Elaborate on what? As I wrote, I am putting things into perspective. I described 2 facts. That's it.

 

so what you're saying is that I can't be as learned as you because I'm 10 years your junior. And that because I'm Canadian, I must be anti-American?

 

The comany started out in the UK and still manufacture its cars in the UK. The Jaguar company itself even says it is British.

 

Where did you see me write or ellude to any of the above? And why the negative attitude?

 

So? What does it matter where the cars are manufactured? I say again. The Camry is manufactured here. Does that make Toyota an American company?

 

apples and oranges

 

why else would you bring up such frivolous information?

 

I already answered that.

To put perspective to your attack.

 

What does that mean and how is it an argument to my statement above? So if Jaguar is British, is Toyota USAmerican? I ask you again.

 

my "attack" would still have been the same if I was a 30-year-old American.

 

Toyota is a Japanese company that just happens to build "America's best-selling passenger car" in the U.S.A. It's just smart business practice.

http://129.33.47.206/about/news/prod...1-1-sales.html

Jaguar is a British car manufacturer that just so happens to be owned by Ford. Jaguars are their own cars, built in Jaguar plants, in the UK.

 

you know, i find it funny sometimes that the canadians know more about our country and gevernment than we do. interesting huh?

 

Any car you can put Altezza's on.

 

I think it's Omogato, or something along those lines.

 

I looked it up...The Ferrari was Gran Turismo Omologato...not to be confused with Gas, Tires, Oil. (Not my joke, I read it.)

 

So it's smart business for Toyota, but that does not apply for Ford and GM. Nice and fair arguement. Sorry.


"...just so happens to be owned by Ford"

Wow. So the fact that Jaguar would have been in the history books, if it were not for Ford's acquisition and rekindking of it says nothing to you. Ford could have bought the company and changed the name to FORD. Or Gabe. They could have done anything they wanted with the company and they can do anything they want with the company.

I say again, the SHOTS ARE CALLED IN DETROIT. For Jaguar. By Ford execs. If the X Type would have been built, someone from Ford decided on that. Which platforms and engines will be shared and how will Jaguar's future will look like, FOrd execs decide. Jaguar plants operate because of FORD money. USAmerican money. Jag employees get paid with that money too. Jaguar exists because Ford exists.

So "just so it happes" for Jag cars to be produced in England. That, in no way, makes Jag a British company. Jaguar is 100% a USAmerican company like Volvo, Saab, Aston, Holden, Opel, Vauxhaul and others.

 

That's part of the perspective I was trying to input. Only part of it.

 

Omologato. Look for my post above.

 

i wasnt trying to be ignorant yesterday but i dint think it thru ... rough day

 

Missed that one...my bad.

 

No they are not Domestic companies, but that doesn't mean some of their cars can't be domestic.

 

The CL-S is 100% designed, manufactured and assembled in the US, but it's still an import

 

 

Right. Cost it's been designed and manufactured by a Japanese company. So that makes it an import.

 

That is a false statement. Only 70-75% (I don't remember which, but you can tell by looking at the sticker at the dealer) of the CL parts are made in the USA. The rest come from Japan.

 

If its location of final assembly is in North America it is NOT an import. No matter where the company is located or who is backing the production. Its all about where the car is assembled. If it is "imported" just like any other good (beer, wine, furniture, etc.) it is an import car. Therefore, the CL is NOT an import car.

 

That's what I meant by "apples and oranges".

Quote:

"...just so happens to be owned by Ford"

Wow. So the fact that Jaguar would have been in the history books, if it were not for Ford's acquisition and rekindking of it says nothing to you. Ford could have bought the company and changed the name to FORD. Or Gabe. They could have done anything they wanted with the company and they can do anything they want with the company.

Actually, that means a lot to me...thanks to Ford, the quality and reliability of Jaguars is at its best.

Quote:

I say again, the SHOTS ARE CALLED IN DETROIT. For Jaguar. By Ford execs. If the X Type would have been built, someone from Ford decided on that. Which platforms and engines will be shared and how will Jaguar's future will look like, FOrd execs decide. Jaguar plants operate because of FORD money. USAmerican money. Jag employees get paid with that money too. Jaguar exists because Ford exists.

