ShadowDog

My question would be what Toyota thinks would be any reason for other owners to complain about the same thing when it may not have happened. If Toyota is confident that all buyers are satisfied with their product, who would bother complaining about nothing? That just doesn't add up.

Well, if we must talk about the reality of the situation, let's cover the two things mentioned: education and cost. In the 90's, if a domestic product required a repair, it was typically lower in cost next to the import product. As an example, my friend's parents owned a 90's 4Runner that was left to rot in a field until they could sell it because the cost of a new ECM was not in the hundreds, but the thousands. They finally did sell it a year later. It's funny how educated people won't touch something superior with a ten-foot pole if it isn't working. No fit-and-finish, quality materials, refined engineering or superior components will help a vehicle that won't start until a couple grand is pumped into it. When it comes to education in university, for many, their vehicle purchase is based on status. When educated people buy a Mercedes, are they getting a superior product? A product that has been notorious for electrical issues has been reserved for people with the money. Educated people have earned the right to drive a status symbol, not a superior car. Did Honda build a superior vehicle in the 90s? Perhaps. But how many buyers were looking at panel fit-and-finish when making their car purchase? How many people likely bothered to compare the Lumina and the Accord when making their decision. It's more likely that an Accord buyer was always a Honda buyer to begin with. Honda had just designed the Accord for entry in the mid-sized car market, so if anything, it was 'worth a look' to buyers of other models. If so, did these buyers get sold on the car because a salesman said it was 'better put together than a Lumina'? Likely not. If anything, all the salesman had to say was, 'and you get Honda quality with your purchase'. For most sheeple, this is all they need to hear. Educated buyers are classroom smart, but that doesn't mean they are automotive smart. In fact, I would bet that most classroom-educated buyers know far less about cars than your average buyer. To me, it's expected they would receive their information from media publications and bias personal relationship reviews than actually doing their own homework. I'm not calling them ignorant buyers, but I would tend to think that an informed buyer would be one with experience behind the wheel of both makes through owning from both makes outright. If we want to read words on a paper, read these: Honda Accord: http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com...onda-accord.htm Chevrolet Lumina: http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com...olet-lumina.htm ...doesn't seem to be a lot of difference these days.

Where mentioned that the 4500 lb. stretch-version of any van is oddly considered a "mini-van", being that they are pretty near the same size as our good ol' A-Team shaggin'-wagon, I would have to agree that they represent a class of their own with the exception of a few major details: FWD, unibody construction (sans ladder frame), and more versatile. Came home today from a trip to get boxes for our move. I threw twenty in the back in one level row and easily had room for as many as 45-50. Had I a truck, I would have needed to tie them all down. Got home, unloaded, pulled the seats out of the floor, put my kid in the car seat, picked up our friends and we all went out for dinner ten minutes after I originally pulled in the driveway fully loaded. Minivans still have a place in this world, more now than ever. Some people just don't want the added convenience over vanity.

