[davidlane]

It seems like an easy solution: Americans are looking for more fuel-efficient vehicles, so Ford Motor Co. is bringing over some of the small, gas-sipping cars it's been selling to Europeans for years.

But introducing the cars to the U.S. market isn't as simple as changing the speedometer from kilometers to miles. Ford has to reconcile American and European safety regulations - everything from the color of rear turn signals to the positioning of crash test dummies - that will keep the cars from hitting U.S. highways anytime soon.

Competing interests among automakers, governments and the insurance industry are hampering efforts to standardize safety requirements worldwide. That means extra engineering to make different versions of vehicles for different markets.

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/aug/29/bz-us-puts-european-cars-to-the-test/

 

[monkeylizard]

I'm glad he wrote this article. Folks wine here all the time that GM should bring over their European models without having a clue as to what the cost and effort required to do so. It's easy to sit in ignorance and tell others what to do. Good article, sheds some light on the requirements and challenges for globalization.

 

[Bokl]

I'm glad he wrote this article. Folks wine here all the time that GM should bring over their European models without having a clue as to what the cost and effort required to do so. It's easy to sit in ignorance and tell others what to do. Good article, sheds some light on the requirements and challenges for globalization.

Well maybe gm needs to be told what to do? Maybe gm should of engineered cars that could meet europe and America safety standards. How come BMW, Mercedes, Audio, VW. Volvo. They all make their cars to meet Europe and American safety standards but GM and Ford do not? Doesnt that tell you that gm needs to be told what to do. Rick and Lutz still do not understand this. IF they did Beat would be built for Europe and America.

 

[eurohazard]

None of this info is news to me....but I agree with the above poster...it's a good article. Not everyone knows this information.

One interesting stat that I didn't know, and caught my eye was 45% of traffic fatalities in the U.S. didn't wear their seatbelt. That means 55% who died did wear their seatbelt. It just seems that the writer was trying to make it look like not many Americans wear their seatbelts.

 

[bcjohnso99]

Well maybe gm needs to be told what to do? Maybe gm should of engineered cars that could meet europe and America safety standards. How come BMW, Mercedes, Audio, VW. Volvo. They all make their cars to meet Europe and American safety standards but GM and Ford do not? Doesnt that tell you that gm needs to be told what to do. Rick and Lutz still do not understand this. IF they did Beat would be built for Europe and America.

Exactly. And it's not like it costs much because Honda, Toyota and others do it with $15K vehicles. Costs are likely offset by increase volume.

Lutz stated years ago that new cars would be designed with the world in mind. The people making decisions contrary to this should be fired.

 

[tgagneguam]

Competing interests among automakers, governments and the insurance industry are hampering efforts to standardize safety requirements worldwide. That means extra engineering to make different versions of vehicles for different markets.

The above nicely encapsulates the ways in which government could more substantively assist American industry. While some people think throwing tax breaks and federal loans around is helping America, I think rational, standardized requirements would go a long way to helping industry. Red tape is rarely helpful to consumers or businesses. Sure, rationalizing standards would be tougher-it might mean cooperation with other nations-but I'm sure American industry would welcome the move.

 

[ogg vorbis]

None of this info is news to me....but I agree with the above poster...it's a good article. Not everyone knows this information.

One interesting stat that I didn't know, and caught my eye was 45% of traffic fatalities in the U.S. didn't wear their seatbelt. That means 55% who died did wear their seatbelt. It just seems that the writer was trying to make it look like not many Americans wear their seatbelts.

55% of 200,000,000 drivers wear their seatbelts. they should each get a cookie. single car collisions account for 42% of all fatalities...the 'drivers' did it all by themselves! source - www.makinac.org. i say 'driver' because if you don't have control of the vehicle, you're technically a passenger!

only about half of all car buyers wear their seatbelts, and the government makes it the car maker's problem. go figure.

btw, lane depature warnings, parallel parking devices, etc, are all designed to keep baby boomers, whose driving skills are waning, from killing themselves and others. i have a cheap idea: test drivers frequently, and revoke incompetent driver's licenses! car makers will never tell a potential buyer that they're not competent enough to buy their product.

