Detroit Vs Japan
#451
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
"Ruel Smith" <NoWay@NoWhere.com> wrote in message
news:d900b$429a43d7$4275e0b7$8427@FUSE.NET...
> No, you're being an idiot.
coming from someone claiming dealership mechanics make $83,000 a year ill
consider the source and smile. :-)
> Next you'll tell me that I don't know any
> plumbers that make 80 grand a year
i never said anything about plumbers so stop with the red herrings. we're
talking about dealership mechanics, most of whom are complete dumb asses who
couldnt fix anything that isnt clearly outlined in their book.
however, the licensed plumber earns a really good living. the unlicensed
plumber working under his license certainly isnt making $80k per year
either.
> I'm a union plumber myself
that explains a lot, but since this isnt about the absurdity of unions and
those who need the protection of a union because they cannot succeed on
their own work ethic and capabilities i wont get into it. :-)
--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
news:d900b$429a43d7$4275e0b7$8427@FUSE.NET...
> No, you're being an idiot.
coming from someone claiming dealership mechanics make $83,000 a year ill
consider the source and smile. :-)
> Next you'll tell me that I don't know any
> plumbers that make 80 grand a year
i never said anything about plumbers so stop with the red herrings. we're
talking about dealership mechanics, most of whom are complete dumb asses who
couldnt fix anything that isnt clearly outlined in their book.
however, the licensed plumber earns a really good living. the unlicensed
plumber working under his license certainly isnt making $80k per year
either.
> I'm a union plumber myself
that explains a lot, but since this isnt about the absurdity of unions and
those who need the protection of a union because they cannot succeed on
their own work ethic and capabilities i wont get into it. :-)
--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
#452
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
"Ruel Smith" <NoWay@NoWhere.com> wrote in message
news:d900b$429a43d7$4275e0b7$8427@FUSE.NET...
> No, you're being an idiot.
coming from someone claiming dealership mechanics make $83,000 a year ill
consider the source and smile. :-)
> Next you'll tell me that I don't know any
> plumbers that make 80 grand a year
i never said anything about plumbers so stop with the red herrings. we're
talking about dealership mechanics, most of whom are complete dumb asses who
couldnt fix anything that isnt clearly outlined in their book.
however, the licensed plumber earns a really good living. the unlicensed
plumber working under his license certainly isnt making $80k per year
either.
> I'm a union plumber myself
that explains a lot, but since this isnt about the absurdity of unions and
those who need the protection of a union because they cannot succeed on
their own work ethic and capabilities i wont get into it. :-)
--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
news:d900b$429a43d7$4275e0b7$8427@FUSE.NET...
> No, you're being an idiot.
coming from someone claiming dealership mechanics make $83,000 a year ill
consider the source and smile. :-)
> Next you'll tell me that I don't know any
> plumbers that make 80 grand a year
i never said anything about plumbers so stop with the red herrings. we're
talking about dealership mechanics, most of whom are complete dumb asses who
couldnt fix anything that isnt clearly outlined in their book.
however, the licensed plumber earns a really good living. the unlicensed
plumber working under his license certainly isnt making $80k per year
either.
> I'm a union plumber myself
that explains a lot, but since this isnt about the absurdity of unions and
those who need the protection of a union because they cannot succeed on
their own work ethic and capabilities i wont get into it. :-)
--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
#453
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
"Ruel Smith" <NoWay@NoWhere.com> wrote in message
news:d900b$429a43d7$4275e0b7$8427@FUSE.NET...
> No, you're being an idiot.
coming from someone claiming dealership mechanics make $83,000 a year ill
consider the source and smile. :-)
> Next you'll tell me that I don't know any
> plumbers that make 80 grand a year
i never said anything about plumbers so stop with the red herrings. we're
talking about dealership mechanics, most of whom are complete dumb asses who
couldnt fix anything that isnt clearly outlined in their book.
however, the licensed plumber earns a really good living. the unlicensed
plumber working under his license certainly isnt making $80k per year
either.
