Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

How about those pickup crash test results???????

1235

Comments

  • picturethispicturethis Member Posts: 16
    I'm a Radiologic Technologist (that's the "X-ray guy" to you) and I work in an ER on 3rd shift.
    I X-ray alot of folks who have been in wrecks and I have learned that the make and model of the vehicle have almost NO bearing on the amount of injury (except motorcycles--or as we call them "donor-cycles").
    It almost always comes down to SPEED and SEATBELTS. About every MVA (motor vehicle accident) fatality I have seen has been due to not wearing seatbelts and/or traveling at a high speed (over 55mph). I have never seen or even heard of a case where anyone has said or believed "He would have survived if he had only been driving a Toyota".
    The SUV "high roll-over rate" is also a load of BS. The problem lies not with the SUV, but with the driver who still thinks his Suburban is a miata.
    If you really want the "safest" truck, buy one with a 5-point racing harness, a roll-cage, and a 45mph governor. And don't forget to wear a helmet and fire-suit too.
    But if you want to just walk away from a wreck: wear your seatbelt, drive at speeds appropriate for the situation, don't drink and drive, and keep a good distance from the car in front of you.

    And if you ride a motorcycle: at least wear a full-faced helmet, dental work is too expensive and painful.

    Sorry for the rant.
  • dweezildweezil Member Posts: 271
    with a lot of small minded hateful and nasty lemmings who hate pickup trucks that love to be manipulated because they won't think for themselves. Talk about "tripe": total emotional and irrational reactions backed up by no critical thinking or objective reasoning. Not even the slightest bit of skepticism. Exactly the type of audience Dateline aims for.
    I have been watching these shows since the first 60 Minutes in 1967, read "Unsafe At Any Speed" when I was 11,almost the same year it came out.I guess now I'll be accused of having written "The Turner Diaries" and because I recognize a formula that has been in place for over 30 years when it comes to TV journalism I'll be accused of having an electrical implant in my brain put there during my last alien abduction.
    The breathless sound bite is how TV gets you to tune into their shows. It's called competition.And far from being a tool to provoke discussion when 60 Minutes ran the murder tape of Dr. Kevorkian,as Dan Rather claimed,the piece was aired to get ratings, why else would they run it during sweeps week,hmmmm? Nothing wrong with that unless you're pretending to do something you're not.It's business.
    There's no conspiracy involved, just common sense [something lemmings and hysterics seem not to possess]and hyper emotional knee jerk reactions.
    Amazing that when you point out the statistical improbability of ever encountering a set of circumstances as are used by the Insurance Institute and pointing out the millions of factors involved in EVERY accident it's called a conspiracy.That's pretty laughable.But nothing posted to persuade or convince that these results should have any bearing on which vehicle purchase to make.
    Yes they're called accidents and you never know when they're going to happen.There are so many factors involved in collisions that simply because one truck did better in that particular test under those particular conditions in one Insurance Institute test, doesn't mean anything more than that.The II has not the capability money manpower or capacity to predict anything further than what the lab results are.
    There's always someone bigger more stupid less skilled faster and less prone to taking care of their vehicle out there.The capability to project anything beyond simple raw data as was presented by the II does not exist in that lab. But there are those among us who would have us all put on helmets just to cross the street because "something might happen".That is no way to live.
    Life is a series of trade offs. You make a decision and hope it's the correct one.Sad to see so many people allow themselves to be manipulated by yet another hit piece on the auto industry.I have seen so many of them they've become a cliche.An easy story that gets lots of attention.Impact on real life:none.Conspiracy: Where?
    I haven't defended or "dissed" any of the trucks on that piece.Buy what you like and don't let yourself be manipulated by yellow journalists and trade groups with an agenda.Investigate for yourself and go with what you think [operative word:think] will best suit your needs and enjoy it.I'm not the one that needs the aluminum foil hat OR the valium.Whatever happened to "Question Authority"?
  • dweezildweezil Member Posts: 271
    Let THAT be the final word.
  • redsilveradoredsilverado Member Posts: 1,000
    easy Dweezil, there are ladies present.
    -
    Taco- loyalty and patriotic had nothing to due with my purchase, nor price or safety. i don't believe any thing on the road is safe as long as people that drive on the road can't even agree which lane they belong in, sorta like people disagree here. no my purchase was based on my needs for what i use the cab for and the loads i need to haul. the refined Japaneese(who do make SOME excellent products) don't seem to care about what the american that uses his/her truck for, so they build this pathetic excuse of a truck called the Tundra. if i had bought the tundra, and try to take on the loads that i usually carry, i'd be doing it in an illegal and definately UNSAFE manner as opposed to using the truck i have now which allows me to perform my daily projects in the safe manner that the american sees fit to build my vehicle for. some think the tundra is capable of hauling loads safely(Bama does this) by inserting materials through the rear slider, and on through the cab. i'd hate to be a passenger in his tundra when he tries to stop all of a sudden, just think of how safe that is. so what have the Japaneese really done, oh wait, you can fix this truck after you hit a wall, but just don't use it for work, because it was meant to keep you safe, but that's it. but you must be right, because us dumb americans only buy chevy's, ford's or dodges because they are AMERICAN, nothing to do with what we need the truck to do. give me a break ace.
  • alahirialahiri Member Posts: 17
    Toyota and Honda make some reliable and safe vehicles. But that does not mean Japanese vehicles are always better than those made by Big-3. Consider the low speed 5-mph crash test for bumpers:
    Lexus GS 400's bumper crumbled, even the car suffered damages worth thousands of dollars. Chevy Impala's bumper only lost some paint! Volvo (I don't remember which Sedan) saw it's airbags inflated - scary thought for people who believe European cars are the most reliable.

