General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2215650

    The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

    Locked

    by oz_media ·

    GM has been hitting the media hard with some really brazen marketing campaigns that they are not going out of business but 8 brands was just too much, that they are rebuilding and recreating a ‘smarter GM’ for tomorrow, yada-yada, gee haven’t we heard all their promotional lies before?

    “Reinventing the automobile and our company” ??

    “General Motors expanded its significant battery research and development capabilities today by opening the largest and most technologically advanced battery lab [b]in the United States[/b] on its Technical Center campus in Warren, Michigan. ”

    Since when has the US been known for battery technology at all? Would it take a facility more advanced than a 7-11 store to actually be “the largest and most technologically advanced in the United States”? Not a shot at the US but seriously, since when was battery technology a strength of US manufacturing?

    How about Germany, Japan, Canada? THEY all have massive battery technology development plants. Plants such as Ballard, Better Place are massive and have been developing the most advanced battery technology is MASSIVE plants, often in several countries at once.

    “GM has the most models with 30mpg EPA HWY fuel economy” …based on 2009m “estimates”
    (Of course that includes Saturn, Chevy and Pontiac brands combined).

    “Best warranty in America”
    While they have a LIMITED 100,000km/5yr warranty, the actual base warranty (which is not even close to being comparable to competitors) is 36,000km/3yrs. FAR below the standard others offer.

    It just goes on and on, more garbage from America’s worst vehicle manufacturer to date.

    In the 80’s we saw similar horrors from US manufacturers, GM and Chrysler. We were promised improvement through the 90’s. After Chrysler BARELY keept their heads above water through the 80’s, due to Iacoca’s decision to make K-Cars and Lebarons, Horizon’s and Luxury Dynasty’s from identical parts (just with a bigger tag for their ‘luxury cars’) they managed to stay out of bankruptcy and continue into the 90’s.

    In the 90’s all the 3-5 year econo-boxes that were sold by them in the 80’s fell apart, including thei rluxury models that sold at nearly twice teh price but also used the same parts as econo-boxes.

    Instead of improving vehicle quality, manufacturing quality and safety, as they had previously PROMISED the public, Chrylser went on a marketing campaign with cab forward designs of the Mitsubishi built Intrepid and the clone bodies that again used the same parts, whether an entry level model or top of the line.

    GM stayed alive because of Buick and Cadillac products living on former merits which were selling well in the orient also.

    But seriously, they are trying to show they are a good car manufacturer in TODAY’S competitive industry, while their past shows us just how well they have competed against the same companies in the past.

    Onmi, Horizon, Firefly, need I say more? US manufacturer’s have failed the public and failed themselves time and time again.

    Sure people have built lemons like that before, Ford had the Pinto, Hyundai had the Pony, but they BOTH came back to build some of the best in class. Hyundai’s Genesis has been voted car of the year by countless mags, industry shows, pros etc. It’s a Lexus at sub-Honda pricing. Ford now makes some of the most advanced and evolved compacts on the market, while STILL deominating the truck segment, as they always have, they were unstoppable in he midsize market with the Taurua, while GM was playing with mid sized pigs and Chrysler pushed cab forward marketing games in the 90’s too.

    NOW, we are supposed to believe that this has all changed, GM’s failure to live up to promises or compete in the last 3 decades is to be forgotten, they are now new and improved. But all I hear are empty promises, judging by their restructuring promises, nothing is changing, it’s all just more of the same, smoke and mirrors with no actual substance to support it.

    GM should e left to simply perish, they are not Ford, they are definitely not anything capable of Japanese competition or European cars.

    I always understood capitalism as survival of the fittest, while I despise the practices of companies like WalMart, I still must accept that they are a result of capitalism, mixed with some questionable/unlawful business practices, but they initially got strong due to fair merits and fair business.

    Why is it that GM, can fail, be beaten by FAIR competition time and time again, show that they are simply unable to compete or keep up to a market and then still get bailed out?

    I don’t get it, it’s almost like principles are on a sliding scale for some. One company is justifiably closed due to competition, another in a different marketplace is bailed out to help when fair competition wins their share of the market.

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #2944223

      I’m confused.

      by charliespencer ·

      In reply to The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

      Is this about GM or Chrysler?

      “After BARELY keeping their heads above water through teh 80’s, due to Iacoca’s decision to make K-Cars and Lebarons, Horizon’s and Luxury Dynasty’s from identical parts … In the 90’s all the 3-5 year econo boxes that were sold in the 80’s fell apart, including their sister products from Chrysler’s higher end. … they went on a marketign campaing with cab forward designs of the Intrepid and the clone bodies … They stayed alives because of Buick and Cadillac products living on former merits which were selling well in the orient also. … Onmi, Horizon, Firefly, need I say more?”

      You need to edit your post. By combining the names of multiple GM and Chrysler brands and products, it reads like you think Chrysler and GM are the same company.

      “GM should e left to s]imply perish, they are not Ford, they are not Chevy, …”

      Actually, yes, they ARE Chevy.

      I agree that GM should be allowed to fail if it cannot market a product that appeals to consumers, but your original post is all over the map.

      • #2944215

        You’re right

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to I’m confused.

        Mistitled, I’ll reword it, I was looking at an article form GM last night and was posting about eth GM/chrysler bailouts.

        Back to teh drawing board, when I typed it it made sense, reading it doesn’t.

    • #2944216

      price has always been the biggest factor

      by jdclyde ·

      In reply to The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

      thanks to high union overhead and slow union mentality on the line, I am only surprised they lasted this long.

      I have known many GM employees over the last few decades, and they are far from overworked. Something that all these changes will not address.

      And because it all goes by seniority, it is the oldest and most set in their ways that will be left to man the lines.

      I do not see them coming out of this tail spin.

      And yes, and almost all of my cars have been either Chrysler or Chevy, with ONE mazda in the mix.

      • #2944205

        It started

        by tonythetiger ·

        In reply to price has always been the biggest factor

        back when robots took over some tasks. Less for employees to do but they demanded same pay.

        • #2944201

          Think so?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to It started

          Robots increased quality in manufacturing.

          In every other nation they have increased quality of the finished product and reduced overall costs.

          Once again, it’s not the union per se, but the stipulations of the UAW contracts. Either way, the resulting failure of these companies goes light years beyond the unions that they were built upon.

          If unions were a key issue, GM could have closed their US doors and moved all operations to Japan, as many other companies do to sidle their union obligations.

          They just thought they could do better and were invincible.

        • #2944095

          stipulations in contract, not the union?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Think so?

          The contract is what makes the union.

          When the union will not allow the phasing out of a job to make way for a new job, it is just one more reason that the union is behind a lot of the decline of the US manufacturing power. This goes well beyond UAW.

        • #2944069

          Behind a lot of the decline,

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to stipulations in contract, not the union?

          Fair enough. It is an important factor, especially as far as production speed and standards are concerned.

          Your first comment seemed to pass the whole blame simply to a lazy union mentality due to seniority. While that is a key issue, there’s a lot more to it than just the union, contracts, workers etc.

        • #2944058

          Lots of blame to be shared

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Behind a lot of the decline,

          Becoming extremely top heavy with excessive management was a major issue.

          And no, I don’t believe for a second it has anything to do with making trucks. They made what people bought.

        • #2944031

          Uh

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          I didn’t say it WAS due to making trucks though. That is just some tangent james is running on and I don’t even understand the relevance or why.

        • #2953924

          It was you Oz who brought up trucks

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          And how Ford, according to you was “Dominating the market”. When I show you the stats that prove otherwise, you try to weasel away.

          The manufacturers did make big bucks with trucks, they didn’t have to be made with the same safety engineering as cars and there was less emphasis on mileage as well. But no one put a gun to the buyers head and forced people to buy them. Sure many people need trucks, but I see a lot of trucks that have never ever seen a payload in the back, driven to office buildings.

          James

        • #2953873

          Why are you ttrying to kid, hjames?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          seriously, when you show me the stats? Get bent, you showed NOTHING and I proved it.

          All i did was list some VERY common stats that have been that way for ages, your little small truck rant was completely irrelevant, proved nothing and was a complete waste of effort on your part.

          I mentioned truckks, I did NOT say that the reason for GM’s decline was due to Ford selling more trucks, not at all, not once, not ever.

          Read it again, you are horribly mistaken.

          My complete comment, if yuo had read it properly was that while GM promised change and better qualirty before, they did nothign to provide it. Whereas many other companies, this is where I mentionned Hyundai and Ford, addressed their lemons and followed up with good vehicles. Hyundai has made what is widely regarded as the best mid sized sedan in 2009. ” Ford now makes some of the most advanced and evolved compacts on the market, while STILL deominating the truck segment”

          Ford DOESN’T dominate the truck segment is what yuo are trying to argue. Either way, whereever you want to get your stats and whatever you personally choose to believe is completely irrelevant. FORD made changes and came back, Hyundai made changes and came back as have MANY others over the years, GM is just mroe empty promises.

          Perhaps now you can understand how petty and irrelevant your light truck tirade is? I could have used many other manufacturers as examples, WHO is not imprtant, the fact is that GM has done this before “we promise, we’ll do better’ but they don’t, end of
          story.

          As for “And how Ford, according to you was “Dominating the market”. When I show you the stats that prove otherwise, you try to weasel away.”

          You showed NOTHING, NIL, NADA, SQUAT F-ALL, BuggerBoo! I definitely don’t weasel away, havign known me for a few years now, you should know very well that I don’t weasel away from anything, especially here. I’ll always stand up and be counted.

        • #2953862

          where the buck really stops

          by jck ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          Corporate execs voted to approve all those over-paying contracts.

          The boards voted all the over-compensating executive packages/golden parachutes.

          You can blame all the lazy people (union or not) you want for the demise of a company.

          But in the end, GM was incredibly poorly managed. Its board and executive leadership sat and fed each other huge paychecks for years while the profits were good and spent like they were US congressional members.

          Besides, there is this: just how long does it take to train someone off the street how to bolt a seat into place, place a windshield into the cavity, or start the cars at the end of the assembly line?

          If they would have wanted to eliminate the union and really protect the corporate well-being in the long-term, they would have told the union to go shove it in the 70s/80s and went out and found some of the thousands of unemployed in the Flint/Pontiac area who would have been more than happy to work for $12 an hour instead of $22.

          Executives just didn’t care as long as they got theirs.

          And, that’s the fundamental problem with American business: no real fundamental ethics are in place.

          I say let them all bleed, take back the money the government hasn’t spent, cut every tax payer a $3000 check, and watch them spending that money make the economy grow.

          BAH!!!! I need a drink 😀

        • #2953852

          Oz/James/Trucks

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          This was not in response to you Oz, nor was it in regard to James.

          It was entirely to do with the current trend in the US among liberals to blame the evil SUV (out of their own ignorance/stupidity/dishonesty).

          Was just putting it out there, mKay? 😀

          TheObama keeps trying to blame the crisis for failure to change to micro cars, which is a total lie on his part, but it helps him push his anti-progress agenda against anything that uses petroleum (which is just about everything)

          Yeah, declare war on petroleum and see how much THAT helps him bury the economy as prices soar.

        • #2953847

          Jck

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          It was a clusterphuck from top to bottom.

          I did not cut the execs any slack, nor did I cut the union “workers” any slack. They all were the problem.

          I personally know someone that a few decades ago was part of a ring that would take flatbeds of brand new engines out the door. A few people eventually lost their jobs over it, but most were never caught, the person I knew was one that never got caught (recently passed, ex family member).

          Everyone was on the gravy train….

        • #2953822

          things

          by jck ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]It was a clusterphuck from top to bottom.[/i]

          Yep. Agreed.

          [i]I did not cut the execs any slack, nor did I cut the union “workers” any slack. They all were the problem.[/i]

          But you lay the majority of the blame on “lazy union people” all the time. A) Not all union people are lazy/take advantage of union rules, and B) if everyone in a union was lazy like you imply, none of those cars would have gotten made.

          There are a lot of hard working union people. Just cause you know/have heard of a lot of slackers doesn’t mean everyone is.

          [i]I personally know someone that a few decades ago was part of a ring that would take flatbeds of brand new engines out the door. A few people eventually lost their jobs over it, but most were never caught, the person I knew was one that never got caught (recently passed, ex family member).[/i]

          Sorry they passed…and that they were a criminal.

          I know your pain…my sister is a big thief/scammer. And, I wish she never existed.

          [i]Everyone was on the gravy train….[/i]

          Yeah, and some of them (probably more than you’d admit to) earned their paychecks.

          ———————————————

          [i]It was entirely to do with the current trend in the US among liberals to blame the evil SUV (out of their own ignorance/stupidity/dishonesty).[/i]

          Actually, auto manufacturers got around the mileage mandates from Congress by lobbying the legislation to be written to apply to “passenger vehicles”. Then, SUVs were classified not as passenger vehicles and didn’t have their mileage rolled into the EPA numbers for them.

          Shady dealings? Yep. WTG big business and government.

          [i]TheObama keeps trying to blame the crisis for failure to change to micro cars, …[/i]

          I thought Obama and his administration were blaming poor management and lending practices on the state of things. He’s blaming SUVs now? Wow. News to me. 😉

          [i]…which is a total lie on his part, but it helps him push his anti-progress agenda against anything that uses petroleum (which is just about everything)[/i]

          As opposed to…the progress of the agenda previous to his that allowed:

          1) oil prices to rise skyrocket 100% in 3 years due to unregulated speculative market practices.
          2) uncontrolled spending by a one-sided political system during 3/4 of the time the last president was sitting in office
          3) the quieted, passive (yet still existing) approval of the use of torture we condemn used against our own people and troops, but condone for our own uses
          4) the pressing of unisecular religious beliefs by institutionalized departments from “discretionary funds” to implement personal religious beliefs into governmental function and practice.

          Boy…that’s real progress to be metered against.

          I was always taught there’s nowhere to go but up when you’ve hit bottom.

          Of course, who knows if Obama brought a shovel or a trowl.

          [i]Yeah, declare war on petroleum and see how much THAT helps him bury the economy as prices soar.[/i]

          Kinda funny. Prices are gonna soar anyway this summer, as the United States begins its rollout from Iraq in August that the Bush administration committed us to stand by.

          Just watch. As the unstable Iraq government (who refuses to take responsibility for their own country) takes power and militants and secularists start small engagements all over Iraq, I won’t be surprised if you are gonna see $4+ a gallon by October.

          Declaring war on petroleum won’t be necessary. Having declared war in Iraq 6 years ago was enough to send oil prices through the roof for years in the past and years to come.

          That’s why I’m pondering screwing the banks for $125k. I figure they got their payout of my mortgage in the federal bailout.

          Now it’s time for me to bailout.

          Merry Christmas.

        • #2953673

          Not necessarily lazy…

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]But you lay the majority of the blame on “lazy union people” all the time. A) Not all union people are lazy/take advantage of union rules, and B) if everyone in a union was lazy like you imply, none of those cars would have gotten made.[/i]

          There were just more of them than there was work to keep them busy. In the early 60s, UAW members staged numerous sick-outs and work slowdowns to protest the implementation of robotic assembly line. In theory, tens of thousands could have been let go, but because of union tactics (the above plus some not-so-nice tactics like intimidating management employees and in some cases even threatening their families!) robotics were delayed, and where they were implemented not as many workers were displaced as should have been. Upwards of a third of auto workers had little or nothing to do, and they got used to this, and when they retired, the union again used their threats to make sure the retiring do-nothings were replaced.

          (mis)Management’s part was bad too, don’t get me wrong, but their biggest mistake by far was caving to the union in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. If they hadn’t, there would have been a little pain, spread over decades, instead of a lot in 2008 and 2009; there would be fewer retirees needing supported, and today’s cars would be 25% cheaper and a larger share of the market.

          The robotics, and the UAW’s resistance to them, started the ball rolling, however.

        • #2934834

          UAW/CAW and detachment from reality

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          I don’t think they are necessarily lazy. There were some studies done that showed that the CAW controlled GM plants in Oshawa were actually more productive than the non union Honda and Toyota plants in Ontario. But they also cost a heck of alot more, most in the cost of benefits.

          Over the years the unions have come to demand benefits that added up to between 20 and 30 dollars an hour over and above their already considerable hourly wage. They have benefits like paid tuition for workers kids, spa days etc. The president of my company doesn’t get those benefits.

          They really did delude themselves that they were worth that kind of money. They lived pretty extravagent lifestyles. They spent like crazy.

          James

        • #2934790

          Okay, well I’ve worked for the AW union.

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          I know exactly how SOME portions of the union wor as I have worked with both the AW and the ADA unions in the automotive sector.

          I have also worked for Teamsters and Longshormen’s unions, and there is VERY little difference in them as far as being an employee is concerned.

          In fact nobody really cares about or talks about their respective unions here, as much as I saw from teh US anyway, where it seems to hold more of a proud/prestigious role.

          The key is secure pay, secure position. the rest of it, metings etc. are just crap that you need to attend once in a while to keep them happy.

          the LAZINESS issue is always misunderstood by non0union employees and staff with less senority.

          A new member is like fresh meat, “Great, less wrk for me!”. But it is not a matter of being lazy, it’s a matter of payign your dues. When you are new, you get all teh grunt work, bust your butt and live up to high expectations and constant demands to get on board and earn respect of others.

          It can take years but eventually you see someoen else take over such roles and your job becaomes easier. It’s like the whole High School or College Freshman to Senior routine.

          Union wokers are actually some of the hardest working of all, they need to in order to earn their right and seniority.

          certainly once that seniority has been earned, the responsibilities increase but the hands on labour decreases.

          It’s not unique to Auto workers, nor even unions. As I mentioned it is a simple seniority system, which is found in many private companies, family owned businesses and large corporations also.

          People that have never worked for a union or in a seniority based system, simply have no idea what it is like or WHY people do less as they gain seniority. Those who live it, do and accept that they ocne were overworked and now have others to do that work while they are retained due to knowledge, experience to overcome more challenging tasks etc. They are held with a lot more responsibilty towards lesser experienced members. In reality teh enw guy who busts his butt has little to worry about beyond keepign your head down and just getting your jo bdone.

          Senior members are usually responsile for the new guy’s actions and development, while the physical tasks are reduced.

        • #2934754

          What about cases

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]A new member is like fresh meat, “Great, less wrk for me!”. But it is not a matter of being lazy, it’s a matter of payign your dues. When you are new, you get all teh grunt work, bust your butt and live up to high expectations and constant demands to get on board and earn respect of others.[/i]

          Where the newbie is CLEARLY superior, both in quantity and quality, but can’t advance because of lack of seniority?

          Sorry, I don’t agree with that…

          If I’m creating more profit per unit of time for the company than someone else, regardless of seniority, I should be paid more per unit of time than someone who is creating less, and if the union opposes that, they are opposing ME, and therefore they are by definition not working in MY best interest.

          Now if there’s something that the more experienced person can do that the newbie can’t, by all means promote the more experienced person… but spell that skill out in the job description, don’t just say your promoting him because of experience.

          Just as they shouldn’t discriminate against someone because of a higher age, they shouldn’t discriminate because of a lower one either. Measurable performance and/or ability should be the primary measuring sticks. Using anything else is less than ethical, and if the union were really working for me, they’d fight for that.

        • #2934746

          Sorry, I don’t agree with that…

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          “Sorry, I don’t agree with that…”

          As I said, unless you have worked in or work in such a situation, it seems alien to most/ For those working in it, it makes complete sense. From a business model standpoint? Irrelevant. We are discussing lazy workers not business practices.

          If someone walks in, has less experience or responsibility and works grunt jobs all day, he better NOT be getting paid what I am. If he is, they can lumber him with all my jobs and responsibilities too; I’ll walk, leaving him to make mistakes, slow production, leave issues unresolved as well as all problems on the line.

        • #2934739

          By your own standard, Tony

          by jck ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          I should be making $500,000 a year, since I make software that makes people do their job more productively, eliminates positions not needed and saves money, and automates systems so that tasks can be done without human intervention or error.

          Hell, I should be rich. I want to work for you. When do I start?

        • #2934713

          I am only comparing

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]If someone walks in, has less experience or responsibility and works grunt jobs all day, he better NOT be getting paid what I am. If he is, they can lumber him with all my jobs and responsibilities too; I’ll walk, leaving him to make mistakes, slow production, leave issues unresolved as well as all problems on the line.[/i]

          Apples to apples.

        • #2934710

          Fair enough

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          But you must remember, in a seniority system, anyone with equal position of reposnsibiliy and seniority makes the same money while the grunt learns and gets paid less.

        • #2934704

          Possibly …

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]I should be making $500,000 a year,[/i]

          but I’m not the one you have to convince …

          🙂

        • #2934702

          Of course,

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]But you must remember, in a seniority system, anyone with equal position of reposnsibiliy and seniority makes the same money while the grunt learns and gets paid less. [/i]

          But often, the student learns more than the teacher knows, or he knew more in the first place, and used the entry-level job to get his foot in the door.

        • #2934695

          well then

          by jck ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          I’d really like to know who I can convince, Tony.

          I worked for a company once and brought in millions in R&D money from customers with my concepts, yet I was paid under $40,000 a year.

          Are you saying I was swindled?

          I wish you made the rules. Then I could sue them for back pay and interest and emotional distress. :^0

        • #2933246

          Specific amounts aren’t the point…

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]I worked for a company once and brought in millions in R&D money from customers with my concepts, yet I was paid under $40,000 a year.[/i]

          The point is equal pay for equal results. In your situation, if there were multiple people with the same job duties, and your abilities made the company more money than the others, then yes, you should logically have been paid more than those others (even if all of those others had more seniority).

          The purpose of business is to make a profit, so naturally, they won’t hire you unless they think they’ll make more money off of you than what they pay you. Their job is to get you as cheaply as possible. Yours is to know your own value and negotiate using that information.

          [added: Think of it like you were a player on a baseball team.]

        • #2933019

          But Tony…

          by jck ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          you are the one that said:

          [i]”If I’m creating more profit per unit of time for the company than someone else, regardless of seniority, I should be paid more per unit of time than someone who is creating less, and if the union opposes that, they are opposing ME, and therefore they are by definition not working in MY best interest.[/i]

          Well:

          1) I was non-union
          2) I was one of 3 on the entire project who came up with a concept
          3) Part of my original idea was used as part of a now commercial vulnerability tool
          4) The other part has been implemented in other “sectors”
          5) I received no extra, even tho I came up with the concepts on my own and none of the senior engineering staff, management,or executives contributed in any way to conceptualizing, developing, or implementing the software.

          In essence according to your own standard since I made all that money for my time put in 100% doing it myself, I should have made the bulk of the income from the profits of it.

          So like I said. When can I come to work for your union shop? 😉

        • #2933001

          What should be

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          and what is are often two different things.

          Someone in your situation in a non-union shop might ask for a promotion and might have got it.

          In a union shop, however, management couldn’t promote you over those of the same job classification who were more senior.

          Given the information provided, If you wanted a promotion, you should have asked.

        • #2958008

          Why does there have to be a purpose that meets with your approval?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          Sorry to jump in, but it’s not a matter of TELLING people what is right or wrong, it’s a matter of assuming personal responsibility and not wasting resources.

          Restaurants are non-smoking, but even wher they wre not, I didn’t smoke in restaurants because people are trying to eat and I have respect for other people’s choices as well as my own. Eventually there were enough inconsiderate people smoking in restaurants that it became illegal to do so. I don’t think that’s havign my own rights disrespected or trampled on though. Sometimes you NEEd to enact such laws because some people are just idiots.

          As for castles and mansions, are you now going to equate accepting personal choices to the resulting wealth of a monarchy? I thought you were American and everything you stand for is basedon opposing a monarchy. MOST castles were built not as single family dwellings but as fortresses for entrie villages. Mansions the same, but were more for 100’s of staff to be housed as well as the residents, who were mainly part of a monarchy.

        • #2958003

          Wasting vs Using resources

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          Some could make the point of flying around the world to go on vacation is wasting resources.

          Some say going mud bogging or trail riding with a motor vehicle is wasting resources.

          Some say motorized watercraft use for recreational purposes is wasting resources.

          Some say for the people that complain about that so STFU and go live in a cave.

          Where is the line between waste vs use, and who is going to be the one to make that determination?

          Here in the US, I see TheObama will be trying to make that determination FOR us.

        • #2957994

          Well obviously he needs to then

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          If you feel that flying once ayear for an annual vacation is a waste of resources, it IS but it is not irresponsible waste. Doing it once a month may be over the top though.