> I'm a union plumber myself
that explains a lot, but since this isnt about the absurdity of unions and
those who need the protection of a union because they cannot succeed on
their own work ethic and capabilities i wont get into it. :-)
--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
news:d900b$429a43d7$4275e0b7$8427@FUSE.NET...
> No, you're being an idiot.
coming from someone claiming dealership mechanics make $83,000 a year ill
consider the source and smile. :-)
> Next you'll tell me that I don't know any
> plumbers that make 80 grand a year
i never said anything about plumbers so stop with the red herrings. we're
talking about dealership mechanics, most of whom are complete dumb asses who
couldnt fix anything that isnt clearly outlined in their book.
however, the licensed plumber earns a really good living. the unlicensed
plumber working under his license certainly isnt making $80k per year
either.
> I'm a union plumber myself
that explains a lot, but since this isnt about the absurdity of unions and
those who need the protection of a union because they cannot succeed on
their own work ethic and capabilities i wont get into it. :-)
--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
#454
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
Every time someone provides examples of so-called poor reliability of
American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
> 60 degree V6's"?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>
>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>> they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>> period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>> with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>> entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>> horrible Neon.
>>
>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>> bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>> passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>> big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>> rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>> Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>> If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>> and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>> be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>> who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>> work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>> the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>
>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>> on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>> lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>> overall operating expense.
American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
> 60 degree V6's"?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>
>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>> they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>> period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>> with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>> entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>> horrible Neon.
>>
>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>> bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>> passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>> big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>> rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>> Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>> If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>> and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>> be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>> who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>> work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>> the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>
>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>> on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>> lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>> overall operating expense.
#455
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
Every time someone provides examples of so-called poor reliability of
American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
> 60 degree V6's"?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>
>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>> they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>> period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>> with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>> entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>> horrible Neon.
>>
>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>> bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>> passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>> big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>> rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>> Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>> If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>> and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>> be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>> who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>> work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>> the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>
>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>> on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>> lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>> overall operating expense.
American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
> 60 degree V6's"?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>
>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>> they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>> period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>> with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>> entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>> horrible Neon.
>>
>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>> bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>> passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>> big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>> rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>> Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>> If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>> and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>> be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>> who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>> work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>> the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>
>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>> on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>> lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>> overall operating expense.
#456
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
Every time someone provides examples of so-called poor reliability of
American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
> 60 degree V6's"?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>
>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>> they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>> period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>> with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>> entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>> horrible Neon.
>>
>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>> bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>> passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>> big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>> rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>> Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>> If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>> and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>> be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>> who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>> work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>> the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>
>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>> on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>> lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>> overall operating expense.
American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
> 60 degree V6's"?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>
>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>> they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>> period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>> with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>> entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>> horrible Neon.
>>
>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>> bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>> passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>> big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>> rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>> Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>> If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>> and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>> be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>> who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>> work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>> the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>
>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>> on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>> lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>> overall operating expense.
#457
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
Every time someone provides examples of so-called poor reliability of
American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
> 60 degree V6's"?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>
>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>> they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>> period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>> with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>> entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>> horrible Neon.
>>
>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>> bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>> passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>> big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>> rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>> Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>> If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>> and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>> be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>> who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>> work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>> the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>
>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>> on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>> lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>> overall operating expense.
American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
> 60 degree V6's"?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>
>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>> they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>> period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>> with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>> entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>> horrible Neon.
>>
>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>> bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>> passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>> big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>> rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>> Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>> If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>> and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>> be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>> who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>> work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>> the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>
>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>> on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>> lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>> overall operating expense.
#458
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
There are some well-respected auto journalists who claim that since
Ford bought Jaguar/Aston Martin, the darned things don't self
destruct and puke oil all over your driveway any more. However
I still don't know of any auto journalist who rates any American
brand at the reliability levels of the Japanese. The Americans
on the way up appear to have met the Germans on the way down, with
the Koreans almost up to Japanese levels. All referring to
passenger cars of course, doubt if any of them will outlast a
Peterbilt.
