Talking to Lawyer

[CHICO2003]

dude... turn up the damn radio!!! if you cared about NVH levels, you wouldn't have bought this car.

 

[jflo]

where's AGR...'cause i know he loves his mazdaspeed. i do, too. <3

 

[Tito1]

Pay attention now

Jhew84, SpaceMonkey, You Are Wrong...it is that simple. For ex. Jaguars are not known for their reliability, while honda civics are known to be reliable. Which one costs more???

Anyhow, the COST DOES NOT AFFECT RELIABILITY or the manufactures RESPONSIBILITY to producing a reliable, and safe car. The law reads the same for rich and poor.

Get it???



And yes I love driving my MSP, but I WILL NOT be mazda's b****.

 

[JHew84]

i am not wrong, i chose to hit on one specific point instead of others and that was probably a mistake, yes cheaper cars (i did acknowledge this at one point even) can be reliable, but you WILL sacrafice performance for that, your example of hondas, yes they are reliable, they are also slow, dont handle incredibly great, and are econoboxes, and on top of that i know plenty of integra/prelude owners who have had more than their fair share of problems, why? because it is a performance oriented vehicle, everytime you push something further and further along on the performance line it will get less and less reliable... and the main reason for hondas reliability is they haven't changed anything, really, it is the same basic platform that they have been using for YEARS, it is tried and true and they have been more than happy with it so they haven't changed it, you can swap any and everything from just about any honda onto any other honda, its also all the same, this allows them to put more development into the individual peices because there are less peices to development, but with mazda, especially the mazdaspeed edition, there are many peices that make the car what it is that were new arrivals, and had never been used on a mazda before and would never be used on a mazda again, so they didn't have a nice baseline to go from to tweak a couple small things here and there, they built the suspension from the ground up (persay), the turbo kit from the ground up (persay), etc etc etc, hence, loss of reliability due to lack of development due to a small price tag... bottom line, the MS Protege is not an unreliable car, and it is not a lemon, it has common problems that any car of its kind has, had, and will have in the future, it is fact, it has been proven time and time again, just because you feel mazda is making you their b**** has nothing to do with it, thats just wrong, if you don't want to accept this FACT, then dont own an MSP, its simple, but the sooner you realize these cars are not lemons, the sooner you will be able to truly enjoy all of the great aspects of performance the mazdaspeed protege has brought to the table, these are all of the things that i mulled over and over again in my head while deciding whether or not i wanted the car, i finall came to the conclusion that it would be worth it, and i was right, i am more than glad i chose the protege over some econobox with incredible reliability, it is a lot more fun...

cost DOES affect reliability, YOU are wrong in saying that, *but* it is not the only factor, i suppose i did not emphasise that enough, so with that said... if you want something with less problems that performs well, go spend the money on an expensive sports car where the company could afford to put the time into development, or if you want reliability, go buy an econobox that wont break down, but at the same time does not have the performance aspects, you ALWAYS sacrafice something with cars ALWAYS, there are three dimensions of car ownership, price, performance and reliability, and you can only have 2 at a time, what do you really want out of a car?

 

[Tito1]

Which expensive sports car is known for it reliablity? Also this isn't a reliability issue in terms of safety and operation. It is a reliability of value. How do I sell a vehicle I can't stop from squeeking. No one is looking for that.

And $20k is not a cheap car.

 

[JHew84]

20K is a cheap car, whether or not its cheap for you is irrelevent, in the grand scheme of things 20K is not an expensive car, not to mention most people paid less than that by a few thousand...

and it depends on your definition of a sports car, go buy an M3, those are very sporty and are also very reliable at the same time, but again, you are going to pay for that extra quality, a lot more than 20K ...

and if a squeek is stopping someone from buying the car, then they weren't going to buy it in the first place, a squeeky sway bar bushing is a cop-out excuse, not a legitimate one, if they were truly interested they would accept the fact that it squeeks and that they will have to take it into the dealership to get it fixed, but obviously they didn't want the car, and again, i doubt it has anything to do with the squeeks/creaks...

