"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Hbayg.32135$aW2.24884@trnddc03...
> jg wrote:
>
>>
>> It sounds to me like stating the bleedin obvious. If they want to sell
>> more they have to get more attractive (not just in looks), otoh position
>> on the scoreboard might not have been their prime concern. Maybe it's
>> profit on what they did sell... probably doesn't bother BMW or Morgan
>> that they are not top of the sales tree. They have different objectives
>> to you & I who just want a good car. And what sells the most doesn't
>> necessarily drive us either.
> BMW's strategy is in many ways similar to Hondas in that in the categories
> BMW chooses to compete in it regularly builds one of the best in class
> vehicles out there. By best in class I do not necessarily mean top
> selling. However, usually best in class vehicles also end up being
> amongst the top sellers in the class.
>
Depends which magazine you read. But something other than sales volume being
their prime objective in the past, is about the only way the comment about
ing development dollars across cars & trucks... makes sense. (and I
don't think it makes sense - they always need to spend development dollars)

 

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Hbayg.32135$aW2.24884@trnddc03...
> jg wrote:
>
>>
>> It sounds to me like stating the bleedin obvious. If they want to sell
>> more they have to get more attractive (not just in looks), otoh position
>> on the scoreboard might not have been their prime concern. Maybe it's
>> profit on what they did sell... probably doesn't bother BMW or Morgan
>> that they are not top of the sales tree. They have different objectives
>> to you & I who just want a good car. And what sells the most doesn't
>> necessarily drive us either.
> BMW's strategy is in many ways similar to Hondas in that in the categories
> BMW chooses to compete in it regularly builds one of the best in class
> vehicles out there. By best in class I do not necessarily mean top
> selling. However, usually best in class vehicles also end up being
> amongst the top sellers in the class.
>
Depends which magazine you read. But something other than sales volume being
their prime objective in the past, is about the only way the comment about
ing development dollars across cars & trucks... makes sense. (and I
don't think it makes sense - they always need to spend development dollars)

 

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Hbayg.32135$aW2.24884@trnddc03...
> jg wrote:
>
>>
>> It sounds to me like stating the bleedin obvious. If they want to sell
>> more they have to get more attractive (not just in looks), otoh position
>> on the scoreboard might not have been their prime concern. Maybe it's
>> profit on what they did sell... probably doesn't bother BMW or Morgan
>> that they are not top of the sales tree. They have different objectives
>> to you & I who just want a good car. And what sells the most doesn't
>> necessarily drive us either.
> BMW's strategy is in many ways similar to Hondas in that in the categories
> BMW chooses to compete in it regularly builds one of the best in class
> vehicles out there. By best in class I do not necessarily mean top
> selling. However, usually best in class vehicles also end up being
> amongst the top sellers in the class.
>
Depends which magazine you read. But something other than sales volume being
their prime objective in the past, is about the only way the comment about
ing development dollars across cars & trucks... makes sense. (and I
don't think it makes sense - they always need to spend development dollars)

 

"Just Facts" <Jfact@intnet.wrld> wrote in message
news:Jfact-D32414.12021227072006@news.telus.net...
> In article <yfIxg.17744$pu3.351347@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> "Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>
>> Aren't Impalas fuel efficient cars? Here in Canada, they are rated at
>> around
>> 40MPG.
>> BTW, if you think it's too optimistic, remember that Canadian and US
>> gallons
>> are different.
> They will get that on highway driving.
> In urban driving their milage reflects their weight and engine size, the
> same as similar competition.

So what's city MPG with an Impala?

 

"Just Facts" <Jfact@intnet.wrld> wrote in message
news:Jfact-D32414.12021227072006@news.telus.net...
> In article <yfIxg.17744$pu3.351347@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> "Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>
>> Aren't Impalas fuel efficient cars? Here in Canada, they are rated at
>> around
>> 40MPG.
>> BTW, if you think it's too optimistic, remember that Canadian and US
>> gallons
>> are different.
> They will get that on highway driving.
> In urban driving their milage reflects their weight and engine size, the
> same as similar competition.

So what's city MPG with an Impala?

 

"Just Facts" <Jfact@intnet.wrld> wrote in message
news:Jfact-D32414.12021227072006@news.telus.net...
> In article <yfIxg.17744$pu3.351347@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> "Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>
>> Aren't Impalas fuel efficient cars? Here in Canada, they are rated at
>> around
>> 40MPG.
>> BTW, if you think it's too optimistic, remember that Canadian and US
>> gallons
>> are different.
> They will get that on highway driving.
> In urban driving their milage reflects their weight and engine size, the
> same as similar competition.

