Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

andres3

oldfarmer50 said:

driver100 said:

I just got an email from our Passat dealer in Tampa, $2000 off on any car....and we don't even need a trade in.

Tempting......I don't think so.

Just got another mailer from some dealer wanting to give me $3100 for my wife's PT Cruiser. It just turned 30k miles so I don't think so.

Didn't think there would be any car worth less than a VW right now.

Saw data that said diesel VW's dropped about 8% in value if affected by the scandal. I really don't see them dropping much unless the government tries to retroactively ban cars that passed their tests. They'd get a face-full of lawsuits if they tried that though.

andres3

driver100 said:

imidazol97 said:

driver100 said:

stever said:

No floating sideways in a Class III rapid in an open canoe sculling one-handed while fighting a grayling on light tackle?

We are just talking mainstream sports....none of that weird stuff!

I knew there was a play on words in there. Canoeing is about as stream-oriented as one can get.

With my golf experiences, the fairway turned into a farway because I couldn't consistently hit any distance.
Golfing has dropped in favor here as the older guys drop the game. Many courses have closed. Looked to me that the ones left are having trouble because the economy is not good. My barber(s) have had several sets of used golf clubs sitting in their shop for older customers trying to sell them. Younger set is not interested in golf.

Golf is going through a rough time. Too expensive for a lot of people, and just takes too much time. Young people don't have the money or the time.

They are trying to revive the game though. Making huge 12 inch holes to speed up the game. There is frisbee golf. 12 hole course instead of 18. Ah, young people just want to play on their computers.

The fastest growing game in the USA is pickleball. Kind of like tennis on a smaller court, use paddles, and the ball is plastic. Seniors are taking it up, not too much running, but can be very active....and it requires some good skills.

pickleball sounds like Ping Pong on a life-size table.

imidazol97

driver100 said:

But new technology can cause problems. Honda Motor Co. took a risk and put two new transmissions — an eight-speed dual-clutch and a nine-speed — in its 2015 Acura TLX sedan. Consumer Reports said they had multiple problems, and the Acura brand slipped seven spots to 18th in this year's survey.

Honda having transmission problems? Say it's not true. LOL.

imidazol97

driver100 said:

Tesla wasn't ranked because it only has one product, the Model S sedan. But Fisher said responses from 1,400 Tesla owners indicated that Tesla has below-average reliability. Owners reported sunroof leaks and problems with the electric motor and the dashboard screen, among other issues.

CR earlier had said Tesla was wonderful. The reason is they liked Tesla so they decided they had to be reliable and perfect because they like the idea of "green" with pollution being somewhere else to make the electricity rather than at the point of use. Sort of like how CR did with toyota many years back--they predicted new model's worthiness based on past experience, and then got burned. Was it the Avalon version of the toyota they had to do a retraction for a few months later?

isellhondas

PF_Flyer said:

Nope, it's 12... and the Trico "Exact Fit" is an 11... you can see it if you look carefully

Did you try the dealer? Aftermarket wiper blades never seem to work as well as the OEM ones.

ab348

andres3 said:

Did the world change between 2015 and 2016? CR is the only honest publication with integrity out there. I trust them down to the core. Their data always seems to reflect real-world experiences and word of mouth. There is no hogwash in their numbers. Anyone who doubts manufacturer's don't use "ringers" with other publications that don't randomly purchase their tested vehicles is extremely naive. Sure, only VW would dare to "cheat" on anything; really believable.

I don't know what you are going on about. My comment was that they would not have many/any 2016 models in their sample. That's it. Someone else says they are predicting reliability for 2016 based on earlier models. Fine, but if major components change they really cannot do that with much accuracy. The 8-speed transmission is not the same one purchased by FCA and Acura among others, it is GM's own THM8L-45 unit, so you cannot make any extrapolations there. Same with CUE if it is new as it seems to be. So yeah, the world did change in that respect.

dino001

And we are back into Consumer Report discussion. No surprise, where the lines are drawn. Bias! Shout some. Confirmation of real life! shout others. As always, the truth is a bit more complex.

My opinion on CR reliability, they are probably best source for long and short term reliability data wherever sample size is decent, i.e. on either overall brand or large-volume models. They may be less so on smaller models or less popular trims (like top engines). Often they would say so in their tabulation "not enough data" - I'd also add there may be plenty of marginal calls, where sample size was just big enough, but not that great. They also explain their reliability ratings, but who would really read those introductions. However, if you do, you find out that all cars, all brands are more reliable and durable as a whole vs. say 30 years ago. However, they give them relative rating vs. the average. Sometimes "well below average" can mean "much better than before, just not as good as others". In some cases they would do system-by-system rating, where they'd assign percentiles to each of those circles. Finally - they did make a note that the most modern systems, i.e. fuel efficient transmissions, etc. are now focus of their scrutiny. In other words, those things that pushed us over 30 mpg are also things that seem to be breaking down more frequently and are expensive to fix - this is the price we pay for politicians mandating better efficiency because "it's going to be only a little more expensive" (don't we always hear this "only a little more expensive" hogwash?). Obviously, the manufacturers know they can't jack up their prices too much, so they'll get it back in other ways (cost cutting in components, less testing, etc.) and we will pay them later either by ditching a perfectly good car before the warranty expires, or by paying out of warranty costs.

