US vs. Japan
- Thread starter Clocker
- Start date
udaman
Wannabe Storage Freak
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,209
Program Three: "No Turning Back"
http://www.pbs.org/becomingamerican/ap_prog3.html
From the pg.26 pdf transcript clocker:
http://www.pbs.org/becomingamerican/program3_transcript.pdf
You were old enough to remember this place in American history, were you not Clocker?
ON June 19. 1982, Vincent Chin, a draughtsman, was days away from his wedding, celebrating his bachelors' party at a neighborhood lounge.
HELELN ZIA: Unfortunately for him, sitting across from him at the bar were two auto workers who looked at him, saw his Asian face, his Chinese face, and saw Red. They saw him as the enemy.
MOYERS: We'll never know for sure how it started; there was drinking, and angry words were exchanged. The white men mistook Chin for Japanese and taunted him: he was a "Nip," a "Jap", then a "Chink." It's because of you, they said, that we're out of work. After a scuffle broke out, everyone was told to leave.
Once outside, the whites stalked Chin, cornered him, then beat him with a baseball bat. Four days later, he was dead.
CHARLIE CHIN: I remember that distinctly because I was at a gallery in Chinatown. Somebody walked in and said, 'Have you heard?' 'Heard what?' 'They killed a Chinese guy in Detroit because they thought he was Japanese.' Everybody got quiet because this was our worst fear.
SHAWN WONG: It wasn't in the deep south. It wasn't in the 19th dentury California. It was in Detroit. If it could happen to Vincent Chin, it could happen to any Chinese American.
MOYERS: Ronald Ebens and Michael Nitz were charged with second-degree murder but plea-bargained down to lesser charges of manslaughter. Their sentence: $3000 fines, plus court fees, and probation. The judge was quoted as saying "These weren't the kind of people you send to jail."
Helen had been laid off her job as an autoworker: seh was writing for a couple of Detroit papers when she heard the news.
HELEN ZIA: It was like wildfire. You know the first metting had a hundred people. Then the next meeting had two hundred people.
MOYERS: The light sentences outraged much of Detroit, and stunned the Asian community. But lawyers said there was little hope of changing them.
BENNY PAN: Vincent Chin's mother was crying because it sounded like people were saying there's nothing we can do. And I sat there and I, I raised my hand and I said, "we have to let people know that we think this is wrong. We have to do something.
Speaking up about this was, had everything to do with my experiences and the cumulative insults, all fo the things that had built up, all of the things I had seen my parents subjected to, all of the bitterness that I could see my father carried with him beacuse he was mking baby novelties. All of those things came to me.
In these meetings there would be people who would stand up and say, "I've been working as a scientest or an engineer for the last thirty years in this company. I've taught every wet-behind-they-ears-college-kind to be my boss. And I know I've known more than every one of them as haver known. And I've never been considered to be the supervisor. "This time I have to speak up."
MOYERS: With Chinese leading the way, a coaltion formed with Japanese, Fillpinos, Koreans and South Asians. It was the first Asian-American advocacy group of it's kind with a national scope. And it led to one of the first federal prosecutions of a civil rights case on behalf of an Asian American.
BENNY PAN: To have rallies and emonstrations and to be marching and talking about civll rights and about racism was something very new to Chinese Americans and to Asian Americans. For community people, for restaurant workers to shut down their resaurants for a day so that their waiters and their cooks and the family could go and participate in a march, that was unheard of, and that was hwo deeply people felt at that moment, how important it was, you know, a hundered years after the Chinese Exclusion act, to say, 'a hundred years have gone by and we don't have to, we don't have to accept this stuff anymore."
MOYERS: When the federal conviction was thrown out on appeal, Lily chin filed a civil suit (pre-cursor to OJ Simpson), and won. Then the men were ordered to pay her compensation, but most of it she never saw. They never served time in jail.
Vincent Chin's death became a symbol shared by Chinese Americans, an emblem of identity.
But wat was the indentity, the history they shared? At the time of his death, the Chinese in American numbered almost a million; nearly half were new immigrants. And for these newcomers, the scars of Exclusion -- even the battles over civil rights --- were something remote, learned from newspapers and books.
Chinese Americans were dividing, as their numbers climbed. The poor and working class in the old Chinatowns, making the street more crowded, and vital, than ever. The more educated, meanwhile, made a straight for the mainstream.
udaman
Wannabe Storage Freak
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,209
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&subject=ami&story=amMade0808
What Are the Top American-Made Cars?
1. Ford F-150
2. Chevrolet Cobalt
3. Chevrolet Malibu
4. Pontiac G6
5. Toyota Tundra
6. Toyota Sienna
7. Honda Odyssey
8. Chevrolet Silverado 1500
9. Chrysler Sebring
10. Ford Explorer/Sport Trac
Say clocker, where was that cheapest to own Chevy Aveo you so proudly boast the 'American is good mantra' about, where is it made again?
79 workers compared to aggregate foreign made doing it with less than 1/2 that number. Holy Sh*t, with those kinds of labor/medical/pension plan costs, I’m surprised all American car companies haven’t gone bankrupt already!!!