So what's city MPG with an Impala?

 

"Just Facts" <Jfact@intnet.wrld> wrote in message
news:Jfact-D32414.12021227072006@news.telus.net...
> In article <yfIxg.17744$pu3.351347@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> "Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>
>> Aren't Impalas fuel efficient cars? Here in Canada, they are rated at
>> around
>> 40MPG.
>> BTW, if you think it's too optimistic, remember that Canadian and US
>> gallons
>> are different.
> They will get that on highway driving.
> In urban driving their milage reflects their weight and engine size, the
> same as similar competition.

So what's city MPG with an Impala?

 

Look to your north, health car costs are a fraction here as well.

Gordon McGrew wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:02:28 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
>> news:yfIxg.17744$pu3.351347@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>>> snip
>>>
>>>> While the power shift has been long in the making, it's nonetheless a
>>>> disheartening sign that Detroit's auto industry is losing the battle for
>>>> the hearts and wallets of American car buyers.
>>> Does anybody know how much it costs Toyota and Honda to build a car
>>> compared to
>>> the Big 3?
>>> What are the benefits and salaries paid to the employees?
>>> If there's a difference, the day may come when the Big 3 are going to
>>> demand concessions
>>> from them to save the companies and their jobs.
>> It's already here. The companies are demanding concessions involved health
>> care. Soon they will involve pensions. The Big 2 and the American part of
>> the Dialmer-Chrysler and many of their suppliers have pension obligations
>> that have not yet been met. IN most of Europe, the government takes care of
>> the pensions.
>
> And health care too. Of course, it has to be paid for by someone
> either way. In Europe and Japan, health care costs are a fraction of
> those in the US and everyone is covered.

 

Look to your north, health car costs are a fraction here as well.

Gordon McGrew wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:02:28 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
>> news:yfIxg.17744$pu3.351347@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>>> snip
>>>
>>>> While the power shift has been long in the making, it's nonetheless a
>>>> disheartening sign that Detroit's auto industry is losing the battle for
>>>> the hearts and wallets of American car buyers.
>>> Does anybody know how much it costs Toyota and Honda to build a car
>>> compared to
>>> the Big 3?
>>> What are the benefits and salaries paid to the employees?
>>> If there's a difference, the day may come when the Big 3 are going to
>>> demand concessions
>>> from them to save the companies and their jobs.
>> It's already here. The companies are demanding concessions involved health
>> care. Soon they will involve pensions. The Big 2 and the American part of
>> the Dialmer-Chrysler and many of their suppliers have pension obligations
>> that have not yet been met. IN most of Europe, the government takes care of
>> the pensions.
>
> And health care too. Of course, it has to be paid for by someone
> either way. In Europe and Japan, health care costs are a fraction of
> those in the US and everyone is covered.

 

Look to your north, health car costs are a fraction here as well.

Gordon McGrew wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:02:28 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
>> news:yfIxg.17744$pu3.351347@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>>> snip
>>>
>>>> While the power shift has been long in the making, it's nonetheless a
>>>> disheartening sign that Detroit's auto industry is losing the battle for
>>>> the hearts and wallets of American car buyers.
>>> Does anybody know how much it costs Toyota and Honda to build a car
>>> compared to
>>> the Big 3?
>>> What are the benefits and salaries paid to the employees?
>>> If there's a difference, the day may come when the Big 3 are going to
>>> demand concessions
>>> from them to save the companies and their jobs.
>> It's already here. The companies are demanding concessions involved health
>> care. Soon they will involve pensions. The Big 2 and the American part of
>> the Dialmer-Chrysler and many of their suppliers have pension obligations
>> that have not yet been met. IN most of Europe, the government takes care of
>> the pensions.
>
> And health care too. Of course, it has to be paid for by someone
> either way. In Europe and Japan, health care costs are a fraction of
> those in the US and everyone is covered.

 

Look to your north, health car costs are a fraction here as well.

Gordon McGrew wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:02:28 GMT, "Jeff" <jeff@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
>> news:yfIxg.17744$pu3.351347@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>>> snip
>>>
>>>> While the power shift has been long in the making, it's nonetheless a
>>>> disheartening sign that Detroit's auto industry is losing the battle for
>>>> the hearts and wallets of American car buyers.
>>> Does anybody know how much it costs Toyota and Honda to build a car
>>> compared to
>>> the Big 3?
>>> What are the benefits and salaries paid to the employees?
>>> If there's a difference, the day may come when the Big 3 are going to
>>> demand concessions
>>> from them to save the companies and their jobs.
>> It's already here. The companies are demanding concessions involved health
>> care. Soon they will involve pensions. The Big 2 and the American part of
>> the Dialmer-Chrysler and many of their suppliers have pension obligations
>> that have not yet been met. IN most of Europe, the government takes care of
>> the pensions.
>
> And health care too. Of course, it has to be paid for by someone
> either way. In Europe and Japan, health care costs are a fraction of
> those in the US and everyone is covered.

