thoughts on KIA??
sethster27
08-24-2006, 08:36 PM
So from what I hear the Rio has been making waves in the car market recently. I’ve been doing some work with Kia and there has been a lot of talk about the JD Power award they recently won. It’s surprising because I like Kia cars but that’s not something I expected. On the other hand it’s really cool to see an auto company working hard on improving their cars and not just going through the motions. Has anyone heard about this or agree with me? Let me know.
del
08-24-2006, 10:57 PM
kia today is what hyundai was over 10 years ago. hyundai stepped up their game and as long as they keep up their momentum, they'll stay on their way to being on the same playing field as toyota, honda and nissan. the new sonata has ranked quite high amongst the popular car critics. haven't driven one myself but they at least look better. i think kia has that same potential but not quite there yet. my personal experience with kia was a sephia that belonged to a good friend of mine. and it wasn't positive. just felt, well like a kia - generic, cheap inside and out, brittle as if it were completely snapped together with plastic rivets. not to mention it broke down more than a new car should - at the time. they'll do what hyundai has done - introduce cheap, affordable econoboxes, like the rio into a new market, make themselves at home and eventually come out with some real contenders. i believe honda started out the same way too and now look where they are.
Moppie
08-24-2006, 11:19 PM
i believe honda started out the same way too and now look where they are.
Toyota started out that way, Honda took a slightly different root, similar to Ferrari, they started building sports cars to help finnance the racing program.
Only they were very Japanese sports cars, small, efficient and effective, cars like the S600 etc.
Toyota started out that way, Honda took a slightly different root, similar to Ferrari, they started building sports cars to help finnance the racing program.
Only they were very Japanese sports cars, small, efficient and effective, cars like the S600 etc.
Jimster
08-25-2006, 09:09 AM
Kia are working hard, thier cars are still a little short of the mark, but the Picanto and new Magentis (As well as the Sportage and Sorrento) have certainly moved the brand on from the low point of the last Rio and Magentis etc.
stamar
08-25-2006, 05:17 PM
Toyota started out that way, Honda took a slightly different root, similar to Ferrari, they started building sports cars to help finnance the racing program.
Only they were very Japanese sports cars, small, efficient and effective, cars like the S600 etc.
i recomend reading the history of honda because its a very fascinating story.
Honda and Toyota ( toyoda) were born out of the same contract. Both were auto parts suppliers for mitsubishi holding company.
Toyoda wanted to make small cars and honda wanted to make motorized bicycles. So they traded factories.
Honda was a race car driver no doubt. But honda motors made motors, spinning the wrong way. They were a motorcycle comapny that eventually made motorcycle derived cars. I think the first honda cars came out in the late 60s
I cant see how KIA is actually like either of these companies which started in post ww2 japan in a market where the average income was about $100 a month in todays dollars.
In a vague parallel suzuki cars sort of parrallels honda in that their orignal cars use their motorcycle engine.
Anyhow my opinion of KIA is that its the butt end. A company so horrid hyundai drove them out of business.
Only they were very Japanese sports cars, small, efficient and effective, cars like the S600 etc.
i recomend reading the history of honda because its a very fascinating story.
Honda and Toyota ( toyoda) were born out of the same contract. Both were auto parts suppliers for mitsubishi holding company.
Toyoda wanted to make small cars and honda wanted to make motorized bicycles. So they traded factories.
Honda was a race car driver no doubt. But honda motors made motors, spinning the wrong way. They were a motorcycle comapny that eventually made motorcycle derived cars. I think the first honda cars came out in the late 60s
I cant see how KIA is actually like either of these companies which started in post ww2 japan in a market where the average income was about $100 a month in todays dollars.
In a vague parallel suzuki cars sort of parrallels honda in that their orignal cars use their motorcycle engine.
Anyhow my opinion of KIA is that its the butt end. A company so horrid hyundai drove them out of business.
Right_LiRrr
08-30-2006, 07:45 AM
I don't understand why anyone would want to buy a korean car (cost aside). they're all imitation japanese cars. Just get the real thing.
Unless they differentiate themselves and have their own distinct style, I'd always choose jap over korean.
Unless they differentiate themselves and have their own distinct style, I'd always choose jap over korean.
bluevp00
08-30-2006, 11:29 AM
You also have to consider the cost of ownership. Sure they're cheap when you buy them new, and thats what attracts customers, but the resale value for Kia goes WAY down after you buy it. It's not as bad as in years past, but still expect the car to lose a lot of value once you drive it off the lot.
Japanese cars (espically Honda & Toyota) have the best resale value, but are more expensive when bought new. So if you want a good medium, go for a used Japanese car in your price range.
Japanese cars (espically Honda & Toyota) have the best resale value, but are more expensive when bought new. So if you want a good medium, go for a used Japanese car in your price range.
kachok25
08-30-2006, 12:17 PM
OK I respect the fact that KIA is really trying their best to be a real car company, but untill they build a good car I won't touch one. Sure all the auto mags like the Rio but everbody I know who has to drive one every day hates them with a passion. Out of the 7 kia owners I know 5 of the 7 of them have had their car just eat tires like candy one of them says she has to change tires every 8000-10000 miles (no she does not race it)! Others have had thier tires explode for no good reason. I saw a brand new Kia have a total blowout right in front of me the other day. One has gone through three transmissions and the car is not even three years old yet! Everybody builds the occasional fluke but this is crazy untill I start meeting happy kia owners I will keep far away from them.
stamar
08-30-2006, 09:05 PM
I want to add on to my previous post a key point.
I dont know what the story of KIA is.
BUT I DO know how it ends. It ends with them being bought out by ford, and then sold to hyundai.
Their full function seperate car company image actually ended more than 10 years ago, and as of today I dont believe there is even one car sold as a KIA in north america that is made by KIA. I think if the sportage is still the old model its a KIA. The rest are made by hyundai.
The name brand itself will dissolve within a few years. At the moment it is the plymouth of hyundais dodge.
So really when you are talking about KIA today you are talking about used cars. Like what, a sephia? Horrid. And the very worst thing about KIA that doesnt make sense is they get worse gas mileage than us v6s
The most desireable vehicle KIA got off was called the sedona, a bad gas mileage minivan.
If you find a low mileage sportage for a steal, you have a disposable 4 x 4 which would be nice. I mean if youre worried about like rolling your geo tracker you have a true beater you can call on.
ok and to further pontificate, vehicles carrying a KIA nameplate are now built by hyundai which is a great improvement. So next you have to think what do you think about hyundai? I dont think a whole lot of them either but I can say its a real 2nd world car manufacturer something like chrysler or ford in quality to me.
I dont know what the story of KIA is.
BUT I DO know how it ends. It ends with them being bought out by ford, and then sold to hyundai.
Their full function seperate car company image actually ended more than 10 years ago, and as of today I dont believe there is even one car sold as a KIA in north america that is made by KIA. I think if the sportage is still the old model its a KIA. The rest are made by hyundai.
The name brand itself will dissolve within a few years. At the moment it is the plymouth of hyundais dodge.
So really when you are talking about KIA today you are talking about used cars. Like what, a sephia? Horrid. And the very worst thing about KIA that doesnt make sense is they get worse gas mileage than us v6s
The most desireable vehicle KIA got off was called the sedona, a bad gas mileage minivan.
If you find a low mileage sportage for a steal, you have a disposable 4 x 4 which would be nice. I mean if youre worried about like rolling your geo tracker you have a true beater you can call on.
ok and to further pontificate, vehicles carrying a KIA nameplate are now built by hyundai which is a great improvement. So next you have to think what do you think about hyundai? I dont think a whole lot of them either but I can say its a real 2nd world car manufacturer something like chrysler or ford in quality to me.
twospirits
09-01-2006, 10:14 PM
I cant see how KIA is actually like either of these companies which started in post ww2 japan in a market where the average income was about $100 a month in todays dollars.
In a vague parallel suzuki cars sort of parrallels honda in that their orignal cars use their motorcycle engine.
Anyhow my opinion of KIA is that its the butt end. A company so horrid hyundai drove them out of business.
I want to add on to my previous post a key point.
I dont know what the story of KIA is.
BUT I DO know how it ends. It ends with them being bought out by ford, and then sold to hyundai.I really don't know where you are getting your information from, but its wrong.
One doesn't have to go far to see that there are similarities between the companies in one way or another. Just going to the companies websites and looking at their official record of history/timelines will show what I mean.
YearKiaHondaToyotaHyundai1933--Toyoda Automatic Loom establishes Automobile Department-1935--First Car produced-1937--Toyota Motor Established-1944Hyungsung Precision Industry established-Wartime truck production-1946Tubing and Bycycle parts--Hyundai Auto Service1947-A Type bicycle engineCommercial Car Production begins-1948-Honda Motor established--1949-First motorcycle--1952First Motorcycle---1952Production of Trucks---1963-First Sports Car and Light Truck--1967---Hyundai Motor Company
I don't know, maybe its me but looking at the timelines it seems that Toyota was started in the 1930s and then Both Kia and Honda in the post ww2 timeframe. Both Kia and Honda started with motorcycle/parts production and within a few years of each other started automobile production. Toyota is the more establish one with more years of experience.
As for their relationship with Ford, Kia under license with Mazda produced a few vehicles which were sold in the US but Ford never did have any holdings on Kia. The company did eventually have finiancial troubles which contributed to the Asian financial crisis in 1997 and through government intervention was acquired by Hyundai in 1998. Although its under the wing of Hyundai, its reputation precides it. Hyundai also had this problem and in some peoples mind still does, but it has improved it ranking to third place while its sister Kia continues to place near the bottom of the durability lists.