If you want a true consumer point of view, look no further. We needed a second vehicle to begin doing the things that her simpler Optra5 hatchback was becoming too small to do. So, my wife and I were looking at a variety of vehicles this past year and bought a Grand Caravan just last weekend. We looked at everything from the smaller crossovers like the Escape, to the larger of the SUVs like the Acadia. We tested a variety of crossovers and SUVs, reviewing mostly the practical needs of the vehicle. We drove and reviewed the Nissan Murano, Suzuki Grand Vitara, and checked out the information on a host of other vehicles. My wife drove a Pontiac Montana at work used to shuttle clients and that thing was a rattle-monger with half-working power side doors; however, she found so much practical use out of it that she was determined to take a serious look at the Caravan with its stow-n-go seating. We quickly determined one thing after months of info searching: The grand majority of SUVs and crossovers have been so fluffed for comfort and techno-features that almost all of the practical use of them have disappeared. To me, they have become simply larger people-movers, as opposed to just having a full-size sedan. One quick observation showed us that, while their cargo room is larger than your average sedan or hatchback, it's mostly found in height. That does absolutely nothing for new families when you need one or two strollers, car seats and groceries. The only way to put all of that in the back is to stack it to the roof. They just were not practical enough for our needs. We looked at the Grand Caravan and immediately knew that it had everything we needed to be a versatile family vehicle. After driving other vehicles, the van also felt quite comfortable to drive. We took it on a 1000 km round trip with our son, enjoying the floating-nature of the drive that really helped keep him satisfied. All of the bin-storage capacity while the seats were up gave us a great amount of organization. One seat-stow bin even served us to keep some beverages cold with the help of a freezer pack. That helped void the need for a cooler altogether. At home, I set all the seats down and filled it full of recycling for a single trip to the bottle-depot and recycling site. When I previously borrowed a Trailblazer for the job, I had to make those trips separate. All things considered, this makes it a far more fuel efficient answer to the rising fuel costs. My wife could give a crap about image or stereotypes. We bought it because it served a greater number of our needs for many years to come. If the industry doesn't return to the practical aspect of building the minivan again, it might just be that consumers have too much pride that keeps them from buying one. Some buyers just need something bigger than a car, so that's accepted; however, a countless number of people I see every day are using SUVs as a daily driver with simple to-and-fro trips to the grocery store for that evening's dinner needs. I know this because it's something I see from my office window overlooking a parking lot.

Gees, talk about someone smokin' leaves from the Optimism plant. Industry-wide changes and a re-surgence of newly developed product is quite a postive story, but there sure is going to be a lot of hurting people for a little while between. The answer to the question of who would end up on top will be the one closely watched by all. Of course, if all you do is write articles and papers, you don't care that town and cities can become instant ghost-towns for a while, or even permanently. This situation hurts people and global life in general. Business is just business.

To me, this is important to note, not because of the volume, but of the market trend. Traditionally, Canadians drive smaller vehicles with great appreciation and not simply because of fuel economy. If there were some higher-end, quality small cars available, they would definitely be on the top list of preferrence by consumers. This isn't to say the Cobalt, etc. are lower-end in terms of quality; however, they are simply considered the cars that 'replaced' the J-Body (not exactly known for any quality, j/k). Perception is everything to me. This means I would consider GM to be serious about its issues as they relate to fuel prices if they didn't simply market 'just another' high-volume 4-banger. If there was to be a market, it would likely be for people with the income able to afford a large SUV or truck as a daily driver, but didn't want to pay for the high fuel costs. Would these people even think about something that isn't an SUV or truck, but could still take their dog in the back with two kids and groceries? Yish, tough sell... but a fuel-efficient cross-over is most likely, if not a completely return to a trendy station-wagon... I almost couldn't finish typing that sentence.

My sister had a Lumina Euro, which is still being driven today by her step-daughter. The few times I drove it, I wasn't mortified or running away scared with the door swinging open behind me and a trail of dust from my feet. It was a car of the times, and many people enjoyed them. I'm part of a group at W-Body.com where there is enjoyment in these cars. These enthusiasts appreciate the car for its abilities and don't sit back and whine about fit-and-finish as it compares to an 18 year old import. They, and many others, could care less. If this is purely a discussion based on business decisions that were reflected in the cars built in those times, then mistakes were clearly made; however, as I see it, people (sheeple) perhaps found themselves in a position of awkward embarrasement when they own a car the media and like-minded people continually spew negative remarks on. Who would WANT to be put in a position of constantly reading that the car they own is a piece of trash. That alone is enough to make a person wish they'd bought something else, compelling them to do the little research they would ever hope to for their next purchase, which would likely be in reading what the media would always have to say about how their crappy car couldn't hold a candle up to the imports. Gee, you think sheeple would take the extra steps for a personal opinion, as opposed to simply reading and saying, "Yeah, I'm going to buy an import next time. These guys clearly know what they're writing." What does a regular consumer know about such things? While I would agree that there have been great advancements for quality standards that have placed imports in respectably high rankings next to the domestic product, I also think that many people were shamed into refusing to buy another domestic product just because they owned a particular vehicle the press and metro-sexual, interior-decorator-minded individuals hated. I don't know if I worded that clearly enough to understand, but I think the point is easy to see.

