Do you care where your tools are manufactured?

"Brian Henderson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:23:13 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Oddly enough, they sell them everywhere else but North America. Many
>>Tacomas are sold worldwide, as the Hilux, with diesel engines. The 4
>>liter gas V6 is a North America-only powerplant.
>
> That's because Americans don't really like disesl. It's like looking
> at the car market in the UK and Europe compared to the US. There are
> tons of really nice, extremely gas-efficient cars made in Europe but
> because they're not the size of a schoolbus, Americans won't drive
> them. We bitch about gas heading for $5 a gallon, but we won't give
> up our gas-guzzling SUVs. Go figure.

The biggest problem with Diesel in the US is passing the latest emission
standards. I have heard that many will have to use Urea injected some where
in the process and that is obtained from the dealer.

Leon wrote:
>
> I understand the new diesels will have to have Urea introduced to help cut
> down on the pollution. Urea? Apparently the dealer will have to fill that
> tank periodically. Honda is coming out with a diesel that will not need the
> Urea to pass the emission tests.
>
Hadn't heard that. I was told the new ultra low sulfer fuel made diesel
less polluting than gas. There's certainly no diesel odor or black
smoke from the late models I've seen/smelled. I know one Safeway gas
station in Washington State had 20% soy bio-diesel. The problem for
older pre '07 diesel engines and the low sulfer fuel is supposed to be a
lack of lubricity causing wear on the turbo. But then, the local Chevy
dealer claims no need for any additive as the oil companies already add it.

dpb wrote:
> Doug Winterburn wrote:
>> dpb wrote:
>>>
>>> That again is an oversimplification -- was in E TN where there was a
>>> nearby facility of, Motorola/Quasar/Sylvania/I forget the pedigree as
>>> it went through a succession trying to keep it alive. In the end,
>>> the labor costs were the killer as compared to offshore and despite
>>> several major retoolings for the electronics portions, the cabinetry
>>> and peripherals remained the high-cost items they couldn't compete
>>> against and eventually the whole facility went away...but it was the
>>> last US production facility and management didn't walk away early or
>>> lightly.
>>
>> Moto has also sold off it's SPS (Semiconductor Product Sector) to
>> Freescale. Their main focus now is radios and cell phones and
>> infrastructure.
>
> Yes, that simply completes a transition that started roughly 20 years
> ago...
>
> --

Yup, I know - I was with them for 23 years (as a result of an
acquisition) until they divested themselves of the group I worked for in
1998. The new owners decided they didn't need any (over 50 yr/old)
geezers, so I managed to get my severance from Moto before they
completed the dump. I'm not so sure the "transition" is complete as
there are acquisitions and divestitures going on constantly at Moto. As
one of my co-workers used to say "This is a great place to work -
there's a going away party every Friday" ;-)

On Nov 23, 1:53 am, "DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "John Horner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:d_s1j.5981$XT.5534@trnddc01...
>
> > Where to the rest of you sit with this question?
>
> I try to buy U.S., Canadian, British, German etc. because the quality is
> better, and I try to buy domestic because I see no reason to export jobs to
> China. I suppose some cheap tools are acceptable, a garden rake or
> something like that, but for jobs I care about I prefer tools that do the
> job properly and will still be doing it ten or twenty years down the road,
> and from what I've seen most of the tools coming out of China are still
> distinctly lower quality.

That works exceptionally well when you can FIND tools manufactured in
those countries. Today, a very large percentage of woodworking tools
is manufactured in China. Some of the comments I read today are
similar to those that used to crop up about Taiwanese tools 20-25
years ago, and about Japanese products of all kinds 25 or 30 years
before that. Today, Japan leads the world in quality in several areas--
autos, cameras, among others. Taiwan isn't far behind. Today, with
very minior exceptions, tool manufacture has moved out of the U.S.
German tools retain their excellence, but also have an excellent
price, so are not for a lot of people (check both quality and price of
Festool for an example: their tools are wonderful; the prices can be
staggering).

China's tool quality is much better now than it was a few years ago. I
wonder more than a little, though, about a system of goverment that
tends to blame poor quality manufacturing on the people buying the
product for resale, as in the toy flap with Mattel which had to
apologize to the Chinese because Chinese manufacturers used lead in
children's toys. Absolutely weird by my standards, but, more than
that, it limits the incentive for manufacturers to improve products
while maintaining price.

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 00:34:47 GMT, Ralph <[email protected]> wrote:


>Have to agree with you Mac. Remember when "J.A.Pan & Co." meant junk or
>popcorn toys (must be dating myself there). Their first cars into North
>America were a joke, but they did their homework and now they are
>forerunners in industry. It seems that China may be following the same
>route.

That brought back a dim memory... when I was a kid, I got some kind of little
toy out of a gumball machine and it broke.. I asked my dad if he could fix it
and he said "nope, it's potmetal.. must be made in Japan"..
Not sure if there really is something called pot metal, but I've always
remembered him saying that..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:40:39 GMT, Bob the Tomato <[email protected]> wrote:

>Do you know the "Harbor Freight Smell"? That's the smell of lead
>paint mixed with cheap plasticizers, or something. Anyhow, it's very
>distinctive, and Sears didn't have it until a couple of years ago.
>The HF power tools have this cheap plastic housing that is usually
>orange or something. It actually has a bit of an oily film on it when
>you first take the tool out of the box. It might be mold release, or
>it might be plasticizer oozing out of the plastic, I don't know. And
>they *always* have that strong smell. Then you have the cardboard
>box. I keep the old boxes from my purchases. That way I can locate
>by Craftsman jigsaw from 1985 quickly, and keep all the accessories
>and the manual together with it. Those cardboard boxes are sturdy and
>have a real solid feel about them. The new ones feel like a wet
>cereal box. I don't know how to describe it, they just do.
>
I guess my nose is too old to tell the difference...
I tried a HF biscuit jointer to see if that was a tool worth adding.. when made
a few things with it and realized that biscuits were a good thing, I bought the
Dewalt one with the craftsman name on it..

It's been working great for years but just to be safe I better get a neighbor or
someone to smell it..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

Brian Henderson took a can of maroon spray paint on November 24, 2007 04:06
pm and wrote the following:

> On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:09:52 -0500, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Uh, you missed their taking over the entire consumer electronics
>>industry.
>
> Because the Japanese could make a better product for less money, why
> shouldn't they take over the industry? They earned it!
>
> The question you should be asking is why the U.S. completely wasted
> their superiority.

Obvious answer, they were reaping in the profits, instead of spending some
of that money to improve quality and R&D in new technologies.

--
Lits Slut #9
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.

"John Horner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:d_s1j.5981$XT.5534@trnddc01...

> Where to the rest of you sit with this question?

I try to buy U.S., Canadian, British, German etc. because the quality is
better, and I try to buy domestic because I see no reason to export jobs to
China. I suppose some cheap tools are acceptable, a garden rake or
something like that, but for jobs I care about I prefer tools that do the
job properly and will still be doing it ten or twenty years down the road,
and from what I've seen most of the tools coming out of China are still
distinctly lower quality.

"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> That works exceptionally well when you can FIND tools manufactured in
> those countries. Today, a very large percentage of woodworking tools
> is manufactured in China. Some of the comments I read today are
> similar to those that used to crop up about Taiwanese tools 20-25
> years ago, and about Japanese products of all kinds 25 or 30 years
> before that.

Agreed, and as the west has transplanted its technology to China their
quality has improved greatly, consider the guitars they're making there now.
However in most cases I can still find western-made tools that are markedly
superior to the Chinese versions and not always at a much greater price,
although I'm willing to pay more for something I won't have to replace when
it dies a premature death. That will change as more companies with
manufacturing in China aim for the quality market rather than just punching
out discount-bin disposable tools. Still, when I'm looking at a display of
tools for sale I'll go for Made in America (or Britain, Germany etc.) if I
possibly can, how long that will be possible is anyone's guess.

J. Clarke wrote:

> John Horner wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> <rolling eyes> They have more than four times the population of
>>> the
>>> US in the same land area. They have trouble feeding all the people
>>> they have. Further, they are not and have never been a Christian
>>> nation or a nation that owes any part of its heritage to any
>>> religion
>>> that is part of the heritage of Christianity, so no, on no count is
>>> it wrong for the Chinese to require women who have been so
>>> irresponsible as to become pregnant in violation of the law and
>>> common sense to have abortions.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not a Christian either, so I don't see what that has to do with
>> this.
>>
>> You must realize that not all laws are just, eh? Legalized slavery
>> in the US was never just, although it was legal.
>
> So if you are not a Christian then what is your basis for the
> allegation that abortion is wrong?
>

Why would one have to be a Christian to recognize that a life is being
taken by the act of abortion?


