This merger will be good.
Fear of Foxconn reportedly driving possible Nissan, Honda and Mitsubishi merger
The automotive industry has been shaken this week by news that giant Japanese carmakers Nissan and Honda are contemplating a merger, with Mitsubishi Motors apparently keen to become part of the mix. A merger is not a far-fetched outcome. In March this year the three Japanese firms announced an intention to collaborate, and in …
COMMENTS
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 04:03 GMT Gene Cash
LOL, no. Look at the unholy Stellantis union.
It's mainly an entire bag of idiots. They will each want to do it their way and "not invented here" will sink the entire venture, and when they do decide on something, it'll be the lowest common denominator that satisfies nobody.
I won't shed a tear over Nissan and Mitsubishi, but I do remember the days gone by when Honda could engineer its way out of a paper bag.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 09:28 GMT MJI
Lets shut British factories
Whan PSA bought Chrysler, the entire Chrysler setup disappeared. No more Rootes, no more Simca.
I had the moderately hot hatch and that factory was the first to go, Then Ryton.
Now they have GM and of course shutting time, Luton going, when will Ellesmere Port go? Russelheim?
And who are they going to buy next?
There is a very valid reason the surviving car brand in the last Blade Runner film was a Peugeot, they had bought everyone else.
As to that 3 way merger? What about the bike divisions?
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 09:46 GMT werdsmith
Re: Lets shut British factories
Renault are a shareholder in Nissan and Nissan are a shareholder in Renault. Nissan hold 15% of Renault, which is similar to the French state's holding. Renault have 15% voting rights at Nissan.
Then they have the Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi Alliance joint venture to share car development. Any deal will just have to take that into account.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 12:42 GMT nobody who matters
Re: Lets shut British factories
When Rover and Honda collaborated on development in the 80s and 90s, Honda held a 20% shareholding in Rover Group (and vice versa). That didn't stop the majority shareholder in Rover (British Aerospace) selling their share off to BMW behind Hondas back and with no prior consultation with them at all. Honda has looked vulnerable on its own ever since.
-
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Friday 20th December 2024 05:43 GMT PRR
the surviving car brand
> ....the surviving car brand ..... was a Peugeot
The film was (will be) wrong. The last 'car' standing will be JEEP. Jeep survived the collapses of Willys Overland, Ford(partial), Kaiser, Rambler/Nash/Packard/AMC, Renault (the year they ate AMC, put up new signs, and choked), Chrysler, DaimlerChrysler, Chrysler LLC, Chrysler Group LLC, Fiat Group, Fiat Chrysler, Stellantis, and....? Historically Jeep has gone out of business (and revived) more often than my urologists. Winking at overlaps, that's still about 7 different companies who grasped at the Jeep market. Ne'rmind that today's Jeep can't chew through a paper bag, cuz it's at the dealer waiting for FIAT parts. JEEP has ferocious fanboiz who will buy Jeeps even if they never run.
-
-
-
Friday 20th December 2024 13:31 GMT Gordon 10
Stellantis FTW
Criticise Stellantis all you want but given most of their market is mediocre cars in the first place they've made a decent fist of seeing the direction the market is moving and producing mediocre EV's along side their legacy vehicles.
Rather than the Japanese who have just buried their heads in the sand.
-
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 03:44 GMT SP2000
Not just Foxconn
There’s also the fact that the long term Nissan and Renault partnership has failed to deliver benefits to Nissan, leaving them high and dry. Meanwhile the emergence and strong growth of Chinese EV manufacturers like BYD and Li Auto have taken significant market share and none of these three Japanese brands have kept up. Nissan failed to follow up on Leaf and they all missed the demand for hybrid vehicles. Nissan owns 24% of Mitsubishi (largest shareholder) which would be why they too are in the mix for a three way merger with Honda.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 07:18 GMT DS999
Re: Not just Foxconn
Yep it is the Chinese EVs they are really afraid of. They look to sweep aside western automakers everywhere except the US and EU where there will be trade barriers. Losing the rest of the world's market means they will need to merge to survive. At least half the current automakers will no longer exist 10 years from now, because their market share in the rest of the world is going to disappear completely as Chinese EVs take over. They want to be one of the survivors.
