Wow, is this true about GM?
- Thread starter Popinski
- Start date
- Status
Don’t know how true it is, but I’ve been told that the Swedish Government mandated that Saab automobiles be constructed to last at least 20-years. Then every now and then I see an older Saab on the road.
Originally Posted By: CompSyn
Then every now and then I see an older Saab on the road.
And every now and then I see an older car on the road that isn't a Saab.
You can find older Saabs (and other cars) at junk yards, too.
Then every now and then I see an older Saab on the road.
And every now and then I see an older car on the road that isn't a Saab.
You can find older Saabs (and other cars) at junk yards, too.
Originally Posted By: andyd
planned obselescence takes a back seat to supply and demand. Those very same 50s cars with a 3 yr planned lifespan have lasted 50yrs in Cuba, with no spare parts!
Cuban cars have been modified with whatever parts can be had, they're merely shells of their former selves, Toyota suspensions, Hino diesels, anything goes. they're around because of ingenuity and necessity of the owners, not because of the quality of the cars. Some do look great good from a far.
planned obselescence takes a back seat to supply and demand. Those very same 50s cars with a 3 yr planned lifespan have lasted 50yrs in Cuba, with no spare parts!
Cuban cars have been modified with whatever parts can be had, they're merely shells of their former selves, Toyota suspensions, Hino diesels, anything goes. they're around because of ingenuity and necessity of the owners, not because of the quality of the cars. Some do look great good from a far.
Originally Posted By: CompSyn
Don’t know how true it is, but I’ve been told that the Swedish Government mandated that Saab automobiles be constructed to last at least 20-years. Then every now and then I see an older Saab on the road.
That's why the lifespan of an 80's vintage 900's headliner was 5 minutes. As misty-eyed as I can get about my 2 SAABs, about all I can say is they do have a good solid thud when you slam the door shut. When I got into my first SAAB to take a test drive, my wife's Eclipse soon felt like it had all the rigidity of a paper airplane.
Don’t know how true it is, but I’ve been told that the Swedish Government mandated that Saab automobiles be constructed to last at least 20-years. Then every now and then I see an older Saab on the road.
That's why the lifespan of an 80's vintage 900's headliner was 5 minutes. As misty-eyed as I can get about my 2 SAABs, about all I can say is they do have a good solid thud when you slam the door shut. When I got into my first SAAB to take a test drive, my wife's Eclipse soon felt like it had all the rigidity of a paper airplane.
Originally Posted By: Popinski
First of all, I am not intentionally making this political, I want to this to be automotive.
I watching a Michael Moore video and he said that GM invented a strategy where they purposely designed the product to last only 3 years so they could buy again in the 1950's. Today, even though it's obsolete with cars, many electronic companies are following GM's strategy. Is this true!?!?
If it is true Ford didn't seem follow G.M. with the Crown Victoria,Grand Marquis,and Town Car...Those cars last 400K miles with the original computers and most everything else.
First of all, I am not intentionally making this political, I want to this to be automotive.
I watching a Michael Moore video and he said that GM invented a strategy where they purposely designed the product to last only 3 years so they could buy again in the 1950's. Today, even though it's obsolete with cars, many electronic companies are following GM's strategy. Is this true!?!?
If it is true Ford didn't seem follow G.M. with the Crown Victoria,Grand Marquis,and Town Car...Those cars last 400K miles with the original computers and most everything else.
Kestas
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Popinski
I watching a Michael Moore video and he said that GM invented a strategy where they purposely designed the product to last only 3 years so they could buy again in the 1950's.
That's only half the equation. We are a supply-and-demand market. An automaker can invent any strategy they want, but people have to buy into it, and vote with their pocketbook. Some vote yes, some vote no.
People like Michael Moore like to bash the automakers as evil entities manipulating helpless people, when in reality the consumers deserve some of the bashing.
I watching a Michael Moore video and he said that GM invented a strategy where they purposely designed the product to last only 3 years so they could buy again in the 1950's.
That's only half the equation. We are a supply-and-demand market. An automaker can invent any strategy they want, but people have to buy into it, and vote with their pocketbook. Some vote yes, some vote no.
People like Michael Moore like to bash the automakers as evil entities manipulating helpless people, when in reality the consumers deserve some of the bashing.