 

[spacemonkey]

Jhew84, SpaceMonkey, You Are Wrong...it is that simple. For ex. Jaguars are not known for their reliability, while honda civics are known to be reliable. Which one costs more???.

um which one has less power and smaller engine to cut the cost and increase reliability? Which one is 6 cylinder vs 4 cylinder (6 cylinder is exxpensive then 4 cylinder). Which one has curtain airbags or cutting edge safety at the time? Which one has premium grade leather seats and wood trim? Which one has a six speed? Which car is bigger thus cost more to produce? Which car is RWD which cost more to make? Which car is heavier becuase the material used (steel is alot different). Try opening a door of a Jaguar or BMW compared to a protege or honda civic...its like tank...very robust. Tires are definately different as the Jaguar has bigger and performace like tires. Civic are made in Mexico cuting cost. Jaguars are made in Britain by people and a assembly line. Which one cost more? A Mexican woker making like $0.50 per hour or a team of british workers who probally take mroe pride in their work? Sometimes a more effienct manufatuering and managment will cut cost but not so in jaguar, until ford took over.

BTW reliability cleaned up after Ford took over. Remember at the time Jaguar probally didnt have a manufatuer to provide engines so they designed it them selves which ended up costing more. Ford came in an effecentcy increase and and price decreased. TVR is a good example. Those engine are custom designed and hand made by TVR and thus they have bad reliability. Liek the Corvette one reason why they are so cheap is because the engines they used are used in many car thus allowing them to mass produce them which is cheaper then producing a engine for one single car. psuhrod engines are less complicated so thus is argubally cheaper. Fiber glass is cheaper then aluminum or carbon fiber. using a Malibu steering wheel is cheap. Leaf springs are cheap. so thus the ingredients is you get a $45K sports car. Japanese sports cars maybe cheaper due to the production technique and the fact they dont have to deal with unions. but the Corvette is made of fiber glass which is more expensive then steel and it also makes more horse power so you dont have a car that is under price you have a car that is priced right. comparable is a lotus elise which if you look at it also jsutfies a $45K price tag...reguarless of what peopel say.

So I disagree becasue a jaguar is a $40K car and a civic is a $15K car. And the price reflects. you can have a ultra reliable car but the power decreased for that extra barrier of safety. 115hp engine dont always blow because you are putting less stress on the engine itself thus increasing reliability. if you have a high hp engine that is reliable then they used good internals to handle that stress and thus cost more...i.e. RSX type S. and there is a difference in what you get in a type-S vs a RSX. mainly i-vtec and the real vtec and transmission. People use to say when you buy a honda you are buying its engine....and thats where honda spreads its money.

 

[spacemonkey]

Which expensive sports car is known for it reliablity? Also this isn't a reliability issue in terms of safety and operation. It is a reliability of value. How do I sell a vehicle I can't stop from squeeking. No one is looking for that.

And $20k is not a cheap car.

maybe in the early 90s it wasnt but inflation kicked in at about 3% annually. Nowadays thats considered average or maybe cheap considering what price high end golfs and civics are charging. most cars now and even when we bought the MSP was around $15K-$20K Anything cheaper and its probally a kia or Deawoo. Even the MAzda 3 is around $15-$17K. My brothers 2002 Golf GLS (low introductory 4 door golf) was $15-$16K and it only had 115hp and no cool stero system, LSD and even cheaper seats. Put a Kenwood system ($800-$1K) in my brothers car and a LSD ($1K), a turbo ($3K), better seats and it will certainly come up to a $20-22K car. Oh right thats the VW GTi which starts around $20K, which reflect its value. Keep in mind a GTi has a turbo smaller then the MSP (K04E) and the innercooler is worse then ours. Not to mention the golf was made in mexico...not sure where the GTi is made.

 

[Tito1]

You guys are obviously much higher rollers than me I guess.

My first car cost $2400, second cost $4600, my girlfriend drives a $6700. I'm just wondering, did you guys actually pay for your car yourself?

And the idea that Ford can fix a companies reliability record is a joke...but you miss my points anyway...The expectation for reliability is exactly the same for a $15k as a $100k car.

This thread is so off topic, I can't even remember where we started.

 

[Tito1]

I just got off the the phone with the lawyer...it seems that the suspension issues are enough to warrant a lemon.


He's taking my case, now I just need to figure out what to get...MSM hehe

 

[spacemonkey]

I thought We are talking about new cars. I cant think of anything new thats $2K. a 240sx is probally $2K but thats hardly new and even when it was new in the 80s it most befinately was not $2-4K. If you bought your MSP for $20K used then I would really question that and see where you got tricked into buying it. When the miata was 1st introduced in the market it was below $20K...look at it now.

