Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > The Pub
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

The Pub A friendly forum where everybody is nice, and will answer any questions you have about life.







Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 22nd, 2005, 05:37 PM   #21
GreaseMonkey
Senior Member
 
GreaseMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Washington, MI
Posts: 17,873
iTrader: (22)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AWK
I don't see Sol Goode comment as generic at all. All of what he said is based on statisical fact.

The Facts: In the latest J.D. Power Initial Quality Study — a respected, independent consumer survey — Buick and Cadillac both placed in the top five, ahead of the equally respected brands Toyota, Honda, Acura, Nissan, Infiniti and Mercedes-Benz. Out of 84 assembly plants in North and South America, GM swept the top three awards for quality in the same J.D. Power Study … beating out all other automakers.

In the most recent Harbour Report on plant productivity, GM’s Oshawa, Ontario, assembly plant was named the most productive plant in North America; in fact, GM plants took three of the top five spots in the report.

And in the most recent Total Quality Awards by Strategic Vision, GM had six vehicles that took the top awards in their respective segments – more than any other full-line manufacturer: Pontiac G6 (beating out Camry and Accord), Chevrolet Corvette, Buick Rainier, Hummer H2, Cadillac Escalade and GMC Sierra Heavy Duty pickup.

I love facts...

AWK
My point is that every one of those vehicles aren't going to have the exactly same quality vehicle to vehicle. One person buys a Hummer H2 and puts 70,000 miles on it and never has a problem. Someone else might put 70,000 on another one and have alot of problems. Just an example.

Just because one vehicle J.D. Powers looked at had high quality, doesn't mean every single vehicle is going to be a 100% identical carbon copy coming off the assembly line. Shit happens, and nothing is perfect.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryann View Post
I am not a lesbian but if I was I would do her.
GreaseMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 05:54 PM   #22
jamiesann
Senior Member
 
jamiesann's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods
Posts: 2,888
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreaseMonkey
My point is that every one of those vehicles aren't going to have the exactly same quality vehicle to vehicle. One person buys a Hummer H2 and puts 70,000 miles on it and never has a problem. Someone else might put 70,000 on another one and have alot of problems. Just an example.

Just because one vehicle J.D. Powers looked at had high quality, doesn't mean every single vehicle is going to be a 100% identical carbon copy coming off the assembly line. Shit happens, and nothing is perfect.
JD power surveys tens of thousands-hundreds of thousands of vehicles Greasemonkey. If you belive in math (and you should since you gamble when your being greasemonkey the hot shot poker player) you should belive in JD powers results are a good indicator of your "luck" as a car buyer.

I for example, would be pretty darn confident buying a all new model from Toyota or Honda. Thats it. No one else does it as good bringing new models to market with out a glitch. None of the domestics have demostrated they can across the line bring out new models that arent plagued with problems. Of course there are some fords that are great and came out with no probs i fear buying a focus like new product.

Buying a car form a well scoring manufacturer is a safer bet. Sure there are probably a few 1993 Hundai excells running around that have no rust and are tight as hell with 200,000 miles on them. But Hundai built crap uptill about 2000-2001 and the safe bet is that anyone that bought an early hundai did not see 200k. Sol goode was refering to scientificly studying the problems per 100 vehicles in JD power and associates. Its pretty irrefutable proof of a companies progess or decline. I personally wasn't sure if his opinon was Toyota head to head was the value leader or he was saying GM was.
jamiesann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 06:01 PM   #23
GreaseMonkey
Senior Member
 
GreaseMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Washington, MI
Posts: 17,873
iTrader: (22)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiesann
JD power surveys tens of thousands-hundreds of thousands of vehicles Greasemonkey. If you belive in math (and you should since you gamble when your being greasemonkey the hot shot poker player).

I for example would be pretty darn confident buying a all new model from Toyota or Honda. None of the domestics have demostrated they can across the line bring out new models that arent plagued with problems. Of course there are some fords that are great and came out with no probs i fear buying a focus like new product.

