(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

History Channel Car Show

N

NY 986

Well-known Member
Just wondering how many saw the 3 part series about the key men in the automobile industry over the last 100 plus years? I'm sure a lot of it is in print if somebody cared to look and a fair amount of the show is stylized. Nonetheless, it is interesting to look at the profiles of Edsel Ford and Henry Ford II plus Alfred P Sloan. Before the 1980's most would have looked at the big three as invincible but it is interesting to know how much the failures cost them. I know the time was limited in what they could have shown but it would have been nice to have seen a little on AMC and how that was folded into Chrysler. I remember a lot of hand wringing by some and breaths of relief when that happened during the late 1970's. AMC had some nifty vehicles such as the Eagle which probably influenced companies such as Subaru.
 
I have seen the first 2 and the last one is recorded so hopefully tonight I can finish it. A show about Deere, IH and Ford would be great. Another good one the history channel did a few your back was The men who made America and Hatfield's and McCoy's.
 
Yes, I watched part of it. I didn't realize Ford had so many labor issues, I thought he treated his employees well, at one time he doubled their wages to keep the assembly line manned. Ford's problem was the thought the model T was an adequate car and no one would want anything better, but Chevrolet proved him wrong.
 
Yes, this show is in the same style as the one about the Men Who Made America. I would love to see one about the farm machinery industry but I know it will not happen. The History Channel is looking for massive ratings on everything they put out so niche shows such as an farm machinery show will not happen IMO. I don't mind shows aimed towards bikers but that seems to be the focus of everything they produce anymore. Well , not everything when you look at Mountain Men but it has to have a he-man theme to it. As far as farm machinery goes we can only hope. You would need to discuss the contributions of the smaller companies such as what New Holland was prior to the 1990's and New Idea who pioneered the apron chain/ beater type manure spreader. IH would need a fair amount of time to discuss how much of an impact IH had on the national economy during most of its existence. IH was the Microsoft of a lot of its early existence.
 
Saw much of it, yes very interesting. Would also have like to have seen some AMC included, would like to see another show on AMC, Studebaker and a few others.

Never knew the Dodge brothers were victims of the flu pandemic.

So much success tied to guys who were with more than one of the big 3 like the Dodge brothers starting with Ford and Walter Chrysler with GM and Iococa with Ford then Chrysler.

Thought the numbers on what the acquisition of Jeep and the sales of the new Grand Cherokee meant to Chrysler at that time were staggering.
 
William Hewitt who was Deere's CEO from the mid 1950's to the early 1980's came over from Ford albeit he was not in the top ranks at Ford. A lot of Deere's succession is son in law comes in to replace father in law and would be a big focus for the Deere segment of a farm machinery series. I've seen it written that William Butterworth who Charles Deere's son in law was an inspiration in Hollywood when a movie called for a very wealthy stuffy and conservative type character. But it could be said that in the era during WWI when a lot of companies were making reckless moves that Butterworth kept the ship from running on the rocks.
 
Actually a show on IH would be pretty interesting. At one point it was one of the largest corporations on earth. Showing its downfall then reemergence from the ashes would be interesting to people because of the story. The History channel never did get very in depth on the individual cars on their series (except possibly the model T).
 
From what I remember reading. Ford was hard to get along with but did treat is workers well. The problems came with the union.
 
As the car show demonstrated when it comes to the CEO it's about having the right man in place at the right time. Also, something that looks good at one point in time does not look so good several years down the road. I think that it is often a matter of luck whether a company lives for a long time or not. Deere's Butterworth was not progressive when it came to product development but he did not ruin the company by taking many new ventures all at once either. Read about Deere's agonizing entry into building tractors.
 
I read "Wheels for the World" by Douglas Brinkley which gave me an insight into Henry and the Ford Motor company in the early days. The History rendition is very accurate including the "liquidity" of the "big guns" moving around the arena either for their own reasons or being relieved of their commands.