TS
In a vague parallel suzuki cars sort of parrallels honda in that their orignal cars use their motorcycle engine.
Anyhow my opinion of KIA is that its the butt end. A company so horrid hyundai drove them out of business.
I want to add on to my previous post a key point.
I dont know what the story of KIA is.
BUT I DO know how it ends. It ends with them being bought out by ford, and then sold to hyundai.I really don't know where you are getting your information from, but its wrong.
One doesn't have to go far to see that there are similarities between the companies in one way or another. Just going to the companies websites and looking at their official record of history/timelines will show what I mean.
YearKiaHondaToyotaHyundai1933--Toyoda Automatic Loom establishes Automobile Department-1935--First Car produced-1937--Toyota Motor Established-1944Hyungsung Precision Industry established-Wartime truck production-1946Tubing and Bycycle parts--Hyundai Auto Service1947-A Type bicycle engineCommercial Car Production begins-1948-Honda Motor established--1949-First motorcycle--1952First Motorcycle---1952Production of Trucks---1963-First Sports Car and Light Truck--1967---Hyundai Motor Company
I don't know, maybe its me but looking at the timelines it seems that Toyota was started in the 1930s and then Both Kia and Honda in the post ww2 timeframe. Both Kia and Honda started with motorcycle/parts production and within a few years of each other started automobile production. Toyota is the more establish one with more years of experience.
As for their relationship with Ford, Kia under license with Mazda produced a few vehicles which were sold in the US but Ford never did have any holdings on Kia. The company did eventually have finiancial troubles which contributed to the Asian financial crisis in 1997 and through government intervention was acquired by Hyundai in 1998. Although its under the wing of Hyundai, its reputation precides it. Hyundai also had this problem and in some peoples mind still does, but it has improved it ranking to third place while its sister Kia continues to place near the bottom of the durability lists.
TS
VAD0R
09-02-2006, 12:11 AM
KIA started in 1944 as a bicycle maker and stopped existing as their own automotive company in 1997 according to this website. (http://www.4wdonline.com/Kia/Kia.html)
Right now though it seems Hyundai wants to bolster KIA as their sporty brand like Ford did with Mazda judging by the Spectra5 and recent Sedona commercials.
Right now though it seems Hyundai wants to bolster KIA as their sporty brand like Ford did with Mazda judging by the Spectra5 and recent Sedona commercials.
stamar
09-02-2006, 01:32 AM
Im not sure what you are contradicting on my post.
Where did I get my information from?
I referenced it, a book called THE HISTORY OF HONDA.
I said I dont know the history of KIA. Everything I said was true they ceased being their own automobile company around 10 years ago. The were bought out by ford
( they produced ford festiva, ford aspire. Ford owned controlling interest, ford owns controlling interest of mazda, Kia makes mazda 121....) when Hyundai bought KIA, that is who they bough it from lol.
Only one or two of the vehicles sold in north america is made by KIA, the rest are made by hyundai. Its possible none at all are. This is fact.
The one thing I said that I stand corrected on was the founding of toyota. Not really only in somantics. I personally think I was talking about toyota automobiles.
You will have to follow the timeline you printed.
Toyota commericial car company 1947,a type motorcycle engine honda. honda motors established 1948. This is what Im referencing. Do you see.
1947, honda a type motorcycle engine, toyota commercial car production?
Will you reread what I wrote?
Wow check it out " honda and toyota were formed out of the same contract in post war japan. Toyota to make small cars honda to make motorized bicycles. Honda didnt make cars until the late 60s." Isnt all that some cool factual information? Related in clear and correct english for you to understand. 1947 is post ww2. Japan is japan. Forming at the same time is the same time. motorized bicycles. commercial automobiles. Meditate.
Sort of verified everything I posted in your information but somehow you want to contradict me.
According to this Toyota existed before they started a commercial car industry, but what was established was the business. That is what started at the same time, in the same place. In the same city. Hopefully if you are trying to keep your history clear you understand now. I know that toyota existed in some fashion before this now too but it is not actually relevant to the history of car manufacturing which is what we were talking about.... Honda existed before 1948 as well. They were a part supplier for mitsubishi holding company. Not called Honda obviously. Not honda motors. Not toyota automobiles. No those two things started at the same time from the same contract like I said. I mean Im telling you what I read in the history of HONDA, so who is probably mistaken?
Mr toyoda and Mr Honda knew eachother well.
I dont have time to write out all the facts but i recomend you read this same book called the history of Honda.
I reread what I wrote, I reread what you wrote and everything I said was correct.
and then, where is this sidetrack leading? The poster is wondering if they should buy a KIA car. Another poster is describing some abstract connection between KIA improving and Honda Cars who when they reached the us market in the 70s were rusty or something.
Ok, NO, KIA doesnt make cars anymore. They are not improving. They are not like Honda in any way that I can think applies to us as car consumers. 20 years from now they wont be making civics and accords, theyre already gone.
I spent a lot of time typing in this thread. Im fairly certain some of you benefitted from my education on this subject. If you dont want to thats fine as well. In the end I dont have time to explain every detail to you but if you have questions and interest I recomend you read up on it. I dont think theres a better book on the subject than the one I referenced I think that will explain a whole lot about japanese cars and will even give you a lot of important information about anything you can buy cars or otherwise.
Where did I get my information from?
I referenced it, a book called THE HISTORY OF HONDA.
I said I dont know the history of KIA. Everything I said was true they ceased being their own automobile company around 10 years ago. The were bought out by ford
( they produced ford festiva, ford aspire. Ford owned controlling interest, ford owns controlling interest of mazda, Kia makes mazda 121....) when Hyundai bought KIA, that is who they bough it from lol.
Only one or two of the vehicles sold in north america is made by KIA, the rest are made by hyundai. Its possible none at all are. This is fact.
The one thing I said that I stand corrected on was the founding of toyota. Not really only in somantics. I personally think I was talking about toyota automobiles.
You will have to follow the timeline you printed.
Toyota commericial car company 1947,a type motorcycle engine honda. honda motors established 1948. This is what Im referencing. Do you see.
1947, honda a type motorcycle engine, toyota commercial car production?
Will you reread what I wrote?
Wow check it out " honda and toyota were formed out of the same contract in post war japan. Toyota to make small cars honda to make motorized bicycles. Honda didnt make cars until the late 60s." Isnt all that some cool factual information? Related in clear and correct english for you to understand. 1947 is post ww2. Japan is japan. Forming at the same time is the same time. motorized bicycles. commercial automobiles. Meditate.
Sort of verified everything I posted in your information but somehow you want to contradict me.
According to this Toyota existed before they started a commercial car industry, but what was established was the business. That is what started at the same time, in the same place. In the same city. Hopefully if you are trying to keep your history clear you understand now. I know that toyota existed in some fashion before this now too but it is not actually relevant to the history of car manufacturing which is what we were talking about.... Honda existed before 1948 as well. They were a part supplier for mitsubishi holding company. Not called Honda obviously. Not honda motors. Not toyota automobiles. No those two things started at the same time from the same contract like I said. I mean Im telling you what I read in the history of HONDA, so who is probably mistaken?
Mr toyoda and Mr Honda knew eachother well.
I dont have time to write out all the facts but i recomend you read this same book called the history of Honda.
I reread what I wrote, I reread what you wrote and everything I said was correct.
and then, where is this sidetrack leading? The poster is wondering if they should buy a KIA car. Another poster is describing some abstract connection between KIA improving and Honda Cars who when they reached the us market in the 70s were rusty or something.
Ok, NO, KIA doesnt make cars anymore. They are not improving. They are not like Honda in any way that I can think applies to us as car consumers. 20 years from now they wont be making civics and accords, theyre already gone.
I spent a lot of time typing in this thread. Im fairly certain some of you benefitted from my education on this subject. If you dont want to thats fine as well. In the end I dont have time to explain every detail to you but if you have questions and interest I recomend you read up on it. I dont think theres a better book on the subject than the one I referenced I think that will explain a whole lot about japanese cars and will even give you a lot of important information about anything you can buy cars or otherwise.
drunken monkey
09-02-2006, 09:58 PM
you said that kia is nothing like honda or toyota.
I cant see how KIA is actually like either of these companies which started in post ww2 japan in a market where the average income was about $100 a month in todays dollars.
he said that kia is like them and produced a rough timeline to illustrate their similar history in terms of inception, to timelines of developments.
you also seem to have missed the bit about toyota having already produced a car in the 1930s which puts their (bespoke-ish) car production as pre-war whereas the first honda car was exhibited in 1962 (that's 29 years AFTER toyota in cased you missed it) and even then, the cars didn't really see serious production for another year or so with the 500 being quickly replaced.
You also say that toyota (motor) and honda (motor) were born out of the same contract deal. Toyota motor was formed in 1937. Honda motor was formed in 1947. Again, this is from TS' timeline.
anyway, let me get this right, you're basing this discussion on THREE car brands on ONE book about ONE of them?
I cant see how KIA is actually like either of these companies which started in post ww2 japan in a market where the average income was about $100 a month in todays dollars.
he said that kia is like them and produced a rough timeline to illustrate their similar history in terms of inception, to timelines of developments.
you also seem to have missed the bit about toyota having already produced a car in the 1930s which puts their (bespoke-ish) car production as pre-war whereas the first honda car was exhibited in 1962 (that's 29 years AFTER toyota in cased you missed it) and even then, the cars didn't really see serious production for another year or so with the 500 being quickly replaced.
You also say that toyota (motor) and honda (motor) were born out of the same contract deal. Toyota motor was formed in 1937. Honda motor was formed in 1947. Again, this is from TS' timeline.
anyway, let me get this right, you're basing this discussion on THREE car brands on ONE book about ONE of them?
