| General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
| Reply to Thread New Thread |
03-05-2009, 06:40 AM
|
#1 |
|
|
 10 Cars That Sank Detroit
|
|
|
03-05-2009, 07:03 AM
|
#2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2009, 07:08 AM
|
#3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2009, 07:37 AM
|
#4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-04-2009, 09:50 AM
|
#5 |
|
|
the point wasn't that the explorer or H2 were bad cars, its that they acted as blinders to managament who only saw the cash flow from those models without investing enough into models that were less of a cash cow.
|
|
|
|
04-04-2009, 12:13 PM
|
#6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-04-2009, 01:55 PM
|
#7 |
|
|
The Taurus and Explorer don't belong on that list.
Were it not for those models Ford would have declared bankruptcy long ago. |
|
|
|
04-04-2009, 05:47 PM
|
#8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-04-2009, 11:24 PM
|
#9 |
|
|
exactly. what theyre trying to say is that the American companies did nothing to compete with the high selling Prius when it first came out. Now they are, but it might be too late.
|
|
|
|
04-04-2009, 11:30 PM
|
#10 |
|
|
Ford Pinto
The Pinto and the equally dire Chevrolet Vega were responses to the VW Beetle which was seen as the import to beat. Detroit was apparently unaware of the Toyota Corona and the subsequent Corolla. Detroit believed that no one would ever abandon chrome barges. Chevy Cavalier A good car for its day sort of but the point that GM built the thing with different hats for about two decades is the issue. They believed that the platforms they created in the 1980s needed no improvement so throwing on a new body every so often was the business plan. Granted, Toyota's "all new" Camrys and Corollas are never really "all new" but Toyota does major surgery and updates to their proven platforms. Detroit didn't believe it needed to. Chevy Astro While it was not a good response to the Dodge Caravan, it nevertheless sold quite well. The Astro was not a dismal failure. What was a failure was Ford and GM's inability to design a minivan. Toyota and Honda paid attention to the Caravan and got into the segment. Ford Taurus The Taurus was an epic fail when the second-generation came out with the hideous oval look. Ford took a CamCord fighter and submarined it. Then not replacing it with a competent new car for years was just crazy. The FiveHundred being renamed a Taurus was also a dumb move. That said, the new Taurus will erase these terrible memories just as the '05 Mustang erased the terrible Mustang II years from memory. Ford Explorer Idiotic. They are saying that a successful SUV addicted us to SUVs. We bought SUVs and Detroit built them BECAUSE WE WANTED THEM and not because we were bamboozled. It it idiotic to suggest that Detroit should build what we need even if we do not want it. Jaguar X Type It sank Detroit? Hardly. The Aztek should have been here because its idea was to be a segment buster like a Honda Element. Hummer H2 Agreed. Hummer was all about making profits and there was no investment in technology. Hummer should have been loaded with future tech instead of being a rebodied Tahoe. Hummer should have led with turbodiesel powertrains and or hybrids. Toyota Prius Detroit ignoring the Prius is an epic fail. The Volt is the wrong answer. A cheap hybrid with a quirky name and look is what Detroit needs. Chrysler Sebring We MUST lay this face plant on Mercedes belching out a terrible variant of a Mitsubishi platform to produce a true class trailing design. What Mercedes did to Chrysler is criminal. Jeep Compass The Caliber, Compass, and Patriot are further examples of Mercedes' destruction of Chrysler. Granted an entry-level Jeep sounds like a great idea, but two of them??? If anything the PT Cruiser should have been replaced instead of fielding two Jeeps the same size as the PT Cruiser. |
|
|
|
04-05-2009, 05:16 AM
|
#11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 02:46 PM
|
#12 |
|
|
And I quote... "Besides--what is a sebring anyways?" (from the article^^)
ummm...it's only one of the most famous racetrack/race series to take place in America. And this guy thinks he can write about cars?? |
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 02:58 PM
|
#13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 10:51 PM
|
#14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-04-2009, 10:24 AM
|
#15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-04-2009, 10:39 AM
|
#16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-04-2009, 11:00 PM
|
#17 |
|
|
Well JBlair, I guess we know who the resident Mercedes fanboy is. Lordy!
|
|
|
|
08-04-2009, 11:34 PM
|
#18 |
|
|
I mainly agree with swizzle's list form the previous page, though the last gen. Chryslers came out too late to be responsible. Infact, their poor execution is party due to the sinking of Detroit.
Cars which I strongly suspect: GM sticking too long to the uncompatitive J-cars, building them facelifted and rebodied for a good 25 years. TOyota and Honda had moved on the game lightyears in that time. Many SUV/Cross over of the last years: Whereas not bad cars indivdually, they took resources from mass products, letting the whole compact to family segment fall into Japanese/Korean hands. Taurus from the 1990ies - couldn't agree more. Also, some Euro colaborations like the Ford Contour were simply not what US buyers wanted. The Cadillac Catera being kind of King in this segment. Furthermore I'd say, in a globalized world like we live today, it's not good to concentrate on one market only, even if it's big. US producers hardly ever built export vehicles, like Asian or , smaller extent, Euro producers did. And instead of using economies of scale in cooperation with Euro branches, they habd mostly technology and concepts of their own. Ford Focus Mk. I being one of the few examples to work world wide |
|
|
|
09-04-2009, 08:31 AM
|
#19 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Reply to Thread New Thread |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
Linear Mode
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