CR is (IMHO) a great source of information for people who don't particularly care about cars and don't really care how the car drives, but rather whether it is designed to satisfy transportation needs. In other words, if cupholders are right size and good grip, trunk lid doesn't crush groceries, or if seats have enough room. I'm not disparaging those issues, they are important to many people. They will also rate things handling in emergency, but the weight is given much more into utilitarian aspects of the vehicle - which is fine, if that's what you want.

I have no confidence in JD Power, I think their studies are garbage. I'm not saying it because I think they lie (I have no evidence of that), but I question the way they construct those ratings, like calling an inconvenient (in eyes of the user) cupholder a "quality problem" and giving it same kind of weight, as say engine gasket blown after a month. Also, calling 3 years "long term reliability", etc. Their website is very deceiving, where it allows you to choose a particular trim of a model (say six cylinder engine), but the ratings you get are not for that particular trim, but for the average of all vehicles in that model. I saw that evident, when they rated acceleration "below average" on a trim that was fastest in its class at the time (the low engine trim was certainly slow). Essentially, it gave one impression of a much higher "resolution" of the study than it really was. That's not an honest assessment. Say "no data", don't pretend you know something you don't.

andres3

murphydog said:

Cadillac

GG - I wish you the best of luck. I had a co-worker lemon law her Cadillac. Much more open and shut that yours, she had a first year SRX with all kinds of issues. Motor finally spilled its guts on the interstate while climbing a mountain pass. She got a 2 year newer model and while pleased with it still plans to sell it when the warranty is up.

I think different States have different strength lemon laws. I hear CA is strong for consumers here.

andres3

graphicguy said:

Sorry to keep all of you waiting. I was livid last week.

Update.....in fairness, the paperwork for licensing my car from the dealer was reported wrong. Dealer says it was a BMV mistake. BMV says it was a dealer mistake. At this point, I didn't care. They issued a new title with everything correct. I am listed as the sole owner. Somehow, I still feel something is amiss. But, it SEEMS everything with the title is taken care of.

As far as the buyback.....talked to a couple of lawyers (not my personal lawyer, who originally sent Cadillac a letter). These lawyers specialize in Lemon Law. None of them are local to me, though. The nearest one is a couple of hours away in Columbus, OH. He confirmed that in OHIO, the complaint must indeed go through BBB arbitration first, which is scheduled for this Thursday. I can't be there, and neither can my wife. So, I will participate in the hearing over the phone. He also said they'd want to drive the car, which they can't since I'm not going to be there. I guess if the case is deemed worthy of going forward, then they'll schedule time to drive the car.

During all of this, and while I was raising three kinds of holy hell with Cadillac over the dealers they choose to do business with, a customer service manager got involved and asked if they could offer me a 2016 CTS with a higher sticker price than my '14. I called the Lemon Law attorney back and told him of this offer. He said if the BBB arbitraitor does not authorize a buy back (difficult to do without driving the car to see the problems I have been having) and puts me off another couple of months, its tough to see if I would prevail or not. He said he normally negottiates a new car...not a buy back.

That said, Cadillac seems like they don't want to go to arbitration, even if they rarely lose.

Cadillac sent me the differences between the '14 CTS and the '16. I guess they totally redid CUE, put in an 8 speed trans vs the '14s 6 speed. Just about everything is standard with the exception of the upgrade engine (twin turbo V6 vs the turbo 4 and "regular" V6). Nav is now standard, which seems silly given they are now using Apple Car Play and Google Android interfaces. I guess lane keep, lane change, front and rear snesors for parking, etc are now standard, too.

I don't know if they've worn my down or not. I'm wondering if I should just follow someone else's advice here, take the '16, sell it when I get it (and take the "depreciation hit") and move on down the road.

The depreciation hit on a '16 with under 100 miles might not be all that bad. I bet there would be dealers and Carmax's that would offer top dollar for something like that.

dino001

ab348 said:

andres3 said:

Did the world change between 2015 and 2016? CR is the only honest publication with integrity out there. I trust them down to the core. Their data always seems to reflect real-world experiences and word of mouth. There is no hogwash in their numbers. Anyone who doubts manufacturer's don't use "ringers" with other publications that don't randomly purchase their tested vehicles is extremely naive. Sure, only VW would dare to "cheat" on anything; really believable.

I don't know what you are going on about. My comment was that they would not have many/any 2016 models in their sample. That's it. Someone else says they are predicting reliability for 2016 based on earlier models. Fine, but if major components change they really cannot do that with much accuracy. The 8-speed transmission is not the same one purchased by FCA and Acura among others, it is GM's own THM8L-45 unit, so you cannot make any extrapolations there. Same with CUE if it is new as it seems to be. So yeah, the world did change in that respect.

