Hyundais as Dodges?

DC has the distribution rights for Hyundai in Mexico. Hyundai has not been
there that long, so they do not have a national office or distribution arm
setup. Only because DC was in bed with them, that they distribute them. But
since they sold out there stake, they might not be the distributor for
hyuindai's to soon in Mexico.

"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
n.umich.edu...
>
> The recent thread on the Mexican-market Dodge Ram Durango had me over to
> www.dodge.com.mx . Apparently they've got a new model called the "Verna".
> The Verna greets us when the page comes up...
>
> ...replete with Hyundai badge in the middle of the grill. Wonder if this
> is a Mexico-only marketing arrangement, or if DC, having failed to learn
> the lessons presented by years of unholy alliance with Bitsu****ti, has
> got in bed with Hyundai.
>
>

"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote

>... Wonder if this
> is a Mexico-only marketing arrangement, or if DC, having failed to learn
> the lessons presented by years of unholy alliance with Bitsu****ti, has
> got in bed with Hyundai.

Could be worse. Hyundai used to make poor cars (but cheap, which is what
kept them in business) but lately their quality seems to be improving
considerably. The Excel, for example, is a better car than the Neon by
almost every measure. Hyundai is a huge and very formidable company - they
dominate the large ship construction industry for example.

"Getting into bed" is not only fashionable, it's absolutely necessary to
survive in today's market. It's the only way to finance the R&D, and this
will become more important in the future with new types of fuels,
drivetrains etc.

Besides, it's hardly new. For example, the CVT transmission that Ford is
introducing in the 500 and Freestyle goes all the way back to the Dutch DAF
car in the 1950s, and has been developed in cooperation with Volvo and other
companies since then.

"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote

>... Wonder if this
> is a Mexico-only marketing arrangement, or if DC, having failed to learn
> the lessons presented by years of unholy alliance with Bitsu****ti, has
> got in bed with Hyundai.

Could be worse. Hyundai used to make poor cars (but cheap, which is what
kept them in business) but lately their quality seems to be improving
considerably. The Excel, for example, is a better car than the Neon by
almost every measure. Hyundai is a huge and very formidable company - they
dominate the large ship construction industry for example.

"Getting into bed" is not only fashionable, it's absolutely necessary to
survive in today's market. It's the only way to finance the R&D, and this
will become more important in the future with new types of fuels,
drivetrains etc.

Besides, it's hardly new. For example, the CVT transmission that Ford is
introducing in the 500 and Freestyle goes all the way back to the Dutch DAF
car in the 1950s, and has been developed in cooperation with Volvo and other
companies since then.

"Dave Gower" > wrote in message
...
> Could be worse. Hyundai used to make poor cars (but cheap, which is what
> kept them in business) but lately their quality seems to be improving
> considerably. The Excel, for example, is a better car than the Neon by
> almost every measure.

Are you sure you mean the Excel? If you mean the Elantra or something MAYBE.

1994 Excel:
81HP engine
0-60 12 seconds
28/36MPG with a manual shift
Everything breaks at a moment's notice


1998 Neon
132HP engine
0-60 9.1 seconds
29/41MPG with manual shift.
Not the best, but not absolutly horrid for maintanence

"Dave Gower" > wrote in message
...
> Could be worse. Hyundai used to make poor cars (but cheap, which is what
> kept them in business) but lately their quality seems to be improving
> considerably. The Excel, for example, is a better car than the Neon by
> almost every measure.

Are you sure you mean the Excel? If you mean the Elantra or something MAYBE.

1994 Excel:
81HP engine
0-60 12 seconds
28/36MPG with a manual shift
Everything breaks at a moment's notice


1998 Neon
132HP engine
0-60 9.1 seconds
29/41MPG with manual shift.
Not the best, but not absolutly horrid for maintanence

"Bill 2" > wrote

> Are you sure you mean the Excel? If you mean the Elantra or something
> MAYBE.

Sorry, Elantra.

"Bill 2" > wrote

> Are you sure you mean the Excel? If you mean the Elantra or something
> MAYBE.

Sorry, Elantra.

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Dave Gower wrote:

> Could be worse. Hyundai used to make poor cars (but cheap, which is what
> kept them in business) but lately their quality seems to be improving
> considerably. The [Elantra], for example, is a better car than the Neon
> by almost every measure.

Well, "better" what? Refinement, power, economy, fit 'n' finish, etc? OK,
good, I wouldn't have too much trouble with that. But durability and
long-term dependability and serviceability are three big unknowns with
these "better" Korean cars. So far, Korean cars get old and unworth fixing
(or impossible to fix) in a big hurry. Will the more recent models be
significantly better in this regard? Maybe, maybe not. We don't know yet,
and won't for a number of years.

Not that a Neon is the sine qua non of vehicular durability, but servicing
remains *possible and affordable* in the long term.

DS

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Dave Gower wrote:

> Could be worse. Hyundai used to make poor cars (but cheap, which is what
> kept them in business) but lately their quality seems to be improving
> considerably. The [Elantra], for example, is a better car than the Neon
> by almost every measure.

Well, "better" what? Refinement, power, economy, fit 'n' finish, etc? OK,
good, I wouldn't have too much trouble with that. But durability and
long-term dependability and serviceability are three big unknowns with
these "better" Korean cars. So far, Korean cars get old and unworth fixing
(or impossible to fix) in a big hurry. Will the more recent models be
significantly better in this regard? Maybe, maybe not. We don't know yet,
and won't for a number of years.

Not that a Neon is the sine qua non of vehicular durability, but servicing
remains *possible and affordable* in the long term.

DS

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:09:23 -0500, "Daniel J. Stern"
> wrote:

>On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Dave Gower wrote:
>
>> Could be worse. Hyundai used to make poor cars (but cheap, which is what
>> kept them in business) but lately their quality seems to be improving
>> considerably. The [Elantra], for example, is a better car than the Neon
>> by almost every measure.
>
>Well, "better" what? Refinement, power, economy, fit 'n' finish, etc? OK,
>good, I wouldn't have too much trouble with that. But durability and
>long-term dependability and serviceability are three big unknowns with
>these "better" Korean cars. So far, Korean cars get old and unworth fixing
>(or impossible to fix) in a big hurry. Will the more recent models be
>significantly better in this regard? Maybe, maybe not. We don't know yet,
>and won't for a number of years.
>
>Not that a Neon is the sine qua non of vehicular durability, but servicing
>remains *possible and affordable* in the long term.
>
>DS
Agreed - but you will have to admit the Elantra is much farther ahead
of the excel than the excel was ahead of the Pony.And the excel was a
quantum leap above the Pony.
Parts availability and pricing will be, to a large extent, what
determines how repairable todays Korean cars will be 5 or more years
down the line.

Fit and finsh, engineering, and design of Hyundai, Kia, DaeWoo(GM) et
al are at LEAST on a par with Mitsubishi, Suzuki and many european
cars - very competetive with the Mazdas and Nissans of the world, and
breathing heavily down the necks of Honda and Toyota.

Where does that put them in relation to Ford, Chrysler, and GM?
GM, for one, is banking heavily on its DaeWoo designed engines (and
cars).

And the Korean vehicles are significantly less costly to purchace than
the Japanese "equivalents"