Buying a car form a well scoring manufacturer is a safer bet. Sure there are probably a few 1993 Hundai excells running around that have no rust and are tight as hell with 200,000 miles on them. But Hundai built crap uptill about 2000-2001 and the safe bet is that anyone that bought an early hundai did not see 200k. Sol goode was refering to scientificly studying the problems per 100 vehicles in JD power and associates. Its pretty irrefutable proof of a companies progess or decline. I personally wasn't sure if his opinon was Toyota head to head was the value leader or he was saying GM was.
about the poker!

Ok my bad...I was thinking about something else besides JD Powers...hey, it's been a long day at work.

One of the problems with JD Powers though is that a problem with the vehicle is a problem...there's no categorization. As far as I know, catastrophic engine failure and a loose door panel are both categorized the same, a problem with the vehicle. An engine blowing up and a door panel coming loose are going to paint very different pictures of a vehicles quality. But, to JD Powers, they're both the same thing. So how do you really know what you're getting?

Granted I'm biased on this, because I'm no fan of Toyota or GM, but I'm trying to be objective here and just play devil's advocate.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryann View Post
I am not a lesbian but if I was I would do her.
GreaseMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 06:09 PM   #24
scottie
American Leyland??
 
scottie's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Sweet home Georgia on my mind
Posts: 8,481
iTrader: (2)
Send a message via AIM to scottie
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn
OMG!!!!11!!1!111 Toyota put a bigger engine in a smaller vehicle and managed to make it go faster.... wow, they sure are geniuses... what'l they think of next?

I agree that that V6 is a turd. GM has better V6's

actually they aren't that much different in size, GM's is a 3.4L OHV boat anchor, and Toyotas is 3.5 or 3.6 i forget which with DOHC. IF GM would just put the cams on top of the heads and use variable valve timing, they might just come up with a competitor.


Interesting side note, when it comes out it will be toyotas 2nd fastest car, and it puts out more power than the V8 that is the 4 runner :gman:


I realize the 3.4L is a Value engine, I just like how their Value engine seems to find its way out of Value cars and into upperscale cars, Like the rendezvous :tonka:

Exactly what i want to do spend 35K on a Buick to have essentially the same engine that came in Z24 Cavliers



GM just doesn't seem very competitive anymore, and they don't seem to have a direction to change this, Everytime they start to head in the right direction they get sidetracked and end up with the same turd refreshed.


DIE W-Body DIE!!!
scottie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 06:11 PM   #25
AWK
Senior Member
 
AWK's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-15-05
Location: Chesterfield
Posts: 626
iTrader: (3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreaseMonkey
about the poker!

Ok my bad...I was thinking about something else besides JD Powers...hey, it's been a long day at work.

One of the problems with JD Powers though is that a problem with the vehicle is a problem...there's no categorization. As far as I know, catastrophic engine failure and a loose door panel are both categorized the same, a problem with the vehicle. An engine blowing up and a door panel coming loose are going to paint very different pictures of a vehicles quality. But, to JD Powers, they're both the same thing. So how do you really know what you're getting?

Granted I'm biased on this, because I'm no fan of Toyota or GM, but I'm trying to be objective here and just play devil's advocate.
Ever failure is catorgorized into a labor operations. If a failure occurs they know about it. They measure these in Incedence Per thousand Vehilces, or cost per vehicle. This is VERY detailed and there is loads of data that can be pulled to understand any issue. It is defined much deeper that you think. Resolving and containing these early increases Customer Satisfaction, reduces warranty waste, and improves the bottomline.

All manufactures build with variation. Variation is measureable. That is part of J.D. Powers.

AWK

AWK
AWK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 06:15 PM   #26
GreaseMonkey
Senior Member
 
GreaseMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Washington, MI
Posts: 17,873
iTrader: (22)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AWK
Ever failure is catorgorized into a labor operations. If a failure occurs they know about it. They measure these in Incedence Per thousand Vehilces, or cost per vehicle. This is VERY detailed and there is loads of data that can be pulled to understand any issue. It is defined much deeper that you think. Resolving and containing these early increases Customer Satisfaction, reduces warranty waste, and improves the bottomline.

All manufactures build with variation. Variation is measureable. That is part of J.D. Powers.