-
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 18:50 GMT DS999
Re: Not just Foxconn
If you aren't taking long trips in your car you don't need a "charging infrastructure" you just need a place to charge your car at home. In a lot of places it isn't common to take a car on long trips, you take trains or buses. If you're never going to go more than 50-100 miles from your home, you will never charge it anywhere but your home. Even if you suffer from occasional power outages that's not a show stopper - having an EV would be an advantage in such places as it could provide power when your electricity is out.
Plus in less developed countries most people can't even dream of owning a car. It is the rich people - and they are the ones who will have a garage and more reliable electric supplies. Depending on whether the country they live subsidies or heavily taxes gasoline, you could pay anywhere from the equivalent of $1 to $10 per gallon. At $1 per gallon and EV isn't offering as much savings, but at the higher prices it is a no brainer.
If you have two cars, having one be an EV is even more of a no brainer. No one needs two cars able to take long trips away from their home charger.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 20:55 GMT Ian Johnston
Re: Not just Foxconn
If you aren't taking long trips in your car you don't need a "charging infrastructure" you just need a place to charge your car at home.
Tough shit if you live in a flat, a terrace house or anywhere else without a driveway. For most people, in other words.
If you have two cars, having one be an EV is even more of a no brainer. No one needs two cars able to take long trips away from their home charger.
If your argument for EVs is "They are fine if you have a proper car as well" it's a bit unconvincing.
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 13:41 GMT A. Coatsworth
Re: Not just Foxconn
Where else, outside China, has got the necessary charging infrastructure for EVs?
Not my (third world) country for sure, but that doesn't stop people from buying chinese EVs in spades.
"Geometrys" and "Seagulls" are now a very common sight in the roads, a local newspaper tells me there are now 34.2 EVs per 10000 persons, which is a respectable ratio.
And this number is eating from the lower-end Japanese models (Suzuki, smaller Nissans) which used to dominate the market until not long ago.
-
Friday 20th December 2024 04:07 GMT SP2000
Re: Not just Foxconn
Now the New Zealand is anywhere near a significant market but about 7 years ago my wife and I were driving around the South Island on holidays (not in am EV) and we pulled into a random middle-of-nowhere town on a Saturday and decided to have a walk around as there was a street market in progress. Due to the markets parking was at a premium and we eventually found a spot in a small, council owned carpark a few blocks away. Maybe 30 spots all up. Unlike every other parking area we’d checked this was just a gravelled area - not even bitumen - and lo and behold it had half a dozen charging bays. The moral of the story is that the council hadn’t just put a few bays in the Main Street, or even just their main car parks, they’d extended the rollout to the third tier parking areas too. Amazing!
-
-
Friday 20th December 2024 11:17 GMT Alan Brown
Re: Not just Foxconn
"At least half the current automakers will no longer exist 10 years from now"
That includes China too. There are currently dozens of new makers and that's not sustainable in the long term
The problem for "traditional" car makers is that they've painted themselves into a corner. The huge crop of wannabe EV makers is proof that the entire market has changed in a similar way to what buggy whip makers saw back at the end of the 19th century
"Market barriers" will only make their problems worse, not better. The Chicken Tax nearly destroyed the USA domestic car industry and pushed drivers into trucks/SUVs because it was more profitable for makers to sell those
The bloat on things like F150s is a direct result of emissions, milage and safety standards being tightened up on smaller trucks. Makers are continuing to chase short term profit and the long-term is someone else's problem
-
-
Friday 20th December 2024 11:11 GMT Alan Brown
Re: Not just Foxconn
Japan has entirely missed the boat on EVs for various reasons including:
1: Not wanting to be beholden to China on rare earths/batteries
2: Wildly unsuitable home charging connections (110V makes for VERY slow charging and unlike USA domestic power there's no 220V option)
#2 has made for a virtually nonexistent home market for EVs. Things are changing recently but there's still a lot of consumer resistance
-
Saturday 21st December 2024 09:26 GMT bazza
Re: Not just Foxconn
#3 if you have a spot to park a car in the first place, it’s far from guaranteed to be on your property with options of a hook up to one’s meter.
