Reuss deniesCamaro.......!!!!
07-31-2002, 11:31 PM
#46
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by muckz:
I would think that upcoming Supra will be just as impressive, but we have to see.
How come its price tag will only be $30 or $35K? How did we get to this figure? I was under the impression that last generation Supra cost around $40K or $45K?</font>
I would think that upcoming Supra will be just as impressive, but we have to see.
How come its price tag will only be $30 or $35K? How did we get to this figure? I was under the impression that last generation Supra cost around $40K or $45K?</font>
Both of these cars' predecessors died in the US...namely because of their artificially inflated $50k+ price tags.
In the last year of the American spec Supra, Toyota lowered the price of a Turbo model from about $50k to about $39K.
I think Toyota is very sensitive about not repeating the same mistake again.
08-01-2002, 12:17 PM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 2,612
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by PacerX:
[B]See, GM used to have experts. They were called 'Senior Project Engineers'. It took my father nearly 20 years to become a Senior Project Engineer at Fisher Body, after starting as a detailer in the drafting group. Those guys knew their products forward and backwards, and were used as mentors for younger engineers while developing new products. That was the methodology that made Fisher Body the undisputed engineering champion of automotive body engineering.
B]</font>
[B]See, GM used to have experts. They were called 'Senior Project Engineers'. It took my father nearly 20 years to become a Senior Project Engineer at Fisher Body, after starting as a detailer in the drafting group. Those guys knew their products forward and backwards, and were used as mentors for younger engineers while developing new products. That was the methodology that made Fisher Body the undisputed engineering champion of automotive body engineering.
B]</font>
Not only does it help you learn how to do things, it also helps you learn how to learn and work with other people.
But it dont really matter to me because im a Comp. Sci major
08-01-2002, 08:10 PM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Beyond the Sun
Posts: 123
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by PacerX:
My dearest hope is that someday, folks who know what needs to be done at GM are moved into the positions where they can make the changes.
The truth of the matter is, they probably have to lay low and keep opinions like those above to themselves - but I bet a lot of folks think them. Rocking the boat, even in the VASTLY smaller Tier 1 company that I work for = the death of a career.
My father worked for Fisher Body for 35 years. My personal dream would be to work for GM, although that may never happen. When I said I bleed Chevrolet I meant it.
Christ, I OWN AN AZTEK (it's a great vehicle, BTW... really ugly, but REALLY useful).
I'm currently writing a book on product engineering as the keystone to success. Here are some of the main points that any company can be sucessful with:
1) It takes WORLD-CLASS product engineers (and stylists and designers) to make a WORLD-CLASS product.
2) The only way to acquire world class engineers (and stylists and designers) is to TRAIN THEM. You cannot BUY them. Colleges cannot do it, contract shops have no interest in doing it, and attrition is the #1 enemy if you want to make a great product.
3) Modern companies, especially automotive companies, bleed out their best and brightest at an alarming rate. At the same time, they bleed out their future sucesses and profits and breed continual mistakes that cost horrendous amounts of money to fix.
4) Product engineering is the NUMBER ONE contributor to final product cost. The designers and engineers who develop your products have more influence on your profitability than any other single discipline (quality, manufacturing, purchasing). The only exception to this rule MAY BE marketing.
5) Quality can be engineered into a product during the development phase far less expensively than it can be added to an existing product after launch.
6) The latest quality fad (6 Sigma anyone?) will NEVER make you more sucessful than a company that engineers (and styles and designs) the product correctly in the first place.
There, now you don't need to buy the book when it is finished.
Ranting again... yeesh. I need to drink less coffee.</font>
My dearest hope is that someday, folks who know what needs to be done at GM are moved into the positions where they can make the changes.
The truth of the matter is, they probably have to lay low and keep opinions like those above to themselves - but I bet a lot of folks think them. Rocking the boat, even in the VASTLY smaller Tier 1 company that I work for = the death of a career.
My father worked for Fisher Body for 35 years. My personal dream would be to work for GM, although that may never happen. When I said I bleed Chevrolet I meant it.
Christ, I OWN AN AZTEK (it's a great vehicle, BTW... really ugly, but REALLY useful).