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&subject=iqs&story=iqsCar&referer=&aff=national
J.D. Power and Associates Initial Quality Study: Top-Rated Cars
Best Subcompact Honda Fit
Best Compact Honda Civic
Best Compact Sport Mazda MX-5 Miata
Best Luxury Compact Sport Mercedes Benz CLK-Class
Best Entry Luxury Infiniti EX35
Best Luxury Midsize Infiniti M35/M45 & Mercedes-Benz E-Class (tie)
Best Full Size Luxury Lexus LS460/LS600h
Best Midsize Chevrolet Malibu
Best Full size Pontiac Grand Prix
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&story=iqsBrand&subject=iqs&referer=&aff=national
J.D. Power and Associates Initial Quality Study: Top-Rated Manufacturers
Porsche 87 Problems per 100 Vehicles (if not covered by warranty a few years later, mortgage the house to pay for repairs, lol…not very meaningful data)
Infiniti
Lexus
Mercedes-Benz
Toyota
Mercury
Honda
Ford
Jaguar
Audi
Cadillac
Chevrolet
Hyundai
Pontiac
Lincoln
Buick
Industry Average: 118
Acura
Kia
Nissan
Volvo
BMW
GMC
Mazda
Volkswagen
Hummer
Subaru
Scion
Dodge
Chrysler
Mitsubishi
Saab
Suzuki
Saturn
Land Rover
Mini
Jeep
^^^Again, meaningless data. Btw, Saturn’s press darling, is at the BOTTOM of this list. Ugly styling, Hyundai is near the top; that and some S. Korean babes are smoking hot…guess I should buy S. Korean by that "logic", huh?
A change we can believe in (that Obama ain't going to change the facts of auto manufacturin globalization, emerging competition from China * India*...no matter how pretty his speeches make Merc adore him)..., yes, you can believe in that that "Change", that auto manufacturing costs are too high in Canada/USA compared to what it will cost in the future for Chinese or Indian made autos, sad reality of the global markets of the *near* future.
What Are the Top American-Made Cars?
1. Ford F-150
2. Chevrolet Cobalt
3. Chevrolet Malibu
4. Pontiac G6
5. Toyota Tundra
6. Toyota Sienna
7. Honda Odyssey
8. Chevrolet Silverado 1500
9. Chrysler Sebring
10. Ford Explorer/Sport Trac
Say clocker, where was that cheapest to own Chevy Aveo you so proudly boast the 'American is good mantra' about, where is it made again?
79 workers compared to aggregate foreign made doing it with less than 1/2 that number. Holy Sh*t, with those kinds of labor/medical/pension plan costs, I’m surprised all American car companies haven’t gone bankrupt already!!!
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&subject=iqs&story=iqsCar&referer=&aff=national
J.D. Power and Associates Initial Quality Study: Top-Rated Cars
Best Subcompact Honda Fit
Best Compact Honda Civic
Best Compact Sport Mazda MX-5 Miata
Best Luxury Compact Sport Mercedes Benz CLK-Class
Best Entry Luxury Infiniti EX35
Best Luxury Midsize Infiniti M35/M45 & Mercedes-Benz E-Class (tie)
Best Full Size Luxury Lexus LS460/LS600h
Best Midsize Chevrolet Malibu
Best Full size Pontiac Grand Prix
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&story=iqsBrand&subject=iqs&referer=&aff=national
J.D. Power and Associates Initial Quality Study: Top-Rated Manufacturers
Porsche 87 Problems per 100 Vehicles (if not covered by warranty a few years later, mortgage the house to pay for repairs, lol…not very meaningful data)
Infiniti
Lexus
Mercedes-Benz
Toyota
Mercury
Honda
Ford
Jaguar
Audi
Cadillac
Chevrolet
Hyundai
Pontiac
Lincoln
Buick
Industry Average: 118
Acura
Kia
Nissan
Volvo
BMW
GMC
Mazda
Volkswagen
Hummer
Subaru
Scion
Dodge
Chrysler
Mitsubishi
Saab
Suzuki
Saturn
Land Rover
Mini
Jeep
^^^Again, meaningless data. Btw, Saturn’s press darling, is at the BOTTOM of this list. Ugly styling, Hyundai is near the top; that and some S. Korean babes are smoking hot…guess I should buy S. Korean by that "logic", huh
?A change we can believe in (that Obama ain't going to change the facts of auto manufacturin globalization, emerging competition from China * India*...no matter how pretty his speeches make Merc adore him)..., yes, you can believe in that that "Change", that auto manufacturing costs are too high in Canada/USA compared to what it will cost in the future for Chinese or Indian made autos, sad reality of the global markets of the *near* future.
Unfortunately GM is the second worst in reliability according to Consumer Reports April 2008 issue (pg.18 ). Worse even than Volkswagon, only better than Mercedes Benz.
Per Consumer Reports APR 2008 (pg.25), Toyota Yaris (manual) is least expensive to own over 5 years at $23,250 followed by the Chevrolet Aveo (manual) at $24,750 and the Honda Fit at $25,250. The Toyota Prius is listed at $27500, the best Family Car according to the same Consumer Reports issue.
Hardly a large difference.
While it is tremendous progress to get that kind of mileage it's still a horribly inefficient mode of transportation. According to http://www.chevrolet.com/hybrid/articles/index.jsp?id=6 it only get's 22 MPG highway. Not horrible for an SUV but compared to that same Camry http://www.toyota.com/camry/specs.html which gets 31 MPG highway it's not that good. If you want to go a step further and compare hybrid Tahoe to hybrid Camry; the Hybrid Camry get's 33MPG city and 33MPG Highway. Seems like the Camry is a much better choice, especially at a little more than half the price starting at $27K with the Tahoe Hybrid starting at $50.5K.
According to Consumer Reports April 2008 (pg.61, 72, 73) this is only currently accurate for the Tundra. Both the Camry and the Lexus are recommended. According to the same issue GM only has 13 models that are recommended across all their various brands where Toyota has 22. (I hand counted this so I could be off by one or two but I double checked.)
jtr1962
Storage? I am Storage!