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Frank Boettcher wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 10:53:43 -0600, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>>...
>>
>>> ... How many people are willing to spend $xxx more for brand D
>>> knowing they have superior quality of a machine built by experienced
>>> craftsmen?
>>
>>Not nearly enough, apparently...
>
>
... snip
>
> I think we may have discussed this before. Did the market demand the
> switch or did the corporate hacks just listen to their consultants and
> believe their BS about "conversion costs" etc? It was the latter not
> the former in my case. The customers for my product left *after* the
> move, not before.
>
> There will always be a segment of the market that wants high quality
> and is willing to pay a reasonable amount more for that quality. If
> they can find it.
>

... and the Delta tool line was one of those places that people were
willing to pay for that quality.

Now the consultants have been paid, the switch has been made such that
recovery to the pre-change state is most likely nearly impossible, and the
executives are left with a dwindling market in that segment with a high
return rate and higher warranty costs. You know what that means, right?
They are going to have to bring in some highly paid consultants to identify
the problems and get recommendations for turning things around.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

mac davis wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 21:06:27 GMT, Brian Henderson
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:09:52 -0500, "J. Clarke"
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>Uh, you missed their taking over the entire consumer electronics
>>>industry.
>>
>>Because the Japanese could make a better product for less money, why
>>shouldn't they take over the industry? They earned it!
>>
>>The question you should be asking is why the U.S. completely wasted
>>their superiority.
>
> I watched the transition in the quality of Japanese steel.. from tin can
> quality to better than ours (US)..
> One of the reasons is that the Japanese government underwrites research
> and renovation..
>

That and/or the fact that Japanese industry can do updates and renovations

> Back maybe 10 or 15 years, I watched a documentary on the steel industry
> and they were pointing out that Japan was tearing down it's oldest steel
> mill and rebuilding it to be better and efficient... and that the newest
> steel mill in the US was almost 100 years old...

One of the reasons for that is the significant resistance of organized
labor to any changes in plant configuration that might automate something
and take away a job. They were successful for a while, but that eventually
caught up to both the steel and auto industries. I believe Leon posted a
while back about the amount in a new GM car that goes to pay the health
insurance for retired workers.

> Same thing happened to our auto industry... the Japanese did their
> homework and found out what the American people wanted and made it..
>
>
> mac
>
> Please remove splinters before emailing

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Cooniedog wrote:

> The answer to wasted superiority is simple - cheaper labor equals more
> and much bigger profits for the U.S. companies, who happen to be the
> cronies of the current administration.
>

Please, this goes way past the last 6 3/4 years. I know lots of folks
like the mantra, "It's Bush's fault", but let's be reasonable and recognize
that this problem has been going on for quite some time, with roots as far
back as the 50's and 60's. I'm not old enough to remember, but have had
mentors tell me about purchasing appliances or cars in that era. The US
manufacturers considered themselves to be the only game in town and really
pretty much didn't give a rip about the opinions or needs of consumers.
You also had organized labor applying extortionist demands on those
industries, forcing deeper and larger concessions -- the bill for which is
coming due even now. The bottom line here is greed and has been practiced
by both sides of this issue, labor and management.

One of the pieces of good news regarding the lowered value of the dollar
is that it is now making US goods attractive on the world market again.
Spoke with someone this morning who is involved in commercial aerospace
components -- they are seeing an upswing in foreign sales opportunities.

... snip

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

"Cooniedog" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The answer to wasted superiority is simple - cheaper labor equals more and
> much bigger profits for the U.S. companies, who happen to be the cronies
> of the current administration.
>

Two quick questions:

1. Wasn't Most Favored Nation trading status granted to China in 1980 under
the Carter administration?
2. Under what Constitutional provision or by what specific law would this or
any other president be able to restrain trade for non-beligerant
merchandise?

No ax to grind, no desire for an argument, just questions.

Glen

Brian Henderson wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:23:13 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Oddly enough, they sell them everywhere else but North America. Many
>>Tacomas are sold worldwide, as the Hilux, with diesel engines. The 4
>>liter gas V6 is a North America-only powerplant.
>
> That's because Americans don't really like disesl. It's like looking
> at the car market in the UK and Europe compared to the US. There are
> tons of really nice, extremely gas-efficient cars made in Europe but
> because they're not the size of a schoolbus, Americans won't drive
> them. We bitch about gas heading for $5 a gallon, but we won't give
> up our gas-guzzling SUVs. Go figure.

Maybe because we know there are answers other than driving glorified
bubbles powered by lawn mower engines? We have ample opportunity, shale
oil in the west, Anwar to the north, oil off of Florida before the Chinese
and Cubans suck it dry, etc. The reserves are there, but the will to
overcome the resistance to developing our own sources seems to be weak.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Frank Boettcher wrote:

... snip
>>
>>I wasn't in the boardroom, were you?
>
> No, I was a vice president, a company officer fully exposed to all
> financial data specific to the company in all segments. The group and
> corporate financial information was available to anyone who asked for
> an annual report. There is nothing "secret" that happened in the
> boardroom that would negate the actual financial results of the
> specific company or my operation. It is as I described and I'm
> constrained by confidentiality agreements that outlive my employment
> from going into any more detail than that although they don't mean
> much at this point.

It's good to hear from someone with a close perspective of the situation.

... snip
>
> You don't know about the concept of present value do you. At this
> point in history, the chances of it turning out with the desired
> overall end effect financially are zero. The group was sold at a deep
> discount (about $500 million) to sales volume after a number of break
> even years followed the disastrous strategy. So those corporate
> officers can *never* recoup what they have lost for the stockholders
> of the corporation. It's lost for good.
>

Did the off-shoring decision occur before or after Pentair sold Delta?




--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Frank Boettcher wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:31:47 -0700, Mark & Juanita
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
... snip
>>
>> Did the off-shoring decision occur before or after Pentair sold Delta?
>
>
> Before. Pentair only starting looking for a buyer after the strategy
> went very, very bad. The Tool Group, the most profitable part of
> Pentairs business throughout my tenure, went south in a hurry. Stock
> dropped to about half its pre consolidation/globalization level losing
> about a billion bucks of shareholder value.
>
> Public record. Annual reports. Glossy words, but you can't hide the
> numbers. Also Fortune wrote an article about the disaster, 2000 or
> 2001. It was very accurate except for the parts that indicated the
> "current Corporate management had a handle on the fix".
>

Thanks. I bought some Pentair stock in 2004 when things seemed to be
going up and shortly before the announcement to sell off Delta. Just got
out a few months ago; I didn't lose money, but could have done better if I
had bailed in 2005.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Brian Henderson wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:28:41 -0700, Mark & Juanita
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Maybe because we know there are answers other than driving glorified
>>bubbles powered by lawn mower engines?
>
> Maybe Americans need to grow up and deal with the reality that oil
> reserves are rapidly running out.

Only if the currently active tapped reserves are taken into account.

>
>>We have ample opportunity, shale
>>oil in the west, Anwar to the north, oil off of Florida before the Chinese
>>and Cubans suck it dry, etc. The reserves are there, but the will to
>>overcome the resistance to developing our own sources seems to be weak.
>
> It will be a stopgap measure at best, the fact is that China and India
> are sucking up tons of gasoline now that they're becoming massively
> industrialized and it will only get worse from here. Sure, you might
> be able to suck another 10-20 years of oil out of Alaska but in the
> end, we're going to be back in the same place with too much demand and
> not enough oil to go around.

You really don't have a grasp on the amount of coal and shale reserves in
the US, do you?

While deliberate waste is never justified, the idea that having us all
drive Prius's will save the world is hardly a rational approach.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

mac davis wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 00:34:47 GMT, Ralph <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Have to agree with you Mac. Remember when "J.A.Pan & Co." meant junk or
>>popcorn toys (must be dating myself there). Their first cars into North
>>America were a joke, but they did their homework and now they are
>>forerunners in industry. It seems that China may be following the same
>>route.
>
> That brought back a dim memory... when I was a kid, I got some kind of
> little toy out of a gumball machine and it broke.. I asked my dad if he
> could fix it and he said "nope, it's potmetal.. must be made in Japan"..
> Not sure if there really is something called pot metal, but I've always
> remembered him saying that..

Remember the same thing. I think "pot metal" was reference to a very low
grade of metal casting that would neither weld, braze, nor glue well after
it was made.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

J. Clarke wrote:

> John Horner wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> <rolling eyes>
>>>
>>
>> Isn't that the typical behavior of a think-the-know-it-all teenager?
>
> I've seen Hillary Clinton do it to Bush. It's a typical reaction to a
> statement so far off the wall that one has trouble figuring out how to
> _start_ educating the person making it.
>

It's also an expression by those who view themselves and their viewpoints
as so superior to people who disagree with them that they view others as
inferior. Like know-it-all teenagers, that isn't necessarily the real
case.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Leon wrote:

>
> "Mark & Juanita" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> John Horner wrote:
>>>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <rolling eyes>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Isn't that the typical behavior of a think-the-know-it-all teenager?
>>>
>>> I've seen Hillary Clinton do it to Bush. It's a typical reaction to a
>>> statement so far off the wall that one has trouble figuring out how to
>>> _start_ educating the person making it.
>>>
>>
>> It's also an expression by those who view themselves and their
>> viewpoints
>> as so superior to people who disagree with them that they view others as
>> inferior. Like know-it-all teenagers, that isn't necessarily the real
>> case.
>>
>> --
>> If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
>
> Typically facial jesters and or grunts used in place of words are an
> animal instinct reaction when one is typically at a loss of words and or
> feels he
> or she must make some kind of response. The more one's education works to
> your advantage and or the smarter you are, the less likely actions vs.
> words are used.