          As for off road vehicles, it depends entirely on teh build, I’ve seen high performance buiggies that burn less fuel than a mid sized sedan. They usually burn cleaner too. Motorbikes? 2 or 4 stroke? makes a difference too.

          The point is personal responsiility, you can drive to the store or you can walk to the store. Someoen being concerned about their carbon footprint would walk, within reason.

          Someone smoking in a restaurant is disrespectful of others, so does that mean asking them NOT to smoke is infringing on their personal liberties?

          If someone doesn’t want to accept responsibility for their actions, they instantly jump on teh individual liberties bandwagon. ‘I can be a pig because you’ve got no right to tell me not to be.’

          Yeah, that’s how countries like America become so divided, half give a crap about others, half care about themselves, end of.

        • #2957986

          So if someone only KIND of wastes a little?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          What if someone else said it is only reasonable to fly around the world once ever 5 years?

          It is a safe bet that you have already clocked more air miles than I will in my entire life time, and you are not even American…. 😀

          I will be driving to KY from Mid Michigan next week, and do not consider the expenditure of petroleum to be a waste. Still hope James makes sure his tires are properly inflated before the trip, following TheObama method for lowering your fuel costs…..

        • #2957936

          problem is

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]Sorry to jump in, but it’s not a matter of TELLING people what is right or wrong, it’s a matter of assuming personal responsibility and not wasting resources.[/i]

          Some people think it’s necessary to define “wasting” for what someone else does with THEIR resources.

          Now in the case of taxpayer provided resources, yes, the public has the right to determine what isn’t and isn’t wasteful…

          [i]Restaurants are non-smoking, but even wher they wre not, I didn’t smoke in restaurants because people are trying to eat and I have respect for other people’s choices as well as my own.[/i]

          Me too.

          [i]Eventually there were enough inconsiderate people smoking in restaurants that it became illegal to do so.[/i]

          In my opinion the wrong track… Do I have the right to smoke anywhere I want? Of course not. If I am on someone else’s property, I should either agree to the owner’s conditions, or leave! The owner is capable of deciding whether allowing smoking is good or bad for HIS business, the customers are capable of determine whether or not they want to stay in that particular environment, and the employees are not chained up slaves… they are capable of deciding whether or not they want to work in that particular environment.

          If hickory smoke makes me ill, should I be allowed to go into a rib joint (as either a customer or an employee) and demand that they stop using it? Of course not… I should simply patronize a different establishment!

        • #2957934

          Change your thought process

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          Its NOT a matter of what is allowable by anyone, it is not up to OTHERS.

          It is up to YOU. Personal responsiblity.

          Funny, but people KNOW they are wasting a trip, or buying a vehicle that is more than they ever need. They do it anyway an dprepare a defensive justification. WHY? THEY knew it was rresponsible and not needed, they just wanted it.

          What’s wrong with buying what you want? Nothing, but as society moves towards personal responsibility, there will always be those who feel that they don’t need to be responsible and if they were supopsed ot be the government would enact a law. Exactly what they oppose to begin with, and just coming up with excuses for doing as you please and not caring about those around you.

          So WHo should make these deicions? Everyone should make them themselves, BUT as that is not a reality, some people decide to become IRRESPONSIBLE and don’t give a crap what anyone else thinks about it (by saying WHO are you to decide what I should do?)then we get no further ahead and people wind up being pushed and urged to live up to societies expectations.

          You live in a city and have neighbours and those around you all day, it is not YOUR city it is EVERYONE’S city. Have some repect and make small concessions that dont’ really infring upon you but offer some respect for those around you.

          Personal responsibility, something many Americans juts can’t seem to get their heads around. Why should I? Because it is courteous to others. Who cares? Nobody, noe get back under that rock.

        • #2957930

          My god, you lot are SO f’kin clueless!

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          Why should I? I don’t HAVE to do that because you said so.

          No, but you didn’t take personal responsility on yourself so now others are telling you to get with the program.

          Who cares what they think?
          Nobody, you can be a shut-in hermit all you like. you don’t have to become a valued memer of society afterall. You can always be deemed that old, loser, hermit in the corner house until you die and they plow it down for someone more ‘with it’ to move in.

          Its not a matter of who decides what, it’s not a matter of who can tell you to live a certain way, its a matter of making decisions that you KNOW are more resourceful/responsible and less gluttonous, as you rely on the rest of the world for all your resources which you consume like a fat kid in a candy shop.

          THAT’S why America will always be left behind, why America will always be scoffed at as the idiots who simply don’t know any better, how America will always be seen as the slower cousin to the rest of the world. Repsct is earned not granted to you by your Constitution or wallet.

          Some people are just so frickin pig headed and ignorant in their stand to protect their Constitutional rights that they ignore their neighbours and the rest of society who wants to stop living in a sh*thole of a city and make it a better place for everyone to live in tomorrow too.

          Ever think that is’s not all about YOU either? If you don’t give a crap what your neighbours and townsfolk think, then go find a cave in the middle of nowhere and be a loner for real.

          Don’t pretend to care about people you are surrounded by and yet your actions prove you don’t give a toss aout anyone but yourself at the same time.

        • #2957728

          Another problem

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]So WHo should make these deicions? Everyone should make them themselves, BUT as that is not a reality, some people decide to become IRRESPONSIBLE and don’t give a crap what anyone else thinks about it (by saying WHO are you to decide what I should do?)[/i]

          So how do you determine what one need or doesn’t need? Is it OK to follow someone in a truck around to see if they’re picking up cargo, or someone in a van to make sure they’re picking up a bunch of kids… (and are you wasting fuel in doing this?) or peer into their windows to find out if their TV or bed is too big, or they have something you think they don’t need?

          And then what? Do you run to the “Excess Police”, who then run out and investigate them, and make them prove that they need it or face stiff fines or jail time?

          Are you listening to yourself? Do you REALLY think you have that right? The right to obliterate someone’s privacy and control their liberty? What ARE you smoking, really?

          BTW, you do realize, don’t you, that people who spend the money they earned on all of this “excess” are providing the means for others to have jobs and feed their families? But I guess if the Excess Police say I can’t have it, I guess they’ll have to starve. Or are you planning on stealing my earnings anyway and giving it to them?

          If so, you’d better put on some body armor first!

        • #2956503

          Tony

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          Yuo just quoted teh comment I made and then asked a question taht was EXACTLY what my comment was about. How can you quote something and then ask a question that the quote explains?

          THAT’S what I mean by pathetic comprehension skills.

          Its like someone saying ” YOu shouldn’t cross the street at night without reflective clothing on, becase you may get hit.”

          Then you say:

          [i]” You shouldn’t cross the street at night without reflective clothing on, becase you may get hit.”[/i]

          Yeah but what about if you cross the street without reflective clothing on at night?
          ______________________________________
          “So how do you determine what one need or doesn’t need?”

          That is up to the person buying items to be responsible enogh to buy what they need, use it for what they need it for and not be wasteful.

          YOU don’t need legislation if people assume personal responsibility. I KNOW I don’t need an Escalade to get to work and go see clients. I DO need something with a medium payload capacity and some room for product though. Noody had to tell me or force me to buy something, what I pown has practical purposes, I even sold off a Jag I never drove, a Honda I rarely drove and Buick that was sitting in the yard.

          Teh store is a 10 min walk from my front door, I USUALLY walk if I go in teh evenings, but if it is really late and i have forgotten milk I need in tha AA, I’ll drive. THAT is being personally responsible too.

          Nobody has to force me to recycle and reuse, I do it when I can.

          Nobody has forced me to use less electricity, I grew up turnign off lights when I leave a room, putting on a sweater or long sleeve when its a bit cooler etc. It’s not some horrifc invasion of Constututional rights and liberties, its personal responsibility. Nobody HAD to tell me because I assumed it myself.

          Those who DON’T accept personal responsibility should be urged to do so, it’s called beign a controbuting and value dmember of society. Not just someone in it for themself at everyone else’s expense.

          HOW is this such a hard concept for you to grasp? Have you never had to be responsible for your actions before?

        • #2956447

          getting a promotion in a non-union shop

          by jck ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          When I worked at the corp I made all the money for, I walked in with tons of experience and under the belief (which was really a delusion, because what they said and what they did were two different things) that I would be promoted after the first year to Engineer II because of all the experience I came on board with.

          After not getting the raises promised, the promotions I was told would be forthcoming, and being lied to about being given “flex” time for all the 60-80 hour weeks I worked catching a project up after the management screwed the schedule, I left.

          So, non-union will lack in promotional/compensatory means too. But, moreso out of greed rather than policy or practice.

        • #2956393

          Contracts

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          I assume you were younger or unaware, as I don’t think you’d do that again.

          Any promises, deals, gurantees or potential advancement comments must be on paper, if not you may as well tell me we get ot fly to the North Pole and meet the real Santa each winter. I am still not going to work for you though.

        • #2958121

          Oz, this entire thread seems to be summarized by your words

          by nicknielsen ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          [i]…when I typed it it made sense, reading it doesn’t.[/i]

          The only way your posts make sense to me is through the filter of rabid, arrogant anti-Americanism.

          Clicks “Ignore”

        • #2958098

          Contract/union/non-union/ advancement

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          So jck, you made the mistake of working off of verbal agreements in business and got burnt. That doesn’t mean everyone is taken advantage of in such a situation.

          So, in your mind it is better to know you will NOT advance because of union rules than take a chance with your own skills and negotiation skills? To each their own.

          When given the choice, I will go the non-union route ever time because i know my skills and work ethic will help me to advance instead of stagnate and punch a clock.

        • #2958067

          It seemed, Oz

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          that you were advocating that the government should step in when someone is too wasteful, and that is what I was responding to.

          In another message you said

          [i]If someone doesn’t want to accept responsibility for their actions, they instantly jump on teh individual liberties bandwagon. ‘I can be a pig because you’ve got no right to tell me not to be.'[/i]

          Most of them DID take the responsibility… by EARNING the “perks” that they enjoy.

          Like it or not, the rule of the jungle is universal… you cannot escape it, no matter what kind of “ism” you live under. The strong and smart will always have more than the weak and stupid… whether that’s money in a capitalist society… or political power in a socialist one. And the funny thing is, the same people would find a way to thrive in either of those settings, or any other. The cream always rises to the top.

        • #2958066

          nick

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Lots of blame to be shared

          ‘click’…however you still read and posted.

          bored?

      • #2944203

        Only because of the American consumer

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to price has always been the biggest factor

        The American consumer saw the subcompacts of the late 70’s and early 80’s and laughed, gas was also cheaper than water.

        By the time we hit the mid 80’s consumers were starting to believe in subcompacts but nto Japanese pricing.
        Why buy a Civic or Tercel when you could buy a full sized Buick with a V8 for the same money? Size and power means better, doesn’t it?

        By the time the Us manufacturers’ jumpe don board, they had no choice but to copy the subcompact but do it for less money. Anyone interested in such cars wanted to pay less for them and were trained to think they SHOULD cost less because they were smaller.

        The US manufacturer’s made such a mess of the compact segment that it turned into an ‘entry level’ segment and thus was constantly a matter of price war.

        Cheap price = cheap car.
        Cheap car = no revenue
        No revenue = building even cheaper cars
        Continued low revenue = cheap mid sized cars and eventually full sized cars.

        They just couldn’t compete with a compact Japanese and European market that was built on providing high-quality engineering, excellent fit and finish, quality and craftsmanship at a premium price.

        the result is pumping out cheap crap to try and stay alive while hoping your full sized market keeps you alive. It was a horrific business model.

        Ford was saved in teh mid 80’s, despite teh Pinto woes (which are NOTHING like most people think they were) the Explorer turned out to be the top selling vehicle bar none. Built on their Ranger truck platfom and tweaked with 3 finish groups (XLS, Eddie Bauer and LImited) they took off and help strong. Ford’s truck reputation les them into the 90’s and kept them alive, with the release of the Taurus, there was no looking back. (Bias? Yes I am a certified Ford tech, but that’s besides the point, i don’t work for Ford). Facts are facts and Ford simply left Chrysler and GM in the dust.

        Today, there are FAR better Ford’s available in Europe than in North America. The European market understands paying a premium for quality and engineering efficiency, thanks to Germany. The Japanese understand that mass manufacturing and speed does not have to mean sacrificing quality.

        IN North America all we see is the bottom line, TOO MUCH MONEY FOR A 4 CYLINDER!!

        They don’t sell well here, they aren’t built well here and they dont’ do well here.

        If GM was a European manufacturer, they jutsmight have had a chance. But as long as they just lie to consumers and produce garbage, he mighty buck will see their demise, and well it should.

        Unions? Yes that’s part of it, but a very small part, it is only that way due to a poor business model and lack of focus. Being ‘unionized’ isn’t the issue, union contracts are an issue and the way they are aplied in the automotive workers union is a major issue. The manufacturer’s focusedon capital gains, which is a proven success model for US corporations, but these are companies competing and failing in a global market, not just the US.

        • #2953830

          IF larger vehicles are still selling well

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Only because of the American consumer

          then continuing to make full sized trucks is not the problem, despite the sniveling from the econuts.

          Would it be nice to have more options? Of course.

          Another problem is the over regulation by the US government that causes extra weight because they focus on survival of a crash instead of the European focus of AVOID the crash. The same reason we can not have a bullet train here in the US.

          Get government the phuck out of the car business completely. That includes bailouts. If a company goes out of business, it will just serve to make the rest of them shape up.

          “Ford. Built WITHOUT your money”. B-)

        • #2953825

          Why do large vehicles sell well?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to IF larger vehicles are still selling well

          Because North American consumrs have had little to nothing of value to choose from in a compact market for decades now and the only hope of any value for money is in a mid to full size vehicle.

          They are scared to buy a compact car, and judging by our compacts compared to compacts around teh world, they are justified fears in many cases.

          In other nations, where fuel costs have been an issue and pollutants have been an issue for many decades, small cars are high quality and accepted widely.

          Try driving an F-250 around Germany fo rth eday and see how much fun it is. Try driving one in the UK and find your tires slahed and paint scratched for having the audacity to drive it to begin with.

          WE on the other hand, have this backward mentality tha bigger is better, it it more powerful and mighty. Which is of course horse crap considering there are 4-cylinder econo cars that outrun our current muscle.

        • #2953814

          broad brush there

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Why do large vehicles sell well?

          Ever try taking four people and four sets of golf clubs anywhere in a compact car? Doesn’t work well.

          Ever taken a week long road trip with a family of four, with each kid bringing along a friend, in a compact car?

          There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in the reality that is North America.

          No, I don’t buy based upon muscle, and most people I know don’t either. Size based upon need/want.

          Now that my shoulder won’t allow me to swing a golf club anymore and the family is going their own way more, I can get a smaller car to fit my life, but 10 years ago it was not an option.

          We hear about the soccer mom with the SUV, and I often see them packed because of car pooling. dang evil suv’s…..

          Question, how far will the 4 cylinders of Europe keep running? I know my last few cars, I kept driving well past 250k, and the current one is at 215k. At least my work week is only 150 miles instead of 700 now.

        • #2953794

          There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to broad brush there

          Your examples are great examples for the need for a minivan or compact SUV/crossover, but not a pickup, Expedition, Hummer, Sequoia, Yukon or Armada.

          Golf was originated in Scotland, I wonder how THEY do it without a large people mover?

          You comments also include a particular market segment, perhaps you should note who is driving these vehicles and how many do so out of necessity.

          THe reality that is North America? What different reality do we have that justifies us driving vehicles that are more than we need? of course a reality that doesn’ texist elsewhere where they do not drive such large vehicles.

          YOu talk about how recently yuo don’t need a car but 10 years ago it was a different optin. So what about the last 10 years? You are just realizing you don’t need a big vehicle now?

          Soccer mom wuith the SUV, again a compact SUV or minivan is actually just as good with mileage as most newer cars, or very close to it and justified by need of course.

          4-cylinder in Europe? They last ages and are priced accordingly. 250K? Pretty much anything well engineered will do that. A North American 4-cyl these days, I wouldn’t bank on, the rest of the car will fall apart first.

          I have had a Pinto with 743,000kms on it and it ran fine when sold to an auto student. I also had a civic (’81) with over a half million kms on it, ran fine but I scrapped it for yard room when I lived in Port Hardy.
          My mother drives a 4cyl Ford, with 173kms on it, and it runs as new (but she’s pretty meticulous with her stuff).

          250K miles? It’s not a stretch if peopl take care of their vehicles properly. I’m not suggesting a dealer visit once a month but just preventative ,maintenance and proper driving technique, will make a car last ages, again if it is properly cared for.

          I have a European 1997 V6 in my SUV, 286K kms and it gets 22MPG (brand new was rated at 20mpg) and runs like a top. Sails through air care, plenty of go, plenty of life left. I was talking the other day with a guy who thinks it’ll be a million miler the way I keep it. The equivalent motor made by Ford in Canada or US these days, averages 80,000kms before a complete reuild.

          People can bash Europe for many things but engineering superiority and manufacturing standards are not arguable. Only a fool would think we can’t keep up with them.

        • #2953737

          Um, Oz?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          I clearly said my life situation changed over the last 10 years, changing what my vehicle NEEDS are.

          And I didn’t bash Europe, just asked a question that I didn’t know the answer of.

          And no, not everyone NEEDS the vehicle they have.

          The same can be said for European sports cars, do you NEED to be able to go +160mph? Do you NEED to go zero to 60 in X seconds?

          Do people NEED blahblahblah.

          Always get sick of when people pick and choose what OTHERS “need” or don’t. Like many other things, when you start bitchen about your neighbors lawn, he will bitch back about your garage or whatever.

        • #2953731

          Okay you run with that then

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          If you are happy with tha for a reply, you go for it.

          When you decide to figrue out what I had said, why you piped in and why you got the reply you did, then you may have a worthy comment.

        • #2934853

          it’s just this simple

          by jck ·

          In reply to There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          Most Americans have a taught feeling of entitlement because they’re “American” and from the “land of milk and honey” and the “land of opportunity”.

          It seems the American psyche has shifted. It used to be a community-minded mentality from the settlement of places like Plymouth, MA and Jamestown, VA where people cooperated and did their part because it was what was best for them AND their community.

          Now, most Americans have the mentality of “if I earn the paycheck, I can spend it on whatever I want that’s not illegal”.

          Of course, this leads (mainly because of lack of giving a $hit) to overindulgences and the like.

          Hell, I know. I do my share of spending what I shouldn’t.

          But when it came to buying a house, I didn’t go get a 4 bedroom “just because I can”. And when I went to buy a car, I didn’t get a Porsche “just because I can”.

          And jd: anyone with any sense of doing right by themselves and the people around them (not just their own family btw)…will never have to hear from their neighbors about “cleaning up their yard”.

          Europe has been doing a lot of things better for decades, and I’m not just talking about beer. 😉

        • #2934841

          jck, how is working for nice things a bad thing?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          If you work hard and are wise with your money, their is nothing wrong with having a nice house and/or car.

          Mind you, getting over extended, declaring bankruptcy, and then starting all over again is NOT being responsible, nor earning what you have.

          I just can not understand where you are coming from. I would not look down upon you or anyone for buying a Porsche, even if someone of your stature would probably look silly in one…. 😀 [i](mental image of HighTower pulling Mahonys front seat out of the car and sitting in the back seat for the driving practice)[/i]

          People in Europe don’t have nice houses? Where do you think the idea of mansions and castles COMES from? :0

          How about the protectionist policies making it difficult for you to migrate to Ireland? Anyone that supports that idea in the US has weakminded fools try to portray them as racist.

          Careful about looking at the grass on the other side of the fence….. Everyone has their pros and cons. Some are just better at hiding the cons because they don’t have the scavengers that pass for media in the US.

        • #2934808

          it’s not about working for [b]nice[/b]

          by jck ·

          In reply to There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          [i] If you work hard and are wise with your money, their is nothing wrong with having a nice house and/or car.[/i]

          There is a difference between nice and excessive.

          I can build a 2 bedroom house with a 9 car garage and 9 hole golf course on the property.

          Is that just nice, or excessive?

          [i] Mind you, getting over extended, declaring bankruptcy, and then starting all over again is NOT being responsible, nor earning what you have.[/i]

          Actually, holding a job and paying your bills is earning what you have.

          Although, you can’t always control holding a job. We both know that all too well.

          [i] I just can not understand where you are coming from. I would not look down upon you or anyone for buying a Porsche, even if someone of your stature would probably look silly in one…. grin (mental image of HighTower pulling Mahonys front seat out of the car and sitting in the back seat for the driving practice)[/i]

          Exactly. Me driving a Porsche (basically because I would need to rip out the front seat to drive one) is just as silly as a retired couple in their 80s driving around a Cadillac Escalade. Other than just having it “because you can”, what is the purpose?

          Understand now? There is none, other than shallow vapidness.

          [i] People in Europe don’t have nice houses? Where do you think the idea of mansions and castles COMES from? shocked[/i]

          Trust me. I stayed with a half dozen friends in Europe. Most homes are what they call “attached” which means…to Americans…they are condos or townhouses.

          Only 2 of my friends (who lived in rural Ireland and rural England) had homes that weren’t attached to another person’s home. The rest lived in “council houses”.

          Are they nice? I guess, for some of them being 100+ years old. Well, my friends in Holland have a very nice one. But they take meticulous care of theirs (painting every year, new flooring every year, etc).

          BTW, Castles quite often were NOT the home to one family. People having castles also had servants, concubines, and even live-in nobles from allied regions who lived with them. So to compare a European castle concept to a modern single-family dwelling situation is unequal.

          And, castles were not owned by everyone. They were usually built by a noble.

          [i] How about the protectionist policies making it difficult for you to migrate to Ireland? Anyone that supports that idea in the US has weakminded fools try to portray them as racist.[/i]

          The EEC isn’t restricting me based on race. They are restricting me on nationality.

          And, I’ve not heard that the USA is portrayed as racist for the immigration policies in recent years. If anything, the USA is often portrayed as an easy place to get into…especially if you’re willing to break the law to do so.

          [i] Careful about looking at the grass on the other side of the fence….. Everyone has their pros and cons. Some are just better at hiding the cons because they don’t have the scavengers that pass for media in the US.[/i]

          Yeah, but take it from me.

          Standard work leave in the USA: 80 vac/80 sick 1st year, or 132 PTO usually, plus 8-9 holidays.

          Standard for my friends who live in Holland:
          80 hours vac plus unlimited sick leave plus 13 national holidays plus a 2 week leave time for a “summer break” (that’s how they explained it to me.)

          My friend in Germany got about the same too to start.

          So just to think. If I had to be out of commission and in a hospital any longer, I either would have had to cash in accts to pay my bills or probably lost my house.

          In Holland, I would never had to worry.

          So, see what I mean? Can you say that situation is worse?

          Maybe the grass is greener there, and just the propaganda we’re all raised on here in the USA isn’t really the truth you’ve been brought up to think it is?

        • #2934787

          Sidear on scavenger media

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          The SCAVENGER media in the UK is as bad if not worse than that in the USA. The lie spinners are everywhere, the tabloids and TV “news” shows are no different.

          You just don’t see as much fo it because you are sitting behind the veil of US media who ensures that you only get the information THEY want to feed you about the rest of the world. havign lived in eth US and UK, I have seen both sides of teh fence, it is VERY similar from a media perspective.

        • #2933143

          There sure is!

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          There is a difference between nice and excessive.

          “Nice” is what you want. “Excessive” is what you think the other guy shouldn’t have. Who has the right to determine that for another? (Unless they’re stealing from you to get it.)

          [i]Other than just having it “because you can”, what is the purpose?[/i]

          Why does there have to be a purpose that meets with your approval?

          [i]And, castles were not owned by everyone. They were usually built by a noble.[/i]

          And “How dare he?”, right?

        • #2956425

          oh yes, tony

          by jck ·

          In reply to There are a lot of reasons that the compact does not/will not ever work in

          How dare a noble:

          House people
          Give them employment
          Provide an army

          Yep, so unneeded that someone wealthy under the rule of a monarch take care of those within their duchy.

          He should just make all those individuals build their own armies, sell their own foods, etc.

          Again, the noble did for others as well as themself.

          Maybe we Americans need to look to others for examples, rather than assuming our self-indulgent lifestyle is the pinnacle of human achievement.

          BTW, I don’t own a castle, wouldn’t own a car if I could walk to work, and wouldn’t buy a $4500 guitar for $2000 if they made $200 guitars that sounded as good.

          Anyways, I guess you will never agree that little old couples shouldn’t be driving Escalades that aren’t needed to just go to Denny’s and the grocery store, and that they run over peoples’ lawns with because they can’t control them.