Hybrids are the latest media darlings but IMO they're mostly hype. I'm no fan of either the Prius or the Tahoe. So you gain a few MPG, mostly in city driving. Good I suppose but the extra cost and complexity probably outweighs the fuel savings. And for all GM did to make the powerplant of the Tahoe Hybrid more fuel efficient the boxy shape and HRR tires undo. I bet that thing could get 30+ mpg if it were more aerodynamic and used LRR tires. Engineering 101 but apparently basics like that get lost when you have a design team. Besides all that, why are most of the car commercials still for trucks/SUVs these days? I know you need to heavily advertise what people don't really want to buy, but how how making vehicles people actually want, instead of trying to get them to buy the vehicles the car companies feel like making?
In case you haven't guessed, I've little confidence the US auto industry will survive into the next decade. If GM had kept their EV1 program they might have had a good shot. In fact, they probably would have cornered the fleet and urban markets. The Volt is too little, too late, and way too complex (WTF is up with sticking in a gas engine?). I know GM et al want to get the most out of their investments in engine and transmission plants but at some point it's a losing proposition. The automakers should take a cue from the monitor and TV manufacturers who decided to ditch their CRT plants when they saw the hand writing on the wall with flat screen. Sure it was probably a big writeoff, but why continue trying to push what people don't want? With gas going nowhere but up people would switch to electrics in droves if only they were mass-produced. Everyone I've talked to without exception said so.
In case you haven't guessed, I've little confidence the US auto industry will survive into the next decade. If GM had kept their EV1 program they might have had a good shot. In fact, they probably would have cornered the fleet and urban markets. The Volt is too little, too late, and way too complex (WTF is up with sticking in a gas engine?). I know GM et al want to get the most out of their investments in engine and transmission plants but at some point it's a losing proposition. The automakers should take a cue from the monitor and TV manufacturers who decided to ditch their CRT plants when they saw the hand writing on the wall with flat screen. Sure it was probably a big writeoff, but why continue trying to push what people don't want? With gas going nowhere but up people would switch to electrics in droves if only they were mass-produced. Everyone I've talked to without exception said so.
ddrueding
Fixture
I read somewhere that the weight savings put into the Tahoe Hybrid (in order to fit the motors and batteries) could have caused the efficiency increase on it's own. Instead, they but them in, just so they could make up for themselves. Stupid.
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
Research says, that, even though they don't need it, people won't buy a car without the additional range afforded by dragging around a gasoline engine. Ah, yes... people *are* stupid.
You have to recognise that, unlike all the other hybrids currently on the market, GM has made the Volt a serial, rather than parallel, hybrid. This makes it an electric car with a gas-powered generator, rather than a gas-powered car with PowerBoost(tm). If GM doesn't deliver it when they say they will in the form that they say they will, there might be trouble, but I don't think the company's sunk.
The US auto industry will get alone (except for Chrysler, the discards of Stuttgart). They just won't be doing it here in North America. What they may end up doing is importing models from Asia and Europe - which is to say, it's the Asians and Europeans who seem to have a better idea as to what to sell here.
Actually, I think that "foreign" car makers manufacture more cars here than the "domestic" ones.
time
Storage? I am Storage!
While I appreciate the points you are making, Consumer Reports must have made some heroic assumptions to come up with only $4250 difference in TCO between the Yaris and Prius.
Consider that there's a $13000 difference in purchase price for starters. If you assume a 10-year design life and ignore maintenance and interest costs, even straight-line depreciation over 5 years puts the Prius $6500 behind. In practise, just the cost of replacing that battery pack (NiMH won't last 10 years) will blow this out of the water. Then there's the electric motors and associated componentry to consider.
Because the EPA tests don't allow for electric power, they show the Prius as using less fuel in stop-start driving than cruising - 60 and 50mpg respectively. Outside of the short EPA test, the city cycle is actually in the 40's. The Yaris achieves 37 and 40mpg on the same tests, so I'd suggest that in fact there isn't more than 10-12 mpg between them - a city cycle of 47mpg (just 6% less than the highway) for the Prius would be more credible.
But even with the EPA 2007 figures, taking the widely accepted average of 12000 miles per year and assuming gasoline is $4 per gallon, that translates to 5-year fuel costs of $4365 and $6235 respectively, i.e. $1870 less for the Prius.
With the EPA 2008 figures (still nonsense for hybrids), 5-year fuel costs are $5215 and $7060 (had to extrapolate this because the EPA hasn't published figures for the manual hatchback), i.e. $1845 less for the Prius.
In contrast, the EPA driver-feedback figures equate to $5115 and $6215, i.e. only $1100 less for the Prius, meaning you'd have to do 25000 miles a year just to match the Consumer Reports amount and 355000 miles over five years to actually break even.
As a footnote, in researching this, the true scale of the hybrid deception finally dawned on me. For example, how come no-one has questioned why the city cycle is better than the highway cycle? For that matter, why do people think that plugging a car directly into mains electric power won't incur any financial or environmental cost? With this sort of logic, you can expect claims of 1000mpg for hybrids - it's easy if you only count gasoline consumption over 11 miles!
Bozo
Storage? I am Storage!
It's odd that foreign companies can build quality cars in the US and make money, but the Big Three can't. Then the Big Three blame it on labor????
After 40 years of Big Three cars I bought a foreign car. Not because of the so-called better quality, but because of the Big Threes complete lack of customer service and support after the sale. And, after my dealings with their so-called "service" I found that the lack of service and support started with the top management.
Consumer reports is biased. The last I heard, their top management and editers were driving new Acuras supplied by (and titled to) Honda. Hmmm
Bozo :joker:
After 40 years of Big Three cars I bought a foreign car. Not because of the so-called better quality, but because of the Big Threes complete lack of customer service and support after the sale. And, after my dealings with their so-called "service" I found that the lack of service and support started with the top management.
Consumer reports is biased. The last I heard, their top management and editers were driving new Acuras supplied by (and titled to) Honda. Hmmm
Bozo :joker:
I would not want a vehicle with a range of less than 250 miles/city and 300 miles/highway.