<---- ex-ford Explorer owner V6 SOHC...no problem only one recall (tires). Reliable as can be and you can ask my friends how much I cared about that car. I hated it and down right neglected it. Lived in Gainesville for School and drove 200 miles back to orlando 1-3 times a month. Never even washed it. Traded it in with 65,000 miles with 0 problems. A broken tensioner because I broke it.

Why cant ford fix a company's relability record, if its bad? MG use to be a joke until Ford got ahold of it and not its a better car then it was in the past. Do we remember MGs past in the 70s? Or the Aston MArtin DB7 vs the DB9? In the case of Jaguar it started using ford engines which is more relaible then a old skool XJ10 engine. What about ford Trucks? The very same tucks and cars used by people who need to be more relabile then anyone else...emergency workers and law enforcement? I would hate to be in a emergency and have someoene come to the rescue in something unreliable. My mom's Linclon LS is one of the very 1st car to be shared in platform between ford and Jaguar (linclon LS is the Jaguar S Type). No problems once so ever since we bought it back in 2000. Ford just runs a efficent operation and thats how you survive in Business by being efficent. The companys that havent been efficent have floped or been bought out by companies that are more efficent then they are. Yeah you can used the most perfect and flawless materials in a car (throw effiency out the window) and have excetptional relability and power for a cheap price and lets see how ling you stay in business. Example of efficentcy is the Ford, Mazda Volvo C1 platform or aka Mazda 3, Ford Focus and Volvo S40. The theroy was to creat a car with Volvo Safety, Mazda Handling and ford Managment. honestly for $20K did you really expect a car that was comparable to a RSX Type S in realiability? or perhaps a BMW 3-series in refinment and power? that For 20K you will have looks, safety, power, practicality, economy, handling all with top notch relability? All I hear is people talk s*** about ford relability without ever driving a ford. I cant say the same for Ford cars but I have yet to meet anyone that bitched and moned about a ford pickup truck. I was a ford owner in the past and I will gladly be a Ford owner in the future. I love mazda and I think my MSP is a fantastic car, I will gladly own another Mazda in the future.

Relaibility is not a justification of price, its the overall package. In that case hondas will be worth more then a Koeinisegg CCR, Formula 1 car or a Ferrai 360 modena. Or even a Mclaren F1. It is extremely hard to put more power in a car/engine and still main relaibility at a cheap price. It can be done but you will have to sacrifice somethign else, maybe comfort, safety, handeling or if its a cheap car to begin with like a kia. Pratically imposssible from a finance and accounting standpoint. A burger from outback steak house isnt going to be the same price and same quality as a Mcdonald's quarter pounder.

Ferrari, Mazaratti were bought by highly efficent operations of Fiat
Lambo was bought by VW which runs a very efficent company.
Rover group (mini, MG and Rover) were bought by Ford and BMW. Although MG and Rover are not seen as profitable anymore they are currently being sold to Shanghai Auto Group.
TVR was bought by a russian millionair who plans to over haul the managment and save the companies image.
Ford, GM run a very efficent operation and thats how they stay alive and on top.
Lotus was bought by a singapore company which fantastic managment team.
Nissan seeked help from Renault
Subaru and Saab needed help form GM

A company is only as strong as its managment team...and a very good example would be Mitsubishi right now.

 

[girth]

I just got off the the phone with the lawyer...it seems that the suspension issues are enough to warrant a lemon.


He's taking my case, now I just need to figure out what to get...MSM hehe

Sweet! Keep me up to date on the progress. I'd like to persue my coolant issues (as well as the other bunch of 'annoying' issues). The fact that the car was "cheap" has nothing to do with the lemon laws. Like you're saying, cheap cars can be lemons just as easily as expensive cars.

 

[Swerny]

I will be VERY surprised if Mazda buys back your car due to the clunk and squeaky bushings.
I will however eat crow if they do.,

 

[Tito1]

Space Monkey, your rambling are so incoherent, and actually quite comical that I don't know what to say.

VW reliable? GM reliable? Ford Reliable? ARE YOU J/king???

Companies don't joining forces because they want the best of both worlds, They want their STOCK HOLDERS to be happy.

And no my car isn't new, but I wan just giving a reference point. And the fact that my '84 240dL Volvo was in the shop less than the MSP is actually kinda funny.

But simply the ability to buy a $20k car, or a $15k car for that matter show U have enough dough to play. I make the US national average in income, and I can't afford a more expensive car. So this car seems like average in price to me.

We must come from different financial contexts.

