"I hope
the car flops like a flounder," writes Neal Rubin of the Detroit News, referring to the Chinese Geely 7151 CK,
recently shown at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, Michigan. He points out that, despite
all the hysteria about the Chinese automakers coming to the U.S. and stomping all the competition—domestic
especially—the displayed vehicles are, so far, a “wreck”.The glove box wouldn’t close. Corroding engine. Need to pass standard safety and emissions tests. Then there's all those patent infringements that Chinese businesses committed on foreign companies (seemingly ignored by their government.) One reaction? "Business has to be interpreted in terms of laws around the world,” stated Kevin Wale, Australian president of the GM China Group.
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
In the Autoblog Garage: Aprilia RSV 1000 R
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Nick @ Jan 16th 2006 3:03PM
Just give it 10-20 years. People laughed about the Japanese and Koreans.
Rastus @ Jan 16th 2006 3:25PM
"I hope the car flops like a flounder"
Why is this such news? I mean, Detroit would love to see Toyota, Nissan, Honda, and Hyundai all do the same...flop. But go ahead, keep "hoping"...keep "hoping" the competition will die off, and keep hoping your cars will mysteriously get better.
So many weak minds...absolutely unbelievable.
Finished.Law.School @ Jan 16th 2006 3:27PM
Does he hope the car flounders because it is from China or because they presented a car that was in crap condition?
Even if the car at the show was in crap condition why would that make him want the car to flop? I would say this is a good example of why a GM and Ford made the Detroit News' cars of the year - BIAS. Which is a perfect example of why the Detroit News is useless along with many other things in Detroit...
will @ Jan 16th 2006 3:30PM
i really do think that for the first few years, these chinese cars will do the "kia". i foresee that they will enter the ring after passing emmisions and safety marginally. sell a sub $10k car with about a 15 yr 150,000 warranty or a sub 20k luxury sedan. they will sell many, only to have them all back in the shop being fixed under warranty. after all of the warranty repairs are done, the company will go belly up.
i dont foresee chinese manufacturers being a big threat for at least another 5 years. which should give the big 3 time to improve their game
Finished.Law.School @ Jan 16th 2006 3:35PM
And yes, fewer competitors does not mean that people will suddenly flock to GM and Ford dealerships to purchase overpriced, misfit, ugly sheet metal with horrible fuel economy.
When China does the Korea thing (improve quality while keeping low prices and also including longer than average warranties) in half the time it took Korea, will domestics finally make the changes that are needed? Will the unions let them?
I doubt it.
The lack of GM execs willing to take pay cuts to help GM is a good indicator of the lack of change that is likely to occur...
cowboy bob @ Jan 16th 2006 4:01PM
I am old enough to remember the late sixty's when the first toyota hit this country. Same thing with the first Hondas. Reciently the Hyundai. Now here come the Chineese. Just how many times CAN Americans BE so stupid? fIFTEEN YEARS......They will be a force beyond present comprehension. If you don't think so, you are BEYOND just stupid.
Marcel @ Jan 16th 2006 4:09PM
"I hope they will all flop" ?
Would it be appropriate to say that about a American or European car ?
Takeo @ Jan 16th 2006 4:52PM
Automobiles are an iterative process. They may suck now but they'll get better, probably faster than the Japanese and the Koreans before them. If nothing else it's cause they are working off of knowledged gained and paid for by their predecessors. If they make a good product at a good price, I expect they will do well.
P C Rao @ Jan 16th 2006 5:02PM
Chinese Motor cycles did not pass the easy Indian Pollution standards.Further from my experience,even TVs did not stand the competition?I see many chinese consumer items on American stores which also behaves very badly in its functional work?For few months operation,it is fine and not for long period of service.In India we look for long service and with lots of abuse and if it does work,then it has a future.I am yet to come across a good chinese product but for crackers which they used to be imported when India was with British operation.
Only time will tell whether after 20 yrs,they make a good car for American Users?We have to wait and see?