I'm currently writing a book on product engineering as the keystone to success. Here are some of the main points that any company can be sucessful with:
1) It takes WORLD-CLASS product engineers (and stylists and designers) to make a WORLD-CLASS product.
2) The only way to acquire world class engineers (and stylists and designers) is to TRAIN THEM. You cannot BUY them. Colleges cannot do it, contract shops have no interest in doing it, and attrition is the #1 enemy if you want to make a great product.
3) Modern companies, especially automotive companies, bleed out their best and brightest at an alarming rate. At the same time, they bleed out their future sucesses and profits and breed continual mistakes that cost horrendous amounts of money to fix.
4) Product engineering is the NUMBER ONE contributor to final product cost. The designers and engineers who develop your products have more influence on your profitability than any other single discipline (quality, manufacturing, purchasing). The only exception to this rule MAY BE marketing.
5) Quality can be engineered into a product during the development phase far less expensively than it can be added to an existing product after launch.
6) The latest quality fad (6 Sigma anyone?) will NEVER make you more sucessful than a company that engineers (and styles and designs) the product correctly in the first place.
There, now you don't need to buy the book when it is finished.
Ranting again... yeesh. I need to drink less coffee.</font>
PacerX,
I currently work in product engineering in the auto industry. I have to say that I agree with everything you have stated here.
I thought I would comment on another disturbing trend in the industry. Lately, there is a tendency to over react to short term budget and sales fluxuations with total disregard for long term effects. The standard response is to open an early retirement window to reduce head count. This has happened all across the industry for the last few years. The problem is the people that are leaving are the ones with all the experience and knowledge. In addition, they usually leave before anyone can be trained as a replacement and lack of documentation allows them to take thier knowledge with them. The other problem is the head count reductions force those remaining to pick up the slack. So increasing amounts of work have to be done by fewer and fewer people. Executives in this industry somewhere got it in thier heads that "Lean" means anorexic head count coupled to an increasingly obese process.
So not only do you have untrained, inexperienced, contract engineers who are spread so thin they don't know whether they are coming or going, but the only people with the knowledge to train them are being forced out in attempts to "burn the furniture". The truth is many engineers have so much work place on them they are unable to apply the focus and detail needed to create world class products. Most are happy to just survive a project. This is how things slip through the cracks, mistakes get made and how mediocre products make it into production. I personally loose sleep at night over this issue and I am considering getting out of automotive. The truth is I don't do this kind of ****ty work and I don't like being forced to do so.
Attrition at an alarming rate? Imagine that!
08-01-2002, 09:25 PM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,165
Wow, a lot of very eye-opening inside info on the auto industry. In an age where profits are paramount and bringing new products to the market quicker than anyone else is key, rush-jobs on cars would be pretty common now that I think about it. I'm all for the goal of getting the development of a new car down from ~5 years to 18 months but you have to wonder, at what expense to your engineers and the resulting car itself? Do we as consumers accept the bad with the good of getting our car quicker?
------------------
Mark
94 Z28, Red, A4, 3:23
Lone Mods--LPE CAI, !Lapeer Dragway.
(Hey, I'm a college boy I can't afford gobs of bolt-ons!)
Best time: 14.658 @ 95.1
with SES light on and Driver off! (First and only time at track)
The F-body will NEVER die.
------------------
Mark
94 Z28, Red, A4, 3:23
Lone Mods--LPE CAI, !Lapeer Dragway.
(Hey, I'm a college boy I can't afford gobs of bolt-ons!)
Best time: 14.658 @ 95.1
with SES light on and Driver off! (First and only time at track)
The F-body will NEVER die.
08-02-2002, 08:58 AM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
"Lately, there is a tendency to over react to short term budget and sales fluxuations with total disregard for long term effects."
Yep. Kill the Camaro. Bring out the SSR.
"The standard response is to open an early retirement window to reduce head count."
Yep. Kiss all the expertise goodbye. "We'll replace him/her with a contract guy that will be just as good. The design release engineering positions are a good example.
Retired an EXPERT seat engineer, and then REPLACED him with someone with a graphic arts degree from a contract shop. <------- This ACTUALLY HAPPENED. No bullsh!t.