    I bought a 1999 2DR 4WD LS Chevy Blazer. I test drove 4Runner also before buying Blazer. 4Runner's engine felt weak, ride quality was horse-like rough and bouncy. Also, 4Runner was more expensive. Even though 4Runner was ahead on safety, I decided in favor of Blazer. Pathfinder had the X-terra engine at that time and also felt weak. I haven't test driven after Nissan raised the engine power to 240 HP.

    Anyway this is what I got for $24,000 (this excludes tax-registration, financing costs, etc.):

    6 cyl 4.3 L Vortec Engine; Automatic 4-Speed Transmission; Shift-on-the-fly 4WD; Air Conditioning; Aluminum/Alloy Wheels; AM/FM Compact Disc Player; Anti-Lock Brakes; Automatic Dimming Mirror; Center Console; Cruise Control; Dual Air Bag Restraints; Heated Power Mirrors; Intermittent Wipers; Keyless Entry System; Leather Steering Wheel; Lighted Entry System; Luggage Rack; Power Brakes; Power Door Locks; Power Driver Seat; Lower Back Lumbar Support for Driver and Front-Passenger Seats; Power Steering; Power Windows; Privacy Glass; Rear Window Defroster; Rear Window Wiper; Remote Trunk Release; Tachometer; Tilt Steering Wheel; Velour/Cloth Seats; Overhead Console (with Outside Temperature and Direction Display); Swing Out Tire Carrier (with Full Size Spare)

    I have driven my Blazer about 34,000 miles in 26 months. It still feels like new. Why should I think that it is a "20 year old piece of junk"?

    Bye the way, I am not a US citizen and will leave the USA in 2-3 years. I didn't buy a GM due to patriotic reasons.
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    WHY DO I STILL GET NO ANSWER FROM TUNDRA OWNERS ABOUT THE INJURY PART OF THE TEST, THEY CLAIM ALL THIS ABOUT HOW CRAPPY AMERICAN TRUCKS ARE IN THIS TEST BUT THE SILVERADO HAD LESS INJURIES, ANSWER ME WHY YOU WON'T TALK ABOUT THIS?

