Detroit Rescue Plans Revealed

With Congressional hearings starting Tuesday, everyone wonders what pitch
the Detroit automakers will use to try to convince Congress - and more
importantly, the public - that spending taxpayer money will rescue them.
Bits and pieces have leaked, and its time to start evaluating them.

Rick Wagoner, GM's CEO, has spent most of his career in finance related
functions, after having started as an analyst in GM's treasurer's office.
He will offer expert testimony on GM's finances. "There should be more
digits in these numbers" is one of his planned lines.

But, with a known lack of product experience, it is expected that Congress
will instead try to grill him mercilessly on car features and manufacturing
issues. During a crash course over the weekend, Wagoner learned to recite
all GM's current brand names in less than 60 seconds (his tendency to
include Oldsmobile was a particular stumbling block).

Ford's Alan Mulally is probably the best prepared of the three. With a
engineering background (at Boeing) he is likely to be able to impress
Congress that he knows how to lead a manufacturing company.

Yet he can't speak too highly of Ford products lest he be considered
dishonest. Before being appointed Ford CEO, he was quoted as saying his
personal Lexus was the best car in the world.

Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli may have the least to say. His opening
statement, based on his experience at The Home Depot, is reported to be
simply "We can do it, you can help".

"Comments4u" > wrote in
message ...

> Yet he can't speak too highly of Ford products lest he be considered
> dishonest. Before being appointed Ford CEO, he was quoted as saying
> his
> personal Lexus was the best car in the world.

Doesn't everyone think the car they are driving is the best car in the
world "for them, all things considered?" If there were no constraints,
I am sure my current car would not be the best car for me, but given
my real world constraints, I bought the car because it was the best
one that met my requirements/constraints/desires at that time. I doubt
Mulally any more knew whether a Lexus was the best car in the world or
not than I do, but he certainly could have thought it was the best car
for him as far as he knew. I assume he knows better now When he was
running Boeing, I can't imagine him riding around in a Lexus and
saying, well it is a good car, but I was a dope for spending so much
for a pimped out Toyota. What high power, over paid CEO would ever
admit he bought anything but the best - especially when it was a
product produced in a foreign country?

Ed

At nearly $1,000,000 one would think so, but I think he said ONE of the best


> Yet he can't speak too highly of Ford products lest he be considered
> dishonest. Before being appointed Ford CEO, he was quoted as saying his
> personal Lexus was the best car in the world.
>
>

In article <49343ee8$1@kcnews01>,
"C. E. White" > wrote:

> "Comments4u" > wrote in
> message ...
>
> > Yet he can't speak too highly of Ford products lest he be considered
> > dishonest. Before being appointed Ford CEO, he was quoted as saying
> > his
> > personal Lexus was the best car in the world.
>
> Doesn't everyone think the car they are driving is the best car in the
> world "for them, all things considered?" If there were no constraints,
> I am sure my current car would not be the best car for me, but given
> my real world constraints, I bought the car because it was the best
> one that met my requirements/constraints/desires at that time. I doubt
> Mulally any more knew whether a Lexus was the best car in the world or
> not than I do, but he certainly could have thought it was the best car
> for him as far as he knew. I assume he knows better now When he was
> running Boeing, I can't imagine him riding around in a Lexus and
> saying, well it is a good car, but I was a dope for spending so much
> for a pimped out Toyota. What high power, over paid CEO would ever
> admit he bought anything but the best - especially when it was a
> product produced in a foreign country?
>
Seeing the current Lexus E350 ads amuses me.
It looks and is so similar to my grey 300M. Under the Lexus only gains
on more recent VVT, 6 SP auto and more air bags.

Toyota copies very well as do a few other "foreign" cars.
Perhaps the smart tasteful car stylists, that seem to be absent from
recent Chrysler car body designs, were hired by this competition.