"Executives in this industry somewhere got it in thier heads that "Lean" means anorexic head count coupled to an increasingly obese process."
Yep. Engineers now do paperwork 24/7 while designers (because of the contract hiring situation) are so unskilled that they do little more than draw pictures. People who draw pictures are called "illustrators", not designers.
"Attrition at an alarming rate? Imagine that!"
Yep. And they hide it by using the retirement and contract employment angles. See, if the investors knew that the auto companies were losing or moving around 60-80% of their employees every 3 years, they'd be furious.
Yep. Kill the Camaro. Bring out the SSR.
"The standard response is to open an early retirement window to reduce head count."
Yep. Kiss all the expertise goodbye. "We'll replace him/her with a contract guy that will be just as good. The design release engineering positions are a good example.
Retired an EXPERT seat engineer, and then REPLACED him with someone with a graphic arts degree from a contract shop. <------- This ACTUALLY HAPPENED. No bullsh!t.
"Executives in this industry somewhere got it in thier heads that "Lean" means anorexic head count coupled to an increasingly obese process."
Yep. Engineers now do paperwork 24/7 while designers (because of the contract hiring situation) are so unskilled that they do little more than draw pictures. People who draw pictures are called "illustrators", not designers.
"Attrition at an alarming rate? Imagine that!"
Yep. And they hide it by using the retirement and contract employment angles. See, if the investors knew that the auto companies were losing or moving around 60-80% of their employees every 3 years, they'd be furious.
08-02-2002, 09:52 AM
#52
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 145
Where I work, we are governed by the “body count mentality”. Clearly, a short sighted way of implying that cost reductions have been made when in fact, it usually does not result in lower costs. Usually the labour provided is necessary, so it is completed through other means (i.e contracting out), or deferred to future periods where the damage is threefold the cost to fix.
The problem is that people are relatively simple and can easily understand that 10,000 jobs costs less than 11,000. Thus the measure is easily understood and hence gets preference over a real solution like expanding or developing expertise.
I know nothing about engineering or auto manufacturing, but I do know areas such as statistics and have extensive experience in labour economics and especially supply and demand issues as they relate to labour. What I see coming from the this type of “management by body count” is that the critical mass and knowledge necessary to move a company forward will be at risk, when we move to future years (2004 and beyond). In my humble experience this is a critical time to build knowledge, and create a work place that fosters loyalty of staff. The war for talent has not yet begun, but when it does the battle will be vicious. The only thing that will save a company will be the satisfaction and loyalty of knowledgeable people, not recruiting .... because the battle will already be over.
These companies may be successful in avoid a financial deficit ... but they are creating a skill, knowledge and resource deficit. This may be acceptable today, because of surplus labour, but give this market a few years and watch the baby boomers retire .... and bang ... crisis ....
Ted 99 TA WS6 Conv
The problem is that people are relatively simple and can easily understand that 10,000 jobs costs less than 11,000. Thus the measure is easily understood and hence gets preference over a real solution like expanding or developing expertise.
I know nothing about engineering or auto manufacturing, but I do know areas such as statistics and have extensive experience in labour economics and especially supply and demand issues as they relate to labour. What I see coming from the this type of “management by body count” is that the critical mass and knowledge necessary to move a company forward will be at risk, when we move to future years (2004 and beyond). In my humble experience this is a critical time to build knowledge, and create a work place that fosters loyalty of staff. The war for talent has not yet begun, but when it does the battle will be vicious. The only thing that will save a company will be the satisfaction and loyalty of knowledgeable people, not recruiting .... because the battle will already be over.
These companies may be successful in avoid a financial deficit ... but they are creating a skill, knowledge and resource deficit. This may be acceptable today, because of surplus labour, but give this market a few years and watch the baby boomers retire .... and bang ... crisis ....
Ted 99 TA WS6 Conv
08-02-2002, 08:45 PM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: CNY
Posts: 2,224
I also work for a Tier 1 supplier. We have one particular program that's a total mess. I don't want to go into it because I need my job. But suffice it to say that my company is spending a dime to save a nickel.
I'll agree with holeshot. Our company's biggest problem is that they are too short-sighted. They don't see the big picture. I f they could just take the blinders off, that would help alot.