While what you say may be true in many instances, in this case, I would
say the gestures are deliberately staged to generate an air of superiority.
Like all things Shrillary, it's all show and no substance, but it does help
delude the ignorant with that all-knowing, everybody else is an idiot
facial expression. Kind of along the same lines as the old Dan
Akroyd, "Jane, you ignorant slut ..." put-downs.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

John Horner wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
>> On Nov 27, 2:08 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I've never met a nurse who was paid as a sub-contractor. In fact I
>>> suspect their union would go ballistic over it.
>>>
>
> You must not be familiar with travel nurses. They go from job to job
> as temps. Here in California many hospitals rely on travel nurses
> for a significant portion of their staffing.


As my daughter did for several years.....as an employee of a temp service as
I suspect most are....no vehical deduction allowed<G>....Rod

On Nov 25, 9:15 am, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bob the Tomato wrote:
> > On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 21:20:27 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski" <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> >> "Brian Henderson" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> message
>
> >>> The question is, does that extra quality translate into additional
> >>> capacity for the tool, does it actually work that much better than
> >>> an "inferior" tool to make it worth the additional cost. There
> >>> comes a point where miniscule improvements only come at a much
> >>> more
> >>> than miniscule cost. Does it really matter if your table saw top
> >>> is
> >>> flat within a billionth of an inch? Is it worth an extra 20% to
> >>> get it that flat?
>
> >>> Most people would say no.
>
> >> The hard part is finding out exactly where that point is on the
> >> curve. Yes, I'm willing to pay more for accuracy. For 20% more,
> >> it
> >> had better be noticeable. At 10%, it had better be useable. At
> >> 5%,
> >> there is a certain satisfaction knowing the tool is capable when
> >> needed, even if never needed to that accuracy. If I can spot the
> >> differences at ten paces, it is worth the extra. If I need an
> >> electron microscope, to tell the difference, I'll pay something
> >> less
> >> of a difference.
>
> >> While tools made in China is the question here, the same set of
> >> rules
> >> applies to other purchases as well, even made in the USA versus
> >> made
> >> in the USA. Most everything is engineered to be barely acceptable
> >> in
> >> the name of lower price and/or more profit. Would I pay more for a
> >> Delta made here? I did buy a hose reel for the garden this year
> >> and
> >> paid $179 if that helps answer your question. Last one I'll ever
> >> have to buy and it works greathttp://www.rapidreel.com/
>
> > I think, at a certain point it becomes obvious that a company is
> > trying to bilk you for every red cent they can. Walk thru the tool
> > dept at Sears lately? It's more like Harbor Freight than Home
> > Depot.
> > Yet the prices are still up there. Sears used to mean quality...
> > the
> > best. Now it means the bean counters are going to grind the
> > company's
> > formerly good name into the dirt to make a good profit this quarter.
>
> Huh? Was in there a couple of days ago, they still have the Bosch
> jigsaws and the Orion hybrid saws and the polished wrenches and so on
> that they had a year ago.
>
> Their reputation was made on hand tools, not power, and finish on
> their hand tools is better than it was 20 years ago. They see Snap-on
> as their competitor in that market and it shows. But even in that
> market Craftsman was never "the best", they were what you got if you
> couldn't afford Snap-On.
>
> Their Craftsman Professional power tools have always been decent,
> seldom the best in the industry but one could count on them to do what
> they were supposed to do and still can. One example is their jigsaw,
> which is clearly a relabelled Bosch (and jigsaws don't _come_ better
> than Bosch) but not the latest and greatest model. I've seen
> accusations that the Craftsman Professional tools are cheapened
> versions, but I've never seen anyone post side-by-side photos of their
> innards that demonstrates this, it's always been vague assertions.
>
> Their bench tools have always been a mixed bag--some have been decent,
> some crap. Right now their Orion table saws are probably the best
> table saw they've ever sold under their own brand. Their radial arm
> saws are mechanically pretty much like they were 30 years ago, they've
> just changed the trim and added a few bells and whistles over the
> years. Their new band saws are quite good--they cut corners on
> features, not on cutting ability.
>
> > I don't mind paying for quality. Once in a while I buy cheap, if it
> > passes the grade. But I will pass the junk every time. If there is
> > a
> > quality tool available, I will buy it if I can.
>

Agreed. I've currently got a 10" Craftsman Industrial tablesaw, and a
friend has the early production Orion hybrid I used to have. Both are
excellent tools. I've also got a refurb 15" planer, which is very
good. I need to look at the new bandsaws. Currently, a Steel City 16"
draws my praise...it is Taiwanese, I think, and very, very well made.
Trunnions are cast iron (not always the case in bandsaws under 20")
and all is well made.

As a general statement, I think there has been a basic upgrading of
quality in the past two decades, with more and more woodworkers
demanding better tools. A lot of the perceived faults we bitch about
these days might have been overlooked in the '70s, '80s and maybe even
into the '90s. Not today.

Yes, some Chinese/Taiwanese tools are junk, evennow, regardless of the
name on the tool, but an awful lot of that is the fault of the company
providing the specs and inspections. For example, 17-18-19 years ago,
any framing nailer cost upwards of $375, often way upwards. Today, a
decent brand name framing nailer may be had for well under $250. Why?
IMO, a large part of the credit goes to Porter-Cable, which started
getting decent production out of Taiwan by the simple matter of
sending an inspector over there, full time as I was told, with the
authority to reject anything that didn't meet standards.

I also don't have a real problem with Harbor Freight tools. They are
cheaply made, but they are also sold cheap. There's not a whole lot of
BS and artifice in their sales techniques. You pay 25 bucks for a
biscuit joiner, and you get a 25 buck (or close to it) biscuit joiner,
but you have no right to expect anything else, and HF doesn't tell you
you should.

On Nov 24, 7:41 am, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Charlie Self wrote:
> > On Nov 24, 2:22 am, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> John Horner wrote:
> >>> J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >>>> <rolling eyes> They have more than four times the population of
> >>>> the
> >>>> US in the same land area. They have trouble feeding all the
> >>>> people
> >>>> they have. Further, they are not and have never been a Christian
> >>>> nation or a nation that owes any part of its heritage to any
> >>>> religion
> >>>> that is part of the heritage of Christianity, so no, on no count
> >>>> is
> >>>> it wrong for the Chinese to require women who have been so
> >>>> irresponsible as to become pregnant in violation of the law and
> >>>> common sense to have abortions.
>
> >>> I'm not a Christian either, so I don't see what that has to do
> >>> with
> >>> this.
>
> >>> You must realize that not all laws are just, eh? Legalized
> >>> slavery
> >>> in the US was never just, although it was legal.
>
> >> So if you are not a Christian then what is your basis for the
> >> allegation that abortion is wrong?
>
> > Quite possibly the forced aspect of it, I'd guess.
>
> If it's not morally wrong then why is the forced aspect of it wrong?
> The women know the law.
>

So if someone makes a law saying you have to eat two servings of
pickeled pigs' feet per day, you should obey because you know the law?

My father loved 'em. They make me puke. That kind of force is wrong.

On Nov 26, 5:41 pm, Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote:
> Frank Boettcher wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:38:51 -0600, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Frank Boettcher wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:35:15 -0600, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Again, I wish many things were the way they used to be, including
> >> casting foundry in McMinnville, but it's a different world...
>
> > Why on earth......
>
> > Frank
>
> You probably know some/all of these guys:
>
> http://www.steelcitytoolworks.com/
>
> I know their manufacturing is done in Chiwan, but does anyone have any
> comments on their quality?

I think there are some Delta/Guelph Canada people in there too.

Charlie Self wrote:
>>
>> FWIW, Toyota is playing with a large dually diesel now:
>>
>> <http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2007/11/05/069676.html>
>>
>> It's got an 8.0 litre, inline-six turbo diesel. <G>
>
> Got to drive the then new Tundra in September of '06 at a press
> conference. That one was immense, had the immense gas V8, and the
> power was almost frightening. No quality comments apply, as the
> interior trim and other bits were not yet set, but it pulled like a
> train. They did announce, in response to questions, that a diesel
> would be forthcoming in a year or two, but gave no details at all.

When General Motors divorced Isuzu recently, Toyota stepped in a bought
a minority interest in Isuzu. Isuzu is the source of GM's Duramax truck
diesel engines. Dodge gets it's from Cummins and Ford's is from
Navistar. So you see, the US truck makers only look like they have an
edge in diesel powered trucks. In reality the engines are bought from
third parties and are available in any interested enough maker.