    TACO- as far as loyalty and patriotism I find nothing wrong with making it part of your buying decision, I love my country and my fellow citizens (excluding bama, toddstock, dhanley) and I like to support US Jobs, GM is one of the largest single employers in the country, when I buy from them I'm supporting 100,000 jobs. Not too mention all the suppliers in the US, don't forget that GM US component % is a lot higher than the Tundra. As far as loyalty to the manufacture, GM has treated my family with the upmost loyalty and respect, and there is no reason to change our main "supplier" when they treat us well.
  • mbaudibest1mbaudibest1 Member Posts: 25
    the IIHS still rated your beloved chevy a marginal. they arent biased towards any makes or countries of origin. in recent tests, several GM cars have done well, given the Good rating - Seville, Lumina(though not made anymore). Toyota has also done well with the camry, LS430 and Sienna. Ford has also done well with the Taurus, LS and Windstar. the silverado may have had low injuries, but othe critical parts of the tests were not as good, including kinematics (meaning likely sever whiplash and neck strain and overall structural integrity. the floor under the driver seat buckled. it did better than the ford and dodge, but the experts believe the tundra's injuries were less significant. these experts are credible and i'm sure your vast knowledge of crash physics means you can interpret the results better, huh.

    btw have u ever heard of Comparative advantage? if you havent (very likely) this means that you should buy the best no matter where it comes from, irrespective of how many jobs in your country you are supporting by buying the inferior product. by not buying the best for your needs at the price you can afford, you are allowing a firm (GM in this case) to go on building inferior less competitive products. in the end, supporting a business out of patriotic loyalty hurts the firm. such is the case at GM. are there any mainstream GM products that have become wildly popular or considered benchmark cars in their category? the answer is no. GM does not know how to build a small car. they dont make competitive minivans. cadillacs are barely considered luxury cars except for 60+ year olds. a large chunk of their midsized car sales are to rental car companies, and most GM midsized cars are as bland as the Camry but not as reliable or well built. GM trucks are probably the best mainstream vehicles they build, however there is hardly any competition other than ford and dodge and now toyota. dont bash the new competition, competition benefits the consumer.
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    no mainstream products huh, the Silverado and Tahoe are going on an unbelievable sales tear while tundra sales are dropping off, after only a little over one year on the market its sales are down, once again toyota made an inferior product for the truck segment.Silverado is certainly the benchmark in the pickup truck segment. Saying they don't know how to make small cars is a joke, the fact is they don't care about small cars, and frankly most of their customer base doesn't either, In march Cavalier sales surpassed civic sales-the new civic is a sales flop. The only reason they sell small cars is the fact that 7/10 Cavalier owners buy GM again and usually move up to a more profitable cars. Why should they spend their resources on small cars that a small % of the public wants to drive when they can spend their money making awesome vehicles that people actually want to spend their time in such as the Silverado and Tahoe. GM latest crop of cars have been great sucess with customers, if you think the Impala or Grand Am/Grand Prix/Regal are as bland as the camry you haven't driven one. They were all having record sales last year until cars sales started to slump. If you seem to think that cars that are instant hits sell 300,000 a year then you have no idea of how the industry works, if you want to make that comparison I will mention that the GMC Yukon is outselling the Seqouia alone, not to mention if you included tahoe sales with that. I have been unable to find the highlander sales in may because toyota won't show them on the press releases, just like how they group tacoma and tundra sales togather so that its harder to find out how bad the tundra is really doing. If you look at the ten best selling cars in the US, 4 are General Motors models, more than anybody else, and Malibu and Impala sales had heathly growth last month, Malibu sales were up about 19%. While GM car sales are down overall the most important midsize market they are still doing fairly well.

    So does that mean if I don't agree with the new tax bill by GWB I should fight the government and move somewhere else, and since I move out the government is going to change the tax bill right? give me a break.
  • bamatundrabamatundra Member Posts: 1,583
    Chevy sales are DOWN 18% since last year. Toyota is having a record year. As usual, GM is losing more market share. They already closed down Oldsmobile, and Buick is next.