Plus public transport is so much more dominant there. Replacing all the ICE cars with EV won’t really change all that much.
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 04:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
computers on wheels
Modern cars are sometimes blithely described as "computers on wheels," which belittles the knowledge needed to make robust and reliable vehicles. But the phrase also reflects the reality that consumers want cars that, like almost every product these days, deliver an excellent digital experience.
Is the desire for digital experience a reality though? Have consumers been given a real BEV alternatives to a computer on wheels yet?
Mabey in the small car class the Leaf and Volt, but you could see the manufactures where just dabbling (or meeting some arbitary governmnet target to obtain subsudies) and where not really not really interested in EV vehicles.
Then Tesla turned up with their computers on wheels in larger sedan and sports car models, seemingly scared the shit out of the other automakers who decided to lift wholesale the Tesla design and felt they absolutley had to do EV's as computers on wheels.
My Ideal EV is not a computer on Wheels, but a car from the 90-00's with an electric drivetrain, the computer power I want onboard is just enough to look after the drivetrain and nothing else.
I have been seriously comtemplating that instead of purchasing a new EV getting an electric converstion to my existring 4x4 done, the costs of doing this appear to be on a par with a new EV anyhow.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 16:30 GMT Lon24
Re: Consumers Want.. An Excellent Digital Rxperience
Nor me. But if I ever replace my EV one function I will not be willing to forgo is Android Auto compatibility or its equivalent. I didn't know I needed it until I got it.
However powerful the on-board computer is - it will not be a match for a mid-range smartphone with all its lovely goodies which will be upgraded several times within the lifetime of the car. More ram, more cores. Cars can update software but not the on-board hardware its runs on - and software tends to bloat too.
-
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 07:21 GMT DS999
Re: computers on wheels
Have consumers been given a real BEV alternatives to a computer on wheels yet?
Are there are any ICE alternatives to computer on wheels anymore, other than maybe at the very bottom of the price range? People wonder why auto insurance prices are skyrocketing, it is because more and more cars are stuffed with technology in their front and rear bumpers so what used to be maybe a $1000 fender bender is now a $4000 fender bender. Even if you're driving a 20 year old car without all the doo-dads, you are paying more for the liability end of your insurance because you might hit one of those cars and your insurance company will pay a lot more.
If you want to avoid a computer on wheels you're going to have to either buy an entry level cheapo model or something old - and eventually ALL models will have it and the level of "old" car to avoid it will get older every year.
Personally I like some of the stuff, but there's a lot that's unnecessary and you don't really have a choice between what features you want and what you don't.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 08:02 GMT blu3b3rry
Re: computers on wheels
I've been yet to be burned by that sort of issue, but more luck than anything I'd say.
My neighbour has a Vauxhall Combo (rebadged Fiat Doblo) van, 2014-ish.
Occasionally it refuses to start, and cranks with seemingly no power going to the injectors. Our local garage took one look with an OBD II reader, and refused to touch it any further for fear of breaking it altogether.
They did recommend a automotive sparky they knew, but he charged a £150 up-front callout fee and a similarly high hourly rate after that - and no guarantee he'd be able to diagnose the fault or know how to fix it! Neighbour is now just running the van about until it dies for good....
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 19:07 GMT DS999
Re: computers on wheels
I had a previous car that would trip the check engine light every few days. It would claim a problem with cat 1, but I'd had that looked at at the dealership and they said there was a tiny hole in some sort of flex metal hose attached to the left cat which didn't really impact its function. The only fix they could do would be to replace the entire thing at a cost of over $1000 (over a decade ago) and of course it was just out of warranty. So I decided I'd simply reset the code every time it tripped.