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
The Volt is not really a hybrid. The Volt is an electric car with dual battery charging sources: plug in and the on-board gas engine. JTR shouldn't have issues with this; it's the same model his lovely trains use: Electric motors with diesel engines to generate the power. By using the engine solely to charge the batteries, they will run it at peak efficiency RPMs unlike a traditional engine/trans combo. The 1.4L 4 cyl will be able to return approximately 50 miles/gallon worth of electric charge.
As to range, the Volt's AER is 40 miles. My commute is 46 (without going out for lunch). The range-extender is needed. And apartments and parking lots are generally not going to provide plug-in capabilitiy so some owners will simply use the Volt as a 50 MPG sedan. This crap about 40 miles being adequate range is just that: crap. It may cover most people's daily commute but does not cover additional incidental driving or trips beyond the commute. You need either a range extender or a 250+ mile range and a <5 minute recharge time.
Re: plug-ins having financial/environmental benefits. In general it should be easier to make and maintain one efficient/eco-friendly power plant than 100K efficient cars. Power companies are eager for this, as well, as it lets them get better use of their plants at night, when charging times are expected to be (and of course the added revenue). As to finances, that's settled already. The Volt's 40 mile AER will cost around 85 cents at average power rates; you would need to get over 180MPG to match that with $4/gallon gas.
Also, with regenerative braking, brake wear & tear is reduced, extending the life of pads/discs and further reducing costs (and environmental factors as fewer pads/discs will need to be manufactured). Oil changes will be far less often for the on-board ICE. Basically, maintenance will be reduced and the less things that have to be replaced, the less things have to be made/transported so their is a trickle down improvement on the environmental impact.
As a side note, the need to run accessories off electric v. ICE is also driving innovation. Electric heat/AC, more efficient lighting (LED typically), etc.
As to range, the Volt's AER is 40 miles. My commute is 46 (without going out for lunch). The range-extender is needed. And apartments and parking lots are generally not going to provide plug-in capabilitiy so some owners will simply use the Volt as a 50 MPG sedan. This crap about 40 miles being adequate range is just that: crap. It may cover most people's daily commute but does not cover additional incidental driving or trips beyond the commute. You need either a range extender or a 250+ mile range and a <5 minute recharge time.
Re: plug-ins having financial/environmental benefits. In general it should be easier to make and maintain one efficient/eco-friendly power plant than 100K efficient cars. Power companies are eager for this, as well, as it lets them get better use of their plants at night, when charging times are expected to be (and of course the added revenue). As to finances, that's settled already. The Volt's 40 mile AER will cost around 85 cents at average power rates; you would need to get over 180MPG to match that with $4/gallon gas.
Also, with regenerative braking, brake wear & tear is reduced, extending the life of pads/discs and further reducing costs (and environmental factors as fewer pads/discs will need to be manufactured). Oil changes will be far less often for the on-board ICE. Basically, maintenance will be reduced and the less things that have to be replaced, the less things have to be made/transported so their is a trickle down improvement on the environmental impact.
As a side note, the need to run accessories off electric v. ICE is also driving innovation. Electric heat/AC, more efficient lighting (LED typically), etc.
CR uses depreciation, fuel costs, interest, insurance, maintenance and repair, and sales tax to come up with their cost over a 5 year period.
Without going through the trouble to look it up I'm guessing since the Prius are very popular depreciation isn't much of a factor for them. For fuel they assumed 12,000 miles driven per year and used the national average cost of gas as of December 2007. Unfortunately I don't see where they get their MPG figure. When they test cars they show figures for city, highway and overall MPG. I imagine they use the overall figure.
Even if that were true, and I've seen no evidence at all other than that statement that it is, to me it makes them no more biased in this context than Edmunds or any other publication who accepts advertising.bozo said:
BTW, I heard that Chevy execs were seen driving Toyota Prius and Toyota Supras!
Consumer Reports accepts no advertising ...
Bozo
Storage? I am Storage!
What prompted the bias remark was a report in their magazine. They gave a new Honda vehicle top ratings, even reliability in the long term, although the vehicle was a just introduced model. It had only been available for 3 months.
In the same magazine they trash an American made vehicle that was a competitor of the new Honda. This vehicle had been around over 5 years, had no recalls, and customer satisfaction was "excelent".
CR is biased.
CR did a report on high end audio equipment. Odd, no American companies were tested, just Japanese.
CR is biased.
Bozo :joker:
In the same magazine they trash an American made vehicle that was a competitor of the new Honda. This vehicle had been around over 5 years, had no recalls, and customer satisfaction was "excelent".
CR is biased.
CR did a report on high end audio equipment. Odd, no American companies were tested, just Japanese.
CR is biased.
Bozo :joker:
jtr1962
Storage? I am Storage!
Well, I'm not a big fan of diesel trains, either. With the current cost of diesel the Class 1 freights would actually save money by stringing up wire and going with straight electric operation. Besides saving in energy costs, electric engines easily last twice as long as their diesel counterparts (40+ years versus 15-20). And if you've ever heard the racket a diesel train makes, you'll know why they're a half-baked solution.
I agree that the Volt's 40 mile range is nowhere no adequate for all trips. Supposedly it's good for about 95% of them. My big complaint about the Volt besides the gas engine is the change in tactics by GM. Funny how they decided not to produce the EV1 ostensibly because they considered the 150 mile range offered by the NiMH batteries of the time inadequate, yet now 40 miles is suddenly considered enough. Besides that, with current battery technology if the gas engine were replaced by more batteries you have your 250 mile range. And you have 5 minute recharge with today's batteries, effectively making the range issue entirely moot. And before anyone says but they are no recharging stations, well, if EVs were mass produced they would pop up.