MS MSP- I wouldn't be so surprised, the lawyer doesn't get a dime if we loose, so I think he is quite confident...but again the law is different for each state.

 

[BinaryRotary]

You guys are obviously much higher rollers than me I guess.

My first car cost $2400, second cost $4600, my girlfriend drives a $6700. I'm just wondering, did you guys actually pay for your car yourself?

And the idea that Ford can fix a companies reliability record is a joke...but you miss my points anyway...The expectation for reliability is exactly the same for a $15k as a $100k car.

This thread is so off topic, I can't even remember where we started.

Porsche and Hummer have the worst reliability on the market.

 

[BinaryRotary]

And no my car isn't new, but I wan just giving a reference point. And the fact that my '84 240dL Volvo was in the shop less than the MSP is actually kinda funny.

You're talking about a Volvo sedan and a Mazdaspeed car. TOTALLY different animals.

 

[Tito1]

Jhew, SpaceMonkey & now in particular Binary

Your ability to miss the point is impressive.

Binary-Do you read previous posts??

And Jhew84, your focus on the MSP being a 'cheap' expresses a disconnect from most Americans reality. Maybe this explained in your screen name. So, born in '84, means your 21 and driving a 'cheap' $20k. There is no way in hell that you worked to pay for that car. Thank mommy, daddy, and/or the trust fund, b/c you just sound a bit spoiled.

Plus that screen name is so wack! Can I be Torah69

 

[b00sted]

this is amusing..more power to ya tito. some people just dont appreciate the value of money. as far as im concerned - regardless of how much money i spend on ANYTHING, whether it be $5 or $20000000000...i want it to be in PERFECT working order

 

[Tito1]

Finally someone gets it!

 

[spacemonkey]

Porsche and Hummer have the worst reliability on the market.

<----- Try a BMW 7 series. Porsche I havent heard of that much. the higher end Mercedes are horrible. Theres a joke/rumor going around that they delibertly try to make car with problems so the dealer can profit off you taking to the dealer for a fix. maintence cost more then the car itself. I think it sthe amount of electronics and advance technology in it. I think the new high end BMW are better but the old high end BMW are just a pain.

this is amusing..more power to ya tito. some people just dont appreciate the value of money. as far as im concerned - regardless of how much money i spend on ANYTHING, whether it be $5 or $20000000000...i want it to be in PERFECT working order

Not as amusing as your statment.....

Well no s*** shirlock. I enjoy spending money and getting broken, cheap, and bad stuff (sarcastic). The problem is if you have taken a mangerial accounting course its nearly impossilble to get perfection at low cost. Good material that lead to relability cost money and business need profit to survive. In that case you would see prime rib sandwiches and grade A Fillet Migon stuffed with golden flakes and cavior Hamburgers at Mcdonalds 99 cent menu. insteadof sesame buns you will see diamond studed buns.

In a ideal/perfect world (your world) I could get a porsche GT1/ferrari Enzo for $50 and have it produce 1000 hp, handle on a dime, stop on a penny, last 1,000,000 miles with absoluely no engine rebiuld, get 1,000 miles to the gallon, a seat made of solid gold with eagle down seats made of manatee skin and throw in a Micheal Shumacher as your chuffer/instructor. oh what the hell throw in a supermodel with it too....or Jenna Jameson. All under $50.

But this is reality and money is the bottom line. Damn straight, when I spend $1 or how ever much it is, you would want the best/perfect product. But reality you cant and there is no such thing. You could spend $10 on a burger at houston and it would use the greatest meat and bun possible for a burger place but then you would b**** about how it doesnt come with a salad and soup. And if they include soup and salad you would b**** about how it doesnt come with dessert. Then you would say its not worth it because $10 only included salad and soup but not dessert. Perfection is hard to strive especially at a bargin. So I say again what did you expect from a $20K car? A freaking Porsche? What did you expect from a $10 burger? For them to go out of business because they made you happy and gave you everything you could have wanted in a car, burger or whatever at a cheap price?

The question at hand is how much reliability/quality can you get out of a car that is $20K brand new? let say You think a honda civic is reliable and a good "value," its also cheaply manufatuered in MExico, underpowered, feels cheap and handles like crap. But one thing you wont get with a civic is klunking noise but you will get all 115-130 hp and a 17 sec 1/4 mile..

How am I missing the point? I told you many times....brand new $20K cars at the time are 2003 SRT-4, MSP, Civic, Kia, Toyota Corrolla, camery, base RSX, base Celica, Sentra and many more but out of those which one would you choose?

