US Yaris to be imported from France ?

[Flipper_1938]

I WILL NOT BUY A FRENCH MADE CAR!

I have owned Toyotas since 1991. Not even Toyota can make the french build a GREAT car.

My 1991 toyota mini truck was great.
My 1984 Toyota landcruiser that followed it was great (I still have it).
My 2001 Toyota Echo that followed the Cruiser was GREAT!!!! (crashed at 318,000 miles)
The 2010 Yaris that followed the Echo has been pretty darn good so far.

All four were built in Japan.

My wife's 2005 Corrolla is OK, but not engineered or built to the same level as the Japan assembled ones. It is put together more like an american car.

[DebbyM46227]

Originally Posted by Flipper_1938

I WILL NOT BUY A FRENCH MADE CAR!

I have owned Toyotas since 1991. Not even Toyota can make the french build a GREAT car.

My 1991 toyota mini truck was great.
My 1984 Toyota landcruiser that followed it was great (I still have it).
My 2001 Toyota Echo that followed the Cruiser was GREAT!!!! (crashed at 318,000 miles)
The 2010 Yaris that followed the Echo has been pretty darn good so far.

All four were built in Japan.

My wife's 2005 Corrolla is OK, but not engineered or built to the same level as the Japan assembled ones. It is put together more like an american car.

ITA! I won't buy a French-made Yaris. I specifically chose a Yaris because it was made in Japan. Just like my 3 Honda CRX's I owned in the 80's up until 1997 when I got stupid and sold it to buy a Chevy Cavalier (only because my brother works for GM and I got the discount).

BTW, I still see my 1988 Honda CRX being driven around town. It doesn't look too great but it still keeps up with the rest of the cars.

[why?]

Originally Posted by tk-421

I just can't fathom a company like Toyota settling for worse quality in components and manufacturing just to save a few bucks, especially when one considers that doing recalls afterwards is one of the most expensive things that can happen to a car company. They need to be sure that their quality (at least in those areas) is top notch, simply because the alternative is much more expensive.

Another point that I would like to make is that things change. Japan used to build really bad electronics just a few decades ago, and US automotive quality standards was considered to be among the best in the world at the time.

Is there any chance that car production has evolved in the last 50 years to a point where the end product is exactly the same no matter which factory they came out of? I think there is. The thing about building machines with machines is that the outcome is predictable and can be controlled.

OTOH, is there a chance that even the most profitable companies make stupid mistakes like cutting corners in the manufacturing process, even if that means that the quality will most likely suffer? Of course there is.

So I guess that in the end it's up to the people at the top to decide. And with competition being the way it is these days, it just seems unlikely that they would introduce inferior components in one plant and better ones in another, or simply hire just anyone to be in charge of production and/or assembly. But I do acknowledge that everything is possible in this crazy world of ours.

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

I agree that competition plus automation in some areas has narrowed the gap so to speak, but I don't think we've gotten to the point where the human component has been wrung out of the quality equation...yet. A rising tide has definitely lifted all boats though re quality and that day is getting closer.


In the last paragraph of my previous post (when I was addressing the faith we all have in Japan built Toyotas no matter the different feelings we have about Toyotas manufactured elsewhere) I was thinking how great it is to have such faith in a company that has a wide enough product line that a customer can temporarily change course and then change back again if the original product is still worthy. If my Yaris lasts 4-5 years into the French production of the Yaris, that would probably be long enough to assess if a drop in quality from Japanese production has occurred. If my Yaris doesn't last that long I can always buy the Prius C/Yaris Hybrid/Aqua which is scheduled (from what I've read) to have production remain in Japan during the run of its current generation. I then could go back to the French built Yaris equivalent after the 'C' if the quality has remained at the level of my original Yaris.

One of the questions this thread triggered in my mind is what are the production location issues in the Honda Fit universe. I did a search and learned that the U.S. spec Fit will also be experiencing a migration re its production location. Starting with the 2014 model year, the U.S. spec Fit will be assembled in Mexico. A different hit on the same search discussed Honda's plans to cut its vehicle production within Japan by 50 percent by moving that production elsewhere. Yet another hit suggested that one of the motivations behind such plans is that Honda recently lost the #2 spot among Japanese auto makers to Nissan. The strong Yen is really having an effect accross the industry.

I don't believe the quality difference would have anything to do with Toyota's systems. They are world renowned and have been paid by other auto companies to teach them.