On Nov 26, 4:34 pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Nov 26, 3:54 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> How is "their behavior" "irresponsible, nay, short-lived"? If you are
> >> talking about consuming fuel, if everybody drove a mo-ped it would
> >> still run out, just might take a little longer. There is no level of
> >> consumption that will result in the oil lasting forever. Might be the
> >> great grandkids instead of the grandkids who have to transition to a
> >> different fuel, but it's still going to happen.
>
> > Might as well blow it all out of our asses and get it over with, huh?
> > I tend to support the viewpoint that if we conserve, we might buy
> > ourselves enough time to find alternate solutions. ...
>
> Tell that to the Chinese and the other developing nations -- whatever
> changes in our actions can realistically make will so far in the noise
> of their changes as to make no discernible difference.
>
> Options are there, they're just not yet economically viable. When they
> become so, then they'll take off.
>
> --

It is the fact that we over-consume that makes us vulnerable to making
mistakes.

On Nov 26, 3:54 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> How is "their behavior" "irresponsible, nay, short-lived"? If you are
> talking about consuming fuel, if everybody drove a mo-ped it would
> still run out, just might take a little longer. There is no level of
> consumption that will result in the oil lasting forever. Might be the
> great grandkids instead of the grandkids who have to transition to a
> different fuel, but it's still going to happen.

Might as well blow it all out of our asses and get it over with, huh?
I tend to support the viewpoint that if we conserve, we might buy
ourselves enough time to find alternate solutions. If you were in a
life-boat, you wouldn't eat everything on board in one day, would you?
No you wouldn't. You would conserve in the hope that there would be a
rescue.
This ball of dirt on which we float about in space, will not get
rescued by an outside source. Our resources are finite.
Conserving what we have is nothing but smart.

>
> > "Smell my exhaust, you serfs!" "I am on this planet all by myself,
> > eating and drinking and driving what ""I"" want." " I have NO
> > responsibility to my fellow planet dwellers." "It is all for ME, ME,
> > ME *diabolical laughter*."
> > "And I will kill those who have more fuel for me to burn!!!!"
>
> > Nice.
>
> OK, now you've officially lost it.
>
LOL... you think? Naaa, my sense of the absurd has its own way to
illustrate things.
You probably wouldn't understand why I broke out laughing when I saw a
Lincoln pick-up truck.

r

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 13:14:12 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:22:11 GMT, Bob the Tomato <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>> Sears used to mean quality... the
>>best.
>
>While it was plenty "good enough", especially for the DIY world, I
>don't think Sears was ever "The Best". In many cases, Sears was
>simply the only game in town.

I mean "the best" in terms of what was readily available to the
average guy walking in off the street. I have never been to a snap-on
dealer, or ever purchased one of their tools, because we simply run in
different circles. I'm not a professional mechanic. (I'm talking
hand tools in this instance, although the same argument could be made
for hand held power tools, but probably not for heavy stationary
tools... since Sears really didn't try to get into that market.)

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 08:21:22 -0600, "Leon"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
-snip of faux talking points-
>Buying American does not guarantee better quality nor does it help the
>economy unless we get what we pay for. Paying some one to do a piss poor
>job or manufacture a sub par product is bad for the economy.
>

Then we have the other side of the coin.
Let's take Delta as an example.

Established, long term, excellent reputation for WW machinery.
Happened to be made in USA (vs, say Japan).
Moved production to China.
Quality went to H#LL.

Never was one to buy strictly American, but when American (or Japan,
or Germany,...) had the reputation for the best, that's what I buy.
Now, they keep their premium pricing - for Chinese junk.

This is my big issue - premium pricing remains - production costs waay
down after moving to China; quality inevitably deterioted in some way.

Won't be buying new Delta any time soon. Maybe one day the quality
will be back, the customer service will have some folks who know the
difference between the stationary tools and portable stuff, then can
revisit decision.

Renata

On Nov 26, 6:36 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Martin wrote:
> > On Nov 26, 5:57 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Or do you think that I'm consuming
> >> excessively riding my 650 and want me to ride a Vespa instead?
> >> --John
>
> > Actually, you are, aren't you? Enlighten us with your MPG numbers
> > and
> > carrying capacity.
>
> <rolling eyes>
>
> If you think that somebody who rides a motorcycle in the winter in New
> England is "consuming excessively" then you really, really do have a
> screw loose.
>
> --
> --
> --John
> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Since you decline to provide the numbers, let me guess. 40 - 45 MPG
maybe? Or am I too high? The SUV with two or three aboard is
actually a bit more effcient, no? Now, how about the 2.2 liter car
with two or three aboard? Oh, wait - you always have a passenger on
your motorcycle, right?

I'm not objecting to your gasoline consumption. Not at all. What I
am objecting to is your implication that, by riding a 650 cc
motorcycle rather than driving a car, you are more efficient than
others. You're not.

In the winter in New England.... please tell me again who has the
screw loose.

John Martin

dpb took a can of maroon spray paint on November 24, 2007 11:53 am and wrote
the following:

> Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> ...
>
>> ... How many people are willing to spend $xxx more for brand D
>> knowing they have superior quality of a machine built by experienced
>> craftsmen?
>
> Not nearly enough, apparently...
>
That is the crux of the problem, the company has to move enough product to
cover overheads and show a bottom line. There isn't enough people willing
to spend extra for a quality product to support the facilities to create
that quality. Unfortunately this extends far beyond wood working tools,
but to pretty much everything we need in life, including a nice pair of
warm socks.

/me steps down from personal soapbox
--
Lits Slut #9
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.

Robatoy wrote:
> On Nov 26, 5:59 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> On Nov 26, 4:34 pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Robatoy wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 26, 3:54 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> How is "their behavior" "irresponsible, nay, short-lived"? If
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> are talking about consuming fuel, if everybody drove a mo-ped it
>>>>>> would still run out, just might take a little longer. There is
>>>>>> no
>>>>>> level of consumption that will result in the oil lasting forever.
>>>>>> Might be the great grandkids instead of the grandkids who have to
>>>>>> transition to a different fuel, but it's still going to happen.
>>>>> Might as well blow it all out of our asses and get it over with,
>>>>> huh? I tend to support the viewpoint that if we conserve, we might
>>>>> buy ourselves enough time to find alternate solutions. ...
>>>> Tell that to the Chinese and the other developing nations --
>>>> whatever
>>>> changes in our actions can realistically make will so far in the
>>>> noise of their changes as to make no discernible difference.
>>>> Options are there, they're just not yet economically viable. When
>>>> they become so, then they'll take off.
>>>> --
>>> It is the fact that we over-consume that makes us vulnerable to
>>> making
>>> mistakes.
>> Who is this "we" and what "mistakes" are "we vulnerable to making"? I
>> see far more people starving in places where energy consumption is far
>> lower than in the US than I do in the US. So seems to me that _they_
>> are the ones who are "vulnerable".
>>
> Oh goody, we're talking about energy/fuel, now we have added
> herring...I mean food.. I mean lack of herring...food...red
> herrings... I'm all confused now. (That tactic is called ridiculing
> the opponent)
>
> I'll get right on chasing that.
>
> Try to stay on topic, John.
>
The topic being what. I thought this topic was about tools.

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> As an individual, I make
>> my own decision on such matters and I suspect others do also.
>
> And of course the official policies of the government of another
> nation should be based on your personal opinion. Should they also
> require everyone to wear a tinfoil hat?
>

Never said that. If you take the time to read what I wrote and try to
comprehend it, you will see that the government nor the church matters to me
in this case. You will also note that I did not say which side I'm on. None
of your business, none of the government's business, nor is it the business
of any religion.

J. Clarke wrote:

>
> <rolling eyes> They have more than four times the population of the
> US in the same land area. They have trouble feeding all the people
> they have. Further, they are not and have never been a Christian
> nation or a nation that owes any part of its heritage to any religion
> that is part of the heritage of Christianity, so no, on no count is it
> wrong for the Chinese to require women who have been so irresponsible
> as to become pregnant in violation of the law and common sense to have
> abortions.
>

I'm not a Christian either, so I don't see what that has to do with this.

You must realize that not all laws are just, eh? Legalized slavery in
the US was never just, although it was legal.

John

On Nov 22, 11:50 pm, John Horner <[email protected]> wrote:

> Where to the rest of you sit with this question?

Some tools are needed immediately for a specific job with an intended
"one time" use (A).
Others are considered useful with a foreseeable use over time, but no
immediate need/demand/requirement. (B).
Then there are those you will use regularly with some hope of
precision and "repeat-ability." (C)
Of course there are those tools that are cheaper to replace than
sharpen/repair given the intended or experienced frequency of
use." (D)
Lastly(?) there are tools you just want to experiment with to see if
the investment in the FEIN version might be worth the 10X price
differential over the chink rip-off. (E)

When you are on a tight budget, you might find the one-time biscuit
joiner from HFT will get you through the project, allow you to learn
about the tool generally and the important and superfluous features to
should you ever decide your craftsmanship warrants a fine version of
the tool. The subsequent time(s) you go to pull it out will hint at
the need for a quality replacement - e.g. can you find it, recall
where you put it as much as will the ease of use, repeatability and
the finished work.