Yes, electric operation has all the advantages you mention. A pure electric car would have greatly enhanced reliability over an ICE, which is yet another reason it irks me that they're putting in a gas engine. My prediction is the gas engine will break on these long before anything else. The users will simply take it out, put in more batteries, and end up with what GM should have made in the first place. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they're making the Volt at all despite its flaws. If nothing else it'll increase the visibility of electric traction. I'm sure once people experience being able to drive without emissions, and without hearing a big fuss under the hood when they accelerate, they'll be hooked and want more. That's when it might dawn on them that they don't need the gas engine at all. That's why I feel GM should offer the Volt with no engine and a larger battery pack as an option to those who might want it. The sad part of all this is if GM had kept the EV program probably most of the cars on the road today would have been electrics. And who knows where battery technology would be today with the automotive industry driving it?
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
From what I've read, EV1's used lead-acid batteries and had a 100 mile range. They were also 2-seat only with very little cargo room. GM could not at the time sell them at a profit; all vehicles were leased and even them GM took a bath on them. EV1s would nowhere near meet modern crash test standards.
For the Volt, GM may well offer battery boosters in place if the ICE in future versions. Sine the Volt is a modular design, they could also offer fuel cells, diesel, and whatever other tech comes along. Third party companies will probably be the first to bring such offerings to market much like there are 3rd party offerings for the Prius.
Right now GM cannot afford to sell cars at a loss, so the first iteration of the Volt will not be the end-all be-all electric car. It will shoot solidly towards that 80% of the 80-20 rule. It is a huge step forward, and over time I imagine other options will come out to expand the range-extender.
For the Volt, GM may well offer battery boosters in place if the ICE in future versions. Sine the Volt is a modular design, they could also offer fuel cells, diesel, and whatever other tech comes along. Third party companies will probably be the first to bring such offerings to market much like there are 3rd party offerings for the Prius.
Right now GM cannot afford to sell cars at a loss, so the first iteration of the Volt will not be the end-all be-all electric car. It will shoot solidly towards that 80% of the 80-20 rule. It is a huge step forward, and over time I imagine other options will come out to expand the range-extender.
Again, all I'm really seeing here is hearsay. Myself or my father have been a subscriber for years and I haven't noticed this "bias".
Even if they were biased towards Honda, it wouldn't explain away their rating on the Prius.
It seems to me that you're just making stuff up as you go along to try and refute data that I showed where I got it from. Until I see the same effort from your responses you'll get no more from me.
I know this, Bozo was contending that CR accepted gifts from Honda and this made them biased. I was stating even if it was true (he still didn't produce any evidence to say it was) that it would make them know more biased than Edmunds or any other publication online or in print that accepted advertising or other compensation themselves.P5-133XL said:
Customer satisfaction is a joke. That won't identify the percent of people people that had transmission problems or how many people needed brake work. The most customer satisfaction can be used for is the customer's expectations were satisfied and that is not even close to a good reliability estimate. The fact that there were no recalls is at least a minimal reliability estimate but not a very detailed one that helps much.
Consumer reports sends out an annual survey to all its members that details all repairs for all models. They then assign reliability ratings based on that survey. Some new models, generally get assumed reliability ratings based on previous similar models, from the same manufacturer for the first year: That's because the manufacter is reasonably consistant with their reliability ratings over many modeles over many years. For others, they won't supply a reliability rating till after the first survey because the manufacturer isn't as consistant. Matter of fact, new Toyota models were downgraded because of recent poor surveys: They are no longer assumed to be of high reliability but now have to prove it, via the survey.
The point is that CR basicly assigns reliability using statistics rather than bias unless those millions of subscribers are inhierently biased. They use the same questions and apply the same number crunching to all the vehicals. Because there are millions of surveys filled out, the confidence of the conclusions are quite high...
So I'm not buying the biased arguement for their automobile reliability ratings. Now, I will buy into a certain amount of bais for their testing labs. The samples are generally small; the number of people involved is also relatively small so it is much harder to eliminate bias under those conditions. I don't really believe the bias is intentional, but it is probably there to some extent.
My question is -- Is there another organization that does similar testing and surveying that can be trusted more? If so, what's the arguement...
I seriously doubt that CR accepted gifts: the risk vs reward just to bad that it doesn't make any sense that they would. They claim that all the stuff they test are bought anonomously from retail establishments. If someone could actually prove that CR had accepted gifts there would be some rather big-time lawsuits claiming it and I've never heard of such. Matter of fact, CR prowdly claims that they have never lost a lawsuit and they are constantly being sued by unhappy manufacturers.
Now mind you, I'm a rather big believer in CR but that doesn't mean I don't see flaws in what they have done where I know something about the products they are reviewing. However, bias towards one manufacturer or another is not one that I have detected.
P.S. As far as I can tell Honda is incredibly reliabile having owned an Accord since July 1996 with only one non-maintence repair over the entire lifetime of the automobile: A door lock controller failed last year. 12 years with only one relatively minor repair -- How can one argue poor reliability. It's only anectdotal, but I'm impressed with my luck.
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
Which is exactly why all-electric vehicles don't sell well.
People love to suboptimise their vehicle choices based upon all reasonable situations in which they might want to use that vehicle.
For example, my father's minivan is well past its prime, and, of course, he no longer has to drag around three kids. So, he wants to replace it with a truck. Why? A couple times of year he needs a truck to haul stuff around. So, he wants to get terrible gas mileage all year for the four total trips for which he actually needs the vehicle. I told him to buy a little sports car and rent a truck when he needs it.
Most people can get an electric vehicle that covers most of their trips, and catch the others some other, more cost efficient way; but they buy one that covers them all.