          And, you can never convince me that someone who lavishes themselves with inordinately unnecessary things should be the norm in our country.

          A little humility and reason in this country used to be the standard.

          Now, it’s just history.

        • #2953809

          *raises hand* OOOOH! CAN I ANSWER THIS QUESTION, Professor Oz?

          by jck ·

          In reply to Why do large vehicles sell well?

          Is it because, lots of American car buyers are less worried about the environment and depletion of natural resources, and more worried about impressing their neighbor and having what’s “cool” or the “in thing” and willing to do just about anything (including go into debt up to their eyeballs) to indulge a self-interest in their ego and narcissism??

          Thanks. :^0

        • #2953808

          That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          by slayer_ ·

          In reply to *raises hand* OOOOH! CAN I ANSWER THIS QUESTION, Professor Oz?

          I saw it all the time in the lawn mower sales, guy wanting a 64inch deck to cut 1 acre. It is no supprise when he comes back with it later claiming it does a terriable job, leaves clumps of grass, and can’t go around trees. No shit you idiot.

          People have very odd expectations of things. Horsepower is also bad, everyone wants the most horsepower. Both sleds, quads, tractors, all the same thing, wanting more horsepower, then not understanding why it wears out so fast.

          Why oh Why do we need 9 horse power handmowers. the 21inch deck needs 9hp now????

          2 years earilier I bought a 5.5 Honda engine Mower, 21 inch, I have yet to run out of power with it, I have cut 6 foot tall grass with it and mulched it. WHY could you possibly need 9 horse power????

          Even better, the manufactuer actually got sued once because the mower advertised 5.5HP but only actually produced 5.3. So they now no longer display the power, just the displacement.

          The world is fked, end of story.

        • #2953805

          agreed

          by jck ·

          In reply to That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          my lawnmower is 4.5hp and 22″ cut, and i push it. the only reason it is 4.5hp is because they didn’t have a 3.5 like i bought last time about 7 years before.

          like Oz said somewhere…lots of people think bigger (or more) is better.

          really sad. i agree. the world is phooked.

        • #2953804

          Not to mention the extra fuel consumption

          by slayer_ ·

          In reply to That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          Frankly I am amazed my 5.5 mower will cut my grass for the year on 4 dollars in fuel :). I wonder what those new 9HP ones get for fuel economy.

        • #2953803

          not too sure

          by jck ·

          In reply to That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          but God…one of the riding mowers i looked at one day was 9hp.

          a push mower that is 9hp?????

          that’s just silly…unless it makes your margaritas for you while you mow :^0

        • #2953787

          Same with electronics

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          I know its quite a stretch out of line but it is teh same mentality.

          I STILL get people asking about amps they have been looking at that are 100’s of watts, it’s complete garbage.

          When you consider that I can put a 1973 20WPC amp up against today’s 100W sony/pioneer etc. and have it be louder and better sounding, how imporant is wattage?

          When you buy a 100W amp and have it on at a normal, comfortable listening level you are LUCKY to be pumping our 5-10 watts. You aren’t listening to 100W. To get a 3 decibel gain, you pretty much need to DOUBLE the output wattage. If you get 80dB at 50Watts you need 100Watts to push 83dB.

          the point is though, nobody ever considers AMP class, current etc. Just that favorite wattage spec. Wattage that doesn’t MOVE (amperage/current)is useless.

          Horsepower that doesn’t reach the road is also useless. When you consider how cheaply built our cars are, with thin, tin heat shields to dissipate heat away from the motor, it’s no wonder people need/want more and more horse power.

          An identical motor engineered by European standards will have better efficiency, reducing teh need for such heat shields as they are wasting less fuel energy as heat and delivering more to the road.

          A 16′ Zodiac needs about 7hp to plane properly, yet people always want a 25 horse motor as that is the top capacity and MUST be faster, but not necessarily.

          It all boils down to marketing and people actually believing the BS they are fed.

        • #2953782

          yeppers

          by jck ·

          In reply to That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          It’s just people either being ignorant or obtuse, for the most part.

          And I know what you mean about tuners. I still have a Panasonic tube amp/tuner somewhere that kicks butt.

          Oh well…maybe some day i can find a way to exploit ignorant people and sell them more than they need. :^0

        • #2953770

          Check THIS out

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          Warning: you might not be able to get up for a little while without an embarassing tent in your pants.

          http://www.iavscanada.com/0903%20Inventorypics/0903-3281/0903-3281_master.htm

          20WPC and I’d throw it up against the top of the line 1000W amp of today any time.

        • #2934868

          rut roh

          by jck ·

          In reply to That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          I will look at it from home.

          The mention of making a tent in my pants leads me to believe I need to refrain from viewing it, in case the department secretary calls me out for some advice. :^0

        • #2934783

          Nothing that can’t be veiwed form the office

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to That’s gotta be it, or people are idiots…

          There is nobody IN the picture, just one hell of a beauty amp; sexy, sleek and simply divine!

          I drool over it daily, I often check with IAVS for vintage gear (like my HK receiver), have picked up some great deals from them too, used to be a client of ours at one time before their business model changed.

        • #2953792

          Wow

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to *raises hand* OOOOH! CAN I ANSWER THIS QUESTION, Professor Oz?

          Better than I could have done

        • #2953785

          I think part of it is

          by jck ·

          In reply to Wow

          Americans of this and future generations are spoiled rotten.

          I’m glad I was raised around people like my father who grew up in a 2 room house, my mother who was born in a house with dirt floors and was made to butcher chickens and wash other peoples’ clothes for money, and my uncle who was a decorated survivor of the attack on the Arizona at Pearl Harbor who always taught me to not only have dreams but to go after them with as much passion as you have about them.

          Nowadays, most people here are only interested in self but they will sure wave the flag and act like their interest are in community and country.

          It’s sad. I bet most people here would throw a hissy if they couldn’t choose what night they eat beef on. They wouldn’t know how to deal with the stresses of a Great Depression and a real war.

          What is worse: the American-based companies are, rather than finding ways to help make it better, exploiting the situation for all the profits they can make of it…and often right under the nose of the government who is supposed to make sure they aren’t being the “fox raiding the henhouse”.

          Sad, I tell ya.

        • #2953775

          One of the things I notice

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to *raises hand* OOOOH! CAN I ANSWER THIS QUESTION, Professor Oz?

          Is how cars and trucks are getting so much bigger over the years.

          The new Honda Civic is bigger than a 20 year old accord. The Toyota Tacoma used to be a small truck, then a mid size, now its pretty darn close to what a full size used to be – same with the Dodge Dakota, Nissan Frontier etc. Ask yourself why….

          James

        • #2953768

          ?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to One of the things I notice

          Trucks are all the same, anything larger than a Tacoma is a commercial truck that must be sought out through a commercial dealer. What do you mean, small truck, mid sized and full sized?

          HOGWASH! I tell you, HOG….WASH!

        • #2934846

          Ok mister smartypants

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to One of the things I notice

          First generation Tacoma (2wd regular cab):
          Length 174 inches
          Wheelbase 103 inches
          Width 66 inches
          Weight 3155lbs

          Second Generation Tacoma (2WD regular cab)
          length 190 inches
          wheeelbase 110 inches
          width 74.6 inches
          weight 3550 lbs

          It was classed as a compact pickup in the first generation, and a mid size in the second. 16 inches longer, 8.5 inches wider, 400 lbs heavier, 7 inches longer wheelbase. If you are an automotive engineer, as you have previous claimed, you will note that its a huge change in just one generation.

          I could do the same thing with the Dakota, its wheelbase went from 111 inches in the shortest version to 131. 20 inches of wheelbase, pretty big change.

          But hey what would I know, I’m not a master mechanic or automotive engineer.

          And before you say I’m nitpicking you are the one who argued against what I was saying – you brought it up not me. My point still stands, same model vehicles are getting bigger all the time.

          James

        • #2934781

          LOL you just don’t see it do you?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to One of the things I notice

          I think you REALLY don’t see it. I initially thought you were joking but you are actually serious, I think.

          YOU gave me this big spiel that anything beyond a light truck was a commercial truck. Which is horsecrap.

          [i]”In manufacturers terms ALL pickups are light trucks – Medium/heavy trucks are not sold in car dealerships.”[/i]

          Wiki facts:
          “The compact pickup (or simply “pickup”, without qualifier) is the most widespread form of pickup truck worldwide. It is built like a mini version of a two-axle heavy truck, with a frame providing structure, a conventional cab, a leaf spring suspension on the rear wheels and a small I4,I5, I6 or V6 engine, generally using gasoline.”

          “Full-size pickups in North America are sold in four size ranges – ? Ton, ? Ton, 1 Ton, and now 1 1/2 ton. These size ranges originally indicated the maximum payload of the vehicle, however modern pickups can typically carry far more than that.”

          As you just noted yourself, payload capacities and bed sizes grow all the time, just as they have done for full sized trucks, which you wrongly claim only includes commercial vehicles.

          I’m not doing this all day again today.
          If you cant’ read and keep up with comments in a common English language, don’t bother with me, I simply don’t have the interest for your two-faced BS anymore.

        • #2934766

          No Oz, you refuse to meet with reality

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to One of the things I notice

          I personally did not define what a Light Truck is. I don’t have that kind of power, and I’m pretty sure it happened well before me.

          The US Department of Transport defined what a Light truck is. And they defined it as anything with a GWVR of 10,000 pounds or less which includes the most popular “full size” pickups, the F150/F250, Sierra/Silverado 1500/2500 etc. I’ve seen other descriptions that describe “light duty” as up to Class 3, but lets go with the Governments rating.

          I’m not the only one who uses this rating and neither is the government. Clealy by the sales numbers they publish the rest of the industry does as well. The pages for the WSJ, Automotive News etc all show remarkable consistency.

          Anyway the point of that post I made was nothing to do with “Light” truck classification, it was about the size of a mid size truck growing to near full size truck proportions, and cars growing as well. Do you deny that? Or do you want to yammer on about what you think a light truck is, which I presume is what most people call a compact or Mid size (which are in the Light Truck catagory along with the low end of Full size trucks).

          Edited for spelling.

          James

        • #2934750

          So you haven’t made up your mind yet?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to One of the things I notice

          If yuo read your initisal comments, you were defending that MANUFACTURER’S consider all trucks light trucks. Now you are saying that it is a regulating body, which rates vehilces for safety and insurance standards.

          Whatever James, oyu are all over the place just itching to make SOMETHING you say ring true, in any way you can muster, but you are a lost cause. You should really read your own comments before contradicting yuorself.

          Like I said, don’t bother, I don’t care, you’ve lost your credibility on the subbject with me, you have made it VERY clear that you will simply argue any commenst I make just for the sake of argument, even if taken far off track.

          Bugger off, get a life.

        • #2933291

          I will admit that the line is fuzzy at times

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to One of the things I notice

          US DOT says Light Truck are up to 10,000 lbs GVWR.

          GMC on their website has all of their picks and Vans in their “Light Duty” Catagory, including some that others would consider Medium (TopKick GVWR of 17,500 lbs is listed as a light duty truck)
          http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/fuel.html

          Chevrolet’s website is similar, they list light duty as up to the Topkick’s equivalent, the Kodiak twith a GVWR of 16,500.

          National Highway Traffic Safety Administration considers Light Trucks to be 10,000 lbs GVWR and under, but for fuel consumption ratings only applies the Light Truck standard (CAFE) to trucks under 8500lbs. So an F350 would be a light Truck according to NHTSA, but not have to meet the Light Truck CAFE standard. Think there was some lobbying going on there.

          I do acknowledge that Light Duty as the manufacturers describe it and Light Truck as the government and others describe it are not exactly the same. But even with the most wiggle room Light Trucks (by the Governments lower GVWR standard) includes all compact and Mid-size pickups and most models of full size pickup. I’ve said that before, I will say it again. You can find all the GVWR for all the trucks you like and compare them to the 10,000lbs standard.

          Does that help clarify? I don’t think I’ve been inconsistent in how I’ve used these terms, though frankly I didn’t think of models like the TopKick/Kodiak/F450 as light duty. I don’t think you did either.

          James

        • #2953783

          Or…

          by jiminpa ·

          In reply to Why do large vehicles sell well?

          It could be that I have not yet found a compact 4 cylinder car that will tow my camper. I’m just saying…

          B-)

        • #2953777

          But how many people never tow

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Or…

          I tow a popup trailer (1250 lbs empty/1600 full) with a minivan, even with 5 passengers and a couple of coolers and other gear in the van.

          I have seen people with compact cars towing small trailers – around 1000 lbs – including Ford Focus, Toyota Matrix and even a Mini Cooper. They might have the torque to tow it, but I wonder if they know what they are doing to their tranny, let alone if they have enough brakes to stop with a trailer behind them. I wouldn’t recommend it.

          But my point is you don’t need a full size pickup or big SUV to tow a trailer either.

          James

        • #2953772

          I do agree with that

          by jiminpa ·

          In reply to But how many people never tow

          My pop-up is actually 3200lbs loaded and I pull it with a 6 cylinder Envoy. Most of the rest of my family has 5000-6000lb campers and tow them with diesels. I don’t think that is over kill in either case.

          I also definitely agree that you shouldn’t be towing any sort of trailer with a compact (I also own a Focus). My grandpa used to always say don’t worry about pulling it, worry about stopping it and those types of vehicles were never intended to tow.

        • #2953767

          Noody said it would

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Or…

          This I have a family, I am a soccer mom, I need to tow a trailer BS is gettign tiring.

          There are uses and purposes for larger vehicles. But MOSt people don’t NEED a larger vehicle MOST of the time.

          a) You could own a truck for towing your camper and buy a small used, compact for day to day, to and from work etc., but that wouldn’t work because……..?

          b) For the times you tow yuor camper you could rent a full sized truck for the weekend and still com eou ton top as you are drivign a more effficient car the rest of teh time.

          c) You could buy a smaller camper or a Class A or B whic is self propelled, then you are only using the large vehicle when needed, save your money the rest of the year.

          Of course you will have a quick excuse for each of these suggestions, it is easy to do whan you need ot justify your own luxuries, almost preprogrammed at time of purchase. of course you will have valid reasons to NEED a large vehicle, just as other said you need a full sized vehicle if you are a soccer mom (a 4-cylinder minivan or cmopact SUV s not sufficient I suppose).

          People like to make excuses for their own luxuries, people will not sacrifice THEIR luxuries but will always talk about other luxuries they DON’T have as being unnecessary.

          Old hat, and I just don’t buy it anymore. If you really DID care and wanted to do something about it, you would end of story.

        • #2953765

          I couldn’t have said it better myself Oz

          by jiminpa ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          “People like to make excuses for their own luxuries, people will not sacrifice THEIR luxuries but will always talk about other luxuries they DON’T have as being unnecessary.”

          I get so tired of people looking down their nose at the things others are doing when they themselves could hardly be considered perfect. Do you do EVERYTHING you can for the environment? The great and powerful Oz has no little indulgence that he could curtail for the good of the planet?

          In case you missed it I also own a Ford Focus. :p

        • #2953752

          No but more than most

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          No, I am sure I could do more. But I walk to the store instead of driving, I take the skytrain or bus when I can, I am part of the 1 tonne challenge that David Suzuki’s website sets our for personal waste responsibility and I do well with it. I do what I can, not always what is most convenient and I am a lot more concious of my carbon footprint than most others I meet.

          On a whole I do more than most, with the exception of the over zealous tree huggers who think that exhaling is going to kill off the planet.

          Do I do my part? Yes.
          Do I do everything I possibly could? Within reason of course, nobody expects you to live by to candle light and sewing your own clothes from your trappings.

          If you are so proud to drive a compact car, what was the relevance behind your statement of needing a bigger vehicle for towing a trailer?

          Everyone knows that some vehicles have a purpose, you use yours for that purpose and not for day to day driving, so what was your point if not just for the sake of argument by not mentioning your more economical habits?

        • #2934723

          doing what you can

          by jck ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          A lot of times, people mistakenly throw a bottle in the trash they could recycle, drive a car to a shop a block away instead of just walking, etc.

          That’s an incidental occurence.

          However when you live alone and have no need for a GMC Yukon Denali with the 350 c.i.d. engine with the optional tow package just to drive to the grocery store and the office, it’s a long-term decision that not only impacts the environment but also your neighbors and others.

          Do I do everything I can? Yes. I recycle, I use products made from recycled product, I turn the AC up during the day to not run as much while I’m not there, I unplug/cut power to things I don’t want consuming power in stand-by, I walk to the store if I can, etc.

          But, there are a LOT of people who don’t even make a single effort or make one sacrifice of an unnecessary extra simply because they just want it for no practical reason.

          As I’ve said before, I could have well afforded a 4 or 5 bedroom home when I moved to this part of Florida, could have gotten a big SUV when I bought 8 years ago, and could have built a swimming pool behind my house with a heater pump and all that.

          But did I? No.

          And why? Because it’s not what I needed to live comfortably, and there was no practical reason for me to have any of those.

          Again, it comes down to self-interest and self-indulgence of extras in life that someone could live without, but they “need” it because it gives people like that some kind of personal ego pump or feeling of self-importance versus the rest of the world that I guess they need to validate their life to them.

        • #2934716

          I would like to be’kept’

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          “As I’ve said before, I could have well afforded a 4 or 5 bedroom home when I moved to this part of Florida, could have gotten a big SUV when I bought 8 years ago, and could have built a swimming pool behind my house with a heater pump and all that.”

          I’ll wear a dress on Saturdays, do the cleaning and ironing and housework. You got some dough for a bigger home with a pool in Flordia, I’m in. 🙂

        • #2934715

          I’m truly flattered, Oz

          by jck ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          But, I really can’t fathom you’re my type.

          However, the 5’4 blonde haired brown eyed former volleyball player/softball player/tennis player/cheerleader/gymnast I’ve been getting to know [b][u]is[/u][/b] my type.

          And to boot, she is smart and funny…and she likes me.

          SOMEONE CALL RIPLEY’S!!!! :^0

        • #2934708

          Think

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          Bugs Bunny in a dress, a little odd but still adorable and funny.

          I can play sports too, used to anyway, and she’ll only get all fat and gross when she stops the activities anyway.

          Not to mention I have a nearly non-existent gag reflex (probably too much information for you there, sorry.) 😀

        • #2934697

          Yeah you’re right Oz

          by jck ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          TMI :^0

          Besides, she no longer is an athlete or cheerleader because of a back injury from an accident she was in a few years ago.

          But, she’s still 5’4, about 115 lbs, gorgeous, works for a bank, and is just amazing.

          Did I mention that SHE ACTUALLY LIKES ME????? :^0

          Heck, get Satan a winter coat cause surely hell has surely frozen over lol

        • #2934686

          Take it for what it is then

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          Have a laff with her anyway.

        • #2934680

          good idea

          by jck ·

          In reply to Noody said it would

          Of course, I have passed the idea by her joining me on vacation both here and abroad, and she’s quite open to it.

          We might spend some time in TN in the fall, depending on her schedule and how her father is (he has a medical issue).

          That goes well, I may well take her to Europe with me next to meet my friends who demand to know who this girl is that has all my attention . :^0

          But, we laugh and talk every night. We really click. So, I might have found someone. We’ll see if it’s all for real in the coming months.

        • #2953816

          larger vehicles and car companies

          by jck ·

          In reply to IF larger vehicles are still selling well

          are not selling “well” compared to past numbers.

          That’s a no-brainer.

          As for Ford doing it without your money?

          Ford applied for and got $1Bs of taxpayer dollars that were labelled “subsidies” rather than “bailout” funds.

          Those monies are earmarked for: “…efforts to become more fuel efficient.”

          Here…I have an idea: use smaller engines in cars that use less gas, and limit throttle levels that would save gas too.

          Okay, I’m waiting on my check from Ford for $250,000 for a consulting fee. :^0

          But I agree…get the government out of the car business. Take the stock our tax dollars bought, and sell it to whatever company wants to buy it that gets us our money back.

        • #2953743

          Duh

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to larger vehicles and car companies

          Yeah, it took “no brain” to make that statement…..

          Sales of just about everything is down, not a reflection on the auto industry at all, but the world economy. In an honest discussion that wouldn’t be brought up as a slam against US automakers as ALL car sales are down. Sales of hybrids are WAY down. how does that fit in with your anti-large vehicle statement?

        • #2934857

          because

          by jck ·

          In reply to Duh

          compact, sub-compact, and other more fuel efficient car sales are not down nearly as much as large passenger vehicle sales, i.e.- SUVs.

          For example, motorintelligence.com shows the 3 worst suffering car categories in sales for 2008 were:

          Mid-sized SUVs: down 53.7%
          Luxury SUVs: down 46.8%
          Large SUVs: down 45.5%

          This compared to:

          Small (more fuel efficient) SUVs: down 17.9%
          Crossover vehicles (Honda CR-V, BMW X3, etc): down 25.5%

          And while passenger cars of all sizes suffered a 36.5% decline, SUVs of all sizes averaged a 46% decline.

          It’s safe to say according to data that the larger vehicles are less desireable, and that my statement is spot on.

          If you don’t believe me, go check out:

          http://www.motorintelligence.com

          or

          http://www.motortrend.com

          Either one will show you sales statistics that say one thing clearly: the large vehicle/large SUV market has suffered the worst because of their lack of efficiency and cost to operate in terms of fuel.

          And if you don’t like their research and facts, then go argue with them…not me.

          QED

        • #2934778

          Assumptions

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to because

          as to why each market is down.

          also if you follow the link to get the excel sheet for new car sales, you see total sales for Toyota and Honda are DOWN more for May08 to May09 comparisons by quite a bit.

          toyota -40.7
          Honda -41.5
          ford -24.1
          chrysler -46.9
          GM -29

          If you look at the year numbers, they are closer.

          Based upon your own link, the data for brand to brand comparison does not show GM the big loser as far as consumers voting with their pocketbook.

        • #2934774

          I can attest to that

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to because

          It is teh mid sized vehicels that have taken teh hit though. Mid sized cars today were the standard sedans in the 90’s, Tarus etc. are losing their place in the lineup these days. People are mainly either buying compact or luxury/full sized these days.

          With a price point well over the subcompact carm and build quality that doesn’t match the luxurt cars, people either save their money and GAS by going subcompact or they spend a bit more and get the quality of materials and workmanship in a full sized, luxury car.It has happened in MAnY industries in the last 8-10 years, entry level products survivce, high end products survive and the mid market dwindles.

          Ir even goes for new homes these days, I see the market, builders and developers every day. Spec houses are few and far between these days, but custom homes are still going gang busters as always. People with money still spend money, people in the midrange of teh market are spending less and being more wary of such decisions.

        • #2934744

          exactly

          by jck ·

          In reply to because

          You’re assuming too much.

          First point? May 2008 to May 2009:

          It’s a month to month comparison. I am sure I can find a month that would be different of the 4 others in 2008 and 2009 that are available.

          In fact 3 columns over on that chart, they show the YTD numbers, and:

          YTD SALES
          2009 compared to 2008 and +/-%
          General Motors Corp.
          768,126 1,316,710 -41.7
          Ford Motor Company
          595,665 938,566 -36.5
          Chrysler LLC
          402,900 750,369 -46.3
          Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc.
          638,795 1,046,854 -39.0
          American Honda Motor Co Inc.
          430,358 655,819 -34.4
          Nissan North America Inc.
          289,446 446,474 -35.2
          Hyundai Motor America
          166,743 181,033 -7.9

          Hm. Totally different boat there, eh?

          Try comparing the whole year rather than just a period that suits the numbers you want to see. That’s what I did.

          You went off on me as being “anti-large vehicle” and I addressed the topic, and pointed out statistics to you that show that consumers were moving away from them more. Not because of manufacturer.

          However, I just now showed you wrong too that so far this year, people are moving away from American cars at a more rapid pace as well. The statistics don’t lie. And, you’re wrong about that too.

          Nice change of direction tho. 😉 :p

          P.S.- the numbers just don’t get closer: they totally flip-flop. nice way to try and spin your point with numbers that contradict your stance :^0

        • #2933268

          look closer

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to because

          GM, still most sold. Sales went down the most, but still have the most sales?

          Ford still comparable to others for percentage of downsize.

          And as a throwback to your comment about excess, just how much did you spend on your last guitar?

        • #2933259

          my last guitar costs vs your hobby costs

          by jck ·

          In reply to because

          The last guitar I bought was right at or below $200.

          I have almost always gotten used/consignment guitars I found. Only ever bought 3 new.

          You’re probably trying to refer to my Taylor K20CE I bought about 4 years ago.

          Thing is, that guitar retailed for $4,498.

