Domestic Auto Industry

[LenexatoKCMO]

Imagine that - R&T prematurely declaring a new American model to be on par with foreign competition.  Never seen that before.   &&&  I'll believe that the big 2.5 has really gotten their shit together the day that legitimate auto reviewers can still say with a straightface that their models are on par with the competition three or four years into the model cycle instead of just during the prerelease puff piece.  

[FangKC]

I would recommend taking a subscription to Motor Trend and reading their long-term reviews.

[chrizow]

yeah, cadillacs and even buicks have made great strides in quality and performance the last few years, earning favorable marks from JD Power, Consumer Reports, etc.

[GRID]

Finnally starting to get some sharp looking american made cars to choose from!

[LenexatoKCMO]

JD Power, Consumer Reports, etc.

All well and good if you view your vehicle as an appliance.  Yes they have made strides - nowadays, the american made cars enter their life cycle on par with the with the weakest foreign competition - previously they were entering their lifecycle on par with the weakest foreign competition two model cycles back.  Plus, for the most part, they still haven't mastered that whole driving dynamics thing. 

For a good car rag, try Automobile - their reviews tend to be far less colored by nationalism. 

[KC0KEK]

Daimler-Chrysler

How do you pronounce this? "Chrysler" is silent, right?

[FangKC]

Daimler was running the show at Daimler Chrysler.  Industry analysts say that Chrysler suffered as a result of the merger, and their quality and profits went down.  They were actually doing better before Daimler bought them.  Many in the automotive industry, including Lee Iacocca, believe Chrysler would have been better off today without the merger.

I wasn't intending to be nationalistic. I drive a Toyota afterall.

I have just been noting constant and improved positive remarks from the automotive press about North American makes.  Many people still have preconceived notions that all cars from North American manufacturers are crap, and they are not.

[FangKC]

Interesting sidenote. The Claycomo Ford Plant builds more vehicles than any factory in North America--almost one vehicle a minute. In 1994, they produced 490,000 vehicles. Claycomo has been called the largest car manufacturing plant in the United States in terms of units produced--Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_City_Assembly

The Fairfax GM Plant is the fourth most efficient auto plant in North America.

On another note, I read once that after Michigan, Missouri produces more vehicles than any other state.

[cityscape]

Thanks for that post Fang.  I was pretty much sold on the Acura TL, but I'm going to check out the CTS now.

[GRID]

Interesting sidenote. The Claycomo Ford Plant builds more vehicles than any factory in North America--almost one vehicle a minute. In 1994, they produced 490,000 vehicles. Claycomo has been called the largest car manufacturing plant in the United States in terms of units produced--Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_City_Assembly

The Fairfax GM Plant is the fourth most efficient auto plant in North America.

On another note, I read once that after Michigan, Missouri produces more vehicles than any other state.

Didn't StL close one or two of their auto plants? One of them was pretty new I thought. We are lucky to have fairfax and claycomo, two of the highest ranking plants in the nation.

[shaffe]

i didn't have time to read the article, but did it mention a price point?  i really liked the first CTS and am glad to see them continue to improve it.

edit:  a quick hop over to the cadillac website reveals that they start right at $33k.

[shinatoo]

Biggest draw back of the CTS has been the fit and finish of the uninspired interior. From what I have heard this is no longer an issue.

[Highlander]

Didn't StL close one or two of their auto plants? One of them was pretty new I thought. We are lucky to have fairfax and claycomo, two of the highest ranking plants in the nation.

Remember the Saturn plant search, not all that long ago (1985, began production in 1990), a high stakes location sweepstakes that just about every city in the US entered.  In the end, GM chose Spring Hill Tennessee (which I believe did not even offer incentives) just south of Nashville.  Not many years later and the plant is already closed.  We are, indeed, fortunate to have both Claycomo and Fairfax.  OKC's GM plant closed in 2005. 

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/12/01/ ... saturn.php

While the automobile industry is a favorite whipping post on this forum, they are responsible for about 1 in 8 jobs in the US.  Mostly urban jobs at that. 