But I quickly got over doing that since at the time the only ODB interface I had required a laptop and USB connection and it wasn't something I really wanted to do in the cold (I have a detached garage and it was winter when they found the issue) so I just left it. I'd only check/reset it before I was going to drive more than a couple hours, so that I would at least know I wasn't leaving home with any problems other than the one that guaranteed another fault would pop up before I'd make it an hour down the highway. Otherwise I was basically driving with that light constantly lit the last year I owned the car.
Too bad the ODB-II standard doesn't allow for a way to indicate "yes I already know about this issue don't light up again when the exact same problem recurs".
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 09:15 GMT Charlie Clark
Re: computers on wheels
Insurance premiums have been driven by more larger and expensive vehicles but the technology is not the driver. Look at the cost of replacement wheels, etc. The change was driven by the poorly thought out incentives to buy SUVs twenty years ago. A couple of bankruptcies back then would have forced the industry to up its game. Instead we got, and still have, expensive tax breaks so that someone has an SUV to drop the kids off at school 10 minutes walk away.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 12:12 GMT nobody who matters
Re: computers on wheels
Larger and more expensive vehicles is only a small part of the story. Being larger, parts are therefore more expensive when they need to be repaired, and being larger they also inflict greater damage on whatever they hit, which also increases insurance repair costs. The 'larger' vehicle factor has been at work for well over two decades and lead to a steady flow of small insurance premium increases for most drivers.
However, a great deal of the recent increase in repair costs has been fueled by the cost of the electronic technology that is now incorporated in the most vulnerable areas of modern vehicles - bumpers with sensors and cameras mounted in them to allow such things as lane assist or auto parking functions to work. As DS999 has already pointed out, bumpers are often several times more expensive to replace than they would be without the electronics.
I have spent my whole driving life with the same insurance company, and for the last couple of decades my annual premiums had more often been less than the previous year, and only rarely was there a an increase and even then it was quite small.....until a couple of years ago that is; since then it has seen large increases each year. I am now at an age which is beyond the point where insurers weight premiums more heavily due to age (this typically starts after your 55th birthday), but even so the increases are quite large and almost entirely driven by the huge increase in the cost of insurance repairs within the last decade - in turn this is principally the result of the cost of repairing increasingly expensive tech, and only partially due to the greater proportion of larger, heavier cars.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 18:12 GMT Gene Cash
Re: computers on wheels
Another one is windshields. They have really complex sensors attached now, so even if you don't have to replace the sensors, you still have to go through a time consuming calibration.
My friend has an Accord, and the *HONDA dealership* could not do the calibration, they had to hire some sort of specialist. WTAF is that?
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 18:51 GMT Yet Another Anonymous coward
Re: computers on wheels
It's these damn EU bureaucrats forcing all these safety features on car manufacturers. Forcing them to fit more expensiveness (and high margin) safety features to new cars, making repairs uneconomic forcing insurers to write off cars in minor accidents, making used cars less attractive and blocking cheap imports from developing countries.
If only the manufacturers weren't being oppressed
-
Friday 20th December 2024 19:20 GMT ske1fr
Re: computers on wheels
In my case, a previous Jazz needed a replacement windscreen/windshield, ok, insurance covered that at a local place, then the insurance company demanded I drive 35 miles to a different Honda dealer for the sensor array recalibration. And then on the day of the appointment they rang me to say the technician was ill! I said "oh dear, I will make alternative arrangements" or something similar and paid my local dealer to sort it out, then dumped that insurer at renewal time.
-
-
Friday 20th December 2024 08:46 GMT Charlie Clark
Re: computers on wheels
I think you're missing an essential economic point: the change in policy to favour larger and more expensive cars also removed the need to drive down unit costs, which had dominated the industry since the 1980s, even through various phases of innovation, which is why Japanese manufacturers expanded so successfully: there were making better cars that were also more affordable.
The tax breaks have allowed manufacturers to add components, particuarly for data collection, without needing to worry about the costs or the utility to the driver. Without the financial incentive, we'd have smaller cars with better safety features.
