Mazda3i, 2.0 engine, Oil Level Issues
#41
03-05-2007, 03:20 AM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
It seems everyone is really getting "spun up" about the engine oil issue. Let me toss in my two cents.
There is a reason that the other auto makers are trying to copyToyota. They run their business very differently than the others,specifically the Big Three. Ironically, many of Toyota's recent problems have been caused by the U.S. plants run by former GM, and other domestic, employee's.
Ever read about "Andon" and how GM has implimented it at their plants? Morons if you ask me.
As for Ford...just to toss some mud...anybody losing that much money should qualify for a reward. Toyota is sitting on billions in cash reserves and Ford is losing billions every year. At what point do they go belly up? Who is going to loan them the next 40 billion if they are still losing money when it runs out?
There is a reason that the other auto makers are trying to copyToyota. They run their business very differently than the others,specifically the Big Three. Ironically, many of Toyota's recent problems have been caused by the U.S. plants run by former GM, and other domestic, employee's.
Ever read about "Andon" and how GM has implimented it at their plants? Morons if you ask me.
As for Ford...just to toss some mud...anybody losing that much money should qualify for a reward. Toyota is sitting on billions in cash reserves and Ford is losing billions every year. At what point do they go belly up? Who is going to loan them the next 40 billion if they are still losing money when it runs out?
#42
03-05-2007, 11:44 AM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
Hey blackdiamond, seeing as how you're willing to sling some mud, do you have any comments about the reasons above for the very different business situations between US/Japanese mfg? It's been widely reported in every form of press about the $3-4,000 advantage the Japanese have over the US auto industry due to the above reasons.
It's real easy to strictly look at the very different profits between the companies and to state that it's simply because the company is being run wrong....It's another thing altogether to look at the business realities of the industry and to make recommendations as to how the players within the industry can be treated fairly.
If things don't change in this country with regards to how people view their purchases, the American auto industry will go the way of the American electronics industry. Just look at the record trade deficits to see how skewed things are with regards to products being manufactured outside of this country simply because it is cheaper. Our products are heavily tariffed anywhere we export products to prevent us from getting a foothold in those markets, yet we don't impose any kind of tariffs on imports. The currently policies with regards to trade are essentially anti-US manufacturing in their result.
It's real easy to strictly look at the very different profits between the companies and to state that it's simply because the company is being run wrong....It's another thing altogether to look at the business realities of the industry and to make recommendations as to how the players within the industry can be treated fairly.
If things don't change in this country with regards to how people view their purchases, the American auto industry will go the way of the American electronics industry. Just look at the record trade deficits to see how skewed things are with regards to products being manufactured outside of this country simply because it is cheaper. Our products are heavily tariffed anywhere we export products to prevent us from getting a foothold in those markets, yet we don't impose any kind of tariffs on imports. The currently policies with regards to trade are essentially anti-US manufacturing in their result.
#43
03-05-2007, 05:53 PM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
ORIGINAL: sstlaure
I think it's funny that this thread got started because you thought your "piece of crap Ford dipstick" was manufactured incorrectly, and it turned out to be perfectly fine.
I think it's funny that this thread got started because you thought your "piece of crap Ford dipstick" was manufactured incorrectly, and it turned out to be perfectly fine.
The dipstick is the right length, yes,but itis extremely hard to read. I went to a junkyard, and got a regular old "blade" dipstick (turns out an automatic transmission dipstick out of anoldFord was about the right length). I have calibrated it to the right level (I scratched my own marks into it),and I now useit tocheck my oil.
#44
03-06-2007, 10:17 AM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
I agree that overall vehicle mileage needs to increase. You can increase mileageand make the playing field more fair in this market.....I would propose a 5 mpg increase across every vehicle segment, which would roughly be the equivalent of a 5 mpg CAFE increase. As the car vs truck balance in the market is roughly 50/50 (I think it has tipped back towards cars again with the recently higher gas prices)
But within each segment, there should be a MPG expectation set for that segment.