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
In general I agree WRT renting a truck/van when you need to haul things as most households don't need heavy hauling capability but 3-6 times per year. In my case, a friend inherited a full size pickup when his father passed; I can borrow that when needed. So my household remains dual-sedan (1 compact, 1 midsize).
However, on the miles issue, many people/families will take weekend trips. Thousands of people flee Chicagoland every weekend for the Wisconsin Dells and for NW Indiana/southern Michigan. As adult children and their family live in the same town less and less often, driving trips of a couple hundred miles are fairly common and occur often enough that a vehicle with limited range is the unreasonable solution. The cost of renting a "long distance" vehicle so often would far outweigh the benefits of a commute-only EV.
However, on the miles issue, many people/families will take weekend trips. Thousands of people flee Chicagoland every weekend for the Wisconsin Dells and for NW Indiana/southern Michigan. As adult children and their family live in the same town less and less often, driving trips of a couple hundred miles are fairly common and occur often enough that a vehicle with limited range is the unreasonable solution. The cost of renting a "long distance" vehicle so often would far outweigh the benefits of a commute-only EV.
ddrueding
Fixture
I'm actually back to practical-land WRT vehicles...considering a Toyota Yaris and a Hyundai Genesis.
jtr1962
Storage? I am Storage!
You know what my answer to that is? It's basically the same answer I've given to relatives who move hundreds of miles away and then might invite me or other family members to some event. If you want to move into some middle of nowhere place I never even heard of where no reasonable public transit options exist then don't expect to see too much of me. I've even said the same thing to my brother and sister. Thankfully, my brother only lives about 15 miles away with no plans to move. He works a mile from us, so he drops by a lot. My sister is 62 miles away. As it is, I only go there a few times a year, and then only with my mother or brother since I don't drive/have a car. Granted, I could visit my sister by LIRR if they pick me up at the station, but it's not exactly a short or easy or inexpensive trip. Anyway, my sister was mentioning to my mom about getting out of the northeast. I basically told her she could do what she wants, but she won't be seeing me much, if at all, should she decide to relocate a few hundred miles away. Car rides of that length are beyond intolerable for me.
I really think families scattered to the four winds is one of the things fundamentally broken in the US. Many people commute to work all week, and then they're actually OK with driving hundreds of miles on their precious two days off? I don't get it. Car is probably the single worst way in terms of comfort and efficiency to travel long distances short of horse and buggy. My mom remembers the good old days when you would walk to your aunt's or grandparent's house. On many levels I think we were better off that way.
Seriously, the range issue you're talking about here is a symptom of 50 years of asinine sprawl. Maybe we should address that first while everyone is so gung ho about reducing oil dependancy. Even an electric car driven hundreds of miles every weekend leaves a footprint.
Where is all the power for charging coming from? The power grid is marginal as it is in many places and there are possibilities of rolling blackouts, etc. in the summers. I can just see people coming home at 6-7 PM, plugging hundreds of thousands or a million of their cars in on those >100 °F days (heavy HVAC use) and blowing out the power. Has anyone realistically calculated the cost and impact to upgrade power plants and distribution systems nationwide? Too, many people in apartments or condos will not have direct access to charging their cars and would need to do so at a gas station/recharging station. How long will that take? Even if one has access to power at home, how much power is needed for a charge? Some older gas homes are not wired for a whole lot of extra power. Extra circuits can become rather expensive for homeowners, and at the least some digging may be needed to run lines and outlets to the front driveways, etc.
I am also skeptical that the batteries will reliably provide a full charge. We all know that batteries sometimes do not discharge linearly especially as they degrade. I can just see the 405 clogged with a bunch of idiots that were on a 1/4 "tank" and then ran out of charge 5 miles later. How will the AAA get then out of that jam?
Anyway, I would not have a purely electric even for free. I want a vehicle that can reliably drive on unpaved roads in the heat of summer and the cold of winter, 50+ miles from the nearest service station, when necessary.
I am also skeptical that the batteries will reliably provide a full charge. We all know that batteries sometimes do not discharge linearly especially as they degrade. I can just see the 405 clogged with a bunch of idiots that were on a 1/4 "tank" and then ran out of charge 5 miles later. How will the AAA get then out of that jam?
Anyway, I would not have a purely electric even for free. I want a vehicle that can reliably drive on unpaved roads in the heat of summer and the cold of winter, 50+ miles from the nearest service station, when necessary.
Another point is that everyone does not live close to work. In some areas many younger people (20- or 30-something) with children that have a 30-40 mile, 60-90 minute one-way commute because that is the only way they can afford a decent house.
ddrueding
Fixture
Most people will charge at night, and electricity consumption is lowest at night. Having the car charger start up at 3AM would be easy to do. I already spoke to the apartment manager here, and she voiced interest in installing outlets in the carports (for a fee, of course).
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
Yes, your answer is f*** 'em if they won't play by your rules. Why are you so important that you'd expect family members to cater to your whims? Why are you so against people striking out to seek their fortune if they have to strike out further than you can bike in a few hours? Thank god the settlers weren't like you or we'd have 300MM people living within 50 miles of the east coast, no Gold Rush, no Silicon Valley, no Hollywood, no NASA, no Grand Canyon, and so on.
Why is everywhere away from you the middle of nowhere? To name a few, within a 4 hour drive of Chicago there are several large metropolitan cities: Madison and Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Springfield, Champaign/Urbana, and Peoria Illinois; Indianapolis, Lafayette, and South Bend, Indiana. Even Grand Rapids, Michigan. A four hour drive can be done Friday evening after work with the return drive starting mid-afternoon Sunday leaving two nights and a day and a half for R&R or to visit family.
FTM I would be earning about 40-50% less money if I had stayed in my home city, assuming equivalent job opportunities were available (bad assumption).