P C Rao -Sanfransisco-16th Jan 06
Mark @ Jan 16th 2006 5:29PM
I'm not sure I'd compare Chinese cars to Japanese or Korean. Chinese manufactured goods tend to be of significantly sub-par quality even as compared to Japanese goods of the '60s. Japanese cars were able to make such an impact on the market because they were reliable and fuel-efficient at a time when gas prices were rising and American cars were large and thirsty. (By the same token, Japanese motorcycles put the British bike industry out of business because they were less expensive, more reliable, and performed nearly as well if not better.)
Point is, the Japanese brought quality to the table. The Chinese have not. Yugo failed miserably because the cars were appalling; it didn't matter that they were cheap. Are Chinese cars as bad as Yugos? Time will tell, but all the reports I've read don't bode well.
As for the Koreans, they may have put some pretty bad cars on the market, but they certainly weren't as bad as Yugos, and they seem to have addressed those problems efficiently. What's more, of all the other types of manufactured goods I've seen that are Korean-made or Chinese-made, the Korean ones have been of higher quality (ranging from musical instruments to electronics to machined metal items).
Finally, I can't disagree with Rubin's comments about China's government and about their industries' blatant theft of patents and technology. For those reasons alone, I would refuse to buy a Chinese car even if the quality were good and the prices lower than anything else in their class.
I_Hate_China @ Jan 16th 2006 5:32PM
You don't have to wait until 2008 to try a Geely 7151CK; you can try them now by buying a used Daewoo Lanos, for 7151CK is a "licensed"(Not sure who licensed Lanos to Geely, but it certainly wasn't GM) Daewoo Lanos replica.
I_Hate_China @ Jan 16th 2006 5:40PM
Another thing is that Japanese and Koreans were in full control of their respective home market when they hit the US with their "self-engineered" cars, as opposed to the present Chinese market where foreign brands control 90% of passenger market and Geely and Chery are trying to survive their fierce homemarket by finding new markets for their "cloned" cars using somebody else's technology.
I mean, Geely and Chery are insignificant players even in China, so why should they even matter in the US market?
Art Bjornson @ Jan 16th 2006 6:04PM
Looks like one of the cars on the Cheveron commericals.
Pinkerton @ Jan 16th 2006 6:32PM
So Neil Rubin has a problem with a car from an oppressive communist country that already has a huge trade imbalance over the US. Oh, and the product is of poor quality.
What he said is hardly shocking, even if he wasn't employed by the Detroit News.
Meek @ Jan 17th 2006 8:48AM
I_Hate_China - I think you misread the other post - or I'm misreading your comments. 90% of the Chinese market is controlled by Chinese companies.
"5.76M of those vehicles were domestically produced, as China's market remains very difficult to crack for importers."
http://www.autoblog.com/2006/01/16/china-became-2-auto-market-in-05/
Domestic produced for Chinese, not domestic for Americans.
Takeo - "they are working off of knowledged gained and paid for by their predecessors."
I'm sure when you say gained, you mean stole, right?
patrick @ Jan 17th 2006 12:06PM
meek, you are mistaken, yes, 90% of the chineese market was supplied by made in china vehicles, but 90% of that 90% are foreign brand cars (GM, ford, VW, chysler, jeep), and AFAIK, none of the foreign manufacturers have a joint venture with either chery or Geely
Steve @ Feb 2nd 2006 5:09PM
The Geely resembles the Daewoo because it is a pirated version of it. I read somewhere that the doors are even interchangeable (which would be impossible for even near-identical cars normally). The Chinese don't understand intellectual property rights at all, and their vehicles will never be allowed to be sold in the US until they do. The analogy to Japan and Korea misses by a long ways for this reason.
The question of Detroit vs. Asian car makers is moot; that war was all over bar the shouting twenty years ago. American car makers are history.
John @ Mar 3rd 2006 12:00AM
I own a chineese tractor that I would put up against
any other. When you have a chance look under the hood of a John Deer and see who makes the motor.It's only
a matter of short time for thier cars to catch up. Also the Chineese own some of the ports on the west coast of the U.S. So what import charge is there.
Think about it.
John