"Bill McKee" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
They're made here. They employ a ****load of Americans who can actually
be proud of producing vehicles that don't suck.



They are assembled here. Big difference.


Many of the parts are made here, Bill. If the engines and transmissions are
made in Japan (and I'm not sure), there's a good reason for it: Toyota has a
reputation to uphold, and they haven't yet managed to build those parts to
their standards using local help.

For the last few years, the same family has rented the cabin next to mine
when I'm on vacation. The father works for a company that programs CNC
equipment for auto makers, and lately, a couple of gun companies.
Unfortunately, talking to him is like talking to some C++ programmers, but
the jist of the conversation goes like this: All CNC equipment is not the
same. Even if it were, manufacturers request various levels of tolerances.
And, if those first two factors were identical, the machinery still produces
a certain percentage of parts that are not up to par. This is based on
various factors, like the speed at which the equipment is expected to
operate. Then, it's up to the manufacturer to determine their reject rate.
That's where the problems begin. His non-programmer explanation is this:
We've all been behind cars that stink so bad, we'll do anything to pass
them. Normally, you'd think of a 40 year old Blazer when you hear this idea,
but in fact, you can have the same experience driving behind a 3 year old
Chrysler vehicle that burns a quart of oil every month or two. Meanwhile,
most Toyota owners will buy a quart of oil when the car's new, and the
bottle will remain unopened for 10 years.

He works with Japanese engineers who did intern work during college at
Toyota plants in Japan. He says they're often shocked at how they're asked
to widen tolerances for customers here. Practices considered normal here
would be enough to shut down a Toyota machining process until the problem is
corrected.