Matt Macchiarolo proclaimed:
> Every time someone provides examples of so-called poor reliability of
> American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
> lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
> because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
> compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
> bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
> Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
>
>
> "L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
>
>> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
>>60 degree V6's"?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>>
>>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>>>they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>>>period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>>>with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>>>entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>>>horrible Neon.
>>>
>>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>>>bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>>>passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>>>big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>>>rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>>>Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>>>If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>>>and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>>>be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>>>who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>>>work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>>>the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>>
>>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>>>on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>>>lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>>>overall operating expense.
>
>
>
#459
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
There are some well-respected auto journalists who claim that since
Ford bought Jaguar/Aston Martin, the darned things don't self
destruct and puke oil all over your driveway any more. However
I still don't know of any auto journalist who rates any American
brand at the reliability levels of the Japanese. The Americans
on the way up appear to have met the Germans on the way down, with
the Koreans almost up to Japanese levels. All referring to
passenger cars of course, doubt if any of them will outlast a
Peterbilt.
Matt Macchiarolo proclaimed:
> Every time someone provides examples of so-called poor reliability of
> American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
> lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
> because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
> compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
> bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
> Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
>
>
> "L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
>
>> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
>>60 degree V6's"?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>>
>>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>>>they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>>>period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>>>with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>>>entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>>>horrible Neon.
>>>
>>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>>>bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>>>passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>>>big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>>>rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>>>Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>>>If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>>>and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>>>be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>>>who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>>>work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>>>the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>>
>>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>>>on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>>>lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>>>overall operating expense.
>
>
>
#460
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Detroit Vs Japan
There are some well-respected auto journalists who claim that since
Ford bought Jaguar/Aston Martin, the darned things don't self
destruct and puke oil all over your driveway any more. However
I still don't know of any auto journalist who rates any American
brand at the reliability levels of the Japanese. The Americans
on the way up appear to have met the Germans on the way down, with
the Koreans almost up to Japanese levels. All referring to
passenger cars of course, doubt if any of them will outlast a
Peterbilt.
Matt Macchiarolo proclaimed:
> Every time someone provides examples of so-called poor reliability of
> American autos, they bring these 20-30-year old designs up. How about
> lately? As I said before, reliability level was raised by domestic automakes
> because it had to, and there is very little difference in reliability now
> compared to imports. The car I ever owned (OK, leased) was a Honda that got
> bought back under lemon law, but not until after a legal fight. Basically
> Honda's response was "Our cars don't break like that."
>
>
> "L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:42993551.BB71EB2E@***.net...
>
>> And what was wrong with these "Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the
>>60 degree V6's"?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>There were a lot of them. There still are.
>>>
>>> GM made the Vega, the Monza, the X-bodies, the 60 degree V6's, in fact
>>>they did not build a single decent small car for a roughly twenty year
>>>period.It wasn't until the Saturn GM had a small car it could look to
>>>with any self-respect at all. Chrysler built and still builds an
>>>entire generation of minivans with marginal transmissions and the
>>>horrible Neon.
>>>
>>> For what it's worth, for the weight and money, if new car buyers
>>>bought strictly according to reliability and cost per mile, Detroit's
>>>passenger car line would be in even worse shape than it is. And their
>>>big truck lines are selling mostly on the basis of macho and status
>>>rather than as work trucks-most people do not need that big a truck.
>>>Somewhere between a Ford Ranger and a Dodge Dakota is the right size.
>>>If they would offer a Dakota size pickup with the 4 cylinder Cummins
>>>and a full tilt fiberglass hood like a Freightliner, it would probably
>>>be the best selling _work_ truck for fleet use in the country-that's
>>>who's buying Rangers. If you need a "full size pickup" for actual
>>>work, you probably need a _medium duty truck_ and not a pickup, like
>>>the small Internationals, the Isuzu Chevy forward cabs, or similar.
>>>
>>> And another thing, the toughest industrial engines are Toyotas. Based
>>>on my company's record with forklifts, I would buy no other brand of
>>>lift truck. Hyster and Clark simply cannot compete on downtime and
>>>overall operating expense.
>
>
>