Moppie
09-03-2006, 12:56 AM
stamar I have no idea what your on, but i suggest you see your doctor and get the dosage changed.
Soichiro Honda was born in 1906, and passed away in 1992.
Sakichi Toyoda was born in 1867 and passed away in 1930.
Soichiro would have been only 24 and working in a different part of the country to Sakichi Toyoda when he passed away.
After running his own workshop Soichiro Honda was able to live and share his passion of cars, bikes, and engines by starting a company that not only designed and produced some of the best in the world, but also took part in all forms of motor sport at all levels, and did so with a great success.
He had a hands on role with in the company right up until his death, and the same love of motor sport and passion for great cars still exists with in the company.
Soichiro Honda's involvement with Honda, and the reason he created the company are why is so often compared with Enzo Ferrari.
Its also why Honda and Ferrari are regarded as the worlds best engine manufacturers (along with BMW).
Sakichi Toyoda died not only before the Toyota motor company was founded, but even more Soichiro Honda had made a name for himself, let along started Honda.
He was regarded as a bit of a Thomas Edison in Japan, and was a very creative inventor and business man.
However his interest was with Looms, the Toyota company move into Automobiles occurred only after his death.
I can find no evidence that Honda EVER supplied Mitsubishi with anything, except a licence for VTEC (called Mivec by Mitsubishi) in he 90s.
Nor is there an evidence of involvement by Toyota with Mitsubishi.
Mitsubishi has a very interesting history, it is a very old Japanese company, and after WWII one of the largest corporation's in the world.
Because of its size, and therefore potential threat to US and European manufacturers, the allies broke Mitsubishi up into 3 separate companies. Each retained the name, and 3 pointed logo, but was initially banned from interacting with each other.
For example Mitsubishi engineering make Turbo chargers, but when Mitsubishi Automotive first started turbo charging cars they had to buy them from a different manufacturer.
In terms of pure Automotive history Honda started out building small sports cars, then when Soichiro saw the success of Alec Issigonis Mini design, and saw how much it could be refined, they started making the Civic and invented the modern hatch back. Despite their size and age, I dare anyone to drive an original model Civic and not smile.
The very easy to build, and fun to drive nature of the Civic made it an instant success in Japan, and gave Honda an easy introduction to over seas markets. It also served as a very good platform to base bigger cars on, a design approach they still use, and its why every new Honda passenger car generation is lead by a Civic model.
They of course retained their sports car history with RS, Si, SiR Type R, Type S and VTiR models in most of their range. And of course the NSX and S2000.
Honda started building cars because he wanted to share his passion for them the rest of the world.
Toyota started building cars because they saw a market opportunity.
Like wise Mitsubishi, and in 1974, so did Kia.
In terms of overseas market penetration Toyota and Honda took two very different approaches.
Honda simply built a bike that filled a huge hole in the market, it sold world wide in record numbers, and still does.
This gave them a presence in all the large over seas markets which they were able to exploit, along with the oil crisis in the 70's, to set up manufacturing plants in North America and Europe (they bought into the collapse of British Leyland, and got a lot of cheap factories etc). They have been producing cars in America since 1982, and in 1988 they started exporting US made cars back to Japan and out to the rest of the world.
However, in the mid 80s they decided that the oil crisis and the popularity of the Civic had hurt the Honda image. They were known as a cheap economy car maker only.
So they used an American marketing company to start the Acura brand name, and used it to sell their higher end models in North America.
Toyota lacked the market penetration and brand awareness outside of Japan that Honda benefited from.
Instead they had to go about it the hard way, introducing one model into the US and Europe in the, I think, early 60s.
They then gradually and slowly expanded the model range as brand awareness grew, but it took them nearly 20 years to reach the same sort of market penetration that Honda gained in only 7.
However, by the 80s both were competing successfully in the international market.
I think Kia has tried to follow the Toyota Model, it worked for Hyundai as well. Like Hyundai they have also, and continue to do so, built previous generation Mazda's, Toyota's and Mitsubishi's under licence.
They are in a similar position to Toyota 40 years ago, and Toyota has a roughly 40 year head start.
However Toyota in the 60s still had a massive non-car related manufacturing industry to fall back on when things were tough.
I don't know if Kia does anymore, and give how tight and competitive the current car market is, and how far behind Kia is in terms of product compared to Toyota in the 60s and 70s I have to wonder how successful they will be following the Toyota model.
Soichiro Honda was born in 1906, and passed away in 1992.
Sakichi Toyoda was born in 1867 and passed away in 1930.
Soichiro would have been only 24 and working in a different part of the country to Sakichi Toyoda when he passed away.
After running his own workshop Soichiro Honda was able to live and share his passion of cars, bikes, and engines by starting a company that not only designed and produced some of the best in the world, but also took part in all forms of motor sport at all levels, and did so with a great success.
He had a hands on role with in the company right up until his death, and the same love of motor sport and passion for great cars still exists with in the company.
Soichiro Honda's involvement with Honda, and the reason he created the company are why is so often compared with Enzo Ferrari.
Its also why Honda and Ferrari are regarded as the worlds best engine manufacturers (along with BMW).
Sakichi Toyoda died not only before the Toyota motor company was founded, but even more Soichiro Honda had made a name for himself, let along started Honda.
He was regarded as a bit of a Thomas Edison in Japan, and was a very creative inventor and business man.
However his interest was with Looms, the Toyota company move into Automobiles occurred only after his death.
I can find no evidence that Honda EVER supplied Mitsubishi with anything, except a licence for VTEC (called Mivec by Mitsubishi) in he 90s.
Nor is there an evidence of involvement by Toyota with Mitsubishi.
Mitsubishi has a very interesting history, it is a very old Japanese company, and after WWII one of the largest corporation's in the world.
Because of its size, and therefore potential threat to US and European manufacturers, the allies broke Mitsubishi up into 3 separate companies. Each retained the name, and 3 pointed logo, but was initially banned from interacting with each other.
For example Mitsubishi engineering make Turbo chargers, but when Mitsubishi Automotive first started turbo charging cars they had to buy them from a different manufacturer.
In terms of pure Automotive history Honda started out building small sports cars, then when Soichiro saw the success of Alec Issigonis Mini design, and saw how much it could be refined, they started making the Civic and invented the modern hatch back. Despite their size and age, I dare anyone to drive an original model Civic and not smile.
The very easy to build, and fun to drive nature of the Civic made it an instant success in Japan, and gave Honda an easy introduction to over seas markets. It also served as a very good platform to base bigger cars on, a design approach they still use, and its why every new Honda passenger car generation is lead by a Civic model.
They of course retained their sports car history with RS, Si, SiR Type R, Type S and VTiR models in most of their range. And of course the NSX and S2000.
Honda started building cars because he wanted to share his passion for them the rest of the world.
Toyota started building cars because they saw a market opportunity.
Like wise Mitsubishi, and in 1974, so did Kia.
In terms of overseas market penetration Toyota and Honda took two very different approaches.
Honda simply built a bike that filled a huge hole in the market, it sold world wide in record numbers, and still does.
This gave them a presence in all the large over seas markets which they were able to exploit, along with the oil crisis in the 70's, to set up manufacturing plants in North America and Europe (they bought into the collapse of British Leyland, and got a lot of cheap factories etc). They have been producing cars in America since 1982, and in 1988 they started exporting US made cars back to Japan and out to the rest of the world.
However, in the mid 80s they decided that the oil crisis and the popularity of the Civic had hurt the Honda image. They were known as a cheap economy car maker only.
So they used an American marketing company to start the Acura brand name, and used it to sell their higher end models in North America.
Toyota lacked the market penetration and brand awareness outside of Japan that Honda benefited from.
Instead they had to go about it the hard way, introducing one model into the US and Europe in the, I think, early 60s.
They then gradually and slowly expanded the model range as brand awareness grew, but it took them nearly 20 years to reach the same sort of market penetration that Honda gained in only 7.
However, by the 80s both were competing successfully in the international market.
I think Kia has tried to follow the Toyota Model, it worked for Hyundai as well. Like Hyundai they have also, and continue to do so, built previous generation Mazda's, Toyota's and Mitsubishi's under licence.
They are in a similar position to Toyota 40 years ago, and Toyota has a roughly 40 year head start.
However Toyota in the 60s still had a massive non-car related manufacturing industry to fall back on when things were tough.
I don't know if Kia does anymore, and give how tight and competitive the current car market is, and how far behind Kia is in terms of product compared to Toyota in the 60s and 70s I have to wonder how successful they will be following the Toyota model.
stamar
09-03-2006, 02:04 AM
Some of the responses are showing really poor reading comprehension.
So, if you didnt understand what I wrote previously why would you understand if I rewrote it?
I took a class on market economics. We studied the auto industry.
You have not. Obviously.
The last poster has some interesting opinions on history. A great deal of what is in it is false. A quote like
" I see no evidence that honda supplied mitsubishi with anything"
Is pointless to respond to. No kidding you dont see any evidence. You dont know of course.
Go ahead and go to borders bookstore. Pick up the history of honda. Pick up the history of japanese motorcycles. Then you will know
You made a lot of comments, based off of google search cut and paste. And so many many of them are incorrect and I dont have time to edit them. Some are containing some facts.
The only thing you have communicated to me though Moppie, is that you dont know. AND that you are interested IN KNOWING about the auto industry, and possibly about the japanese economy. And be knowledgeable as opposed to ignorant.
And I appreciate that much more than some of the other posters so Im spending some of my time responding to you and giving you a reference to read to put the whole picture together.