    They should be ready for a government bailout in a few years. I wonder if GWB will pony up the dollars?
  • redsilveradoredsilverado Member Posts: 1,000
    ROTFLMFAO
    get your story straight bama, olds is on for another year, and even so, who cares? oh yeah, you and your sedan buddies in here that know absolutely nothing about what they are spewing about and not the first clue about what a pickup truck is meant for. but then again, you don't use a truck and sure as heck don't work the little pissant you have now.
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    hey bama you are lieing once again, GM's market share is up ytd compared to last year. Also if you will notice GM didn't double the amount of vehicles it offered.
  • redsilveradoredsilverado Member Posts: 1,000
    this was about the pickups used in a crash test. now we have sedan owners telling us about what we don't give a rats [non-permissible content removed] about. you guys board over there or what. i'll say it again for those who cannot comprehend what we are talking about here. being patriotic is not the only reason someone buys an american truck. it has a lot to do with what the buyer needs and the fact that the american truck builders have or build the truck that someone who uses their truck for more than hauling groceries, needs. what part of this don't you sedan and minivan folks understand. just to see what some of you sedan guys talk about, i took a visit to your forum and had to laugh. won't mention any names but one of you were inquirying about a picture of a dash with and without a monitor. talk about anal. but since you took the time to tell truck owners what you think, please tell us what you would use a truck for and what kind you would buy and why?
  • redsilveradoredsilverado Member Posts: 1,000
    yep, your profile says it all. we have another tundra boy that feels the pain.
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    Speaking as someone who has railed against the US "truck culture" in the past, I've been trying to figure things out.
    So far, the big problem I see people have with trucks, is that for the purpose of personal transportation, they are inferior in way.
    However!
    It sounds like many truck owners in this country, especially in rural areas, actually NEED trucks, for either work, or the daily necessities of rural living (hay, horses, seed, fertilizer, etc..). Others require them for towing, offroading,etc. More power to them. These people are using the truck for what it was designed.
    The real problem comes with those urban and suburban dwellers I see who buy trucks for the SOLE purpose of looking cool while driving johnny to soccer practice, or guys who actually like that "marlboro man" image, who think driving a truck will fool people into assuming they are rugged and work hard in the outdoors for a living. It is THOSE people we despise. Those are the people who assume their workhorse truck is as safe, and rides as well as a car, who attempt to corner faster than they should, who have NO idea how to use 4wd, or low range. Those people endanger the lives of themselves, their families, and those around them on the road. Same applies for truck based SUV's. Car crash results are fairly meaningless, as trucks should not be used for safe family transportation, period. Thats what cars/minivans were invented for.
    For all those of real people, who use a truck for what its designed for..keep on truckin!
  • mbaudibest1mbaudibest1 Member Posts: 25
    7/10 of cavalier buyers end up buying another GM? isnt that low? ford, toyota and most other makes have higher loyalty rates. i believe toyota keeps close to 90% of their buyers. i dont believe the silverado is the benchmark, the F150 is, even though it's even lousier in the crash tests. it sells the most too. the GM small cars are indeed a joke, and u seem to realize this, too. the midsizers i feel are bland, especially the malibu, impala, and cetury/regal. edmunds ranks their interiors as close to deplorable, even the korean cars are built better when it comes to fit and finish. they sell well because of the deep discounts. you cannot get a discount on a honda accord. same for a honda odyssey. the GM trucks are definitely selling better than the brand new contender, but considering the fact they've existed in an uncrowded market place for so long, that's to be expected. consider that a few years ago, there were only 3 makers of full sized pickups. all three of them are going to rack up incredible sales numbers, since the market is so large and growing ( though i dont know why). lest we forget this is a discussion about crash test scores- you didnt refute any statements i said about the evaluation of the trucks, so i must surmise you are in agreement. of course, you were in the second best truck based on the scores- you're lucky.

    if another country has better taxing/ employment/ job/ overall better quality of life, you should move there. however, even with tax bills you do not like, you are still staying in the US. you have made a decision that you can live with it. this actually is an economic theory.
  • eric2001eric2001 Member Posts: 482
    Not to be rude, but you are insinuating that all truck drivers are idiots. I am sorry, but your post is way out of line. Many urban/suburban people also use trucks for work. You don't have to live in the rural areas to need one.

    And even if they don't use it for anything at all, but buy one, what gives you the right to bash them for that? This is the good old USA and we have rights to buy & drive whatever we choose. Do people bash you for driving an Audi? What about those that drive Mercedes or BMWs? Can you judge someone by the vehicle they drive?

