Excellent article on
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,991
Likes: 3
From: Blue Bell, PA
Excellent article on
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,535
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix
Another reason why I prefer Hondas to Toyotas. Toyota can when it wants to, but they are much more American (read: focused on profits) than Honda is. Honda's got the mix of ingenuity and money-making ability.
As for the American companies, I think there was plenty of innovation for a time. The Oldsmobile Rocket engines focused on high compression, Chrysler with the hemi (though I personally question its real significance in anything other than drag racing), Cadillac on OHC V engines when straight-8s were king, Buick's initiation into turbo power...there was plenty of American innovation when there were more American companies in the mix.
Notice today, that America effectively has only Ford and GM. Chrysler's products have been mired in other company's designs for so long, they seem to be little more than the Hemi and the Viper anymore, where homegrown designs are concerned.
Back when the American market was hyper-competitive, you had all of these vying for showroom floors:
Ford (not counting Lincoln and Mercury)
Chrysler (not counting Dodge, Plymouth, Desoto)
Packard
Deusenberg
Studebaker (who at one point owned Packard)
Chevrolet (not counting GMC, Pontiac, Olds, Caddy, Buick)
Rambler
American Motor Company
Today, you have:
Ford
GM
Chrysler
That's a shrinking of 8 to 3, or 7 to 3 if you remove Deusenberg, who was least copetitive the longest (they didn't make it out of the 30s.). Add to that, back when GM was in its hey-day, each of its divisions competed with not only Ford and Chrysler, but with GM's other brands.
Japan's car companies on the other hand, looked like this before and/or after WW2:
Nissan
Mitsubishi
Honda
Toyopet
Mazda
Suzuki
Isuzu
(Am I forgetting anyone?)
What does Japan's auto industry look like now?:
Nissan
Mitsubishi
Honda
Toyota
Mazda
Suzuki
(Isuzu doesn't count for cars anymore)
Almost no change, and fewer names than ever before to formulate America's competitive response. In fact in Ford's case, Japan's designs have started underpinning their cars, whereas GM's cars are becoming more focused on world and Euro platforms. But in essence, when Ford and GM ran out of competitors, they ran out of steam. Notice that's not the case in Japan, although one could argue Suzuki ain't exactly up there with Nissan or Toyota.
IMO the competitive landscape for the Japanese has always been the toughest, and is now treating them the best because they put their asses on the line against everyone else, in addition to forming their own specific identities early, and more or less sticking to them over decades. The Germans and the Italians got by, and still do, mostly on prestige. The American companies I think competitively were what Japanese companies most focused on imitating, while injecting their own ideas and capitalizing on economies of money and scale rather than the simple more-power-more-cheaply that America switched to around 1965.
The Coupe 9, like the S600, is an exemplary piece of Honda's capability.
As for the American companies, I think there was plenty of innovation for a time. The Oldsmobile Rocket engines focused on high compression, Chrysler with the hemi (though I personally question its real significance in anything other than drag racing), Cadillac on OHC V engines when straight-8s were king, Buick's initiation into turbo power...there was plenty of American innovation when there were more American companies in the mix.
Notice today, that America effectively has only Ford and GM. Chrysler's products have been mired in other company's designs for so long, they seem to be little more than the Hemi and the Viper anymore, where homegrown designs are concerned.
Back when the American market was hyper-competitive, you had all of these vying for showroom floors:
Ford (not counting Lincoln and Mercury)
Chrysler (not counting Dodge, Plymouth, Desoto)
Packard
Deusenberg
Studebaker (who at one point owned Packard)
Chevrolet (not counting GMC, Pontiac, Olds, Caddy, Buick)
Rambler
American Motor Company
Today, you have:
Ford
GM
Chrysler
That's a shrinking of 8 to 3, or 7 to 3 if you remove Deusenberg, who was least copetitive the longest (they didn't make it out of the 30s.). Add to that, back when GM was in its hey-day, each of its divisions competed with not only Ford and Chrysler, but with GM's other brands.
Japan's car companies on the other hand, looked like this before and/or after WW2:
Nissan
Mitsubishi
Honda
Toyopet
Mazda
Suzuki
Isuzu
(Am I forgetting anyone?)
What does Japan's auto industry look like now?:
Nissan
Mitsubishi
Honda
Toyota
Mazda
Suzuki
(Isuzu doesn't count for cars anymore)
Almost no change, and fewer names than ever before to formulate America's competitive response. In fact in Ford's case, Japan's designs have started underpinning their cars, whereas GM's cars are becoming more focused on world and Euro platforms. But in essence, when Ford and GM ran out of competitors, they ran out of steam. Notice that's not the case in Japan, although one could argue Suzuki ain't exactly up there with Nissan or Toyota.
IMO the competitive landscape for the Japanese has always been the toughest, and is now treating them the best because they put their asses on the line against everyone else, in addition to forming their own specific identities early, and more or less sticking to them over decades. The Germans and the Italians got by, and still do, mostly on prestige. The American companies I think competitively were what Japanese companies most focused on imitating, while injecting their own ideas and capitalizing on economies of money and scale rather than the simple more-power-more-cheaply that America switched to around 1965.
The Coupe 9, like the S600, is an exemplary piece of Honda's capability.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SpeedxRacer
Car and Bike Talk
3
Mar 1, 2005 02:02 PM