I really don't consider the X-Type a real Jaguar since it's basically a Ford Mondeo. Same with the S-Type since it's basically a Lincoln LS. :P

Quote:

So "just so it happes" for Jag cars to be produced in England. That, in no way, makes Jag a British company. Jaguar is 100% a USAmerican company like Volvo, Saab, Aston, Holden, Opel, Vauxhaul and others.

Sorry, I disagree.

Again, these are just my opinions. I have nothing against you; I just happen to not agree with your notion that Jaguar, Volvo, Aston Martin, Mazda, and Land Rover lose their respective heritages simply because they are owned by Ford.

LOL, that reminds me of the phrase: "You can take the boy out of the ghetto, but you cannot take the ghetto out of the boy."

 

So Ford is the Orange and Toyota is the Apple. Why? They are both automakers. Are you making your own rules to make an argument. It's invalid...

 

Agreed. But where in there do you admit that Jag is not a British company currently due to the above reasons I posted.

 

1. I got nothing against no one either. You were the one that attacked me and admitted to it and then admitted that you'd do it 10 years later under the same circumstances. So maybe you did have something agains me or what I wrote...

2. Why are you putting words in my mouth? Where did you see me write that Mazda is an American company? Mazda is not a WHOLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY of any American company. So...

3. "You can take the boy out of the ghetto, but you cannot take the ghetto out of the boy." So I guess I will categorize this as attack number 2 against me. Nice. Keep it up...

 

As far as Holden goes, they were a completely separate car company until GM bailed them out a few decades ago. They were designing there own cars even then. All I'm saying is there are different style cars, for different countries. Perhaps GM makes financial decsions for Holden and helps decide the direction of the company. But there has to be Aussies at least bringing those ideas to the table. As probably is the case with Europe and other regions. Who knows what an Aussie wants to drive better than an Aussie? Which brings me to the Monaro. Which through the 80's and 90's more resembled an Asian make than any GM car I've ever seen IMHO. I think its possible that whith GM's cancellation of their muscle cars due to CAFE, they needed a sporty V6 to fill in. And Holden happened to have one that has 430 hp (the GTS not the GTO). IMO because of the graying lines between import and domestic, an import would be a foreign Maker (originally), foreign market intended for (originally), and a foreing majority producer or builder. Or a combination of the three.

 

I give up...this is ridiculous.

 

:sqnteek:

IBTL

 

Just because a car maker is owned by another car company doesn't mean that the owner totally drives the direction of the subsidiary. Like Ford decides the directions of Lincoln. Which is apparent in the use of the same platforms. Ford probably has a pool of designers, enginers, and artists that come up with most of the ideas. Then each other maker will take from that which they want to integrate, with Ford's approval. But what would be the point of being the president of Mercury if Ford was going to make all the decisions anyways. Even Lincoln and Mercury have to be making decisions on where they want to take the company. And they're in the same market region as ford. Holden has to be calling its own shots for the most part. But I will try to find out how much involved GM is with Holden.

 

Okay.. Let's look at it in a different light and get out of the automotive discussion.

One example: GE recently bought Amersham (a British medical business that used to be owned by the British government) for $9.5 billion. The company will still be based in London and still employ British. But it is now an American company? Yes. Why, because it is now part of GE, a American conglomerate. The shots are called in the US by Americans.

It doesn't matter where the parts are made. Parts for most of what we get are made outside of the US. What matters is where the business is incorporated.

Why should the auto industry be any different?

 

[quote]Just because a car maker is owned by another car company doesn't mean that the owner totally drives the direction of the subsidiary[quote]

It doesn't matter what level the corporate leaders are calling the shots. It's part of an American business.

Again, think of it in a context of where you work. If your business (American company) bought a company in England for example and now runs it, the company is now American. Your bosses are calling the shots. It's part of an American business.

 

I was actually replying to a comment on the first page of this thread, but after reading more of the earlier posts, I see this one of those topics that will just be opinion based and not come to a real conclusion unless someone actually produces facts or those involved just agree to disagree.

 

That makes sense

 

There was an article in Motor Trend like 4 or 5 years ago about "The best built American cars but they are domestics"Off my head, they tested
The TL
Camry
Accord
Solara
Tundra

and some others. Some agency classifies them as domestics.

 

Nice argument. Keep it up...