Those eight-dollar 4" Grinders can clean a weld as well as the $50
Sears model for a fellow with a dusty Arc Welder hidden in the dark
recesses of his shop. But might not prove cost-effective for a welding
shop with a fancy TIG, arc stabilizer, etc.

A good link belt and sharp blade will go a long way toward making
theat Craftsman table saw a "gem."

My grandfather's expression "'tis a poor workman that blames his
tools," holds true today and watching that fellow on PBS ho uses
1700's versions of tools (including a foot-operated scroll saw!)
should prove that point.

Its a balance of budget, craftsmanship and need in my view and the geo-
political angle is nice cocktail talk, but impractical and unlikely to
kill NAFTA etc.

On Nov 26, 7:29 pm, John Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 6:36 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > John Martin wrote:
> > > On Nov 26, 5:57 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Or do you think that I'm consuming
> > >> excessively riding my 650 and want me to ride a Vespa instead?
> > >> --John
>
> > > Actually, you are, aren't you? Enlighten us with your MPG numbers
> > > and
> > > carrying capacity.
>
> > <rolling eyes>
>
> > If you think that somebody who rides a motorcycle in the winter in New
> > England is "consuming excessively" then you really, really do have a
> > screw loose.
>
> > --
> > --
> > --John
> > to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> > (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
>
> Since you decline to provide the numbers, let me guess. 40 - 45 MPG
> maybe? Or am I too high? The SUV with two or three aboard is
> actually a bit more effcient, no? Now, how about the 2.2 liter car
> with two or three aboard? Oh, wait - you always have a passenger on
> your motorcycle, right?
>
> I'm not objecting to your gasoline consumption. Not at all. What I
> am objecting to is your implication that, by riding a 650 cc
> motorcycle rather than driving a car, you are more efficient than
> others. You're not.
>
> In the winter in New England.... please tell me again who has the
> screw loose.
>
> John Martin

Two frozen rubber wheels on black ice...now THAT is efficient.

Brian Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 14:11:20 -0500, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Bingo, it's an individual conscience thing, and not a basis for
>> condemning the whole nation of China. If there were universal
>> consensus that it was absolutely wrong then things might be different,
>> but there isn't.
>
> Besides the fact that it isn't the Chinese companies that are forcing
> abortion on anyone, it's the government which has nothing whatsoever
> to do with the quality of the tools their companies put out.

The majority of Chinese companies are in fact owned by the government.

Leon wrote:
> "Doug Winterburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> dpb wrote:
>>> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> The US has 1 to 1.5 million casualties to Roe vs Wade every year - 48
>> million since it became law. I don't believe they were volunteers.
>
> Not doubting you here but that sounds kinda high. With about 175 million
> women of all ages living in the US that would be 1 in 175 this year and or 1
> in 5 since 1972.
>
>

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats.html

I know some might question the nrlc source, but googling "us abortion
statistics" will show the same numbers from many sources.

This compares to 4 million live births/year.

dpb wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
> ...
>
>> In this case though, whatever one thinks of China, their efforts to
>> get their population under control without marching people into gas
>> chambers would seem to be making the best of a bad situation.
>
> For some appropriate definition of "best", I suppose... :(
>
> It would seem to be essentially the equivalent, however, for the victim
> so pretty sure I don't think it a very promising comparison.
>

The US has 1 to 1.5 million casualties to Roe vs Wade every year - 48
million since it became law. I don't believe they were volunteers.

J. Clarke took a can of maroon spray paint on November 24, 2007 12:47 pm and
wrote the following:

> FrozenNorth wrote:
>> dpb took a can of maroon spray paint on November 24, 2007 11:53 am
>> and wrote the following:
>>
>>> Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> ... How many people are willing to spend $xxx more for brand D
>>>> knowing they have superior quality of a machine built by
>>>> experienced
>>>> craftsmen?
>>>
>>> Not nearly enough, apparently...
>>>
>> That is the crux of the problem, the company has to move enough
>> product to cover overheads and show a bottom line. There isn't
>> enough people willing to spend extra for a quality product to
>> support
>> the facilities to create that quality. Unfortunately this extends
>> far beyond wood working tools, but to pretty much everything we need
>> in life, including a nice pair of warm socks.
>
> If you can't find a nice pair of warm socks you aren't looking very
> hard. My expedition weight Thorlos keep my feet nicely warm on my
> motorcycle at highway speeds in New England winter weather.
>
Oh, I can find warm socks, problem is they don't last, before the sole wears
out. They just aren't as good as they were twenty or so years ago.

>> /me steps down from personal soapbox
>

--
Lits Slut #9
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:23:30 GMT, John Horner <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Brian Henderson wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:44:13 GMT, John Horner <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> There are very few modern Delta branded tools for which I'm willing to
>>> pay a price premium, because it is almost all Chinese junk much like the
>>> competition's. Why pay Delta prices for Grizzly quality?
>>
>> There was a time 15-20 years ago when Delta was the top of the line
>> and brands like Jet were looked upon as crap. Now the situation has
>> reversed and you're getting the brands that were laughed at years ago
>> getting all the awards and traditionally respected brands losing out.
>
>Indeed. This makes Delta/Porter-Cable's current attempt to reposition
>itself as the brand of choice for "professional woodworkers" seem like
>too-little, too late.
>
>For a good laugh, check out the July 2007 press release:
>
>http://www.deltaportercable.com/AboutUs/PressRelease.aspx?BlockID=5bbb6e07-86f8-43b5-924c-9f8f6a665324
>
>These guys used to be the top of the food chain, but now are somewhere
>in the middle.
As happened with Dewalt/Black&Decker talk about crap!!! I recently
bought a 45 YO Delta Unisaw and love it. Sold several other newer
Delta products at garage sale prices and was glad I didn't have to
haul them to the landfill.
The sad part is if you don't want to support China what are the
alternatives?? After they snubbed our navy even in "a port from storm"
which has never been done in the history of sailing ships will our
dipshit gov't limit imports....naw we are too STUPID to do
that!!!!!!!!!! It's the dollar folks, our gov't is selling us down the
tubes.

On Nov 22, 11:50 pm, John Horner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Over the years I have sometimes been a Buy US only tool buyer and
> sometimes a whatever is cheapest that I think will do the job buyer and
> just about everything in-between. Many years ago I was ashamed that I
> had bought some no name Japanese combination wrenches, but guess what,
> they are still good wrenches 30+ years after they were a guilty bargain.
>
> Presently I'm avoiding anything Made in China as much for geo-political
> reasons as anything else. That and it saves me time not even having to
> look at the Harbor Freight or Grizzly catalogs :).
>
> Where to the rest of you sit with this question?

That is both a simple and a very complex question. Loyalties to
certain manufacturers/countries(of origin) only go so far. Sometimes
adequate is good enough and it doesn't always have to be the 'best'.
In my line of work, certain equipment MUST give me consistent results
and be absolutely reliable.
In my shop, you'll find a Milwaukee jigsaw made in Germany. A Ridgid
sander made in Germany. A German Fein vacuum made in Italy...and then
there is stuff 'assembled' in the USA.
My questions are usually the same: will it do the job? Is there a
warranty? Can I fix this myself, assuming I can get parts?

If everything else is close to equal, I will try to buy North American/
European in that order.
The exceptions are many as there are 'niche' tools that certain
manufacturers seem to do 'just better'.

r

On Nov 27, 11:46 am, John Horner <[email protected]> wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
> > John Horner wrote:
> >> J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >>> <rolling eyes>
>
> >> Isn't that the typical behavior of a think-the-know-it-all teenager?
>
> > I've seen Hillary Clinton do it to Bush. It's a typical reaction to a
> > statement so far off the wall that one has trouble figuring out how to
> > _start_ educating the person making it.
>
> You just might not be so much smarter, better informed and more deeply
> educated than other people as you may think.

Come on, John, if the smartest woman in Washington can do it, why not
the smartest man on the Internet?

His problem was that the facts, with which he might "educate" us,
simply weren't on his side.

I guess now we'll both be accused of whining.

John Martin

J. Clarke wrote:

>
> <rolling eyes>
>

Isn't that the typical behavior of a think-the-know-it-all teenager?

On Nov 25, 3:23 pm, Brian Henderson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 00:34:47 GMT, Ralph <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Have to agree with you Mac. Remember when "J.A.Pan & Co." meant junk or
> >popcorn toys (must be dating myself there). Their first cars into North
> >America were a joke, but they did their homework and now they are
> >forerunners in industry. It seems that China may be following the same
> >route.
>
> Precisely. They succeed because they want to succeed, they're hungry
> for success. You get a lot of American companies who think that
> because they bother to open their doors in the morning, they deserve
> success and the world will beat a path to their door because they're
> Americans.
>
> Ain't so.