Small car 40 mpg
med car 30 mpg
large car 25 mpg
truck 20 mpg
By doing this, you put all of the players within that segment on an even playing field, so that you compete vehicle by vehicle, rather than portfolio vs portfolio....Toyota likes to tout how green and fuel efficient they are, but the new full-size Tundra that just came out will get maybe 13-15 mpg. Toyota doesn't have any motivation at all for this vehicle to get stellar mileage because their fleet is already heavy in fuel efficient cars. If the truck average were set at say 20 mpg, then regardless of how good mileage their other cars get, they would be tasked to get good mileage out of their trucks as well. (This would hold true for all manufacturers). By increasing CAFE within vehicle segments, you would then be challenging all of the manufacturers equally in getting better efficiency out of their vehicles (not just the ones that have traditionally supplied work industry vehicles like trucks), so that all players have to expend equal resources to maintain their position within the industry.
This would also allow for production numbers of each vehicle segmentto be set by demand for the specific vehicle. This allows you to operate at a profitable level and sustain the company. It's basic economics.
But within each segment, there should be a MPG expectation set for that segment.
Small car 40 mpg
med car 30 mpg
large car 25 mpg
truck 20 mpg
By doing this, you put all of the players within that segment on an even playing field, so that you compete vehicle by vehicle, rather than portfolio vs portfolio....Toyota likes to tout how green and fuel efficient they are, but the new full-size Tundra that just came out will get maybe 13-15 mpg. Toyota doesn't have any motivation at all for this vehicle to get stellar mileage because their fleet is already heavy in fuel efficient cars. If the truck average were set at say 20 mpg, then regardless of how good mileage their other cars get, they would be tasked to get good mileage out of their trucks as well. (This would hold true for all manufacturers). By increasing CAFE within vehicle segments, you would then be challenging all of the manufacturers equally in getting better efficiency out of their vehicles (not just the ones that have traditionally supplied work industry vehicles like trucks), so that all players have to expend equal resources to maintain their position within the industry.
This would also allow for production numbers of each vehicle segmentto be set by demand for the specific vehicle. This allows you to operate at a profitable level and sustain the company. It's basic economics.
#45
03-06-2007, 12:40 PM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
I agree, SST. Though well intended, the CAFE laws were really bone headed, as is a lot of government regulation/interference in the free market. They made people with families give up big cars and station wagons that, if they were built now would get 22 ot 25MPG on the highway, and move to SUV's which useat least20% more fuel and are actuallyLESS safe than the cars they replaced because they handle so poorly. Unintended consequences are a bitch.
#46
03-07-2007, 11:05 PM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
Without putting unreasonable restrictions on personal freedom, how do you get less people to drive big cars, large SUVs and trucks?
What I find sadly funny is seeing a 3 year old F150, with not one mark of any kind in the box, meaning the truck has never been used as a truck.
Or the family of 2 or 3 of average height with no pets who "need"the full size V8 equipped SUV.
The good thing about the high oil prices of last year was that suddenly fuel efficiency came back in fashion.
Better than CAFE would be, a $0.50 or $1.00 per gallon increase in tax on gasoline. The highway system all over the country needs major upgrades - use the money for that, and give people an incentive to buy the more efficient vehicle. And lessen our dependence on foreign oil in the process, reduce air pollution, etc. Unfortunately, our politicians don't have the cajones.
What I find sadly funny is seeing a 3 year old F150, with not one mark of any kind in the box, meaning the truck has never been used as a truck.
Or the family of 2 or 3 of average height with no pets who "need"the full size V8 equipped SUV.
The good thing about the high oil prices of last year was that suddenly fuel efficiency came back in fashion.
Better than CAFE would be, a $0.50 or $1.00 per gallon increase in tax on gasoline. The highway system all over the country needs major upgrades - use the money for that, and give people an incentive to buy the more efficient vehicle. And lessen our dependence on foreign oil in the process, reduce air pollution, etc. Unfortunately, our politicians don't have the cajones.
