Photo: Toyota Industries Corporation

The Beginning

This is the Type-G Toyoda Automatic Loom with Non-stop Shuttle Change Motion which was developed by Sakichi Toyoda. This loom was considered revolutionary for its speed and efficiency and was sold to a British textile company for the equivalent of 1 million yen in 1929. Great-grandfather Toyoda provided the seed money from his sale of the Type-G Automatic Loom to start, with his son Kiichiro, the Toyota Motor Company and hence, the Type-G loom gave life to the Type A engine and Toyota Motor Corporation.

• - Note #1: The Toyoda family business of making looms was known as Toyota Industries because the word “toyoda” means “fertile rice paddies” and associating with a farming background just wasn’t considered progressive. It is also said that the family considered 8 brush strokes in Toyota more fortuitous than the 10 brush strokes in Toyoda.   Lesson #1: The Toyoda family was firmly on its way to understanding how to sculpt public perception and convince itself of prosperity by self-design.
• - Note #2: Sakichi Toyoda’s loom was a technological achievement in implementing the principle of Jidoka , a system in which the machine stops itself when a problem occurs. This became an integral part of the Toyota manufacturing process, allowing for a more lean operating staff. Lesson #2: Toyota was built on the principal that good engineering was at the core of allowing a manufacturing based business to grow with maximum labor and minimal technological distractions.
• - Note #3: Kiichiro Toyoda took his father, Sakichi’s, ideas to a new level by introducing the method of The 5 Whys, a problem-solving technique designed to learn the root of a problem and more quickly develop a solution. Together with his father’s ideas, this became a way of improving quality, reducing cost and increasing efficiencies. Lesson #3: The Toyodas were giving life to a new way of thinking through a problem: asking why, why and why would eventually lead to a solution.

The Celica

The Bit in the Middle

The Toyoda family continued building Toyota Motor Corporation and finally, due to the oil crisis in the early-1970’s, began to get a foothold in the North American market by introducing small cars with better fuel economy than it’s US produced competitors. They were successful in the level of quality they had because smaller economical cars manufactured and sold in the US were considered entry level and therefore, sub-par and were with lower quality standards. In the 1980’s, due to tariff imposed on imported vehicles, Toyota began manufacturing in the United States. Let’s just jump to the notes and lessons here because that is where the real story continues.

• - Note #4: The Toyodas’ commitment to Jidoka and the 5 Whys gave way to an entirely new way of manufacturing cars, specifically the Just In Time (JIT) principal and the Toyota Production System (TPS). JIT is an inventory driven process that determines the best return on investment by assuring that parts and product are not manufactured before they are needed, thereby increasing the capital and labor and increasing the return on investment. JIT and TPS were both inspired by a visit by the Toyota engineers in the US to a Piggly Wiggly.  Lesson #4: JIT meant that Toyota was producing like clockwork. Once the product was designed it meant that, like Santa’s toy factory, product just popped out of a system that ticked along.
• - Note #5: Toyota began manufacturing in Fremont, CA (as part of the philosophy of creating and manufacturing for the local sales market) with GM at a plant that became known as NUMMI. This joint venture with GM gave Toyota a supplier and employee base that was multi-generational because of the base of previous automotive plants in the area and gave GM the ability to adapt the lean methods of JIT, TPS and Jidoka to their own assembly techniques. Lesson #5: The opportunities at NUMMI were supposed to be mutually beneficial while the 2 companies learned from one another. Toyota got American corporate design tastes and unionized employees and GM got more lean production techniques.
• - Note #6: Toyota began making larger than entry level cars and introduced its luxury brand, Lexus, in response to market demand. Lesson #6: We all know where this lesson is heading now, don’t we?

Part 2 is here.

Things are not always what they seem. For instance, you might think this episode is nearly a week late. Wrong as usual, idiot. We were planning to do this episode a year from now, so technically it’s early. Why are you so offended? Clearly you are unfamiliar with the word “idiot’s” Greek roots. I was simply suggesting you were a private person unfamiliar with the vagaries of podcasting. Again, not what it seems.

So there you go. Houston, we have a theme. This week we’ve got the coolest 4×4 you never expected, a bevy of protests as the Detroit Auto Show gets going and a wrecked Yaris that is more functional than you’d think. Plus we’ve got some new fun and games this week including our Mystery Words of the Week, a new segment where we get to stereotype drivers and a couple of burnouts gone terribly wrong.