    As for the unsafe driving habits, I agree that people shouldn't be driving trucks like a sports car, but I see more @$$holes behind the wheel in cars than I do in trucks, so lets not limit your perceptions to people who drive trucks.

    Also there are a lot of people out there who are lulled into a false sense of security driving 4WD in the winter and during foul weather, but I've noticed as of late just as many all wheel drive cars sliding off the roads in such conditions. The real problem lies with the driver, not the vehicle, so drop the prejudice.

    I apologize if I have offended you, didn't mean too, but I did take offense at your post (you might not have meant it that way - sorry again).
  • mbaudibest1mbaudibest1 Member Posts: 25
    do you know how hard it is to find what the dash of the LS430 without the nav looks like? i just wanted to know. perhaps there is nothing special about trucks and you've never wondered what a certain feature looks like. that isnt anal. BTW in a severe accident i bet you'll feel more pain than vaffanculo!!!!

    what would i do with a truck if i was unfortunate enough to buy one? i dont think i would use it other than to haul dirt and other things i would never put in the trunk of my car. that's a more rational reason than most of the people who do buy trucks.

    BTW if any of you like the blackwood you are definitely a poser. no 4WD, a trunk (they dont call it a bed) only a few cubic feet more than the towncar, lowered suspension height that makes sever hybrid stationwagons look like ATVs, and tacky fake wood on the sides and of course bad handling. $52,000 for this piece of rubbish, i hope everyone says NO THANKS to lincoln. they should immediately fire the people responsible for this "truck".
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    proteus456-what gives you the right to say people shouldn't drive trucks, when I daily commute in my truck I find it far superior to driving cars, and have found cars such as the audi far inferior fro daily commuting, they are low to the ground so semis easily spray crap on your window, your viewing position is poor with small mirrors making it worse, you have no push to your car (i.e. if someone doens't want to let you in their lane you have no intimidation factor), and personally I don't like the ride of a car , I like to sit high with an aggressive ride that jars you around (honest). PS I like the Marlboro Man Image very much. Though I use my truck every week for work and will even more as I move to a more rural setting I can completely see why someone who never uses it for work would want to, they are very attractive looking, long lasting, durable and yes they do exude a manly image. If thats what you are into then that great, drive a pickup and be happy, don't let some snooty import driver try to make you feel bad because you like the way a truck handels and rides and looks. Personally I think audi's and VW's are some of the ugliest vehicles on the road.

    mbaudibest1- that is just a lie. Last year-according to Polk research-GM had the HIGHEST customer loyalty at 64.8% with Ford Motor Company 2nd at 58.6.

    In individual modelsIn the midsize car category the Buick Century has the best at 31.8%, the LeSabre best in Full size at 41.1, in Luxury cars the Cadillac DeVille leads with 42.4%, the suburban was best in full-size SUV with 26.0% In fact the only japanese car maker to have a leading model was subaru with the forester in the small SUV category at 18.2% loyalty
    The two european models were prestige luxury car Mercedes-Benz S Class with 27.6% and
    Porsche Boxster in sports car with 20.5
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    Eric..did not mean to offend ANYONE who uses a truck for work. For a perfect example of who I was talking about, read "chevytruckfans" post#221.
    Chevytruckfan.
    You're the perfect example of whats wrong with truck "commuters". Taking your points.
    Low to the ground - Of course, for far superior handling, cornering and braking with little body roll.
    Viewing position - Never been a problem in a sedan. If an SUV or truck blocks my view, and it bothers me, I maneuver through traffic until I get around them.
    Mirrors. I see perfectly fine around me...its just a matter of adjusting your seat and mirrors correctly.
    Intimidation factor. This one has me laughing. I never let myself be intimidated by large SUV's or trucks, especially in a traffic situation. I simply don't let them in front if they are acting aggressivly. If they hit me, they can talk to the judge. As for merging, its simply a matter of using common sense. Never been a problem for me, but then, I learned to drive in NYC.
    "Aggressive ride" not sure what that means...you like that land barge, wallow in the corners, slightly offbalance feel?
    Attractive looking? In the eye of the beholder I guess..perhaps in podunk. with interiors theres even more of a difference. Most trucks have real cheap looking interiors, with loads of hard plastic, and fake trimwork.
    long lasting/durable. A good euro sedan will go 200k+...not sure of others.
    "Manly image".....uh...whatever....
    How anyone can consider a truck superior to a sedan for commuting boggles the imagination.
    To use an example, an Audi A4Q will outhandle, outaccelerate and outmaneuver any truck on the road. It will be far safer, and more luxurious than any truck while doing it, while getting far better gas milage. On a highway, I can travel quietly in complete comfort at speeds that would have a truck shakeing itself to pieces. In rain snow or ice, my AWD system, traction control and braking systems are superior to anything available on any domestic truck. So tell me in what way a truck is superior for commuting purposes?
    That being said, this is America, and we americans have the right to be as dumb as we want, buy whatever we want, vote for whoever we want...etc. The free market rules this country. Other countries learned long ago that commuting in a truck when gas is $4/gallon makes no sense..I guess we need to wait for gas prices to head up that way before people here will wise up.
  • spellboundspellbound Member Posts: 77
    I was always a GM loyalist and still wish they'd get their act back together. I went through my younger years with a number of GM cars, 3 GTO's and a Z28. In 1989 I factory ordered a new Chevy C1500 Silverado and drove it for the past 12 years.