          I can sell that guitar for $2,500.

          I paid $2,000 for it. So, I can make a profit. It was a practical investment, as well as something that fostered a hobby and maintained my talents.

          It doesn’t emit sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, or carbon dioxide. It’s pretty environmentally friendly.

          Plus, Taylor guitars a number of years ago agreed to reduce the number of rare wood guitars they made in a year in an effort to conserve natural woods and make sure that they weren’t raping the ecosystem or possibly eliminating the woods they use.

          Besides, I’ve had that guitar for 4 years.

          So, how much did you spend on your last set of golf clubs?

          And then, how much have you spent in 4 years on golf outings (including drinks, meals, gas, etc.)?

          Playing my guitar is free 🙂

          Touche’ 😉

        • #2933254

          My golf clubs

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to because

          $50 out of a rummage sale, $70 for a used hybrid, and $50 for a Nike driver. Half of that is now being used by my boys instead.

          So, the criteria is if the excess is eco friendly? I am sure many would say you don’t NEED a $2000 guitar, and they would be right. It was a WANT, and barring your hypocritical standard on such things, you have every right to indulge in a “want”.

          Other hobby? I paid $40 for my darts. They emit zero emissions and will last for decades.

          Then is my bike. Bought it 14 years ago for $250 and ride it at least 4 times a week. The only emissions are if I have mexican before a ride…..

          Most I spent on a guitar was $650 as a birthday gift to myself when I turned 20, and it is my boys favorite to play to this day, even though I have 6 others.

        • #2933133

          Gee jck.

          by dhcdbd ·

          In reply to because

          You got off cheap. My last guitar, completed three weeks ago cost me $200 for the wood, $800 for the electronics and hardware, and 16 months of labor. Of course, it is entirely hand built – no machinery used other than hand tools, excluding a Dremel tool to polish the SS frets.

        • #2933038

          actually, jd

          by jck ·

          In reply to because

          if we got down to “wants”, i want a different job too and i can get it. does it mean i’m gonna just “do what i want” and bail on my mortgage holder on the hook?

          Fact is, I got the guitar as an investment too that I knew wouldn’t lose me money. It was safer than stocks…or would you argue that too?

          Trust me. If it was just a “want”, I would have spend $2800-4500 8 years ago in various other places i saww them to get the same guitar. But, I knew it would lose me money if I did.

          As well, I had offers and was pondering playing gigs with some people so it would have meant income as well.

          Hence, it was not just a “want”. It actually served a purpose to have it more than just a bauble in a collection of personal items. It is a secure value item (unlike my house), and it can provide me an income if need be.

          I don’t suppose you were looking to become a professional golfer, were ya? 😉

          Oh P.S.- I have played the guitar for others, so it isn’t just sitting around in my closet. And if you want to buy a set of clubs, I have a set in the garage i’ll sell ya for $200. :^0

          And btw, there is a definite difference in a Taylor guitar and most lower-value guitar and it can help not only the sound instrumentally but can improve your performance.

          Maybe you should consider shopping around for better clubs and improve your golf game if you’re gonna go pro 😉 :^0

        • #2932983

          Doesn’t look like much golfing for me

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to because

          shoulder just won’t allow it. Only was able to get one game in last year. Will have to try swinging the club and see how it feels.

          More interested in buying a kayak, actually. One that can handle over-night trips. I would have one now if I wouldn’t have gotten laid off. Maybe next year.

        • #2932979

          Justified want?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to because

          Justify the purchase they way you want, you still could have gotten by in life without one, as most people do.

          That is the key though, how DARE someone tell someone else what they need/want/should have or not?

          Enjoy the guitar.

          Know anyone looking for a seven string washburn? 😀

        • #2956439

          having a justification

          by jck ·

          In reply to because

          At least I have a justification more than “just because I wanted it”.

          I made a sound investment.
          I bought the guitar because it is a quality guitar that would allow me to improve my talents and skills.
          It wasn’t bought just because it was “cool” or “flashy” or “what all my friends have”.

          I’ll put it in golf club terms:

          I coulda got a $50 set of rickety, unbalanced Wilson golf clubs. But, I found this set of used Pings on sale for less than half price and knew I could sell them to any of the other golfers later on. I would have liked to had a custom set of Taylor or Calloway, but the Pings were good enough and made my performance just as good as a top-dollar set.

          BTW, $2000 is nothing for a quality guitar with good electronics/tone/sound. You should know that, if you’ve ever priced a Martin, Gibson Les Paul Electric ($7k), Custom-series Taylor guitar ($6k-10k), or something like an Olsen hand-made guitar (which is what James Taylor plays…i.e.- $12,000-17,000).

          The guitar I got is essentially a middle-of-the-road guitar and is not fancy.

          It’s basically a nice Toyota, and not a Lamborghini like everyone assumes because they’re used to buying $200 Japanese-made Fenders or Takemine Jasmines for their kids.

          And no, I don’t know anyone that plays 7-string guitars…except Steve Vai :^0

      • #2933051

        Unions are a part of the problem, but there’s more

        by delbertpgh ·

        In reply to price has always been the biggest factor

        GM hasn’t had alert management for forty years. Maybe fifty. A big part of the reason they’ve got union contracts that they can’t live with is that management saw nothing else it could do but say “yes” to everything. That applies to relations with dealers and suppliers, and the way they have modeled their whole product development effort around a dying demographic, and leave the growing elements to foreign manufacturers. Somehow Europe and Asia can make a profit building small cars that are more fun, fit better, and burn less fuel, achievements that generally elude GM (especially the profit part.) Headquarters is some sort of imagination-free zone.

        About the only people who can be trusted to buy GM’s oversized products are Americans who are too fat to fit into a Hyundai, or who have such overwhelming inferiority complexes that they can’t leave home without driving something that lends them an image of guts and toughness.

        Every one of my cars has been a Ford, GM, or Chrysler product, except for a used VW bug (my first) and a used Honda Civic. I didn’t think it was fair for me to spend so much American money putting foreigners to work, so every new car I ever bought (and most of the used ones) was U.S. I’m not sure that’s such a valid idea any more, since half the parts in my U.S. cars seem to be imported, and half the foreign cars are now built here.

        • #2933004

          Number of brands for one thing

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Unions are a part of the problem, but there’s more

          When GM made over 50% of the cars built and sold in North America, it made some sense to provide a wide range of brands. But as the sales dropped to the mid 20s level, it made some sense to lower the number of brands. But other than dropping Oldsmobile, GM went and added to the number of brands in the last 20 years, not decreased.

          Specifically, they bought Hummer, Saab and Daewoo, invested in Suzuki, Subaru and Isuzu. While Daewoo is the only thing they still own, you can tell that a big part of senior management focus was on acquisitions, not product development.

          I had a conversation with a few family members on the weekend, one of whom lives in Oshawa, which is a big GM town. He was arguing for continuing to buy local to support the economy. I offered up that since Oshawa truck production moved to Mexico, would it be better to buy the Honda Ridgeline built in Ontario than the GM truck built in Mexico. Its probably something only a forensic accountant could figure out. The Honda has labour in Ontario, and some Ontario made parts, but drivetrain (engine/transmission etc) from Japan. The GM truck, which used to have Canadian built engines(they closed that plant too), would have Mexican labour and some Mexican made parts, some American made parts, and a small number of Canadian made parts. My uncle commented that the corporate profits would be in the US as opposed to Japan, but I’m not sure thats a big help to Ontario.

          So I am a fan of buy what you want.

          James

        • #2957730

          Another thing to consider

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Unions are a part of the problem, but there’s more

          the auto makers are owned by share holders. How many of the share holders are not American?

          The biggest problem I have with they UAW hypocrites and their “Buy American” bumpersticker slogan is how many of these lowlifes I know that do the majority of their shopping at Walmart (anti-union) instead of the union store a mile up the road.

          Translation, “buy OUR American made product and screw everyone else.”

    • #2944194

      Counterpoint…

      by jamesrl ·

      In reply to The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

      GM developed its battery technology through the production of the EV1. Yes they killed it because they learned what they needed to learn, and because it was cost prohibitive to try and sell the cars at what they cost to make, but they gained valuable insight into what it takes to run electric cars in the real world. That work means that GM with the Volt will be the first mainstream manufacturer (Tesla isn’t mass market) to make an all electric car.

      As for the worst manufacturer, what about Chrysler. I owned an Intrepid, and spent more in repairs than I did for the car, over 4 years of ownership. GM definately made better transmissions.

      As for the current lineup, the Chevy Malibu/Saturn Aura, built from a Vauxhall Opel Platform is IMHO better than a Ford Fusion it competes against, and a worthy rival to a Camry/Accord. But I’m not alone, the automobile journalists association thought the same thing.

      The new G8 sedan, with engineering by Holden is a great rear wheel drive performance sedan. Too bad its a Pontiac.

      I’m not sure why you are mentioning K Cars, Horizon/Omni when talkinbg about GM, cause those were Chryslers of lesser quality than their rivals. The Firefly, which was a Suzuki which GM rebadged (made at a joint plant) was a good car, I drove alot in one, and it went to 350,000 kms with only a battery, tires and brake replacement.

      I’m not saying that there aren’t problems with GM. Its a slippery slope. Chrysler has its issues as well.

      But one of the reasons for the bailout is that if GM goes down, so do a number of parts manufacturers etc. Many have said that if GM went down, they couldn’t survive until new orders come on line from other manufacturers. So we could lose not only assembly but parts as well. Thats hundreds of thousands of jobs.

      The Intrepid by the way was in no way built by Mitsubishi. It was built in Brampton about 2 miles from my house, in what had been an AMC plant before Chrysler bought them and Jeep. The engines, the 3.3 and 3.5 are all Chrysler designed.

      Mitusbishi did build the Colt and 2000 GTX for Chrysler, and the Talon was a joint venture. Chrysler, Hyundai and Mitsubishi still co-operate on small motors, the 2.4 being a recent example (Calibre).

      As for your truck sales comments, you do know that GM sells more light trucks (pickups) than Ford. Its just that Ford sells more than Chevy, but not more than Chevy and GMC combined. This is an age old debate and obviously by sales not everyone agrees with you.

      While I’m not a fan of my tax dollars going to Chrysler, GM or any of the banks I understand that it was done to forestall the panic that would happen if they went under. I think GM can survive, it made great strides in reforming over the past few years, but it needed a big push before it could drop as many brands and focus itself.

      James

      • #2944186

        Sidebar – Too big to fail?

        by charliespencer ·

        In reply to Counterpoint…

        “But one of the reasons for the bailout is that if GM goes down, so do a number of parts manufacturers etc.”

        We’ve heard the phrase ‘too big to fail’ tossed around a lot lately. Is there such a concept as applied to investment banks and automobile manufacturers? If so, does the government have an obligation to break up such a company for the good of the economy BEFORE it fails?

        All I know is that the US government dumped a lot of money into GM before it went into bankruptcy anyway. Wouldn’t it have been better to keep the money and let it file Chapter 11 in the fall of 2008, instead of stalling the inevitable?

        • #2944176

          The government invested in GM, and forced bankruptcy

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Sidebar – Too big to fail?

          Because they thought it was the only way to get GM to shed assets and focus on core business.

          AIG was considered too big to fail because it was the insurer for so many financial institutions that if they went down, so would a number of banks.

          In the fall of 2008, the government didn’t have leverage to make GM do what was needed. It could not have forced them into bankruptcy at that point without changing the bankruptcy laws. It took that investment in them to give the feds the leverage they needed.

          James

        • #2944129

          they did get cash in 2008 though

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to The government invested in GM, and forced bankruptcy

          Didn’t the federal government and Ontario Provincial government, as well as the US government give them a big handout in 2008 to counter dropping sales?

        • #2953919

          What they got in the fall was bridging funds, not shares of the companies

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to they did get cash in 2008 though

          It wasn’t until GM and Chrysler negotiate this spring that the government took an ownership stake. Thats when they had the power to force rather than coerce.

          James

        • #2953872

          So that’s a no?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to What they got in the fall was bridging funds, not shares of the companies

          They DIDN’T get federal and provincial money in 2008?

        • #2953848

          Loans versus shares

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to So that’s a no?

          In 2008 the governments gave them loans, in 2009 as part of the restructuring agreements the governments bought shares, thus giving them the ability to force the board to do things, but remember the companies were forced to provide an acceptable plan before the shares were bought.

          James

        • #2953833

          So that’s a no?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to So that’s a no?

          They DIDN’T get federal and provincial money in 2008?

          I wasn’t asking you to split hairs, no matter how much you feel it necessary to overanalyze and twist whatever I say, it was a straight comment.

          They either did receive money or they did not receive money.

          Apparently they did not, as you seemingly want to argue my comment that the received both Federal and Provincial government money from Canada in 2008.

        • #2953773

          I didn’t say that and you know it

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to So that’s a no?

          I said they received a loan in 2008. That was not enough to be able to force anyone into bankruptcy.

          In 2009 the governments bought shares, making them part owners, which did give them a say in whether or not they would file for bankruptcy protection.

          Thats all I said, and it was to Palmies point. You seem to be the one nit picking this one.

          James

        • #2953756

          My mistake

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to So that’s a no?

          I just automatically thought that if you were replying to Pamie, you would have replied to/below Palmies comments and not right below mine.

          Yuo replied under Palmetto initially, then I added that they HAD been given some money in 2008.

          You then replied TO ME, describing what they had received, which didn’t dicount my comments but did detail the money given to them.

          As you are dead set to argue any point I make, including this one I’m sure, I asked if that was not the same thing.

          You again replied directly to me and under my post, stating again LOANS vs SHARES, so I again asked if that was to deny my comment or simply add to it.

          To THAT reply you then AGAIN posted to me, and underneath my question, that you were talking to Palmie.

          LOL How convenient for you.

          So any time you post, regardless of where, you can simply say you were talking to someone else?

          YOU do know that you can post right below the person you are replying to and it makes it easier for everyone to follow. You don’t need to reply under my comment to you and pretend it was for someone else.

          Look at the thread, there’s plenty of room to post your comments to Palmie right under Palmetto’s comment. You chose to debate with me again instead, nice try though, but you really underestimate the intelligence of users here who can see for themselves that you are way out of whack on that one.

        • #2953753

          The point being

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to So that’s a no?

          Palmie suggested that the governments should have/could have forced them into bankruptcy in 2008 before all the money was spent. My point was they didn’t have the means, because they didn’t own the shares.

          You seem to want to get me to say I said something else. I replied to you, cause you replied to me. Nothing more or less.

          James

        • #2953750

          HUH>

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to So that’s a no?

          I asked a question and your reply was “… Thats all I said, and it was to Palmies point”

          If it was to Palmies point, why do you now say it was to me?

        • #2944051

          to big to fail? no way

          by jaqui ·

          In reply to Sidebar – Too big to fail?

          Sorry, but bad management / business decisions need to be paid for by the management / business.

          bail out companies with bad management? no way.

          yes, it would hurt, with the suppliers losing sales, but in the long run it will make a stronger economy, with better leadership in business.

      • #2944147

        Mitsubishi

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Counterpoint…

        Mitsubishi’s MiEV is a fully electric car that should be availale to the comsumer through Mitsubishi dealers across canada in the next 4 years.

        Canada is also slated to start full production runs in 5 years, as far as benchmarks go, Canada should be the first north American country to mass manufacture a fully electric car.
        _________________________________
        “what about Chrysler”

        I mentioned Chrysler, in fact the Intrepid specifically, I couldn’t agree more.

        Cab forward sales pitch and forget about all your promises to the industry and consumers.

        I know two people that bough Intrepids, after asking me and ignoring my advice of course. After about three years I refused to fix them anymore, just garbage products and too much hassel for what hit was worth.
        ____________________________________

        Opel has been a GM product for over 80 years now, and has been a lackey’s car in Europe ever since they bought it. Though it DID nearly edge out Ford in the late 90’s and early 21st century but sales still didn’t top Ford.

        The key I think you need to consider is that these are EUROPEAN cars, which as I have mentione dcountless times, are built far better in Europe, as are the same Fords, than in North America. We just don’t get their craftsmanship from our industry. That’s why I bought my truck with a German built Ford V6 engine ‘Cologne motor’.
        ___________________________________

        P.S. The Malibu was 2nd to the Ford Fusion in most reports I’ve read. and it is built on GM’s 112″ Epsilon AWD platform. Former models, the previous versions with the 105″ wheelbase were BASED on the Opel platform but did not offer the same steering and suspension system at all, just footprint dimensions. Those past models were lemons and failed miserably in the market though.

        BC Auto Dealers Assn. ranks it poorly, US News auto ratings have it set behind th eFusion too. As far as Japanese, it is too expensive, gets poor fuel rating, the 4-cylinder is low powered (“gutless”), they are dropping the Hybrid for 2010 (which was a waste anyway) and it has a terrible resale value.

        Its main merits are large interior size and …..large interior size ….and yeah that’s all.

        I was actually looking forward to that car after seeing the protos, but after driving one, nah, I’ll stick with the Camry or Accord, 10X the car for less money and with FAR better resale.

        ___________________________________——

        “I’m not sure why you are mentioning K Cars, Horizon/Omni when talkinbg about GM, cause those were Chryslers of lesser quality than their rivals. ”

        Probably why I mentioned they were Chrysler products. Though my initial post was a bit misleading, as pointed out and quickly edited this morning, long before your post showed up though.

        _________________________________

        “Many have said that if GM went down, they couldn’t survive until new orders come on line from other manufacturers. So we could lose not only assembly but parts as well. Thats hundreds of thousands of jobs.”

        That’s also cpaitalism, the business model that america and massive corporations like GM and Chrysler are built upon.

        ________________________________________

        As for Mitsubishi,the Intrepid’s and Concords initially used the 3.3L and 3.5L engines, which were complete garbage, up until around 1997/98, I think.

        They then used Mitsubishi’s 2.7L and transmission was indeed built by Mitsubishi (also used in the Concord and Sebring) and used a evised Kbody frame called an LH (jokingly the Last Hope for them), .

        It was also one of the most useless and problematic motors Chrysler ever put into a car besides their 2.0L in the late 80’s or their first shot at the Intrepid with the 3.3L.

        Daimler Chrysler owns 34% controlling interest of Mitsubishi (as well as Hyundai which builds Chrysler badged cars in Mexico), they are all one and the same really.

        As both Mitsubishi and Chrysler build mid-sized cars and mass market to a similar segment, they decided to simply ‘share two models’ and the rest are quite individual, same goes for Hyundai in the compact car segment.

        A compact Chrysler badged car may have actually been built by Hyundai in Mexico, passed electrical quality assurance testing in the US and tagged with the “US Union built” sticker.

        Plant location and badging means nothing these days.
        ______________________________________

        • #2953895

          Re the Malibu

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Mitsubishi

          Car of the year, North American International Auto show – the Detroit show is the most important to the industry.

          Kelly Blue Book Best Redesigned Vehicle

          Car and Driver 10 Best cars of 2008 (not a single Ford on that list)

          Automobile Magazine’s All Star list for 2008 (not a Ford on the list unless you count the Volvo C30

          Consumers Digest Best Buy

          JD Power 2008 Highest Ranked Mid size car in initial quality
          US News and World Report – #1 out of 23 mid size cars(for 2008, 2009 it was the Fusion Hybrid #1, Malibu #2, Fusion #3)

          As for milegae, according to the Automotive magazine website, the Malibu gets slighty better mileage in the city than Accord or Camry, the same highway milegae as the Accord, and slightly worse highway mileage than the Camry.

          Regarding Mitsubishi, Chrysler sold 90% of its Mitsubishi shares in 2005, they don’t have much left at all.

          NONE of the Intrepid engines were Mitsubishi, including the 2.7. You can find it in Wiki if you don’t believe me. But hey what would I know, the plant where Intrepids/300/Charger etc were/are made is a couple of miles from my hosue and some of my neighbours work there. The 2.7 was designed and built by Chrysler in Kenosha.

          And now you are going to get all huffy and accuse me of all kind of crap and being pedantic etc.

          But the truth is facts matter.

          When you try and show that GM is all crap and Ford can do no wrong, thats an opinion. When you back it up with facts that aren’t true, you don’t help your argument.

          James

        • #2953893

          Gotta wonder where my car rated

          by slayer_ ·

          In reply to Re the Malibu

          Where did mine rate?

          Mitsu Eclipse.

        • #2953881

          The 2009 model ranked number 8

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Gotta wonder where my car rated

          …in the US World News and Report “Affordable Sports Car” grouping.

          Hyundai Genesis Coupe ranked #1.

          James

        • #2953834

          ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Re the Malibu

          if you are going to debate my comment, at least debate MY comment and not just something else as if you have an argument.

          I give up with you, it doesn’t matter what I say you will find something irrelevant or previously unsaid to argue about. Your just such a ‘king waste of time when you stop makign sense and start grasping for straws andlooking for some kind of pi$$ing contest for reasons unknown.

          To further prove how hideously lacking your reading comprehension skills are, you then went on about the new Malibu, completely disregarding that I was not referring to the same car at all.

          [i]”Former models, the previous versions with the 105″ wheelbase were BASED on the Opel platform but did not offer the same steering and suspension system at all, just footprint dimensions. [b]Those past models were lemons and failed miserably in the market though.[/b][/i]

          BC Auto Dealers Assn. ranks it poorly, US News auto ratings have it set behind the Fusion too. As far as Japanese, it is too expensive, gets poor fuel rating, the 4-cylinder is low powered (“gutless”), they are dropping the Hybrid for 2010 (which was a waste anyway) and it has a terrible resale value.”[/i]

          one more time for the reading impaired

          So what’s wih your rant about the 2008?

          As for the Mitsubishi 2.7L whihc was one of the worst engines of recent years, which WAS used by Chrysler for Intrepids, here’s a run down on your car of the year.

          http://dodgestories.blogspot.com/

          http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090615080834AAXOe1H

          “Most people like the styling of these small [b]Chrysler-Mitsubishi V-6 2.7L [/b]power-horses, ”

          Mitsubishi built 2.7L engines are ALL over the internet, MAINLY with respect to the Itrepid and how unreliable that motor was due to timing chain and sludge issues.

          Seriously James, it’s like trying to talk to a 5-year old with you sometimes.

          It doesn’t matter where you friends worked, do they need ot be in Japan in order to install a Mitsubishi engine in a Dodge?
          Chrysler was using the 2.7L FLOP of a motor, Mitsubishi designed and implemented the 2.7L and it was adopted by Chrylser and used in their second Generation Intrepids, which were horrific failures.

          There are SO many websites relating to the Mistubishi 2.7L sludge issue and failed Intrepids I really though that you’d find it yourself. I’ve waded through them looking for comon solutions to Intrpid issues more than once.

          You do know that Chrylser owns an equity share (around 35%) in Mitsubishi right?

          However as you seem more interested on trying to make moot points for some irrelevant reasons, I’ll let you just run amok waving your arms for a while anyway.

          http://fix27engine.com/
          “Most people like the styling of these small Chrysler-Mitsubishi V-6 2.7L power-horses”

          How do I know these things? I didn’t have a friend who worked at a plant down the road, who went out of his way to assure me they were installing Chrysler engines and not Mitsubishi engines in Intrepids.

          I have worked on the friggin’ things dozens of times! I worked F/T as a tech when these cars were popular, I know the engine VERY well, unfortunately.

          You are not about to convince me that a famous lemon of an engine, designed and engineered by Mistubishi, then later used by a company that owns a chunk of Mitsubishi, then discussed by mechanics and car buffs all over as a Mitsubishi engine used in Intrepids is NOT a Mitsubishi engine. Especially when I have repaired them, labelled with Mitsubishi and with Mistubishi OEM replacemeent parts.

          Christ, James just pop the friggin hood!

          Stick to what you know James, it sure as hell isn’t cars.

          As for pupularity, AGAIN you are ignoring my comments in your haste to prove an irrelevant point.

          “As for Mitsubishi,the Intrepid’s and Concords initially used the 3.3L and 3.5L engines, which were complete garbage, up until around 1997/98, I think”

          And yet your argument is some rant aout 2008 models, which i had not even mentioned in my post. However you decided to try and make a point out of it? Are you really going insane or something? Di yu have reading issues?

          It would explain things if you did, but if you don’t, what’s your point or purpose with your unrealted arguments?

          But whatever, tell me all about how Barry Manilow wrote a song in 2001 and how it proves my comments wrong.

          Have fun with it.