Download MP3 | | |

The Old Gray Mare Ain’t Worth What She Used To Be

Last year GM was able to trim down a quarter of its workforce- about 19,000 hourly workers in all. But the employees who decided to bail before the bailout were offered a lot more money than the employees being asked to leave now. How much more? About $120,000 each! That is right- before the slide became the avalanche on the car lots last summer, GM was offering employees $140,000 each to voluntarily leave the company. Given that they also had to forgo health and insurance benefits when they left, it really isn’t that much of an offer in the scheme of things. The employees who were either not offered the buyout or turned it down now are going to be offered a buyout package at a deep discount of $20,000 to leave and a $25,000 voucher for a ….what else……a free car.

But The Wagon Maintained Its Value?

With photos coming out recently of excessively unsold inventories of cars piling up around the world it seems that the value of unsold cars would be plummeting but they aren’t. Yet. Imagine what happens when all of these employees who take the buyouts end up with cars they don’t need but have payments due for things that they do need, like housing. The cars will potentially end up on the market and at deeply discounted prices because the employees are now deeply discounted in their employment value. Call it a Former Employee Discount. And the dealers will not make a dime from these transactions because these cars will be sold on Craigslist.

Back On The Farm

Recent ‘temporary layoffs” have hit all of the Big 3’s plants and most do not seem to have an end in site. Usually the plants shut down for 2 weeks around the Christmas holidays but this year the holiday period is extending into mid-February at the very earliest for even some of the most successful plants, including GM’s Fairfax plant in the Kansas City area. Fairfax employees have been producing two of GM’s biggest successes: the Chevy Malibu and the Saturn Aura. Currently between employee compensations from GM (negotiated by UAW 31) and unemployment benefits the workers are drawing about 90% of their normal wages but the state has been slow in paying because of the sheer volume of sudden claims coming their way. Any suggested or the inevitable forced buyout will further strain the state which has until recently maintained better than average unemployment.

(I am curious if GM ever received a $146,000,000 bond initiative that was being presented if they would make a mid-sized car at the Fairfax plant because I am pretty sure that mid-size is the new Buick LaCrosse that was already in pre-production at the plant when they sent all of the workers home for their long winter nap.)

“Forced buyouts”, you ask? If employees don’t accept the package to leave then they probably will be given a ticket to ride. And that may not include a free car.

I heard a story last month about a GM employee who had worked in the marketing department for over 15 years but still made less than the people who worked on the lines for less than 10 years. When this marketing guy left he went to another company with a nice parting bonus from GM and a $75,000 increase in pay at the next company. His value went up while the workers on the line he used to resent are being devalued every day.

Cars get crushed every day but not just in the junk yards where wrecked and unrepairable cars go to die.

Which cars are getting crushed?
Some cars are squeaky clean, have leather seats, full navigation systems, V6’s or V8 engines with far less than 30,000 miles on them. They still have that new car smell and in some cases, will still have bits of protective film covering the interior parts. For the most part they could never be considered damaged except for the odd scratch or ding that comes from brushing against the car or pulling a suitcase out of the trunk. Most of them are so new that they are not even on the dealers’ lots yet so they are considered pre-production vehicles but are made pretty much the way subsequent ones will be made. Later ones are just made faster.

Who is crushing this lost tribe of cars?
Their makers. The automotive manufacturers, foreign and domestic.

What was their crime?
They were review cars for journalists, film cars for advertising placement in big budget movies and television shows and sometimes were just lenders to high profile (and sometimes B-list) celebrities. Sometimes they only sat on an auto show floor for the public to crawl in and out of. They were part of the marketing engine.

Why are they being crushed?
To tell you the truth, not by the choice of the manufacturers. No creator likes to see their offspring, their pride and joy, the result of years of hard work reduced to an over-sized smashed can. Some of these cars are such special editions that they have features and packages that will never be seen in combination again and could be valued at an extremely high price (if they even could be sold). But they have to crush them. The government requires that they destroy them. These cars are usually off the same production line that the cars come from for safety tests and so are licensed to the manufacturer but the title is not transferable. You cannot legally register one of these cars even if the manufacturer sold it in a charity auction. A rogue auto employee couldn’t even hide one in their garage forever; the government checks up on these things!

The cars are not even allowed to be dismantled so that parts like seats and stereos can be reused because the government knows that eventually someone would build their own car out of refuse. Mind you, perfectly good, often high end refuse.

I am not pointing fingers at any manufacturer in particular because they are all held to the same standards. Maybe this will make some of them uncomfortable that I am even telling you this and I want to reinforce to them that, on this point, I am on your side. What would be better for brand building than to see rare editions turn up in auctions like vintage rare edition cars can and sell for ridiculously cool prices?

