中国人认为美国飞机和汽车的制造质量差吗？美国网友：美国仍然拥有庞大的制造业，高端制造业仍由美国主导，它是全球第二大制造商。

Alexexy·3d ago
Im Chinese American and the overall consensus is that most American car manufacturers are some combination of overpriced or poor in quality. Most of the cars my family purchased were either of German or Japanese brands.
我是华裔美国人，总体而言大多数美国汽车制造商都是价格高或质量差的代名词。我买的汽车大多数都是德国或日本的品牌。
With that said, I do like Chevys
话虽如此，我确实喜欢雪佛兰

Law-of-Poe·3d ago
As an American I agree with your statement on cars.
作为一个美国人，我同意你关于汽车的说法。
Despite some high profile incidents though, the airplanes have a strong safety record.
尽管发生了一些引人注目的事件，但这些飞机拥有良好的安全记录。
Boeing is doing a horrible job of maintaining it but I wouldn’t generalize the entire aviation industry based on a few incidents.
波音在维护它方面做得很糟糕，但我不会根据一些事件来概括整个航空业。

Alexexy·3d ago
I didn't even bring up the Boeing planes because I don't really have an opportunity to pick the plane I'm riding on. The lack of safety is really concerning but there's very little an average person can do to pick the actual planes they fly on
我甚至没有提到波音飞机，因为我真的没有机会选择我乘坐的飞机。缺乏安全性确实令人担忧，但普通人几乎无法选择他们实际乘坐的飞机

Naive_Ad7923·3d ago
I know a lot of people actively trying to avoid the MAX planes when they book their flights.
我知道很多人在预订航班时积极尝试避免乘坐 MAX 飞机。

Complex-Fluids-334·2d ago
Iirc, air travel is still the safest option for trafficking, it’s just every time something fails the consequences are devastating.
IIRC，航空旅行仍然是人口贩运最安全的选择，只是每次出现问题都会造成毁灭性的后果。

UrRightMyDude·2d ago
German cars are the epitome of overpriced and poor in quality. I’ve been a car enthusiast for decades and even the niche that loves them admits this. The people that buy them new are the type that cycle through cars too quickly to even care. The most expensive thing you can buy is a used German car.
德国汽车是价格高、质量差的缩影。我几十年来一直是汽车爱好者，即使是喜爱德国车的小众群体也承认这一点。购买新车的人都是那种换车太快，根本不在乎的人。你能买到的最贵的东西就是德国二手车。
Meanwhile the US puts out some of the best engine platforms that can be bought.
与此同时，美国推出了一些可以购买的最好的发动机平台。

David_88888888·23h ago
I'm Chinese-Australian, it's the same with us as well.
我是澳大利亚华裔，我们也是一样。
But those in Mainland China seem to have more favorable views towards American cars & less favorable views towards Japanese cars. Granted a good chunk of American cars sold in China are produced locally, and Teslas are cheaper in China than a lot of other markets.
但是中国大陆的人似乎对美国汽车的看法更乐观，而对日本汽车的看法则较差。诚然，在中国销售的美国汽车中有很大一部分是本地生产的，而特斯拉在中国比许多其他国家市场的价格要便宜。

Competent_Finance·3d ago
Made in the USA, almost never means made in the USA.
在美国制造，几乎从来不意味着在美国制造。
American car manufacturers are a perfect example of capitalistic failure, parts are all manufactured by the lowest bidder in China, India, Taiwan, etc… but assembled in the US and then sold for top dollar as if the whole process wasn’t a grotesquely inefficient cost cutting effort.
美国汽车制造商是资本主义失败的完美典范，零部件都是由中国、印度、台湾（地区）等地的低价竞标者生产的，但在美国组装，然后以高价出售，好像整个过程并不是一种怪异的低效削减成本的努力。