        • #2953811

          The 2.7 litre engine

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz

          This site gives a comprehensive history of the engine:
          http://www.allpar.com/mopar/new6.html

          “To clarify again – the 2.7 was developed from the 3.2, which was developed from the 3.5 ? all at Highland Park and later, CTC, in the early days there were several changes, but the starting point for all was the 3.5. ”

          Is Highland Park in Japan? No its Chrsyler’s headquarters.

          You saw a Mitsubishi badge on an Intrepid engine? Really? I have opened the hood on a 2.7 L Intrepid, and gee, it didn’t say Mitsubishi. By the way my Ford Duratec 3.0 L in my Mazda MPV doesn’t say Ford on it.

          As for the Malibu, to your original post, you claim GM is not improving. Now you say that you weren’t talking about the 2008. Gee thanks for proving my point, if the 2007 was a dog and the 2008 is good, then they have improved.

          And further to your original point, Saturn’s lineup, with the Opel based Astra, Aura (same as Malibu), Vue (Vauxhall/Opel) are all much better vehicles than the ones they replaced.

          JD Power’s initial quality survey for 2008:
          Highest initial quality pickup – Chevy Silverado – a much better vehicle than the old Chevy Truck.

          James

        • #2953774

          Sure James

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to The 2.7 litre engine

          You couldn’t get a grip on reality if it landed in yuor fist.

          As for your constant Ford issues, I haven’t said Ford is without suchj issues, as I explaned and detailed twice now, I have used tehm as an example of a company that was making changes WHEN THEY SHOULD HAVE, while GM was still pumping out junk years after saying they wouldn’t be pumping out junk anymore.

          Chrysler designed the 2.7L engine?
          Perhaps you should also look up GEMA and find out who designs these motors,its a joint venture of Mitsubishi, Chrysler and Hyundai.

          Huundai and Mitsubishi, though designers do not use most of the engines GEMA produces, but Chrysler does. That’s probably why the motors are identical and used in identical vehicles. Many manufacturer’s do this, as you noted with Ford. I had commented o a mistsubishi engine that was a flop and installed in many Inrepids during their second generation. I have replaced parts on them, have seen the labelled as Mitsubishi while sitting in a Chrysler. I just don’t get what your ridiculous point is or what you are attempting to achieve.

          As usual, I don’t care either, yuor comments have proven taht you have a single focus; you feel i am sayign Ford does no wrong, which is WAY of base if you had been ablr to read and comprehend my posts befor eyour chip fell off yoru shoulder. You seem to feel a need to defend what has become the dodgiest (sorry for the pun) and most unreliable car manufacturer in US history.
          Whil ethey scramble and beg for tax money in a nation where fair competition has always seen companies come and go, people lose jobs people find jobs.

          In other words, you have no point to be made. Go back to the original thread and try to make ANY sense out of your comments and you will see just how far off topic and how unrelated and irrelevant your comments are.

          Or you can just put on your GM badge and touque and have a good wank while thinking about how great you are.

        • #2953762

          I don’t wear a GM badge

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Sure James

          Lets be clear. I work every day with all manufacturers of vehicles including Ford. I drive a Mazda with a Ford engine. I have a father who has always had a Chevy truck, and a brother who has always had a Ford truck. I’ve driven them both.

          I’m well aware of GEMA, I was told about it by marketing people at a business lunch years ago by people who work at Chrysler. It was well after the Intrepid though.

          Did you even go to the Allpar link ? More credible than a link to Yahoo answers, but hey. The allpar link, as well as the wikipedia link are both unanimous that the 2.7 is a derivitative of previous Chrysler designed and built V6s.

          I’m not a Ford hater, I’ve actually never owned a GM car, but I have owned a Ford Mustang. I owned a Hyundai Pony for crying out loud, I’ve had my time in hell.

          I will give Ford credit for managing its assets better than GM.

          But before you trot out the old Ford has done it without subsidies mantra, know that Ford threatened to close down the Oakville Truck plant in 2002 unless it got subsidies from the government, and thats not the first time. It actually announced the closure, and were convinced with subsidies to keep it open. Today it makes the Flex and the Edge.

          I am not saying that GM is golden. But they started to make significant changes years ago.

          So lets say that none of the recent subsidies happen and GM and Chrysler close their doors. Do you think someone will simply buy the assets and start hiring workers, ordering parts and building vehicles right away? It could take months or years for production to resume, in the mean time we the taxpayers pay out unemployment insurance and the parts makers go under. Many parts makers started to go under last year, before plants were shut, just because production was down.

          I know in sunny Vancouver you couldn’t give a crap about the Ontario economy. But my livelihood, my paycheck is directly affected by these things.

          James

        • #2953742

          allpar

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Sure James

          First of all I am VERY familiar with Allpar, I have contributed to and helped visitros to the Allpar site many times with respect to Cuda’s. You seem to feel it has great credibility, its just a user forum though, no different than Ford 4X4 owners forums etc.

          “But before you trot out the old Ford has done it without subsidies mantra”

          Now you are even arguing points that are not made, just DYING to get a point in, aren’t you?

          I know very well that Ford has been helped in the past, your defense is unwarranted, as usual.

          And nwo the reality of your ranting comes to light: “But my livelihood, my paycheck is directly affected by these things.”

          You are justifying the government bailing out a capitalist corporation in a free market because it effects YOUR paycheck.

          That’s no different than any union worker saying they approve of the bailout because they will keep their job. Not exactly a compelling reason to spend hundreds of millions of everyone else’s money though.

        • #2953717

          The industry as a whole

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Sure James

          My paycheck is not tied to one manufacturer or another, unlike the guys on the line. I’m concerned about the health of the industry as a whole. So you don’t care about your paycheck and the health of the business segment you are in?

          As for allpar, I’m familiar with it from my years of owning and constantly repairing my Intrepid. I give it alot more credence than Yahoo answers where there is no come back. The wiki listing also confirms it.

          I’m no fan of government intervention, I wish it wasn’t necessary, and I know we will take a bath over it in taxpayers dollars. But have you considered at all what would happen to the economy if both GM and Chrysler just failed, and then many parts makers fail. In Canada alone thats hundreds of thousands of jobs. What will that do to confidence in the stock market? Will that give consumers confidence to go spend money? I can survive with a lowered paycheck, but the cuts to our company’s staff and the impact that has are huge.

          James

        • #2953712

          no, not really

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Sure James

          “So you don’t care about your paycheck and the health of the business segment you are in?”

          not particularly, if the bottom falls out and there are no more homes built anymroe, c’est la vie, I’m not a one trick pony I’ll do something else. I get bored too easily to rely on any particular industry for my livelihood.

          “from my years of owning and constantly repairing my Intrepid”

          No need to say more about such a great American car.

          as for your links or disqualification of my own, I couldn’t give a rat’s.

          I am a technician, I have removed a Mistubishi engine from an Intrepid and replaced it with a used Mitsubishi engine from an Intrepid. Link ’til your little heart is happy, it makes no difference nor does it validate your claims.

          Chrylser/Mitsubishi collborated on many cars and built many engines together, MOST were used in Chryslers as Mitsubishi and Hyundia rarely used teh engiens they developed together with Chrysler. Chrysler may rebrand them in Ontario, down the street where your friends worked and confirmed that they installed only Chrysler deisgned and engineered motors. However I have seen many with Misubishi motors and support systems and not one with a fully Chrylser badged engine of support system in it.

          OU simply cannot change or argue that, I have seen it and spent a lot of time repairing their garbage. You may also want to note the formidable list of “Chysler/Mistubishi” 2.7L engines that have entire websites decidcated to them full of PO’d owners too.

          I suppose all those owners are simply wrong for not reading Wiki before they looked under the hood too.

          “the cuts to our company’s staff and the impact that has are huge”

          And you thought that the industry was stable and guaranteed for how long? Just like teh guy who says he is irreplaceable in teh office, who comes in one day to see his desk filled by someone else.

        • #2934858

          Never disputed that Mitsubishi and Chrysler worked together on engines

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Sure James

          And I am well aware of the complaints about the Mitsubishi 3.0 engines in Chrysler minivans.

          The Ontario plant just down the road from me was the only place in the world where the second generation LH cars (Intrepid/Concorde/300M) were made and its where the 300 and other derivatives are made today. So no one “rebranded” anything. They took engines in and installed them. None of them had an Mitsubishi info on them. They all came from Kenosha, WI.

          As for my industry, I never said there were any guarentees in life, nor in any job. I worked for Nortel, once the biggest company in Canada, now in bamruptcy, so I know how it goes. But that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t feel sorry for those who have put their life into a career in an industry. And it isn’t just people here, or in domestic manufacturers, many of my contacts at Japansese manufacturers are being laid off as well. There is a lot of valuable industry knowledge that will be lost, and won’t be around in a few years when the industry starts to turn around. But I don’t expect any sympathy or empathy.

          James

        • #2934771

          Then you are aware of these complaints too then

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Sure James

          Your vast industry expertise would have also noted that the Mitsubishi/Chrysler 2.7L WAS also one of the most problematic and unreliable engines they ever put in a car.

          http://dodgestories.blogspot.com/

          You should tell them all about your friends down the street too, they all seem a bit lost in all thinking that it is a Mitsubishi motor. I suppose they can’t read the badging properly and think that MITSUBISHI spells MITSUBISHI instead of CHRYSLER. Keeo in mind also that the Chrysler intake cover, with Chrysler stamped on it, does NOT mean it is a Chrysler engine, start pulling a few parts and you’ll see who makes them soon enough.

          Who builds it is irrelevant, who engineers it is the key. This is NOT an engine designed and engineered by Chrylser, it is a Mitsubishi engine. If YOUR plant down the street badged their 2.7’s as Chrysler so be it, but there is no question at all that it is a Mitsubishi design, Mistubishi made them for installation in Chryslers and I have removed, repaired and replaced Mitsubishi motors from Chrysler cars.

        • #2934761

          As someone that has seen multiple 2.7’s die

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Sure James

          I can tell you first hand, NEVER buy one.

          as for mitsu, when I was 19 I bought a reliant Kcar. rode acceptably well, and while not sporty, it was a decent looking car.

          Then the trouble starts.

          it was sold with a 2.4, right up until the end of the year, then they threw a 2.6 mitsu piece of crap in it.

          I would call for parts, and I wouldn’t even be in the computer. Everytime I would go to the parts store, I would get the same “you’re an idiot” look that WE give end users now. I would have to drag them out to the car to show them what I have……

          it died. car still looked nice (clean), but engine was shot. 🙁

      • #2944132

        Light trucks/pickups?

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Counterpoint…

        Light trucks, are but a small portion of the truck segment. I was referring to full sized trucks in my comments. Though the Explorer was built on the Ranger frame with IFS instead of the i-Bar used in their larger trucks.

        “For a number of years, the 1/2 ton full-size Ford F150 has been the best-selling vehicle in the United States, [b]outselling all other trucks and all passenger car models.”[/b]

        “Ford F-Series tops its own all-time truck sales record with more than 912,000 units sold in a single year. During the past 25 years, F-Series has been the only nameplate to cross the 800,000 annual sales mark in the U.S.

        28 Years and Counting: On Dec. 31, F-Series will extend its winning streak to 28 years as the best-selling truck in the U.S., along with [b]claiming the title of best-selling overall vehicle for 23 consecutive years.[/b]

        TWENTY THREE YEARS!

        Now technically ANY vehicle manufacturer can claim to be the #1 seller, as vehicle classes are so infinitely defined now.

        Top selling small car of all time**
        Where the ** details, ‘with a centre mounted ashtry, a bump just left of the drivers console etc.’

        But as far as sales, TRUCK sales and North American cars of all makes and models, Ford has outsold them all for decades.

        Let them go teets up if they can’t stay in business, providing good products at affordable prices, while competitors can.

        Parts dealers will just start making aftermarket parts for the garbage they’ve sold for the last 30 years. Chrysler hasn’t been worth a bag of spit since the days of Mopars, and GM hasn’t been worth a bag of spit since….well, I’m not quite old enough to think that far back.

        I didn’t see Woolco get bailed out when they couldn’t afford to compete with US WalMart.

        Will WalMart get bailed out if Americans wake up one day and realize what a lot of garbage they sell?

        These are car manufacturer’s not small countries or governments, they build substandard products for North American consumers and build their best products on other continents.

        Sure lets give them a helping hand, why not maybe they can improve on their European models and screw us some more, maybe they’ll listen and start giving US the good stuff too! Don’t hold your breath.

        • #2944090

          Ok lets talk light trucks

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Light trucks/pickups?

          In manufacturers terms ALL pickups are light trucks – Medium/heavy trucks are not sold in car dealerships.

          According to the data in the Wall Street Journal, for 2008, GM sold 744,872 light trucks. Ford sold 603,230. Both sold far fewer in 2008 than 2007, but the proportion is almost exactly the same.

          http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html#autosalesE

          Here are numbers for 2003 through 2006.

          http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/auto-auto.nsf/eng/am02068.html

          You may disagree with me, and every other organization that gathers stats.

          But the truth is the F150 is the best selling truck. But the truth is also that GM also sells more pickups – under 2 brands. And of all the brand differences in GM, one of the least significant is between a Chevy truck and GMC truck. Is one more luxurious than the other – depends how you option it and which model. And if you go back 23 years of stats you will see the same thing. Ford isn’t lying, exactly. But I wou;dn’t call it the whole truth either.

          Woolco was a Canadian subsidiary of an American company that went out of business(Woolworth).

          I’m not arguing that GM doesn’t build better cars elsewhere, but then again so does Ford.

          And I wouldn’t argue that Ford management was better at managing cash and paying off debt. At the same time they failed to make Aston Martin, Jaguar or Land Rover into a profitable venture, and Volvo is only slightly better off under Ford than they were as an independant.

          James

        • #2944063

          Start by discounting your entire comment?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ok lets talk light trucks

          Your opening statement is ridiculous. “trucks” is a term that encompasses a massive market and I think it’s clear that we both know that. Light trucks are a segment of that market, full sized trucks are another segment of that market, heavy duty/commercial trucks are yet another segment and so on.

          “In the United States and Canada “truck” is usually reserved for commercial vehicles [b]larger than normal cars, and for pickups and other vehicles having an open load bed.”[/b]
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truck

          “an automotive vehicle suitable for hauling”
          http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:truck&ei=m_E2SuiHH4mwsgOUg92nDg&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

          So hopefully it is clear now that “trucks” encompasses many segments of a market. The reference I offered and statistics I was speaking of point directly to that market segment.

          The light truck of which you speak is yet another, which was not part of my discussion. Get it? Light truck argument irrelevant.

          My mistake was probably just not being more specific and forgetting I was speaking to a computer technician.

          Semantics? What for? There’s no purpose or point to be defended by it anyway.
          You state:
          [i]Medium/heavy trucks are not sold in car dealerships[/i]

          The Ford F-550 is available at all local Ford dealers for retail consumers, I have a few pictures of my friend’s if you like.
          The Ford F-550 is also used as a light armoured car, for 3 and 5 tonne delivery vans, welding and street workers work , light dump trucks and many other commercial applications. I think it would definitely be considered a medium or heavy truck by any automotive standards.

          FORD, GM,CHRYSLER, CHEVROLET, HONDA, TOYOTA et al. are all brand names.

          In the case of this comment, it was clearly a qualification of brands. Ford also makes trucks under other names all over the world, but just because one brand shares the corporate name, it doesn’t make it ‘sly’.

          If you are looking at trucks sold, GM sells X number of GM trucks, Chevrolet sells X number of Chevrolet trucks, Ford sells X number etc.

          It’s just like anything else; if Phillips was to say they were the leading brand for selling the most over-ear, stereo headphones, it wouldn’t mean Phillips and Magnavox and Sylvania’s sales. Perhaps at a corporate level but not at a consumer level, it is branding and selling a brand.

          Woolco (which I didn’t say was Canadian):
          “a retail company that was one of the original American five-and-dime stores”

          “Despite growing to be one of the largest retail chains in the world through most of the 20th century, [b]increased competition led to its decline beginning in the 1980s.”[/b]

          Woolco:
          “While the American stores were closed in 1982, the chain remained active in Canada until it was sold in 1994 to rival Wal-Mart.

          Did you miss the point of what I was saying while using your fine comb?”

          Point is, fair competition and a long time corporation is taken down by a company that has equal right to competition due to capitalism. I thought that would have been really clear considering the context of the discussion.

          Regardless of Ford’s decisions, or success with past brands, they made changes on the fly. GM is just now promising the same, as if it is some unique business plan to save the world. Car manufacturer’s have been selling and trading each other since day one. With over 3000 small shop cars looking for production in the UK alone, this is part of an auto business. Fail at that business and you should rightly be taken over just like any other of the hundreds or thousands who have failed in the industry.

          It’s like restaurants and hotels, a very unstable and unpredictable industry.

        • #2953937

          You are being idiotic

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Start by discounting your entire comment?

          Light trucks – I did not make up the term. Everyone, including the manufacturers, the retaillers, the government, the economists know what we mean when we say light trucks. But just in case you continue to be dense on the subject, they would include the F150/F250/F350 (what you call full size)as well as smaller trucks. The F450/550 are cnsidered medium trucks. Can you order them in every Ford dealership? I can tell you from my working experience that you can’t. They are sold by dealerships who have a Truck franchise. They get different parts lists. They use different software for sales and service. They have different equipement to service them. Are some Ford auto dealers also Truck dealers – yes. But it is a separate franchise.

          And the government, the economists and the manufacturers, JD Power all agree the same thing. GM, the corporation, sells more light trucks than Ford, the corporation. The numbers are all there, the wall street journal and the government of canada aren’t making them up. When you combine the sales of GMC pickups and Chevy pickups(which are the samer except for a few options and some badges) more of them are sold than Ford pickups.

          You think you can insult me by calling me a computer technician. I’m proud to say I have been one. I’m also heavily involved in the automotive industry as well you know, in marketing as well. And my customers are every manufacturer, including Ford, GM, Honda etc. etc. I don’t think any of them are perfect, you seem to think Ford can do no wrong and GM can do no right. You have a blindspot as big as the moon.

          James

        • #2953839

          So you don’t want to do the math, I will help you

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to You are being idiotic

          From the links I already provided:

          2003
          GM Light Trucks: 2 756 023
          Ford Light Trucks: 2 175 880

          2004
          GM Light Trucks: 2 780 735
          Ford Light Trucks: 2 162 057

          2005
          GM Light Trucks: 2 711 602
          Ford Light Trucks: 1 971 780

          2006
          GM Light Trucks: 2 444 623
          Ford Light Trucks: 1 660 838

          I found this for full size only (Light equals fulls size, medium and small trucks in industry temrs)

          http://blogs.cars.com/photos/uncategorized/2009/01/07/fsttable560_2.gif

          Its shows that for 2007 Full size trucks:

          GM 820261
          Ford 698971

          2008
          GM 673334
          Ford 520144

          I’m didn’t say GM dominated Ford, you said Ford dominated the market. In my world dominates means making more sales, and domination implies at least by a sizeable amount.

          But hey why let a few facts and figures change your mind.

          James

        • #2953824

          Fudge and figures?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to So you don’t want to do the math, I will help you

          GM sales are based on total sales for all GM brands.

        • #2953827

          Go get a clue

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to You are being idiotic

          First of all James, I am a certified F series technician. I have repaired AND sold Ford trucks, Chevy trucks and Nissan LIGHT trucks.

          “Light truck or light duty truck is a classification for trucks or truck-based vehicles with a payload capacity of less than 4,000 pounds”
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_truck

          Truck classes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truck_classification

          Full size truck comparison:
          Ford F-150 Lariat
          Chevy Silverado
          Toyota Tundra
          Dodge RAM 1500

          All available at retail dealerships, not just commerical.

          Commonly, a full size truck is a truck with a ed size of 4X8 (enough for a sheet of playwood to lay flat).

          1/4 tonne and compact turcks/lkight trucks have a smaller bed, lower tow ratings and lighter payload capacity.

          YOu are arguing a moot point, there is ZERO purpose or gain from yoru argument. Shall we start a separate thread looking for PERSONAL AND PUBLIC OPINIONS of what a light truck is and what a full size truck is or do you wish to continue splitting that hair too?

          Again combinging sales of two brands does not ofer an accurate view of whihc brand is a best seller. Don’t know how you don’t se ethat, well maybe I do, you will see anything if you want ot argue it, relevant or not.

          Callign you a computer technician was not intended as an insult at all, nice you take it that way though, how defensive of you. the point is, you see life as specific definitions, most other see life as reality.

          Whereas MOST people woul dsee an F-350 on teh street and call it a full sized truck, which is acceptable to MOST others too, or a Ford Ranger and call it a mid-seized or light-truck, you would see them and put them both in the same classification, awaiting full towing and payload capacity figures in order to set them apart.

        • #2953807

          From your own source

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Go get a clue

          Commercial truck classification in the United States is done based on the vehicle’s Gross Vehicle Weight Rating. The classes range from 1-8.[1] It also done more broadly under the US DOT FHWA Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey (VIUS) standards, which groups Class 1 and 2 as “Light Duty”, 3-5 as “Medium Duty”, and 6-8 as “Heavy Duty”. [2][3]

          Class 1 and 2: GVWR up to 10,000 lbs.
          Examples include the Nissan Titan (what you call a full size truck) and the F250 (full size).

          So what the US government Department of Transportation classifies as a “Light Truck” includes all the Full size trucks you mention. Unless you want to convince me that an F250 is smaller than an F150.

          Thanks for the source. I knew that to be the case. It only makes sense from the sales numbers (or did you think that Ford was making a million Rangers a year?).

          Go ahead tell me I’m wrong again.

          James

        • #2953739

          Okay, you ARE wrong again

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Go get a clue

          Obviously teh government will consider ANY truck used for work purposes as a commercialvehicle. My EXPLORER is a commercial truck by governmnt standards, however by personal insurance standards it is a WAGON and not even a truck at all. Use it for business purposes and require commercial plates to park and move around downtoan and it is a commercial vehicle.

          Again though, I welcome you to start an individual thread simply asking, by listing a group of specific models, which are considered lightweight, which are considered full sized and which are considered commercial trucks. You obviously couldn’t pull it off and BS that many people though.

        • #2953769

          What we think of American vehicles

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Light trucks/pickups?

          http://videos.streetfire.net/video/057-Top-Gear-Ford-F150_183157.htm

          “doing whatever they’re doing…incest mostly…”

        • #2953754

          Come on Neil fess up

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to What we think of American vehicles

          Oz knows, as do I, as does anyone who watches Top Gear regularly that Jeremy Clarkson’s stock in trade is over the top hyperbole. He continually tries to top himself in outrageous statements.

          In fact the Toronto Star, which has a weekly automotive section, started to carry Jeremy’s columns, and received a torrent of hate mail. Once those nasty letters were published another torrent started, people who understand dark sarcasm.

          Actually the best example of how Top Gear feels about US cars is in the “Top Gear goes to America” episode, when they buy cheap junkers in Florida and drive to New Orleans with much hilarity along the way.

          James

        • #2953736

          the greatest car

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Come on Neil fess up

          “…in the world!” I love Clarkson, the Top Gear UK bunch are excellent! Can’t wait for the new season to start showing up for download…I mean, er, purchase.

        • #2953723

          I know, James…..but

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Come on Neil fess up

          we DON’T buy US cars in any quantity. The UK view of US car build quality is that it’s bad – and it’s not just Jezza saying that.

          🙂

        • #2953716

          Well and the pricing sucks

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to I know, James…..but

          When I hear Jeremy and the gang talk about the UK price for an american car, its a huge gap, far more than one can justify for a right hand conversion. You gotta be a little loonie to spend that kinda $$ on an american import.

          James

        • #2953700

          Same money, built in UK

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Well and the pricing sucks

          Ford has a plant in the UK, they build different cars than those built in North America, with a few similar models but also soem that are very different.

          UK models have far more engine options and driver preferences than our own, a far greater selection.

          A Ford Focus starts at a base of 11,995 UK Pounds MSRP. Converting that to US dollars, depending on teh variance in daily rates, you are lookign at about $19,600 US dollars.

          The Ford US MSRP for the base Fusion is $19,270.00 so they are almost the same price.

          That same UK car in Canadian dollars would cost: $23,313.00

          The Canadian MSRP for a base Fusion is : 21,449.00

          So there is a difference of about $2,000.00

          Where is this horrific gap you speak of for “converting” to right hand drive?

          They are actually engineered as right hand drive and built wihting teh UK as right hand drive, what coversion took place taht cost so much more that it becomes unappealing?

          Despite a grat slump, the top selling cars in the UK?

