Wow, I Never Knew Gmc And Toyota Had A Joint Autoplant Together

Jubei69 · April 7, 2010

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/01/news/compa...sion=2010040115

C. Charles Hahn · April 7, 2010

So you didn't realize that the Pontiac Vibe was always just a Toyota Matrix in disguise, the old Chevy Nova from the 80s was just a Toyota Corolla, etc?

revrnd · April 7, 2010

NUMMI was old news.

Suzuki has pulled out of the joint venture in Canada, CAMI.

Jubei69 · April 8, 2010

So you didn't realize that the Pontiac Vibe was always just a Toyota Matrix in disguise, the old Chevy Nova from the 80s was just a Toyota Corolla, etc?

yes i knew, that like the old mazda bt trucks were ford rangers.... the dodge stealth was a misubishi 3000gt, the vw taureg is porshe cayenne etc....

Nick The Great · April 8, 2010

I have known about this but never understood it.

In most lines of work, you never do business with our competitors.

P71_CrownVic · April 8, 2010

So you didn't realize that the Pontiac Vibe was always just a Toyota Matrix in disguise, the old Chevy Nova from the 80s was just a Toyota Corolla, etc?

Wasn't the Corolla a Prism as well?

C. Charles Hahn · April 8, 2010

So you didn't realize that the Pontiac Vibe was always just a Toyota Matrix in disguise, the old Chevy Nova from the 80s was just a Toyota Corolla, etc?

Wasn't the Corolla a Prism as well?

Yes it was

ColoradoSkiCountry · April 8, 2010

Read this, all you idiots who think Honda and Toyota build better quality vehicles:

"Today GM plants are generally rated as efficient as those of its Japanese competitors. Various vehicle quality measures confirm company claims that its vehicles are also comparable to the imports, even if customer perception still lags behind. But it took decades to approach that parity."

Doug_Scott · April 9, 2010

Read this, all you idiots who think Honda and Toyota build better quality vehicles:

"Today GM plants are generally rated as efficient as those of its Japanese competitors. Various vehicle quality measures confirm company claims that its vehicles are also comparable to the imports, even if customer perception still lags behind. But it took decades to approach that parity."

Just because you wrote something in quotes does not make it true. Do you believe everything you read on the internet when presented like that?

Jubei69 · April 9, 2010

Read this, all you idiots who think Honda and Toyota build better quality vehicles:

"Today GM plants are generally rated as efficient as those of its Japanese competitors. Various vehicle quality measures confirm company claims that its vehicles are also comparable to the imports, even if customer perception still lags behind. But it took decades to approach that parity."

Just because you wrote something in quotes does not make it true. Do you believe everything you read on the internet when presented like that?

C. Charles Hahn · April 9, 2010

Just because you wrote something in quotes does not make it true. Do you believe everything you read on the internet when presented like that?

Sell your truck and buy a Tundra.

fbachman · April 10, 2010

I have known about this but never understood it.

In most lines of work, you never do business with our competitors.

Well, Roger Smith ( I THINK is was the Roger Smith era) back in the day decided that to compete, GM needed to learn how to make high quality smaller vehicles.

To some degree, he was right. Back then, GM was isolated with large platform, body on frame, heavy, sedans. High (for then) fuel prices, and the philosophical culture of GM (some may have called it arrogance) that GM knew best, coupled with the japanese invasion left GM out in the cold. The large V8s became anemic, and had huge drivability issues due to the advent of emmissions controls. Remember 400+ CID V8s with <200hp? All US manufacturers got burned by that as they thought that the Government would NEVER go thru with Emmissions COntrols, but, they did. And Detroit was caught with their Jeans around their ankles.

Roger Smith had the thought that you learn from the best. At that time, Toyota was the best at small cars. SO, they created NUMMI out in Ca. The sales numbers and market share indicated that Toyota had something and wasn't going away.

In a wierd way, GM USA owes a LOT to that marriage in their small car platforms that followed. Got off to a shaky start, but, eventually, GM did, indeed, become more competitive in the small car segment (read Saturn) --- AND learned about lean production and automation with high build quality.

What always startled me, is that GM had Opel in Germany which, at that time, had a very significant share of the German market and made very successful Euro style cars that NEVER made it over here. I think that may have had something to do with Union contracts, etc..

bluArrow · April 12, 2010

Read this, all you idiots who think Honda and Toyota build better quality vehicles:

"Today GM plants are generally rated as efficient as those of its Japanese competitors. Various vehicle quality measures confirm company claims that its vehicles are also comparable to the imports, even if customer perception still lags behind. But it took decades to approach that parity."

Just because you wrote something in quotes does not make it true. Do you believe everything you read on the internet when presented like that?

I didn't read it on the Internet, I read the actual report. And yes, it's true.

Roger Smith had the thought that you learn from the best. At that time, Toyota was the best at small cars. SO, they created NUMMI out in Ca. The sales numbers and market share indicated that Toyota had something and wasn't going away.

Roger didn't give a rip about their cars. What the General wanted was insight into lean manufacturing. Manufacturing that was done with the Toyoda Production System (TPS). Entire books have been written on TPS so we'll leave that but the practice was to rotate people into NUMMI from GM's domestic factories for a period of time to observe and take an active role in TPS and then return to their respective domestic factories and put the ideals into practice which culminated into where GM is today, a market leader.

fbachman · April 13, 2010

Read this, all you idiots who think Honda and Toyota build better quality vehicles:

"Today GM plants are generally rated as efficient as those of its Japanese competitors. Various vehicle quality measures confirm company claims that its vehicles are also comparable to the imports, even if customer perception still lags behind. But it took decades to approach that parity."

Just because you wrote something in quotes does not make it true. Do you believe everything you read on the internet when presented like that?

I didn't read it on the Internet, I read the actual report. And yes, it's true.

Roger Smith had the thought that you learn from the best. At that time, Toyota was the best at small cars. SO, they created NUMMI out in Ca. The sales numbers and market share indicated that Toyota had something and wasn't going away.

Roger didn't give a rip about their cars. What the General wanted was insight into lean manufacturing. Manufacturing that was done with the Toyoda Production System (TPS). Entire books have been written on TPS so we'll leave that but the practice was to rotate people into NUMMI from GM's domestic factories for a period of time to observe and take an active role in TPS and then return to their respective domestic factories and put the ideals into practice which culminated into where GM is today, a market leader.

I didn't say he gave a rip about their cars. GM had something to learn, and they learned it. I mean, the two go hand in hand whether he gave a rip or not about their cars.

Not sure about the hostility.... but, you kinda supported what I wrote, only with the lingo. I happen to agree with you on (all) your points.