It would be like being the only kid in class shouting the 'F'-bomb while everyone else reads quietly from the same book. You could be excused for it only if you suffer from mental incompetence... which could be something to consider if the current trend within GM continues.

Dollinger already has too much stock in GM... or not enough, depending upon his time of the month.

In the wake of the news of the plant closures, the recent article on MSN was interesting: http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/..._protest_080607 http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...M_strike_080606 If you get the impression that the CAW is taking a bullish stance on this issue, you're right. Even more surprising was the series of comments by readers after the article. Virtually all of them were completely against the CAW and their reaction to this news. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...closures_080602 This obviously does not satisfy the CAW. I keep reading where people say that GM should not be building a vehicle that nobody wants. It's not the vehicle with the problem, it's the flippin' price of gas that's causing this issue. When you read something like the following, one might begin to better understand what 1+1 equals:

Bingo! The only unfortunate issue here is that there could have been more emphasis on marketing their new car platforms. While general introductions and typical seasonal sales were flaunted, GM could have put themselves in a position to capture more attention during the times when gas prices were initially rising. Even then, there wasn't a soul out there forecasting that gas prices would ever stabilize. Well, this is all just should have -could have - would have in the end. The only nagging point is that there was enough evidence to help point GM in a safer direction; albeit, if they weren't already waist-deep in development of the 900 series. ... I just hope they don't do now what was done in the early 80s; taking popular cars with good power ratings and turning them into low-buck, no-frills four bangers like the Mustang II. *shudder*

That would only satisfy a small percentage of salary costs in the grand scope of operational costs that include all particulars of production and hourly-assembly workers. The problem is with the over-heavy production of low-demand vehicles whereby GM is not going to gain from adding to the inventory of high fuel consuming vehicles. I don't believe this is a decision based on the examination of a period-end statement. This decision comes from review of the consumer trends and managing the future of the brands. GM, heck, all of us saw the writing on the wall during the pre-production phase of the GMT-900 series. Fuel prices were already starting to rise and a great amount of GM's resources were being put into that projects completion. I'm not exactly trying to be critical of GM's steps through the last decade; however, it would appear to me that with all of the changes that were already starting to occur while GM was making decisions on how to progress, they always seem to decide on staying the course, taking one step forward and, unfortunately end up taking two steps back. Money and resources would have better been spent on the development of better fuel efficiency and hybrid programs. This isn't to say none was spent, as well as the fact that GM was forced into the phase of attempting to market higher quality to the consumer, which would have been tough to do with tired-old platforms. A lot has been out of their control for the last decade in this rebuilding phase; however, it never took a crystal ball to see what was coming. Yes, you want to keep the attention of your current consumers. You also want to be able to offer them something should the world change their decision on what they want/need. GM has been giving their customers what they wanted yesterday. Today, they are in need something else that GM hasn't had the time or resources to commit to earlier, though they could have. That's just me...talking out of my butt. Still, I'm a consumer with a need. We bought a Grand Caravan this weekend because my review of SUV's has led me to the conclusion that they offer nothing more than that of a larger hatchback. Stow-n-go seating gives me far more practical use of my van than any SUV could hope to offer; that is, unless I bought a full-size variety, which would be overkill. Sure, I'll spend a lot on gas for this van. Averaging 27 MPG versus the same for a significantly smaller SUV kind of tips my decision to the van. It sure is a shame there are fewer companies still making them. It's even more disturbing that GM axed their vans entirely with this shift from high-consumption SUVs. I would tend to think that the minivan market would potentially increase at this point. Oops... one step forward, two steps back, yet again.

I'm not one to think that it's the vehicle one drives that makes them a crappy driver, but the crappy drivers themselves picking a particular make. There's plenty of evidence on my daily drive to show that so many little Chinese ladies lack basic driving skills. Most of them aren't driving domestic cars; however, most of them are driving Toyotas. I don't blame Toyota because that would make little sense. If I had anything to say, it would be against the stale, old farts in their boats performing amazing, death-defying acts on the streets. I don't blame GM for their dangerous driving, I blame the only one there is to blame... the driver. I would like to make one more observation. Every time I see a woman driving with her lap-dog between her arms, I'm just begging for something to happen in order to have her airbag go off, sending poochie like a cannon-ball out the back window. It's more likely that the woman would have a permanently fused fur-face, but a white ankle-biting yipper sailing through the air would make my day. Why do I say such cruel things? Simply because I am usually the victim of near-mishaps due to poochie occupying the attention of some dumb middle-aged broad as she unsuccessfully attempts to navigate a straight line.