          TOP 10 SELLING CARS IN THE UK – APRIL 2009

          Ford Focus: 8,974
          Ford Fiesta: 8,395
          Vauxhall Corsa: 7,808
          VW Golf: 4,814
          Vauxhall Astra: 4,549
          Vauxhall Insignia: 3,262
          Peugeot 207: 3,136
          Audi A3: 2,439
          Ford Mondeo: 2,356
          Vauxhall Zafira: 2,140

          Neil, wih Ford holding the top 2 slots for new car sales, it kinda debunks the ‘nobody buys American cars’ issue doesn’t it?

          I agree nobody wants a Caddy or F-250, or even an Impala for that matter, but subcompacts seem pretty popular as always.

          on teh flipside I agree that until mroe recently American cars have been avoided like the plague.

          I rembemer in the summers right before Cowes week, we used ot get Americans who would ship their cars into the IOW and park them in teh car park behind our house. These were not yoru ordinary Americans cars but big Cadillacs with the US flag painted on the roof, flashy mags all shined up and sheepskin interiors. (tacky as all hell!)

          At that time, American cars were just a laughign stock, for some reason these guys would spend lots of money to park their cars on UK soil where they got laughed at all day.
          You never saw an owner drive hem they just sat in the parking lot for a week or so then were trailered out again. (yeah, smart, I know) :p

          But the American companies building in Europe these days have a somewhat different line up than we do here, a much more comprehensive set of choices, engine sizes, trim packages etc.

          We just get base econobox garbage that does nothing or top of the line econobox garbage full of bells and whistles that break.

        • #2934958

          Oz, I’ve driven a US-made Focus

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Well and the pricing sucks

          I hired one last US trip because I thought it would be good – familiar – to drive as I own a Focus – 1.8 Zetec.

          Despite having a bigger engine, it was surprisingly gutless. It also had a pretty poor “look and feel” but most disturbing of all was the hugely inferior handling. Just piss-poor chassis design, I suppose. The only reason that the car didn’t drive me mad was that in Florida there aren’t many corners to take at speed.

          Just because Ford is a US company doesn’t mean that the cars that it sells in Europe are.

          🙂

        • #2934908

          The cars I were referring to Oz

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Well and the pricing sucks

          Were cars that Top Gear has reviewed that were made in America and imported into UK.

          Such as:
          Ford F150
          Ford Mustang
          Chrysler Crossfire
          Cadillac CTS V

          AFAIK none of these are produced in Europe, and while creating a left hand drive version must cost some money, the premiums over and above seem outrageous.

          As you yourself have pointed out many many many times, (and I’ve never disagreed with) the UK Focus for example is an entirely different beast, better suspension, differnet engines and gearing etc.

          James

        • #2934769

          neil

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Well and the pricing sucks

          YOU know tha I know Ford manufactures cars in eth UK, roght? I just finished explaining that to someoen else too.

          “Ford has a plant in the UK, they build different cars than those built in North America, with a few similar models but also some that are very different.”

          Yeah, some peopel think that Ford build cars for teh UK, just like they do in North America, fact is we get utter shite in comparison to UK models.

        • #2934755

          That’s private importing though

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Well and the pricing sucks

          You know that’s not Ford by any means though, they don’t sell the Mustang and F-series in the UK, despite constant public pleas to do so.

          Private import prices are dropping fast though, due to the weaker US dollar.
          19,876.00 pounds ($just over 32,000.00 US)will get you a decent V8 Mustang. The smilar model in USD costs 31,000.00

          So again the difference is only $1000.00 and most don’t bother with the right hand driver cnversion, just as the Japanese and European ‘third party’ imports to Canada these days are right-hand drive too.

          I know Clarkson and Hammond ranted about it, I watch TopGear religiously but that was a couple of years back now.

        • #2933243

          UK Pricing

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Well and the pricing sucks

          To pick on one that Jeremy picked on the Cadillac CTS V costs 56,495 pounds or $91,750 by a UK importer(base price). It lists on GM’s US website at $60,700.

          The price I found for a Mustang GT Premium imported to UK was 34,500 pounds or $56,029 versus the US list of $30,500.

          Pretty big gap to me. I’ve looked at the shipping costs to import Japanese cars to Toronto, and I know its around $3-4000 Cdn per car, less if you get a container load of cars.

          James

        • #2933223

          LOL

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Well and the pricing sucks

          I am sure I can dig for even higher import costs if I look, but judgign by teh importer I looked at today, matching two Mustangs for build and price on TODAY’s figures, they were pretty much the same, small difference but nothing to run screaming from.

          From americanimports.com
          Cadillac CTS Sport luxury:
          ?28,750 SAVE ?1,245 from UK list
          = 47,140.77 USD
          US list from $37,585 – $59,730.

          Some listed options like custom paint etc. were extra. but that’s a landslide from your price of $56,495.punds which actually reflects a US retail price with full load!

          I am not saying it’s cheap to have cars hauled over from the US, in fact it is impractical and something only guys with many $ do.

          But Jeremy and the likes on Top Gear exaggerate for a living, they are all just journalists looking for sensation afterall, journalists that landed killer jobs that is.

        • #2933199

          LOL at you too

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Well and the pricing sucks

          CTS V, which I chose because it was reviewed on top gear. Has an engine based on the Corvette engine over 500 HP. Lets try apples to apples shall we?

          James

        • #2953711

          LOL

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to I know, James…..but

          I know a couple who just moved from Germany to St.Albans as they both bought used Ford’s (Probe’s if I remember right) upon arrival. Loving them too, but you have to remember, even though they are not the quality of a lot of European or Japanese cars, THOSE North American cars are still more reliable than our own. Now THAT’S sad!

        • #2933185

          Well depending on which Probe

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to LOL

          They could have had a Mazda engine or a Ford engine. Friend of mine with the Mazda clone MX6 with th Mazda 2.5L V6 loved his and had no issues.

          Other friend with the Probe GT had major issues.

          James

        • #2958004

          It pretty much is a Mazda

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to LOL

          Most of that car was built from a Mazda. The European models are most likely to have a Mazda 2.2L, the US engineered 3.0L didn’t sell well due to excessive size. Even a 2.2 is a large motor for European compacts these days.

          Was there a point to this excercise that I’ve missed or were youjust mentioning that Probes built in Europe used Mazda motors?

        • #2958000

          You can’t even agree to agree with me

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to LOL

          You were saying they had a reliable NA car, I was saying, may or may not be Mazda engine so that may account for the reliability.

          Do you just start out with all my posts and decide to disagree?

          James

        • #2957987

          Yes

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to LOL

          funny how that happens

        • #2934756

          Indeed, after that they were no longer allowed to make an…

          by slayer_ ·

          In reply to Come on Neil fess up

          Entertainment show. The next episode in America (testing muscle cars) had to be considered a documentary and could not be entertaining at all.

          So much fun that show.

        • #2934742

          that was good

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Indeed, after that they were no longer allowed to make an…

          They even got pulled over in Vegas and convinced the cop they were NOT being entertaining.

          Meanwhile they are all sh*ts and giggles, pulling a straight face when they started to look like they were having too much fun. That’s about the size of working on a show like that, TOO MUCH DAMN FUN!! I’d do it in a heartbeat though.

          I thought that episode was great, Ford pulled th Mustang out of the test because they though it would be cutting and joking, so they just went down the road and BOUGHT one instead. LOL.

        • #2934735

          I thought it was the challenger…

          by slayer_ ·

          In reply to that was good

          I remember specifically it was the slowest car.

          And James actualy hit the ditch while trying to accelrate without traction control.

          So much fun.

        • #2934714

          You’re right

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to that was good

          that’s right, it was the Challenger SRT8.

          I got mixed up with Hammond’s normal ride that he speaks abotu all the time, a US made Mustang.

          Dodge backed out of the road test, fear that they would be put down and joked about by the UK’s supercar boys.

    • #2944028

      just another mask

      by jaqui ·

      In reply to The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

      until the governments quit bailing the companies out the bad management won’t learn by losing everything.

      Government should be setting up replacement financial / insurance companies for the consumer. being backed by government not stock market, they will be a stable provider until the commercial providers fail / stabilize. and the government run ones can do the same for loans / mortgages as they do for student loans, they never go away, the money does get paid back, with interest.

      no free handout to companies, they have to pay it all back in the same way, the debt can only be cleared by repayment, with interest.

      • #2953823

        too true

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to just another mask

        and no amount of argument will ever change it.

    • #2953866

      Back to the original question, and, of course, my opinion

      by dadspad ·

      In reply to The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

      I would not call the current media blitz completely a mask. I seems to be more of marketing keeping the GM name alive while the, finally, let the engineers develop the product they should have been working on for years.

      The lack of engineering development put in vehicles is the main problem GM has. Emphasis on design and finances seems to dominate until the rest of the automotive world passed them by.

      Buying transportation is a very personal event. We tend to buy what our need dictate. Trucks are a good example. The light duty or pick up truck have been popular for many years due to their utiltarian value for both business and personal.

      A young growing family needs room. After WWII, there was the station wagon, then the minivan, then the SUV, now the crossover is popular. Again, these vehicles were bought, primarily, because the family need them.

      In quality, I do agree that years ago quality was an issue with all American vehicles, but not in today’s world. I can only vouch for the GM and Ford products I have bought, but they all were made with high qualtiy.

      • #2953818

        Be careful

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Back to the original question, and, of course, my opinion

        Light duty and pickup trucks are all the same, ask James. HE knows these things, he knew a guy who worked at Chrysler and has worked in “marketing” withing th eindustry before. Of course, as a certified truck technician myself, such info is well beyond my own understanding.

        ‘Full-sized pickup truck’ is a term I apparently made up, in actuality full sized trucks are ALL commercial and not available to consumers. Light trucks includes all consumer available trucks, regardless of payload or towing capacity, regardless of what the dealers insist they are and regardless of common consumer knowledge.

        Quality these dya IS getting better as it MUSt to compete with Japanese and European cars(it should have been in the 80’s too though), but if you compare materials, fit and finish with the same manufacturer’s vehicles made in other continents, ours pale. Just like everything ele we manufacture, we settle for lower standards than we see in other nations even by the same manufacturer. Expect less, get less.

        • #2953764

          Oz, are talking about the quality built in Canada?

          by dadspad ·

          In reply to Be careful

          Just kidding, I know a lot of GM, Ford are assembled in Canada. 😀

          I will disagree with you on the quality. Although, some models are/were not of equal quality, I have own autos that stand easily up to any manufacturers. I had a 70’s Firebird and a Murcury Cougar (very similar cars then) that I loved and had no quality issues on mine. Only really poor quality cars I have owned were small Dodge and Chevy, both imports and not pleasant memories.

          On the other hand I have met people that had bad experiences, maintenance wise, with Toyota and Nissan. There are bad cars made by all manufacturers and excellent cars made by all manufacturers. It is not fair to believe that some years US cars were very bad.

        • #2953733

          70’s

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Oz, are talking about the quality built in Canada?

          That was over 30 years ago. I had a rock solid Charger and a die hard Cougar and a killer Cuda too, but then we saw the 1980’s and then we saw the 1990’s and now we see bankruptcy.

        • #2934816

          the only, really true cars I know of

          by dadspad ·

          In reply to 70’s

          were the engines of the late ’78 and early 80’s (incuding many imports) that were not prepared for the air polution requirements going in effect. The main thing were the anemic engines. The 80’s gradually solved the problem and they became Demming disciples in the 90’s.

          When you talk about quality of cars in the US, you must look at the past and all makes not just some of the lemons all carmakers have occasionally.

        • #2934734

          I do

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to the only, really true cars I know of

          In fact it is the new models that are the worst built. It’s not a matter of air care or pollution control, those are surface add-ons and not the actual engineering and efficiency of the engine, though having an impact on combustion efficiency. Erupean models have had such pollution controls a lot longer than ours have.

          The only advancement that is to the consumers benefit is crumple zones. Many people cry aout how cars used to stand up i accidents and new ones just crumple, well that’s for a good reason as I am sure you already know.

          Instead of being thrown around and against a steel dash, now teh car abbsorbs impact and the passengers are pretty well protected from the impacts, reducing internal, life threatening injusires by a great deal.

          As for efficiency, our cars suck bag sompared to European designed. Our cars are NOT fuel fficient, they needlessly waste fuel energy by dissipatign it as heat because cheap manufacturing and engineering creates so much unnecessary heat from poorly comusted fuels. There is SO much energy stored in fuel, the idea of a good design is to get that fuel energy to the road. Close tolerances and superior materials ebsure European cars run efficiently and don’t waste fuel energy.

          US and Canadian models have poor engineering, cheap materials and they create so muhc heat from wasted fuel energy that they need little tin strips all over them to stop vital components from burning up.

          That HEAT is simply wasted fuel energy, you PAY for your engine to get hotter than it needs, to take the energy from the fuel and dissipate it into the air as heat. It’s a waste of money! But hey it makes a cheap car at the dealership so people line up in droves to buy them. The same build in Europe wouldn’t last ayear before being ditched. People simply wouldn’t buy it and waste their money on fuel.
          Considering the cost of fuel in the UK, wasting potential energy and disipating it as heat is intolerable for most.

          That’s MONEY heating up the outside air instead of propelling the car it was bought for.

          Our gas is cheap, so nobody seems to care if they waste the potential energy.

        • #2957887

          It seem Ford has a CEO from the European side

          by dadspad ·

          In reply to I do

          First thing he did was replace the Lincoln Towncar with a scaled down model (MKZ) that Ford said was what people wanted.

          The Lincoln Towncar (and it’s siblings) had top awards for safety, confort, same customer re-sale. The MKZ is smaller, less trunk space. The Towncar has a V8 with adequate response, the MKZ has a 6 cylinder with anemic response (they will fix that later).

          The point is, the big solid top safety Towncar gets the same gas mileage as the new better MKZ. The information comes from my wife’s car and the website claim of gas mileage on the MKZ.

          Not always do the Europeans have better cars and more efficient. The safety ratings are from JD Power.

          http://www.jdpower.com/autos/Lincoln/Town-Car/2004/Sedan

          Note: the mileage claim on the above for the Towncar is by my actual mileage measure for city and the internal one for highway.

        • #2957875

          From what I see driving down the road

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to I do

          In the big cities I live in, the only Town cars around are airport limos. The equivalent Cadillacs are often used in the funeral business. There are however an increasing number of BMWs/Mercedes and Audis around. This is the market that Mercury is persuing. Whether this makes sense is anyone’s guess.

          While things are going sideways in the US luxury market, in Canada Mercedes is actually doing better than last year. I’ve also heard Audi is doing well -people want something not as flashy as a BMW in these economic times.

          James

        • #2957848

          Dad how is that a point?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to I do

          My point is the same company engineers better vehicles for sale in Europe than their HO does in North America.

          You are referring to a car made in North America, the point is fair but irrelevant. All it really instills is that, even with a smaller motor, American made cars are still poorly engineered.

          It isn’t a testament to the old Towncar.

        • #2957844

          Expensive mports

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to I do

          Mercedes, BMW, Lexus etc. Sell by the thousands here, we have an incredible number of ‘well off’ oriental imigrants here. I have even considered selling cars again because the luxury sport vehicle market here is in a massive boom as if nothing has changed with the economy.

          You see teenage kids driving $80,000+ cars here all the time. Their parents live somewhere in Japan or China and the kids come here for school and have an endless supply of money. I knew a guy (21) a few years back who was sent here for an education, his parents would send him $30,000 every month or two, as requested. he just pi$$ed it away on anythign he wanted, went to school a coupe of time a week and then asked for another $30K for books, rent and such a month later. He lived in a LUXURY townhome, monthly rent around $1800.00 and just played like a rich kid.

          The thing is, he was not an exception but the norm.

          When I was a teenager, I rebuilt a 73 Ford pickup (The Blue Bitch)and delivered flyers, mowed lawns etc.to pay for gas…before I found out how easy it was to siphon anyway.

          After that it was a Ratsun 500, a ’67 Cougar, a Dodge Dart, several Hondas etc. Never was GIVEN a car (not a new car anyway, but was given a couple for $1), always begged borrowed and busted my arse to get it myself.

          I think I have more respect for money though, I need to because I don’t have as much of it I suppose. I had to earn everything, while I thought it sucked at the time, it sure as hell paid off for me, as now I am resourceful and can earn money doing just about anything these days.

    • #2953741

      Hey, wait a minute.

      by dhcdbd ·

      In reply to The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

      I have a 94 Nissan Sentra that was made in Japan (First three on vin JNE) rather than the Canadian make of this vehicle. The Vehicle runs fine and averages 33 MPG combined. It has 173,000 miles on it without full or partial rebuild. I am just getting around to a partial rebuild of the motor, i.e. check and if needed spin in oversized main bearings, replace crankshaft seals, check and shim or replace valve lifters, etc. There is currently no need for a full rebuild (bore cylinder walls, replace valves, valve springs, valve seats, valve guides, bore and hone main bearing seats, mill head, replace oil pump, etc).

      On a few of these posts I see that a rebuild needs to be done at 80,000 km. A kilometer is .69 of a mile, so that post reads that an engine needs a rebuild at appx. 40,000 miles. Another post reads that an engine needs a rebuid at 173,000 km which is apprx. 80,000 miles.

      Just who am I to believe: the 80k km, the 173k km, or my completion of an apprentice auto mechanics program in my teens at the Clark County, Nv County Motor Pool in my teens during the early 70’s?

      • #2953727

        Once again

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Hey, wait a minute.

        It depends entirely on your driving habits and routine maintenance.

        Now in your case if you feel that replacing cap bearings, and lifters is good enough, which it very well may be and that’s your decision. But why pull a motor apart and replace one thing wihle skipping over the rings, head gasket (plane), cam etc? Why SHIM a lifter when you can replace it for little money? Why shim a lifter when the cam is most likely worn below or near to tolerance? Or better still why SHIM a lifter period? Doesn’t that car use a pushrod system? I thought it was an OHV not an OHC?

        A full recondition makes a lot more sense to me, not a full rebuild but at least a proper reconditioning before buttoning it up again.

        • #2953721

          Why ask why.

          by dhcdbd ·

          In reply to Once again

          1. Compression test reveals no compression problems, thereby indicating no ring sealing problems or valve seating problems.

          2. The ga16de engine that this car has uses solid lifters driven by dual overhead cams, solid lifters need shimming not replacement to correct for wear unless the camshaft is excessively worn. The camshaft is withing specs.

          3. the milage is at a point where prudence indicates checking the wear on the mains. This requires removing the oil pan and the main caps and then checking with plastiguage.

          4. The principle is de-minimus work, not replacing parts that do not need it. This is one of the things that was drilled into me repeatedly during my apprenticeship so many years ago.

          5. The ga16de is known for two things: high oil consumption without burning oil, and 300k miles before partial rebuild is needed under normal maintenance conditions. You check the timing chain at 80,000 (it is withing spec at 173k, check front oil seal at 60k to 80k intervals [in my case, when the seal was replaced I sleeved the crankshaft rather than replace it or the harmonic balancer, both equally effective solutions to the groove that a worn seal creates]) you check lifter clearance at 60k to 80k.

          6. The solution that you propose is analogous to tearing out the walls in your home and replacing all the wiring because a wall socket is defective. It does not make sense. Just replace the defective socket.

          As a side note: a few years ago the ECU on this car failed. Because I wanted a warranty on the ECU I took the car in to a mechanic along with my work notes in isolating the problem. The dealer wanted to replace almost everything that had anything with engine performance. I walked out. I located a mechanic that agreed in writing not to charge for anything that did not require replacement, gave him my notes. He replaced almost everything that had anything to do with engine performance. In the end it cost me $600 for a new ECU and he ate almost $1200 in parts that did not need replacing such as MAP sensor, O2 sensor, anti knock sensor, and temperature sensor. Once the ECU was replaced all those problems were determined to be due to a faulty ECU. I determined the problem before hand by replacing the MAP sensor and then checking the ECU voltages.

        • #2953695

          Why ask?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Why ask why.

          1) Compression is okay MAY mean rings are sealing properly, could also mean rings are embedded and not flexing with the taper, how do you know where the compression if from? top or bottom of stroke? It says VEry little regarding valve seats though, you would need to do a leakdown test for that.

          2) Even with a DOHC “shimming” is cutting corners ( I hav yet to see someone justify shimming a lifter or even bothering to do so to begin with), why not just replace faulty lifters? You can do so with compressed air and a pickle fork, it only takes minutes and costs little for a much greater end result.

          3) You said replace main bearing caps, not platiguage them. if they needed raplacing as well as lifters and other work like water pump, oil pump etc. It’s a lot easier to bench the motor than do an in car, you know that though. that’s what they teach you in fourth year, when and when not to pull it.

          4) not replacing parts when they don’t need it? That would probably be why I recommended a recondition (not rebuild) of all worn parts, Plane a head, replace teh gasket, reseat teh valves, new rings bearings and gaskets, you know the $150.00 rebuild kit, not the full pull.

          6) YOU are so far off base, as you are suposedly a mechanic and know better, why would you not see teh difference between a rebuild and a reconditioning? Why would you feel it easier to do such repairs in car and nto just pull it and do it all in less time and with less effort?

          So yuo beat out a guy who you thought scammed you? Don’t get teh point of that part though, perhaps proof of something I haven’t said either?

        • #2953680

          Bad memory or selective reading?

          by dhcdbd ·

          In reply to Why ask?

          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=311297&messageID=3096742

          Me:”check and if needed spin in over sized main bearings”

          All solid lifters are shimmed in some form, whether via valve adjustment set screw, or shims. In this case shimming is what is done at the factory, therefore in checking and perhaps correcting valve lash shimming is what is called for.

          If a cylinder holds over 120 LBS of pressure at my altitude, then it does not matter because the valves are sealing as are the rings. Therefore that is a moot issue.

          You ask why not replace faulty lifters? The point is addressed above, but again. The manufacturer of the motor (Nissan GA16DE) shims the lifters at the factory because of manufacturing variances involved. The factory recommends shimming or checking the valves every 60 to 80k miles. Why do they do so? The shims are of a softer metal than the camshaft and they are primarily what wears. Nissan, for this car, manufactures 50 sizes of shims just for adjusting valve lash.

          No, I did not beat out the guy who I took my car to when I wanted the ECM replaced. He got his money back. What happened is that based on knowledge of computers and experience with cars I diagnosed the car independent of the on board OBDC1 based upon reading the code and replacing what the OBDC indicated was wrong. When that part was replaced and the OBDC indicated that the new part was bad, I used my head, experience and knowledge to look for a common issue to the problems indicated. It would be extremely rare for all the performance (read emissions) parts to fail at the same time. This in turn led to checking voltages at the ECM (computer). When those voltages read incorrectly, I built a module that interfaced with the ECU and overrode the settings selectively via laptop until I isolated the problem. If you wish, I will take photo’s of the module and email them to you; you can tell the module is hand built because it is bread boarded on perfboard and because the port connection is cut off paper clips that were inserted into the port slots. I used Nissan’s DataScan program as the controlling program for the laptop. This professional mechanic assured me that he had the proper tools and equipment for the job. I simply took a proactive approach and refused to pay for unneeded repairs or replacement parts; which by the way is common in the auto world.

          You wish to speak of cylinder wall runout? Then, of course, you must know that the only ways to correct that are to either replace the block or bore it because honing is not the correct solution.

          You, of course, also know that if you remove an aluminum head, then you are virtually guarantying that you will have to mill it.

          Then, of course, you know that if a cylinder holds compression that the cylinder is not leaking via the valves when they are seated.

          You know, again of course, that there is only one way to check for main bearing wear and that that is with plastiguage; that this is what is done at the dealer and what any Chilton’s or Mitchell’s, and the dealers service manual will tell you. A micrometer in this application is useless. Why? because when you untorque the main the crankshaft drops and a micrometer will only inform you of the wear on the bearing and not that of the crankshaft, but the plastiguage gives you both in one shot.

          The difference between the specialist and the generalist is that the generalist knows more and more about about less and less until he knows everything about nothing. This was the purpose of this thread, not to argue the specifics of repairing a car.

          To leave you with one question: how is it easier to remove three motor mounts, 16 transmission mounts, all the fluid, vacuum hoses, and the hood of the car and then lift the motor out of the car to do the work out of car than it is it is to remove 16 bolts each on the oil pan and valve cover and 8 on the main caps to do up the work in car?

        • #2934692

          oh god not again

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Bad memory or selective reading?

          People here and their friggin semantic arguments make me puke!