 

[Chaz_23]

Solution:
- build cars that comply with all safety standards. Isn't that included when the suits babble on about global platforms, "leveraging global resources" and all that other pablum. So with all the global-babble, they can't figure our how to sell cars globally? Nonsense.
- lobby for a one-world safety standard. The globalizers in the US and Brussels ought to love that idea. Now that we live in the lovely global world with global corporations, why do we still have different standards?
Why is it that when Europeans companies bring cars to America they don't whine. But when American companies should bring their European cars to the US- then it's suddenly difficult and costly, impossible, undoable, etc.

 

[fp115]

Solution:
- build cars that comply with all safety standards. Isn't that included when the suits babble on about global platforms, "leveraging global resources" and all that other pablum. So with all the global-babble, they can't figure our how to sell cars globally? Nonsense.
- lobby for a one-world safety standard. The globalizers in the US and Brussels ought to love that idea. Now that we live in the lovely global world with global corporations, why do we still have different standards?
Why is it that when Europeans companies bring cars to America they don't whine. But when American companies should bring their European cars to the US- then it's suddenly difficult and costly, impossible, undoable, etc.

Thats not exactly possible, while some want one thing, others will want something completely different forcing you to make changes to the car that will make it non-compatible with other markets, for instance bumpers.

 

[mgescuro]

Exactly. And it's not like it costs much because Honda, Toyota and others do it with $15K vehicles. Costs are likely offset by increase volume.

Lutz stated years ago that new cars would be designed with the world in mind. The people making decisions contrary to this should be fired.

Lutz lied. That's the core of this problem.
You're right, costs are likely offset by volume (economies of scale).

The only real answer is that GM and its brain-dead, cant-think-out-of-the-box management sternly believes that Americans don't want European cars. Small cars. Their belief is that Americans want big cars for room. Period. No discussion.

 

[fp115]

Lutz lied. That's the core of this problem.
You're right, costs are likely offset by volume (economies of scale).

The only real answer is that GM and its brain-dead, cant-think-out-of-the-box management sternly believes that Americans don't want European cars. Small cars. Their belief is that Americans want big cars for room. Period. No discussion.

Ah yet another post of mgescuro whining. I'd be rich for every post of you whining and lack of common sense.

So whats the Daewoos, Aveo, Astra, Aura, G8, CTS, Sky, Escalade, H2, H3... right those aren't global products.

 

[PhishPhood]

The above nicely encapsulates the ways in which government could more substantively assist American industry. While some people think throwing tax breaks and federal loans around is helping America, I think rational, standardized requirements would go a long way to helping industry. Red tape is rarely helpful to consumers or businesses. Sure, rationalizing standards would be tougher-it might mean cooperation with other nations-but I'm sure American industry would welcome the move.

One very critical point that's not understood well is that the crash tests run by the NHTSA are the ones that are at odds with the rest of the world. The IIHS tests are more similar to the ones done in Europe, Australia and Japan.

GM however can't say to the Feds, 'Hey look at our good IIHS tests, or our tests in Europe, Australia'. The NHTSA makes them design vehicles to pass the US test, ( which, BTW, are significantly less stressful to the occupants and to the vehicles ).

 

[benroethig]

Well maybe gm needs to be told what to do? Maybe gm should of engineered cars that could meet europe and America safety standards. How come BMW, Mercedes, Audio, VW. Volvo. They all make their cars to meet Europe and American safety standards but GM and Ford do not? Doesnt that tell you that gm needs to be told what to do. Rick and Lutz still do not understand this. IF they did Beat would be built for Europe and America.

