OT: The first Made in China car coming to North America…..

[Coronita]

…And it will most likely be a Volvo 🙂

S60 or eventually XC90

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/business/international/volvo-introduces-its-first-suv-made-under-chinese-ownership.html?_r=0

STOCKHOLM — Volvo on Tuesday introduced its first vehicle designed and built under Chinese ownership. But the influence, if any, of the new owners from Hangzhou has been carefully hidden by many layers of Swedish aesthetic.

The vehicle, a seven-seat sport utility vehicle known as the XC90 that will go on sale in April, is probably a make-or-break model for Volvo. It must succeed for the company to regain stature in America, where a few decades ago — before the advent of S.U.V.s — the Volvo station wagon was a suburban status symbol.

It will be sold in Europe and Asia, too, but Volvo expects the United States to account for at least a third of sales. The carmaker wants to replace BMW, Mercedes and Audi S.U.V.s in the driveways of the well-to-do.

Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE

Saab’s aerospace heritage is evident in the so-called Ur-Saab, a 1946 prototype of the first Saab car, now on display at the Saab Museum in Trollhattan.The Divergent Fortunes of Saab and VolvoOCT. 24, 2011
Volvo in a Deal to Be Sold to Company in ChinaMARCH 28, 2010
Since Zhejiang Geely Holding bought the company from Ford Motor in 2010, China has become Volvo Cars’ largest market. But that is partly because sales in other markets have been poor. Sales in the United States fell 10 percent during the same period, and Volvo’s American market share has shrunk to a nearly irrelevant 0.35 percent.

Still, the car company, separate from the Volvo Group, a truck maker, has returned to profit after losses in late 2012 and early 2013, and sales rose 10 percent in the first half of this year, to 229,000 cars.

To achieve its goal of doubling global sales to 800,000 vehicles a year, Volvo is promoting its traditional emphasis on passenger safety while pumping up the elegance, albeit in a restrained Swedish way. Along with a shock-absorbing seat meant to protect a passenger’s spine in a crash, and automatic braking to avoid collisions with people or other cars, the XC90 has a shift lever inlaid with Swedish-made glass crystal.

Volvo said its goal was to ensure that, by 2020, no one would be killed or seriously injured in a Volvo car.

[spdrun]

That’s not a car, it’s a farking sensory deprivation barge on wheels. G-d do I hate trucks and crossdresser utility vehicles.

A CAR is something like a Miata, BR-Z, Tesla Roadster, or Tesla Model S.

[The-Shoveler]

I want to see this thing hit the market.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2014/06/24/the-tiny-three-wheel-car-that-could-be-the-next-big-thing/

Great for just commuting to work and back IMO.

Volvo was never high on my list of cars I want to own.

[ucodegen]

This doesn’t make me feel very good about Volvos now. I have seen several crash tests on current Chinese manufactured vehicles. Very scary. Some of these are Chinese knock-offs of high end German and Japanese vehicles.

Possibly some dup portions above. The Chinese are supposedly getting better, though in general with Chinese products, I am very careful. There is some very good mixed in with lots of crap. My drop box wrenches are made in Chinese, and are made of Chrome Vanadium – not mild steel. Much tougher than anything Sears, Snap-on or Matco put out.

http://jalopnik.com/why-the-chinese-qoros-3s-euro-crash-test-victory-is-a-1383336053

—

Think I know why Volvo is considering the ‘Chinese’ option. They got bought by Chinese car maker Geely.
http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/chinas-crashtest-flunky-20101021-16v6c.html

The Chinese car that did well in the crash test was not a ‘Geely’ vehicle.

[Coronita]

[quote=ucodegen]This doesn’t make me feel very good about Volvos now. I have seen several crash tests on current Chinese manufactured vehicles. Very scary. Some of these are Chinese knock-offs of high end German and Japanese vehicles.

Possibly some dup portions above. The Chinese are supposedly getting better, though in general with Chinese products, I am very careful. There is some very good mixed in with lots of crap. My drop box wrenches are made in Chinese, and are made of Chrome Vanadium – not mild steel. Much tougher than anything Sears, Snap-on or Matco put out.

http://jalopnik.com/why-the-chinese-qoros-3s-euro-crash-test-victory-is-a-1383336053

—

Think I know why Volvo is considering the ‘Chinese’ option. They got bought by Chinese car maker Geely.
http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/chinas-crashtest-flunky-20101021-16v6c.html

The Chinese car that did well in the crash test was not a ‘Geely’ vehicle.[/quote]

It will be fine… Some of the Buicks are designed in Shanghai now. And a good portion of the parts are from China now.. Most people just aren’t aware of it yet (or are in denial of it).