And to those of us who have driven these cars: I feel guilty and sad when I see my time end with one of these cars destined to be destroyed. Sometimes I wonder if I have played a part in a wasteful destruction. What I do know is that the manufacturers don’t like it either. It is an unspoken death because their hands are tied.

All that I know is that at a time when the car makers are being criticized for wasteful behavior it is makes sense to sometimes look further than the actions and try to get to the reason. There are always blatant examples within every company (automotive and non-automotive related) where waste can be highlighted in the media. It is sometimes the unspoken waste resulting from an industry held to standardized practices for safety and the environment directly by the government and the manufacturer swallowing, taking their lump and trying to move ahead that should be reported.

Most of this government regulation stems from emissions and safety concerns but to such a degree that one European luxury manufacturer will not import its very saleable models because they are handmade and the government wants a dozen or so to crash. These regulations also are the reason that a lot of American manufacturers do not sell their best models in the US.

RIP all of the 2009 cars conceived by artists, executed by engineers and have now gone to meet their maker.

XOO,Michelle

Originally posted here

My parents had a 1967 yellow Mustang that I drove quite a lot! It carried Heidi, the 1984 Goddard High School Homecoming Queen, on the back in the parade down Main Street in my hometown of Roswell, NM (she may have looked like a California Princess but it was my car). I was also allowed to take it out of town with 2 friends my senior year for an uneventful weekend at Mustang Island in Texas (a gift from my mother when she felt sorry for me because I missed my Senior Spring Break when I had mono).

I remember when my parents found that car. We were driving from Roswell to Horseshoe Bay, Texas and while driving through Brady, Texas (the disputed “Heart of Texas if you ask my friend KIRK) and there it sat: all restored in a showroom window of a vintage brick car lot. This was the early ’80’s. I think my parents were making more money than they ever had in their whole life, deservably so. We’d had some pretty cool cars previously, mind you! But never an old one and never a convertible. There are funny things that I miss about the Mustang: the little pedal I could push with my left foot to make the windshield wipers pass when I drove through sprinklers, the air vent down in the floorboard where fresh air could come in while the top was up and listening to only AM radio music stations.

Oh! the 1980’s! My friend Ruby flipped her Fastback one day with other friends in the car while skipping school to smoke. My dad’s brother Raymond, one of my heroes, bought his own red convertible vintage Mustang which he proudly kept garaged until he died earlier this year. As my cousin Shawn said, “unless something changes some minds, dad’s will be joining my two ‘65 hardtops after we get things sorted out.”

The 1980’s also saw an era of new Mustangs that honestly, were so ugly to me and I blocked them so much that I didn’t even acknowledge their presence. That trend continued until 1994 but by that point, I guess, I became a non-believer and it wasn’t even a viable car to consider wasting time thinking about.

In 2005 that all changed. The Mustang made a comeback and Ford had obviously had a re-think: pretty is as pretty does. When someone I know was looking for a new car I persuaded him to buy an ‘05 coupe (I still love his car & he doesn’t love it as much because he can’t carry his band’s equipment in it so well).

Last night, despite the current pre-shock economic trembles affecting the manufacturer, Ford revealed the latest Mustang. The 2010 version still has that look and performance that made me fall in love again but this time the object of my affection has been in the gym, eating right and is ready for a new era of fans.

Is it the wrong time to introduce this car? I don’t think so because we can’t force muscle car lovers into hybrids or PZEVs or even 4-cylinders. It just ain’t American to shame buyers for so many reasons. It isn’t even like Ford should be chastised for the improved model: it isn’t significantly different enough from the previous iteration that they wasted precious engineering hours to detract from their ability to develop extremely well executed hybrids, PZEVs and low MPG models. (Is it un-American to suggest that GM wasted hours/days/years on the new Camaro from SCRATCH when they should have pursued not making a muscle car to compete with the Mustang?)

Yes, I am sentimentally attached to the Mustang. I cried at the big Reveal last night for both its history and its future.

Originally posted here

For those of you not familiar with this model, it was a real technology tour de force for Honda, combining their hybrid Integrated Motor Assist with an ultra-efficient and light-weight two-seat vehicle. It was also the first hybrid-electric vehicle available in the U.S. and was rated at 70 mpg highway by the DOT standards at the time. Honda stopped selling them in 2006 after poor sales. Forbes reported near the end of the model’s availability that in some months Honda only sold 8 Insight’s in the United States. Yes, 8!

I reviewed one when new and was pretty astounded. The driving experience reminded me of the old Honda CRX, especially the HF model. It was light, nimble, surprisingly roomy for a tiny two-seater, and with the manual transmission it was fun to drive. I thought it was awesome, but to be fair I was also a fan of the GM EV1, so I was a bit biased.