First, most European companies do not make their cars to meet U.S. standards. BMW, Mercedes, and VW/Audi all consider the U.S. a major market and design their cars for the most part with the North American market in mind. Pugoet, Renault, etc would have a very hard time adapting their vehicles to the U.S. market. Second, you're seeing things met half way here. Traditionally while european cars have been more up market, they've been much smaller than those sold over here. This is not the case anymore. Both the Mondeo and Insignia grew considerably from their predecessors to the same size as the Malibu and Fusion.

 

[mgescuro]

Ah yet another post of mgescuro whining. I'd be rich for every post of you whining and lack of common sense.

So whats the Daewoos, Aveo, Astra, Aura, G8, CTS, Sky, Escalade, H2, H3... right those aren't global products.

How long was Astra sold for before GM sold it here? And then it was because they saw the "blogosphere" was talking about it. It was still pulling teeth to get it here. Now it's pulling teeth to get them to advertise it. If GM had faith in the product, there would have been significant promotion for it.

CTS is a global car positioned in the wrong market.

Aura isn't a global car.

Sky is a great global car. But the annual production is what? Insignificant. And build quality is subpar.

Escalade and H2 are not global -- despite what GM may think. H3 is global.

What Daewoos are sold in the US outside Aveo -- barely?

I rest my case.
Quit drinking the Kool Aid.

 

[fp115]

How long was Astra sold for before GM sold it here? And then it was because they saw the "blogosphere" was talking about it. It was still pulling teeth to get it here. Now it's pulling teeth to get them to advertise it.

CTS is a global car positioned in the wrong market.

Aura isn't a global car.

Sky is a great global car. But the annual production is what? Thought so.

Escalade and H2 are not global -- despite what GM may think. H3 is global.

What Daewoos are sold in the US outside Aveo -- barely?

I rest my case.
Quit drinking the Kool Aid.

Daewoos: Epica, Optra, (one more, the name slips me)
Astra: Regardless of what you say it is still a global car.
CTS: Again, still a global car
Aura: You must be on something, whats the Opel Vectra?
Sky: Yep, again another one
Escalade and H2: Are sold in nearly all markets worldwide. I had one when I was in Australia.

This goes to prove GM does have global cars, regardless of what you want to say. There are still other models that I haven't put thought through that are also globally sold, such as the Vue. They easily have more global cars than any other manufacturer, but you are so blindsided by this anti-GM propaganda that you fail to see the true reality.

Mind telling me or anyone for the matter why you even visit these forums? I have yet to see anything positive come from you, even on positive press releases.

 

[Toto]

Daewoos: Epica, Optra, (one more, the name slips me)
Astra: Regardless of what you say it is still a global car.
CTS: Again, still a global car
Aura: You must be on something, whats the Opel Vectra?
Sky: Yep, again another one
Escalade and H2: Are sold in nearly all markets worldwide. I had one when I was in Australia.

This goes to prove GM does have global cars, regardless of what you want to say. There are still other models that I haven't put thought through that are also globally sold, such as the Vue. They easily have more global cars than any other manufacturer, but you are so blindsided by this anti-GM propaganda that you fail to see the true reality.

Mind telling me or anyone for the matter why you even visit these forums? I have yet to see anything positive come from you, even on positive press releases.

The Aura is not a Vectra. Even the wheelbase is different (Aura=EPI LWB/Vectra=EPI SWB) and the Vectra is 4 years older.

 

[baloo]

Obviously you can't just bring over cars from different markets on a whim, but come on...VW can engineer a $16k Rabbit to be sold in Europe and the US, Honda sells their $14k Fit on either side of the pond and Daewoo complies with Euro and US standards with a $10k Aveo!

If a European car cannot be sold in the US it's because the manufacturer lacked foresight, not because it's particularly difficult to do.

 

[mgescuro]

Daewoos: Epica, Optra, (one more, the name slips me)

And they're sold in the US?

Astra: Regardless of what you say it is still a global car.

Ummm... I said it was a global car.
GM just treats it like it has the plague.

