Autoblog

It actually is very very easy to switch from making a ridgeline to a civic. I know its unbelievable but that shows you Honda ingenuity.

By pressing a switch the programs for the robots change, the track system gets narrower, the arms get closer and production changes from a Pilot to a Civic. Ive seen it done.

10 years ago a flex plant was one where two vehicles off of the same platform were built simultaneously, like a Camry or Avalon or Silverado and Tahoe. Now you can get completely unrelated in every possible way vehicles made on the same line.
Maybe in 10 years it gets so crazy you can build a Cobalt, a Corvette and a Suburban right after another.

↓↑report

Actually, for Honda it is fairly effortless.

About 10 years ago they began redesigning all of their assembly lines to be able to assemble any model that is currently in production, so that they can do exactly what the article discusses.

There are still logistics involved, but nothing like the wholesale re-configuration that would be required in a traditional older style plant.

I'm speculating here, but my guess is that since they already build the trucks in Alabama, all they're doing is removing truck production from the Canadian plant in order to increase Civic production, since they both currently run down the same assembly line.

↓↑report

@ Johnny & Tim:
Thanks guys. I actually did not know it was that easy. Prompted by your posts I went and did some research and found some interesting articles on Honda's standardization of it's plants worldwide, and it's streamlining of assembly processes. Truly ingenious stuff.

↓↑report

Why don't they effortlessly fix those transmissions that have been recalled? You know, swap everyones transmission from the problem years instead of just adding to the warranty. Remember, the great Japanese replace the problem part with no questions asked, they don't just extend warranties.

While they are at it, why don't they effortlessly add a woman to their executive team like GM has running the Saturn division?

How about adding some diversity to their boardroom, effortlessly.

BTW, I hope Harley is not American because he loves him some Japanese. It shows through in *every* blog he writes. The funny part is that he is not very Japanese in his greatness: "For comparison's sake, Toyota has sold 32,435 Corollas, Ford has sold 23,850 Foci and Chevy has sold 18,636 Cobalts so far this year."

I.E. check the numbers.

http://wardsauto.com/keydata/USSalesSummary0804.xls

↓↑report

good job jared to think that all auto mftrs are as, well...dumb as their american counterparts. well, maybe i shouldn't use the word dumb, but maybe naive...or "yet to be enlightened". if you build a plant, or even operate one that can only product two large vehicles...say a tahoe and a surburban...what will happen if that type of vehicle becomes less desirable, and smaller vehicles become more desirable. Even think about the converse...honda has in many plants around the world ran them at 100% of capable output. no matter what the trend is, all their plants really stay close to that. Compare this to what you find in domestic plants, and its very very very far from that. i must say i'm not 100% familiar w/ all the financials, but judging from past layoffs and previous surpluses of inventories from the big 3....i'd say they be lucky to get 100% from even 70% of their plants.

↓↑report

and just how old are those US plants? yes, they should have re-tooled or built all new but trying to save a dime on real estate probably impacted this during the Accounting-in-charge years.

of course, they didnt have the US government footing the bill for them to get started and showing them how to build steel cheaper with new processes, like the Nipponese companies did after WWII.

Now, if GM and Ford could only get the US to bomb one of their plants and rebuild all of them, maybe the US companies would get a head start.


Just saying, be careful when you compare two companies at one moment in time, without regard to their history getting them to that point in time.

↓↑report

@lithous
I'd say a well-performing, well paying, diverse workforce corporation with the manufacturing flexibility to manage its product lines well, thus keeping as many of their employees as possible, beat companies that are shedding their employees left and right, even though such companies management practices maybe utopian in your view.

↓↑report

You people are insane.

I don't care how much gimcrackery a plant has. It is not effortless to switch from one car to another. The plant does have to be reconfigured. The supply chain does too. Hell, even if you just have to figure out how where to stack the new smaller cradles efficiently, that's effort. You say you just load new software on the robots? What happens when the robot that places a part has to grab a larger part and the conveyor that brings it isn't wide enough or has to be moved a foot over because the post holding up the roof is in the way?

I grew up in Flint, saw the inside of a lot of plants, my father worked in one for 25 years. Model year changeover can be a bitch, let alone changing models.

Making cars isn't like making software.

↓↑report

It's not "effortless" but it's not too hard either. Saw a program on Discovery I believe, of the Hyundai assembly plant here, and I'm sure Honda/Toyota/Big2.5 all have the same techonology to quickly change a production line. We're all computers now dude, it's not hard labor anymore.
This shows the narrow and short term vision of the domestics to not see that although small cars are smaller money makers, you'll make more by volume on selling small cars, than selling 0 cars or high profit vehicles.
Good again for Honda !!!!

↓↑report

Not for long, there an old article from Autoblog who mentionned then Honda ramped up the CRV production in.... Mexico (for the Brazilian and Argentine markets but who knows if a small batch might come to the US and Canada as well). http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/27/honda-ramping-up-cr-v-production-in-mexico/

Since a couple of years Sony closed some plants http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/01/23/sony-closing-tube-plant-in-san-diego/ http://blogs.rnw.nl/medianetwork/sony-to-close-tv-parts-plant-cuts-650-uk-jobs and who knows if history will repeat with Toyota and Honda?

↓↑report

Gee, does that mean Honda has more U.S. jobs now? Why don't you go look up number of U.S. Honda (automobile) jobs vs. GM and tell me if you statement is true. My guess is that GM has more U.S. jobs than Honda period (and don't forget they make motorcycle, ATVs, lawnmowers, etc.)

But that is a brilliant deduction. Since GM used to have 600K U.S. only direct employ jobs and all of Toyota, Honda, Nissan and the rest have not filled that many jobs it means we are still in a negative gain from the destruction that, "Oh, I have to buy a Camry because it is rated 8.8/10 and a Malibu 8.6/10", has caused. Now you want to bend the truth (no, the jobs aren't filled in by the Japanese by anything but a fraction) and make it worse.

↓↑report

Japanese companies outsource everything except final assembly. So when times get lean, they squeeze their suppliers, who then lay off their workers. The layoffs don't come under their own names. This happens in their homeland too. You heard Toyota gives employment for life? Yeah, only to a few people. Most people toil away at Nippondenso selling parts to Toyota (or at a subcontractor who sells parts to Nippondenso) and when times get tight, these companies cut jobs.

The American companies are trying to remake themselves in this image by outsourcing as much production as possible. For example, I can tell you from the pics of the American Axle plant that that used to be a GM plant, the sign is the characteristic shape GM put up in the late 70s. UAW contracts don't allow GM to outsource as much as they want. So they can't "platoon" their workers, laying them off when a model doesn't sell as well as they hoped, like a supplier does.

Heck, just watch "8 Mile". Rabbit (Eminem's character) works at a supplier company. He works in automobile production, but not for the big 3. These people are paid a lot less than at the big 3, and might not even get 40 hours in every week (the downside to hourly employment). And since the big 3 pays so much more, any one of these people would love to get a job at a big 3 plant.

Anyway, this is part of the reason Honda isn't nearly as big an employer as Ford or GM. And a reason that Honda can keep their people on in slow times. They've already configured to employ as few people as possible, so when tough times come, they just cut their contracts and keep as many people as they can. But people at their suppliers do lose jobs, make no mistake about that. If the Paseo turns out to be a loser (it did), all the companies that supply parts for it suffer and they make their employees feel the pain.

↓↑report

Union and legacy health and retirement plans are EXACTLY why they can't compete.

Japanese companies with US plants are usually non-union shops, and pay people on merit, like most of the US economy. They hire and fire, offer moderate benefits, and remain cost effective. Merit based employment works every time it is tried in good faith. (employers committing fraud or gross mismanagement negates the whole point, and is a separate issue. Big 3 aren't THAT bad, they are just trying to survive.)

UAW striking at American Axle cost GM a reported TWO BILLION DOLLARS!!! That is just the most recent temper tantrum they've thrown.

Who do you think pays that? GM doesn't print money, they collect it from consumers, by either raising prices, or offering less value for the same price.

That is especially true on sliver-thin margin economy cars, less evident on high-margin, less regulated SUVs. No wonder what the Big 3 have been building and selling. And people do buy what is sold to them, most of the time, if the economics aren't forcing their hand. now that is starting to happen again.

GM, as well as Ford and Chrysler have not been managed well, to be sure, but one executive's compensation is a drop in the pond compared to the concessions given to labor, including retired union workers who are no longer producing ANYTHING, but still costing the company.

The only way out of this for the "big three" is through. Cutting labor and legacy costs, and improving management culture. And they need to do it FAST. There is no real way around, they just have to bear through it.

Old union concessions and contracts could be a noose around their necks... the blocks just haven't been kicked out yet... Can they get the nooses off before that happens?

↓↑report

Union issues and legacy costs are why they're having trouble turning a profit. That is NOT the reason why people have a low opinion of American cars.

↓↑report

Gung Ho came out AFTER Detroit/Flint lost a crapload of jobs, not before.

If the folks on this site ran an auto company, I'm sure it'd overtake Toyota in a few years.

Things look simple from a far, it's sure easy to think that you're smarter than everyone else when in reality there are big issues to running such a huge company and the people there are doing the best they can.

↓↑report

If you know domestics are making bad vehicles, but at same time all the vehicles you listed are domestics, how can you call yourself not a "blind patriot?"

↓↑report