Most of us may tend to have a focus on the present day quality of the domestic vehicle. We then might battle too-and-fro on what we believe to be the reason people don't seem to observe that quality. We call those people 'uninformed' or virtually 'stupid', thinking that the domestic companies should do more to push the message out there that they can rest assured that their purchase of a domestic vehicle will be a sound decision. What I observe in conversation with others relates completely with the past. What I'm getting at is that today's domestic vehicles have a chance with the consumer looking for quality; however, the ghosts of the past are still on the roads to haunt us. I believe a domestic salesman is more likely to sell to a person with an open mind and little recollection of the bad years. These people have little experience with the by-gone era of clunky, squeeky and often-in-need-of-repair rides. This doesn't mean everyone whom has ever owned a domestic car of the past has had these experiences; however, let's face it, people always focus on the negative and bad news travels fast. So, the question begs to be asked: What do foreigners know about the quality history of a domestic vehicle or company? All they know is what they have ever heard or learned from their neighbor. What experience do they have to put them in any position to say anything negative about the domestic product? You can't blame them for just sticking with their own, what they've known and trusted all their life, their father's life, their grandfather's life, etc. There is no reason to risk it, buying a domestic vehicle on some wonder if the wheels will stay on. They know the wheels have always stayed on the foreign car, so what's to chance? The unfortunate thing is that there are untold numbers of used demostic vehicles out there continually giving the homefront industry a bad name. It doesn't take a few years to escape bad news, it takes decades just to start! Those whom have had the unfortunate experience with their poor quality vehicle have found a good reason to jump-ship and go to a foreign make. Everything they ever heard about a foreign import would tend to be positive. They take a look out their window and have a heavy sigh at their vehicle and think they might as well take the plunge... either that or they practically throw their keys to the salesman to trade it in for a new Camry. They believe they have everything to gain! The ones I have a problem with are the sheeple. These are the people with little experience in any vehicle, yet they think they know everything enough to say what is fact (because they just know so). These are the people convincing their other stupid friends not to buy a 2008 GM vehicle by pointing to a rust-bucket from the 70's and saying, "Look at what you're getting yourself into." I'm just thankful that as each year goes by, the domestic movement has a more favorable ratio of good quality, recent used vehicles over the old, used clunkers ripe for the scrap heap. This provides less for the sheeple to point to. Hopefully GM keeps from producing a lemon MODEL for them to use as another negative 'fact'. Perception is a key component to the decision-making of a car to buy. Everyone wants the opinion of someone else regarding what they think about their options in a new vehicle. It's hoped that the opinions gathered are educated and updated. ...but who am I kidding? I believe people, in general, are inherently dumb.

Pressure is a motivator, but for me, it's my drug. The operation I manage has completed its 3.5 million dollar renovation. It was quite the experience and a whole lot of fun being directly involved in establishing just how this operation would be developed. FYI, it's a full-foods retail with a service station and laser/touchless carwash built on. Of course, it had its fair share of development snags that forced a great deal of pressure on me throughout two build shifts, so that meant a lot of extra time. Once we were setting up our opening for regular sales, I worked lengthy days with the shortest being about 16 hour days at a time, and my longest day being 20 hours. I thrived with the pressure, but I knew it was going to take a physical toll on me. I seemed to get through alright; however, I haven't been back to my hometown to see my family in over two years, and I was basically skipping breaks and lunch periods because I didn't care to suspend my tasks when I felt like I was cookin'. I'm very organized otherwise, with a layout of my duties that basically provides for set periods of every day of the week to get my tasks done. It's taken me about a couple of months to arrange everything here to revolve around my set schedule, and only a major crisis or a typical holiday week tends to screw with it, so it's alright. I tend to have a slight problem with micromanaging; however, since I don't mind the stress, I work better this way (so long as it's not affecting my staff in a negative way). Nice topic subject, btw.

