 | |
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016?
Toyota Discussions related to Toyota cars and trucks (alt.autos.toyota)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#21
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Who will be the US "Big 3" in 2016? -
08-06-2006
, 07:27 PM
|
"Edwin Pawlowski" <esp (AT) snet (DOT) net> wrote in message news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120 (AT) newssvr12 (DOT) news.prodigy.com... Mike Hunter wrote: Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from RWD, to build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles smaller and lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American wanted. A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea if that is true. At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the same is not true at Ford. -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply) |
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter" mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote: You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is taking about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to meet CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still building to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring down the build costs  mike hunt It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has to do with it. Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers but they are still allowed to sell cars here. |
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly, I supose mike hunt |
Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to develop
FWD cars without a previous history ;-)
I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other companies.
Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money on FWD cars?
--
Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)
Quote:
|
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353 (AT) msgid (DOT) meganewsservers.com... "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp (AT) snet (DOT) net> wrote in message news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120 (AT) newssvr12 (DOT) news.prodigy.com... Mike Hunter wrote: Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from RWD, to build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles smaller and lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American wanted. A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea if that is true. At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the same is not true at Ford. -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply) |
#24
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:FuWcnaqkkv1k50vZUSdV9g (AT) ptd (DOT) net... You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly, I supose mike hunt I believe that because that is what the chief engineers for the Tercel and Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to develop FWD cars without a previous history ;-) I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other companies. Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money on FWD cars? -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply) "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353 (AT) msgid (DOT) meganewsservers.com... "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp (AT) snet (DOT) net> wrote in message news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120 (AT) newssvr12 (DOT) news.prodigy.com... Mike Hunter wrote: Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from RWD, to build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles smaller and lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American wanted. A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea if that is true. At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the same is not true at Ford. -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply) |
doing.
#25
| |||
| |||
|
|
Isn't envy one of the deadly sins? mike |
I would really help if you inline post rather than top-post.
Jeff
#26
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:i-icnfcmZpai6kvZUSdV9g (AT) ptd (DOT) net... Isn't envy one of the deadly sins? mike What are you talking about? I would really help if you inline post rather than top-post. Jeff |
#27
| |||
| |||
|
|
You believe that because you know nothing about how CAFE rules are applied, I suppose. mike |
Ferraris?
Quote:
|
"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote in message news:klocd21lot1mpdeovm1rgvvmgs8uaufsgm (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter" mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote: You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is taking about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to meet CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still building to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring down the build costs mike hunt It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has to do with it. Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers but they are still allowed to sell cars here. |
#28
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Edwin Pawlowski" <esp (AT) snet (DOT) net> wrote in message news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120 (AT) newssvr12 (DOT) news.prodigy.com... A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea if that is true You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is taking about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to meet CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still building to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring down the build costs |
all the machinery, how much more would FWD cost compared to RWD?
#29
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote in message news:FuWcnaqkkv1k50vZUSdV9g (AT) ptd (DOT) net... You believe that because you know nothing about how vehicles are built on an assembly, I supose mike hunt I believe that because that is what the chief engineers for the Tercel and Corolla design teams told me when I asked why Toyota had decided to develop FWD cars without a previous history ;-) I am not doubting that the case may be different at Ford or other companies. Perhaps Toyota's assembly methodology allows them to save money on FWD cars? -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply) "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message news:e17aa$44d65168$47e40e57$3353 (AT) msgid (DOT) meganewsservers.com... "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp (AT) snet (DOT) net> wrote in message news:PZkBg.3331$kO3.2120 (AT) newssvr12 (DOT) news.prodigy.com... Mike Hunter wrote: Because of CAFE, date certain deadlines, the domestics had to spend billions to change their manufacturing facilities over from RWD, to build the more costly. less safe FWD vehicles to make vehicles smaller and lighter, yet still have sufficient room for five people that American wanted. A high ranking GM manager told me the reason they changed to FWD was that they could build the car $50 cheaper than a RWD. I have no idea if that is true. At Toyota, FWD is less expensive to make than RWD. I do no know why the same is not true at Ford. -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply) |
#30
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 19:30:06 -0400, "Mike Hunter" mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote: You believe that because you know nothing about how CAFE rules are applied, I suppose. mike Perhaps you could point me to the website for those 30mpg RRs and Ferraris? "Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote in message news:klocd21lot1mpdeovm1rgvvmgs8uaufsgm (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:07:39 -0400, "Mike Hunter" mikehunt2 (AT) mailcity (DOT) com> wrote: You can tell your 'high ranking' friend he does not know what he is taking about. Ford sold the first FWD Fords to dealers below cost, just to meet CAFE, so they could still sell the larger RWD cars they were still building to make money. It took three years for economies of scale to bring down the build costs mike hunt It would be just as correct to say that Ford sold small cars below cost to offset poor milage due to big cars. I don't see what FWD has to do with it. Besides, there is a limit to how much you would be willing to lose on small cars just to hit the CAFE numbers. Remember, you don't have to hit the CAFE numbers. Ferrari and Rolls Royce never made the numbers but they are still allowed to sell cars here. |
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.