          “All solid lifters are shimmed in some form”
          Horsesh*t, MOST have some form of adjustment but a 2.3L 4-cylinder, Honda’s 2000CC Civic Motor, Volkswagens fox (mid ot late 80’s) and MANY MANY others have NO lash adjustment, the only resolution, and recommended solution for lifters that don’t pump up anymore is a replacement lifter. As it is easier to simply replace a lifter than to measure lash and adjust with shims until lash meets spec.

          Your compression test now regards HOLDING pressure, which would be a full leak down test not a base compression test.

          I don’t need your module I use an Autotap system with my noteook.

          replace block or bore? Sure in an older car or high performance car you can resleeve it. But in most cases it is just as effective to go over 30 thou and use oversized rings and pistons, as do all engine reconditioning shops. My ’74 Cuda I restored could have even sleeved but I went 60 over and bought oversized pistons and rings. It shortened the stroke enough (which was square initially, with 188 intakes which I oversized to the 340 Dart’s 202’s) that when balanced and blueprinted I was looking at another 40HP.

          Your plastiguage comments belong in a grade 10 power mechanics workbook, have no idea why you even mention it here. My point is that if yuo are going to check your mains, install new seals and replace/check lifters, why wouldn’t yuo take the hour to pull teh motore and do it all properly? Teh way you are doing it is the type of thing you get from a recon shop mechanic on a time limit.

          You are then trying to tell me what the purpose of the thread is, did you note who started the thrdiscussion to begin with?

          It has NOTHING to do with specialists or generalists, it has everything to do with manufacturer lies.

          You can pull that motor in 45 minutes, after which time you can replace and measure parts as needed with little effort. Replacing the motor takes as much as 2hrs including fills. Or at least that’s the time allotted in the CAW service estimate, it ususally takes less time when you have done a few.

          You make transmission to bell housing bolts seem to be a lot more than they really are. A 24″ extension on an air ratchet and they are all out in 5 mins (I worked at a trans shop in 3rd year, VERY tight times and you learn to get it done FAST).

          You should be able to pull a trans in a front wheel drive in aout 20 minutes, a rear wheel drive in less.

          But you know all that, you just want to debate procedure and partially reconditioning your motor versus actually reconditioning it. I had a service manager who used to tell me ot do that, to save time, when I showed him that in the same time I can pull properly measure and recondistion the engine, and he could charge mroe for more replaced parts. that required engine removal/block planing etc, he soon shut up.

        • #2933150

          Apparently

          by dhcdbd ·

          In reply to oh god not again

          You do not understand the difference between a solid and a hydraulic lifter, you also appear not to know how a motor is installed in a B13.

          You may be a certified Ford Truck mechanic, but I do not believe it and I do not think anyone else does either.

          All solid lifters are shimmed or adjusted in some form because they do not rise to adjustment as do hydraulic lifters. Motors with rocker arms have a set screw for this adjustment, on motors with OVH cams shims are used. This is why they are called “Solid lifters.” Remember that in OVH cams the cam lobe comes into direct contact with the lifter, therefore there is no place for a adjustment screw and because the lifter is solid the lifter itself cannot adjust. This now resorts to a recursive argument, so I will let it go.

          You could possibly sleeve a cylinder on an aluminum block but you would have to be very very careful for a few reasons: thermal expansion characteristics between steel and Al (if you chose steel), ditto with iron (if you chose iron), ditto with Al; Al is a very malleable metal and the risk of deformation is high. When a sleeve is pressed in it compresses the material it is being pressed into. When that material is heated under normal use the Al. considerably expands and compresses itself. Add in the expansion of the sleeve. When the engine cools the sleeve is now loose. This is why Al. is no longer allowed in house wiring and against all building codes in the U.S.

          If you choose to debate the issue of motor removal,I will be happy to scan either Chltons, Mitchells, or the Nissan service manual and send it to you.

        • #2933126

          I follow you two with interest

          by santeewelding ·

          In reply to oh god not again

          Not, of course, that I know a thing about it…

        • #2957997

          You’re right

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to oh god not again

          I know nothing about what you are talkign about. I certainly wasn’t aware there were different types of lifters and a B52 did you say? That’s a pretty big plane indeed, way out of my league. I actually spent 6 years in school and 10 in the field so I could become a bicycle mechanic and am pretty good at oiling chains now.

          Thanks for your waste of breath, you have proven your point, MAN are you ever friggin clever!

          One goo dthing is noody here is going to have you “fix” their car half-assed to get them rolling for a few more months. I do feel for those who’s cars you do fix though, exactly the type of mechanics mentality that people are so scared of when they take their cars in.

          Now f-off and go waste someone else’s time with your bullshit.

          Get a life, a real one this time.

    • #2953706

      A few points from my perspective

      by maxwell edison ·

      In reply to The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

      1. I have a 22 year old 4×4 Chevrolet pick up with over 200k miles (one that was 6 months old w/10k when I bought it). It’s still going strong, and I’ll probably put another 100k – 200k on it before it’s over. Hands down, it’s one of the most dependable vehicles I’ve ever owned.

      2. The government didn’t bail-out GM to bail-out GM. They did it to bail-out the union membership that was working at GM.

      3. The government didn’t bail-out GM, they nationalized the company.

      4. They should have let them fail – period – not given them a dime, and let the chips fall where they may – unionized chips, corporate chips, and otherwise.

      • #2953705

        Agree (NT)

        by dhcdbd ·

        In reply to A few points from my perspective

      • #2953694

        Uh huh

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to A few points from my perspective

        Your Chevy runs great, the government didn’t bail out GM, they helped the union and that costs you a lot less as a taxpayer and means that GM builds a great product line and has earned the right to stay in business.

        I agree they don’t deserve a dime. Just like ANY other company big or small, you live in a country built upon capitalism. THIS is not capitalism though. They are beaten out by fair competition in their own market segment, they lose.

        Unfortunately it seems that this stupid fear/loathing of “the Japs” has not really gone away since the mid 20th century but it has changed it’s face a bit. There’s no way a Japanese company should be able to win over a US auto market, but of course the opposite is faiir game.

        • #2953666

          I’m confused

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Uh huh

          I’m not sure if that’s a good reply or one intended to insult. Oh well, what else is new?

          You tell me. Which is it?

        • #2934948

          That’s easy to figure out. That’s standard OZ

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to I’m confused

          Surely you know by now that he’s an expert on everything. Let’s see now; due to his direct personal involvement, he’s become an expert on R & R, Artist management,IT, Programming, Computer languges, Whisky, Horses and horse racing, Law, Management practices, Cigars, Motorcycles, The USA, Canada, The UK, foreign exchange, foreign relations, military affairs, politics, business in various foreign climes, medicine, video recording, cinematography, studio music recording,and that’s only to name a few of his fields of expertise. He does exhibit a certain degree of modesty in admitting to somewhat inferior keyboarding skills, which makes for an air of refreshing modesty bur it must be difficult to exhibit such humbleness when you are as superior as the great OZ. The only question remaining is; with all this going for him , why isn’t he rich. Maybe he’s a philanthropist as well.

          Let’s wait for it. 😉

          [b][i]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2934862

          oh so close

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to That’s easy to figure out. That’s standard OZ

          It isn’t inferior keyboarding skills. It is as he has repeatedly told us, that he is in a hurry and just doesn’t CARE enough to make sure it is right.

          Oh, if only we were worthy his full attention……. 😀

        • #2933274

          Both right

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to oh so close

          I can’t type, my keyboard is actually missing the B right now, and I don’t care enough to edit most of my comments, unless sharing a fair discussion with a reasonable person.

        • #2933266

          Not likely

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Both right

          that you will find a reasonable person to have your fair discussion with… ;\

          As for typos, thank goodness FF has a built in speel cheeker….. 😀

        • #2933248

          I know

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Both right

          On reasonable discussion I agree with you, though Max often perks my interest and I must admit has taught me a great deal about US politics, from his viewpoint at least.

          We used to have a good dozen peers here who offered up very interesting debates and teh rule of thumb was al assertions were automatically suported with sources for validation, Max was part of that group and why I respect most of his opinions. We also had GuruofDOS who was grat and still sometimes pops in to touch base. Neil is interesting and very knowledgablein many areas, however he is dismisse dby many as his opinions are often read to be assertions of fact, as are often mine when they are opinions but people see them as me making factual assertions against THEIR opinion.

          For the most part, TR peers are not what they used to be, but it’s certainly a more coloruful bunch these days anyway. Half of what we say now would never have been accepted before.

        • #2934728

          Ooops, forgot at least one thing; thus this addendum.

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to That’s easy to figure out. That’s standard OZ

          Along with the profundity of personal experiecnce and knowledge that OZ has, it seems ‘ol OZ has also become an expert on the the economy and the markets. All this while we weren’t looking. He must have foreseen the downturn and consequently made so much money, that he now, as JD says,doesn’t give us his full attention. By his standards we don’t deserve his presence. He misses the point that noby deserves having to put up with his know-it-all, mouthy attitude.

          Amongst all his other areas of knowledge and expertise, it seems he has also taken the time to turn himself into an expert on physics and the Laws of Thermodynamics

          As JD says,he doesn’t give us his full attention, probably because he thinks of us as beneath him. This is much in keeping to his lack of any attention to detail, which accounts for the abysmal keyboarding skills.

          Consequently we have lived to see ol’ OZ take up opposing viewpoints within the same email, nevermind, within the same thread. Ol’ OZ is a true wit; a nitwit!!!

          Waiting for it. :^0

          [b][i]Dawg[/b][/i] ]:)

        • #2933269

          It’s pretty hard tracking your endless, compulsive lies but here goes:

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ooops, forgot at least one thing; thus this addendum.

          Here we go again, yet another post from Dawg completely filled with lies and false assertions.

          You offer so much BS I am not sure if you even know the difference between your lies and the truth anymore.
          Last time you went on a rant, full of lies and BS, threatening me about coming here and visiting my home in Port Hardy, I called you to task and offered to meet you in the mainland while I was there on work.
          I thought it would make things easier for you as i know the territory well.
          You then told me that your ‘bird’ would be landing at Vancouver International for gas and you wouldn’t be there long enough to come and meet me. I then offered to meet you at the airport as I have a friend who lives there and it would be no effort on my part. At that time you went on with some more excuses and more lies. You even said you had been by my house, and when I described a completely different house that doesn’t exist, you agreed that was the one you visited and that I wasn’t home, obviously caught in your lies.

          So now we see yet more lies and false assertions, without an ounce of proof to support it, just like everything else you claim. Chances are you are a shut-in, you are a loser, a bottom feeder and a sad pathetic man just trying to be somebody you wish you had become, via the internet.

          So once again we get to revisit another day of Sleeping Losers compulsive lies.

          You suggest I am an expert on many things (flattery will get you nowhere), NONE of which I have EVER claimed to be an expert on. You seem to feel that offering opinion based on personal experience is the same as professing to be an expert. Is there ANYONE here who does not reply to posts or discuss topics based on personal exposure or experience? No, including yourself besides your lies.

          False assertions/outright lies from you where you claim I profess to be an expert:

          [b]R&R/Artists management[/b]: I have NEVER claimed to be an expert on either subject. However my 20+ years of personal experience do afford me a strong working knowledge of the industry. As I have many years of market development, artist development and industry exposure on various levels, I offer opinions from my own first-hand experience, but never claim to be an expert as you so decided to lie. I will defend a point in most cases as I usually have specific experience that others here don’t

          [b]IT/Programming/Computer languages:[/b] Not ONCE have I EVER said I was an expert in either field, NOT ONE SINGLE MENTION OF IT. Technically I am a Master Certified Novell Engineer, but I know CNE’s that have more hands on knowledge and experience than I do. I know how to write basic python scripts/modules for use in email filtering and SPAM reduction. Again you lie. (Lie @2 actually)

          [b]Whiskey[/b] again NOT ONCE have I claimed to be a whisky expert. I drink Scotch and have developed a pallet that can differentiate between brands and some finishes. I think I have a good understanding of Whiskey, what’s good and what’s crap, but never said I was an expert. (That would be Lie #3 for you now, I’m being nice by grouping your lies too)

          [b]Horses and Horse racing[/b] Again you lie, I have NEVER EVER said I was an expert on horse racing, in fact there are NO such things as horse racing experts. I am a good handicapper and know how to read forms and predict potential winners based on past performances. I have never, as you claim, said I was an expert. Spending a lot of time at the track and studying race horses, I do have a better understanding of the races than most though.

          [b]Law[/b] While I did consider following through and pursuing a legal career, after studying psyche and criminology, I chose not to. However, I do have two lawyers in the family, one who I have spent extensive time with learning law and sitting in on cases he has handled. He works in corporate law, so I use speak from real experiences and the BC law library when discussing corporate legal issues here. Again though, I have NEVER EVER professed to be an expert on law, just a person with a lot of personal exposure and a strong understanding of Canadian law.

          [b]Management practices[/b] I have been in management since I was 18 or 19. I have managed groups from 4 to 200 staff, have a business management degree and am currently a business development manager. Though I have NEVER EVER claimed to be an expert, I do have a great knowledge of management practices and a lot of experience working in the field. (Losing count of all your incessant lies AGAIN!!)

          [b]Cigars[/b] As with Scotch I smoke cigars and have done for some time. I have not EVER said I was an expert on cigars and I think the topic has only ever been raised once or twice in which case I have not offered any specific knowledge of cigars other than first hand experiences of my own. (Again, and not surprisingly, you LIE again.)

          [b]Motorcycles[/b] Once again, you are a liar. I have owned motorcycles in the past, now own two dirt bikes. My uncle used to race bikes on the Isle of Man and I have fixed my own more than a few times, so I do have SOME first hand knowledge and some passed on. At NO time however, have I EVER said I was an expert on the subject though. I can discuss experiences and offer personal opinions on bikes but that’s about it. (what’s that, LIE #100 from you now)

          [b]The USA, Canada, The UK,[/b] USA, I have travelled America more than many Americans. I have operated offices and stayed in the USA for extended periods of time, I have seen MOST states. I have conducted business in and with Americans and American companies for years, I market to teh American public. When I speak of America I speak from personal experience and offer personal opinion based on that experience. I have NEVER EVER said I was an expert though, just another LIE from you again. Canada, well I frickin well live here, I think I’ve got a pretty damn good understanding of Canada but am not a political expert nor have I ever claimed to be one. The UK, first of all I was born there, I AM a UK citizen, I have most of my family there, I have bank accounts and run a business based just outside of London, I have artist contracts there and still spend time there when I can. While I again NEVER claimed I am an expert on the UK, just as any other citizen of any other country I do have a valid and qualified opinion on most matters. Once again, the Dawg is a blatant LIAR.

          [b]Foreign exchange?[/b] That’s just a lie to begin with, no idea what you were on about there. Have I exchanged money before? yes, and I have a good friend who is a foreign exchange broker, I guess that means you see me as an expert.

          [b]Foreign relations and military affairs[/b] Even governments with a ministry of foreign affairs aren’t experts on foreign affairs and I have DEFINITELY NEVER said I was an expert on foreign affairs. It seems that if I have an opinion, you confuse that with me saying I am an expert. Well thanks again for the flattery, but it is unwarranted in this case. (You just wanted to lie some more, didn’t you? What else is there to do when you name yourself DAWG). Military? My opinion is as valid as any and based on similar criteria.

          [b]Business in various foreign climes[/b] I have conducted business worldwide. part of that role is having a good working knowledge of business practices, demographics and marketing across different markets. Once again, I have NEVER EVER said I was an expert on the subject but merely offer my own knowledge based on personal experience.

          You’ve lied god knows HOW many times now!

          [b]Medicine[/b] I have offered my opinion a few times, especially with respect to private vs subsidized medical systems, but that is as valid as any. It doesn’ t make me an expert nor have I ever claimed otherwise. You just don’t know how to say anything without lies, do you?

          [b]Video recording, cinematography, studio music recording[/b] I have HAD to learn video production for both work and for music videos, and have attended BCIT classes on video editing. I have NEVER EVER said I was a video editing expert. Again that’s another LIE from you. [b]Cinematography?[/b] WTF? [b]Studio Music recording[/b], I was a concert sound engineer for 4 years, after that time I engineered and produced quite a few tracks for bands and have picked up the ability by hands-on work.I have a home studio with an analogue board used by AC/DC at Little Mountain Sound in Vancouver and run Cakewalk through it (pretty cool indeed!). I actually explained quite recently that I am constantly LEARNING that field, though I have sat with some pretty well known/famed engineers and producers as they helped me learn the ropes in their studios. Again THREE LIES IN ONE DAWG!!

          Man, you just can’t enter a single HONEST keystroke, can you?

          So it is clear that if I have an OPINION on a subject and stand by my opinion, you feel that is the same as me CLAIMING to be an expert on the subject. This of course means that TR is full of experts on any field imaginable, as they all offer opinions, some just opinions based on media portrayals, others from life experience others from actually having a learned knowledge of the subject.

          I know that with you being incapable of anything but being a compulsive liar, you must get depressed at the thought of not being an expert at anything but sharing lies. Your limbs have failed you, which is no laughing matter but a reality you face all the same. You are most likely just a shut-in, no life, no hope, nothing really worth waking up for, except to jump on TR pretend to be someone you aren’t and spend all day spewing out more and more lies with no substance and no proof to support them

          That is a pretty f’kin sad way to waste your few remaining years, but a great way to remind everyone of what the world will be rid of when those years and yourself finally expire.

        • #2933159

          Well there’s the ol’ OZ we’ve all come to know and love

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to It’s pretty hard tracking your endless, compulsive lies but here goes:

          Feeling a wee bit put upon are you now?? Not taking to the heat too well, are you??

          Don’t sweat it Sparky. Your a legend in your own mind and the epitomy of a loud-mouthed know-it-all barstard in everyone elses.

          I’d bet you make at the very least, 15 posts to anyone of mine

          [b][i]Dawg[/b][/i] ]:)

        • #2957990

          No its just you

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to It’s pretty hard tracking your endless, compulsive lies but here goes:

          YOu like to lie, annoy and offer up the rudest comments in an effort to be noticed and create a shock factor.

          It is childish, you are full of lies and seem to impress yourself more than anyone else.

          FACT is, you posted an endless line of horseh*t about me and what I have said, of COURSE I am going to correct you, you are a bold faced compulsive liar and it shows in most of your comments.

          But you can have a rant and throw out a bunch of BS about others and that’s just fine right? If someone proves you are a liar and defends their charactes they are feeling ‘put upon’.

          Fk off and die already, we’ve been waiting several years now and you almost promised you were getting cloe to your expiry date before, I suppose just more lies though, you sound like a snot nosed 12 year old, wanking in mom’s undies while she’s at work to pay for your therapy.

          What a loser, what a bottom feeding cretin.

        • #2957739

          Keep it up. I don’t have to do anything; you’re proving my point for me.

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to It’s pretty hard tracking your endless, compulsive lies but here goes:

          .

        • #2957736

          Keep it up. I don’t have to do anything; you’re proving my point for me.

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to It’s pretty hard tracking your endless, compulsive lies but here goes:

          Speaking of lies and liars, I’d say it takes one to know one, but that aside, do you really think anyone is impressed by your line of drivel expressed in the crudest of terminology and the poorest of keyboarding skills??? Should I remind you of the time …….. nah that would be descending to your level and would be far too easy a shot for me. You really aren’t worth the effort, but …………..
          Say hi to your old pal ………. like him, are you still big on …….
          Remember getting a post pulled??? Not many rose to your defense, did they?//

          As I said you’re a legend in your own little delusional mind. Do I care what you think about anything, never mind me??? I just get a laugh out of making you get your tail in a twist winding yourself up. Now I’d suggest getting back on your meds before you hurt yourself.

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2956499

          Great defense as always

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to It’s pretty hard tracking your endless, compulsive lies but here goes:

          Whenever yuo are proven full of sh*t you just change teh subject to somethign irrelevant and dwell on it.

          NO I don’t remember having a post pulle,d though many people have done, incldign yourself several times for offering offensive comments that multiple people report as spam.

          But that’s your sorry, sad pathetic life, not mine and again, I don’t give a rat’s arse what you do with your life, it’s your demise. I and thousands of others who have tripped across your mmisguided path, will celebrate tha day that you no longer infest the world with your incessant lies, and bullsh*t.

          Difference between you and I, besides your lack of intelligence, I can prove and substantiate what I have done, you are just an old man full of lies, hot air and a thick layer of BS on top.

        • #2933279

          Close, but I am not the compulsive liar you are, that’s your expertise

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to That’s easy to figure out. That’s standard OZ

          However I have explained dozens of time that I am a jack of all trades but master of nothing, perhaps you missed all that amongst dreaming up your constant lies.

          I am not an expert on R&R an dartist management, have never said so, though I do find I have more experience in the industry than anyone else that has come forward here so far.
          I do appreciate your flattery but is just your view of my expertise I suppose.

          I have NEVER EVER said I am a master at programming or computer languages. I am Master Certified Network Engineer (it’s Novell’s title, not a self imposed one, I have the paper/card too). I don’t know ANY computer languages outside of Python, which I have only used for specific scripting based on its functionality with fewer lines and ability to make errors.
          Whiskey? I drink a lot of fine Scotch and appreciate Scotch, but it is a personal preference, I have never claimed ot be a Scotch expert, EVER. Cigars? I smoke cigars but I have never said I was an afficionado on the subject.

          How many more blatant lies will you come up with here?

          Motorcycles? What have I ever said about beign a motorcycle expert? I own bikes, I ride, I can fis them but I have NEVER said I was an expert on motorbikes, again just more lies from you, as always expected.

          the USA, I am NOT an expert on teh USA, have never said I was. I have great exposure to teh USA, have travelled MOSt of the US states, have oopearted US offices and stayed for extended time in the USA. I have met thousands of Americans and I am swamped with US networks from all over teh country every day.

          Compared to people from teh UK, Middle East and Autralia, I have a greater knowledge of teh US and Americans than most foreigners do. I have also seen mroe of teh US than many Americana have. This does not make me an expert on teh subject nor have I ever claimed i was. Just that I make QUALIFIED opinions basedon first hand exposure and knowledge.
          My knowledge of America is far more accurate than the lies you share here that are proposed as your own knowledge and expertise on me.

          The UK, well I’m not an expert, more than any other citizen of the UK is, but I am from the UK, lived there, run a business there etc. and understand teh British mentality a lot better than most foreigners do. Again, your LIES about my “claims” that have never been made are unfounded.
          Foreign exchange, that’s ripe, post links please where I claim to be a foreign exchange expert, LIAR.
          Foreign relations, NOBODY is an expert on foreign relations, including our nation’s leaders and staff. I have also NEVER claimed to be an expert on foreign relations, again your just rife with LIES.
          Military affairs, I get news you get news they get news etc. Please post that link to where I claim to be an expert on military affaors? liar.
          Business in foreign climes? Again you lie for the sake or typing words. never claimed to be a foreign business expert, I have worked with businesses worldwid and marketed merhandise and promoted worldwide though. not an expert just speaking from personal experinces. Medicine? What teh F are you on about there? You are so clueless, what a liar! Video recording, I do a lot of video work, more then than now but am mroe focused on audoi engineering now. Cinematography? Where the hell do you come up with this garbage? Liar. stuiod recording, I have been to school for audio engineering and have worked iwth some pretty famous engineers and producers who taught me the ropes and some common mainstream hit tricks. it is a skill I am still developing but again yo LIE when you assert I claim to be an expert on the subject.

          Compared to yourself though, who simply does nothing but lie about whatever he wants to make a point about, I am an expert in just about everything, but I pale in comparison to yrou ability to fabricate stories about people and make false claims and lie about what they say.

          Why aren’t I rich? I have investments, but I am not rich, I am also not teh person you seem ot think I am. According to your lies, I would be aout 7 hundred years old and a billionaire. but as reality has it, I am 40 and just been around teh block many times. It’s not such a stretch when you aren’t complacent or set on a single track through life.

          My attitude is I’ll do and try anything, if there’s something I haven’t tried yet, let me know so I can do it now.

          sorry to hear that it is so unfathomable for you to see hwo someone can be mroe than a one trick pony.

          I suppose its hard for you to comprehend, when you make a life of lies; its hard to for you to see how anyone could have done more with their life other than become a miseable, old, spastic, sod that is of no value to anyone, including himself.

          I won’t wait for your proof, you’ve never been able to support your lies before, why would you begin now?

        • #2933154

          Oh yeah? Okay loud-mouth, let’s see you try …………………

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Close, but I am not the compulsive liar you are, that’s your expertise

          Russian roulette with all the chambers loaded.

          Just quoting you.

          [i]My attitude is I’ll do and try anything, if there’s something I haven’t tried yet, let me know so I can do it now.[/i]

          We’ll be waiting, but I know you’re goig to let us all down. I’ll try not to be too disappointed if you don’t keep your word and follow through, although it will be considered a pity by many.

