Will GM's problems ever end?

[ranma]

A real issue is Quanity over quality. My dad worked for International Harvester/Navistar And that's a Quote from him. He worked 31 years and saw first hand how those cost cutting ideas worked. the idea was and is out produce the other company's. build more sell more, build them as cheap as you can and sell at a high price. Is this GM's idea? NOPE IT"S ACROSS THE BOARD, All auto makers do it! AND So attack GM for doing what Ford done in the 1970's But rember one thing here folks GM Wasn't the First and most likely not the last! As my dad once said cars and such went down hill when Companies decided to move to mexico or china for cheap labor and less inspection's

HotWheel's recalled due to lead paint

Tainted pet food kills pets

toys recalled because small parts brake off to easy

and this little jem Nike shoes made in sweat shops cost under $10.00 per pair cost at the store?(quanity/quality=$$$$$$$

[Ace-Garageguy]

... build them as cheap as you can and sell at a high price...

It's called "maximizing profit", yes, and if you cut through all the doublespeak and BS, THIS SINGLE PHRASE is the mantra of EVERY business, and when implemented without any moral or ethical constraints, it becomes the dark side of capitalism. There's NOTHING wrong with making money, but when that's ALL you care about, fiascoes like GM's current woes are what you get.

When the primary focus is on MAKING MONEY, bad stuff happens. When the primary focus is on MAKING A GOOD PRODUCT, there will be plenty of money...but unfortunately not enough to satisfy the massive greed that has become the driving force of business today.

Things need to change, which really means that PEOPLE need to look at what's REALLY important, and change how they do business to reflect some compassion and caring about the people who BUY the stuff. A little pride in turning out a good product or service might be a good thing too have, too.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Oh, there's a reason, all right. Gadgets and gizmos sell. A lot of consumers these days expect a car to have all sorts of technical wizardy installed in it.

But it's more pervasive and runs deeper than just gadgets and gizmos. I first noticed many years ago (LONG before cars became rolling entertainment and communications centers) that Mercedes would use 15 tiny little bolts and nuts, plus various clips and brackets, and hide them all so they were almost impossible to get to...when two or three larger bolts, properly located for easy access, would have done exactly the same job.

Mercedes engineers seemed to all be drawn from a genetic offshoot of the human species that obsessed in making things completely and unnecessarily complicated just for the sake of complication. This mindset has spread like a disease through almost every manufacturing industry...even into software...so much so that to me, it's a REAL source of pleasure when I encounter a well-designed, well-thought-out, and SIMPLE part or assembly in ANYTHING.

Frankly, it's HARDER to make something simple and clean that works well, so piling on meaningless detail and clutter often is the sign of mediocre or uninspired designers and engineers who really don't understand FULLY what they're doing.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[JohnU]

I honestly believe this "over engineering" is intentional to prevent shade tree mechanic and home tinkerers from doing their own repairs and forcing people to buy new or rely on the professionals for expensive repairs!

[Dave Van]

I honestly believe this "over engineering" is intentional to prevent shade tree mechanic and home tinkerers from doing their own repairs and forcing people to buy new or rely on the professionals for expensive repairs!

I RECALL a few years ago when GM announced they were going to seal the hood with only small aircraft style panels to check fluids etc and removing the hood would void the warranty. That didn't go over well......so maybe they choose to over engineer!!!

[Brett Barrow]

I RECALL a few years ago...

ISWYDT.

[booboo60]

Heard they are recalling the 1966 and 67 Nova's for loose Mirrors that can come down while driving and cause you not too see behind ya,,lol

[Art Anderson]

Oh, there's a reason, all right. Gadgets and gizmos sell. A lot of consumers these days expect a car to have all sorts of technical wizardy installed in it.

I guess it's a classic chicken-and-egg situation... Which came first? Did the manufacturers start loading on the gadgetry in an attempt to lure consumers with the latest shiny things, or did consumers demand more gadgetry on their cars and automakers responded to market demand? Or is it more a case of "monkey see, monkey do?" The Germans had started with all this "I Drive" krap... typical Teutonic over-engineering and tech for tech's sake... the luxo Japanese makes followed suit, and so did the American makers. Now they're all hell-bent on outdoing the other guy, and we get ridiculous TV ads like the totally clueless male-model type lost in a daze, while his trusty car does the "driving" (and thinking) for him!

Bring back the Model T! Dad always used to swear that all Grandpa needed for his Model T tool kit was a monkey wrench, a pair of slipjoint pliers, a roll of baling wire, and a little sack of oatmeal. (why OATMEAL? Easy, that was the original radiator StopLeak!). Life must have been lots simpler a century ago, huh?

Art

[Rob Hall]

Bring back the Model T! Dad always used to swear that all Grandpa needed for his Model T tool kit was a monkey wrench, a pair of slipjoint pliers, a roll of baling wire, and a little sack of oatmeal. (why OATMEAL? Easy, that was the original radiator StopLeak!). Life must have been lots simpler a century ago, huh?

Art

Or for those who find the Model T too fancy, they can always go neo-Amish and get a horse and buggy...

[Draggon]

I RECALL a few years ago when GM announced they were going to seal the hood with only small aircraft style panels to check fluids etc and removing the hood would void the warranty. That didn't go over well......so maybe they choose to over engineer!!!

