Thread: Death Of The Australian Motoring Industry

Based on Kiwi fuel prices you would be a fool to buy any petrol engined car over there compared to a diesel. The Australian car industry was never going to grow or fail based on how many (few) cars they have ever sold across the ditch and that is no different now to what it was 40 years ago.

Originally Posted by TerryO

Based on Kiwi fuel prices you would be a fool to buy any petrol engined car over there compared to a diesel.

Nope. Pretty much any car that burns less than a falcodore is good to go and selling well. Regardless of petrol vs diesel.

Originally Posted by TerryO

The Australian car industry was never going to grow or fail based on how many (few) cars they have ever sold across the ditch and that is no different now to what it was 40 years ago.

You sound like Ford/GMH management.

As has been mentioned engine choice and the cars produced here where not determined by anyone here.
The ford territory/falcon should have had the 2.7tdv6 in 2004-5 the same year the ford owned LR introduced it with Peugeot. Instead it took almost 8 years to get into the territory.
We used to build the corolla and pulsar here. My sisters corolla, last of the oz built ones, is a 1.8 and has done 400,000 km. The pulsar production in Australia was having fewer faults than the parents Japanese line.
Both shut and moved .
The other biggest issue is export. Ford never tried or allowed oz built to export, and it's territory looks just like the next gen disco. It would have sold well in uk/eu/usa with a tdv6 and turbo petrol from 2005. Both the falcon and commodore would have sold in china but not allowed. And ford could have replaced it's crown Victoria(35 year old design with rwd solid axle low power v8, mainly sold to police) in the us anytime over the last decade with a much higher performance falcon turbo 6 or v8 but chose not to.
The difference between us and UK is the uk Govt sat down with the manufacturing sector and said how can we help you build and export more. So are now on the path to building more cars than ever,1972 was their peak, with half being exports.

Originally Posted by frantic

As has been mentioned engine choice and the cars produced here where not determined by anyone here.
The ford territory/falcon should have had the 2.7tdv6 in 2004-5 the same year the ford owned LR introduced it with Peugeot. Instead it took almost 8 years to get into the territory.
We used to build the corolla and pulsar here. My sisters corolla, last of the oz built ones, is a 1.8 and has done 400,000 km. The pulsar production in Australia was having fewer faults than the parents Japanese line.
Both shut and moved .
The other biggest issue is export. Ford never tried or allowed oz built to export, and it's territory looks just like the next gen disco. It would have sold well in uk/eu/usa with a tdv6 and turbo petrol from 2005. Both the falcon and commodore would have sold in china but not allowed. And ford could have replaced it's crown Victoria(35 year old design with rwd solid axle low power v8, mainly sold to police) in the us anytime over the last decade with a much higher performance falcon turbo 6 or v8 but chose not to.
The difference between us and UK is the uk Govt sat down with the manufacturing sector and said how can we help you build and export more. So are now on the path to building more cars than ever,1972 was their peak, with half being exports.

Same can be said about the Eco-boost falcon, fantastic car but built to late.And what were Ford thinking in the 80's with the rubbish Capri project which was meant to be a export design.

I would have thought the XR8 or XR6 turbo would have been perfect for the American market.Same as the V8 ute from both makers.

Capri was a perfect example of management ignorance. One of the several factors that killed the Capri was fwd and Mx-5. Ford owned Mazda so must have known about rwd mx5 yet let Capri, which was a laser/323 in bling, fwd be designed and built. A smarter approach would have done the ranger bt50 thing, what they did with the laser/323 and put our suspension and body on . It took Mazda years to put a turbo on the mx5, whereas the Capri had it in from day one. Those 2 simple points may have turned the sales around.

The fact is that protection works, that's why all the big car-making countries protect their industries. This is a unpopular political and economic theory in Australia, but taken for granted in most of the world.


Obama nationalized GM and Chrysler to save them, and then sold them off, while Japan and Germany offer huge hidden subsidies to their vehicle industries. Thailand has built the biggest vehicle manufacturing industry in the region by imposing massive tariffs on imports. The countries that tried to reduce protection have seen their vehicle industries shut down or be sold overseas.


Of course, to succeed you need a lot more than protection. You need world competitive cars made at acceptable costs which meet the actual needs of consumers. Our industry mostly either made the wrong cars, failed to adjust to changing buyer preferences and failed to develop export markets. Part of the reason for that is that multinational companies are always going to shift the bulk of their manufacturing costs to low-cost countries and be reluctant to invest in high-cost factories.


So, sadly, I think our industry has been doomed for about 20 years. That doom was hastened when the current government pulled the plug on about $300 million or so in assistance. Apparently, it would prefer to pay the dole to many of those workers than to support them to have real jobs. Strange thinking...




.

Originally Posted by frantic

Capri was a perfect example of management ignorance. One of the several factors that killed the Capri was fwd and Mx-5. Ford owned Mazda so must have known about rwd mx5 yet let Capri, which was a laser/323 in bling, fwd be designed and built. A smarter approach would have done the ranger bt50 thing, what they did with the laser/323 and put our suspension and body on . It took Mazda years to put a turbo on the mx5, whereas the Capri had it in from day one. Those 2 simple points may have turned the sales around.

When you look at the sales of the MX5 worldwide it was a smash hit,I am not saying the capri would have been better than the MX5 but at least it would of had a rival.Little car with a turbo and rear wheel drive 2plus2 drop top would have been a winner.

When ford gave up on the LTD and Fairlane they turned their back on a segment that used to be important to them.I know the Statesman and Caprice were outselling them in a big way,so instead of improving the design they just gave up.

When Ford stopped making the ESP how much ground did they give Holden and Brock with their V8 commodores,a hell of a lot.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

The fact is that protection works, that's why all the big car-making countries protect their industries. This is a unpopular political and economic theory in Australia, but taken for granted in most of the world.

Does it work or does it just create lazy industries dependent on corporate welfar delivering lack of choice for their customers?

East German cars vs West German cars etc.

Quantas (in the poo) vs Air NZ (record profits).