What was glazed over was the initiation of the imported vehicle and what it did for the American consumer. Today we have everything as standard equipment thanks to them. I bought a 1965 Ford ? ton years ago that didn't even have a heater! I still recall a long faced CEO of GM back in the 1970's general era that said that the American consumer will get what we choose to build as they have no other choice...best I can remember what he said verbatim. Well guess what sports fans, the Orient solved that little problem and look at how many of them are built right here with American labor with my last several big 3 vehicles coming from Canada or Mexico! Hello NAFTA!
 
I bought it right after it came out back in the 1980's. Butterworth and the board of directors honestly did not want to get involved in building tractors. They were for the status quo where IH and Ford would build tractors and Deere would build tillage, grain drills, and mowers. It's not talked about much but what I think what tipped Deere into buying Waterloo was the company was worried about the competition raiding Deere dealers because they had no tractor to sell and then taking on additional non-Deere products. Then there is the matter of bringing the model D to market.
 
Another interesting show is "The 24 Hour War". About Ford vs Ferrari at La Mans. Lots of interviews with drivers and Ford's.
 
Billy I read another version of the story. Whether it's true or not, I don't know. The article I read showed Ford as a very demanding and domineering employer when the model T's were made. He was very against alcohol and banned alcohol consumption by his employees even in their own homes. He hired people to knock on employees doors to see if they were drinking. If they were caught drinking, another employee would be in their place the next day. Employees on the lines were fired if they talked to their neighbor. He employed goons to beat up employees who tested his ways. After reading this article I had a hunch Ford was one of the reasons unions were formed.
 
Yep, the Ford goon squads are well known even though they date back nearly 100 years. I never heard about the alcohol but I had read an employee had to be very careful to not look like that they were going any less than full bore while on the clock for Ford. Locally, Kodak generally had amicable relations with its workers but that gets shadowed by Ford, Henry Frick (Carnegie Steel), and the McCormick's (Hay Market Riot) of which founded IH. Yes, unions went too far but by the time Teddy Roosevelt took office there were plenty of examples of abuse by companies towards their employees.
 
I knew there would be some union bashing! Jealous? The unions created the middle class and that's one reason we are loosing it now, unions are declining! Who is going to buy new cars and houses once the middle class is gone? The one% ers can't keep Detroit going!
 
Speaking of jealous. If you depend on the collective to give value to your service then you understand the limited value of your skill set.



What is amazing is the areas of the country that had the strongest union membership are now the areas in the greatest decline. The only remaining areas with strong union membership are governmental unions - you know the people noted for their terrible service and productivity levels. Yet since they are exempt from the free market due to their wages depending on taxes and not producing a useful product they "enjoy" a standard of living the exceeds that of those paying their wages.
 
Agreed. The management of IH made the exact opposite decision in 1979 that it should have made. The former Xerox CEO thought all businesses were similar. When the strike happened in 1979 he should have slowly rebuilt the inventory instead he ran the plants at full bore building a massive backlog of inventory for what he thought was going to be a huge year in ag sales - instead the ag recession only deepened in 1980 and continued to deepen each succeeding year. The massive hit on their cash reserves nearly wiped them out as banks would readily extend credit - at 22%. Similar to the "2008" crisis, corporations that went into the crisis with cash or established credit (John Deere & Ford) weathered the storm, GM and Chrysler went into the "crisis" low on cash and it couldn't be borrowed - at any interest rate. Not having cash on hand to meet operating requirements they went into bankruptcy and government bailouts.



In 1984 you could still buy brand new 1980 equipment off most dealer's lots and they were desperate to sell it.
 
The more I read about the 1979 strike the more complex it seems. But in any event I agree McCardle should have been more amicable when it came to negotiating with the union. IH had already borrowed a mountain of cash while the workers were out and going back to pre-strike levels of production seemed to be the only way out in terms of paying the debt off. Had Jimmy Carter not come along with his embargo that plan may have paid off.


My father in law and his brother were both Xerox lifers and had their taste of McCardle.