#47
03-08-2007, 01:06 AM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
High gas prices would take care of that....Look at Europe...They don't have the large trucks/SUVs that we do, but they pay $5-6/gallon....Is that what you want?
Wouldn't it make more sense to get those vehicles getting better mileage and still allow people to purchase those types of vehicles if they have a need?
Wouldn't it make more sense to get those vehicles getting better mileage and still allow people to purchase those types of vehicles if they have a need?
#48
03-10-2007, 08:25 PM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
ORIGINAL: sstlaure
High gas prices would take care of that....Look at Europe...They don't have the large trucks/SUVs that we do, but they pay $5-6/gallon....Is that what you want?
Wouldn't it make more sense to get those vehicles getting better mileage and still allow people to purchase those types of vehicles if they have a need?
High gas prices would take care of that....Look at Europe...They don't have the large trucks/SUVs that we do, but they pay $5-6/gallon....Is that what you want?
Wouldn't it make more sense to get those vehicles getting better mileage and still allow people to purchase those types of vehicles if they have a need?
The problem with a "CAFE by class" system (eg. you can sell as many trucks as you want, as long as those trucksget anaverage of 20 MPG)is ... what is to prevent Ford (for example) from selling nothing but Trucks that get 20 MPG?In order to reduce fuel consumption, CO2 emissions, etc, for the country as a whole,we need overall MPG for all vehicles on the road to improve - which is what CAFE pushes.
Could CAFE be better? Maybe, but having "CAFE by class" and allowing any automaker to sell an inordinate proportion of Trucks does not get us where we need to be. In fact, if CAFE was stronger in the past, a company like Ford would not have become so wrongly reliant on selling gas sucking vehicles ... and Ford would not now be in as much trouble as it is now.
#49
03-11-2007, 11:23 PM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
We sell the vehicles that people want to buy....period. They are willing to pay a certain penalty (high fuel consumption) for a certain amount of utility out of their vehicle. A "little more tax" won't get the job done. (if the job is to eliminate trucks/SUV's, I disagree with your overall line of thought, but you are entitled to your opinion.) In the last 10 years, gas prices have doubled, yet we still sell tons of full-size SUV's/trucks.
I predict you would have to have gas prices above $5/gallon range for people to really reconsider buying an SUV/truck
People want room for their 3 kids + their stuff, they want the ability to tow RVs, boats, etc....they buy trucks and SUV's. The only way to change the buying habits of the general public is to make these types of vehicles too expensive for them to operate (precisely what has occurred in Europe.) If they can afford these vehicles and the cost of upkeep, why shouldn't they be allowed to buy them and why shouldn't we build and sell them?...why shouldn't any company be able to choose which products it sells. Should a company be forced to produce a product that doesn't make any money? I sure don't think so. That doesn't sound like a free-market to me.
The difference between European and American buying habits (with respect to cars) can be summarized like this....the Europeans don't mind being a little cramped, or not being able to do a million things, or haul your kids + their friends in a single vehicle. They use multiple vehicle to do these things, or they rent trucks to use when they need them....In America, we want our vehicle to be able to do anything, go anywhere, and haul anything at anytime....We pay a premium for that kind of utility and versatility as the only way to package that kind of utility is in an SUV or truck...
I predict you would have to have gas prices above $5/gallon range for people to really reconsider buying an SUV/truck
People want room for their 3 kids + their stuff, they want the ability to tow RVs, boats, etc....they buy trucks and SUV's. The only way to change the buying habits of the general public is to make these types of vehicles too expensive for them to operate (precisely what has occurred in Europe.) If they can afford these vehicles and the cost of upkeep, why shouldn't they be allowed to buy them and why shouldn't we build and sell them?...why shouldn't any company be able to choose which products it sells. Should a company be forced to produce a product that doesn't make any money? I sure don't think so. That doesn't sound like a free-market to me.