I have a friend with a 2012 Fiesta, auto trans. You can NOT ck the trans fluid in it. There is no dipstick. The manual says it is sealed, and the owner must take it to a Ford dealer for service. At least you can still ck the oil and coolant.

[Joe Handley]

I have a friend with a 2012 Fiesta, auto trans. You can NOT ck the trans fluid in it. There is no dipstick. The manual says it is sealed, and the owner must take it to a Ford dealer for service. At least you can still ck the oil and coolant.

The 6 speed auto in my 200 is like that too, however, since the trans was designed to use one, all the provisions are there to install one yourself once you get the dipstick (the ones that were in the 3 speed autos in my Lebaron and Shadow would probably work) from the parts store/dealership.

[Harry P.]

Or for those who find the Model T too fancy, they can always go neo-Amish and get a horse and buggy...

Isn't that a little ostentatious? I mean, a horse and a buggy?

[Rob Hall]

8.4 million more recalls announced today... the drama continues.

Edited June 30, 2014 by Rob Hall

[Harry P.]

OH MY GOD!

When I posted that it was Saturday, any new GM recalls?... I was joking. Apparently they only took the weekend off. SIX MORE NEW RECALLS today.

Can this be real?

Story and chart of affected vehicles and the various problems here:

http://www.businessinsider.com/gm-recalling-7-million-more-cars-2014-6?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheMoneyGame+(The+Money+Game)

[Rob Hall]

"Oh, the movie never ends

It goes on and on and on and on"

[mikemodeler]

8.4 million more recalls announced today... the drama continues.

Yep, turned on the TV to check the stock market and they were breaking in with news of GM stock trading being halted to see what effect these latest recalls would have on it's price!

Pretty sad when the reporters at CNBC were discussing GM and it's recall woes and several of them said they wouldn't consider GM if they were new car shopping! What was even more surprising is that supposedly GM new car sales are UP despite all of this negative publicity, someone said it was because consumers view these problems as "being part of the OLD GM!" and not the new cars available today!

[Rob Hall]

Yep, turned on the TV to check the stock market and they were breaking in with news of GM stock trading being halted to see what effect these latest recalls would have on it's price!

Pretty sad when the reporters at CNBC were discussing GM and it's recall woes and several of them said they wouldn't consider GM if they were new car shopping! What was even more surprising is that supposedly GM new car sales are UP despite all of this negative publicity, someone said it was because consumers view these problems as "being part of the OLD GM!" and not the new cars available today!

Yeah, looking at my GM stock, I see the share price has gone down a bit in the last week. My Ford stock has gone down also, but my Daimler stock has gone up...

[Harry P.]

Some of today's new recalls go back to 1997! Wow, talk about a major case of CYA syndrome. And strangely, the new recalls affect more Canadian cars then US cars. That's a little odd.

[Deano]

Let's see ... according to the article there have been 7 crashes with 8 injuries and 3 fatalities ... out of 8.4 MILLION cars involved in the recall. Now, I'm no mathematician and I realize that to the victims and their families these crashes ARE significant but 7 crashes out of 8.4 million cars doesn't even begin to be statistically significant.

Of course, I could be very wrong and I could have missed all sorts of significant stuff.

[Harry P.]

Let's see ... according to the article there have been 7 crashes with 8 injuries and 3 fatalities ... out of 8.4 MILLION cars involved in the recall. Now, I'm no mathematician and I realize that to the victims and their families these crashes ARE significant but 7 crashes out of 8.4 million cars doesn't even begin to be statistically significant.

Of course, I could be very wrong and I could have missed all sorts of significant stuff.

So at what point do you start taking defective cars seriously? If 10% of them are involved in fatal crashes? 50% of them? 75%? How many crashes would be "acceptable" before you decided you need to fix the problem?

[High octane]

Exactly Harry, how many people need to die because of a company's screw up, and before it's fixed???

[Deano]

So at what point do you start taking defective cars seriously? If 10% of them are involved in fatal crashes? 50% of them? 75%? How many crashes would be "acceptable" before you decided you need to fix the problem?

I dunno ... maybe we pillory and then burn at the stake at .83 out of a million? That would be a failure rate of .000083%. Yes, 83 ten-thousandths of a percent. I'd be willing to wager that significantly more people have died in those very same cars from DUI or Distracted Driving.

[Scale-Master]

Seven crashes out of 8.4 million cars put the percentage at .0000008%. That's a long way from the ballpark of even one percent.

[Rob Hall]

It seems the problem isn't that they had a defect, but that they apparently knew about it 9 years ago and didn't act then. The appearance of a coverup is the problem. But that's been said several times already in this thread. It's a question of corporate governance and accountability as much as it is about defective parts.

Edited June 30, 2014 by Rob Hall

[Harry P.]

First of all, only the cars with the defective ignition switches have been linked to fatalities... so it's not all 8 million cars they recalled today, only the ones they recalled for the faulty ignition switch. Others in today's recall total are for other issues (bad engine heater power cord insulation, fasteners torqued incorrectly at the factory, electrical overload problems, and power dor lock/power window switches).

And I ask again... if you know you've sold cars with faulty parts, at what point do you take that seriously and issue a recall? Never?