Its all actually a confusing mess to try and communicate with you in this format. I would need to say a short point, made sure you clearly understood it and then move on.
You also posted that you are beggining research into mitsubishi. A holding company works in a very different method than a western company. Again I must say you have no idea how mitsubishi holding company works, not the current company mitsubishi automobiles. BUT, you still know more than the average person and if you are interested in learning I say go for it.
Honda and toyoda were parts manufacturers for mitsubishi holding company THE HISTORY OF HONDA.
Ok so who was the head of toyoda? It wasnt a MR toyoda? LOLOLOLOLO yes it was. Mr honda and Mr toyoda knew eachother
http://www.amazon.com/Illust-History-Honda-Roy-Bacon/dp/1856482340/sr=8-3/qid=1157263303/ref=sr_1_3/002-6592675-3676852?ie=UTF8&s=books
BOOKS. There you go. For some reason you dont believe me telling whats directly in the book you will have to read it.
So, if you didnt understand what I wrote previously why would you understand if I rewrote it?
I took a class on market economics. We studied the auto industry.
You have not. Obviously.
The last poster has some interesting opinions on history. A great deal of what is in it is false. A quote like
" I see no evidence that honda supplied mitsubishi with anything"
Is pointless to respond to. No kidding you dont see any evidence. You dont know of course.
Go ahead and go to borders bookstore. Pick up the history of honda. Pick up the history of japanese motorcycles. Then you will know
You made a lot of comments, based off of google search cut and paste. And so many many of them are incorrect and I dont have time to edit them. Some are containing some facts.
The only thing you have communicated to me though Moppie, is that you dont know. AND that you are interested IN KNOWING about the auto industry, and possibly about the japanese economy. And be knowledgeable as opposed to ignorant.
And I appreciate that much more than some of the other posters so Im spending some of my time responding to you and giving you a reference to read to put the whole picture together.
Its all actually a confusing mess to try and communicate with you in this format. I would need to say a short point, made sure you clearly understood it and then move on.
You also posted that you are beggining research into mitsubishi. A holding company works in a very different method than a western company. Again I must say you have no idea how mitsubishi holding company works, not the current company mitsubishi automobiles. BUT, you still know more than the average person and if you are interested in learning I say go for it.
Honda and toyoda were parts manufacturers for mitsubishi holding company THE HISTORY OF HONDA.
Ok so who was the head of toyoda? It wasnt a MR toyoda? LOLOLOLOLO yes it was. Mr honda and Mr toyoda knew eachother
http://www.amazon.com/Illust-History-Honda-Roy-Bacon/dp/1856482340/sr=8-3/qid=1157263303/ref=sr_1_3/002-6592675-3676852?ie=UTF8&s=books
BOOKS. There you go. For some reason you dont believe me telling whats directly in the book you will have to read it.
stamar
09-03-2006, 02:09 AM
Some of the responses are showing really poor reading comprehension.
So, if you didnt understand what I wrote previously why would you understand if I rewrote it?
I took a class on market economics. We studied the auto industry.
You have not. Obviously.
The last poster has some interesting opinions on history. A great deal of what is in it is false. A quote like
" I see no evidence that honda supplied mitsubishi with anything"
Is pointless to respond to. No kidding you dont see any evidence. You dont know of course.
Go ahead and go to borders bookstore. Pick up the history of honda. Pick up the history of japanese motorcycles. Then you will know
You made a lot of comments, based off of google search cut and paste. And so many many of them are incorrect and I dont have time to edit them. Some are containing some facts.
The only thing you have communicated to me though Moppie, is that you dont know. AND that you are interested IN KNOWING about the auto industry, and possibly about the japanese economy. And be knowledgeable as opposed to ignorant.
And I appreciate that much more than some of the other posters so Im spending some of my time responding to you and giving you a reference to read to put the whole picture together.
Its all actually a confusing mess to try and communicate with you in this format. I would need to say a short point, made sure you clearly understood it and then move on.
You also posted that you are beggining research into mitsubishi. A holding company works in a very different method than a western company. Again I must say you have no idea how mitsubishi holding company works, not the current company mitsubishi automobiles. BUT, you still know more than the average person and if you are interested in learning I say go for it.
Honda and toyoda were parts manufacturers for mitsubishi holding company THE HISTORY OF HONDA.
Ok so who was the head of toyoda? It wasnt a MR toyoda? LOLOLOLOLO yes it was. Mr honda and Mr toyoda knew eachother
http://www.amazon.com/Illust-History-Honda-Roy-Bacon/dp/1856482340/sr=8-3/qid=1157263303/ref=sr_1_3/002-6592675-3676852?ie=UTF8&s=books
BOOKS. There you go. For some reason you dont believe me telling whats directly in the book you will have to read it.
If there is anyone out here who has read what I wrote which were just trying to be short direct facts, nothing really to debate
and also read these other posts filled with some thing false many things strange, many opinions basically that could be misleading really I recomend you read those two books Ive referenced or if you are more interested in the history of japanese industry I have other books Id like you to read as well. Some of what I just read through above is close to what I would call trash with some facts cut from web site google.
So, if you didnt understand what I wrote previously why would you understand if I rewrote it?
I took a class on market economics. We studied the auto industry.
You have not. Obviously.
The last poster has some interesting opinions on history. A great deal of what is in it is false. A quote like
" I see no evidence that honda supplied mitsubishi with anything"
Is pointless to respond to. No kidding you dont see any evidence. You dont know of course.
Go ahead and go to borders bookstore. Pick up the history of honda. Pick up the history of japanese motorcycles. Then you will know
You made a lot of comments, based off of google search cut and paste. And so many many of them are incorrect and I dont have time to edit them. Some are containing some facts.
The only thing you have communicated to me though Moppie, is that you dont know. AND that you are interested IN KNOWING about the auto industry, and possibly about the japanese economy. And be knowledgeable as opposed to ignorant.
And I appreciate that much more than some of the other posters so Im spending some of my time responding to you and giving you a reference to read to put the whole picture together.
Its all actually a confusing mess to try and communicate with you in this format. I would need to say a short point, made sure you clearly understood it and then move on.
You also posted that you are beggining research into mitsubishi. A holding company works in a very different method than a western company. Again I must say you have no idea how mitsubishi holding company works, not the current company mitsubishi automobiles. BUT, you still know more than the average person and if you are interested in learning I say go for it.
Honda and toyoda were parts manufacturers for mitsubishi holding company THE HISTORY OF HONDA.
Ok so who was the head of toyoda? It wasnt a MR toyoda? LOLOLOLOLO yes it was. Mr honda and Mr toyoda knew eachother
http://www.amazon.com/Illust-History-Honda-Roy-Bacon/dp/1856482340/sr=8-3/qid=1157263303/ref=sr_1_3/002-6592675-3676852?ie=UTF8&s=books
BOOKS. There you go. For some reason you dont believe me telling whats directly in the book you will have to read it.
If there is anyone out here who has read what I wrote which were just trying to be short direct facts, nothing really to debate
and also read these other posts filled with some thing false many things strange, many opinions basically that could be misleading really I recomend you read those two books Ive referenced or if you are more interested in the history of japanese industry I have other books Id like you to read as well. Some of what I just read through above is close to what I would call trash with some facts cut from web site google.
Moppie
09-03-2006, 05:18 AM
From http://world.honda.com/history/ its make it pretty clear how Honda was formed, by Soishiro Honda, a mechanic.
From http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/history/index.html it makes it pretty clear that Sakichi Toyoda founded the Toyota company to manfacture and sell some of his own inventions.
If your refering to his Son Kiichiro Toyoda who founded the Toyota Motor Corp, on the back of his fathers existing bussines, as someone who would have known Soishiro Honda then you might be right. They were contempory, however Kiichiro Toyoda did not start, or found Toyota, only one of its divisions.
From http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/history/index.html it makes it pretty clear that Sakichi Toyoda founded the Toyota company to manfacture and sell some of his own inventions.
If your refering to his Son Kiichiro Toyoda who founded the Toyota Motor Corp, on the back of his fathers existing bussines, as someone who would have known Soishiro Honda then you might be right. They were contempory, however Kiichiro Toyoda did not start, or found Toyota, only one of its divisions.
Moppie
09-03-2006, 05:25 AM
This gives a pretty good break down of how Mitsubishi has been broken up. http://www.mitsubishi.com/e/group/about.html
Note, these are all the offical company historys, so they are pretty acurate in terms of dates and what happened, but anything do to with the after affects of WWII will be distorted.
It was the allies who broke up Mitsubishi, and lots of other Japanese companys, not the Japanese themselves.
Note, these are all the offical company historys, so they are pretty acurate in terms of dates and what happened, but anything do to with the after affects of WWII will be distorted.
It was the allies who broke up Mitsubishi, and lots of other Japanese companys, not the Japanese themselves.
Moppie
09-03-2006, 05:34 AM
Some of the responses are showing really poor reading comprehension.
So, if you didn't understand what I wrote previously why would you understand if I rewrote it?
I took a class on market economics. We studied the auto industry.
You have not. Obviously.
You are young, arrogant and IMO a little shit who clearly wants to make this personal.
So excuse me while I make you into a fool, and I will do it all with your first post in this thread.
The problem with understanding i not a comprehension issue at my end, I have spent far longer at university than you ever will, and I can guarantee Iv read and understood much more advanced books than you will find in a market economics course.
Any issue around understanding is entirely your fault.
Your use of language has so far been limited, and your ability to express ideas in a coherent manner seems limited to a high school level.
Allow me to demonstrate.
So, if you didn't understand what I wrote previously why would you understand if I rewrote it?