[shinatoo]

Remember the Saturn plant search, not all that long ago (1985, began production in 1990), a high stakes location sweepstakes that just about every city in the US entered.  In the end, GM chose Spring Hill Tennessee (which I believe did not even offer incentives) just south of Nashville.  Not many years later and the plant is already closed.  We are, indeed, fortunate to have both Claycomo and Fairfax.  OKC's GM plant closed in 2005. 

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/12/01/ ... saturn.php

While the automobile industry is a favorite whipping post on this forum, they are responsible for about 1 in 8 jobs in the US.  Mostly urban jobs at that. 

I guess we know why the politicians are opposed to large scale mass transit.

[Highlander]

I guess we know why the politicians are opposed to large scale mass transit.

I doubt if there are any connection at all.  Large scale mass transit in a particular city is not singularly going to impact the automobile industry in those cities.  I really doubt if Funk is thinking "if we do mass transit, it could cost a lot of folks at Claycomo/Fairfax their jobs".  KC is not a big enough market to make a difference.  If politicians oppose mass transit it's because it is a very expensive piece of hardware that requires a large part of the cities potential wealth; like an airport, it's at least a once in a generation investment so it takes a lot of balls to commit to it.     

[BVC]

Finnally starting to get some sharp looking american made cars to choose from!

Exactly...

[FangKC]

Vehicle manufacturers also can/have  made city buses and streetcars in the past.

[shinatoo]

I doubt if there are any connection at all.  Large scale mass transit in a particular city is not singularly going to impact the automobile industry in those cities.  I really doubt if Funk is thinking "if we do mass transit, it could cost a lot of folks at Claycomo/Fairfax their jobs".  KC is not a big enough market to make a difference.  If politicians oppose mass transit it's because it is a very expensive piece of hardware that requires a large part of the cities potential wealth; like an airport, it's at least a once in a generation investment so it takes a lot of balls to commit to it.     

I was thinking more on a national level. Federal funding of light rail in smaller cities like KC, and intercity mass transit like high speed trains have largely been ignored in the US in favor of subsidies for big oil, and in some peoples opinion, a war to secure oil. I agree with you on Funk. Of course he did take a free Honda, so he might be in big autos pocket too. 

[FangKC]

I agree that there is ample evidence that Congress subsidizes big oil over mass transit in our country. I'd like to at least see a dollar-for-dollar appropriation.  For every dollar big oil gets in subsidies and tax incentives, mass transits gets additional dollars.

[Highlander]

I agree that there is ample evidence that Congress subsidizes big oil over mass transit in our country. I'd like to at least see a dollar-for-dollar appropriation.  For every dollar big oil gets in subsidies and tax incentives, mass transits gets additional dollars.

I do not think you realize how "subsidies" to "big" oil work.  First of all, the "subsidies" to produce oil are available to all production companies large or small so they are not particularly for larger oil companies.  Secondly, the subsidies almost always come in the form of a tax break on production (or for some refining process that is not necassarily cost effective but is environmentally friendly) not in any actual government payment to the oil industry like you might find with agriculture.  For instance, if an oil field was estimated to contain 10 million barrels but was not actually commercial to develop at that size, then the company might receive a break on the royalty payment on the development of that particular field.  Otherwise, the field goes undeveloped and no tax is ever realized, there is no construction of the platform so no jobs and taxes from that endeavor are realized, and that oil is left in the ground until a new technology comes along or price increases make it feasible to produce (which won't always be the case as price increases generally are accompanied by cost increases).  Most oil company "subsidies" work off that kind of premise, and in the end they contribute a lot to the economy and PUT money in government coffers.  It's not like the government is handing money to oil companies, they unequivocally are not.  Now if you wanted to say something like a certain percentage of tax generated off oil or gas production from  projects receiving a tax subsidy will go to public transportation, then fine, that would be far more reasonable and actually doable.