The Insight cost a bit over $20,000 when new and if this Craigslist posting is to be believed, they are now selling for nearly the same prices used. There’s also this eBay listing for another Insight with low miles asking for over $25,000.

It appears that Honda may have pulled the car from the market just a bit too early.

Originally posted here

In the case of Ford, their sales are being hit by an economic downturn that, at this rate, could result in an annualized rate of sales down by 5 million units in 2008. But, that said, Ford is a big part of the numbers that show half of all new cars that were sold in June 2008 were 4 cylinder cars and even though that trend may change as the year progresses, Ford has rallied and responded to the downturn, just like every other manufacturer has, by doing a Big Re-think of their model.

One of their solutions which does a double whammy on their issues is bringing in an improved Focus model that is much closer in quality and style to their European issued Focus. That meets the customer demand for more high quality, less expensive & fuel efficient cars that do not feel like the old school metal lunch boxes known as the America Focus. The second point that this covers is a much needed environmentally friendly response to other manufacturers’ solutions by offering the 2009 Focus with Partial Zero Emissions. These types of cars are commonly referred to as PZEVs.

What is interesting is that this feature of having a zero evaporative emissions from the fuel system costs the manufacturer, Ford, in this case, and extra $1200 on top of normal manufacturing costs to produce but the cost to the consumer is only $200 on top of the normal cost of a Focus.

Are they going to start giving cars away at or below their cost? Well, not exactly but because they are being required in some stated to produce these kinds of PZEVs, they also have to sell them successfully which means they have to take a bit of a loss to incentivize consumers to choose PZEV instead of a regular emissions vehicle.

So instead of keeping an older car that might get good gas mileage but is terrible for the environment, you can buy for under$16,000 a better quality, safer car that will produce less emissions during 5 round trip drives from Los Angeles to San Franciso than your gas powered lawn mower will emit in one hour of use.

The times, they are a changin’.

Originally posted here

Well, that will never happen and that kind of monitoring has a reason! It costs them (mostly man hours) to maintain their systems. The way the government is monitoring the environment is kind of the same way.

Car manufacturing is not environmentally friendly usually although Ford and Subaru are reaching in the right direction. Add to all of that the federal and state governments monitoring carbon emissions from not only the activities of the car manufacturing process but also the environmental effect that their cars cause.

In an effort to reduce emissions dramatically the State of California created a new category for Partial Zero Emission Vehicles based on an agreement between the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the manufacturers who sell cars in California. What CARB would have really loved to have done is passed a mandate that a growing percentage of vehicles being produced were Zero Emissions Vehicles (ZEVs) but that would occur at a huge cost to the automotive manufacturers because it would require huge advances very quickly in systems such as hydrogen or electric fuel cells. I think that we all know that the recent fuel crunch and the current economy is having drastic reprecussions to the auto manufacturers sales.

By current PZEV standards, the cars are required to have a 15 year/15,000 mile warranty on emission-control components, have zero evaporative emissions on its fuel system and fall under the SULEV category. These cars are only available in the 5 “clean car states” California, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, or Vermont and will soon be available in Connecticut, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Washington. All of these states have adopted California’s pollution control rules.

Some other facts about PZEV:

• It has been said that a PZEV driving through Los Angeles County during times of high smog actually releases cleaner air out of its exhaust than it took into its system because it literally cleans the air.
• In the 15 year warrantied life of a PZEV emission sytem, it will emit less harmfull emissions than if you spilled a pint of gasoline on the pavement once. (see the picture of a gas spill at NASCAR- QUICK make another PZEV!!)
• There is a rumor about the amount of low carbon monoxide emissions from PZEVs but because this one is potentially dangerous and I do not have the facts, I am not going to publish it for now.

I wrote in my other details about PZEV in an article specifically about the Ford Focus PZEV yesterday and these emissions controls are pretty incredible and welcome in our smoggy city of Los Angeles.

Originally posted here

I then asked him what his favorite car to drive and was completely surprised by his answer: he loves to drive his Ford Lightning more than anything else. I love this guy! He thinks that the Special Vehicle Team designed sporty performance version of the F-150 pick up is his favorite drive.

The Lightning was featured as Brian O’Connor’s ride in The Fast and The Furious and was also in the video game NASCAR 2005: Chase for the Cup. It has a supercharged Triton V8 and can haul butt and a boat at the same time.

These powerhouses were only made from 1999 to 2004 and like the rest of the F-150 family, maintain their value pretty darn well. A 2004 model with 60,000 miles on it can be had from $16-18,000.00. Not a bad price at all considering what you are getting!

Originally posted here