I can't sleep, so:
If Toyota made hammers, they'd make bland hammers that got the job done well enough for a long time. They'd also produce hammers designed for rugged use that would quickly build a great reputation for being able to handle almost anything, anywhere in the world. Eventually, a carpenter who owned one of these hammers and sold it would see his hammer being used hammer nails by an extremist group, and would sue Toyota.
If Mazda made hammers, they'd care about the act of hammering and produce well crafted hammers that experts seemed to love but everybody else mostly ignored.
If Geeley made hammers, people would watch in horror as it crumpled in a test.
If Lancia made hammers, they'd have historically produced some of the most hardcore hammers during certain periods of time, but faded into relative obscurity in later years.
If Citroen made hammers, they would innovate many improvements and advances into hammer technology. They would build great hammers, but fail to do well in the USA because they were considered a bit weird and ugly.
If Stihl built hammers, they would build three grades of hammers: Home, Pro and Unstoppable. If you could find one, buying a used Pro or Unstoppable would be a better idea than buying a new Home.
If Absolut built hammers, they would be horribly overpriced for what you got, but still manage to do well through the power of brilliant marketing.
If Budweiser built hammers, they'd be advertised as being All-American despite being owned by a foreign company. They'd even go so far as to call their hammers "Americans" instead of hammers.
If cats made hammers, they'd loudly pound nails up and down the hall at 1 in the morning for no damned reason at all.