Fit_Number_6623·2d ago
Typical Americunt. Uts always everyone elses fault. It the fault of Mexico they have too much land. Let me steal some of that. Its the fault of central american farmers. They want more than a peasants wahes. Let me kill those reformers and install puppet dictators. Its the fault of filipinos. They are not christian (catholics) or educated (university of sto. Tomas older than Harvard), let me annex and civilize them. Its the fault of Vietnamese, they should let our fellow white the French exploit them. Its the fault of the iranians, they have too much oil. Let me install a dictator king. Oh they rebelled and have mullahs instead. Lets try to impoverish and starve the iranians. Fuck americunts
典型的美国人。Uts 总是别人的错。这是墨西哥的错，他们有太多的土地。让我偷走一些。这是中美洲农民的错。他们想要的不仅仅是农民的错。让我杀死那些改革者，扶植傀儡独裁者。这是菲律宾人的错。他们不是基督教徒（天主教徒），也不是受过教育的（斯托大学。比哈佛大学还老的托马斯），让我吞并他们并使其文明化。这是越南人的错，他们应该让我们的白人同胞法国人剥削他们。这是伊朗人的错，他们有太多的石油。让我扶植一个独裁者国王。哦，他们造反了，取而代之的是毛拉。让我们试着让伊朗人贫穷和饥饿。去他妈的美国人

Competent_Finance·2d ago
LMao, victim complex much?
LMao，受害者情结很多？
The fault falls squarely on the heads of the executives and accountants looking to cut costs and they then choose inferior means of production to pad the bottom line.
这完全归咎于那些希望降低成本的管理者和会计师，他们选择了低劣的生产手段来垫底。
Not saying great quality production doesn’t exist in China. It absolutely does. No one better at reproducing existing technologies… but to say that the corporate executives are paying for anything but mediocre foreign production would be laughable.
我并不是说中国不存在高质量的产品。绝对存在。在复制现有技术方面，中国无人能出其右......但如果说企业高管只为平庸的外国产品买单，那就太可笑了。
You get what you pay for though ‍.
不过，一分价钱一分货

Prudent_Concept·2d ago
They’re well beyond just reproducing. Your stereotypical view of China is about 15 years behind.
他们远远超出了仅仅复制。你对中国的刻板印象落后了大约 15 年。

CCCPhungus·2d ago
Just built the world's first molten thorium reactor.
刚刚建造了世界上第一个熔融钍反应堆。

BenchBeginning8086·3d ago
In 2024 Boeing planes had 4348 accidents (and this means ANY kind of accident, not just crashes) in the United States. And Airbus had 1481 accidents. In other words, Boeing had 2.9 times as many accidents.
2024 年，波音飞机在美国发生了 4348 起事故（这意味着任何类型的事故，而不仅仅是坠机）。空客发生了 1481 起事故。换句话说，波音的事故数量是空客的 2.9 倍。
The United States has 6701 Boeing planes and 2283 Airbus planes. In other words they have 2.9 times more Boeing planes.
美国有 6701 架波音飞机和 2283 架空客飞机。换句话说，他们的波音飞机数量是他们的 2.9 倍。
In other words. No. Boeing planes aren't poor quality.
换句话说。 不。 波音飞机的质量并不差。
If you use numbers for how many accidents are caused by malfunctions the numbers are so low they don't reach statistical significance. It's in the single digits. But those do suggest Boeing to be slightly worse.
如果你用数字来表示故障造成的事故数量，这些数字太低了，以至于没有达到统计意义。它是个位数。但这些确实表明波音的情况要差一些。

kemb0·3d ago
I'd argue your use of statistics could be seen as not giving a fair picture. You state this covers any kind of accident, so presumably not specific to the aircraft flown. In other words, in terms of an aircraft's safety, we're not concerned about things like, say, minor pilot errors that will get logged as "accidents" but will tell us nothing about an aircraft's safey.
我认为，你使用的统计数据可能并不公平。你说这涵盖了任何类型的事故，所以应该不是针对特定的飞机。换句话说，就飞机的安全性而言，我们并不关心诸如飞行员的小失误之类的事情，这些失误会被记录为 "事故"，但对飞机的安全性没有任何影响。
Let's make up some statistics to show what I mean:
让我们假设一些统计数据来说明我的意思：
Boeing aircraft: 10 fatal disasters leading to 1,000 passenger deaths. 4338 other minor accidents leading to no fatalities.
波音飞机：10 起致命灾难，导致 1,000 名乘客死亡。4338 起其他轻微事故，无人员伤亡。
Airbus: 0 fatal disasters. 1481 other minor accidents
空客：0 起致命灾难。1481 起其他轻微事故
These statistics fit within your "explanation" above of why no aircraft manufacturer is better than the other, yet the figures here clearly show that one is way worse than the other. But your way of explaining this conveniently covers that up by merging the fatal accidents with the far more frequent and essentially meaningless figure of "minor accidents".
这些统计数字符合你上面的 "解释"，即为什么没有一家飞机制造商比另一家好，但这里的数字清楚地表明，一家比另一家差得多。但你的解释方式很方便地掩盖了这一点，将致命事故与更频繁但本质上毫无意义的 "轻微事故 "数字合并在一起。
Now I don't actually know the fatalities of either manfucaturer in the US, so maybe that would paint the same picture, but the point is we DO need to see that picutre and not the one you're presenting.
现在，我并不清楚这两个人在美国的死亡人数，所以也许这也能描绘出同样的画面，但问题是我们确实需要看到那张照片，而不是你展示的那张。
And furthermore, we need to see the global picture too, since America isn't the only place in the world where an aircraft accident can oocur and isn't the only place in the world where people fly.
此外，我们还需要放眼全球，因为美国并不是世界上唯一可能发生飞机事故的地方，也不是世界上唯一有人乘坐飞机的地方。

