> > And all this so the consumer can _feel_ the difference between the
> > vehicles and believe they are getting something of greater or lessor
> > value even though it's largely artificial - a way to segment the
> > market and extract the amount the consumer is willing to pay for a
> > product, rather than the lowest amount that will meet their needs.
>
> Adam, this sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory, of course only if you
> meant to imply that manufacturers make the cheap cars "sound" cheap on
> purpose, to differentiate them from the luxury cars. Or even just that the
> cost is insignificant.
>
> It seems logical that on luxury models the manufacturer can afford to spend
> the extra time to make sure nothing rattles when you shut the door. It makes
> sense why they do it -- they don't want customers saying "I just spent $60k
> on this thing, and it rattles like an old rusty bucket!".


It's an old story.  When Japanese cars were first imported into the USA, their
car doors had the tinny clatter when closing, unlike the solid thud of half a
tonne of steel slamming shut on the local vehicles.

Supposedly they did a bit of research (rather than paint them different colours
or add fins) to find the reason for low sales, and thus re-engineered the doors
to go *thud* rather than *ting* by adding a few braces here & there.  Sales went
up, they were no longer 'jap crap'.  Hear the quality!

Amusingly, there's a car advertisement running on Australian TV that states this
exactly.  "Our cars have doors that go *thud*, not *ting*, so they're really
good quality.  Go buy one!"  Not interested enough to note the brand - sorry. 
Maybe it's meant a joke or something, but how many people would get it?

Tony

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist