and discharging. Even if these parts are warranted for long periods, it's still inconvenient as hell to have cars fixed. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1220 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
Becuase people do not want Hybrids yet. They are not ready for them. Americans no matter what they say still want muscle cars. | ||
Czar Member Username: Czar Post Number: 2923 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 129.137.185.236 |
^Looks like we have a GM or Ford executive on the forum. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 3712 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.223 |
Why Toyota won? becuase were Americans are not making any fuel efficient cars. It's costs MONEY!! Ford GM and Chrysler has to know that the automotive world has gone global since the late 1970s, and they are still stuck in the 1910s mass production period. | ||
Crazy_pete Member Username: Crazy_pete Post Number: 14 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 72.138.178.249 |
Ford doesn't use a Toyota hybrid system... they just have to pay Toyota some kind of royalty, because Toyota was first to the market and patented a lot of the designs. Ford uses a system that they designed themselves, but is still close enough to the Toyota system to involve those patents. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 3687 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 141.217.119.161 |
"Never would I buy a foreign auto. I think there are American Alternatives to foreign vehicles. I am supporting my family, friends and neighbors who rely on the auto industry for jobs. If these people lose their jobs then the MI economy is hit and others lose their jobs and before long I could be looking for work." About a month ago I had a "discussion" with a gentleman who disliked the fact that my car is a Mazda made in Japan for all the usual reasons. I asked him where the sweatshirt he was wearing was made and he said he didn't know. I asked if it could have been made in China and he said "could be, don't know". So I asked him where he bought it and he said Wal-Mart. | ||
Patrick Member Username: Patrick Post Number: 3249 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 65.222.10.3 |
When purchasing a product made my Chrysler (Dodge/Jeep) GM or Ford, you automatically bring thousands of dollars into the tri-county (local) economy. If you live in SE Michigan and purchase Toyota, how much $ are you putting back into the local economy? Maybe a few hundred dollars to some minor suppliers and some bits to the dealership. It is clear that Michigan’s economy is on its own, while the rest of the country grows. People like to use the excuse when buying a Toyota that it is assembled here in the US. Yeah, so what. That certainly isn’t helping the local area at all. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1222 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
Czar, I guess all those big ass turcks with Hemi engines must be a dream that I see driving all around town. Cherokees, Durangos, Trucks, Explorers, Expeditions, Tahoes. Thoise cars were not bought/leased becuase of their gas mileage. And better yet what hybrids are the American car compaines making. Ford Escape, Mercury Mariner, Silverado and Tahoe which is under debate. Hybrids account for only 1.2% of all car sales. It is very easy to say what YOU think people want, but money and the market still dicate and the American is not yet ready. | ||
Czar Member Username: Czar Post Number: 2927 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 129.137.208.20 |
Toyota and Honda love that kind of thinking sj. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1224 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
It is not my fault that the American public thinks this way. Toyota and Honda continue to give the public what they want at a price they can afford. That is not my fault. | ||
Dove7 Member Username: Dove7 Post Number: 2005 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 24.5.195.127 |
I get a kick out of people continuing to tell me to buy American to support American because it brings dollars into the country. When Americans start making American product right then American products and sellers will be taken seriously. GM and Ford are starting to get on the right track, but it only took them to do this after people got tired and fed up with their games. The sad part about it all is even with the improvements they still continue to play games. The GTO (nice car but..). Here is an American classic that they brought back that is the exact same car built in Australia. Give me a break. No originality. Look at the Lacrosse and Lucerne from Buick. The outside of those cars are bland and ugly. Nothing luxury looking about it. When they showed the car in NYC to the public eye. the Lacrosse, it wasn't nothing to jump up and down about and know one in the audience didn't neither. It looks like a Ford Taurus in the back and a Lexus in the front. Where is the creativity at? Like it has been said on here, G.M. gives the public what they think we want. Chysler gives the public what they want and it has showed at the car show that they had a succesful lastyear. A far difference from the company that had a terrible year before and shortly after Mercedes took it over. Now GM is in a far worst position than what Chrysler were in 6 years ago. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 3098 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 67.160.138.107 |
The Chinese love Buicks. GM can't make them fast enough over there. There's a huge market in much of the world who hate the Germans and the Japanese. Remember the geo-politics when discussing this topic. There's much more to it than design, style, gas mileage and va-voom. jjaba, remembering Pearl Harbor in 1941. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 3099 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 67.160.138.107 |