The difference between European and American buying habits (with respect to cars) can be summarized like this....the Europeans don't mind being a little cramped, or not being able to do a million things, or haul your kids + their friends in a single vehicle. They use multiple vehicle to do these things, or they rent trucks to use when they need them....In America, we want our vehicle to be able to do anything, go anywhere, and haul anything at anytime....We pay a premium for that kind of utility and versatility as the only way to package that kind of utility is in an SUV or truck...
#50
03-13-2007, 01:40 AM
RE: Oil Level Issues -pics to prove it
ORIGINAL: sstlaure
We sell the vehicles that people want to buy....period. They are willing to pay a certain penalty (high fuel consumption) for a certain amount of utility out of their vehicle. A "little more tax" won't get the job done. (if the job is to eliminate trucks/SUV's, I disagree with your overall line of thought, but you are entitled to your opinion.) In the last 10 years, gas prices have doubled, yet we still sell tons of full-size SUV's/trucks.
I predict you would have to have gas prices above $5/gallon range for people to really reconsider buying an SUV/truck
People want room for their 3 kids + their stuff, they want the ability to tow RVs, boats, etc....they buy trucks and SUV's. The only way to change the buying habits of the general public is to make these types of vehicles too expensive for them to operate (precisely what has occurred in Europe.) If they can afford these vehicles and the cost of upkeep, why shouldn't they be allowed to buy them and why shouldn't we build and sell them?...why shouldn't any company be able to choose which products it sells. Should a company be forced to produce a product that doesn't make any money? I sure don't think so. That doesn't sound like a free-market to me.
The difference between European and American buying habits (with respect to cars) can be summarized like this....the Europeans don't mind being a little cramped, or not being able to do a million things, or haul your kids + their friends in a single vehicle. They use multiple vehicle to do these things, or they rent trucks to use when they need them....In America, we want our vehicle to be able to do anything, go anywhere, and haul anything at anytime....We pay a premium for that kind of utility and versatility as the only way to package that kind of utility is in an SUV or truck...
We sell the vehicles that people want to buy....period. They are willing to pay a certain penalty (high fuel consumption) for a certain amount of utility out of their vehicle. A "little more tax" won't get the job done. (if the job is to eliminate trucks/SUV's, I disagree with your overall line of thought, but you are entitled to your opinion.) In the last 10 years, gas prices have doubled, yet we still sell tons of full-size SUV's/trucks.
I predict you would have to have gas prices above $5/gallon range for people to really reconsider buying an SUV/truck
People want room for their 3 kids + their stuff, they want the ability to tow RVs, boats, etc....they buy trucks and SUV's. The only way to change the buying habits of the general public is to make these types of vehicles too expensive for them to operate (precisely what has occurred in Europe.) If they can afford these vehicles and the cost of upkeep, why shouldn't they be allowed to buy them and why shouldn't we build and sell them?...why shouldn't any company be able to choose which products it sells. Should a company be forced to produce a product that doesn't make any money? I sure don't think so. That doesn't sound like a free-market to me.
The difference between European and American buying habits (with respect to cars) can be summarized like this....the Europeans don't mind being a little cramped, or not being able to do a million things, or haul your kids + their friends in a single vehicle. They use multiple vehicle to do these things, or they rent trucks to use when they need them....In America, we want our vehicle to be able to do anything, go anywhere, and haul anything at anytime....We pay a premium for that kind of utility and versatility as the only way to package that kind of utility is in an SUV or truck...
I don't think you would need $5 a gallon. A year or so ago, when prices were 10-20% higher than they are now, auto sellers could not keep their efficient models in stock. A friend bought asedan that came with either an I4 or V6 engine, and she paid more for the I4 - they were offering deals on the V6s because no one wanted them. Gas was certainly nowhere near $5.My 2 cents opinion is that another $0.50 a gallon would make enough consumers make a different enough of a choice to help lower our fuel consumption substantially.
I'm going to stop short of getting into some big philosophical rant about buying middle eastern oil, and also air pollution. In summary, there are a lot of good reasons for us to collectively push ourselves to be more fuel efficient and less wasteful with respect to our gas consumption.