-
Saturday 21st December 2024 18:36 GMT nobody who matters
Re: computers on wheels
I think a lot of the increase in the size and bulk has been to accomodate many of the safety features as they have been incorporated in designs for new models (such as side impact protection, side air bags, greater distances mandated for front bumper and bonnet between hard points and outer skin for pedestrian crash protection). All these things have made it necessary to increase the exterior dimensions whilst keeping the interior a similar size.
If you stuck with keeping the cars smaller, they would inevitably have fewer safety features, and very likely the bulky safety features would need to be slimmed down to fit, and would therefore be less effective; smaller cars with poorer safety features.
I don't really think the initial increase in size was driven by economics, rather by fashion tbh.
-
Sunday 22nd December 2024 00:09 GMT Yet Another Anonymous coward
Re: computers on wheels
>smaller cars with poorer safety features.
Although likely to face smaller other cars on the road.
Now you are driving to school in trucks the size and weight of WWII armoured vehicles. The only safety option is to be bigger yourself Until Porsche re-introduce the Tiger SUV
Of course ever larger vehicles with more and more safety features do nothing for pedestrians and cyclists - but manufacturers don't have to care about them.
-
Sunday 22nd December 2024 11:27 GMT nobody who matters
Re: computers on wheels
Cars, yes. But cars are not limited to crashing into other cars; they also collide with vans and lorries which will still be the same size (or larger), and of course there are a huge number of crashes which do not involve any other vehicle and the impact is with a tree, wall, ditch, or any of a number of other very solid structures (both natural and man-made.
Your argument re. school run is disengenuous - back when cars were much smaller and devoid of safety features, I don't remember there being significant numbers of children being killed or seriously injured in road crashes any more than is the case nowadays. Parental 'need' for a larger vehicle than anyone else because 'children' is more because of a perception/illusion of greater safety rather than any real world evidence that it would reduce the numbers of children killed on the school run and the number of school run vehicles actually involved in crashes is (and always has been) a very tiny proportion of the total. It is, as I said, principally a fashion/fad.
I also think that you will find that manufacturers <have> to care about pedestrians and cyclists - there is a whole raft of legislation relating to pedestrian safety which governs how vehicle makers design their vehicles to minimise injury to pedestrians and cyclist in the event of an impact. This is the main reason why modern day bonnet lines are so much higher than on older cars - there is now a mandated minimum distance required between the top of the engine and the bonnet skin. Things like bumper shape and height are also covered.
-
Sunday 22nd December 2024 17:07 GMT Yet Another Anonymous coward
Re: computers on wheels
>there is now a mandated minimum distance required between the top of the engine and the bonnet skin
That explains the pickup trucks driving over sports cars at junctions because they can't see an entire car in front of them.
Of course 'trucks' are exempt from most of these rules because it would be communism if I couldn't commute in a Unimog and roll coal
-
-
Sunday 22nd December 2024 05:27 GMT CowHorseFrog
Re: computers on wheels
nobody: If you stuck with keeping the cars smaller, they would inevitably have fewer safety features, and very likely the bulky safety features would need to be slimmed down to fit, and would therefore be less effective; smaller cars with poorer safety features.
cow: Yup European cars have so few safety features, that why they invented them to begin with while American oversized cars and trucks ran around for how many years without seat belts or air bags ?
-
Monday 23rd December 2024 09:10 GMT Lord Elpuss
Re: computers on wheels
The airbag was invented in 1952 by John Hetrick, an American. The first recorded case of it saving lives was in 1990, in Culpeper, Virginia.
Sigh.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 08:29 GMT Caver_Dave
Re: computers on wheels
I'm quite happy to have a "computer on wheels" so long as that doesn't include the simpler parts of the human interface.
If I want to turn on the lights, turn on the radio, turn on the demister, turn on the wipers, etc., I want to use a simple switch on the dashboard that I can access easily from my muscle memory of where the switch is.