Motorcraft branded rotors come to mind.

It’s about product evolution. The japanese were in the same sitation in the early eighties.

The koreans were in the same situation in the 90ies, and they were able to close the gap in much less time.

Looks like the chinese automakers are trying to do the same.

[ucodegen]

[quote=flu]It will be fine… Some of the Buicks are designed in Shanghai now. And a good portion of the parts are from China now.. Most people just aren’t aware of it yet (or are in denial of it).[/quote]

I think there are going to be some definite teething pains. Much of USA corporate ‘think’ likes to believe in off-shoring it, just collecting the money as it rolls in and ignoring having to quality check what arrives back here. I have seen too much of that, including from maquiladoras.

The Chinese also have a different culture when it comes to work, and making money. For them – it is literally anything goes, what ever they can get away with. Though I also have to mention that some Chinese manufacturers don’t seem to operate with the ‘anything goes’ mentality, and end up producing quality products; but they tend to be a minority.

The Japanese and Korean cultures are different (not saying that Korean’s and Japanese get along, they generally don’t). Both Japanese and Koreans have a ‘honor’ aspect to work products. Their cultures also tend to be ‘conformist’. Very few if any attempts to create fake eggs and sell them as real, putting things in ramen that really don’t belong there, melamine in milk.. etc. – and if/when it occurs, it ends up being very embarrassing to them.

As to whether the ‘anything goes’ attitude from Chinese extends to expats, I think it depends upon how they grew up in the US, if they are first, second, third or.. generation, when their parents emigrated. I have met all types in a University.

Note:
Ford rotors and Motorcraft rotors are not the same. Motorcraft is not Ford OEM.
Motorcraft BRR64
Ford F8VZ-1125-AA
— The Motorcraft rotors are made in China, the Ford OEMs are made in Canada.

another ref:
http://www.fordparts.com/landing/ourbrands.aspx

[quote flu]It’s about product evolution. The japanese were in the same sitation in the early eighties.

The koreans were in the same situation in the 90ies, and they were able to close the gap in much less time.

Looks like the chinese automakers are trying to do the same.[/quote]I agree. That is why brought up Greely-Volvo vs the one Chinese car company that did well on their own with the crash test. I suspect Greely is trying to ‘buy’ the tech and knowledge though the purchase of Volvo, or maybe trying to buy the safety ‘perception’ through the purchase of Volvo – with Volvo’s safety record then being sacrificed. The question ends up being; what will the Geely Chinese corporate culture due to the quality of Volvo?

[svelte]

[quote=ucodegen]
Both Japanese and Koreans have a ‘honor’ aspect to work products. [/quote]

I hear this from some folks and it always cracks me up.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/08/20/japanese-spark-plug-ngk-pleads-guilty-price-fixing/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-09/olympus-sued-for-273-million-after-13-year-fraud.html

http://www.denverpost.com/dater/ci_14865683?source=pkg

“The ES 300 and Camry are essentially the same cars with similar bumper systems, so it’s not surprising that their performances in the 5 mph tests also were similar. The biggest difference was in the pole test. The rear bumper systems on both cars include steel inserts in the middle of the foam in the rear bumpers. This energy-absorbing insert, placed exactly where the car hits the pole in the Institute’s test, would manage the energy of a low-speed crash in only a narrow range of impacts, so the pole tests of these vehicles were conducted slightly off-center.”

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/desktopnews/5-mph-crash-tests-none-of-9-midsize-cars-earns-good-rating-for-bumper-performance-5-of-the-9-are-poor

What a coincidence…an insert *precisely* where IIHS conducts the test…

You don’t suppose they were trying to rig the results, do you? An honorable car company wouldn’t do that!

[spdrun]

I’d say that messing with the results of a testing company run by insurance nannies is not only honorable. It’s commendable 🙂

[Coronita]

[quote=ucodegen]
The Japanese and Korean cultures are different (not saying that Korean’s and Japanese get along, they generally don’t). Both Japanese and Koreans have a ‘honor’ aspect to work products. Their cultures also tend to be ‘conformist’. Very few if any attempts to create fake eggs and sell them as real, putting things in ramen that really don’t belong there, melamine in milk.. etc. – and if/when it occurs, it ends up being very embarrassing to them.
[/quote]

Lol… You don’t work with any of the korean smartphone makers do you?