And how is a volvo comparable to a MSP? A brand new volvo today starts at 23K. And comparing a car thats is 2 decades old is hard to pin point because you need to see how much the MSP time value of money. im sure the volvo cost more at the time then a $20K car now, and thus it had better quality parts which improves relability. Its all in how a company spreads it money. lets compare a brand new volvo S40 vs a SRT-4 similar price. SRT-4 has a amazing engine and tranny superior to the Volvo. But the volvo is more refined, leather seats, 6-speed, and most importantly it wont kill you in a crash. Thus Dodge gave you quality in the engine and tranny department giving you relability. The volov might not have the same relability in the engine but the Volvo gave you reliability in a car crash with its drop down engine design so the engine isnt sitting in your lap in a front end crash, and side airbags standard. a good example of where the money was spent. both car has a value of 22-23K and has the parts for a 22K car...just invested in different areas.

Companies don't joining forces because they want the best of both worlds, They want their STOCK HOLDERS to be happy.

Goal of a firm is to increase Shareholder's wealth...#1 thing they say business school. And you increase shareholder's wealth by running highly efficent operation. The right thing to do is to used beautiful internals and qaulity stuff but that would almost mean no profit for the firm. Joining differnt parts together allow things to be built in bulk quantity and thus cuting cost (saving design and production for many engines). 1 engine can be used in many different cars and thus cuting cost to producing/designing engine for different cars. engines like LS1, 4g63, FS-DE and even Mazda's new MZR. And thus you have a Ford Duratec V6 in the new Mazda 6. Meaning sharing existing platforms or technology will make cars cheaper and easier to manufatuer....thus combining the best of both worlds. AMG is now desinging alot of Chrysler dodge's cars. The Chrysler Crossfire is really a Mercedes SLK with a different body. The new Chrysler 300 is really a Mercedes E class...how is that not sharing of thecnology and combining the best of both world to cut cost? The Chrysler dream car known as a ME412 is a a chrysler but the engine is a AMG V12 producing 850 hp along witha mercedes 7 speed Transmission. is that not an example of combining the best of both world to cut cost? All of it is done in house and thus they are sunken cost on payroll instead (work for the same copany) of outsourcing to lets say Cosworth/lotus. SRT-4 uses a Mitsubishi turbo becasue they are partners and own shares in each other thus comigning the best of both worlds to cut cost. How uch would it have cost them to source out a Garret turbo or design its own.

with that said....Read and this:

http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/MAZDA/tokusyu4/e980526.html

Looking at the restructuring of the world's automobile industry that is currently taking place, I feel that things are going the way we predicted. In the future, world industry will gravitate around the GM and Ford in the US, Toyota and Honda in Japan, and Volkswagen and Daimler-Benz in Germany. Nissan will make efforts of various kinds to keep itself going. What will happen to French and Italian automakers, and Germany's BMW, I'm not sure. Most likely, they will arrive at some form of balanced cooperation and interaction with one another. I should mention that on several occasions talks have been held concerning a merger of Italy's Fiat with Ford, but nothing ever came of these talks.

Around the time of the stock acquisition two years ago, Ford was prepared to take a 51% holding. I thought a 51% holding would be too much at that point in time, and was unsure of the consequences. So it was arranged for Ford to increase its holding to a little over one third instead. Recently, following a Stockholders' General Meeting, Ford Chairman Alex Trotman touched on the subject of Ford increasing its stock ownership in Mazda. But this doesn't mean that such an increase is going to happen right away. Rather, what his words meant was that, taking a long-term view, there is no obstacle whatever to Ford acquiring a majority holding in Mazda. I believe he feels that, provided such a move becomes necessary, it will be appropriate for Ford to acquire a majority holding at any time.

Ford does not want Mazda to become just like Ford. That would be of no interest to Ford. Let's make no mistake about that. Ford says it wants Mazda to maintain its own distinctive existence, and to produce characteristically Mazda vehicles. Ford doesn't want to make Mazda indistinguishable from itself. These sentiments are very strongly held at Ford, you know.

