Subaru is Korean. they are the premier Korean car maker, the others being Kia & Hyundai - both of which merged some time back which marked the beginning of both companies growing to be better and better in many respects.
Uh, no. Subaru has always been a subsidiary of Fuji Heavy Industries, a Japanese company. Have there been outside majority shareholders? Yes, and I will get into this momentarily.
Mazda is Ford. Plain & simple. Much of it merely badge engineered at that. Much of what's left is powered by US blocks, so you might as well just plan on having a blue oval in your driveway. Its Ford.
FALSE. At one point, Ford was Mazda's majority shareholder, but this has not been the case since just prior to the American automotive meltdown. Ford shedding nearly all of it's foreign subsidiaries is SPECIFICALLY why Ford was able to survive without the government bailout. In fact, Mazda is now a subsidiary of Fiat, and will be sharing platforms with Alfa Romeo. Prior to that, Mazda was indeed a subsidiary of Ford.
While your statement is not completely untrue, the way you describe it is not wholly truthful. By your logic, every poor soul who drives a second generation Dodge Neon, can hold their head high and say, "I totally drive a Mercedes Benz. I know the badge says Dodge, but Chrysler was totally owned by Daimler-Benz when my car was designed and manufactured. That makes my car a Mercedes!"
That's ludicrous.
The same can be said of every Subaru built in the first half of the previous decade. GM held majority stock in FHI. Name a single Chevy, Pontiac, Buick, GMC, or Cadillac built during that same time frame that utilizes a boxer engine and full time all-wheel drive? Let me save you the trouble of researching: there isn't one. Did badge engineering occur? Absolutely - GM used it's controlling interest to seize the platform and driveline (and most of the exterior) of the Impreza...and gave it to a different subsidiary! Not a single person on the face of the earth looked at that car and said, "That Saab is totally a Pontiac." No, everyone looked at it and said, "That Saab is totally a Subaru." Why? Because badge engineering is more complicated than that.
Just because a parent company has the power to make its subsidiary share or co-develop platforms and drive trains doesn't mean EVERY platform and drive train is co-engineered or shared. Prime example: my Miata. Here is the extent of Ford's involvement in designing, engineering, and manufacturing the Miata.
Mazda: "Hey, Ford, we've got this crazy idea for a car that we think will work. Any problems if we go ahead with this?"
Ford: "Do it."
Everything on that car was built and developed at Mazda. Developed with Ford dollars? Sure. Designed and built by Mazda. "But I've seen that same engine in Ford Escorts from the '90s! They even had Ford badges in the Escorts!" you exclaim. Now this is where Big Daddy comes in. Mazda developed that engine years earlier for their 323s, which in the '90s, became the Protege. Ford needed a replacement for the Escort, and said, "Hey Mazda, that Protege was a pretty awesome piece. Since we own you, we're taking it and slapping our own body and interior on it. And we're calling it a Ford Escort/Mercury Tracer." Is that badge engineering? Absolutely. Did Ford engineer that car? No, it did not.
Are there some Mazdas that use Ford-developed platforms and/or drive trains? Yes. (Every truck or SUV built by Mazda prior to the CX series was a Ford platform.) If "ALL MAZDAS ARE FORDS" as a concrete, blanket statement were true, simply because "EVERY MAZDA BUILT SINCE 1972 IS JUST BADGE ENGINEERED!" because subsidiaries don't have any internal development and power on their own, then every single rotary powered vehicle Mazda ever made must be a figment of my imagination.
Platform sharing doesn't automatically equal badge engineering. The Charger is a solid, reliable car because it's built on a Mercedes-developed platform. But no one in their right mind says, "My Charger is exactly the same car as the Benz this is based on." EVERYONE has badge engineered products; people just need to do research into individual models before you just make blanket assumptions. Many partnerships involve using a subsidiary's platform and the parent company's drivetrain and vice versa. Some Nissans are Renaults, not all Nissans are Renaults.