I really think this is your fundamental problem. You don't like/cannot physically handle car rides of any length so you shun it for anyone else. You cannot wrap your mind around what having a personal vehicle offers. The ability to go anywhere at any time without having to mind anyone's (or any mass transit system's) schedule.
Reclining leather seats, no weird smells, AC or heat to a temperature I desire, my own music collection playing, no strange kids kicking the back of my seat, the ability to stop when & where I want for breaks and food, traveling on the schedule I want. Yeah, totally uncomfortable.
If you want to stop it you 'd better cut the birthrate to zero. More people means more land/resources required. Besides, as I've noted elsewhere with school systems, communities/cities above a certain size lose their effectiveness. Bureaucracy/politics reign supreme and the will of the people, especially of the non-political individual, is marginalized.
Really, I'd take
over :council: any day of the week. Even if it meant I had to drive a little further.Timers. Not wall timers but in the car itself. It is suggested that charging would occur from 11PM - 4AM or so when consumption is minimal. Some power plants are kept running 24 hours per day but some of the generated power is wasted at night because there's insufficient demand. BTW it's also been presented that during peak period, the car could be plugged in to the grid to act as a supplier, reducing grid peak demand. Essentially charge the car overnight when demand is low (and rates are lower in some areas) then use the energy in the home during the day.LunarMist said:
I'm pretty sure a normal 20 amp 110V circuit is sufficient to slow-charge the car over a few hours. You might need a 30 amp or a 220 V line for quick-charging, but few people would go that route as most garages aren't wired for it.
The 40 mile AER is estimated at end of battery life, not start. So with an approximate odometer reading of 150K mile you should still get 40 miles all-electric range. Initial range should be higher - 44-46 miles. If you care to, read some of the info at gm-volt.com.
True. With the economy the way it is, we need to take the jobs we find. Maybe we can move closer to work, but then that might come with other trade-offs like higher housing cost or worse school.
Life is about balance. Weighing what's important. I value the stability and comfort of my home above a few extra minutes and dollars driving to work.
jtr1962
Storage? I am Storage!
The power companies already have systems which can turn heavy loads like EV chargers on only at night, after the peak load has passed. And a 40 mile each way commute was easily possible with the lead-acid batteries of the first EV1 in the early 1990s. With the NiMH pack the range increased to 150 miles. With today's lithium ion 300 to 500 miles is possible, depending upon how much batteries you want to carry. And these batteries have 5 minute recharge capability, pretty much making the range issue moot.
As for reliability of electric vehicles, let's compare them to electric trains. NYC's newest subway cars go 300,000 miles between breakdowns. That's hardly unreliable enough to strand people on I-405.
I understand that the electric motors and control systems are probably long-lived, but how long will the batteries perform well? After some years there will be plenty of older cars that will require new batteries. How much does that cost? Especially in the southland there are a lot of old cars because rust is not such a problem as it is in some areas.
jtr1962
Storage? I am Storage!
I know the batteries in the RAV4 EV are lasting 200,000 miles or more. And the new lithium cells from A123 Systems are unkillable if you ask the RC people (I have a pair and they're so great I'm planning to use them in a bike light). The key to long battery life is to keep from discharging batteries completely, but modern control systems pretty much prevent that. Remember that things we design today like the RAV4 EV or Chevy Volt are not your grandfather's golf cart. These are sophisticated systems with protection for the battery.
I'll even grant that if you keep your car long enough (say 300,000 miles) there WILL come a point where that expensive battery pack will need replacement. However, let's say $5K amortized over 300K miles isn't so bad. During that time you saved on tune-ups, oil changes, a ton of money on gas. The key is for the battery pack to last long enough that 90% of the vehicle owners will get rid of the vehicle before the pack goes. And ultracaps are coming within perhaps a decade. These can be recharged hundreds of thousands of times. They'll probably have significant resale value even taken from vehicles with a million miles on them. We're not there yet (the best ones are only about 10% of the capacity of chemical batteries) but best estimates have them reaching similar costs/densities in a decade. Point of fact you might actually WANT to change out your pack while it's still good if a new pack offers you significantly greater range.
There are certainly situations where EVs are NOT feasible or desireable. For example, if you use a truck for construction and need hours of PTO then batteries, even today's, won't cut it. If you'll be in the bush for weeks at a time then batteries won't cut it (well, maybe with enough solar panels they might but that's another topic). However, for probably 99% of the trips today's drivers make they CAN work. Let's see what happens with the Volt next year and move from there. I wish we had done more sooner, but you can't change the past.
jtr1962
Storage? I am Storage!
I don't care what they do, but like I said don't expect to see me much either if I have to provide my own transportation. Remember that I DON'T need a car where I live. I certainly won't go through the bother of getting one for the convenience of family members wishing to see me. It's actually annoying a few family members that I won't be attending a wedding on the 20th. I get this kind of nonsense a lot. Your post really touched a raw nerve.
And middle of nowhere to me is basically any place I have no reasonable public transit options. Madison, Milwaukee, Springfield, Champaign/Urbana, Peoria Illinois, Indianapolis, Lafayette, South Bend, and I think Grand Rapids all have Amtrak stations. It's the small towns in between which present problems to me.
Let's see, I miss a train or bus here and another comes in 5 or 6 minutes (10 at the most, as little as 1.5 minutes during peak times). Wow, that really inconveniences me! And I'll probably get where I'm going faster than on our wonderful clogged streets full of road rage morons. Traveling out of state? Well, Amtrak admittedly sucks but for most places where it does go it still matches or beats reasonable driving times. And since I seldom want to travel long distances it doesn't bother me having to adjust to their schedule. It's an infrequent annoyance.
