6th Apr 2009, 22:53

"First of all, the US economy will not go into a depression if the US auto industry fails"

Losing 14 out of every 100 jobs in the U.S. wouldn't cause a depression?? That is the percentage of people whose jobs are either directly or indirectly tied to the U.S. auto industry. Losing Chrysler we might survive. GM, no way. Allowing another 14% of our people to be unemployed is unthinkable.

7th Apr 2009, 09:39

There have been dozens of comments on this thread alone suggesting that whenever an import owner gives their experience, its always on something other than a full-size and that this review and subsequent commentary is and should be about full-sizers.

SHOULD and IS are two very different things. When a guy posts that he convinced two friends to buy Fusions because of commentary on a full-sized-truck review, it kind of empties that argument of validity... unless those who have said that this is strictly about full sized trucks, and only applies to the same, come out of the woodwork and say that this approach is no more valid than using something less than a full sized imported truck as an example of import quality.

Why does that argument only apply to import owners?

The truth is that one vehicle DOES have a tiny, little bearing on another from the same manufacturer since they often use the same parts bin. It DOESN'T make all the vehicles from the same region of the same quality. It doesn't even make the two that share parts the same. But it DOES mean that an F150 CAN have an impact (very small) on a purchase decision of... say... a Fusion.

So yes, someone's experience with their Corolla has an impact on their buying decision of another Toyota vehicle. Is that completely reasonable? No. Only a very little bit. But the same is true of the myriad domestic comments from the "I've owned 40 domestics and they were all perfect, so ALL domestics MUST be good" crowd. That parallel doesn't hold up to the very same standard. If a guy's experiences with a dozen Toyota cars is incomparable to a Tundra, a dozen GM cars are just as incomparable to a Silverado. Even a previous model of the same name can be VERY different... note the difference between the last iteration of the Tundra and the current one.

I really like some of the new domestics AND imports so I have no argument if comments are related to ownership experiences. But when guys on here try to discredit ALL ownership experiences from an entire region using double standards, my feeling is that it only serves to discredit THEIR OWN VIEWPOINT... even if they think they "won" the argument.

As I've posted before, most people who come across this thread are likely laughing and scratching their collective heads... not feeling compelled to buy import or domestic (notwithstanding the examples you may hold forth about). They won't comment because they may have come here just to see if a Tundra is a halfway decent truck... only to find that the commentary isn't really about that. So this tempest rages on in its own teapot completely and blithely unaware of just how inconsequential it really is.

Someone earlier posted that an equally important subject worth debating was the Ginger vs. Mary Ann question... I couldn't have said it better.

7th Apr 2009, 10:52

That's not what would happen. Your numbers would indicate that every single person related to the automotive industry would lose their job, which is simply not the likely outcome. For one thing, some of those would include automotive parts sellers. If you look at the stocks of auto parts retailers, their numbers are through the roof. In a recession, consumers tends to keep and repair older vehicles versus sell and buy new ones. Many of these retailers are actually opening new stores to date. So in some cases, MORE jobs tied to the auto industry are being created.

Secondly, just because GM and Chrysler are going under doesn't mean auto workers have nowhere to go. Foreign brand manufacturers are setting up shop in the US even as we speak. VW has a new plant opening in Tennessee with parts manufacturing and steel plants joining that operation across state lines in Alabama. Toyota has a Prius and hybrid plant in the works. There has even been talks about a company called Mahindra opening a plant to manufacture their new line of small diesel trucks for the NA markets.

Additionally, many US parts makers have contracts with other companies. Delphi makes AC systems for Toyota for example.

So in reality, if GM and Chrysler went under, nothing close to 14% of the US workforce would be out of work. In all likelihood, many of those workers would find work elsewhere in similar fields.

7th Apr 2009, 11:36

Relevance is full size trucks being on topic. It's clear you have zero applications and recognize that's the true reasoning to buy and own. It is not a car or small truck being empty 99 percent of the time. It would be like someone with a canoe telling me what props I need for twins, just because they both float.

Full sizes haul and tow, not like the little train that could. When you own a model and look for reviews, do you not look for exactly the same? A Tacoma would not budge my boat - blown engine, trans rear no doubt in short order, waste of time. You have no concept and cannot recommend any full size. It's scary someone would have faith in zero experience.

7th Apr 2009, 12:28

The funny thing is, the US Auto Industry includes all manufacturers in the US including VW, Toyota, and Hyundai plus parts plants that make for more than one brand. So that 14% wouldn't lose their jobs if GM went under. For that 14% to be unemployed the US would have to stop making parts, vehicles and quit buying new ones of every single brand.