On Dec 2, 1:25*am, Josh S > wrote:
> In article <49343ee8$1@kcnews01>,
> *"C. E. White" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Comments4u" > wrote in
> > messagenews:1ivlpckwmak4r.1cn1x8nnnk5ry.dlg@40tude .net...
>
> > > Yet he can't speak too highly of Ford products lest he be considered
> > > dishonest. *Before being appointed Ford CEO, he was quoted as saying
> > > his
> > > personal Lexus was the best car in the world.
>
> > Doesn't everyone think the car they are driving is the best car in the
> > world "for them, all things considered?" If there were no constraints,
> > I am sure my current car would not be the best car for me, but given
> > my real world constraints, I bought the car because it was the best
> > one that met my requirements/constraints/desires at that time. I doubt
> > Mulally any more knew whether a Lexus was the best car in the world or
> > not than I do, but he certainly could have thought it was the best car
> > for him as far as he knew. I assume he knows better now When he was
> > running Boeing, I can't imagine him riding around in a Lexus and
> > saying, well it is a good car, but I was a dope for spending so much
> > for a pimped out Toyota. What high power, over paid CEO would ever
> > admit he bought anything but the best - especially when it was a
> > product produced in a foreign country?
>
> Seeing the current Lexus E350 ads amuses me.
> It looks and is so similar to my grey 300M. Under the Lexus *only gains
> on more recent VVT, 6 SP auto and more air bags.
>
> Toyota copies very well as do a few other "foreign" cars.
> Perhaps the smart tasteful car stylists, that seem to be absent from
> recent Chrysler car body designs, were hired by this competition.

The biggest example is "Cab Forward" stuff which is the industry
standard now!

I wish the people who say bad stuff about American Cars would actually
go and look some.

On Dec 3, 1:48*pm, "David E. Powell" > wrote:
> On Dec 2, 1:25*am, Josh S > wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article <49343ee8$1@kcnews01>,
> > *"C. E. White" > wrote:
>
> > > "Comments4u" > wrote in
> > > messagenews:1ivlpckwmak4r.1cn1x8nnnk5ry.dlg@40tude .net...
>
> > > > Yet he can't speak too highly of Ford products lest he be considered
> > > > dishonest. *Before being appointed Ford CEO, he was quoted as saying
> > > > his
> > > > personal Lexus was the best car in the world.
>
> > > Doesn't everyone think the car they are driving is the best car in the
> > > world "for them, all things considered?" If there were no constraints,
> > > I am sure my current car would not be the best car for me, but given
> > > my real world constraints, I bought the car because it was the best
> > > one that met my requirements/constraints/desires at that time. I doubt
> > > Mulally any more knew whether a Lexus was the best car in the world or
> > > not than I do, but he certainly could have thought it was the best car
> > > for him as far as he knew. I assume he knows better now When he was
> > > running Boeing, I can't imagine him riding around in a Lexus and
> > > saying, well it is a good car, but I was a dope for spending so much
> > > for a pimped out Toyota. What high power, over paid CEO would ever
> > > admit he bought anything but the best - especially when it was a
> > > product produced in a foreign country?
>
> > Seeing the current Lexus E350 ads amuses me.
> > It looks and is so similar to my grey 300M. Under the Lexus *only gains
> > on more recent VVT, 6 SP auto and more air bags.
>
> > Toyota copies very well as do a few other "foreign" cars.
> > Perhaps the smart tasteful car stylists, that seem to be absent from
> > recent Chrysler car body designs, were hired by this competition.
>
> The biggest example is "Cab Forward" stuff which is the industry
> standard now!

Which is why Chrysler went away from it. If you want to distinguish
yourself, and everybody else is copying your design, you need a new
design.

>
> I wish the people who say bad stuff about American Cars would actually
> go and look some.

The problems:

1. Reliability for GM and Chrysler is still subpar, on average. Only
Ford seems to be in a league with Honda and Toyota.

2. Dependence on archaic 4-speed automatics, which saps power and fuel
economy.

3. Skimping on the details, like too many hard surfaces in the
interior. And just cheap interiors, especially Chrysler mid-size and
small cars and SUVs.

4. Engines which aren't as smooth or as quiet as those from Honda and
Toyota. Or as powerful. Come on, Chrysler, Nissan gets 305 hp from a
3.5 L V6; you get 250. Honda gets 190 hp from a 2.4 L 4; you get 178
hp from a 2.7 L V6.