There's a word for that: Arrogance.
I dealt with a product 20+ years ago. The producers of that product
'Corp X' didn't think I was important enough to be dealt with on the
same basis as their 'bigger' accounts. I didn't get the price-breaks,
I had to pay for freight, while their 'bigger' accounts were getting
wined and dined. That was all to be expected....up to a point.
Then, when the 'off-shore' boys got into the game, and even one Texas
company, I was treated like I was going to be a player in my
territory. They helped me with samples, gave me price breaks on
quantity orders..IOW.. they did all the things that the other company
simply didn't have time for.

I wasn't the only fabricator who got sick and tired of feeling like I
was 'bothering' them when I placed an order with CorpX.

All of a sudden, CorpX headquarters realised that sales were dropping
all over the place. They lost massive market share. They tried
everything. Intimidation, bullying, starting rumours, lying about the
quality of their competitors...and it just made me and my fellow
fabricators more and more resolved to beat the big guys who danced to
Corp X's fiddle.
Guess what?
"We have a whole new attitude" (After a few of the big guys went belly
up because of the onslaught of eStone etc)
Now they are all over us, giving us stuff, trying to get back the 80%
of the market share they lost.
Now, they are arrogant in a different way. They think we don't see
through their schemes. They think we're stupid.

Now, if a woman cheats on you...will you ever trust her again? Or will
you save the nice presents for your mistress?

...waitasec... that didn't come out right...but I had already hit the
'send' button...

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 14:11:20 -0500, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Bingo, it's an individual conscience thing, and not a basis for
>condemning the whole nation of China. If there were universal
>consensus that it was absolutely wrong then things might be different,
>but there isn't.

Besides the fact that it isn't the Chinese companies that are forcing
abortion on anyone, it's the government which has nothing whatsoever
to do with the quality of the tools their companies put out.

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:15:00 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:50:45 -0800 (PST), Charlie Self
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>As a general statement, I think there has been a basic upgrading of
>>quality in the past two decades, with more and more woodworkers
>>demanding better tools.
>
>Do you remember when people would complain about a body rattle in a
>pickup, and be told "It's a pickup truck, who cares?"
>
>_All_ vehicles are better than they were 20 years ago.
>
>Thank Toyota and Nissan. <G>

But sadly, they aren't better because folks complained about fit, they were made
a lot better because (in the case of Japanese cars) the technology for building
them got better..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:34:44 -0800, mac davis
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Folks in Mexico don't have the job security that the US workers have... Screw up
>a truck and they're back on the street..

Or jumping the border.

On Nov 27, 2:13 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Martin wrote:
> > On Nov 27, 11:46 am, John Horner <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> John Horner wrote:
> >>>> J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >>>>> <rolling eyes>
>
> >>>> Isn't that the typical behavior of a think-the-know-it-all
> >>>> teenager?
>
> >>> I've seen Hillary Clinton do it to Bush. It's a typical reaction
> >>> to a statement so far off the wall that one has trouble figuring
> >>> out how to _start_ educating the person making it.
>
> >> You just might not be so much smarter, better informed and more
> >> deeply educated than other people as you may think.
>
> > Come on, John, if the smartest woman in Washington can do it, why
> > not
> > the smartest man on the Internet?
>
> I'm sorry, but the post from Stephen Hawking has not made it to my
> server. Would you be kind enough to quote it?
>
> > His problem was that the facts, with which he might "educate" us,
> > simply weren't on his side.
>
> Which facts, that the Chinese don't adhere to American notions of
> morality? Or that they have a far greater population density than the
> US, making reduction of their population a societal priority? Or
> what?
>
> > I guess now we'll both be accused of whining.
>
> No, you I'm going to accuse of being too chicken to debate me
> directly.
>
> --
> --
> --John
> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

OK, John, here it is - as simple as I can make it. Perhaps you can
follow.

I took issue with your implication that by riding a 650 cc motorcycle
you are using less fuel than others. I asked you to provide the
numbers, but you declined to educate us with them. Nothing about
China or the Chinese. Nothing at all. Got that?

No chickens here, John. Just one jackass, and it ain't me. Or,
perhaps you've just been riding without a helmet for too long.

John Martin

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:23:51 GMT, Brian Henderson
<[email protected]> wrote:

> You get a lot of American companies who think that
>because they bother to open their doors in the morning, they deserve
>success and the world will beat a path to their door because they're
>Americans.


I'm wondering if a slight rewording of the sentence might contain an
equal amount of truth:

"You get a lot of American (labor) who think that
because they bother to (come to work) in the morning, they deserve
success ... ".


Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS
USA

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 08:02:22 -0800 (PST), Hoosierpopi <[email protected]>
wrote:


>Lastly(?) there are tools you just want to experiment with to see if
>the investment in the FEIN version might be worth the 10X price
>differential over the chink rip-off. (E)
>
Been there, done that, but it sort of drives home my earlier point about
quality, not country of origin..

Biscuit jointers looked like a cool tool, but I wasn't ready to pay $150 to find
out... I bought one on sale at HF for $20 on sale.. Made in China and it was a
POS, but it made me realize that biscuit jointing was a useful concept..
My wife then bought me the Craftsman/De Walt version... Also made in China, but
IMO a good tool that has lasted for years so far..



mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> So if you are not a Christian then what is your basis for the
> allegation that abortion is wrong?
>

I just know I'm going to regret touching my toe into a religious diversion,
but abortion is not a Christian issue.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

J. Clarke wrote:
> Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>> "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> So if you are not a Christian then what is your basis for the
>>> allegation that abortion is wrong?
>> You have to be a Christian to be against abortion? If you are
>> non-Christian are you automatically pro abortion? You're smarter
>> than that.
>
> Fine, give me the basis on which one non-Christian religious
> denomination opposes abortion and a source for their official
> statement on the matter.
>

" It is quite clear from a variety of sources that abortion has been
severely disapproved of in the Buddhist tradition."

http://www.kusala.org/udharma/abortion.html

"Doug Winterburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> dpb wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:

>
> The US has 1 to 1.5 million casualties to Roe vs Wade every year - 48
> million since it became law. I don't believe they were volunteers.

Not doubting you here but that sounds kinda high. With about 175 million
women of all ages living in the US that would be 1 in 175 this year and or 1
in 5 since 1972.

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:50:54 GMT, [email protected] (Doug Miller) wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, Brian Henderson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:22:11 GMT, Bob the Tomato <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I don't mind paying for quality. Once in a while I buy cheap, if it
>>>passes the grade. But I will pass the junk every time. If there is a
>>>quality tool available, I will buy it if I can.
>>
>>Same here, but the point I was making is that quality and "made in the
>>USA" are not always the same thing. In fact, they are not usually the
>>same thing most of time. Where a product is made should be irrelevant
>>to what the quality of the product is. A toy made with lead paint is
>>dangerous whether it's made in China or Chicago. Far too many people
>>act like "Made in the USA" is a stamp of quality, not location.
>
>It's certainly more suggestive of quality than "Made in China". <g>

It used to be, anyway... I'm not sure any more, though I hope it still is..
I have a 99 Dodge ram that the VIN says is assembled in Mexico.. it's been a
damn good truck for me..
Better than in the USA? A lot of dodge owners think so..

Folks in Mexico don't have the job security that the US workers have... Screw up
a truck and they're back on the street..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:17:52 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 13:01:47 -0800 (PST), Charlie Self
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>Got to drive the then new Tundra in September of '06 at a press
>>conference. That one was immense, had the immense gas V8, and the
>>power was almost frightening. No quality comments apply, as the
>>interior trim and other bits were not yet set, but it pulled like a
>>train.
>
>Ask Leon. <G>
>
>I have a "little" Tacoma, which had no problem towing a 5000 lb. Volvo
>fro Westchester airport to Meriden, CT a few weeks back.
>
>Did I mention the oil filter is on top of the engine?


Yep, isn't that delightful. As one who has always changed oil myself,
I really like that. I did have to learn (the hard way) that the
"catch"tray around the filter will not actually hold the entire
contents of the filter ( I would have bet good money it would) and
that one should pull the drain plug and place a container beneath
first, but after that lesson, I'm happy.

Frank

On Nov 24, 2:22 am, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Horner wrote:
> > J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >> <rolling eyes> They have more than four times the population of
> >> the
> >> US in the same land area. They have trouble feeding all the people
> >> they have. Further, they are not and have never been a Christian
> >> nation or a nation that owes any part of its heritage to any
> >> religion
> >> that is part of the heritage of Christianity, so no, on no count is
> >> it wrong for the Chinese to require women who have been so
> >> irresponsible as to become pregnant in violation of the law and
> >> common sense to have abortions.
>
> > I'm not a Christian either, so I don't see what that has to do with
> > this.
>
> > You must realize that not all laws are just, eh? Legalized slavery
> > in the US was never just, although it was legal.
>
> So if you are not a Christian then what is your basis for the
> allegation that abortion is wrong?
>

Quite possibly the forced aspect of it, I'd guess.