BenchBeginning8086·3d ago
I agree that it doesn't give the full picture, giving the full picture would require a LOT of research which is why I used accidents in general.
我同意这并不能说明全部情况，要说明全部情况需要大量的研究，这也是我使用一般事故的原因。
My reasoning for why it's still relevant is just that a poor quality plane, logically would still have a higher proportion of "general" accidents. It'd be higher in both categories. Having a plane be higher in fatalities but identical in general accidents seems.... statistically unlikely.
我的理由是，从逻辑上讲，质量差的飞机发生 "一般 "事故的比例仍然会更高。两类事故的比例都会更高。如果一架飞机的死亡事故比例较高，但在一般事故中的比例相同，这在统计学上似乎....，不太可能。
I think it's reasonable to say that to make the claim that a plane is meaningfully "low quality" it would certainly have more frequent accidents in general.
我认为有理由说，要声称一架飞机是有意义的 "低质量"，它肯定会在总体上发生更频繁的事故。
Also, I chose to use just the US because that way maintenance standards were consistent. At least more consistent than they would be across the whole globe anyways.
此外，我选择只使用美国，因为这样维护标准是一致的。至少比他们在全球范围内的一致性更高。

YouthOtherwise3833·3d ago
I think fatal accidents must count along.
我认为致命事故必须计算在内。

IwishIwasaballer__·3d ago
The Boeing accidents that have had a deadly outcome the last years has all been deemed pilot error. The only one we cannot say for sure is the one that happened in China as they don't release the investigation but from the leaks it seems like pilot suicide.
过去几年发生的波音致命事故都被认定为飞行员失误。唯一不能确定的是发生在中国的事故，因为他们没有公布调查结果，但从泄露的信息来看，似乎像是飞行员自杀。

22_Yossarian_22·3d ago
That’s not looking at the full narrative.
那不是在看待完整的故事。
The original 737 entered service in the late 60s, the original Airbus A319/320/321 (737s direct competitor) took flight in the 80s. 
最初的波音 737 于 60 年代末投入服务，而最初的空客 A319/320/321（737 的直接竞争对手）则是在 80 年代开始飞行。
At the time Airbus announced their newest generation of A320s, Boeing was planning a clean sheet design, but faced market pressure to continue the 737 because for 737 operators they wouldn’t have to incur the costs of a different fleet type (crew training, pilot pools (pilots only fly 1 type), maintenance, etc).  So they took shortcuts to keep the 737 going which led to MCAS which they hid from pilots and was flawed and led to the crash of two brand new planes.  Which led to a multi-year global grounding, which combined with manufacturing delays led to a massive problem for airlines that planned on Maxs for their fleets.
当时，空客宣布其最新一代 A320 系列飞机，而波音当时正在计划一款全新的设计，但面临市场压力继续生产 737，因为对于 737 运营商来说，他们不需要承担不同机队类型的成本（如机组人员培训、飞行员库（飞行员只驾驶一种机型）、维护等）。因此，他们采取了捷径来维持 737 的生产，这导致了 MCAS 系统，他们向飞行员隐瞒了该系统，并且存在缺陷，最终导致了两架全新飞机的坠毁。这导致了数年的全球停飞，再加上制造延误，给那些计划将 737 Max 纳入机队的航空公司带来了巨大的问题。
Not to mention that the 787 was also grounded for about 6 months early in its career due to frequent on board fires, and luckily non of them happened 30K over an ocean 2 hours from an airport.
更不用说，波音 787 在其早期职业生涯中也因频繁的机舱火灾停飞了大约 6 个月，幸运的是，这些事故都没有发生在距离机场两小时、三万英尺高空的海面上。
And the whistle blowers at the 787 factory.
还有 787 工厂的吹哨人。
737 Max door blow out due to poor standards of manufacturing.
737 Max 的门因制造标准差而爆开。
The 737-7 Max can’t get certified by the FAA and there a number of 737-7s built years ago sitting in the desert waiting to be certified before they can be delivered to the airline that bought them.
737-7 Max 无法获得 FAA 认证，有许多多年前建造的 737-7 停放在沙漠中，等待认证后才能交付给购买它们的航空公司。
And now, the newest variant of the Boeing 777 (777-X) is years behind schedule.
现在，波音 777 的最新型号（777-X）已经多年延期。
I tell you, I am in no hurry to take the 777X over an ocean.  
我告诉你，我不着急乘坐 777X 跨越海洋。

BenchBeginning8086·3d ago
I can't find a source that's done the research on that.
我找不到对此进行研究的来源。
And if I were to research it myself, I would want to look into the investigations for each one to weed out "freak accidents". Things that clearly were not the plane's fault. That'd take a little longer than I want to invest into a reddit comment so I'm not sure what you'd find.
如果我自己来研究，我想调查每一起事故的调查情况，以排除 "怪胎事故"。这显然不是飞机的错。这比我在 reddit 上发表评论要花费更多时间，所以我不确定你能找到什么。

BenchBeginning8086·3d ago
If you want to argue that Russia shooting down the plane is actually Airbus's fault then go for it.
如果你想论证俄罗斯击落飞机实际上是空客的过错，那就去做吧。
But that is what I'm referring to. Going through the incidents case by case and removing incidents that clearly were not the fault of the plane's manufacturing.
但这正是我指的是。逐个审查事件，并排除那些明显不是飞机制造问题的案例。
If you believe doing this is fundamentally biased... I strongly suggest you never use published research. Because this is common practice.
如果你认为这样做从根本上是有偏见的……我强烈建议你永远不要使用已发表的研究。因为这是一种常见做法。

Gimme_Indomie·3d ago
Around a decade ago, there was a perception that American (or foreign) cars were more prestigious and better quality. Anyone who had money would buy a foreign car over a Chinese car.
大约十年前，人们普遍认为美国（或外国）汽车更有声望、质量更好。任何有钱的人都会选择购买外国汽车而不是中国汽车。
I think as the Chinese car market has matured, particularly with e-cars, this is changing. Chinese cars are no longer poor quality & people are even getting excited about Chinese cars (the xiaomi SU7 and the new SUV come to mind).
我认为随着中国汽车市场的成熟，特别是随着电动汽车的发展，这种情况正在改变。中国汽车不再质量差了，人们甚至开始对中国汽车感到兴奋（小米 SU7 和新款 SUV 就是例子）。

Old_Hero_in_NanJing·3d ago
Not poo quality, but really expensive.
不是质量差，而是真的贵。
For example, a Camry in China only costs about 10k usd. The insurance and other fees are also much higher.
例如，在中国，一辆凯美瑞只要大约 1 万美元。保险和其他费用也高得多。

cyberthinking·3d ago
Tesla sells 60,000 units per month in China, good quality. The sales of other American brands of cars in China are shrinking. Traditionally, American cars are considered stronger than Japanese cars, but the fuel consumption is high.
特斯拉在中国每月销售 6 万辆，质量很好。其他美国品牌汽车在中国的销量正在萎缩。传统上，美国汽车被认为比日本汽车更强大，但油耗很高。
If I have a choice, I will try not to take Boeing planes. The technology of American fighter jets is still very good.
如果我有选择，我会尽量不乘坐波音飞机。美国战斗机的技术仍然非常好。

Fc1145141919810·3d ago
China was already looking to reduce reliance on the US and boost trade with Europe by buying more Airbus planes. Now Boeing’s incompetence just handed China the perfect excuse on a silver platter
中国本就在寻求减少对美国的依赖，通过购买更多空客飞机来加强与欧洲的贸易。如今波音的无能正好给了中国一个完美的借口。

Papapa_555·3d ago
there's a lot of BS against Boeing, as if Airbus is much better. They have just been better are not getting bad press when they have accidents.
针对波音的批评很多，好像空客就特别好。它们只是表现一直不错，在发生事故时没有受到负面报道。
But in terms of automobiles? I wouldn't be caught dead driving an american car.
但在汽车方面？我绝不会开美国车。

moxiaoran2012·3d ago
American don’t make that much physicals good anymore, most of their sp500 asset are intangible now compare to 50 years ago. These days American most known for their software and social media giants
美国人现在不再生产那么多优质实体产品了，与 50 年前相比，他们的大多数标普 500 资产都是无形的。如今，美国人最出名的就是他们的软件和社交媒体巨头。