Tastes in cars vary widely among different groups of people. Japanese people have their favorite kinds of car and so do the elderly and the young. Men prefer different kinds of car to those women prefer. But cost is an important factor, and to cut costs, the adoption of common chassis is increasing. However, such use of common chassis will still permit a wide variety of cars being offered. Although a number of models will share the same "internal organs," extensive variation will be possible in the outer appearances of the different models. Just because the Ford Group is providing Mazda with capital doesn't mean that they want each and every aspect of Mazda made uniform with Ford! For Ford, Mazda isn't simply a collection of plants. It's a fine affiliate company located in the Far East. A relationship in which Mazda languished while Ford thrived, could not be long-lasting. The two companies must prosper together.

The reform of Mazda is going well - thanks to "good American management," you could say. Usually when we think of US-style management we think of intense survival-of-the-fittest practices, especially regarding finance, and of sudden and drastic personnel reductions. But Ford is a little different. I've been in contact with, and observed, Ford since 1975 and that is over 20 years now. I've noticed that they really care about their employees. They have a friendly relationship with the United Autoworkers Union (UAW) in the US. But that's not to say they have a halfhearted approach to business. They run a very efficient operation.


Ford attaches very great importance to profitability, and considers how to lower costs an important issue. They set very strict guidelines for their parts purchasing, but that reflects a highly rational approach. They engage in intensive negotiations with prospective suppliers, recognizing that they naturally expect a certain profit of their own. But in such discussions Ford won't ask point-blank for discounts. Rather, they'll be working hard to find ways of making the supplier's manufacturing processes more efficient to bring costs down. To survive in the automobile world today, you must make cars which are world leaders, but at the lowest possible cost. But Mazda, which sells only 300,000-400,000 vehicles per year domestically, cannot do that alone. So, rather than spend tens of billions of yen on developing its own large vehicles, it's better for Mazda to market Ford's large vehicles as its own. In return, Ford will have Mazda develop the small vehicles that it's good at making, and market those vehicles as its own. Thus, I don't think that Mazda could keep going if Ford were not in charge of its management.

I was due to fly back to Japan the following morning, and as promised, a person from Ford delivered the letter to me at the airport. It said that Ford primarily wanted Mazda to make gears for them, and to progressively increase the number of small-size trucks it received from them. The letter also requested an assurance that the Sumitomo Bank would support Mazda. Another condition expressed was that Mazda produce front-wheel drive vehicles-an area Mazda had no experience in. Ford said such vehicles were set to be a major trend worldwide. Mazda's response was somewhat downbeat, but they eventually agreed. The arrangement brought Mazda orders for 200,000 gear sets annually, which boosted its income. At the time of that first capital tie-up, there were people saying "How about asking Toyota for help?" "What about Nissan Motors?" and so on. We did consider many alternatives. But it was clear that in the 21st century, reorganization and consolidation among the auto industry would occur, not just in Japan, but on a global scale. Accordingly, we thought in terms of either GM (General Motors) or Ford. GM had already formed a relationship with Isuzu, so we came down in favor of requesting help from Ford. As the first company in the world to mass-produce automobiles, Ford has superb resources for anticipating and exploiting trends and currents in the automobile world. I feel today that that decision was the right one, just as I did 20 years ago.

there you go example of effiecny in practic and again like I said those that are effiecent are in business. Those that didnt care about cost and used the best material made no profit and eventually got eaten up by companies that had a more efficent operation. As a plant manager you want to be efficent as possible....because it whats keep you in bsuiness. Whats so hard to get about that?

Have you notice what happened maybe a month ago when proctor and Gamble bought Gillet saying it could reduce cost by being more efficent. combining their managment and their assembly lines they combined the best of both worlds. And the trade off of technology. Gillet #1 income is from innovation...they come out with a new razor all the time. MAch 3, mach 3 turbo blah blah blah. Proctor and gamble hoped they can profit off the innovation because P&G has what people say is "stagnent" innovation as their products havent changed in awhile. Thus combineing the best of both worlds. A more efficent manufatuering from Proctor And gamble. And innovation from Gillet.

Was a MSP really not worth $20K how much does a protege cost with all its suspention component, interior and turbo cost? Probally close to the same price.

I love how you are bitching about how much the MSP cost yet you are talkign to a lawyer that probally charges $200 an hour + legal processing. Loosing your interest on the car by having Mazda buy it back and spend it on another car above $20K. actually if Mazda does buy it back you they should pay you for what you paid plus interest. but you still have your legal fees, gas and insurence (sunk cost) that you paid for the car. And im sure a 175 hp turbo Miata isnt cheaper to insure then a 170 hp 4 door protege.

Good thing is the Miata is a car that cost mroe then the protege when it was brand new so technically you get a better car for that price.