Consumer Reports in 2003 said the Ford ranger reliability ratings were in the toilet. They also said the ratings for the Mazda B-Series light truck were significantly better for the same period of time – enough to up the score by double-digits in some categories. The problem? The Ford Ranger and the Mazda B-Series are precisely the same vehicle and were built side-by-side by the same people in the same plants. You might wanna rethink that quip about “reality” in general and “ignorance” in particular. Consumer reports relies on feedback from readers – as the Ranger nearly outsold the B-Series 2 to 1, it’s not all that difficult to figure out why more people would report problems on the Ranger. Somehow this got missed at CR. I’m not saying they’re crap, but touting them as gospel truth isn’t credible either.
.
“So many domestic cars just aren’t put together well, bad fit and finish, cloned models, squeaks and rattles, you see it in a variety of GM products and Ford products as well, this isn’t the public psychologically assuming domestics are inferior in quality, it’s domestics truly being inferior in quality, nothing else to it.” – LamborghiniZ

Agreed – this has been the case before, and I think Ford and GM deserve to a large extent the perception problem they now have. Their brand loyalty and image has taken a huge hit and it didn’t have to happen in the first place. They broke it, now it’s time for them to fix it. By and large, I think they are on the right track. These days, I think public perception is a few years behind today’s reality when it comes to quality in American cars. Ford and GM have their work cut out for them when it comes to restoring their credibility with the buying public.
.
“GM has made strides, this is true, but right now they’re at the point in quality that Toyota was at 5 or 6 years ago, and well, frankly, that’s not good enough.” – LamborghiniZ

The same could be said of Nissan in late 2002 when the new Altima was released. It had the same cost-cutting on the interior that the Fusion and the Aura have now. So did the Maxima in 2003 and the Murano in 2004. Interiors were not bad, but not great either.. basically just acceptable. There’s reason for optimism with GM in that it’s very likely they will turn around and further invest into improving their products. Ford is a wildcard – I’ve followed them closely over the last few years and have never seen such a bi-polar company in my life. In any case, if GM & Ford follow Nissan’s example, then a healthy portion of the profits will go right back into upping the game for the Aura and the Fusion (they need Nav systems, among other upscale features)

Just like people that hate US automakers love to cite CR? As their statistical and reporting methods aren’t always the greatest, you should take reports for many of these research companies (JD Power, CR, US World, etc) with a grain of salt. They’ve all been criticized at one time or another, with good reason.

People need to develop better critical reasoning skills.

As for Consumer Reports, isn’t that the magazine that just got thumped for printing inaccurate information regarding child restraints? Obviously, CR is not as wonderful as you would like to think it is.

That’s a great article you posted. That speaks to my point about being 2nd place is not a bad thing with reference to the gap in separation. The REAL truth is that American brands are not that bad. For every anti-GM person, there’s the facts, read ‘em and weep. So now it’s time for some major PR work. It starts with delivering a vehicle that looks so good people have no choice but to buy. Solstice. Camaro. Acadia. They’ll see for themselves. The real work will be with the Impala, Malibu and others in the “everyday joe” category. Buyers of Camry and Accord are much more faithful than someone purchasing the aforementioned designs.

I agree on your point regarding two to tango. The problem with management is they give up. Unions are monsters to deal with. Management doesn’t come to the table for war like unions do. So they make concessions left and right, it’s not worth the fight. That’s not an excuse, simply the truth.

As for unions…
Unions are established to serve and protect the rights of their members, but the UAW has overstepped the bounds in many areas. Management deserves some blame here, too, since it takes two to tango. The jobs bank wasn’t created solely by the unions–management had to agree to it, or it wouldn’t have been in the contract. So who’s the dork in management who thought that was a good idea?!

Unfortunately, right now one of the biggest factors hindering GM’s recovery plan is public perception. Even though GM has made great strides in reliability, the public still believes that the import manufacturers are superior. Check out the J.D. Powers results in this recent article:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007701110333

I would give it time with GM. It takes a while to turn a tanker the size of GM. They’ve made a lot of changes over the past few years and it will be another 2 before we see the real gains or losses. It also takes a while to sway public opinion. I do not disagree that the general public opinion is GM’s quality is inferior to the foreign brands. Let’s say the average cycle time of new car buying is somewhere around 3 and 4 years of ownership, factoring in leases with 5 year loans. It will take that long to notice any sort of change in public opinion. The great new products are rolling off the lines now. They’ve acknowledged which factories build good quality and which ones don’t. They’ve also acknowledged that incentives do not promote a good image. So now it’s time to sit and see what the effects are. I predict good fortunes.

Oh, and Lutz can lick my YamBag.

Perhaps you should open your eyes and see what is really out there.

3.6L at GM is 285 in the crossover Acadia and Outlook. You know like a truck. It is over 300 in the CTS.

Get the facts right

during the strike productivity increased. engineers were doing the work of the union people.

about the quality it is really more about perception and demand, consumers think the cars have poor quality or toyota has higher quality causes demand for gm’s and fords to go down. So making “volume” cars people want for whatever reason will increase profit. or they could switch to a margin model like bmw or mb and sell lower volumes for higher profit. either way what lutz and gm are currently doing isn’t working.

I agree GM’s business plan is based around volume, all major car manufacturers profits are based on volume. An example of a car company that is not is Bugatti, or Ferrari. What you have are extremly expensive products. On charges of reliability and quality, I simply disagree. JD Powers ratings on problems in GM vehicles are not bad at all. They may not be #1, but that does not mean they are terrible. If there are a few points separating first and second place, it does not mean 2nd place should bag it up and quite the business. As far as costs go, yes, Honda and Toyota do manufacture vehicles for less. There are reasons for this. First and foremost, they do not have to tack on an immediate $4000 to cover healthcare and salaries of the union work force. If the UAW were so wonderful, then Toyota and Honda would be jumping on the UAW bandwagon. But so far, they are trying to keep them out. It’s just a stark difference that all of GM and Ford’s factories are unionized by contract, but not one of Honda’s or Toyota’s are unionized, and their factories seem to all have better quality control.

the union at my company just finished a strike. during which time productivity improved.

i think the biggest problem ford and gm have is that their business model is based around volume, so if the volume of sales is below estimates it has a huge effect on profit. What ford and gm have done is to try to make cars cheaper at the expense of quality, reliability to increase profit. instead they should have focused on creating a better product that would increase volume sales which is what toyota and honda have done.

Does anyone know why Toyota is successful? It’s the company culture, specifically “Kai Zen”. It’s the bottom-up mentality that Toyota uses to manufacture. They give the people on the assempby lines the ability to make suggestions on improvements and quality control. They empower their employees. It’s the single reason Toyota has as many plants in the US as Ford, and not one of them is unionized. Not a single employee. With that type of culture, the entire corporation is energized on success. How do you think that sort of mentality would work in a unionized shop? GM can’t manufacture a vehicle in the US in a non-unionized plant. And that has been the case for a very long time. Unions suffer from disengagement, they do not feel they are apart of the organization, they feel the organization is against them. Union vs Management. If anyone really wants to support GM and help them be as successful as they once were, start by not supporting unions.

Yes, because that’s a technological issue….

He is making all the right moves and companies from Germany to Japan are felling the pressure. GM is unstoppable, unbeatable, and destined for supremacy. Bob is leading the way.

That’s all I can think of to sum it up haha

Will a few Solstice like “cool” cars save a company that is in debt in the billions??? I don’t think “cool” vehicles are the answer, nor do I think a “car guy” is the answer to GM’s problems. How many “cool” cars does Toyota have??? What is Toyota known for??? QUALITY, DEPENDENDABILITY, VALUE…..not “FUN”, “COOL”…etc.

j i m