Actually, what they do, they publish their guide model by model. When it's a carryover, they'd say so. If it's new, they would say so. The reliability prediction is based on previous record of the model, brand and actual data edition, whatever is available. If the model is a carryover with good/bad reliability, they'd mark it accordingly. If it is a brand new model with a consistent multiyear record of good reliability, they'd mark its predicted reliability accordingly. However, if the record is spotty, they would mark it as "new" (no prediction). They would not recommend a new model with no reliability prediction (spotty previous years). They would recommend an existing or new model with good ratings and at least average reliability of previous years.

When Toyota and Lexus had some issues a few years back to the point they were no longer consistently good across the models, they took away "benefit of the doubt" prediction on new models and Toyota/Lexus had to build it back. I think they did by now.

dino001

graphicguy said:

I don't know if they've worn my down or not. I'm wondering if I should just follow someone else's advice here, take the '16, sell it when I get it (and take the "depreciation hit") and move on down the road.

That's what I would do - the simplest way to cut ties. Take your lumps and move on, man. It's not worth your health and time.

andres3

driver100 said:

thebean said:

stickguy said:

Yeah, at some point, digging in on principle just hurts you. If they will do that, take it and run. Then decide if you want to immediately flip (I assume yes!).

If nothing else, at least you will have a car to use.

+1. It may take another year to get them to do a buyback.  Mental health is worth the difference of $, IMHO.

GG, this is a really good point.

Also, a 2016 is worth an extra $12 to $14K at least. I would drive it for awhile and see if you like it, it may be fine and you may love it as ab does his Caddie. If you don't like it you could trade and you would be pretty close in $s.

Good point was that it would have zero miles on it....not be a demo or something. And, most important:
THE WARRANTY BEGINS WHEN YOU PICK UP THE CAR. I have seen cases where this was part of your original warranty, so they consider this the fix, and you just have the remaining time on the original.

Then carve into the instrument panel on the one you have that it "is a Lemon", so no one else will get stuck with it......but, someone will, and that will be the last Cadillac the will buy.



All good advice, as you might be able to make up your purchase price now.

However, I'd advocate against keeping the new '16 for any amount of time. I'd imagine the depreciation really hits once you cross 100 miles as opposed to reselling an essentially brand new car. Add to that the fact you know the Cadillac dealers may or or more than likely may not honor the warranty terms, the loaner car terms, or any other part of your contract based on how they feel that particular day, you are better off getting rid of the car ASAP. The last repair on my Neon was completed the day before it was disposed of in a quick sale, and yes, I was worried it might break down just taking it to where it needed to be sold (one trip and one day is too long in my opinion). Drive it STRAIGHT to where you will sell it. Advertise the sale if you are doing private party sale starting right now if you intend to do the deal with Caddy. Why run into a situation again where you need warranty service and are stuck with the rental car bill yet again?

Run, don't walk.

andres3

driver100 said:

thebean said:

stickguy said:

Yeah, at some point, digging in on principle just hurts you. If they will do that, take it and run. Then decide if you want to immediately flip (I assume yes!).

If nothing else, at least you will have a car to use.

+1. It may take another year to get them to do a buyback.  Mental health is worth the difference of $, IMHO.

GG, this is a really good point.

Also, a 2016 is worth an extra $12 to $14K at least. I would drive it for awhile and see if you like it, it may be fine and you may love it as ab does his Caddie. If you don't like it you could trade and you would be pretty close in $s.

Good point was that it would have zero miles on it....not be a demo or something. And, most important:
THE WARRANTY BEGINS WHEN YOU PICK UP THE CAR. I have seen cases where this was part of your original warranty, so they consider this the fix, and you just have the remaining time on the original.

Then carve into the instrument panel on the one you have that it "is a Lemon", so no one else will get stuck with it......but, someone will, and that will be the last Cadillac the will buy.



All good advice, as you might be able to make up your purchase price now.

However, I'd advocate against keeping the new '16 for any amount of time. I'd imagine the depreciation really hits once you cross 100 miles as opposed to reselling an essentially brand new car. Add to that the fact you know the Cadillac dealers may or or more than likely may not honor the warranty terms, the loaner car terms, or any other part of your contract based on how they feel that particular day, you are better off getting rid of the car ASAP. The last repair on my Neon was completed the day before it was disposed of in a quick sale, and yes, I was worried it might break down just taking it to where it needed to be sold (one trip and one day is too long in my opinion). Drive it STRAIGHT to where you will sell it. Advertise the sale if you are doing private party sale starting right now if you intend to do the deal with Caddy. Why run into a situation again where you need warranty service and are stuck with the rental car bill yet again?

Run, don't walk.

PF_Flyer

isellhondas said:

PF_Flyer said:

Nope, it's 12... and the Trico "Exact Fit" is an 11... you can see it if you look carefully

Did you try the dealer? Aftermarket wiper blades never seem to work as well as the OEM ones.

OEM replacements would run over $70 for the driver and passenger blades.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

suydam said:

It's called climate change and results on more extreme weather. And it's not a myth. 

The climate has been changing for 6 billion years and many time very rapidly. So why is it suddenly mans fault?

Also extreme weather is nothing new. 

The rate of record breaking temperatures day by day is alarming in recent years.

andres3

tommister2 said:

GG should publish the VINs here (or somewhere online) so that if people search for them they can at least be warned. It doesn't seem right to have cars like that pawned off on some other unsuspecting citizen.

Agreed 100%, but then again if you are in the market for a used GM; buyer beware.

Mr_Shiftright

If you have any money to invest long term, put it in any sound technology that is going to deal with the effects of Global Warming in the near future.

Michaell

PF_Flyer said:

isellhondas said:

PF_Flyer said:

Nope, it's 12... and the Trico "Exact Fit" is an 11... you can see it if you look carefully

Did you try the dealer? Aftermarket wiper blades never seem to work as well as the OEM ones.

OEM replacements would run over $70 for the driver and passenger blades.

I just replaced all the wipers on my Elantra GT - got the front wipers at a local NAPA store, but had to go to the dealer for the rear hatch wiper. $40 or so for the pair up front; $13.50 for the rear blade.

cdnpinhead

CR data is based on a self-selected cohort comprised (in my opinion) of people who: 1) have nothing better to do than fill out a multi-page document, 2) are really upset with their vehicle, 3) have an axe to grind (hybrids/EVs, anyone?), or 4) are so completely pleased with their vehicle that they want the world to know.

There's probably significant overlap (Boolean stuff), but without a blind selection and response system, the data are highly suspect.

It's also significant to note that the people who subscribe to CR's magazine (in particular) or who worship at the website don't necessarily represent the rest of the country especially well. Can you spell dinasour? I knew you could.

PF_Flyer

Got a 28" Trico beam blade (offset mount) for $17 and the 11" Trico Exact Fit was $8

dino001

cdnpinhead said:

CR data is based on a self-selected cohort comprised (in my opinion) of people who: 1) have nothing better to do than fill out a multi-page document, 2) are really upset with their vehicle, 3) have an axe to grind (hybrids/EVs, anyone?), or 4) are so completely pleased with their vehicle that they want the world to know.

There's probably significant overlap (Boolean stuff), but without a blind selection and response system, the data are highly suspect.

It's also significant to note that the people who subscribe to CR's magazine (in particular) or who worship at the website don't necessarily represent the rest of the country especially well. Can you spell dinasour? I knew you could.

The self-selection bias is a part of any survey, not just CR. Nobody can compel anybody to fill a form. I somehow find it hard to believe that if you own brand X AND subscribe to CR you'll have a negative bias, whereas if you own brand Y AND subcribe to CR, you'll respond with positive bias. Those self-selection aspects, both positive and negative, should wash for similarly performing models/brands. In other words, we should have statistically similar number of whiners and boosters owning Toyotas, BMW, Benz and Chevys, thus statistically significant differences between reliability of each brand should still transpire through that. Unless you truly believe that somehow Benz, VW and GM owners subscribing CR are somehow at war with their manufacturers for no reason, whereas Toyota's, Honda's, and Subaru's owners, subscribing CR are paid shills. If you believe that, I can't help you, only a good doctor might

dino001

BTW, it looks Ford is back into old ways. I guess Mullally's touch is already gone. Sad.

andres3

graphicguy said:

You guys all bring up good points. I don't know what happened to the first car. Not sure how this whole swap one car for another car works, either. I just spoke to Cadillac Customer Service again, too. I'm not certain they actually know how this is supposed to go, either. Neither does the dealer, although they said they've done them before but each case is different. Dealer said most likely, they'll give me what I paid for the car, including taxes and fees. And, they apply that amount to another CTS. But, I bought my CTS cheap. I don't think those kind of deals are happening, currently.

I told Cadillac that the deal, as I understood it originally, was for them to give me a like for like car (same model, options, etc) and I give them mine...easy-peasy!

We'll see.

Sounds like they are doing the home mortgage SOP method on you. Everytime I've applied for a home loan mortgage, and granted it's only 3 times so far, I've been bamboozled into paying a few hundred to many hundreds more for my supposed "rate" than what was originally promised or quoted or estimated. It's like a magical bunny always makes the rate hike go in only one direction as soon as you ask for a rate lock.

I'm currently dealing with a bank on my new home mortgage and what they promised became a $1,130 up-charge for the rate. Since their lender fee is $895 they said how about we just give you the $895 back and call it a day after I complained. I get the impression I'm just being squeezed for more money ($227 this time around) until I abandon ship and go with another bank late in the game (would have to close very fast). I think GM might be doing the same to you in trying to figure out how much they can squeeze out of you in this proposed "trade." I know of no other industry as criminal as the banks and mortgage loan industry. In other businesses, a quote is a quote. Seems to me all the regulations and truth in lending disclosures are worth less than an overpriced USPS 49 cent stamp.

andres3

cdnpinhead said:

CR data is based on a self-selected cohort comprised (in my opinion) of people who: 1) have nothing better to do than fill out a multi-page document, 2) are really upset with their vehicle, 3) have an axe to grind (hybrids/EVs, anyone?), or 4) are so completely pleased with their vehicle that they want the world to know.

There's probably significant overlap (Boolean stuff), but without a blind selection and response system, the data are highly suspect.

It's also significant to note that the people who subscribe to CR's magazine (in particular) or who worship at the website don't necessarily represent the rest of the country especially well. Can you spell dinasour? I knew you could.

I guess you would want to edit out #3 given the Tesla was just booted off the Recommended list despite being a great vehicle when it works, the problem is it rarely works

andres3

dino001 said:

cdnpinhead said:

CR data is based on a self-selected cohort comprised (in my opinion) of people who: 1) have nothing better to do than fill out a multi-page document, 2) are really upset with their vehicle, 3) have an axe to grind (hybrids/EVs, anyone?), or 4) are so completely pleased with their vehicle that they want the world to know.

There's probably significant overlap (Boolean stuff), but without a blind selection and response system, the data are highly suspect.

It's also significant to note that the people who subscribe to CR's magazine (in particular) or who worship at the website don't necessarily represent the rest of the country especially well. Can you spell dinasour? I knew you could.

The self-selection bias is a part of any survey, not just CR. Nobody can compel anybody to fill a form. I somehow find it hard to believe that if you own brand X AND subscribe to CR you'll have a negative bias, whereas if you own brand Y AND subcribe to CR, you'll respond with positive bias. Those self-selection aspects, both positive and negative, should wash for similarly performing models/brands. In other words, we should have statistically similar number of whiners and boosters owning Toyotas, BMW, Benz and Chevys, thus statistically significant differences between reliability of each brand should still transpire through that. Unless you truly believe that somehow Benz, VW and GM owners subscribing CR are somehow at war with their manufacturers for no reason, whereas Toyota's, Honda's, and Subaru's owners, subscribing CR are paid shills. If you believe that, I can't help you, only a good doctor might

Couldn't have said it better myself! Great job. The tin foil hat wearing CR conspiracy theorists always make excuses that just don't stand up to any reasonable inspection.

People that hate Chrysler and subscribe to CR (I did last year at least through a Christmas gift) don't still own Chrysler's and disparage them in the magazine. Why inflict the self-torture just to give bad reviews? We've moved onto Honda's and Audi's, and even though I failed to fill out my survey, it would have only confirmed Audi's successes.

By the way, word from mechanic is that not all 4 pads have sensors, and the one that grinded into the rotor metal on metal was one without a sensor. The one with the sensor was about to go off, but hadn't yet, and of course the pads wore unevenly due to not being designed for heavy track use.

andres3

henryn said:

nyccarguy said:

@henryn - have you read the edmunds road test about the F150 with the 5.0 V8? http://www.edmunds.com/ford/f-150/2015/road-test1.html

From some of your postings on CCBA & the Diesel thread, it seems like you are really happy with your truck. Did you even drive the V8 or just the 2.7?

I owned a 2013 F150 Supercrew with the 5.0L V8 for the last 2 years, so I am quite familiar with it. I have driven trucks with the 3.5L ecoboost on more than one occasion, so I’m familiar with that engine as well. This time around, I drove a 3.5L and a 2.7L back to back. The 2.7L felt faster, quicker, more responsive to my “butt-o-meter”.

From the article you linked to, testing the 5.0L :

The lighter weight also helps the F-150 accelerate to 60 mph in a respectable 6.9 seconds. The 2.7-liter and 3.5-liter EcoBoost engine SuperCrew models we tested were between a half and a full second quicker, respectively.

Both of the turbo charged V6 engines are quicker and get better gas mileage than the V8. And the 2.7L twin turbo “feels” even faster / quicker than the larger, more powerful 3.5L. What’s not to like?

On the downside, I have stated before that the longevity of this brand new twin turbo engine is somewhat of a question in my mind. If I were to keep the truck past the basic warranty (unlikely, as a card carrying member of CCBA), then I will buy an extended factory warranty.

How often do you have to punch your CCBA membership card to remain a basic member?

isellhondas

PF_Flyer said:

isellhondas said:

PF_Flyer said:

Nope, it's 12... and the Trico "Exact Fit" is an 11... you can see it if you look carefully

Did you try the dealer? Aftermarket wiper blades never seem to work as well as the OEM ones.

OEM replacements would run over $70 for the driver and passenger blades.

Can't you just buy the rubber inserts? On our Hondas I can but on our Avalon, I had to buy the entire blade with inserts. 45.00 for the pair.

The aftermarket ones never seen to fit just right and performance is reduced, at least for me.

houdini1

andres3 said:

snakeweasel said:

suydam said:

It's called climate change and results on more extreme weather. And it's not a myth. 

The climate has been changing for 6 billion years and many time very rapidly. So why is it suddenly mans fault?

Also extreme weather is nothing new. 

The rate of record breaking temperatures day by day is alarming in recent years.


Not really, they just "adjusted" the past numbers to make the current numbers look higher.

dino001

Bottom line, CR confirms what I always knew - there is a price downsizing. Nothing comes free. You can't have low displacement, low price, high power, high mileage, AND high reliability. When you stress things closer to their end points (higher pressures in turbocharged, direct injected engines), you will suffer somewhere. Add complexity of the design and it not only breaks more often, it is also more expensive to fix.

I think cars are much better and much more reliable than they were in 70s and 80s. However, I'm not so sure if they are more reliable than those made in '90s and early '00s.

We still have it OK. Europeans got really screwed by their representatives. Between those diesel mandates, insane 1.2, 1.4 tripple turbos with 150 horsepower, they are in world of hurt when it comes to reliability.

houdini1

Mr_Shiftright said:

If you have any money to invest long term, put it in any sound technology that is going to deal with the effects of Global Warming in the near future.

I think I would rather invest in frozen spinach on a stick than anything like that.

dino001

Mr_Shiftright said:

If you have any money to invest long term, put it in any sound technology that is going to deal with the effects of Global Warming in the near future.

Like mercury-filled bulbs, NOx spewing VW-branded diesel, lithium batteries and all other good toxic stuff that will make us feel good, but do more harm than good? Newsflash - there is no clean coal, there is no free energy, there is no "sound global warming technology".

I think it would be much more sound to invest in a technology that lets us deal with the aftermath of such climate change. Human-induced, or not, global warming can't be stopped, assuming even it's real and will persist in the future (btw, one supervolcano can stop all warming worries). It can be dealt with by changing policies (economic, migration, etc.) to allow movements from supposedly threatened places to those that may open for agriculture and trade (parts of Canada, Siberia, Northern Passage, etc.). If we spent half of time and money away from scaring people about thing that can't be stopped into something that will let us adapt, we would be much better off.

roadburner

cdnpinhead said:

CR data is based on a self-selected cohort comprised (in my opinion) of people who: 1) have nothing better to do than fill out a multi-page document, 2) are really upset with their vehicle, 3) have an axe to grind (hybrids/EVs, anyone?), or 4) are so completely pleased with their vehicle that they want the world to know.

There's probably significant overlap (Boolean stuff), but without a blind selection and response system, the data are highly suspect.

It's also significant to note that the people who subscribe to CR's magazine (in particular) or who worship at the website don't necessarily represent the rest of the country especially well. Can you spell dinasour? I knew you could.

Precisely.

Mr_Shiftright

Don't say I didn't give you a good tip.

andres3

andres3 said:

driver100 said:

thebean said:

stickguy said:

Yeah, at some point, digging in on principle just hurts you. If they will do that, take it and run. Then decide if you want to immediately flip (I assume yes!).

If nothing else, at least you will have a car to use.

+1. It may take another year to get them to do a buyback.  Mental health is worth the difference of $, IMHO.

GG, this is a really good point.

Also, a 2016 is worth an extra $12 to $14K at least. I would drive it for awhile and see if you like it, it may be fine and you may love it as ab does his Caddie. If you don't like it you could trade and you would be pretty close in $s.

Good point was that it would have zero miles on it....not be a demo or something. And, most important:
THE WARRANTY BEGINS WHEN YOU PICK UP THE CAR. I have seen cases where this was part of your original warranty, so they consider this the fix, and you just have the remaining time on the original.

Then carve into the instrument panel on the one you have that it "is a Lemon", so no one else will get stuck with it......but, someone will, and that will be the last Cadillac the will buy.

All good advice, as you might be able to make up your purchase price now.

However, I'd advocate against keeping the new '16 for any amount of time. I'd imagine the depreciation really hits once you cross 100 miles as opposed to reselling an essentially brand new car. Add to that the fact you know the Cadillac dealers may or or more than likely may not honor the warranty terms, the loaner car terms, or any other part of your contract based on how they feel that particular day, you are better off getting rid of the car ASAP. The last repair on my Neon was completed the day before it was disposed of in a quick sale, and yes, I was worried it might break down just taking it to where it needed to be sold (one trip and one day is too long in my opinion). Drive it STRAIGHT to where you will sell it. Advertise the sale if you are doing private party sale starting right now if you intend to do the deal with Caddy. Why run into a situation again where you need warranty service and are stuck with the rental car bill yet again?

Run, don't walk.



Even better, and I just thought of this; send the best message to GM by having a tow truck pick up your new '16 CTS and have it delivered with no additional mileage put on it to your buyer at their location of choice.

andres3

imidazol97 said:

driver100 said:

Tesla wasn't ranked because it only has one product, the Model S sedan. But Fisher said responses from 1,400 Tesla owners indicated that Tesla has below-average reliability. Owners reported sunroof leaks and problems with the electric motor and the dashboard screen, among other issues.

CR earlier had said Tesla was wonderful. The reason is they liked Tesla so they decided they had to be reliable and perfect because they like the idea of "green" with pollution being somewhere else to make the electricity rather than at the point of use. Sort of like how CR did with toyota many years back--they predicted new model's worthiness based on past experience, and then got burned. Was it the Avalon version of the toyota they had to do a retraction for a few months later?

Tesla was average reliability before it went bad. That tells me that like Dodge, it isn't so terrible the first year or two, but age shows reliability's true colors; sometimes referred to as durability. You have to earn the right to be seen as unreliable by CR, and that is done by building unreliable vehicles. Tesla got a pass because they hadn't built any vehicles.

Sort of like when you open your first line of credit; no credit can be seen as good or bad credit depending on who you ask.

stickguy

since climate change came up, reminds me of an article I just read (in my college's magazine, it was a piece about one of the professors and work he was doing). Geologist, studying a lake in Peru (high elevation) that supposedly can give a record way back (20,000 years?) Anyway, they took deep core samples that show climate over the years, and there was one sample that changed radically right in the middle. Showed some sort of drastic, likely global, change. Maybe what killed the dinosaurs! or some such.

anyway, it was pretty interesting stuff to see.

imidazol97

What I'm reading so far is that CR is a good source of information because some people feel that CR's recommendations fit their anecdotal opinions of some cars and CR's recommendations fit what the people feel is the reliability history of some cars.

The same people feel that JD Powers is not good because they don't discriminate between types of problems. They also feel JD Powers reports information that is blurred in some cases, i.e., some vehicle variations such as engines are lumped in with other engines for the same model which have different characteristics.

The JD Powers information comes from random polling which gives it a lot of credibility. This contrasts with CR's data collection which is based on their subscriber list and sending them questionnaires. The subscribers may or may not decide to respond to the questionnaires giving a bias to the results subject to the various psychological quirks of those owners. Also, do the owners get verified as owners of the cars which they claim to own? Or could I report that I have all kinds of problems with my Honda Civic just because I didn't like a Civic?

Also with CR, there's problem with the randomness of their subscriber list. I believe others have asked if they give out the demographic information about their subscribers. I can make generalizations about their subscribes that would suggest that their responses would give biases. Some brands would not be favored while others would be favored because of past images of those brands/models.

So if the CUE in my Cadillac ATS works in most ways but doesn't work well with my cell phone or doesn't work well with certain aspects I want to use, is that a major flaw in the car or a minor one that JD Powers should leave out? If my Mustang kept flipping the AC belt off the pulley at odd times, is that a major flaw or a minor flaw? If someone had their transmission replaced by Ford twice on their Pinto while under warranty and they consider that a report of "no problems" because it was taken care of by the company, is that truly no problem even though they love their Pinto and reported it that way to protect the reputation of Pintos?

I have no doubt that most people here like getting historical data about the cars and reliability as well as suitability. It would nice to get a report that is truly a random selection of register owners of said vehicles and get responses without bias. What's needed is a blend of the two systems keeping the best features of both.

Even better would be timely summations of the warranty service that the companies had to do on their vehicles. Seeing that Nissan had to replace lots of alternators due to failures for 9 months of the year and then they fixed the weakness in new production and replacements could be good and could be bad in their reputation record.

JD Powers could rank problems by severity, but they would be making subjective decisions. CR could actually do a random survey of registered owners. I'm participating in a random survey of television viewers in a week or so and reporting my TV choices to a company that compiles the data. CR could afford to actually do a random survey and actually tell us how many are in their samples of 2014 Malibu's, e.g., with the 2.5 L and with the 2.0 L engine. CR doesn't give any indication if their sample size is 500 who reported back in their convenience survey non-random assessment or if they got 5 with the 2.0 L engine.

jwm40517

Hey driver

Went from Lexington KY to Toledo and back last weekend. Besides Cincinnati and Dayton there was some construction at Lima and the sign south of Toledo said 50 miles of construction ahead. A lot of it involved narrow two lanes with the portable concrete barriers on each side. Was kind of scary when a 18 wheeler was really close and you had no room to go anywhere. I do not see how they get that 50 miles done before cold weather shuts down asphalt plants. At two places in the 50 mile stretch the two lanes split into 2 single lanes with the wide median between them.

stickguy

speaking of construction, the Jersey turnpike just went through a major project. As long as I have driven it (30+ years) there was always a huge bottleneck going south at "the merge" (exit 8A) where the car and truck lanes came together (dropping from 6 to 5 to 3 in a short period). any even was bad, and some holidays could lead that to back up 5+ miles.

so, they came up with a plan a few years back to extend that down another 15ish miles (estimate!). Was a bit of a pain with the lane shifts, etc. while they replaced all the overpasses, etc. But, it got done last year.

Man, what a transformation. Now, there is no backups, and you breeze through. By the time it finally merges further south, traffic has dispersed enough that it does not seem to be a problem. Plus, they repaved the whole thing (the old parts desperately needed that) and took care of some other bad spots like off ramps.

nice to see a road project that actually made a big positive difference!

andres3

http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/7-cars-their-owners-cant-wait-to-get-rid-of.html/8/ GM has a lot of cars on the list. Not a list I'd want to be on.

stickguy

I like CR overall. Have always found the ratings to make sense. And at least anecdotal reports and personal experience has tended to agree with their reported trouble spots, so while it might not be perfect, it does IMO a pretty good job of pointing out areas to watch out for.

oldfarmer50

houdini1 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

If you have any money to invest long term, put it in any sound technology that is going to deal with the effects of Global Warming in the near future.