I do not want to have to divert my gaze from the road to press (multiple) buttons on a touch screen.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 09:04 GMT Peter Gathercole
Re: computers on wheels
I really don't understand why these touch screen interfaces are allowed. If you take your hand off the wheel to operate a smartphone, you could really get prosecuted (I know, if it's in a cradle on the dash, currently you're allowed to do it according to the law, but only for some things, but how long that will last is anybody's guess).
Modern car GUIs are much, much worse, so in my view they should be banned just as much as 'phones. I want physical switches all the time.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 16:47 GMT Doctor Syntax
Re: computers on wheels
"turn on the demister ... I want to use a simple switch on the dashboard that I can access easily from my muscle memory of where the switch is."
My demister is a simple push-button - flush with the electronics screen so it's a matter of faffing about trying to feel the edge. Ditto the aircon temperature buttons - did you just turn it up or down?
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 09:10 GMT Charlie Clark
Re: computers on wheels
It's interesting that both Nissan and Renault have vehicles with an electric drivetrain powered by an ICE. For manufacturers this means a smaller BOM and, thus, profitable even on smaller models. If I was getting a car, this is what I'd be looking for. Solarthermal production of e-fuels has a much higher potential yield than anything driven by electrolysis.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 13:09 GMT ske1fr
Re: computers on wheels
So does Honda, their E-HEV is theoretically electric hybrid electric vehicle. In practice, the higher the road speed the more likely the wheels are ICE-powered, but for slower road speeds the hybrid train is very efficient. And yet... I'm replacing mine with another brand and EV at that.
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 14:29 GMT jdiebdhidbsusbvwbsidnsoskebid
Re: computers on wheels
"EV buyers, meanwhile, expect their purchases to have plenty of tech inside to power automation, safety, and entertainment systems"
"Expect" is not the same as "want". Especially as "tech" when used in marketing is just a euphemism these days for a crappy touch screen, privacy invasion and a generally rubbish user experience.
-
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
Sunday 22nd December 2024 05:30 GMT CowHorseFrog
Re: You are soooo 20th century!
Hey military systems worth millions dont have remote kill switches or controls of any kind.
Remember stingers and the muhajadeens ? Exactly the same thing happened when the americans left Afghanistan in the latest war and left behind cars and equipment which those same freedom fighters happily grabbed.
-
-
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 09:34 GMT wolfetone
Rover.
Slightly off topic but think it's worth mentioning here to give a bit of colour to this merger in light of Foxconn's sniffing around.
During the mid/late 80's Rover had a partnership with Honda, and Honda helped refit Rover factories in Canley and Longbridge with new robots etc to help production, as some Honda cars were built there alongside the Rovers. When BMW bought Rover Honda allowed Rover to continue to use the robots and that was an agreement held until Rover went bust in 2005. I think Honda had largely forgot about them to be honest.
It wasn't until Nangjing Automotive and SAIC went public about buying Rover and it's assets did Honda think "shit, we've got our robots over there". They didn't want the Chinese to gain access to them, so during negotiations of the sale of Rover Honda vetoed part of it by requesting all of Honda's equipment be returned to them, as they weren't bought by Rover in the first place. Longbridge was gutted (Canley, I think, had long had their production line revamped for the BINI) and this pissed off NA and SAIC but they couldn't do anything. That's one of the reasons car production didn't return to Longbridge outside of hand assembling kits that were sent over from China.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 12:34 GMT nobody who matters
Re: Rover.
I don't know where you got that from, but it is certainly not correct.
Honda removed a relatively small amount of equipment that was related to manufacture of parts for which Honda held the IP, and related almost entirely to the Rover 45 (which was effectively a Roverised 6th Generation Honda Civic, built under licence by Rover, and not a joint development as the 200/400/25, 600 and 800 had been).
The factory was cetainly NOT gutted by Honda - the entirety of the body-in-white assembly lines were removed from the South Works and containerised to be shipped to China by Nanjing Automotive (including the Robots!) and two of the three finishing lines in Car Assembly Building 2 were also removed and taken to China. The third finishing line was left in situ and was later utilised by SAIC for final finishing of the MG6 and later for the first few batches of the MG3. These were initially sent from China as partially completed cars which were finished off at Longbridge (basically had the UK specific bits fitted to them - wheels, speedos and electronic parts etc.).