Dove7, mazel tov on 2,000 posts. jjaba appreciates your comments alot. jjaba, Buy american. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 85 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
In addition to a Buick, whose average owner in the US collects Social Security, the hip Chinese also drinks PBR. | ||
Mrjoshua Member Username: Mrjoshua Post Number: 694 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 69.208.120.249 |
It seems that GM and Ford have been too focused on the JD Power initial quality rankings. They've been able to greatly improve their low defect ratings/initial quality standards, but I'm confused as to why there hasn't been a push by all auto manufacturers to get JD Power to create a long term quality ranking system. It's great if a Ford or GM product doesn't fall apart within the first 3 years, but I'm more concerned with what happens to the car within 5-10 years. This is where the Japanese have us beat hands down, and why the majority of GM and Ford vehicles have low resale value. It's not an impartial press or an uneducated American public that makes models like the Honda Civic or Toyota Celica retain a high percentage of their resale value even 10 years down the road. It's the fact that you can beat the crap out of these cars and they keep going for 200K plus miles without need of major repair. | ||
Czar Member Username: Czar Post Number: 2928 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 129.137.208.20 |
^Agreed Mr. Josh. My wife and I were just talking about this. Our last American vehicle, a Chevy pickup needed two brake jobs before it hit 30,000 miles. The transmission went at 37,000 miles. I had an '86 Pontiac that slowly started to disintegrate at about 40,000 miles. Our current Toyota has 53,000 miles on it and, outside of oil changes, our biggest expense was the 30,000 mile recommended tune-up. Original tires and brakes still working fine, though I'm sure for not much longer. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 1648 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 129.9.163.233 |
JD power does both initial and long term (3 and 5 year) quality studies. The initial quality study usually tracks along very nicely with the long term studies. The initial quality study receives most of the press. We hear a lot about the inital quality surveys because they reflect what is happening in the plants now, not 5 years ago. It is hard to drive changes to quality problems that occured 5 years ago. And as for anecdotal evidence I can point to the last three ford vehicles I have owned that have so far all gone over 100,000 miles, two over 150,000, without any major repairs. All they have needed are batteries, brakes, tires, fluids and belts. My 2001 148,000 mile escape may need a battery this year. It was recalled for an engine software update but that was it. (Message edited by ndavies on February 17, 2006) | ||
Bratt Member Username: Bratt Post Number: 400 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 12.172.207.3 |
Sorry...Lexus (Toyota) for me...I buy for quality and dependability. I have been screwed on too many occasions by buying American. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 88 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
I've been fortunate (or is it typical?) to exceed 200K with my Honda CRX or Mopar vehicles. Not so with most of my Fords or GM units. But I did get 24 years out of a 1973 Chevy van. (Message edited by livernoisyard on February 17, 2006) | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 1649 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 129.9.163.233 |
Last year's JD power long term study had Lexus number 1 followed by Buick and Toyota in 3rd. The next report is due this summer. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2220 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 12.75.24.31 |
The JDP Dependability study shows Toyota at 2.16 problems per car and Chevrolet at 2.62 problems per car at the 5 year point. That's not much of a difference, 0.46 problems over 5 years. It's really not enough to sway a purchase decision unless it's a toss-up on all other factors. The perception gap is much larger than a half of of problem per car though. People's perceptions take a long time to change. It doesn't help that the domestics tend to produce more vehicles than the market really wants and then they have to blow them out to the daily rental fleets or offer huge incentives. Both these actions kill the residual values of domestic brands, and that in turn hurts their reputation. The plastic-y ugly interiors in some domestics also scream "low quality", even if the vehicle doesn't break down. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 3688 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.40.111.105 |
I was out and about today and overheard a guy bitching about people buying foreign cars. He had a diamond stud in his ear. Personally I don't need any social justice sermons from people who support modern slavery in Africa. | ||
Angry_dad Member Username: Angry_dad Post Number: 4 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 64.12.116.204 |
I know hybrids better than anybody else on this board. The Toyota system is a start but by no means is it the best posible solution. In fact the Prius would get better mileage without the hybrid power on board for most drivers. But from the reactions here it's obvious that people buy the smoke. As current economies exist it is difficult for true American producers exist. That they are competitive is more a testament to the efforts of those still on the payroll. That Toyita flat out lies about how American they are is a disgrace. No they do not employe 125,000 people here directly. That is a complete fraud. They do employe roughly 35,000 people and at lower wages. They also employed questionable tactics to get government support to build facilities here. It's tough for GM and Ford to compete when congressmen from Alabama, Ohio and Texas are giving Toyota Nissan and Honda places to build cars and trucks. Plants paid for with taxes paid by GM and Ford workers. Is it any wonder Toyota has such a strong rep? Well this nation elected Bush and Kwame so there are plenty of idiots that enjoy being lied to, | ||