I took a class on market economics. We studied the auto industry.
You have not. Obviously.
You are young, arrogant and IMO a little shit who clearly wants to make this personal.
So excuse me while I make you into a fool, and I will do it all with your first post in this thread.
The problem with understanding i not a comprehension issue at my end, I have spent far longer at university than you ever will, and I can guarantee Iv read and understood much more advanced books than you will find in a market economics course.
Any issue around understanding is entirely your fault.
Your use of language has so far been limited, and your ability to express ideas in a coherent manner seems limited to a high school level.
Allow me to demonstrate.
Moppie
09-03-2006, 06:24 AM
i recomend reading the history of honda because its a very fascinating story.
Honda and Toyota ( toyoda) were born out of the same contract. Both were auto parts suppliers for mitsubishi holding company.
In 1947 mitsubishi holding company did not exist. It was broken down in october 1946.
So while Honda was making piston rings, and selling them to Toyota, and no doubt Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Automotive division, where, and what is this magic contract that Toyota and Honda we're born out of?
It wasn't one with mitsubishi holding company (which your statement implies), and of course while Honda Motors didn't exist, Toyota had been around for 40 years as a company, and 10 years as a automobile manufactorer. So it wasn't born out of this "contract".
Prehaps your refering to a grant from one of the Allies, which were being given out quite freely to any Japanese bussiness that showed promise after WWII.
It would certianly explain how Soishiro Honda was able to go from a humble mechanic, to a small bussiness owner, to a large scale bike manufactor reasonably quickly.
Of course Toyota might have also been given some monetary surport, infact Im certian they would have been.[/QUOTE]
Toyoda wanted to make small cars and honda wanted to make motorized bicycles. So they traded factories.
Oh, your wrong again.
Toyota was ALREADY MAKING CARS.
They didn't start making small cars untill the 60s, after Alec invented the Mini and Honda perfected the concept with the Civi, you know, inventing the mass produced small car.
(the cars they were making were small by US and even European standards, but were NOT considered small in Japan).
Honda
But honda motors made motors, spinning the wrong way.
Thats a nothing statement, there is no right or wrong way for a motor to spin :screwy:
They were a motorcycle comapny that eventually made motorcycle derived cars. I think the first honda cars came out in the late 60s
Hondas first car came out in 1963, and the only thing in it that was even remotly related to a Motorbike was the small capacity (500cc) high reving engine. But it was an all new, and designed for the car engine (Iv you ever seen one (and Iv seen several) you can tell there is no way it would ever fit on a bike).
I cant see how KIA is actually like either of these companies which started in post ww2 japan in a market where the average income was about $100 a month in todays dollars.
As has already been pretty clearly explained in other posts, Kia is nothing like Honda, but given its Automtive division was started about 30 years after its other business activities, and only 30 years later it is just starting to make a name for itself in the international market, and is doing so by introducing only 1 or 2 of its model range into that market, it is VERY similar to Toyota.
[/QUOTE]
Anyhow my opinion of KIA is that its the butt end. A company so horrid Hyundai drove them out of business.[QUOTE]
Now here's a conclusion based on reasoning that seems to be missing from the post.
Kia has been in trouble in the past, but then so was all of Korean industry for a little while.
Hyundai has a different history again, and comes from a much larger corporation, which gave it more to fall back on, and more resources to draw from. It has done better because its been built on better business decisions. Not becuase Kia is some how "horrid".
Honda and Toyota ( toyoda) were born out of the same contract. Both were auto parts suppliers for mitsubishi holding company.
In 1947 mitsubishi holding company did not exist. It was broken down in october 1946.
So while Honda was making piston rings, and selling them to Toyota, and no doubt Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Automotive division, where, and what is this magic contract that Toyota and Honda we're born out of?
It wasn't one with mitsubishi holding company (which your statement implies), and of course while Honda Motors didn't exist, Toyota had been around for 40 years as a company, and 10 years as a automobile manufactorer. So it wasn't born out of this "contract".
Prehaps your refering to a grant from one of the Allies, which were being given out quite freely to any Japanese bussiness that showed promise after WWII.
It would certianly explain how Soishiro Honda was able to go from a humble mechanic, to a small bussiness owner, to a large scale bike manufactor reasonably quickly.
Of course Toyota might have also been given some monetary surport, infact Im certian they would have been.[/QUOTE]
Toyoda wanted to make small cars and honda wanted to make motorized bicycles. So they traded factories.
Oh, your wrong again.
Toyota was ALREADY MAKING CARS.
They didn't start making small cars untill the 60s, after Alec invented the Mini and Honda perfected the concept with the Civi, you know, inventing the mass produced small car.
(the cars they were making were small by US and even European standards, but were NOT considered small in Japan).
Honda
But honda motors made motors, spinning the wrong way.
Thats a nothing statement, there is no right or wrong way for a motor to spin :screwy:
They were a motorcycle comapny that eventually made motorcycle derived cars. I think the first honda cars came out in the late 60s
Hondas first car came out in 1963, and the only thing in it that was even remotly related to a Motorbike was the small capacity (500cc) high reving engine. But it was an all new, and designed for the car engine (Iv you ever seen one (and Iv seen several) you can tell there is no way it would ever fit on a bike).
I cant see how KIA is actually like either of these companies which started in post ww2 japan in a market where the average income was about $100 a month in todays dollars.
As has already been pretty clearly explained in other posts, Kia is nothing like Honda, but given its Automtive division was started about 30 years after its other business activities, and only 30 years later it is just starting to make a name for itself in the international market, and is doing so by introducing only 1 or 2 of its model range into that market, it is VERY similar to Toyota.
[/QUOTE]
Anyhow my opinion of KIA is that its the butt end. A company so horrid Hyundai drove them out of business.[QUOTE]
Now here's a conclusion based on reasoning that seems to be missing from the post.
Kia has been in trouble in the past, but then so was all of Korean industry for a little while.
Hyundai has a different history again, and comes from a much larger corporation, which gave it more to fall back on, and more resources to draw from. It has done better because its been built on better business decisions. Not becuase Kia is some how "horrid".
Moppie
09-03-2006, 07:12 AM
Some of the responses are showing really poor reading comprehension.
So, if you didn't understand what I wrote previously why would you understand if I rewrote it?
I took a class on market economics. We studied the auto industry.
You have not. Obviously.
I'm bored, Ill continue with this post as well.
Your right, I have not studied much automotive history, beyond being involved in the industry for a number of years, and having held an interest in it for far longer than you have.
The last poster has some interesting opinions on history. A great deal of what is in it is false.
Any one with even a basic academic, or well read understanding of history knows it is largely opinion. There is very little objective truth in history, despite what you want to believe.
A quote like
" I see no evidence that honda supplied mitsubishi with anything"
Is pointless to respond to. No kidding you dont see any evidence. You dont know of course.
Whats your point? That was all you could pick out of my whole post to attack?
Oh my god I see no evidence because I don't know, because I didn't look that deep?
All you did was complete my sentence.
You made a lot of comments, based off of google search cut and paste. And so many many of them are incorrect and I dont have time to edit them. Some are containing some facts.
So how about pointing out whats wrong? Since you apparently know so much?
I will warn you that all of it came from the manufacturer's own websites, so when your finished correcting me you can go and correct Honda, Toyota and Mitsubishi, I'm sure they'll love to know their entire history is wrong.
As for using Google? So what. Iv been using the internet since the early 90s when it was just a random collection of BBS that you had to dial into directly. I think I know how to sort the BS from the Gold when it comes to finding information.
The only thing you have communicated to me though Moppie, is that you dont know. AND that you are interested IN KNOWING about the auto industry, and possibly about the japanese economy. And be knowledgeable as opposed to ignorant.
And I appreciate that much more than some of the other posters so Im spending some of my time responding to you and giving you a reference to read to put the whole picture together.
Who the Fuck do you think you are calling anyone on this forum ignorant?
You have done nothing to show you have any sound knowledge, or the ability to convey it.
Your posts show a lack of progressive, conclusion driven reasoning.
You have so far been wrong in several of your posts, and seem more interested in trying to lord a very limited intelligence over others, who are, sadly for you, clearly your superiors.
Its all actually a confusing mess to try and communicate with you in this format. I would need to say a short point, made sure you clearly understood it and then move on.
The mess and failure to communicate is your own. It started with your first post in this thread, a laughable pile of false or incomplete information.
You also posted that you are beggining research into mitsubishi. A holding company works in a very different method than a western company. Again I must say you have no idea how mitsubishi holding company works, not the current company mitsubishi automobiles. BUT, you still know more than the average person and if you are interested in learning I say go for it.
I never stated I was beginning research into anything. As for the Mitsubishi holding company, it has not existed since 1946.
Mitsubishi Automotive is currently a division of Mitsubishi heavy industries.
Honda and toyoda were parts manufacturers for mitsubishi holding company THE HISTORY OF HONDA.
So your stating "The History of Honda" as a reference?
If so then you just failed miserably. At the very least you should say its a book WHEN YOU REFERNCE IT, and give the Authors name.
Ok so who was the head of toyoda? It wasnt a MR toyoda? LOLOLOLOLO yes it was. Mr honda and Mr toyoda knew eachother
http://www.amazon.com/Illust-History-Honda-Roy-Bacon/dp/1856482340/sr=8-3/qid=1157263303/ref=sr_1_3/002-6592675-3676852?ie=UTF8&s=books
BOOKS. There you go. For some reason you dont believe me telling whats directly in the book you will have to read it.
First of all you only ever referenced to the Mr Toyoda, which would be the first Mr Toyoda involved in Toyota, which was its founder, who died in 1930.