"Frank Boettcher" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
>
> Yep, isn't that delightful. As one who has always changed oil myself,
> I really like that. I did have to learn (the hard way) that the
> "catch"tray around the filter will not actually hold the entire
> contents of the filter ( I would have bet good money it would) and
> that one should pull the drain plug and place a container beneath
> first, but after that lesson, I'm happy.
>
> Frank

Have you tried letting the vehicle set for 10-15 minutes to let the oil in
the filter drain back in to the engine? Or is there a check valve that
prevents that?

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 09:45:02 -0500, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:


>And of course if you really want a fancy shirt most cities of any size
>in the US have some Indian or Chinese gentleman who will make you as
>many as you want, for US hand-work prices.
>
>--
OUCH
nice shot!


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Nov 26, 3:18 pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2:39 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> [snipped for brevity]
>
>
>
> > And the popularity of SUVs, which fill the luxury sedan/station wagon
> > niche but exploit a loophole in the fuel economy laws, suggests that
> > the American public wants large cars when they can afford to own and
> > run them.
>
> I suppose it is a rich man's option to drive 3 ton behemoth, spewing
> insane amounts of sickening fumes into the faces of people who cannot
> do anything about that?
> Wouldn't it be nice that if those, with the brainpower to become rich,
> would also apply their advanced thinking toward accepting the fact
> that their behaviour is irresponsible, nay, short-lived? Don't they
> give a shit what they leave behind for their grandkids?
>
> "Smell my exhaust, you serfs!" "I am on this planet all by myself,
> eating and drinking and driving what ""I"" want." " I have NO
> responsibility to my fellow planet dwellers." "It is all for ME, ME,
> ME *diabolical laughter*."
> "And I will kill those who have more fuel for me to burn!!!!"
>
> Nice.

Ooops...what I was trying to say, was that just because one can afford
it, doesn't mean one has to be stupid about it.

On Nov 25, 12:08 pm, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:40:39 GMT, Bob the Tomato <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Do you know the "Harbor Freight Smell"? That's the smell of lead
> >paint mixed with cheap plasticizers, or something. Anyhow, it's very
> >distinctive, and Sears didn't have it until a couple of years ago.
>
> Do I ever know that smell!
>
> At the bicycle shop, we call that smell "L'essence de China". <G>
>
> It's a mixture of paint, sea container "stank", plastic fumes, and the
> sweat of children and forced labor.
>
> Anytime we open a shipment from North America or Europe, the smell is
> noticably missing.

That 'scent' makes me gag. I have posted to that topic before and
since then (not because of) I have noticed more and more people
complaining about it.
I'm looking for 4 tires for Angela's car, so I poked my head around
the corner at our local WalMart and FN lost my lunch. Tire stores used
to smell GOOD!

I tried a line of solid surface sinks (to be undermounted) made in
China. My distributor gave me a couple to play with. They were
actually well packaged, but a part of the package was a slab
of...mmm..whatshallIcallit...kinda particle board, sorta pressed
horseshit,..but VERY stinky. An oily, pissy, vomity, college-bathroom-
pub-floor (so I been told). The $ 50.00 savings per sink didn't cut
it.

Bonehenge now, huh? Love it!

r

On Nov 22, 11:50 pm, John Horner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Over the years I have sometimes been a Buy US only tool buyer and
> sometimes a whatever is cheapest that I think will do the job buyer and
> just about everything in-between. Many years ago I was ashamed that I
> had bought some no name Japanese combination wrenches, but guess what,
> they are still good wrenches 30+ years after they were a guilty bargain.
>
> Presently I'm avoiding anything Made in China as much for geo-political
> reasons as anything else. That and it saves me time not even having to
> look at the Harbor Freight or Grizzly catalogs :).
>
> Where to the rest of you sit with this question?

I really don't particularly care before I purchase the tool. I check
the country-of-origin of a tool only _after_ I have purchased it.

If it says that it is Made-in-Germany or Made-in-Japan, I will tell
myself "I am a good shopper who can spot a good deal."

If it says that it is Made-in-USA, I will tell myself "I have helped
the local economy."

If it says that it is Made-in-China, I will tell myself "I am a good
husband/father who saves money for his family."

Regardless where the tool was made from, I will always feel good.

Jay Chan

Leon wrote:
>
> I literally looked at a 07 Tundra last afer looking at GMC and Chevrolet. I
> have always owned GMC and Chev trucks and had a $6K+ incentive to go with
> the GM products again. After driving GM I decided to not buy at all but
> went a head and drove the Tundra because I had an appointment to do so. It
> was a no brainer to choose the Tundra. The GM products were uncomfortable
> amd the rear doors flexed and mooved while going over bumps.

One thing the foreign pickups don't have is a diesel. Last year I got a
used (57k miles) '04 Silverado 2500HD 6.6L Duramax regular cab full box
with the Allison transmission. The previous owner put a Banks exhaust
system on it. It is one towing machine for my 5th wheel! Gets 23mpg
highway and 13.5mpg towing (on a 4200 mile trip this last summer). It
was _very_ comfortable on that trip.

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John Horner wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> On Nov 27, 2:08 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've never met a nurse who was paid as a sub-contractor. In fact
>>>> I
>>>> suspect their union would go ballistic over it.
>>>>
>>
>> You must not be familiar with travel nurses. They go from job to
>> job
>> as temps. Here in California many hospitals rely on travel nurses
>> for a significant portion of their staffing.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travel_nurse
>
> The one I occasionally lie on top of hasn't heard of those either.
>

Your ignorance in no way negates reality. Weekenders are another way to get
a stack of bucks with little family disturbance. They work the ED mostly
around here, where the 16/8/16 or variations thereof fill the void and the
pocketbook while not violating overtime rules, since they're personal
contractors.

Home health nurses sometimes _need_ SUVs to get where they're going. They
bill on a contact and travel basis.

"Bonehenge (B A R R Y)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Do you remember when people would complain about a body rattle in a
> pickup, and be told "It's a pickup truck, who cares?"

I remember in the late 70's when GM could not put a bed on a pick-up that
aligned with the back glass. New trucks on the lot looked like thay had
been wrecked when looked at from the rear.

>
> _All_ vehicles are better than they were 20 years ago.
>
> Thank Toyota and Nissan. <G>

Yes, and partial thanks goes to Detroit and the labor unions that had the
strangle hold. Had they not charged too much for poor quality the Japanese
would not be quite as far along as they are today.

Brian Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:44:13 GMT, John Horner <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> There are very few modern Delta branded tools for which I'm willing to
>> pay a price premium, because it is almost all Chinese junk much like the
>> competition's. Why pay Delta prices for Grizzly quality?
>
> There was a time 15-20 years ago when Delta was the top of the line
> and brands like Jet were looked upon as crap. Now the situation has
> reversed and you're getting the brands that were laughed at years ago
> getting all the awards and traditionally respected brands losing out.

Indeed. This makes Delta/Porter-Cable's current attempt to reposition
itself as the brand of choice for "professional woodworkers" seem like
too-little, too late.

For a good laugh, check out the July 2007 press release:

http://www.deltaportercable.com/AboutUs/PressRelease.aspx?BlockID=5bbb6e07-86f8-43b5-924c-9f8f6a665324

These guys used to be the top of the food chain, but now are somewhere
in the middle.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:

>I have a "little" Tacoma, which had no problem towing a 5000 lb. Volvo
>fro Westchester airport to Meriden, CT a few weeks back.
>
>Did I mention the oil filter is on top of the engine?

Where it belongs. Oh, how I hate changing oil on an engine with a filter
mounted open end up. What ever made anyone think that was a good idea?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Frank Boettcher wrote:
> and that's where you are wrong. My business was growing at a
> reasonable rate each year. The operation was extraordinarily
> profitable from a return on sales and return on invested capital
> basis. The decision was made purely to try to squeeze out a little
> more profit.
>
> I'm not going to quote direct figures but the volume of business is
> signifcantly off as a result of the strategy.
>
> I think we may have discussed this before. Did the market demand the
> switch or did the corporate hacks just listen to their consultants and
> believe their BS about "conversion costs" etc? It was the latter not
> the former in my case. The customers for my product left *after* the
> move, not before.
>
> There will always be a segment of the market that wants high quality
> and is willing to pay a reasonable amount more for that quality. If
> they can find it.
>

Indeed people show a willingness to pay more for higher perceived
quality. Many folks buy a Honda or Toyota car for more money than the
GM, Ford or Chrysler car in the same segment and pay more for it. They
do so because they believe it is a higher quality product and for the
most part their beliefs are well founded.

