Showing posts with label Toyota. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Toyota. Show all posts

Monday, May 4, 2009

Another Crappy Excuse for the Auto Industry by Newsweek

Car Sales Docked in LA


Newsweek article"So gas just hit another miserable milestone. Unleaded regular is averaging a record $3.30 a gallon and seems likely to blast past $4 by Memorial Day. Wouldn't it be great if you could drive a car that gets 50 miles per gallon? Well, you can. Just hop on a plane and fly to Europe, where all new cars average 43mpg, or Japan, where the average hits 50mpg. Here in the United States, we're stuck at 25mpg...

all auto companies are focusing on jacking up fuel economy, especially
since Congress just mandated that all new autos sold by 2020 must average 35mpg. The new mileage mantra also is motivated by the fact that car sales are weak, partially because of panic at the pump. But putting out a 50mpg car any time soon is daunting even to the maker of America's mileage champ, the 48mpg Toyota Prius...

Consider the exercise Ford just went through. It ran a computer simulation on what would happen to the mileage of a Ford Focus small car if you built it entirely out of lightweight aluminum. Losing the steel allowed the Focus to drop 1,000 pounds—30 percent of its body weight. That enabled Ford to outfit it with a tiny one-liter engine, half the size of its old engine, but far more fuel efficient because of new technology. Best of all, the small motor goes just as fast as the big one because the car is so much lighter. The result: fuel economy on this fabulous Focus went from 35mpg to 50mpg. What's stopping Ford from moving this car from pixels to pavement? The cost of an all-aluminum car could top $50,000...

Back in the 1980s, the Honda CRX-HF and the Geo Metro each got more than 50mpg, but they didn't have airbags or steel beams in their doors to protect occupants in a crash. " (Newsweek)



So this article is trying to convince me, that the reason that the BIG 3 don't have a fuel efficient car yet is the consumers fault? Because consumers want size, power, & comfort the Big 3 cant increase fuel efficiency by 3% every year. What the hell, we employ engineers that can make Nuclear Subs, Satellites, Go to space, Land on the moon, Fight the moon monsters, unmanned flying drones that can take high speed photographs and drop missiles, but asking car companies to increase their fuel economy by 30% in 15 years is asking to much? Why run the test with the focus if the metal cost $50,000, there were no other materials available for the engineers to use in conducting this test. The only reason the companies aren't in a rush to increase efficiency is they still have to sell all these 2008 and 2009 models sitting on some dock. For the article to acknowledge that within the last three decades two car companies had a car with 50mpg, that were deemed unsafe due to removed features. Shouldn't 30 years be enough to make an unsafe car that gets 50 mpg a safe car with 50mpg? That's just lazy on behalf of the automakers, and the govt is encouraging it with these auto bailouts, if they let these companies fail. There cars would be liquidated so people who need vehicles could get them cheap and make room in the market place for fuel efficient car companies so people would buy them. And not this volt shit, Electricity is expensive.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Damn the big 3

Ford, GM, & Chrysler are losers.
The are good at Loosing jobs
They are good at Losing their damn minds.



Why would anyone buy this vehicle if you aren't a Government organization like the FBI? Edmund's.com describes the Ford Excursion as
The Ford Excursion followed in this tradition. This full-size SUV was manufactured between 2000 and 2005, and holds the distinction of being the longest and heaviest sport-utility vehicle ever produced. With seating for up to nine passengers.

9 Passengers? How many families are that size anymore. In the 50's 60's and part of the 70's it was not completely out of the ordinary to see a family of 5 or 6 but 9 is just ridiculous. What is the purpose of 9 passengers, why not just rent a Winnebago if you want to go a trip. But the thought that it was necessary to build such a big vehicle in mass production is just crazy. It highlights are arrogance as a population and the arrogance of the big 3. If We will build it they will buy it. It is not just the big 3 who are involved in feeding on this consumer driven culture, pun intended. All of the automakers have a ridiculous vehicle:

Toyota Sequoia: Seats 8


What is the sense of these big ass vehicles, of course they are fun to drive and makes little people feel protected on the road. You can accomplish the same thing by buying a Tank, and you would get about the same gas mileage as driving these behemoths.

The current state of the U.S. auto market is horrible due to unrealistic expectations and bad leadership. When the Unions forced a renegotiation of their contracts last summer the leadership didn't think about the future of the American Auto Economy. It wasn't a secret that sales & Demand where down. Yet the Unions asked for guarantees to keep the factories of the big energy wasting vehicles open in Detroit. The understanding is there that the Union leaders were looking to secure jobs in a state that is already wasting away. This was their one chance to demonstrate the Vision and get the upper hand on negotiations yet they failed. Just like the industry. This was the Union chance to truly do what is best for workers. Within negotiations they could have asked for many more things that makes sense except the dumb things they agreed to:

assisted their contracts last year
1. 2 new factories equip ed to create "Green Friendly cars"
a. One of those new factories be in Detroit Michigan
b. Another factory to be built in an economically viable area(Not Michigan or the rust belt)
2. Discontinue the creation of large SUV's that are not economically viable
a. If there is no demand why are they creating these super vehicles
b. Has anyone seen a truck lot lately, they have plenty

This is what they agreed to, keep in mind how long can they keep these agreements with a 120 year old business model.

1. Company commitments to invest in new products for its existing U.S. facilities, as well as a moratorium on plant closings.

2.The UAW also was able to secure a commitment to hire 3,000 temporary workers into full-time, traditional employment.


How are they going to keep these commitments to the unions. 3000 temporary JOBS haha, what is UAW going to do if GM doesn't provide these jobs, LOL Nothing out of nothing is Nothing squared.

Yes we need to give another bailout since this is such an important part of our country. They should only give it on these conditions.
1. Fire all the Leadership at those organizations.
A. UAW
B. GM, Ford, Chrysler
I. Just because the the Ford family shares a name with the company they own
they should not be the defacto owners
2. Force the The big 3(GM, Ford, Chrysler) to release all of those patents they have collected to prevent alternate technology to be used. Those should become owned by the general public and should be able to be used by any engineer or company.


A. GM this month said it lost $4.2 billion in the third quarter and almost $73
billion since the end of 2004.(blogger)
3. The big 3 should get rid of all lobbyist that should save 7 million
4. Agreements with developing car companies to mass produce their vehicles
a. Tesla Motors
b. Studebaker Electric bring it back