Agreed. Automakers are playing to our own vanities and desires. Witness the need for ever suburbanite to buy an off-road capable 4wd over the past decade and a half. That's why I don't fault GM for at least SOME of their mess. SUVs gave them high margins and we wanted them!
The automakers advertising led us "the consumer" into wanting them, "SUV", just as they did in the later "50's & early '60's with the first ecno cars ie; Falcon & Corvair.
The tobacco companies did the same with their product. The masses of people are lead around by the few. How else are elections won?
The tobacco companies did the same with their product. The masses of people are lead around by the few. How else are elections won?
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Agreed. Automakers are playing to our own vanities and desires. Witness the need for ever suburbanite to buy an off-road capable 4wd over the past decade and a half. That's why I don't fault GM for at least SOME of their mess. SUVs gave them high margins and we wanted them!
the SUV is the anti-minivan. w/o trying to be sexist, so many women felt empowered by tall powerful trucks that didn't look all dowdy like a FWD little van.
of course, pretend suburban tough guys liked them too; I love the ones w/ brush guards, off road lights AND 24" blingy wheels.
I excuse myself by having a 4WD minivan, hah!
Agreed. Automakers are playing to our own vanities and desires. Witness the need for ever suburbanite to buy an off-road capable 4wd over the past decade and a half. That's why I don't fault GM for at least SOME of their mess. SUVs gave them high margins and we wanted them!
the SUV is the anti-minivan. w/o trying to be sexist, so many women felt empowered by tall powerful trucks that didn't look all dowdy like a FWD little van.
of course, pretend suburban tough guys liked them too; I love the ones w/ brush guards, off road lights AND 24" blingy wheels.
I excuse myself by having a 4WD minivan, hah!
Now we "the consumer" is being told how great the new electric cars will be with no thought of just where the monies are going to come from for road repair and maintence as there will be a huge drop in gasoline tax revenue.
Also just how is the present electric grid supposed to hold up with the increase in usage from charging batteries. Remember the Calif. brownouts from just a couple of years ago.
Also just how is the present electric grid supposed to hold up with the increase in usage from charging batteries. Remember the Calif. brownouts from just a couple of years ago.
Consider the source........
Originally Posted By: Popinski
First of all, I am not intentionally making this political, I want to this to be automotive.
I watching a Michael Moore video and he said that GM invented a strategy where they purposely designed the product to last only 3 years so they could buy again in the 1950's. Today, even though it's obsolete with cars, many electronic companies are following GM's strategy. Is this true!?!?
GMH down here tried to get the Govt to impose "design life" constraints on motor vehicle registration, arguing that the "design life" of the car was 80,000km, and the car should be off the road after they exceed same.
MTA (Motor Trades Assn) also tried to get home mechanics banned on safety reasons.
As to electronics, that's no where more demonstrated in large Distributed Control Systems.
10 years, and they no longer support their "obsolete" equipment.
First of all, I am not intentionally making this political, I want to this to be automotive.
I watching a Michael Moore video and he said that GM invented a strategy where they purposely designed the product to last only 3 years so they could buy again in the 1950's. Today, even though it's obsolete with cars, many electronic companies are following GM's strategy. Is this true!?!?
GMH down here tried to get the Govt to impose "design life" constraints on motor vehicle registration, arguing that the "design life" of the car was 80,000km, and the car should be off the road after they exceed same.
MTA (Motor Trades Assn) also tried to get home mechanics banned on safety reasons.
As to electronics, that's no where more demonstrated in large Distributed Control Systems.
10 years, and they no longer support their "obsolete" equipment.
Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Agreed. Automakers are playing to our own vanities and desires. Witness the need for ever suburbanite to buy an off-road capable 4wd over the past decade and a half. That's why I don't fault GM for at least SOME of their mess. SUVs gave them high margins and we wanted them!
the SUV is the anti-minivan. w/o trying to be sexist, so many women felt empowered by tall powerful trucks that didn't look all dowdy like a FWD little van.
of course, pretend suburban tough guys liked them too; I love the ones w/ brush guards, off road lights AND 24" blingy wheels.
I excuse myself by having a 4WD minivan, hah!