On 2008-12-04, Lloyd > wrote:


> 2. Dependence on archaic 4-speed automatics, which saps power and fuel
> economy.

This is how they pay the UAW workers.

> 3. Skimping on the details, like too many hard surfaces in the
> interior. And just cheap interiors, especially Chrysler mid-size and
> small cars and SUVs.

This is how they pay the UAW workers.

> 4. Engines which aren't as smooth or as quiet as those from Honda and
> Toyota. Or as powerful. Come on, Chrysler, Nissan gets 305 hp from a
> 3.5 L V6; you get 250. Honda gets 190 hp from a 2.4 L 4; you get 178
> hp from a 2.7 L V6.

This is how they pay the UAW workers.

A vehicle will only fetch X on the market. If you pay a higher labor
rate you have to cut materials and time. Lesser interior materials save
money. Specific horsepower is a function of cost in manufacturing
processes and material. using particular designs longer cuts tooling and
development costs making up for high cost labor. unflexible labor also
forces one to stick with present designs because the manufacturing side
can't handle new processes or new automation.

The UAW, as a classic old-school union fights change and has an
artifically high cost of labor. To think this doesn't show up in the
product is nonsense. They could make all the executives work for a
dollar a year and it won't fix these problems. Well it might let them
upgrade the dash pad in every car... maybe the carpet too, but that's
about it, the overall problems still exist.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lloyd" >
Newsgroups:
rec.autos.driving,alt.autos.dodge.trucks,rec.autos .makers.Chrysler,alt.autos.ford,alt.autos.gm
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 3:39 PM
Subject: Detroit Rescue Plans Revealed


> 4. Engines which aren't as smooth or as quiet as those from Honda
> and
> Toyota. Or as powerful. Come on, Chrysler, Nissan gets 305 hp from
> a
> 3.5 L V6; you get 250. Honda gets 190 hp from a 2.4 L 4; you get 178
> hp from a 2.7 L V6.

Lets look at your comparions:

First:

2009 Nissan Maxima:
Engine horsepower 290-hp @ 6,400 rpm
Engine torque 261 lbs.-ft. @ 4,400 rpm
MSRP: $30,160

2009 Dodge Charger V6 SXT
Horsepower 250-hp @ 6,400 rpm
Torque 250 lbs.-ft. @ 3,800 rpm
MSRP: $24,285

I'll bet you at lower engine RPMs, the Chrysler V6 actually has as
much (maybe more) torque than the Nissan V6. Just how often do you
drive around with the engine screaming along at 6400 rpm? For people
who drive sanely, the HP at 6400 rpm is irrelevant. The torque
available in the 1500 to 300 rpm range has a lot more to do with how
the vehicle "feels." I have a Nissan Frontier with the 4L version of
the Nissan V6. It is one fast truck, but it drives like crap in
traffic. You have two choices at a stop light - burn rubber or creep
away. The mid range torque is pathetic. Comapred to my old F150, the
Frontier is a pain to drive in traffic, and a horror on mud or grass.
I constantly spin the rear tires when on my farm unless I put it in
4WD. You can't ease into anything. It is like a switch - 4000 rpm and
a rocket, 2000 rpm and it won't move. I call it idiot engineering
driven by idiots in marketing. And don't forget just a coupel of years
back, all the Japanese manufacturers were dinged for lying about the
horsepower numbers.

Second:

Honda Accord EX Coupe

Horsepower 190-hp @ 7,000 rpm
Torque 162 lbs.-ft. @ 4,400 rpm
MSRP: $23,555

Dodge Avenger SXT

Horsepower 173-hp @ 6,000 rpm
Torque 166 lbs.-ft. @ 4,400 rpm
MSRP: $20,515


The Chrysler engine has more torque where it counts. I'll bet it is a
lot easier to maintain speed in traffic with the Dodge than with the
Accord. And the Avenger is $3K less expensive besides.