In my part of the US it did not seem that there was much IH iron sitting around for a while. It probably mattered that there was far more small dairy back then that was not burned by the grain embargo. It probably did not help IH that a few of their largest dealers here also carried New Holland. One IH dealer was nearly doubled up on every product IH sold by offering Steiger, Deutz, Hesston, Wilrich, and other lines.
 
I did not forget about Dain but IMO Dain was being pacified by the Deere board of directors so Dain would be around to work on hay tools. I never felt a sense of urgency when reading about Dain that the board was anxious to see Dain ready a tractor for production. Deere's top marketing man George Peek (after serving his country in WWI) and top engineer Leon Clausen left Deere during the early 1920's and from what I read there was a feeling of regression-conservatism on the Deere board of directors that was very off putting.
 
It should be said that when the Fordson first came out that many Deere execs had visions of being an exclusive supplier for tools to be used with the Fordson. When it appeared that Henry Ford had lost enthusiasm for a Deere team up then the cold reality of Deere being left in the dark on equipment sales became more obvious. The horse drawn tool market had no where to go but down and if Fordson and IH were looking at having their own lines then Deere would have far fewer market options. This most likely prompted others in Deere management to vote in favor of buying Waterloo.
 
I grew up in NE Kansas and the amount of equipment IH had sitting around was astounding. I remember "Mexican" 86 series tractors being for sale in 1982 (1983?). Apparently IH had built a load of tractors to sell in Mexico and tried to make them as cheap as possible - basic roll cages instead of cabs on smaller tractors. Then they didn't sell. My dad was looking at a left over "Mexican" 886 but found he could buy a 1980 with the cab and air for the same price. He bought the 3 year old "new" tractor instead of the 1 year old "new" tractor.
 
The Pacer was the one built like a bubble was it not? A fair amount of AMC stuff was not noteworthy but give them credit for the Eagle and buying Jeep when nobody was thinking about SUV's. There used to be an AMC dealership in the next town over from me.
 
Russ, the mindset never changes. They all hate unions, but apparently have no problem with their tax dollars subsidizing poverty wage companies, through food stamps and whatever else their employees qualify for.
 
Henry Ford instituted the five dollar work day when his competition paid two dollars a day. He did this so his employees could afford to buy a car. He demanded that you had to live a certain way in order to get the five dollars a day. He insisted that you abstain from alcohol and tobacco.He had people that checked up on his employees and if they didn't live like he said they were fired! He was a tyrant, in some ways.
 
Henry did not hire the goons. They were from his general manager, Harry Bennett. Henry distanced himself from the day to day operations as he advanced in age, trusting his second in command to oversee the daily operations. Unfortunately, Harry was a street thug with a history of violent behavior. When Henry's grandson Henry II was asked to take over the company, his condition was that he had absolute authority. One of the first things he did was to fire Harry. The two men hated each other.
 
first car I drove was a 49 ford flat head with overdrive. man would it go. I remember the oil embargo. was raising my kids and bought the only Toyota I ever owned, great car, great gas mileage is why I bought it. that was 1979. went to a dodge colt in 1982. gas mileage was my first concerned. over the years it sure has changed I enjoyed the first two segments. lots I didn't know. third one I sort of grew up with them so wasn't that interesting. defenitly a good show to watch
 
Actually I have huge issue with that too. To many people paid to do nothing but pop out more kids to make their welfare check bigger. As for poverty wages - the demand for hard working people is sky high right now and if you are only making "poverty wages" you probably aren't even worth that. We have $40,000 and $50,000 a year jobs setting empty that the only requirement is you show up and are willing to break a sweat. But you can't compete with low pay combined with 365 days of vacation.
 
I agree with you, that a lot of blue collar jobs are sitting unfilled. That problem stems from kids being told that they would never amount to a rats arse unless they got a college degree. 30 years latter, the "will" to do physical labor is all but gone. Even skilled construction trades with good pay and benefits are having trouble finding apprentices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top