brockLT1

back engineering is a very common thing with all car companies, this just happens to be an example of GM deciding not to invest in hybrid technology. the japanese and chinese are big on back engineering american goods such as chips, missles, you get the picture

brockLT1

To help pay the bills for college, Im a valet, so that means I get to sit and drive just about every car. The fit and finish of all the new GM's is unbelievable. I would even dare to say that chevy's interior quality is better than Honda's during the turn of the century to the early 2000's. Granted its not up to par with other manufacturers but damn is it nice. There is such a dichotomy between old GM cars and the new ones. I cant tell you how many times I have driven a late 90's GM car and thought to myself how bad this thing feels and drives. Then I will hop in a new GM car and Im blown away at the quality. Sometimes I mistake GM cars for their european and japanese counterparts.

people need to open their eyes to GM; they make damn good cars!

PLYRS 3

who "people", brock??

then why is their (BIG 3) market share dwindling?

you may be an idiot....and i may be an idiot....but the millions of people who pick foreign brands over domestic brands aren't all idiots.

jah

with higher gas prices here to stay people are re thinking the need to own large vehicles. there will be reduced sales for american manufacturers till they can put out new product.

no argument tho; the early 90's cars got the same gas mileage as today’s expensive hybrids. their weight was around 2000+lbs, 13" wheels, less sound insulation, tiny exterior size, lo top speed /torque, less safety for the nanny nation.

probable that gm can not make money on a small car.

Silverstreak HX

Peoples eyes are open but their mouths are saying "Damn that thing is Ugly " except maybe for the SSR,Solstice,or Sky.

rockville

Wow, that was a great, positive, informative contribution to the topic.

brockLT1

I never said they are idiots???????????

PLYRS 3

your statement implied that people were blind/dumb/ignorant of domestic product....at least that's what i inferred.

rockville

The '92 (or was it '93) Camry was a great car for the day but it was quite expensive to produce. When it was time to redesign the car (I think '97 was the redesign) Toyota wanted to reduce the cost with out reducing the perceived quality. The car they said was the most innovative in that regard was the Neon. Yes, Toyota benchmarked the Neon when producing the '97 Camry. They said the ways Chrysler reduced part count and improved assembly were the most innovative in the industry. Learning what they had seen in the Neon they did things like reduce the part count in the bumper and associated hardware from something like 30 parts to 4. The improvements in part count and design for manufacture saved Toyota $3000/car. Much of that was due to ideas from Chrysler. I tried to find a link to this but I suspect the article is too old to be on the web. Chances are the information was published in Car and Driver about the time the second generation of larger Camry was released.
Yes, Toyota does benchmark the domestics. All the companies do it because they all know their are smart people and good ideas in their competitors cars. Just because say Fiat makes a car with a less than stellar reliability record doesn't mean that Fiat doesn't make a great brake caliper or a better upright or seat bolster than the next guy. Also, if you look at truck interiors you can find an example of Toyota following. The domestics were the first to save money on their interiors by using large, basically floor to ceiling plastic trim pieces. When Toyota replaced the Truck with the Tacoma they moved from lots of little interior bits with vinyl covered particle board panels to large plastic panels.
Toyota is a great car company in part because they are willing to adopt the ideas of others (Deming) rather than insist they know best.