CTS: Again, still a global car

YEs. And improperly positioned for the world.

Aura: You must be on something, whats the Opel Vectra?

Vectra is NOT NOT NOT the Aura!!
How many times do we have to go through that on GMI!!????
Aura is based on the North American Epislon platform. Vectra is based on the Euro version.

Sky: Yep, again another one

Small production matters to be of no consequence. And not RHD compatible.

Escalade and H2: Are sold in nearly all markets worldwide. I had one when I was in Australia.

Not world cars.

This goes to prove GM does have global cars, regardless of what you want to say. There are still other models that I haven't put thought through that are also globally sold, such as the Vue. They easily have more global cars than any other manufacturer, but you are so blindsided by this anti-GM propaganda that you fail to see the true reality.

Your brand of "global" is GM's brand of "global."
It's not actually global.

Big SUV's really have no market outside the US. Selling it global doesn't mean it's a "global car."
Selling cars like Vectra and Aura simultaneously, designing and engineering them separately, but sharing similar sheetmetal is not a "global car."
Designing a car for Asia and Euro and then conveniently eliminating the NA market for X, Y, and Z reasons isn't a "global car." You built a car for Asia and Europe.

Malibu? Not a global car.
HHR has the capability to be global. But it's market is NA.
Cobalt? Not a global car.
DTS? Not a global car.
XLR? Not a fully global car.
Corvette? Not a fully global car.

Do all cars have to be global? No. Some cares are inherently more attractive to one region over another.
But the ability to build and sell any of these cars anywhere in the world, at a drop of a hat makes for better business sense.

One Epsilon platform for the globe. Any variety and flavor can be built for any region. Completely ambidextrous. Etc.
Same with Delta and Zeta.

GM just needs to quit the duplication.

 

[44 mpg by 2010]

May I suggest that many of the unique issues around World versus NON-World compatability could be circumvented by "MOST Severe CASE WORLD SPEC" compatable engine/power trains that that could be used in various vehicle configurations around the world!

Then who cares what color turn/brake lights lenses or bumper specs have to be "locally".

Of course this means meeting ... ALL ... AND EXCEEDING MANY ... of the world wide emissions specs with the flexibility to adapt OBD I/O and data to local standards.

You know ... sort of like computer memory cards, there would need to be standardized interface specs.

Then the power train volumes could be based on world ... not regional demand to take advantage of economies of scale.

... plus the opportunity to multi sourcing for greater flexibility!

At least it is a place to start!!!

Here is something to think about ...

The shortest path is for the Det3 to ask the President for an EXECUTIVE ORDER, based on OIL IMPORT BEING a NATIONAL SECURITY issue, waiving, for 24 months, import restrictions (including tariffs, taxes, emissions, and safety) on vehicles achieving more than 44 mpg(US) [53 mpg(Imperial)] combined average and that satisfy Euro Step IV (or Step V) emissions and meet current Euro safety standards for the specified period of 24 months.

That could allow vehicles to start moving into the US within days of the President's signature.

This would allow the auto companies, at very low cost, a path to sell throught their dealer (for cash flow), allowing assessment of consumer preferences, time to resolve any non-compliant standards issues (including emissions and safety), and retooling/training time for NEW/revised product manufacturing start-up.

Just another wild idea .... but it could work ....

 

[ChevroletRevived]

How long was Astra sold for before GM sold it here? And then it was because they saw the "blogosphere" was talking about it. It was still pulling teeth to get it here. Now it's pulling teeth to get them to advertise it. If GM had faith in the product, there would have been significant promotion for it.
CTS is a global car positioned in the wrong market.

Aura isn't a global car.

Sky is a great global car. But the annual production is what? Insignificant. And build quality is subpar.

Escalade and H2 are not global -- despite what GM may think. H3 is global.

What Daewoos are sold in the US outside Aveo -- barely?

I rest my case.
Quit drinking the Kool Aid.

Maybe it's because they lose money on it?