Canley was sold to Ford in 1999 along with the Land Rover operation, so doesn't even enter into the MG Rover calculation, and until the sale of Rover Group to Phoenix in 2000, the BMW plan was for MINI to be built in CAB1 at Longbridge (to which end BMW had already spent a substantial sum renovating the building in preparation for installation of the MINI assembly line). Disposing of Longbridge and the Rover operation meant that they then redeveloped Cowley to manufacture the MINI, and the Rover 75 assembly lines were uprooted from Cowley and re-installed at Longbridge - this is the principally the equipment and robots that were transferred to China, and had no connection to Honda.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 14:46 GMT jdiebdhidbsusbvwbsidnsoskebid
Re: Rover.
"built under licence by Rover, and not a joint development as the 200/400/25, 600 and 800 had been)"
I worked at Longbridge during the early 90s when they were building the rover 200 (aka the Honda concerto). Occasionally there was a mix up on the production line and a car would pop out the end that was Rover on the outside and Honda inside.
To this day I have no idea how anybody could this without thinking "this can't be right". Except that the general attitude of the workforce on the production line was pretty low on quality and care. Despite the Honda influence and all the "quality matters" posters around the place, most people I knew there cared little for what they were doing and were full of cynicism for the company. Which could explain how body shells would go into the spray shop already with splodges of rust on the bare metal. The fate of Rover a few years later surprised me not one bit.
-
-
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 10:58 GMT An_Old_Dog
Collision of the Icebergs
1. When was the last time two or more roughly-equal sized, large corporations making the same sorts of products successfully merged?
2. No, "everyone" does not want "excellent digital experience[s]," a/k/a computerised crap-(mis)-features. "What companies sell" is not the same as "what people want".
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 18:11 GMT Andy Baird
Foxconn's iPhone experience isn't relevant here
"building a few billion iPhones will teach a company what consumers want"
I have to say no. All it teaches is how to assemble hardware. And a smartphone's hardware is an empty shell without the OS and apps that a manufacturer such as Apple installs, once the hardware is built. That software determines how the phone behaves, which is the real value proposition that consumers are paying for. Assembling iPhone (or Samsung, et al.) hardware hasn't taught Foxconn how to write OS or application software. Now, maybe they'll figure it out on their own... but I've seen a lot of Asian-made apps for various Asian-made consumer electronics devices, and no matter how good the hardware was, the software was almost without exception mediocre to poor.
-
Thursday 19th December 2024 20:29 GMT vonBureck
> EV buyers, meanwhile, expect their purchases to have plenty of tech inside to power automation, safety, and entertainment systems that are generally more sophisticated than those offered by traditional automakers.
Who the hell told you that? The press release? First and foremost, EV buyers - especially future EV buyers - expect their purchases to not be more crap than their existing ICE vehicles. Which explains the lukewarm mass adoption of battery EVs after the "more expensive is more better" demographic has been saturated.
-
Friday 20th December 2024 19:24 GMT Kev99
I don't want a damned computer on wheels where everything is controlled thru a grimy, blurry touchscreen a half meter out of the driver's line of sight. Give a vehicle that just works, with real fixed position knobs and buttons. I'll accept a single screen for navigation only. I made numerous trips across the country in my 72 Pinto and 77 Fairmont using a paper map and an AM/FM/cassette radio.
-
Saturday 21st December 2024 02:30 GMT Old Man Ted
Outdated manufacturing plants
Once the money men gain control. Not the Engineers or Founders or Factory or Floor managers. THEY FAIL
All industries fail when run by money men or with Government subsidies for funding, or both. MBA's are the worst managers. Engineers seem to keep project, factories, cities and organisations going. They seem to better manager than the bean counters. As the bean counter waste, the subsides on bonus shareholder payment not updating the equipment or maintenance as this does not advance their standings with the shareholders. Retired mining engineer.