UrRightMyDude·2d ago
The US still has a huge manufacturing industry. It’s the second largest manufacturer on the planet. Many consumer goods were outsourced a long time ago but higher end manufacturing is still dominated by the USA.
美国仍然拥有庞大的制造业。它是全球第二大制造商。许多消费品早已外包，但高端制造业仍由美国主导。

AsterKando·3d ago
Cars, unquestionably. They’re perceived as generally bad quality because it generally holds true. I can’t think of any products I have IRL that are made in the US, but the few that I think of are grossly overpriced. 
毫无疑问是汽车。它们被认为质量普遍较差，因为确实如此。我无法想到我现实生活中有任何美国制造的产品，但我想起的那几个都价格严重虚高。
Booing seems to suffer from the typical American corruption that seeps into monopolies. 
嘘声似乎遭受了典型的美国式腐败，这种腐败渗透到了垄断企业中。

ExcellentRest5919·
3d agoSome think there's worthwhile while others don't.
有些人认为有值得之处，而有些人则不这么认为。
However, it's too early to blame who as the route cause has not been established. While the plane is a Boeing it doesn't maintain or pilot the plane itself.
然而，现在还为时过早来指责谁，因为根本原因尚未确定。虽然飞机是波音制造的，但它自己并不进行维护或驾驶飞机。

Major_Shlongage·3d ago
I think you're being intentionally misleading here.
我认为你在这里故意误导。
You're associating this plane crash with poor quality of the plane. There is absolutely no evidence that this is the case.
你认为这起空难与飞机质量差有关。但完全没有证据表明这是事实。
Also, from watching the video of the crash it appeared that the flaps were't even extended on the plane during takeoff. If I had to guess, my first guess was that he thought the flaps are extended, took off with a normal flight profile and stalled the wing, losing lift. You can see that the plane was level and controllable.
此外，从观看的坠机视频来看，飞机起飞时似乎机翼襟翼都没有展开。如果我要猜测，我的第一个猜测是，他以为机翼襟翼已经展开，正常起飞后机翼失速，失去升力。你可以看到飞机是平稳且可控的。

Awkward_Willingness2·2d ago
Yes, US manufacturers spend all the money on military. That’s where you find the best engineers. The stuff that doesn’t kill people all very poorly made
是的，美国制造商把所有钱都花在军事上了。在那里你能找到最好的工程师。那些不会杀死人的东西都做得非常差劲。

UrRightMyDude·2d ago
The US is the 2nd largest manufacturer on Earth and the bulk of that is high end products and machinery. You can find it all over the world as well.
美国是地球上第二大的制造商，其中大部分是高端产品和机械。你可以在世界各地找到它们。

random_walker_1·2d ago
For cars, the general consensus on quality was Japan > Europe >= U.S. >> domestic. At least when I was growing up.
对于汽车，关于质量的普遍共识是日本 > 欧洲 >= 美国 >> 国内。至少在我小时候是这样。

Which-Technology8235·2d ago
Stuff in US is built for profit not longevity. It’s about how much you can squeeze from the consumers and reduce your manufacturing cost
美国的产品是为了利润而非持久性而制造的。关键在于你能从消费者身上榨取多少，以及如何降低制造成本。

No_Equal_9074·2d ago
American cars are junk, but Chinese still use alot of American plane parts like engines. Most foreign cars you see in China will be Japanese or German anyways. China still has a fleet of older Boeing jets that work just fine, but will probably be slowly phased out with domestic planes or Airbus given the direction Boeing's going.
美国汽车是垃圾，但中国人仍然大量使用美国飞机的零部件，比如发动机。你在中国看到的绝大多数外国汽车都是日本或德国的。中国仍然拥有一批性能良好的老式波音飞机，但鉴于波音的发展方向，这些飞机可能会逐渐被国产飞机或空客飞机取代。

Busy-Ad2193·1d ago
We look up to America brands for some reason, maybe not in terms of quality I would say, but they are seen as desirable nevertheless, people want to be seen with an iPhone or Tesla.
我们不知为何会仰慕美国品牌，也许不在于质量，但它们仍然被视为理想之选，人们想要被看到使用 iPhone 或特斯拉。