If you wanted to refer to one of his sons then you needed to be much clearer and state so, or at least give his first name, or DOB and DOD.
If there is anyone out here who has read what I wrote which were just trying to be short direct facts, nothing really to debate
and also read these other posts filled with some thing false many things strange, many opinions basically that could be misleading really I recomend you read those two books Ive referenced or if you are more interested in the history of japanese industry I have other books Id like you to read as well. Some of what I just read through above is close to what I would call trash with some facts cut from web site google.
So basically your still claiming that the company websites for Honda, Toyota, and a number of the Mitsubishi companies are wrong?
That we should read books you finally managed to reference with a link to Amazon (which will get you kicked out of some university papers).
And, just to stick a final foot in you large mouth, your upset about making a whole lot of noise, flinging a whole lot of BS around, and then being questioned on it via a debate.
Debate being something that happens on pretty much every forum on the net.
So, if you didn't understand what I wrote previously why would you understand if I rewrote it?
I took a class on market economics. We studied the auto industry.
You have not. Obviously.
I'm bored, Ill continue with this post as well.
Your right, I have not studied much automotive history, beyond being involved in the industry for a number of years, and having held an interest in it for far longer than you have.
The last poster has some interesting opinions on history. A great deal of what is in it is false.
Any one with even a basic academic, or well read understanding of history knows it is largely opinion. There is very little objective truth in history, despite what you want to believe.
A quote like
" I see no evidence that honda supplied mitsubishi with anything"
Is pointless to respond to. No kidding you dont see any evidence. You dont know of course.
Whats your point? That was all you could pick out of my whole post to attack?
Oh my god I see no evidence because I don't know, because I didn't look that deep?
All you did was complete my sentence.
You made a lot of comments, based off of google search cut and paste. And so many many of them are incorrect and I dont have time to edit them. Some are containing some facts.
So how about pointing out whats wrong? Since you apparently know so much?
I will warn you that all of it came from the manufacturer's own websites, so when your finished correcting me you can go and correct Honda, Toyota and Mitsubishi, I'm sure they'll love to know their entire history is wrong.
As for using Google? So what. Iv been using the internet since the early 90s when it was just a random collection of BBS that you had to dial into directly. I think I know how to sort the BS from the Gold when it comes to finding information.
The only thing you have communicated to me though Moppie, is that you dont know. AND that you are interested IN KNOWING about the auto industry, and possibly about the japanese economy. And be knowledgeable as opposed to ignorant.
And I appreciate that much more than some of the other posters so Im spending some of my time responding to you and giving you a reference to read to put the whole picture together.
Who the Fuck do you think you are calling anyone on this forum ignorant?
You have done nothing to show you have any sound knowledge, or the ability to convey it.
Your posts show a lack of progressive, conclusion driven reasoning.
You have so far been wrong in several of your posts, and seem more interested in trying to lord a very limited intelligence over others, who are, sadly for you, clearly your superiors.
Its all actually a confusing mess to try and communicate with you in this format. I would need to say a short point, made sure you clearly understood it and then move on.
The mess and failure to communicate is your own. It started with your first post in this thread, a laughable pile of false or incomplete information.
You also posted that you are beggining research into mitsubishi. A holding company works in a very different method than a western company. Again I must say you have no idea how mitsubishi holding company works, not the current company mitsubishi automobiles. BUT, you still know more than the average person and if you are interested in learning I say go for it.
I never stated I was beginning research into anything. As for the Mitsubishi holding company, it has not existed since 1946.
Mitsubishi Automotive is currently a division of Mitsubishi heavy industries.
Honda and toyoda were parts manufacturers for mitsubishi holding company THE HISTORY OF HONDA.
So your stating "The History of Honda" as a reference?
If so then you just failed miserably. At the very least you should say its a book WHEN YOU REFERNCE IT, and give the Authors name.
Ok so who was the head of toyoda? It wasnt a MR toyoda? LOLOLOLOLO yes it was. Mr honda and Mr toyoda knew eachother
http://www.amazon.com/Illust-History-Honda-Roy-Bacon/dp/1856482340/sr=8-3/qid=1157263303/ref=sr_1_3/002-6592675-3676852?ie=UTF8&s=books
BOOKS. There you go. For some reason you dont believe me telling whats directly in the book you will have to read it.
First of all you only ever referenced to the Mr Toyoda, which would be the first Mr Toyoda involved in Toyota, which was its founder, who died in 1930.
If you wanted to refer to one of his sons then you needed to be much clearer and state so, or at least give his first name, or DOB and DOD.
If there is anyone out here who has read what I wrote which were just trying to be short direct facts, nothing really to debate
and also read these other posts filled with some thing false many things strange, many opinions basically that could be misleading really I recomend you read those two books Ive referenced or if you are more interested in the history of japanese industry I have other books Id like you to read as well. Some of what I just read through above is close to what I would call trash with some facts cut from web site google.
So basically your still claiming that the company websites for Honda, Toyota, and a number of the Mitsubishi companies are wrong?
That we should read books you finally managed to reference with a link to Amazon (which will get you kicked out of some university papers).
And, just to stick a final foot in you large mouth, your upset about making a whole lot of noise, flinging a whole lot of BS around, and then being questioned on it via a debate.
Debate being something that happens on pretty much every forum on the net.
blazee
09-03-2006, 08:28 AM
Thanks for the very informative posts Moppie. It's nice when people take the time to research things, and make informative posts, instead of talking out of their asses, and attempting to BS people, like we often see in the forums.
Please don't be so hard on stamar, I'm sure that he didn't mean any harm by posting inaccurate/misleading information. With all the books he reads, he probably just made a mistake, and got a couple of them mixed up. He looks like a trust worthy guy:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9752/23917091fullif0.jpg
Please don't be so hard on stamar, I'm sure that he didn't mean any harm by posting inaccurate/misleading information. With all the books he reads, he probably just made a mistake, and got a couple of them mixed up. He looks like a trust worthy guy:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9752/23917091fullif0.jpg
twospirits
09-03-2006, 11:53 AM
Wow, I surely missed alot.
Moppie has corrected quite a few of the misleading facts but I will also add the following points.
Where did I get my information from? I referenced it, a book called THE HISTORY OF HONDA.I dont have time to write out all the facts but i recomend you read this same book called the history of Honda."History of Honda"? hmmm, how appropriate you would continue to mention a book that cannot be found (reference wise) anywhere on the Internet. Not even Amazon.com has an out of print mention of it. Not even the Library of Congress has a listing.You never mentioned who wrote it or what publisher? Why, because it doesn't exist. Then all of a sudden in your last post you give a link to Amazon.com when all this time you have been saying "History Of Honda", not once was it written as "Illustrated Honda History". Don't try to insult our intelligence by implying you meant "Illustrated Honda History".
I said I dont know the history of KIA. Everything I said was true they ceased being their own automobile company around 10 years ago. The were bought out by ford ( they produced ford festiva, ford aspire. Ford owned controlling interest, ford owns controlling interest of mazda, Kia makes mazda 121....) when Hyundai bought KIA, that is who they bough it from lol.Apparantely you don't know much of anyones history. Licensing agreements/joint ventures are one thing, actually controlling stocks of a company is another. Ford did have holdings in Kia (17%) but lost it due to the company's losses were absorbed by existing shareholders. One can easily go to the corporate Kia site and see their past annual and finiancial reports . Therefore it did not have anything to sell. As stated previously, KIA contributed greatly to the Asian financial crisis and was on the brink, and was bought up by Hyundai, Ford did tried to bid for Kia, but dropped out of the second round of bidding. The fact of the matter is that Hyundai did not buy Kia from Ford. Source (http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/98/1106/biz_1-2_kia.html)
and then, where is this sidetrack leading? The poster is wondering if they should buy a KIA car. Another poster is describing some abstract connection between KIA improving and Honda Cars who when they reached the us market in the 70s were rusty or something.
I spent a lot of time typing in this thread. Im fairly certain some of you benefitted from my education on this subject. Benefited form what? Misleading facts. yes the thread did get sidetracked, and should have been put back on course, but it has become much bigger than just asking a as simple question. We as Automobile Enthusiasts cannot allow anyone giving misleading statements which you insist on saying are true all based on a non-existant book.
Honda and Toyota ( toyoda) were born out of the same contract.
So they traded factories.
KIA is that its the butt end. A company so horrid hyundai drove them out of business
It ends with them (Kia) being bought out by ford, and then sold to hyundaiMaking such misleading statements is wrong. And correcting them is our main priority at this point.
TS
Moppie has corrected quite a few of the misleading facts but I will also add the following points.
Where did I get my information from? I referenced it, a book called THE HISTORY OF HONDA.I dont have time to write out all the facts but i recomend you read this same book called the history of Honda."History of Honda"? hmmm, how appropriate you would continue to mention a book that cannot be found (reference wise) anywhere on the Internet. Not even Amazon.com has an out of print mention of it. Not even the Library of Congress has a listing.You never mentioned who wrote it or what publisher? Why, because it doesn't exist. Then all of a sudden in your last post you give a link to Amazon.com when all this time you have been saying "History Of Honda", not once was it written as "Illustrated Honda History". Don't try to insult our intelligence by implying you meant "Illustrated Honda History".