 

In article <ECJxg.12340$2v.3538@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> ,
"asadi" <j-s-baker@sbcglobal.invalid.net> wrote:

> > Wardlaw points out, for example, that the Ford Focus was merely refreshed
> > for the U.S. market while the Focus sold in Europe was completely
> > redesigned.
Interesting.
> >
> > "What Americans got was a rehashed version of the old Focus and as a
> > result, Ford isn't in a position to compete" against popular small
> > vehicles such as the Honda Civic in the U.S. market at a time when gas
> > prices are pushing consumers to cars.
> >
I recently rented a new Ford Focus (1.6 L ?) manual shift SW in the UK
and although it had excellent interior space I found it very noisy
(noise being amplified in the car) and the fuel mileage was low; about
the same highway mileage as my Sebring V6 2.7 L auto.
The revs in top gear were about 50% higher than the Sebring;
about 3,000 rpm at 60 mph.
Now I'm wondering how bad the NA Focus is, but I'll have to pass on it
based on my UK experiences.

 

In article <ECJxg.12340$2v.3538@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> ,
"asadi" <j-s-baker@sbcglobal.invalid.net> wrote:

> > Wardlaw points out, for example, that the Ford Focus was merely refreshed
> > for the U.S. market while the Focus sold in Europe was completely
> > redesigned.
Interesting.
> >
> > "What Americans got was a rehashed version of the old Focus and as a
> > result, Ford isn't in a position to compete" against popular small
> > vehicles such as the Honda Civic in the U.S. market at a time when gas
> > prices are pushing consumers to cars.
> >
I recently rented a new Ford Focus (1.6 L ?) manual shift SW in the UK
and although it had excellent interior space I found it very noisy
(noise being amplified in the car) and the fuel mileage was low; about
the same highway mileage as my Sebring V6 2.7 L auto.
The revs in top gear were about 50% higher than the Sebring;
about 3,000 rpm at 60 mph.
Now I'm wondering how bad the NA Focus is, but I'll have to pass on it
based on my UK experiences.

 

In article <ECJxg.12340$2v.3538@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> ,
"asadi" <j-s-baker@sbcglobal.invalid.net> wrote:

> > Wardlaw points out, for example, that the Ford Focus was merely refreshed
> > for the U.S. market while the Focus sold in Europe was completely
> > redesigned.
Interesting.
> >
> > "What Americans got was a rehashed version of the old Focus and as a
> > result, Ford isn't in a position to compete" against popular small
> > vehicles such as the Honda Civic in the U.S. market at a time when gas
> > prices are pushing consumers to cars.
> >
I recently rented a new Ford Focus (1.6 L ?) manual shift SW in the UK
and although it had excellent interior space I found it very noisy
(noise being amplified in the car) and the fuel mileage was low; about
the same highway mileage as my Sebring V6 2.7 L auto.
The revs in top gear were about 50% higher than the Sebring;
about 3,000 rpm at 60 mph.
Now I'm wondering how bad the NA Focus is, but I'll have to pass on it
based on my UK experiences.

 

In article <ECJxg.12340$2v.3538@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> ,
"asadi" <j-s-baker@sbcglobal.invalid.net> wrote:

> > Wardlaw points out, for example, that the Ford Focus was merely refreshed
> > for the U.S. market while the Focus sold in Europe was completely
> > redesigned.
Interesting.
> >
> > "What Americans got was a rehashed version of the old Focus and as a
> > result, Ford isn't in a position to compete" against popular small
> > vehicles such as the Honda Civic in the U.S. market at a time when gas
> > prices are pushing consumers to cars.
> >
I recently rented a new Ford Focus (1.6 L ?) manual shift SW in the UK
and although it had excellent interior space I found it very noisy
(noise being amplified in the car) and the fuel mileage was low; about
the same highway mileage as my Sebring V6 2.7 L auto.
The revs in top gear were about 50% higher than the Sebring;
about 3,000 rpm at 60 mph.
Now I'm wondering how bad the NA Focus is, but I'll have to pass on it
based on my UK experiences.