AWK

AWK
I just remember reading an article a year ago about alot of the faults with JD Powers. I guess they were mistaken.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryann View Post
I am not a lesbian but if I was I would do her.
GreaseMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 06:22 PM   #27
scottie
American Leyland??
 
scottie's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Sweet home Georgia on my mind
Posts: 8,481
iTrader: (2)
Send a message via AIM to scottie
My favorite thing about JD powers and Associates is there Best in Intial Quality,

so what they survey a bunch of people the first month they have the car, then after that? and what is it ruely measureing, i think they talking about defects per thousand, so for example in 2000, the GMC sonoma was JD powers best in intial quality for small trucks. they really just liked it because of the number of cupholders and that their were few problems in the first 3K miles of ownership.


well i should fucking hope so, I mean they have only been building the things out of parts bins since 1982, i would hope they have the bugs worked out by now
scottie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 06:39 PM   #28
Sol Goode
Obama Nation!
 
Sol Goode's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Curt1656 & Scooters love castle
Posts: 14,066
iTrader: (10)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiesann
Huh ? Please explain sol goode. I understand from other post this is your expertise and you visit factories and you would know. I just wanted to make sure you said and meant to say: "Head to Head GM is superior to all other manufacturers. In price, quality, service, and reliability. "

I dont even know what a Harbour number is so this is not a jab at you, i assume you meant Toyota and bruce = brewman ?
Sorry, there was a typo in there. Head to head Toyota is superior. In all of the aspects I stated earlier. Harbour numbers = productivity (hours per vehicle)
__________________
Come roll with us........
Sol Goode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 06:50 PM   #29
jamiesann
Senior Member
 
jamiesann's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods
Posts: 2,888
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol Goode
Sorry, there was a typo in there. Head to head Toyota is superior. In all of the aspects I stated earlier. Harbour numbers = productivity (hours per vehicle)
ok good my head was spinning, i was like i know the last three years or so GM has made some decent gains but my world was upside down if GM was trouncing Toyota in productivity and all the other measurements.
jamiesann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 08:30 PM   #30
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,298
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottie
actually they aren't that much different in size, GM's is a 3.4L OHV boat anchor, and Toyotas is 3.5 or 3.6 i forget which with DOHC. IF GM would just put the cams on top of the heads and use variable valve timing, they might just come up with a competitor.
I know, I was just trrying to spin it the other way

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottie
I realize the 3.4L is a Value engine, I just like how their Value engine seems to find its way out of Value cars and into upperscale cars, Like the rendezvous :tonka:

Exactly what i want to do spend 35K on a Buick to have essentially the same engine that came in Z24 Cavliers
The rendezvous with the 3.4L turd in it stickers under 30K, for 33K you'd can get one with a better 3.5L, I'm not sure which engine this is, I'll have to check tommorow.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 08:41 PM   #31
scottie
American Leyland??
 
scottie's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Sweet home Georgia on my mind
Posts: 8,481
iTrader: (2)
Send a message via AIM to scottie
Bruce its the 3.6L DOHC engine that they had in the CTS for a spell, and which comes in the higher end LaCrosse, i know that they don't put the 3.4L in all the rendezvous now, but for a while it was the only engine, it wasn't until 2004 or so when they added the Ultra trim package that they got the 3.6 DOHC


the 3.5L OHV engine that in like Malibus and crap, they claim doesn't share anything with the 2.8-3.1-3.4 family, but i've driven cars with it, they act and sound nearly identical, but they say the 3.9L is supposed to be based off the 3.5L OHV engine too.


what ever happen to the shortstar :gman
scottie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2005, 10:03 PM   #32
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,298
iTrader: (9)
yep. I saw it listed as 3.5 L somewhere and that through me off. It's the basically the same engine as the 2.8L and 3.6L V6s' that come in the caddy. They have plans to put it into more and more vehicles in the future.

I don't know anything about a "shortstar" was that supposed to be a v6 based of the Northstar? i think they probebly killed it.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > The Pub
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:12 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2005 - 2012 Cracker Enterprises - Powered by Linux
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=
Page generated in 0.24081 seconds with 34 queries