What I can't wrap my mind around is the cost versus benefit equation of automobile ownership. It costs something like 50 cents per mile accroding to the latest IRS reimbursement rates to drive. I'm assuming that includes gas, insurance, repairs, maintenance, but not tolls. That seems rather steep a price to pay for "convenience". And if you want to start looking at the precious time saved by an auto, you also need to look at the time spent doing things like repairs, refueling, inspections, cleaning, etc. And what about time spent in court and in hospitals if you get in a bad accident like my mom? Not to mention minor annoyances like traffic tickets. Add to that the extra time spent working to pay for the vehicle. And if you happen to be the driver, then that's more time pretty much wasted. You're way behind. I'll gladly take a little or even a lot longer to travel knowing I won't be wasting time on nonsense like that. So where are your nebulous time savings? Of course, most Americans don't have a choice any more regarding auto ownership but I'll save that one for another topic.
Really, I can warp my mind around personal transport if it's fairly cheap to buy and operate, doesn't require licensing or insurance of any sort, and is reasonably fast. A small electric scooter or a bike are really the only things I can think of offhand which meet these criteria. Feel free to add to the list if you wish. On bikes, I know they're not as fast as cars, but the designs used in the HPV races have the potential to be. Now if we had a lane for HPVs segregated from cars, then I can wrap my mind around not living near public transit. However, we both know a snowball in hell has more chance that such a system ever being built.
And I don't buy your analysis about cities above a certain size not working. Last I checked NYC is doing quite well compared to even small towns. The problem is leadership or lack of it. Special interests cause most of the problems. Right now the teacher's union is the biggest obstacle to the rather poor student achievement here but that's being taken care of bit by bit. You really want to know what killed a lot of big cities? It was the more affluent moving away to the suburbs, taking with them much of the community involvement and tax base. Size has nothing to do with it. If suburbs on average work better it's only because the quality of the people there is higher (and I know that's not a politically correct thought but it's the truth). There was another thread where Gilbo gave a spot on analysis of why suburbs should be more expensive than cities but aren't. So even the argument about living further away because it's cheaper doesn't wash. It may be cheaper, but that's due to direct and indirect subsidies. 100 years ago, when the government didn't stick its 2 cents into the picture, living in the country was for the "swells". The average man couldn't afford it.
One of these days I really should collect all my thoughts in many threads into a cohesive thread about transportation, living densities, etc.
Well, it depends on your culture. I could not stand living in NYC and too many of the people on public transportation are just plain gross. Last time I took a train (years ago) a bag was stolen. F*** that I say. I prefer living in suburban to slightly rural areas if I had to make that choice.
jtr1962
Storage? I am Storage!
The city these days is a far cry from the cesspool typically seen in those Death Wish movies from the 70s or 80s. Granted, a lot of it used to look that way, a bit of it still does, but by and large everything's pretty clean. The people on the subways aren't gross for the most part. Crime rates are less than most small towns. Considering that we often have garbage on our lawn from people who clean out their cars here, I don't think public transit has a monopoly on slobs.
Like Fushigi said, it's about trade-offs. I'll trade off a bit of naked NYC any day of the week for the convenience of walking to stores and not needing to pay for a car or drive one. For others the reverse is true.
Like Fushigi said, it's about trade-offs. I'll trade off a bit of naked NYC any day of the week for the convenience of walking to stores and not needing to pay for a car or drive one. For others the reverse is true.
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
To go back on the original topic, the manual gear box of my Japanese-made car left for paradise yesterday. Finding a replacement has been difficult because apparently, many of my model do that, so there's a shortage of gear boxes. It will cost me 1500$ to repair overall. My car has 134000Km and the powertrain had a 100000Km warranty on it. The CD player stopped working at 110000Km (last winter), the cruise control stick broke without my help last year (after warranty's end) and the central instrument panel has constantly snapped opened at a few places since I bought it four and a half years ago. I cannot say it has been particularly good or reliable.
However, I don't think I would have had a better car than this one back in 2004. A Cavalier, a Focus or a VW Jetta of that year are all poor cars, reliability-wise. The 2004 Honda Civic had problems too with its suspension. I guess 2004 just wasn't a good year to buy a new car. Or I should have picked up a Subaru Impreza. Those don't seem to have any serious problem I heard of.
However, I don't think I would have had a better car than this one back in 2004. A Cavalier, a Focus or a VW Jetta of that year are all poor cars, reliability-wise. The 2004 Honda Civic had problems too with its suspension. I guess 2004 just wasn't a good year to buy a new car. Or I should have picked up a Subaru Impreza. Those don't seem to have any serious problem I heard of.
ddrueding
Fixture
My 03 VW has been really awesome. 274,000km and only one rattle to complain about.
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
Amen, brother.
It seems to me that someone warped the "American Dream" into borrowing to the hilt for stuff you don't need, to live far away from work, in a house that you don't really have time to take care-of.
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
So, your answer is for them to screw over jtr1962? Why are they so important that they expect him to cater to their whims?
And when was grandma retiring to Florida "stiking out?"
Thank god that this nation isn't filled with people like you, else we'd have packed highways creating a polluted cesspool. We'd be doing something stupid, like borrowing from the Chinese to buy oil from the Arabs.
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
What are these people really affording?
At the last place that I worked, there was a guy there who lived about a third of the way to Sacramento, with a 90-minute, one-way commute. He would come in early and leave early to avoid rush; otherwise he could end up spending an extra 30 minutes to an hour on the road coming or going. On a normal basis, he spent half of his day going to, coming from, or being at work; he would eat no meals with his children. When we worked overtime, he would only see his children asleep each day.
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
There are several people that I work with that have 90+ minute commutes. Now, this is mostly by train (Metra) in Chicago. I know very few people that drive regularly to work. However, that's still 3+ hours a day spent commuting, even if you don't have to deal with traffic.