[ucodegen]

[quote=flu][quote=ucodegen]
The Japanese and Korean cultures are different (not saying that Korean’s and Japanese get along, they generally don’t). Both Japanese and Koreans have a ‘honor’ aspect to work products. Their cultures also tend to be ‘conformist’. Very few if any attempts to create fake eggs and sell them as real, putting things in ramen that really don’t belong there, melamine in milk.. etc. – and if/when it occurs, it ends up being very embarrassing to them.
[/quote]

Lol… You don’t work with any of the korean smartphone makers do you?[/quote]A very close friend of mine has… LG to be specific.
[quote svelte]What a coincidence…an insert *precisely* where IIHS conducts the test…

You don’t suppose they were trying to rig the results, do you? An honorable car company wouldn’t do that![/quote]What percentage of that same japanese company is owned by a US company? You are also pointing at one specific incident, I have shown systemic issues.

As for NGK; there may be other details like strong-arming through patents and access to OEM level sourcing to force a group to act as a ‘cartel’ supplying spark plugs. It was not only NGK that was involved.

Most of the items you listed does not even get close to the level of the issues with Chinese supplied goods. You are mostly showing price fixing and a little gaming of the system (If you know anything about auto crash tests, you’ll know that the low-speed collision tests are largely BS. A NASCAR or Formula vehicle will fail the lowspeed tests, but are able to exceed tests in the higher speed ranges. That beam is only useful in low speed collision tests) Part of the problem is building a structure that will resist 5mph 4000lb collision with no/minimal damage – none to frame, but have the frame absorb collisions that are of a higher speed so that the deacceleration of the vehicle will not kill the occupants. The ‘structure’ needs to not add appreciable weight to the vehicle. Remember those bumpers in 1975? Did you ever try picking one of those up when off the car?

BTW: Roll-over tests were not required until 2004. Toyota was actually doing them before that. The court case was almost trying to use Toyota’s own info to prosecute it even though the tests were not required at the time the vehicle was built.

To help you along, I’ll bring up Fukushima, but as I give, I take away. Fukushima also demonstrates another characteristic of Japanese culture. Extreme deference to authority – even when such deference is wrong, dangerous or downright deadly. Since I added to the Japanese list, so I add to the Chinese list; how about the complete copying of Cisco router code by Huawei so complete that even a bug that had been fixed was replicated in Huawei gear.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/680705/thread/1330793331/last-1330900523/Huawei+admits+copying+Cisco+code
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10485560675556000
http://www.networkcomputing.com/networking/huawei-quits-us-market/d/d-id/1234177?

[svelte]

[quote=ucodegen]
[quote svelte]What a coincidence…an insert *precisely* where IIHS conducts the test…

You don’t suppose they were trying to rig the results, do you? An honorable car company wouldn’t do that![/quote]What percentage of that same japanese company is owned by a US company? [/quote]

Toyota is owned by a US company? Do tell! 🙂

[quote=ucodegen]
You are also pointing at one specific incident, I have shown systemic issues.
[/quote]

Lol…you sited no evidence just stated a generalization then claim you showed a systemic issue? Wow!

[quote=ucodegen]
As for NGK; there may be other details like strong-arming through patents and access to OEM level sourcing to force a group to act as a ‘cartel’ supplying spark plugs. It was not only NGK that was involved.
[/quote]

So Johnny did it too so it’s okay?

[quote=ucodegen]
Most of the items you listed does not even get close to the level of the issues with Chinese supplied goods.
[/quote]

Dude. You were saying Japanese business was based on honor. I was saying that is a falsehood. I said nothing about the Chinese so why drag them back in! Focus!

You’ve claimed a generalization was better proof than the specific examples I offered, deflected by saying if Johnny did it too it is okay, and now said yeah but China is worse! Too much.

You would have been better off to admit that falsifying financials for years, breaking US law on US soil by price fixing, and attempting to artificially raise bumper test results were all bad moves.

[FlyerInHi]

About culture, I think that we were about the same in the past with the anything goes MO. Read books about occupational hazards, safety dangers, and pollution by American industry, during periods when American industry was on top, not facing challenges from foreign competitors.

We’ve evolved, and China is still catching up.

[Author]

Posts