That dinky V6 is supposed to lug that massive piece o' junk? Tell me someone intended to upgrade it?

Working in a position that puts me in direct contact with dissatisfied customers, I welcome complaints from the clients; unfortunately, some people are even more dissatisfied that I'm not shaking in fear as they piss and moan about something seemingly insignificant. I simply tell them that I'm sorry for their experience, and that I'm prepared to rectify the situation by replacing the product or returning their money. STILL, this isn't good enough for them. It's like I might as well have killed their first born and they will NEVER forgive me for even anything less. There's a simple, yet completely relevant cliche that applies, "You can't please everyone." I have plenty of examples, but it's just easier to say that some people are easily angered by the slightest inconvenience. These people don't want anything other than just to have their anger heard, and practically walk away before receiving any reply. Again, I welcome complaints so I can make appropriate changes. Sometimes people just won't take responsibility for their own actions and insist someone else is to blame for their inconvenience.

Man, there's bound to be quite a few dents in the Diamler/Chrysler Board Room table... about the size of the average forehead.

A thought to offer? The heck with the tax on gas, tax the vehicle instead (credit/levy): Among the most popular measures introduced by the Canadian Conservative government through its annual budget this Mar 19th was the tax credit for purchasing fuel efficient cars. A basic $1000 rebate for automobiles getting 6.5 L/100 km or less and larger vans, truck and SUV's getting 8.3 L/100. There is even an additional $1000 tax credit available based on values exceeding those above (a Toyota Prius could get the maximum $2000). E-85 vehicles will also be eligible for the credits. * Note: For people living in P.E.I. that means nearly $5000 dollars of incentives are available as PEI is one of the few proactive provinces offering it's own tax breaks. One of the most surprising measures introduced was the plan to charge levies on inefficient gas guzzlers starting with the 2011 model year. If GM wished to benefit from this, they would be more proactive in getting more vehicles on the road that would give money back to the consumer. If the only thing people are concerned about in their purchase is how much money they're spending, the only companies to fail in that market would be the ones not offering enough low-emission vehicles to choose from.

Give the bay a good once-over. You found a bad spark-plug cable, which is good; however, check all the lines and hoses (especially any vacuum lines). People also don't think beyond their noses when it comes to other reasons why a vehicle should not be running while pumping fuel. Besides the common sense of explosive ignition, leaving a running vehicle unattended provides for un-insured theft, inadvertent entry of a drive-gear causing injury and property damage, the lovely aroma of death-inducing carbon monoxide... Oh, there's more! At our service stations, we provide full-service, and nothing annoys attendants more than the following when it comes to whiny-ass people wanting to keep their engine running: 1) the poor attendant has to suck on exhaust fumes all day; 2) when trying to wash the windows (lifting the wiper blades) the driver forgets to turn off the intermittent mode, and damage is caused as the attendant has a hold on the blade (it happens more often than you'd think). The odd thing is, the driver gets mad because they're ignorant enough to believe it's the attendants fault; 3) attendants have finished pumping, set the nozzle back on the pump island, but don't have time to screw the cap on and close the filler door because the stupid driver looks to see the nozzle being put back and thinks the attendant is done, then drives away. Then the driver phones all pissed off, wanting a new gas cap, because they believe the attendant forgot to put it back on; 4) drivers pull in and get mad when the attendant asks them to shut their vehicle off AFTER the driver has asked to have their oil checked; I'm sorry, with as much as attendants have seen go wrong due to ignorant and stupid people, they deserve better than to be treated like $h! just because someone is more concerned about getting into a cold vehicle. Christ, stay at home then.