My son who an insulting err consulting civil engineer (52 years old) is now doing an MBA as he was bored in the evening. Emailed me saying it's so easy compared to engineering he this, he will do an additional 3 subject next year. I think it relaxes me instead of worrying that all the equipment concrete sand gravel etc will arrive by 6 a.m. and I go have my Brekkie.
Just ask an accountant to design and build a freeway bridge without upsetting the traffic flow.
Replace the cities water Storage dam (90-year-old) outlet pipes in the wall., without stopping the cities water supply.
Oh! The joys with talking to bean counters.
No European, there is only 1 USA motor manufacture left who has not yet gone bust. All European manufactures are being kept alive by subsidies The Japanese Co are going now to be followed by the Koreans then China India will be the last one left. Then the whole cycle will be repeated.
Strange that history has a habit of repeating itself.
-
-
Sunday 22nd December 2024 11:48 GMT nobody who matters
Some people enjoy driving, and for a great many, there is no current viable alternative to using a car. I think urban dwellers sometimes either forget this or are so wrapped in their own little bubble that they don't understand that away from urban centres, people do not have the luxury of regular (and frequent) bus services, easy access to railway stations, or may have trips to work or for shopping for essentials that are within realistic walking or cycling distance.
There are also those for whom driving is a part of their job and for which there really isn't an alternative.
-
Sunday 22nd December 2024 23:12 GMT CowHorseFrog
nobody: Some people enjoy driving
cow: Sitting in traffic is enjoying ?
~
nobpdy: there is no current viable alternative to using a car.
cow: In all choices theres always the choice not doing anything.
You dont have to drive or train or plane, you can just stay home at walk local.
~
nobody: There are also those for whom driving is a part of their job and for which there really isn't an alternative.
cow: there are many jobs that can be done remotely. You arent even trying now...
-
Monday 23rd December 2024 08:59 GMT Lord Elpuss
”Sitting in traffic is enjoying ?“
Idiotic response; there’s more to driving than sitting in traffic. Much of it is enjoyable.
” In all choices theres always the choice not doing anything.“
Viable: (adj): feasible, practical or realistic.
There is not always a viable alternative. Don’t be obtuse.
”there are many jobs that can be done remotely.“
And many that can’t. You don’t know what the OP does for work, and to make assumptions as you do is arrogant and wrong.
Why are you even here? You must know by now that everybody is laughing at you.
-
Thursday 26th December 2024 10:56 GMT CowHorseFrog
cow: Sitting in traffic is enjoying ?“
lord: Idiotic response; there’s more to driving than sitting in traffic. Much of it is enjoyable.
cow: its not idiotic, traffic is a very much a major component of the driving experience.
~
cow: ” In all choices theres always the choice not doing anything.“
lord: Viable: (adj): feasible, practical or realistic.
There is not always a viable alternative. Don’t be obtuse.
cow: Obtuse me ?
Says the person who insists that the answer for everything is DRIVING..
Its almost like you arent even trying...
~
lord: Why are you even here? You must know by now that everybody is laughing at you.
cow: What a champion. All you can do is call me names... isntead of actually addressing why my post was incorrect....
Everyone one of your answers is personal.
Dont you value your time ?
Have you ever asked why is it absolutely necessary that basically everybody has to travel into the office when they could just do the same at home ?
Dont you wish that rather than travelling you could keep that time for yourslef, and do something else that you want to do ?
You do have a life dont you ?
-
-
-
-
-
Monday 23rd December 2024 18:20 GMT John 62
China is pushing EVs because it has coal, but no oil
China doesn't have oil, so the power source for ICE cars has to be imported. China does have coal, though, which can produce electricity, which can power EVs. China's vast scale means everyone wants to sell EVs into the Chinese market and China can sell its homegrown EVs to the rest of the world.
Japan consolidating its manufacturers makes sense. Basically there will be Toyota (inc Daihatsu, maybe Subar) and Honda-Nissan-Mitsubishi. The big news will be consolidation in Germany. I'm betting Mercedes or VAG buys BMW.