Dove7 Member Username: Dove7 Post Number: 2010 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 24.5.195.127 |
Angry_dad wrote:The Toyota system is a start but by no means is it the best posible solution. In fact the Prius would get better mileage without the hybrid power on board for most drivers. But from the reactions here it's obvious that people buy the smoke. That was never the issue. The issue is the cost of gas vs alternatives. The hybris is an option that can and evntually will pay for itself as the price of gas continues to climb. With the cost of gas being dumped into Suv, you need better options. That's the point of hybrids. As for Toytota and the games that they are playing here, where did you get that evidence from? | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3571 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.42.168.34 |
Not to quibble, but is that .46 statistically significant? Without knowing the standard deviation and all other scores, that could be HUGE gap or it could be very small. | ||
Crazy_pete Member Username: Crazy_pete Post Number: 17 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 72.138.178.249 |
Jelk, how do you know that diamond is even real, and if so that it came from Afica? | ||
Dtwphoenix Member Username: Dtwphoenix Post Number: 43 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 70.190.215.201 |
Jelk, maybe he was patriotic and bought a diamond made in Sarasota, Florida. http://www.wired.com/wired/arc hive/11.09/diamond.html I'm curious about the reliability of the hydraulic components of the Ford hydraulic hybrid that Jerome81 mentions. No matter what you think of Hybrids' efficiency compared to purely gasoline or diesel engines, you have to agree that it has been very successful marketing ploy for Toyota. (Message edited by dtwphoenix on February 20, 2006) | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1227 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
Along with the taxes of many other Americans who might possible need a job. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2221 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 12.75.18.233 |
Skulker, JDP doesn't publicly release the SD or other statistical measures. I do know that they use a very large sample size. They’re able to provide statistically valid data on individual models, so the number of surveys for an overall brand like Chevy or Toyota is way up there. JDP numbers have been consistent with internal OEM data in my experience. | ||
Jiminnm Member Username: Jiminnm Post Number: 305 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 69.241.164.222 |
If you car about what happens to GM, you should read "The Tragedy of General Motors" by Carol Loomis, in the Feb. 20 issue of Fortune magazine. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2222 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 12.75.18.233 |
Read it online here: http://money.cnn.com/magazines /fortune/fortune_archive/2006/ 02/20/8369111/index.htm Good stuff. | ||
Wcpo_intern Member Username: Wcpo_intern Post Number: 1865 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 71.227.58.187 |
How much does an American Made foreign nameplate bring into Michigan? I know the Honda Element brings in over $600 per vehicle to employ folks at my Michigan facility. That's more than we make on any "American" vehicle manufactured in Michigan. Based on how we perform with the transplants and based on how many auto based Fortune 500 companies are headquarted in Michigan, I'd say several thousand. I specialize in Quality and I can tell you there is a world of difference between transplants and the "American" companies. When Toyota tells you there is a problem, it comes with a trend chart and a report on what they found in their plant. When Ford yells at you that there is a problem, you may be able to beg them to view their process and on extra special occasions they might even have a partial inventory ID. I have to question a company's ability to control quality when they can't identify their process inputs. I feel little sympathy for organizations that look for win-lose or zero sum solutions rather than win-win solutions. Even when the big three "help" with a problem, its designed to dictate the solution rather than provide the information and suggestions that the suppliers need to fix the problems. The question has been asked what should a union do when dealing with a dying company. You offer ways to change how the company does business. If you can't offer a cheaper product, you offer a better product. The unions need to be innovative in offering ways to get more out of every employee. Nobody observes more waste than the guys on the floor. Allow management to reduce the 48 minutes allowed in bathroom brakes per shift. Allow punishishment of the folks that feel that OSHA standards are too inconvenient. Reduce wash time from 45 minutes down to 10. For god sakes, let someone other than a licensed electrician change a light bulb or low voltage fuse. Cut back on the efforts to grieve everytime a manager does five minutes of work with a wrench. Ask for tradeoffs that benefit both. Accept higher co-pays in exchange for a track and weight room. Allow wider scheduling flexibility in exchange for penalties for forced overtime. Take a lower base pay for higher incentive pay. If you can convince management that implementing something will give them a good return on their investment, they'll do it. We pay our workers very well with some nice benefits, but we now make them work and do their jobs right. We've seen astounding improvements in production, profitability, quality, customer satisfaction, environmental compliance, and absolutely astronomical improvements in safety. As a result, everyone in the plant is making more money than ever. Perhaps someday the big three will also understand that you have to work with your unions, but you don't have to work for them. |