Born & raised in the mountain valleys of the south-west Kootenays in British Columbia, I lived there until I was 26. I worked exclusively in one business right out of highschool (food & farm retail) while in pursuit of higher education. During studies, after a couple years work experience in the accounting field had passed, I found myself wanting more than just an office job. I'd enjoyed doing hands-on work in my father's contracting and construction company, and liked being around people in the retail industry, so I took the advice of the general manager and enrolled in a management training program. After the study element was completed, the next step meant moving 1300 kms east to Saskatchewan in order to develop my experience further in a flow-through program. Enter Swift Current, with a population of about 16,000 people, it's more urban than the rural sprawl of the valley in B.C. that had just as many people in a massive radius of communities and towns. I'm no stranger to the flat-lands, but living among the people in this area is a culture shock as compared to the hippies and loggers co-mingling in the valley. Out here, you're a farmer, or you're a farmer. There is a certain lack of sophistication among the masses. The only people I associate with as little as possible are the business owners in the city; they tend to have this certain holier-than-thou attitude about them. Originally, there was a sense of comradery among us; however, since I play no part in their small-town political games of sniffing out dirt on other people, I don't converse with them nearly as often as I did when they only seemed to want to get to know me for my contacts in British Columbia. Relationships rapidly dissolved once I shared stories with them about my father's or brother's companies, and how they'd been burned by the tactics of so-called "friends" in business. My wife and I have been here since '03, and will likely remain for a couple more years; this, mostly due to the fact that there appears to be a lack of qualified individuals in the industry. The three western provinces are in a crunch for skilled labor in all industries as too many people are focussed on the money of the Alberta oil-patches. Many companies are setting high school graduation as a minimum requirement because kids were dropping out just to get into a high-paying job. A recent job posting for a larger retail had an applicant from Ontario with 30 years! experience. It seems companies are picking from the old crop of retirees to fill recruitment slots. I was basically handed the position, which offers me more time to pick and choose what might be available closer to our families in B.C. and Alta. Anyway, Calgary came calling, but I chose not to get into the trap of a 50 year mortgage just to be able to say that I live there. I know more people moving away from Alberta than I do moving in. Certainly, the real-estate market in my home town has gone up a great deal as people profit from the sale of their homes in Alberta to buy a larger property and home elsewhere in the clear. This makes little towns like Swift Current attractive to others; however, the majority of the houses are tiny, war-time style, with a balancing act of chosing whether to buy a place to live in, or tear it down and build new. The city already offers three-years tax-free just to build new...that's how pathetic the average homes are here. To shop for a place means going into a time warp to the 50's and 60's when you enter the buildings. Nobody put any money into updating anything, so there's little to choose from. The slogan for the city was recently changed to: "Where life makes sense." - which is also the running joke among the masses because there is little in this town that makes any sense at all. If I had my job back in my home-region of B.C., or an area of Albera no larger than Olds or Red Deer, life would be far better.

As always, a nice car... but $100k, seriously, the car isn't THAT big a deal.

The Jeep Wrangler, the only vehicle the letters S.U.V. should really be applied to. Pavement pounding mom-mobiles and bling-bling status symbol cars and "trucks" need not apply.

I still miss my white '95 Monte Carlo Z34, perfectly matched with unique, white, rolling 5-spokes and red emblems. With its blacked out greenhouse and clean lines, it turned plenty of heads my direction. Performance was what you'd expect from that era, but not bad at over 200 HP from a reasonably mileage-thrifty DOHC (when you wanted it to be). Tearing through the mountain roads of south-east British Columbia made it one of the most comfortable and assuring cars I've ever driven. It did well to keep pace on the twisties with the same era M3 that a friend owned. We were both quite surprised with its ability. Sure, plenty could have been done to make it better, but it wasn't bad just as it was. Even now, after it was destroyed back in 2004, I frown and my wife pats my head when I see one go by...especially a white Z with matching wheels. As much as the cars appealed me, they've seen better days. Used lots and cheap transportation is what they basically are now. Sure, there are a WHOLE LOT of gear-heads and those with infectious pride in their W's (especially the GPs), but the enthusiasm for most decent passenger vehicles eventually withers. Asked how I feel about the car disappearing? *shrug* <-- it had a good run. It was what it was and many people continue to appreciate its reliability for general transportation.

http://jalopnik.com/cars/custom-cars/someb...trip-248332.php