I think I would rather invest in frozen spinach on a stick than anything like that.

Somebody already thought of that.

driver100

andres3 said:

http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/7-cars-their-owners-cant-wait-to-get-rid-of.html/8/ GM has a lot of cars on the list. Not a list I'd want to be on.

An interesting list....and we did see it before a little while ago.

I would love to know why the owners wanted to trade in their cars after just one year. It would be great to have a survey...whether it was mechanical problems, warranty problems or just uncomfortable. The Cruze, bmw X1. Mercedes C Class are baffling....would really like to know why owners traded in after one year.

suydam

However according to the article you are talking amount a very small number. More than 90% kept their cars. So I'm not sure how meaningful it is.

driver100

stickguy said:

I like CR overall. Have always found the ratings to make sense. And at least anecdotal reports and personal experience has tended to agree with their reported trouble spots, so while it might not be perfect, it does IMO a pretty good job of pointing out areas to watch out for.

I tend to agree. CR can be useless for little factors that don;t really matter, such as not enough legroom in the rear....well, most people won't buy the car if they use the rear for carrying adults a lot. However, when I see trends, like Land Rovers and Fiats being very unreliable....that is information I can use. If Lexus and Toyota are high on the list that may be of use to me.

I don't think of it as the ultimate, but it is one tool in helping me to decide. If I narrowed my choice down to 2 cars, and CR had one in the top 5% for reliability, and one in the bottom 5%, I would go with the one that is more reliable.

driver100

jwm40517 said:

Hey driver

Went from Lexington KY to Toledo and back last weekend. Besides Cincinnati and Dayton there was some construction at Lima and the sign south of Toledo said 50 miles of construction ahead. A lot of it involved narrow two lanes with the portable concrete barriers on each side. Was kind of scary when a 18 wheeler was really close and you had no room to go anywhere. I do not see how they get that 50 miles done before cold weather shuts down asphalt plants. At two places in the 50 mile stretch the two lanes split into 2 single lanes with the wide median between them.

Thanks for the additional information....like CR everything helps. I hate those narrow lanes especially when they zig zag and especially when you have a transport truck right next to you. I will keep that in mind in that area.

driver100

suydam said:

However according to the article you are talking amount a very small number. More than 90% kept their cars. So I'm not sure how meaningful it is.

Yeh but, about 2% to 5% traded in after one year.....that sounds significant I think. Unless the people who buy those particular cars are very fussy. And, I imagine those numbers must be higher than average.

explorerx4

To me, CR is overrated, as are all auto reviewers.
Did any of them figure out that VW was cheating up their diesels?
GM cars had bad ignition switches?
Civics had leaky engine blocks?
Lexus produced bad V8 engines for over 4 years?
Why Ford Explorers rolled over?
Same answer: No, so they are marginally useful.
They have their own definition of 'reliability', which is different than the most common definition.

Michaell

stickguy said:

speaking of construction, the Jersey turnpike just went through a major project. As long as I have driven it (30+ years) there was always a huge bottleneck going south at "the merge" (exit 8A) where the car and truck lanes came together (dropping from 6 to 5 to 3 in a short period). any even was bad, and some holidays could lead that to back up 5+ miles.

so, they came up with a plan a few years back to extend that down another 15ish miles (estimate!). Was a bit of a pain with the lane shifts, etc. while they replaced all the overpasses, etc. But, it got done last year.

Man, what a transformation. Now, there is no backups, and you breeze through. By the time it finally merges further south, traffic has dispersed enough that it does not seem to be a problem. Plus, they repaved the whole thing (the old parts desperately needed that) and took care of some other bad spots like off ramps.

nice to see a road project that actually made a big positive difference!

While I live in the western US, I've had many occasions to drive the NJT when business took me to that part of the country. I do remember the merge, as it was right around the Newark airport. Glad to hear that it's been addressed.

Here in Colorado, the latest discussion has to do with I-70 going up to the ski resorts. At the moment, only 2 lanes in each direction for most of the drive to the major resorts. Lots of debate about toll lanes, railroad options, etc. - all of which would cost major $$$'s.

And in Denver, there is an elevated portion of I-70 that planners want to sink underground (sort of like the Big Dig in Boston). That project is moving forward, slowly.

driver100

explorerx4 said:

To me, CR is overrated, as are all auto reviewers.
Did any of them figure out that VW was cheating up their diesels?
GM cars had bad ignition switches?
Civics had leaky engine blocks?
Lexus produced bad V8 engines for over 4 years?
Why Ford Explorers rolled over?
Same answer: No, so they are marginally useful.
They have their own definition of 'reliability', which is different than the most common definition.

Good point of view but they probably can't find a problem that no one could detect. They don't examen the ignition switches to see if they are up to standard, they don't check emissions in every car, they don't always test for roll overs though some found those smaller GM SUVs (Tracker I think) could roll over.

They only report on what they find when testing, but, they don't tear the cars apart. I still think they do provide some useful information, but, it has to be weighed and analyzed by the user, just as all info must be analyzed.