I said I dont know the history of KIA. Everything I said was true they ceased being their own automobile company around 10 years ago. The were bought out by ford ( they produced ford festiva, ford aspire. Ford owned controlling interest, ford owns controlling interest of mazda, Kia makes mazda 121....) when Hyundai bought KIA, that is who they bough it from lol.Apparantely you don't know much of anyones history. Licensing agreements/joint ventures are one thing, actually controlling stocks of a company is another. Ford did have holdings in Kia (17%) but lost it due to the company's losses were absorbed by existing shareholders. One can easily go to the corporate Kia site and see their past annual and finiancial reports . Therefore it did not have anything to sell. As stated previously, KIA contributed greatly to the Asian financial crisis and was on the brink, and was bought up by Hyundai, Ford did tried to bid for Kia, but dropped out of the second round of bidding. The fact of the matter is that Hyundai did not buy Kia from Ford. Source (http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/98/1106/biz_1-2_kia.html)
and then, where is this sidetrack leading? The poster is wondering if they should buy a KIA car. Another poster is describing some abstract connection between KIA improving and Honda Cars who when they reached the us market in the 70s were rusty or something.
I spent a lot of time typing in this thread. Im fairly certain some of you benefitted from my education on this subject. Benefited form what? Misleading facts. yes the thread did get sidetracked, and should have been put back on course, but it has become much bigger than just asking a as simple question. We as Automobile Enthusiasts cannot allow anyone giving misleading statements which you insist on saying are true all based on a non-existant book.
Honda and Toyota ( toyoda) were born out of the same contract.
So they traded factories.
KIA is that its the butt end. A company so horrid hyundai drove them out of business
It ends with them (Kia) being bought out by ford, and then sold to hyundaiMaking such misleading statements is wrong. And correcting them is our main priority at this point.
TS
stamar
09-03-2006, 05:02 PM
I am having a serious problem with the forum logging me out because my posts are taking too long. Taking a great deal of time on a busy day
I am going to make a post and edit it several times here
Ive retyped this about 3 times
some of the posts are very strange. If you think I havent read a book then what did I read? I mean, thats a strange fantasy Im not sure how Im supposed to respond to it. Im pretty sure that a lot of this is very strange actually I'm interacting with some people who are entertained pretty differently than I am. But at least have a common interest in the automotive industry which is why Im back to read what you have to say and see if there is anything interesting you came up with. And two of you did.
As I browse through the responses there are things that are interesting to me as well that I should respond to.
Some have some interesting facts. Exact holdings in KIA are cool to correct. If that is what is relevant to you. Its never been interesting to me until this exact moment but Ill mark it for future reference. I mean to say then that Ford was a creditor of KIA, Hyundai paid them as well as 83% of someone else. I think that link corrects a few things that were posted by someone else as well. But now that its straight does it add something to the analysis of facts, thats what i missed. This is 1998 news mind you. I summarized and you have elaborated. I think that is great actually. I think that is worthwhile to read actually. It has some information you didnt point out that is interesting.
Ok I have linked the history of Honda already. Is there something else I can do to help you?
I have also read this book
http://www.amazon.com/Pictorial-Japanese-Motorcycles-Cornelius-Vanderheuvel/dp/0760304106/sr=8-1/qid=1157316455/ref=sr_1_1/102-6602646-9274512?ie=UTF8&s=books
These two books I read deal with post ww2 japan in general, honda and toyota specifically. KIA not at all. Pre ww2 toyota very little.
I would not expect you to read books and then come back to the forum and make a post about it.
I have not made a web based research project for the benefit of this thread if I did I would use the same sources as moppie ie I would type history of kia into google and browse what came up.
I would use the wikipedia first though.
So if I reference a book to a forumer Im mostly saying in your own time read it and it will be clearer. I brought up both of those books because you could walk into borders and read them today they are readily available. I've read the history of honda ( thats what its called on the book not illustrated) twice. Its excellent.
A book has more information than a web page. But thats not to say that a web page is incorrect. Theres no link to a book i can give you for your benefit unfortunately.
Ive read this information at honda.com and ive read the history of honda. Well no doubt a book is a great deal longer than a single page although lets compare more a chapter to a page.
Im not directly quoting the actual book either, the physical thing. I could find it in a bookstore though. So for example when I say late 60s when its 1963, or mr toyoda because I didnt write down his first name (LOL) that is not to say the book is incorrect because I assure you its correct, there is just a certain amount of vagueness between when I read it and what Im writing in this forum.
If I didnt remember the date I would say 60s, if I didnt remember the name i would say MR.
I made a post that was correct. It contained the correct facts, and it had my opinion too which was short (" I dont see how you could compare KIA to either of these companies")
I
I am not getting off more than 1 sentence at a time. I have just now realized something about this forum I never realized before that many users have problems making long posts. I have not even gotten into my point but i will do it in 24 hours from another computer
I am going to make a post and edit it several times here
Ive retyped this about 3 times
some of the posts are very strange. If you think I havent read a book then what did I read? I mean, thats a strange fantasy Im not sure how Im supposed to respond to it. Im pretty sure that a lot of this is very strange actually I'm interacting with some people who are entertained pretty differently than I am. But at least have a common interest in the automotive industry which is why Im back to read what you have to say and see if there is anything interesting you came up with. And two of you did.
As I browse through the responses there are things that are interesting to me as well that I should respond to.
Some have some interesting facts. Exact holdings in KIA are cool to correct. If that is what is relevant to you. Its never been interesting to me until this exact moment but Ill mark it for future reference. I mean to say then that Ford was a creditor of KIA, Hyundai paid them as well as 83% of someone else. I think that link corrects a few things that were posted by someone else as well. But now that its straight does it add something to the analysis of facts, thats what i missed. This is 1998 news mind you. I summarized and you have elaborated. I think that is great actually. I think that is worthwhile to read actually. It has some information you didnt point out that is interesting.
Ok I have linked the history of Honda already. Is there something else I can do to help you?
I have also read this book
http://www.amazon.com/Pictorial-Japanese-Motorcycles-Cornelius-Vanderheuvel/dp/0760304106/sr=8-1/qid=1157316455/ref=sr_1_1/102-6602646-9274512?ie=UTF8&s=books
These two books I read deal with post ww2 japan in general, honda and toyota specifically. KIA not at all. Pre ww2 toyota very little.
I would not expect you to read books and then come back to the forum and make a post about it.
I have not made a web based research project for the benefit of this thread if I did I would use the same sources as moppie ie I would type history of kia into google and browse what came up.
I would use the wikipedia first though.
So if I reference a book to a forumer Im mostly saying in your own time read it and it will be clearer. I brought up both of those books because you could walk into borders and read them today they are readily available. I've read the history of honda ( thats what its called on the book not illustrated) twice. Its excellent.
A book has more information than a web page. But thats not to say that a web page is incorrect. Theres no link to a book i can give you for your benefit unfortunately.
Ive read this information at honda.com and ive read the history of honda. Well no doubt a book is a great deal longer than a single page although lets compare more a chapter to a page.
Im not directly quoting the actual book either, the physical thing. I could find it in a bookstore though. So for example when I say late 60s when its 1963, or mr toyoda because I didnt write down his first name (LOL) that is not to say the book is incorrect because I assure you its correct, there is just a certain amount of vagueness between when I read it and what Im writing in this forum.
If I didnt remember the date I would say 60s, if I didnt remember the name i would say MR.
I made a post that was correct. It contained the correct facts, and it had my opinion too which was short (" I dont see how you could compare KIA to either of these companies")
I
I am not getting off more than 1 sentence at a time. I have just now realized something about this forum I never realized before that many users have problems making long posts. I have not even gotten into my point but i will do it in 24 hours from another computer
Dyno247365
09-03-2006, 07:51 PM
Don't fight with a counterpointer, once they've done it, you're pwned. Some asses once tried to tell me that american animation was better than japanese animation and they kept saying my facts were shit. I still say it's better, considering a lot of Japan's and even Korea's economy centers around Anime to market products. We just make kid's shows and the simpsons...damn I went offtopic, don't mess with counterpointers.
porscheguy9999
09-03-2006, 07:55 PM
If this was already said, then never mind. But Kia is a lower quality Hyundai. I dont really like them, but besides the quality and image, I dont have much against them.
drunken monkey
09-03-2006, 08:20 PM
I am not getting off more than 1 sentence at a time. I have just now realized something about this forum I never realized before that many users have problems making long posts.
moppie didn't seem to have any problems.
another of your unfounded assumptions?
moppie didn't seem to have any problems.
another of your unfounded assumptions?
Moppie
09-03-2006, 08:36 PM
I am having a serious problem with the forum logging me out because my posts are taking too lo................................................ .................................................. ..................................g long posts. I have not even gotten into my point but i will do it in 24 hours from another computer[/edit]
Give up!
Blaming the forum software for your own incompetance does not help you.
You are not the great wealth of Automotive knowledge you thought you were, nor are you more intelligent or somehow smarter than anyone else here.
Your "facts" have been refuted and your opinion has been noted, but its reasoning rejected.
And this is not the first thread its happened in.
Give up or you just make yourself look like even more of a fool than you already do.
Give up!
Blaming the forum software for your own incompetance does not help you.
You are not the great wealth of Automotive knowledge you thought you were, nor are you more intelligent or somehow smarter than anyone else here.
Your "facts" have been refuted and your opinion has been noted, but its reasoning rejected.
And this is not the first thread its happened in.
Give up or you just make yourself look like even more of a fool than you already do.
Moppie
09-03-2006, 08:38 PM
I dont really like them, but besides the quality and image, I dont have much against them.
I think thats exactly the angle they want.
As a car enthusiasts we don't really fit into the current export model line up.
However, if we are not put off them in anyway, then chances are people looking more for of an appliance and cheap transport rather than a car, might be attracted to them.
I think thats exactly the angle they want.
As a car enthusiasts we don't really fit into the current export model line up.