Every year Toyota and Honda add to their US manufacturing base and do so
with great success. Honda and other Japanese companies have taken
command of the small engine and marine engine markets as well.

Most of these outsourcing decisions are made by overpaid MBA graduates
who only care about putting "accomplishments" on their resumes to
further pad the paychecks.


John

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bob the Tomato wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 08:30:02 -0500, "J. Clarke"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>

(snippity snip)

>>
>> HDTV was invented in the halls of Congress, not the FCC. Congress
>> said, 'do this...' and the FCC followed suit.
>
> So you're saying that the French invented HDTV because the US Congress
> ordered the FCC to do it? I guess the Soviet Union did the same (are
> you old enough to remember the Soviet Union?). And the Japanese of
> course always slavishly obey the FCC.
>
> Oh, you were talking about the US? Then how is it that the FCC rules
> implementing HDTV predate the first legislation concerning it by a
> year? And what exactly did legislation extending the deadline for its
> implementation have to do with "inventing" it?
>
>
> --
> --
> --John
> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
>

Noob here....

OMG, talk about running astray from the OP -

Anyway, just an observation that there is a big difference between
proof of concept, invention, and product distribution.
Historically there was a LOT of study world wide on the idea of
improving definition of transmitted images, But the studies did not
result in much invention - inventions came along as a means to try
and get the concepts packaged into a form that could (and would)
be distributed to a wide populace for commercial purposes. In that
vein, Zenith, RCA, MIT, & a host of other companies did a lot of
inventing - but there was a problem too large to allow the market
forces to resolve - one of "standardization". THAT's where the
FCC, and ultimately congress, got involved to "make it happen".

Now, is anyone still interested in where their tools are made?????

(smirk)
NGA

"John Horner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:d_s1j.5981$XT.5534@trnddc01...
> Over the years I have sometimes been a Buy US only tool buyer and
> sometimes a whatever is cheapest that I think will do the job buyer and
> just about everything in-between. Many years ago I was ashamed that I had
> bought some no name Japanese combination wrenches, but guess what, they
> are still good wrenches 30+ years after they were a guilty bargain.
>
> Presently I'm avoiding anything Made in China as much for geo-political
> reasons as anything else. That and it saves me time not even having to
> look at the Harbor Freight or Grizzly catalogs :).
>
> Where to the rest of you sit with this question?

Well American would be better for this country, the U.S., but unfortunately
we have this large group that wants to make every one feel good with no one
left behind. They believe that regardless of your productivity you should
be paid equally. Because we have had to lower the standards and
expectations so that many will be automatically raised to "par" we get poor
to average quality for top dollar pricing. Those of us that still believe
that you should get what you pay for buy from other countries. Lowering the
expectations of others productivity while lowering our expectations of that
group is good for no one. It simply does not work.
Buying American does not guarantee better quality nor does it help the
economy unless we get what we pay for. Paying some one to do a piss poor
job or manufacture a sub par product is bad for the economy.

Robatoy wrote:
> On Nov 27, 2:08 pm, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I've never met a nurse who was paid as a sub-contractor. In fact I
>> suspect their union would go ballistic over it.
>>

You must not be familiar with travel nurses. They go from job to job as
temps. Here in California many hospitals rely on travel nurses for a
significant portion of their staffing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travel_nurse

Robatoy wrote:
>
> Ooops...what I was trying to say, was that just because one can afford
> it, doesn't mean one has to be stupid about it.

Be people trying to look like they can afford it will be stupid...

dpb wrote:
>
> That again is an oversimplification -- was in E TN where there was a
> nearby facility of, Motorola/Quasar/Sylvania/I forget the pedigree as it
> went through a succession trying to keep it alive. In the end, the
> labor costs were the killer as compared to offshore and despite several
> major retoolings for the electronics portions, the cabinetry and
> peripherals remained the high-cost items they couldn't compete against
> and eventually the whole facility went away...but it was the last US
> production facility and management didn't walk away early or lightly.

Moto has also sold off it's SPS (Semiconductor Product Sector) to
Freescale. Their main focus now is radios and cell phones and
infrastructure.

J. Clarke wrote:
> John Horner wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> <rolling eyes>
>>>
>> Isn't that the typical behavior of a think-the-know-it-all teenager?
>
> I've seen Hillary Clinton do it to Bush. It's a typical reaction to a
> statement so far off the wall that one has trouble figuring out how to
> _start_ educating the person making it.
>

You just might not be so much smarter, better informed and more deeply
educated than other people as you may think.

mac davis wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 21:06:27 GMT, Brian Henderson
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:09:52 -0500, "J. Clarke"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Uh, you missed their taking over the entire consumer electronics
>>> industry.
>> Because the Japanese could make a better product for less money, why
>> shouldn't they take over the industry? They earned it!
>>
>> The question you should be asking is why the U.S. completely wasted
>> their superiority.
>
> I watched the transition in the quality of Japanese steel.. from tin can quality
> to better than ours (US)..
> One of the reasons is that the Japanese government underwrites research and
> renovation..
>
> Back maybe 10 or 15 years, I watched a documentary on the steel industry and
> they were pointing out that Japan was tearing down it's oldest steel mill and
> rebuilding it to be better and efficient... and that the newest steel mill in
> the US was almost 100 years old...
> Same thing happened to our auto industry... the Japanese did their homework and
> found out what the American people wanted and made it..
>
>
> mac
>
> Please remove splinters before emailing

Have to agree with you Mac. Remember when "J.A.Pan & Co." meant junk or
popcorn toys (must be dating myself there). Their first cars into North
America were a joke, but they did their homework and now they are
forerunners in industry. It seems that China may be following the same
route.

Personally, I try to buy the best quality tool regardless of its place of
manufacture. Having said that, I have compared Chinese made products (often
knock off repicas) to the same functional products manufactured in the US,
Japan, Germany, Canada, and Taiwan. I have yet to find a Chinese product
equal in craftsmanship to those in these other countries. If I was only
interested in cost, I could often have saved anywhere from 30%-50% of the
cost of the better product. I look at my shop as something that I am
equipping for the next 30+ years and I don't want to be replacing broken or
malfunctioning equipment because I tried to save a few bucks.

Roger

Roger
"John Horner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:d_s1j.5981$XT.5534@trnddc01...
> Over the years I have sometimes been a Buy US only tool buyer and
> sometimes a whatever is cheapest that I think will do the job buyer and
> just about everything in-between. Many years ago I was ashamed that I had
> bought some no name Japanese combination wrenches, but guess what, they
> are still good wrenches 30+ years after they were a guilty bargain.
>
> Presently I'm avoiding anything Made in China as much for geo-political
> reasons as anything else. That and it saves me time not even having to
> look at the Harbor Freight or Grizzly catalogs :).
>
> Where to the rest of you sit with this question?

"mac davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 08:02:22 -0800 (PST), Hoosierpopi
> <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Lastly(?) there are tools you just want to experiment with to see if
>>the investment in the FEIN version might be worth the 10X price
>>differential over the chink rip-off. (E)
>>
> Been there, done that, but it sort of drives home my earlier point about
> quality, not country of origin..

Precicely! Most of the China imports are simply the best quality for the
amount of money spent.

"Frank Boettcher" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> I am retired earlier than I had wanted to be partly as a result of
> woodworking machinery moving to china.
>
> About 350 very good, experienced, productive friends and collegues are
> similarly positioned or are working below their skill level as a
> result of moving product to China. These "greedy, slothful"
> individuals were making a pure killing at an average of $13.50 an hour
> with an average experience level of 25 years.
>
> While working the transition of the product to china, I got to see
> first hand the differences in the component quality. I got to see
> cast iron that ranged from 145 to 225 brinnell hardness replace iron
> that ranged from 195 to 205. I got to see pilot lot after pilot lot
> that never was machined to statistical capability, and final the
> powers that be turn their heads and use it anyway. I got see
> literally every batch of finished product from China reworked before
> it could be distributed. I got to experience missed deliveries,
> emergency air freight shipments, orders constantly on quality hold,
> and these things added to the shipment costs, warranty costs that
> tripled, and the overhead required to" manage" chinese purchasing, I
> got to see that those anticipated "savings" never really materialized.
> Maybe some day.

I understand where you are coming from. The one sentence that really stick
out is: "I got to see pilot lot after pilot lot that never was machined to
statistical capability, and final the powers that be turn their heads and
use it anyway." I have a problem with a company doing that.

I'd realy like to know the answers to so many questions when companies
decide to go overseas. Profit, of course, is a big motivator, but there are
many "what ifs".

The US built tools have to compete with other major brands, such as Jet and
Grizzly. In the end, what is the real cost difference when you back out the
emergency air shipments and re-work? What happens to the company reputation
when quality drops? What happens if the US manufacturing is kept in place,
but at a reduced capacity because some sales are lost to the cheaper
competition? How many people are willing to spend $xxx more for brand D
knowing they have superior quality of a machine built by experienced
craftsmen?