The problem is that different countries will have different components. You are not going to get the exact same components in a car made in france as a car made in the US or Japan. This has lead to issues in qualities in the past. Sometimes suppliers are the entire issue.

[tk-421]

Originally Posted by why?

The problem is that different countries will have different components. You are not going to get the exact same components in a car made in france as a car made in the US or Japan. This has lead to issues in qualities in the past. Sometimes suppliers are the entire issue.

How long in the past? I need someone to back this up with some sort of proof. I don't mind being wrong (in fact, sometimes I actually prefer it), but in my mind it just doesn't make financial sense to do this, short- or long-term.

Think about it: The more you buy of exactly the same thing, the cheaper it becomes. For example, buying 10,000 lug nuts made of stainless steel for the US market and then buying 10,000 nuts made of aluminium for the French market will indeed cost more than just getting 20,000 of SS lug nuts for every market in the first place.

But even if that weren't the case (maybe they have some sort of government subsidy on aluminium in that region), it would still cost them much, much more in the long run to recall tens of thousands of vehicles to exchange the crappy lug nuts at the factory. Not only that, but the image that would project onto consumers (and even worse, potential consumers) would compound the problem even more so.

So, again, unless someone can prove to me that a recent enough car (manufactured within the last 10 years mostly by robots) is a POS not because of the quality of the design, or the way it was maintained, or the quality of the roads in the area, but directly because of a crappy part or factory worker which can only be found in France, or Mexico, or Thailand, or whatever, I will not be satisfied with that explanation (nor should anyone else IMHO). Until then I will maintain that some of those comments are baseless, and others even biased and bordering on racist.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by tk-421

How long in the past? I need someone to back this up with some sort of proof. I don't mind being wrong (in fact, sometimes I actually prefer it), but in my mind it just doesn't make financial sense to do this, short- or long-term.

Think about it: The more you buy of exactly the same thing, the cheaper it becomes. For example, buying 10,000 lug nuts made of stainless steel for the US market and then buying 10,000 nuts made of aluminium for the French market will indeed cost more than just getting 20,000 of SS lug nuts for every market in the first place.

But even if that weren't the case (maybe they have some sort of government subsidy on aluminium in that region), it would still cost them much, much more in the long run to recall tens of thousands of vehicles to exchange the crappy lug nuts at the factory. Not only that, but the image that would project onto consumers (and even worse, potential consumers) would compound the problem even more so.

So, again, unless someone can prove to me that a recent enough car (manufactured within the last 10 years mostly by robots) is a POS not because of the quality of the design, or the way it was maintained, or the quality of the roads in the area, but directly because of a crappy part which can only be found in France, or Mexico, or Thailand, or whatever, I will not be satisfied with that explanation (nor should anyone else IMHO). Until then I will maintain that some of those comments are baseless, and others even biased and bordering on racist.

In each of the three articles I mentioned in my last paragraph on post #96 one of the central themes was the trend toward the most localized content possible for each market. This would prompt me to ask how large a role transportation costs(+potential tariffs+taxes+concessions) might play in the overall equation. From what I gathered from these articles, they might play a significant role.

I think the participants on this particular thread can be grouped into two categories (among others)--1. Those who want more information and want a more comprehensive view of the overall situation, and 2. Those who don't. I agree that it could be argued that some of the comments ( smelly French savages , lazy Mexicans, etc.) are borderline racist, but I think ALL of those comments fall into my second category above. They don't care about learning anything from this discussion, so I think bringing that up is kind of a red herring as none of us who has continued to post on this thread has been part of that category.

The illustration you make in the 'Think about it' section of your post makes sense (Economy of Scale), but it only makes sense in a naked way if the other related costs are the same....and they may or may not be depending on the location.

[Flipper_1938]

The french don't have a good track record of building anything great.

The japan has decades worth of history of building great little cars that will last 500,000 miles with no special treatment.

I am a loyal Toyota buyer because of the great little cars!

[tk-421]

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

I can think of two possibilities---1. Availability, and 2. Transportation Costs (and how the transportation costs might effect the overall production cost). In the U.S. (as was promoted to the general public nationwide during the financial crisis) auto makers share suppliers. If this practice is similar in another 'outside Japan' market, then Toyota would likely not be at a competitive disadvantage to other manufacturers re what was being produced within that market.