I used always rag on Chevrolet for selling engines that devloped big
horsepower numbers at ridiculouly high rpms, but the Japanese are well
beyond anything as silly as GM used to do. If you want to ride around
with the engine buzzing at 4k+ rpms all the time, Hondas are great. If
you like nice undramatic smooth efficient acceleration, they are
horrid.

Ed

On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 20:55:38 +0000 (UTC), Brent
> wrote Re Detroit Rescue Plans
Revealed:

>The UAW, as a classic old-school union fights change and has an
>artifically high cost of labor. To think this doesn't show up in the
>product is nonsense. They could make all the executives work for a
>dollar a year and it won't fix these problems. Well it might let them
>upgrade the dash pad in every car... maybe the carpet too, but that's
>about it, the overall problems still exist.

Well said.

"C. E. White" > wrote in message
news:49384663$1@kcnews01...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lloyd" >
> Newsgroups:
> rec.autos.driving,alt.autos.dodge.trucks,rec.autos .makers.Chrysler,alt.autos.ford,alt.autos.gm
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 3:39 PM
> Subject: Detroit Rescue Plans Revealed
>
>
>> 4. Engines which aren't as smooth or as quiet as those from Honda
>> and
>> Toyota. Or as powerful. Come on, Chrysler, Nissan gets 305 hp from
>> a
>> 3.5 L V6; you get 250. Honda gets 190 hp from a 2.4 L 4; you get 178
>> hp from a 2.7 L V6.
>
> Lets look at your comparions:
>
> First:
>
> 2009 Nissan Maxima:
> Engine horsepower 290-hp @ 6,400 rpm
> Engine torque 261 lbs.-ft. @ 4,400 rpm
> MSRP: $30,160
>
> 2009 Dodge Charger V6 SXT
> Horsepower 250-hp @ 6,400 rpm
> Torque 250 lbs.-ft. @ 3,800 rpm
> MSRP: $24,285
>
> I'll bet you at lower engine RPMs, the Chrysler V6 actually has as
> much (maybe more) torque than the Nissan V6. Just how often do you
> drive around with the engine screaming along at 6400 rpm? For people
> who drive sanely, the HP at 6400 rpm is irrelevant. The torque
> available in the 1500 to 300 rpm range has a lot more to do with how
> the vehicle "feels." I have a Nissan Frontier with the 4L version of
> the Nissan V6. It is one fast truck, but it drives like crap in
> traffic. You have two choices at a stop light - burn rubber or creep
> away. The mid range torque is pathetic. Comapred to my old F150, the
> Frontier is a pain to drive in traffic, and a horror on mud or grass.
> I constantly spin the rear tires when on my farm unless I put it in
> 4WD. You can't ease into anything. It is like a switch - 4000 rpm and
> a rocket, 2000 rpm and it won't move. I call it idiot engineering
> driven by idiots in marketing. And don't forget just a coupel of years
> back, all the Japanese manufacturers were dinged for lying about the
> horsepower numbers.
>
> Second:
>
> Honda Accord EX Coupe
>
> Horsepower 190-hp @ 7,000 rpm
> Torque 162 lbs.-ft. @ 4,400 rpm
> MSRP: $23,555
>
> Dodge Avenger SXT
>
> Horsepower 173-hp @ 6,000 rpm
> Torque 166 lbs.-ft. @ 4,400 rpm
> MSRP: $20,515
>
>
> The Chrysler engine has more torque where it counts. I'll bet it is a
> lot easier to maintain speed in traffic with the Dodge than with the
> Accord. And the Avenger is $3K less expensive besides.
>
> I used always rag on Chevrolet for selling engines that devloped big
> horsepower numbers at ridiculouly high rpms, but the Japanese are well
> beyond anything as silly as GM used to do. If you want to ride around
> with the engine buzzing at 4k+ rpms all the time, Hondas are great. If
> you like nice undramatic smooth efficient acceleration, they are
> horrid.
>
> Ed


Ed, you know as well as I do that the quality and durability of a lot of the
Chrysler
models is WORSE than terrible.

I think they are on the road to change but I would rather have unprotected
sex with
an infected woman than buy a Chrysler at this point.