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2957978

          Yeah that’s what I meant!

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Oh yeah? Okay loud-mouth, let’s see you try …………………

          Now that would be th ekind of idiotic thing I would expect form you actually. Just because I haven’t fallen withotu a parachute from 30,000′ doesn’t mean its a challenge for me.

          You are such a tool, your brain operates slower than my 3 month old cousin’s, you offer the dumbest most idiotic comments of all on TR and think that people find you witty or clever. Face it, you are a neo-maxi-zoom-dweebie. Nobody wants to hear from you or read your lies, you have proven for years now all you know how to do is offer tasteless humour and lies ina quest for attention. Well you had mine but you’ve lost it again, doesn’t take long with you.

          What a loser.

        • #2957726

          You’re just like a little snot nosed baby having to have the last word.

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Oh yeah? Okay loud-mouth, let’s see you try …………………

          You said it and my reply was just to show you up as being big mouth that you are. Even if you had done it, who would really care??? It might make for some crude comments on Friday Yuk; along the lines of, “Ol’ OZ must have had a real mind blowing experience” but other than that nobody would be unduly concerned. In fact I seriously doubt anyone would piss on you, even if you were on fire.

          Now before you blow a fuse, better suck down one of your Prozacs. Once you’ve calmed yourself THEN you can reply with your usual line of profanity. BTW just what medications are you on these days. I know it’s Prozac for the depression but what are you taking for your OCD? Considering your past history with addictive halucenogenics, and your possiably being bi-polar, prescribing for you must present a real challenge for your analyst. What are your voices telling you???

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2956488

          You just proved you are lost

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Oh yeah? Okay loud-mouth, let’s see you try …………………

          What “addictive” hallucinogenics would you be speaking of, oh uninformed liar?

          I don’t even know why bother with you, if yo have an issue you know where I am and are welcome to show up and try to prove your point face to face, as you have offered and lied about before.

          Other than that, find a hole (the one the rock left behind when you cralwed out from under it will do, curl up and die, you will be missed by nobody, but peope will notice you are missing when the Friday Yuk isn’t plastred with one crippled, old perverts cut and pasted humour.

          Eiteh stand up and be counted, or stfu. Yuo can’t won’t never have been able to counter or debate a single comment about yourself, you have never proven anyone wrong when they call yuo a liar, a sh*thead, an idiot, etc. as they are always spot on and you don’t even have a leg to stand on, literally.

          You have proof of NOTHING because you ARE nothing. Man, if i was you I’d just pull teh trigger what a waste, it must be so depressing and embarassing to realize just how little people care about you, how insigificant you 100 years on this planet has been and how even at your ripe old age, yuo still haven’t accomplished what most childrenhave in 12 years.

          face it yuo are a loser, do yourself in, it REALLY wouldn’t matter. I am sure even those you consider loved ones, whether they like it or not, would even be elated and feel a great burden lifted from their minds just knowing you are done once and for all.

          Don’t worry about anyone but yourself, just do it, nobody else cares.

        • #2956473

          Still incapable of replying without the massive use of profanity.

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Oh yeah? Okay loud-mouth, let’s see you try …………………

          All idicative of a lack of intelligence and/or a serious personality disorder, not to mention poor ettiquette.

          You really don’t get it, do you? At one point, we seemed to have reached some sort of understanding; you leave me alone, I’d leave you alone. I pretty much left you alone as long as you were polite and offered cogent commentary on subjects. A few months ago, you jumped in on something of which you clearly knew little or nothing about and became insulting and abusive. I decided the gloves were off. So if you wanted my attention, you’ve got it. Completely!!! I will take every opportunity I have to wind you up; it’s fun, it’s so very very easy, and it fully illustrates your true lack of intellect. Short in stature, short of intelligence; gather around folks and observe the only OZ Media in captivity while it’s mind slowly deteriorates, right in front of your very own eyes. You really should have left me alone.

          You may have noticed that at no time have I had to seek recourse in the use of profanity; I’ll try to leave that your exclusive territory. In short, you are nothing but a blithering idiot

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2956469

          that’s funny, coming from you!

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Oh yeah? Okay loud-mouth, let’s see you try …………………

          You are the most offensive and inconsiderate person on this website, which has tens, if not hundreds of thousands of visitors.

          What started out as a VERY tightly peer moderated Friday Joke thread, you turned into an opportunity to copy and paste teh most offensive, racial and sexist jokes you can find online. And not just one or two, as most others offer, but you think it makes you seem witty to copy and paste five, ten or more such tasteless and often old jokes for this community; which you feel consists of a few good natured people and completely disregard the thousands of others who would read comments but refrain from speaking with people such as yourself.

          You are the most tasteless, classless and crass human being I’ve encountered on TR. Your posts have been removed more than once for being over the top, or outside of TR’s guidelines for acceptable content.

          So before you go playing high and mighty, just remember, we aren’t ALL as stupid as you, so your lies fall on deaf ears as people know just who you really and truly are.

          To suggest you are a kiddie diddler and a pervert, really doesn’t take much of a stretch. You are a textbook case of an old, lonely loser, who will stop at nothing to get his way. Your lies and deceit speak volumes.

          If I lived in your area, I would have already contacted police and the PTA at the local schools to raise awareness of your existence in the neighourhood, you are not a well man, you need help, and so do those who are subjected to your presence.

          Again, perhaps a few good beatings may just put you in your place but I doubt it, there’s no hope for compulsive liars and dirty, old, crippled men like you.

          I think few people here realize that you are really just an aging old pervert that needs some real psychological attention and support and they give you some merits based on your lies.

          A compulsive liar and a sexist, racist, pervert, do you put that on your resume too?

          L O S E R !!!!

        • #2958347

          Keep it coming; You OCD types are so predictable. Can’t help it, can you?

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Oh yeah? Okay loud-mouth, let’s see you try …………………

          Gee I’m beginning to think you don’t like me. Keep that up and you might hurt my feelings.

          Bottom line every reply you make just proves my point that you’re suffering from OCD, obsessive compulsive disorder and acute paranoia. Potntially you are exhibiting all the symptomology of the paranoid schizphrenic. But that’s your problem; I don’t give a damn. I just get a charge of winding you up and showing you up for what you are. No matter what I say, we all know you can’t resist responding to it.

          Oh BTW just thought you should know that the inflamatory nature of your responses is taking a negative toll on your credibility, or what’s left of it. But go ahead, flame away; each one of your responses just further diminishes you. Understandable, I guess, since you are rather diminutive. As I said diminutive in stature, diminutive in intellect.

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2934683

          It wasn’t supposed to e an insult

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to I’m confused

          I just felt that your normal rapid wit was missing form teh prvious post, perhaps that’s not a compliment. But seriously I usually find you much more astute and interesting/thought provoking to debate with.

        • #2934861

          You are 100% correct

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Uh huh

          this is NOT capitalism. The Obama does not WANT capitalism, which is EXACTLY why he is doing what he has been doing.

          What else would you expect from someone that has never worked for a company that EARNS their place in the world?

          Next thing you know, he will talk about empathy being more important than following our Constitution. Oh wait, he already has…..

        • #2933277

          BUSH ignore dyour constitution too

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to You are 100% correct

          It’s been doe for years, don’t pretend you are all shocked as it is just now being done by Oabama. The constitution is a fair foundation a benchmark to live by, but to suggest it can be directly applied to life in the 21st century is ridiculous.

        • #2933265

          Rediculous only to someone that doesn’t understand

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to BUSH ignore dyour constitution too

          see, as the world changes, their is a provision to change the Constitution to keep up with the times. They are called Amendments, and are the ONLY legal way to modify the original document.

          The problem is unethical people with unethical agendas that they know will never pass if they try to go through the system legitimately are always looking for ways to go around the system.

          As for Bush, I can’t think of a single thing he did that took anything away from me.

          Is this back about using existing legislation for wiretapping, that The Obama has said will continue?

        • #2933222

          Well done JD

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Rediculous only to someone that doesn’t understand

          And we all read the endless list of people against ANY possible ammendments to the constitution when THAT was nrought up. “We are not socialists, we are nto french, we are American and this is set in stone and should never be changed, all hail the mighty Constitution!”

          Give me a break, you can’t change opinions simply to suit the daily agenda, not everyone reading your posts here is American, some of us believe in consistency, integrity and values.

        • #2933217

          Wrong, it goes up for a vote

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Well done JD

          And either passes or it doesn’t.

          Being off to the side, you are not hearing the story correctly. NO ONE that knows anything about the US Constitution will say it is written in stone, they simply say it is NOT a “living breathing document, open to interpretation”.

          If/when it does not fit, there IS a process in place to change the meaning.

          Sorry if that gets confusing to you.

          There was talk about an amendment to the Constitution to identify marriage as ONE woman and ONE man, but it didn’t go anywhere.

          It is NOT easy to change, and should not be changed on a whim.

          You want a break, earn one by paying attention.

        • #2933211

          That’s too bad

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Well done JD

          Last year we discussed SOMETHING that either involved amending the Constiitution or making an allowance.

          Either way, the consensus from Americans was that it was a horrific feat to even consider an amendment. There was the argument that a democratic vote should change it, but that was said to be a sign of weakness that OTHER nations would do and not America.

        • #2933233

          Yes, our constitution CAN be applied to life in the 21st Century

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to BUSH ignore dyour constitution too

          Living life on a foundation of individual liberty versus under an umbrella of tyranny is a timeless concept.

          And before you dismiss my suggestion of tyranny, it means tyranny in any form.

          You simply DO NOT understand America, Oz. You’re not an American, yet you profess to tell us how to live and how interpret our constitution. Your comments are laughable.

        • #2933221

          Get with the program Max.

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Yes, our constitution CAN be applied to life in the 21st Century

          Time to get caught up, you are falling behind.

          First of all, I DO understand America better than you’ll ever know. I was SO close to becoming an American citizen it’s not funy, in fact its actually rather scary. I decided against it though and stayed put.

          I don’t tell you how to live or how to interpret your constitution. English language has but one interpretation, just because some people twist things to mean whath they would LIKE it to mean and support, it doesn’t make it so.

          We’ve all seen the kindergarten level of comprehension skills shown on this website by Americans for many years now, words speak volumes.

          Laughable, perhaps. But only because facing the reality of your situation and the ignorance demonstrated by your governments over the years, more recent than historical, would make a grown man cry and rightly so.

          Your constitution seems to mean whatever peple want it to mean at any given time. one day you are hanging onto the most carefully defined constutional rights as if every word spoken was one to be adhered to as the law of life. Then, when mroe ocnvenient, the entire Constitution is not investigated in its parts but summed up as “individual liberty versus under an umbrella of tyranny”. LOL, THAT’S tha Max I was talkign about.
          The one who can make such utter patriotic nonsense appear to be thoughtful and convincing enough that people see beyond the hypocrisy and view it as a lesson in history.

          your consitution is so loosely defined and outdated that no matter what yuo want to support or discount, it can be interpreted to support your argyument. It’s not teh work of founders seekign foundations and core logic to build a nation upon, it’s the scripture of lawyers and politicians who put somethign forward that people BELIEVE they will live by, but has more holes than Swiss cheese for politicians and lawyers ot manipulate in their favour to support any given argument they choose.

          Blin dpeople can’t see it though, just like believers in God or any other specific deity; they are so wrapped up in just believing and havign faith, that they forget to question and apply reality and science to their beliefs to see if they hold water.

        • #2933027

          Right – Get with the program. Give up on liberty.

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          People either pay it lip service or don’t know what it really means.

          Sorry, I’ll never give up.

          And after all this time, you still don’t get it – and you don’t get me.

        • #2957970

          Oh I get it and I get you too

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          That doesn’t mean I have to agree or accept it or you though.

          The constitution is held onto in a similar fashion as the bible. Despite being codified, it is soo loosely written and described that, in today’s FAR more complex society, it can be used to support or dicount anything, depending on which side of the fence you stand.

          Just like the bible, six Christians can read teh exact same passage and derive six different meanings from it.

          The Constitution is used by ‘feel’ too, “what this means is that….” IN other words it is not defined but you can fidn a way to wrap anything in the Constitution or use the Constitution to debunk anything too.
          Kinda like God’s way, if it isn’t explainable, “God has his ways”.

          The Constitution is so loos ethey could have just written a single line and it would have had eth same effect.

          “You are free to do as you will. Anyone opposing your viewpoint it is also free to do as they will.”

          so why even write it?

          Even when it IS specifically defined, that definition is still broadened to accept anyone’s personal beliefs of what it means.

          Constitution, what a crock of crap.

          We have a similar Bill of Rights here too, except it is seen and used more to protect us from government intervention into our lives and protection of privacy.It is not something we run around parroting as a reason for all of our beliefs in mankind.

        • #2957954

          No, Oz, you don’t get it (or me)

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          And you proved it (again) with that crock of crap that you wrote (again).

        • #2957925

          Stop thinking you are unique

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          You are American, they only made a half dozen moulds. You words speak volumes, no mater who you may THINK you are, your comments are A-typical American comments.

          I STILL picture Sam The Eagle and hear trumpets playing America the Beautiful when I read your posts, maybe that’s a problem, I need to stop watching Muppets reruns. But based on your comments here, which I have read for MANY years now, which is the only way ANYONE can judge or see you, you are textbook yankee doodle dandy to the ‘nth degree.

          You want to offer a different view of yourself, you can do that, but not the way you wave your flag.

        • #2957862

          More meaningless drivel from Oz

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          Which is why many people don’t take you seriously – especially me.

        • #2957842

          good answer good answer!

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          Way to go, what an eloquent and articulate reply! How telling! Man, that really sets teh record straight and defends your stance well.

          ‘meaningless drivel’ is redundant.

          Now I know that whenever you make a point all I have to do is say you suck and everyone else thinks so too and I will be a winner!

          I always thought debate and defense was a little more involved, who’d a thunk it?

        • #2957840

          good answer good answer!

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          So good I said it twice.

        • #2957731

          Geez OZ, you don’t get it?? You’re implying Max’s answer means…………

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          he won’t debate you??? A battle of wits in debate??? You really don’t get it, Max was being kind. He doesn’t battle the sick, lame or lazy nor, would I humbly suggest, the defenseless.

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2956468

          Geez you don’t get it

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          First of all, I am sure nobody, including Max, needs you speaking for them, especially you.

          It is rather sad that you really need attantion that bad to step in on someone else’s conversation and speak on their behalf, especially someone capable of far better commentary than yourself.

          Isn’t Sesame Street on? Lots of little children for you to fantasize about controlling there.

        • #2958343

          Whatever I’ve got, the one thing for sure, is I’ve got your goat. :^0

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Get with the program Max.

          And it’s ever so easy to do.

          Hmmmm!!! I wonder if you remember certain peer messages you sent me, quite some time ago. Remember what I did with them???

          I would be more than happy to repost them again, if it would help refresh your memory. Just in case you’ve forgotten about your reactions: you ranted, raved and squealed like a stuck pig,and practically cryed like a baby. Maybe it’s time to revisit those posts once again, just for old times sake. Your responses were some of the funniest things we’ve ever seen from you.

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

      • #2953667

        Bad management and greedy unions are what is killing GM.

        by sleepin’dawg ·

        In reply to A few points from my perspective

        The fact that their QA and QC are extremely poor just adds to the problem. Your old truck might be a keeper but would you want to bet that it wasn’t built on a Monday or Friday??

        The politicos took one look at the employee numbers and figured they didn’t want to have them voting against them come the next election. Would Obama have been so quick to offer bail out dollars if he were in his second term of office? I seriously doubt it but right now he is running for that second term.

        Or am I just too damn cynical.

        [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2953665

          Unions killed GM – PERIOD

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Bad management and greedy unions are what is killing GM.

          .

        • #2934944

          Whether it’s the US or Canada, union greed is killiing the market.

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Unions killed GM – PERIOD

          But bad management going along with their demands sure has hell hasn’t helped either. Throw in bad management decisions as regards product development and design, plus abysmally poor QC and it’s no wonder it went belly up.

          What unions better wake up and realize, is if they want the money they’re demanding, they better insure they provide skilled labour of a sufficiently high enough quality to compete with foreign competition in the marketplace. They haven’t been doing that since the fifties and have thus been passed by the Germans,Japanese and it looks now to be the Koreans. China will also probably pass the the US laborer as well. All sad, very sad.

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2934906

          Respectfully diagree

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Unions killed GM – PERIOD

          Though I don’t agree with everything Oz has to say on GM, the truth is that both Ford and GM have the same union. They also have pattern bargaining – the UAW and CAW(in Canada) pick one of the big three and negiotiate a new agreement(under threat of strike). Then the other car makers adopt that deal. So in the end the labour costs between the big three are pretty much the same.

          Ford has managed their money better than GM. Ford has managed their product line better than GM.

          So some responsibility has to rest with GM management, as well as the unions.

          James

        • #2934865

          Point of order, Mr. Chairman

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Respectfully diagree

          Wasn’t that long ago and Ford was hurting pretty badly, without their woes being caused by an economic downturn that is hitting EVERY automaker world wide.

          What kept them afloat was trucks, much to the horror of the global community and econuts alike.

          The big problem GM did was not have anything to fall back on to ride out a down economy, because of wasteful spending from top to bottom.

          A majorly bad idea was when they closed up an engineering department and off-shored it a few years back. Doesn’t seem like that foreign technology has been helping them, huh?

        • #2934852

          GM Ford and Trucks

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Point of order, Mr. Chairman

          You are correct that the profits from trucks did keep both Ford and GM afloat during hard times. But if you look at those figures I posted where I was trying to show that GM the corporation made more trucks than the Ford corporation, you will also notice a drastic decline in the number of trucks made and sold, from about 5 million in 2005 to just over a million in 2008.

          So if the answer was trucks, Ford and GM would be in the same position.

          Perhaps Ford saw the crisis coming earlier and they did manage to sell off some of their foreign brands when there were still buyers will to pay a reasonable value for them.

          As for “foreign” engineering, I’m not sure its as simple as you’d like to portray it. GM got some of that simply by acquiring other companies. The new Saturns/Malibu got Opel engineering, but that capacity has existed for decades, they hadn’t been taking advantage of it. Likewise the rear wheel drive car dynamic in the G8 came from Holden, who have been making cars for many decades. There has always been some engineering spread around, some in Canada, some elsewhere. But also note that the Japanese didn’t significantly penetrate the truck market until they opened up engineering groups in the US.

          No argument that wasteful spending hurt GM, and all the overhead from having too many brands.

          One could probably argue that the engineering departments at Opel and Holden were leaner and meaner than the ones in Detroit and that may be why they had some success.

          James

        • #2934810

          Funny, I was sure I’d said precisely that in my original post

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Respectfully diagree

          http://tinyurl.com/l9yudw

          Sure Ford and GM have the same unions, but that doesn’t mean they share a similar esprit de corps and/or work ethic. Neither can compete with their foreign competition in that area.

          QA is set by management QC is provided by labour. GM’s QC is toal garbage next to Toyota, Nissan, et al and now even Hyundai provides superior quality. For some obscure reason Ford’s is slightly better. Canadian and American labour has priced itself out of the market and doesn’t deliver on what it is being paid for.

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][/b] ]:)

        • #2934772

          I was disagreeing with Max’s assertion

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Funny, I was sure I’d said precisely that in my original post

          That is was the unions PERIOD.

          So we agree.

          James

        • #2933229

          I agree with you only with respect to the way. . . . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Respectfully diagree

          ….. management has given-in to union demands over the past thirty years.

          http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm2135.cfm

          Unions, and the way management has let them ride roughshod over them, has destroyed the American auto industry.

          Ford Motor Company continues to hemorrhage money, losing upwards of 17 billion per year (-7.00 per share), and it’s seeing sales drop close to 30 percent. If Ford closed all plants and stopped making cars, they’d make more money. They LOSE money on every car they sell. That trend can’t last for very long before they crumble.

          All things considered, it costs Japanese automakers much less to produce an automobile than it costs their American counterparts – and ALL of the costs can be connected to Union demands (and management cave-ins).

          And now the tax payers will be footing the bill for those Union demands.

        • #2956631

          A too pat answer

          by delbertpgh ·

          In reply to Unions killed GM – PERIOD

          Ford’s doing better than GM. They’ve got the same union. Their management made better decisions along the way.

          Sure, the union contracts cost more than competitors’ labor agreements, but there’s a second side to the coin. Who signed that agreement with the union? GM has a history of seeing 300 feet down the road, not a hundred miles, and whatever trouble they avoid gets them in more trouble in a few years.

          Both the UAW and GM have become big hidebound institutions that are busy serving so many internal interests (like retirees, or legions of executives and dealers in under-performing divisions) that they can’t respond to the world around them. Part of the reason they went bankrupt was it’s the only stimulus that could overcome their inertia, and allow them to make the mangerial moves they need.

          It’s a good question whether even this shakeup will get them going in a profitable direction.

        • #2956483

          That was my view too

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to A too pat answer

          My initial comment is that it’s just more of the same, we heard it all before, they did nothing to prove their promises and it resulted in them going titties up.

          Other manufacturers responded effectively to market and consumer demands, GM thinks they can drive the market their way and not follow the consumer’s needs.

        • #2956477

          Del, if you think Ford is in such great shape. . . . . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to A too pat answer

          ….. why don’t you buy 1,000 shares of its stock – heck, buy 10,000. After all, EPS means nothing.

          Then again, perhaps selling short would be the better move.

          Edited to add link:

          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=311297&messageID=3097617

        • #2956462

          AsFord is likely to pick up a good chunk of GM market share

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Del, if you think Ford is in such great shape. . . . . .

          they don’t seem that bad a risk when compared to any other US motor manufacturer.

        • #2956459

          People are buying

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to AsFord is likely to pick up a good chunk of GM market share

          If anyone’s selling people are buying Ford stocks now. Not day traders but brokers who know how the auto market bounces, this is where they shine. Despite the fact that two major investors cashed in millions of shares, right now Ford is a good buy. they will probably e deeper in teh cash hole by mid next year, but if you get in now, you should make decent money next spring, I don’t know if I’d sit on it much longer than that as an increased debt may force them to bail and rebuild, issuing new, low share opportunites again.

        • #2956423

          I don’t think they’re in great shape. They’re just not bankrupt, like GM.

          by delbertpgh ·

          In reply to Del, if you think Ford is in such great shape. . . . . .

          I’m not buying anybody’s stocks right now. I’m not even holding stocks. I’m out of the market and sitting on cash.

          American car manufacturers’ labor contracts have done them nothing but harm. Management’s head-up-butt strategic posture has done it harm as well.

          Europe, in general, has more socialistic labor unions, yet their car companies aren’t going broke. Ours are. There’s more in this equation than labor.

        • #2958342

          You might want to consider buying some Ford debt.

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to I don’t think they’re in great shape. They’re just not bankrupt, like GM.

          In the event of a Chapter 11 filing you could make out like a thief in the dark in the event of any restructuring. At the present dicounted prices you would get an excellent ROI even if there were no Chapter 11 filing. I’m not too keen on ford stock unless you buy in on down swings and take advantage of dollar cost averaging. For me the best bet and safest bet would be senior class bonds. As for Ford stocks ; there are better and safer stocks right now.

          [i][b]Dawg[/i][b] ]:)

    • #2953702

      Ford -envolvment in motorsports

      by j-mart ·

      In reply to The new face of GM, reality or just another mask?

      Because Ford has had a long and committed approach to motor sports, for example, several times winners of World Rally Championship, they have had a big advantage over GM and other US Manufacturers when it comes to making good small / medium size cars. The technology and knowledge gained from this form of motorsports has always been used by the Auto Manufactures involved to advance their production models.

      • #2953687

        Could have sworn I’d already replied to your comment

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Ford -envolvment in motorsports

        I just don’t know where. Probably in a different part of the thread, someone’s gonna get all PO’d and think it means something entirely different i guess.

        Actually you have a good point, Ford has doe very well in motorsport over the years, as did Chrysler in the 70’s or Honda and Ducatti do for motorcycle racing.

        Ford also runs C.A.R.T. cars too as well as powerboats etc. pretty diversified.

        Honda even has a CART team, though never expected to win a single race, they iddn’t even hire a decent driver at first. It was strictly a wasy to test parts and steering innovations in a real world setting. They blow up and don’t finish races often but that’s not their goal, their goa lis real time testing in high performance conditions, what a buzz of a job that would be.

        “You don’t have to win, just go out there and fly around until it quits.”

Viewing 7 reply threads