> There is no theoretical reason why Chinese manufacturers cannot attain the same quality level over time (maybe even short time) as everyone else.
Chinese manufacturers can build to any standard of quality, the key being you have to be ready to pay for it which most companies aren't, which is why Chinese manufacturing continues to keep the rep it does: they'll build you a widget worth $0.50 or $50.00, but everybody only wants to spend $0.50 and then they complain when they get $0.50 worth of widget.
However, I would like to know why the BYD vehicles are so much cheaper. Are their workers being paid enough to live? Are they cutting corners in manufacturing? Is this a case of simply vertical integration providing dividends, or are they being sponsored by the Chinese government, and if the latter, why? Is it because they don't have dealers, and if so, is that a good thing? People rag on dealerships all the time and there's plenty of good reasons to hate them, but they do have upshots too. My dealership of choice where my salesman of choice works is one of the few places I'm fairly comfortable that I'm not going to get put over a barrel as soon as I sign. That relationship is hard to find these days.
I'm all for cheaper cars, absolutely. Prices in the states especially are fucking ridiculous. But I also am cognizant of what "X but cheaper" usually means. It usually means one or more of the following:
It's all of the above, but it's also because Americans like big cars, and manufacturers have realized that bigger, pricier cars are higher margin.
It's not that it's that much cheaper for what you get, it's that you can actually pay less for the smaller product, which is harder and harder in the US because they're simply not offering them.
> everybody only wants to spend $0.50 and then they complain when they get $0.50 worth of widget.
I don't think that's quite the case. Instead, I think the people complaining at receiving the $0.50 widget complain when the (now-broken) widget was in a $1000 gizmo, which used to include the $50 version before cost-optimization.
It's a market for lemons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons), only with general, notionally durable goods. Build quality is opaque and liable to change without notice, whereas price is obvious.
All automakers (except maybe, sort of, Volvo) have shown they'll put in a minimum amount of effort on safety unless held to higher standards either by regulators or the insurance industry. It costs money to make things safe and if you spend more money on it than you're required to, your competitors won't.
The Chinese can build a safe car if they're required to do so.
The absolute minimum of safety for a car that's legal to sell in USA or EU today is greater than the maximum of car safety any money could buy in 1990s, and we're not even speaking about 1970s or earlier.
Of course they will build a safe car, because they definitely will be required to do so; the law is there, and the local car industry are sufficiently powerful and capable to act as an effective watchdog ensuring that all the requirements are enforced for their Chinese competitors.
I would presume they might not meet voluntary standards, like high performance on IIHS tests, because their competitive advantage would likely be price. At least, in the short term.
Volvo is Chinese in the same way that RAM Trucks are Dutch.
I think in this context people are more referring to country of origin in terms of culture, engineering, and operations. Not just the financial side of the fence.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive/adventure/red-li...
There is no theoretical reason why Chinese manufacturers cannot attain the same quality level over time (maybe even short time) as everyone else.