What percentage of 20 year old cars are on the road?
in [Technical]
|
From: Dave on 29 Oct 2009 22:13 "Vic Smith" <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:o0vhe5hjrr57i7ek09gj6fbra5pvbu94fb(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:32:38 -0400, "C. E. White" > <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote: > >> > >> >>> The problem I see is that those rankings don't list the actual >>> percentages. They could be closely grouped together. No one argues that >>> Toyotas and Hondas have greater longevity and reliability than Fords or >>> Chevys, the debate is over how much greater longevity and how much >>> greater >>> reliability. >> >>This is a ridiculous claim. If you said, "I believe" Toyota and Hondas >>have >>greater reliability, then I coudn't argue about what you believe. If you >>said many people believe that Toyotas and Hondas have greater reliability >>that Fords and Chevies, then I'd actually agree with you. But I certainly >>can argue about the corretness of this belief. It is my personal experince >>that Toyotas and particualrly Hondas, are not as durable as American cars. > > You have to specify a model/engine. > What Toyota and Honda have done is concentrate on putting quality and > engineering in what they want to sell. > The domestic brands seldom do that. > That's why Camry/Corolla/Accord/Civic have done well. > Although I believe the general public holds onto certain myths, > there's a basis in the Toyota/Honda myths. > With domestics you have to pick well, and if you're a new car buyer > hope it works out. > I'm a Chevy fan, but I buy used and know what I'm getting. > Spend very little per mile driven. > I'm sure the same can be done with Fords, but I don't know them. > But if I were to buy new, I might go for a Toyota or Honda. > Probably feel more secure about getting good engineering and a company > that stands behind their cars, and also because the Chevys are > foreign-built. I don't like sending money over the border. > Foreign built or foreign owned, either way money is going across the border.
From: E. Meyer on 29 Oct 2009 23:30 On 10/29/09 9:13 PM, in article 7kv0fmF37b4siU1(a)mid.individual.net, "Dave" <hairy411(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > "Vic Smith" <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote in message > news:o0vhe5hjrr57i7ek09gj6fbra5pvbu94fb(a)4ax.com... >> On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:32:38 -0400, "C. E. White" >> <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >>>> The problem I see is that those rankings don't list the actual >>>> percentages. They could be closely grouped together. No one argues that >>>> Toyotas and Hondas have greater longevity and reliability than Fords or >>>> Chevys, the debate is over how much greater longevity and how much >>>> greater >>>> reliability. >>> >>> This is a ridiculous claim. If you said, "I believe" Toyota and Hondas >>> have >>> greater reliability, then I coudn't argue about what you believe. If you >>> said many people believe that Toyotas and Hondas have greater reliability >>> that Fords and Chevies, then I'd actually agree with you. But I certainly >>> can argue about the corretness of this belief. It is my personal experince >>> that Toyotas and particualrly Hondas, are not as durable as American cars. >> >> You have to specify a model/engine. >> What Toyota and Honda have done is concentrate on putting quality and >> engineering in what they want to sell. >> The domestic brands seldom do that. >> That's why Camry/Corolla/Accord/Civic have done well. >> Although I believe the general public holds onto certain myths, >> there's a basis in the Toyota/Honda myths. >> With domestics you have to pick well, and if you're a new car buyer >> hope it works out. >> I'm a Chevy fan, but I buy used and know what I'm getting. >> Spend very little per mile driven. >> I'm sure the same can be done with Fords, but I don't know them. >> But if I were to buy new, I might go for a Toyota or Honda. >> Probably feel more secure about getting good engineering and a company >> that stands behind their cars, and also because the Chevys are >> foreign-built. I don't like sending money over the border. >> > Foreign built or foreign owned, either way money is going across the > border. > That argument is officially irrelevant now since the Feds gave Chrysler to Fiat, Hummer to China. Apparently sending the money across the border is now the new American way. Funny how the Italians & Chinese think they can make money selling that same stuff.
From: 80 Knight on 30 Oct 2009 00:38 "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:C70FC81D.13562%epmeyer50(a)gmail.com... > > > > On 10/29/09 9:13 PM, in article 7kv0fmF37b4siU1(a)mid.individual.net, "Dave" > <hairy411(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> "Vic Smith" <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >> news:o0vhe5hjrr57i7ek09gj6fbra5pvbu94fb(a)4ax.com... >>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:32:38 -0400, "C. E. White" >>> <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>>>> The problem I see is that those rankings don't list the actual >>>>> percentages. They could be closely grouped together. No one argues >>>>> that >>>>> Toyotas and Hondas have greater longevity and reliability than Fords >>>>> or >>>>> Chevys, the debate is over how much greater longevity and how much >>>>> greater >>>>> reliability. >>>> >>>> This is a ridiculous claim. If you said, "I believe" Toyota and Hondas >>>> have >>>> greater reliability, then I coudn't argue about what you believe. If >>>> you >>>> said many people believe that Toyotas and Hondas have greater >>>> reliability >>>> that Fords and Chevies, then I'd actually agree with you. But I >>>> certainly >>>> can argue about the corretness of this belief. It is my personal >>>> experince >>>> that Toyotas and particualrly Hondas, are not as durable as American >>>> cars. >>> >>> You have to specify a model/engine. >>> What Toyota and Honda have done is concentrate on putting quality and >>> engineering in what they want to sell. >>> The domestic brands seldom do that. >>> That's why Camry/Corolla/Accord/Civic have done well. >>> Although I believe the general public holds onto certain myths, >>> there's a basis in the Toyota/Honda myths. >>> With domestics you have to pick well, and if you're a new car buyer >>> hope it works out. >>> I'm a Chevy fan, but I buy used and know what I'm getting. >>> Spend very little per mile driven. >>> I'm sure the same can be done with Fords, but I don't know them. >>> But if I were to buy new, I might go for a Toyota or Honda. >>> Probably feel more secure about getting good engineering and a company >>> that stands behind their cars, and also because the Chevys are >>> foreign-built. I don't like sending money over the border. >>> >> Foreign built or foreign owned, either way money is going across the >> border. >> > That argument is officially irrelevant now since the Feds gave Chrysler to > Fiat, Hummer to China. Apparently sending the money across the border is > now the new American way. Funny how the Italians & Chinese think they can > make money selling that same stuff. There isn't anything "new" about it. North America has been selling itself out to other countries for many years. Take a look at where your computer, TV, microwave, etc., were built. They were once built here, by American workers, but not any longer. The same is happening with the auto industry. Too many people like "SMS" think the Japanese are some type of God's, who can do anything better then the American's, and have no problem sleeping at night knowing our children will be forced to flip burgers at McDonald's for a living...providing there are enough people making enough money to *buy* the McDonald's...
From: Vic Smith on 30 Oct 2009 04:45 On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:13:42 -0500, "Dave" <hairy411(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >"Vic Smith" <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >news:o0vhe5hjrr57i7ek09gj6fbra5pvbu94fb(a)4ax.com... >> Probably feel more secure about getting good engineering and a company >> that stands behind their cars, and also because the Chevys are >> foreign-built. I don't like sending money over the border. >> > Foreign built or foreign owned, either way money is going across the >border. I was just guessing that the workers putting the cars together within our borders are getting paid for doing that. And that they spend some of their wages locally, providing even more work. Could be wrong though. Maybe having the middlemen just import a ready made product from a foreign country is better for the economy. That's what they say on Wall street I think. Pretty smart guys there. --Vic
From: hls on 30 Oct 2009 09:28
"80 Knight" <nospam(a)please.com> wrote in message news:KsqdnQER_vMh8HfXnZ2dnUVZ_hWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>> >> That argument is officially irrelevant now since the Feds gave Chrysler >> to >> Fiat, Hummer to China. Apparently sending the money across the border is >> now the new American way. Funny how the Italians & Chinese think they >> can >> make money selling that same stuff. > > There isn't anything "new" about it. North America has been selling > itself out to other countries for many years. Take a look at where your > computer, TV, microwave, etc., were built. They were once built here, by > American workers, but not any longer. The same is happening with the auto > industry. Too many people like "SMS" think the Japanese are some type of > God's, who can do anything better then the American's, and have no problem > sleeping at night knowing our children will be forced to flip burgers at > McDonald's for a living...providing there are enough people making enough > money to *buy* the McDonald's... Neither Hummer nor Chrysler were capable of competing profitably, I guess Chrysler has been in trouble for years, thinking back to the days when Lee Iacocca struggled to keep them from going totally under. I agree with Knight, however, that our "government" has made it too easy for our American companies to send production to sweatshop countries and then reimport the product and make a killing. I heard just the other day that iPhone by Apple is populated with parts from Japan and perhaps Korea, and then assembled in China. The hard parts manufacturers capture some $27 and a little more for the cost of the iPhone. China makes about $4.00 per unit for the assembly. In the end, Apple takes about 50% of the sales price of the phone in the USA as profit. Maybe a smart business decision but it humps the economy and the jobs here in the target market. The object of the study was the design, innovation, and planning make the money. It doesnt take any particular talent to put a screw in a hole. One of the reasons our kids have to flip burgers or roll tacos is that many of them do not prepare themselves for design, innovative and planning jobs. There was a time when a high school graduate could get a job, rear a family, buy a home, and have a good life. That is getting much much harder to do. |