However, if we are not put off them in anyway, then chances are people looking more for of an appliance and cheap transport rather than a car, might be attracted to them.
stamar
09-04-2006, 01:54 AM
Don't fight with a counterpointer, once they've done it, you're pwned. Some asses once tried to tell me that american animation was better than japanese animation and they kept saying my facts were shit. I still say it's better, considering a lot of Japan's and even Korea's economy centers around Anime to market products. We just make kid's shows and the simpsons...damn I went offtopic, don't mess with counterpointers.
lol whats really sad about it is the little clique gets together and starts to flame like its a competition someone can win.
And whats really sad is the three are moderators of some sort. Because in general this is the purpose of a moderator to discourage users that are interested in the forum for weird brow beating, visiting eachothers threads and insulting. Its childish stuff. It suprises me greatly.
I see your point, but what I think about is a reader such as yourself that might really be trying to figure something out.
I mean, that applies to your life about car brands. So I respond and take it at face value if I think it sounds like a reasonable question.
I really doubt anyone read through the second row of moppies posts. It gets really weird, I mean seriously twisted.
I dont get paid to lurk online anymore so I dont have that kind of time. But I dont think its totally weird because there was a time when I did....
Im not going to spend the time to respond to each of the points I think in there that pertain to facts that might be confusing. Mostly because with my online time it would take me several days. I am going to go over some of the things that are interesting. Im sure hell post twice before I have the time to return here
lol whats really sad about it is the little clique gets together and starts to flame like its a competition someone can win.
And whats really sad is the three are moderators of some sort. Because in general this is the purpose of a moderator to discourage users that are interested in the forum for weird brow beating, visiting eachothers threads and insulting. Its childish stuff. It suprises me greatly.
I see your point, but what I think about is a reader such as yourself that might really be trying to figure something out.
I mean, that applies to your life about car brands. So I respond and take it at face value if I think it sounds like a reasonable question.
I really doubt anyone read through the second row of moppies posts. It gets really weird, I mean seriously twisted.
I dont get paid to lurk online anymore so I dont have that kind of time. But I dont think its totally weird because there was a time when I did....
Im not going to spend the time to respond to each of the points I think in there that pertain to facts that might be confusing. Mostly because with my online time it would take me several days. I am going to go over some of the things that are interesting. Im sure hell post twice before I have the time to return here
drunken monkey
09-04-2006, 10:36 AM
way to avoid answering simple and direct questions.
Misleading facts. yes the thread did get sidetracked, and should have been put back on course, but it has become much bigger than just asking a simple question. We as Automobile Enthusiasts cannot allow anyone giving misleading statements
in case you missed it, you have been giving misleading statements.
Misleading facts. yes the thread did get sidetracked, and should have been put back on course, but it has become much bigger than just asking a simple question. We as Automobile Enthusiasts cannot allow anyone giving misleading statements
in case you missed it, you have been giving misleading statements.
stamar
09-04-2006, 05:12 PM
Give up!
Blaming the forum software for your own incompetance does not help you.
You are not the great wealth of Automotive knowledge you thought you were, nor are you more intelligent or somehow smarter than anyone else here.
Your "facts" have been refuted and your opinion has been noted, but its reasoning rejected.
And this is not the first thread its happened in.
Give up or you just make yourself look like even more of a fool than you already do.
hey thanks for your help moppie.
Sunday is study day for me. So Im in the library on a public computer.
Security settings of this hub software are not compatible with the security settings at the libraries computer. Im sure youve heard about it before because I have and I dont lurk here as often as you do.
Seeing as I have no access to either security setting I cant post from the library computer without using a word processor.
And the only reason this matters is because I had planned to quote books in the library for that post and lost a lot of time with a disapearing post.
Blaming the forum software for your own incompetance does not help you.
You are not the great wealth of Automotive knowledge you thought you were, nor are you more intelligent or somehow smarter than anyone else here.
Your "facts" have been refuted and your opinion has been noted, but its reasoning rejected.
And this is not the first thread its happened in.
Give up or you just make yourself look like even more of a fool than you already do.
hey thanks for your help moppie.
Sunday is study day for me. So Im in the library on a public computer.
Security settings of this hub software are not compatible with the security settings at the libraries computer. Im sure youve heard about it before because I have and I dont lurk here as often as you do.
Seeing as I have no access to either security setting I cant post from the library computer without using a word processor.
And the only reason this matters is because I had planned to quote books in the library for that post and lost a lot of time with a disapearing post.
stamar
09-04-2006, 10:22 PM
http://www.amazon.com/Honda-Story-Racing-Motorcycles-Present/dp/185960966X/sr=8-3/qid=1157421439/ref=sr_1_3/002-6592675-3676852?ie=UTF8&s=books
I went to borders bookstore and reread the begining of this book today.
Earlier I refered to the history of honda being easy to find in bookstores. Its not. The story of honda is. I had confused the two books in my memory I read both of them.
This book deals with all the models of motorcycles honda made. around 9 pages in the beginning deal with ww2, japan, the biography of the individual Honda etc. Unfortunately it doesnt really catalogue any of the cars they made.
It didnt have any information not available on the wikipedia on honda. But Ill write some of it down particularly because I just read it.
Before ww2 the individual Honda owned a company called takei heavy industries.
It made piston rings. Toyota owned 40% of the company. Or you could say toyota owned the company eventually but not orignally.
In 1947 the individual Honda formed honda motors with the other founder who was an engineer.
I went to borders bookstore and reread the begining of this book today.
Earlier I refered to the history of honda being easy to find in bookstores. Its not. The story of honda is. I had confused the two books in my memory I read both of them.
This book deals with all the models of motorcycles honda made. around 9 pages in the beginning deal with ww2, japan, the biography of the individual Honda etc. Unfortunately it doesnt really catalogue any of the cars they made.
It didnt have any information not available on the wikipedia on honda. But Ill write some of it down particularly because I just read it.
Before ww2 the individual Honda owned a company called takei heavy industries.
It made piston rings. Toyota owned 40% of the company. Or you could say toyota owned the company eventually but not orignally.
In 1947 the individual Honda formed honda motors with the other founder who was an engineer.
alphalanos
09-11-2006, 12:46 AM
I understand that Kia is trying to make an affordable car, but making it the cheapest way and out of the cheapest materials possible isnt going to get you many customers. I stick to Honda because, even though they are a little expensive, that are that way because of higher quality in manufacturing and parts selection. Not to mention intelligent design of their vehicles and focusing on what is important for a car, which is to transport people in a safe, cost effective way.
Dyno247365
09-11-2006, 03:30 AM
How long is this thread gonna go on? I was still in my parents house when this thread started. XD
VAD0R
09-11-2006, 10:12 AM
I understand that Kia is trying to make an affordable car, but making it the cheapest way and out of the cheapest materials possible isnt going to get you many customers. I stick to Honda because, even though they are a little expensive, that are that way because of higher quality in manufacturing and parts selection. Not to mention intelligent design of their vehicles and focusing on what is important for a car, which is to transport people in a safe, cost effective way.
Who is the car maker that is still sticking with using independent suspension and has had side curtain airbags standard for longer? I rest my case.:icon16:
Being behind the the R&D curb doesn't directly translate to cheap and now under Hyundai's ownership they are catching up quite fast.
Who is the car maker that is still sticking with using independent suspension and has had side curtain airbags standard for longer? I rest my case.:icon16:
Being behind the the R&D curb doesn't directly translate to cheap and now under Hyundai's ownership they are catching up quite fast.
alphalanos
09-11-2006, 12:35 PM
I used to own a 2001 Rio. I have nothing against the company, but the cars are just incredibly cheap. I also owned a 2002 Daewoo Lanos before they went bankrupt. With a GM built engine it was decent car, but still cheap. And no resale value whatsoever. At least the $14,000 that was paid for my Civic 10 years ago is still somewhat intact.
Dyno247365
09-11-2006, 05:37 PM
I used to own a 2001 Rio. I have nothing against the company, but the cars are just incredibly cheap. I also owned a 2002 Daewoo Lanos before they went bankrupt. With a GM built engine it was decent car, but still cheap. And no resale value whatsoever. At least the $14,000 that was paid for my Civic 10 years ago is still somewhat intact.
My question is will Kia ever start making better cars? If so, they should be designing something right now instead of finding new ways to save money. Build a race car, that always works for recognition.
My question is will Kia ever start making better cars? If so, they should be designing something right now instead of finding new ways to save money. Build a race car, that always works for recognition.
VAD0R
09-12-2006, 10:37 AM
My question is will Kia ever start making better cars? If so, they should be designing something right now instead of finding new ways to save money. Build a race car, that always works for recognition.
Well the Spectra5 independent suspension on all four wheels coupled with a front sway bar stock and tightened steering. Its engine however is still enibric compared to the competition at 138hp but it is also a whole lot cheaper which makes a great buy performance as apposed to the Scion xA. However, the new Rio also seems to give other sub-compacts a run for its money. Kia does have aspirations (http://www.wheels24.co.za/Wheels24/News/0,,1369-1372_1461606,00.html) of creating a sports car, however Daewoo once did too. (http://www.histomobile.com/1/Daewoo/1995/Bucrane_.htm?lan=1)
Well the Spectra5 independent suspension on all four wheels coupled with a front sway bar stock and tightened steering. Its engine however is still enibric compared to the competition at 138hp but it is also a whole lot cheaper which makes a great buy performance as apposed to the Scion xA. However, the new Rio also seems to give other sub-compacts a run for its money. Kia does have aspirations (http://www.wheels24.co.za/Wheels24/News/0,,1369-1372_1461606,00.html) of creating a sports car, however Daewoo once did too. (http://www.histomobile.com/1/Daewoo/1995/Bucrane_.htm?lan=1)
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026