And it doesn't help that the Big 3 are squeezing their suppliers dry. Every product is cut to the bone to get prices down and we STILL have to give them a volume related, 5% cut in price every year. The only way to effectively do that is cheapen the unit. There's no other way. After a while, you're looking at a product that is no longer world class.
It truly is sad.
I'll agree with holeshot. Our company's biggest problem is that they are too short-sighted. They don't see the big picture. I f they could just take the blinders off, that would help alot.
And it doesn't help that the Big 3 are squeezing their suppliers dry. Every product is cut to the bone to get prices down and we STILL have to give them a volume related, 5% cut in price every year. The only way to effectively do that is cheapen the unit. There's no other way. After a while, you're looking at a product that is no longer world class.
It truly is sad.
08-02-2002, 10:30 PM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,873
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by HuJass:
I'll agree with holeshot. Our company's biggest problem is that they are too short-sighted. They don't see the big picture. I f they could just take the blinders off, that would help alot.</font>
I'll agree with holeshot. Our company's biggest problem is that they are too short-sighted. They don't see the big picture. I f they could just take the blinders off, that would help alot.</font>
And on the employment skill levels... some thoughts...
In Japan, people tend to be employees at the same companies for life, and since the shareholders are other japanese companies tied to the manufacturer, the focus is more long term. Workers are also treated more like a fixed cost than a variable cost for the company.
In Europe, there is great difficulty to fire people because of the laws there, so Layoffs are not as common as they are here.
------------------
If it breaks, it wasn't high performance enough.
2001 Mustang Bullitt GT
2000 Jetta M5
08-03-2002, 10:50 AM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Beyond the Sun
Posts: 123
Hypothetical Situation:
Lets say you have a Product Engineer who is totaly responsible for the design of a major system in not just one but multiple vehicles. By major system, I mean one that could cause injuries or death if something were to fail. Now, lets say this one engineer is the only product engineer working on this project. He works at least 12 hour days, he typically works 7 days a week and he spends less than 10% of his time actually doing any engineering. The rest of time is spent doing paper work, documentation, and going to meetings to discuss what needs to get done.
How safe would you feel driving this car once its in production?
Now for the scary part, This is not a hypothetical situation!
Lets say you have a Product Engineer who is totaly responsible for the design of a major system in not just one but multiple vehicles. By major system, I mean one that could cause injuries or death if something were to fail. Now, lets say this one engineer is the only product engineer working on this project. He works at least 12 hour days, he typically works 7 days a week and he spends less than 10% of his time actually doing any engineering. The rest of time is spent doing paper work, documentation, and going to meetings to discuss what needs to get done.
How safe would you feel driving this car once its in production?
Now for the scary part, This is not a hypothetical situation!
08-03-2002, 09:53 PM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2
Here is a link to an Automotive News article.
http://www.autonews.com/news.cms?newsId=2754
"In a speech Wednesday to Detroit-based auto writers, Mark Reuss, executive director of GM's Performance Division, said GM plans to:
Look a for a suitable rear-wheel drive platform for a next generation Chevrolet Camaro."
http://www.autonews.com/news.cms?newsId=2754
"In a speech Wednesday to Detroit-based auto writers, Mark Reuss, executive director of GM's Performance Division, said GM plans to:
Look a for a suitable rear-wheel drive platform for a next generation Chevrolet Camaro."
08-04-2002, 03:48 PM
#58
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Pittsburgh Pa USA
Posts: 403
So he did deny it, we all know the canadians would flip if they heard about a 5th gen right now. The very fact that GM is gearing up for a "high performance future" is promising. So we wait until 2005-06ish. The demand for this kind of car from GM will hopefully bring it back.
------------------
1996 Camaro RS
Black M5 T-Top
------------------
1996 Camaro RS
Black M5 T-Top
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
1
04-08-2015 06:08 PM
ChrisFrez
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
2
12-07-2014 11:32 AM
crYnOid
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
6
08-15-2008 10:07 AM
crYnOid
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
10
01-12-2008 08:36 AM
z28projects4ever
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
9
07-16-2002 07:48 PM