No, you're exactly right. Station wagons were so out of vogue by the 80's. First, every mom had to have a minivan. Then, when the 90's rolled around, the SUV craze was driven by a quest to get out of those things. But the point is, there would have been no SUV craze if people weren't buying them. You can't convince EVERYONE that they need a certain car. They've got to make that decision for themselves. More people than Ford could have ever imagined bought the Bronco II. Enter, the Explorer. I remember my older brother bought one the second they came out. It was definately an "it" car to have. GM also came out with a new Suburban at about the same time. All the sudden, it was THE family vehicle to have. I got my CR-V b/c with my limited knowledge of 4wd, I thought it was an okay compromise between fuel economy and off-road capability that I needed every now and then. Thank goodness I stumbled into a job with a company truck before I ever had to use it.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
Agreed. Automakers are playing to our own vanities and desires. Witness the need for ever suburbanite to buy an off-road capable 4wd over the past decade and a half. That's why I don't fault GM for at least SOME of their mess. SUVs gave them high margins and we wanted them!
the SUV is the anti-minivan. w/o trying to be sexist, so many women felt empowered by tall powerful trucks that didn't look all dowdy like a FWD little van.
of course, pretend suburban tough guys liked them too; I love the ones w/ brush guards, off road lights AND 24" blingy wheels.
I excuse myself by having a 4WD minivan, hah!
No, you're exactly right. Station wagons were so out of vogue by the 80's. First, every mom had to have a minivan. Then, when the 90's rolled around, the SUV craze was driven by a quest to get out of those things. But the point is, there would have been no SUV craze if people weren't buying them. You can't convince EVERYONE that they need a certain car. They've got to make that decision for themselves. More people than Ford could have ever imagined bought the Bronco II. Enter, the Explorer. I remember my older brother bought one the second they came out. It was definately an "it" car to have. GM also came out with a new Suburban at about the same time. All the sudden, it was THE family vehicle to have. I got my CR-V b/c with my limited knowledge of 4wd, I thought it was an okay compromise between fuel economy and off-road capability that I needed every now and then. Thank goodness I stumbled into a job with a company truck before I ever had to use it.
As mentioned before, it is called planned obsolescence. All, or most companies use this to a certain extent. Even the beloved Toyota Motor Company that can do no wrong. I'm not saying it is right, but it makes good business sense. What do car companies do? Make and sell cars. If people buy cars and keep them for 20+ years, are the companies making any money? No. Sure, most people will get sick of their car before it destroys itself. Most people I know buy a new car every 3-6 years.
You want to know planned obsolecance? I used to work with Richard Strnard. I asked him what he used to do in the 70's. He said" I was a salt consultant paid by GM to advise the state of New York about which types of salt they should use". So naturally I asked "what types of salt did you advise them to use?" His reply "salts that attacked foreign steels faster than domestic steels. If you owned a Mercedes in NY you were rust busted". Oh man, that's cold. The life span of your car's electronics is highly calculated. The semiconductors have a 12- 15 year life span. I used to do failure analysis for National Semiconductor and we made a lot of the chips in your car (yes, YOUR car. National has chips in EVERY car). We knew exactly how many cycles a chip would last, and they don't last forever. They may as well put a counter in your car telling you how many more morning starts you are allowed.
You will die one day, because of planned obsolescence. Sea turtles can live 150 years. Try counting the rings on a sequoia.
Originally Posted By: BrianWC
No, you're exactly right. Station wagons were so out of vogue by the 80's. First, every mom had to have a minivan. Then, when the 90's rolled around, the SUV craze was driven by a quest to get out of those things. But the point is, there would have been no SUV craze if people weren't buying them. You can't convince EVERYONE that they need a certain car.
No, haven't you been paying attention? GM put something in our water that made us all wake up one morning and want to buy an SUV.
No, you're exactly right. Station wagons were so out of vogue by the 80's. First, every mom had to have a minivan. Then, when the 90's rolled around, the SUV craze was driven by a quest to get out of those things. But the point is, there would have been no SUV craze if people weren't buying them. You can't convince EVERYONE that they need a certain car.
No, haven't you been paying attention? GM put something in our water that made us all wake up one morning and want to buy an SUV.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