Regarding availability of raw materials, I can safely state that some of the countries that a few people here are having problems with have a huge advantage over some of the more established "car making countries". I'm not going to go into details here, but 5 mins. spent on Wikipedia will give anyone a good enough idea of how raw materials are distributed around the world. Mexico, for example, has ample amounts of pretty much everything that's needed to build a car from scratch, whereas Japan tends to have a bit of a harder time getting everything together (which is why is costs more to build a Prius than a Hummer).

Regarding transportation costs, I would think that moving an entire production line to Mexico to cater to the US and Canada markets would be a huge plus as well, considering that it would be somewhat cheaper to move finished cars up the border instead of across the ocean.

Then again, they are going to be building cars in France and moving them across yet another ocean so, like you say, there must be other factors at play...

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

The illustration you make in the 'Think about it' section of your post makes sense (Economy of Scale), but it only makes sense in a naked way if the other related costs are the same....and they may or may not be depending on the location.

I think keeping costs low is only part of the equation. Keeping current customers loyal and gaining new ones is of crucial importance as well. But if I were to boil it all down to one word, it would be this: Consistency. It is unequivocally the most important thing for any company in any market. You have to hit as many high marks with as little money as you possibly can, and you have to do it reliably enough.

In my opinion, Toyota has been very consistent over the years, and I would think they would rather perform mass-harakiri before they started gambling with something that takes so much time and dedication to earn. If they're willing to move entire factories (and thus deprive their local population of jobs), I'm pretty sure it's for very good reasons (i.e. there has to be some advantage to building cars on areas that don't have earthquakes every 5 minutes).

I guess that's basically why I'm being so stubborn about this. That and my general faith in people, no matter where they sprouted from. Sure, there are many bad apples out there, but I think most people mean to do good (as in good products, good deeds, etc) if they're given a fair shake. And that's what consistency is all about, right?

Originally Posted by Flipper_1938

The french don't have a good track record of building anything great.

[Sirius-XM]

Originally Posted by Flipper_1938

The french don't have a good track record of building anything great.

Except maybe the Statue of Liberty, she's held together pretty good for the past 125 years. Same for The Eiffel Tower. Mirages are great jet fighters.

Growing up, my father had a Renault 10. It was relatively trouble free. My father replaced it with a Dodge Aspen that started rusting before it was a year old.

The Renault 10 was a super cool car. Push button automatic transmission. The horn was on a stalk. Ugly as sin. We used to drive up Bear Mountain in NYS. Going uphill was not it's strong point.

http://img2.netcarshow.com/Renault-1...llpaper_02.jpg

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by why?

I don't believe the quality difference would have anything to do with Toyota's systems. They are world renowned and have been paid by other auto companies to teach them.

The problem is that different countries will have different components. You are not going to get the exact same components in a car made in france as a car made in the US or Japan. This has lead to issues in qualities in the past. Sometimes suppliers are the entire issue.

This ^^^^^. The logic tk-421 used in his last post made perfect sense, but I still felt something was missing because production END RESULT is still not interchangeable around the world. One of the questions I posed in post #62 (Are the materials different?) re why MRPJ might have had some of the experiences that he did, was a more generalized thought relating to the 'physicality' of the car and not any processes. My even more generalized prior thought was; What are the inputs into the overall equation? (there are only a few). I really (truly) wanted the best explanation as to why the location change might, based on current experiences from that area, lead to less owner satisfaction.

Billiam stated he didn't have answers to my questions in post #62 and just kept harping on the processes and his 'superior knowledge', yet wouldn't use this knowledge to illustrate why his beliefs are true. I think this was partially because his 'dander was up', so to speak. His 'dander was up' , IMHO, because he didn't like your (IMHO valid) critique of parts of the U.S. workforce. He described his own workplace and it is obvious that he and his co-workers pride themselves on a job well done. Given that (and that his superiors acknowledged and validated that pride), I don't understand why his 'dander would be up'.....If he is secure in the knowledge of his own pride and skill plus that of his co-workers and all of that is validated by management, why does he care what anyone else's view is of unrelated (to him) parts of the U.S. workforce?

I think your explanation in the post above makes the most sense. One might ask, why wouldn't the parts being purchased in Japan for use in plants in Japan then just be purchased in greater quantities and used around the world? I can think of two possibilities---1. Availability, and 2. Transportation Costs (and how the transportation costs might effect the overall production cost). In the U.S. (as was promoted to the general public nationwide during the financial crisis) auto makers share suppliers. If this practice is similar in another 'outside Japan' market, then Toyota would likely not be at a competitive disadvantage to other manufacturers re what was being produced within that market.