Car and Driver Comparison: 2016 Tacoma v. 2016 Colorado

I would suggest this statement is fairly correct. Ford had to fight hand over fist to move a significant portion of engine manufacturing to Kansas. Which is hilarious because if that didn't work it would of moved to Windsor right out of the USA.

 

You clearly need to do a bit of research on not only where vehicles are made, but where the profits go. While Toyota does have SOME of their vehicles made in the USA, for reputation purposes, the money they make goes back to Japan.

 

GM isn't a primary industry. Primary industries produce raw materials. GM is a secondary industry. A manufacturer that produces goods from the raw materials.

Usually government support of the primary industries is to protect national resources and keep them under internal ownership, which I can agree with to some extent.

 

Did I ever mention Toyota. Nice topic shift there .

I mentioned Ford.

Oh, and I suppose all that banked corporate money and huge corporate salaries feeds right back into the economy right? Nope, I didn't think so. It's the money paid to the common worker and middle men that ends up fueling the economy.

 

While not a majority of spare tires are run flat, it seems some high end car companies are using them on some of their cars.

"Run-flat tires are standard on 12 percent of new vehicles, according to Edmunds data. Traditionally, carmakers have used run-flat tires on sports cars, but in recent years they have started to use them for other cars, too. Cadillac and BMW, for example, have made run-flat tires standard on a number of their sedans."
http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/run-flat-tires-a-primer.html

 

I would care to disagree with you on some of this. When it comes to really all 3 of the major US brands (GM, Ford, Chrysler) there is more to support and jobs than just their plants. The thought that there would not be a significant job loss if any of the 3 had gone under is a bit under-thought here. For 1 example: Assuming GM went bankrupt. Even if 80% of the employees could find immediate employment, or simply retire out of the workforce, you would still have 40,000 people without a job. If you look at the buyout and reconstruction, they laid off 20,000 people when they restructured. So already jobs were lost. Then let's look at supporting companies like Delphi, who would stand to lose million of dollars in sales. (Delphi is a division of GM, and purported that if GM foundered, they would have to lay off 75% of their employees to remain fluid in the marketplace) Then look at all of the dealerships that would close. All of THOSE people without a job trying to find work. Steel manufacturers, plastic manufacturers, electronic parts and supplies, overseas corporate concerns from suppliers there, etc, etc... All would suffer a hard hit. THAT is the main reason for the bailout, not some political gain. That is just conspiracy theory stuff there. I worked for GM for 20+ years and was there during the concerns of bankruptcy. There we many of us who were very concerned about the economic disaster that could have fallen.


As for this comparison test, I do not think they took into account one of a buyer's primary concerns with the trucks, and that is resale value. We all know Toyota trucks have notoriously held their resale value FAR better than GM has. Also I find it interesting that the Tacoma had many results that were better, but somehow scored lower? Sure, the 1/4 mile was VERY slightly slower (only .5 seconds), but the speed at the 1/4 was higher, the braking was better, and the handling G-force was better. Plus you have to look and compare WHY people are buying this type of truck. Most of the customers I knew at GM bought 4WD mid size trucks to have a truck they can carry small loads with, without the need for a full sized truck, and be able to handle if there was rain.( Their purpose for 4WD) Most Tacoma people I have met buy a 4WD to go off-road. And even the C&D magazine gave the Tacoma props for that "Off Road Ability, Quality Feel,....."

I had worked for GM for 20+ years, and I know that the Tacoma is still a better truck than the Colorado when looking at PURPOSE. The Colorado may be all new and flashy, but that is all it is: Flashy.

 

You must be a shareholder.

 

Thanks BamaToy1997 !! Everytime I read quotes like yours just confirms I'm making the right decision to trade my 27 APR 15 built Colorado WT in on a new 16 Tacoma. Thanks man! And have a good day.[/QUOTE]

Glad I could help!

 

All in all I just believe that the too big to fail approach eventually leads to the too big to bailout ending which will bring even more sever pain. Time will tell.

 

I'm pretty sure the airbag/ignition debacle showed that GM has a new coat of paint but the same guts underneath. We can talk about it in a decade I suppose.

 

Glad I could help![/QUOTE]

Oh please. And I am sure the Escalade, Camero, Tahoe and Silverado are garbage, right? Every year, every one made.. .all flash....

I'm having a hell of a better time with my 2013 CTS Cadillac than our Sienna.....go figure. lol

 

355nation is calling you. I think you'll find more head nodders there too.

 

Most American made cars: https://www.cars.com/articles/the-2015-american-made-index-1420680649381/
Not 1 Ford on the list. Of only 7 with 75% or more domestic content, 4 are made by GM.

Here is a in depth study including all aspects of what is American made in a car/truck. In this one, GM dominated. http://www.american.edu/kogod/autoindex/2015.cfm

 

Kinda odd that the Silverado is the 2nd best selling vehicle in the US, right behind the F150, year after year..... man, people just must be dumb.... or maybe they just never heard of Toyota....or maybe, hmmm....going out on a limb here....maybe just maybe, the Silverado (like the Tahoe) is a good F'n truck....wait, no that can't be...not without any Japanese involved... lmao

 

Yes, because the Corvette, Traverse, and Acadia are the backbones of the GM brand . If you look at the graph on the website you posted those models supported less than 10,000 worker together at all stages of manufactuing. More than double that amount of workers assemble just the F150. You can twist the data any way you want. The F150 frame, engine, and final assembly are all done in the USA or Canada. It is their flagship and their top seller. That matters to me.

 

You should try actually reading the articles/studies instead of looking at the pictures.

 

It's #2 for a reason. Even this year when Ford didn't build trucks for almost 3 months due to supply issues with a totally new construction method and material for both body and frame it managed to outsell the Silverado.

It's your silver medal. Literally. Why are you even on Tacomaworld lol.

 

Actually if you combine the Sierra and the Silverado sales together, because they are from the SAME COMPANY, they have outsold Ford trucks. Once again, you fail to do basic research before you open your mouth.

 

http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html

Here, I made it easier for you Sterdog... Basic math should help you do the proper totals. Not to mention adding the other trucks GM makes...

 

I did read it. Hence why I know the 75% number is falling year over year due to more distributed production of every little odd and end. Every little additional bit in a modern vehicle is counted the same as each other. Whether it's the relay for a windshield wiper or the transmission it's counted as one. I don't think that accurately reflects the true impact of the manufacturing of a vehicle. The imagery simply reflects how few workers most of the remaining 75% of greater qualifying vehicles actually support. You disagree. You know what? That's okay. I read and interpreted the article from a strict employment sense and you are not.