    But I see GM screwing up big time over the past years. They make good trucks and have spent most of their development money on them as of late but sacrificing a lack of development on their cars. But I think we may see the SUV fad fading away and GM ill prepared for it and losing yet more market share.

    These are some of my opinions on GM vehicles.

    They make some good powertrains, some decent engines and excellent transmissions. The old 3800 V6, auto combo although perhaps not the most modern technology is a good reliable torqey combination well suited for everyday driving. The V8's, again older technology but powerful and reliable.

    GM can't make a good 4cyl engine.
    GM can't make a good small car.
    GM's interior materials look plasticy and sort of cheap.
    Although usually reliable GM vehicles often have quality control issues and get rattles and squeeks.
    I've seen GM produce a number of vehicles (especially a new 1st model year) with many problems that would seem to be poor engineering. (such as brake rotors warping easily) Although personally I believe GM to have good engineers, they are ruled by accountants and the problems could also be from cost cutting.

    They should fire their styling dept. Although I admire their taking risks (which is unusual for GM)with the Aztek they've followed it up with the Avalanche (which I think is butt ugly and will be a flop at it's price).

    Although they may continue to sell LeSabres etc. (especially in the midwest) to it's loyal buying segment it will slowly go away. They don't make a good small car. They don't make a good small or medium sized wagon. They unfortunately don't make many interesting cars at all. They haven't spent much development money on cars over the last few years and it shows. They are mostly older platforms, older technology and unrefined compared to their competition.

    What GM car would you buy for under 15k vs the competition?
    Under 20k? 25k? 30? Wagon?

    GM can't react to the market fast enough.Although I hate to say it I admire some of the things Ford has done, SVT, Lincoln LS, Focus etc. Same with Chrysler's styling dept.

    Although having been a GM loyalist, when I was just in the market for a car in the under 30k range, strongly preferring a wagon when I went to look around GM just didn't offer anything interesting. Their most likely candidate would be the Saturn LW300. Compared to everything I test drove and looked at I strongly preferred the VW Passat wagon and bought one.(I can't believe you think them ugly). It's my opinion that the Passat is simply superior to anything GM offers in it's price range.

    I'd really like to see GM get back on track but they urgently need some "car guys" in control.
  • redsilveradoredsilverado Member Posts: 1,000
    hey bro, you da man! what you said fits a lot of these sedan owners that are more worried about a TV monitor than what this whole topic is about. of course you know that the truth hurts and when you hit a nail in the head the way you did, you are sure to get a pop out of it. but i'm LMFAO, as your description fits alot of know it alls, that haven't any respect for someone who actually uses a truck for their livelihood. safe or not, no one has any business assuming their truck is safer than any other vehicle on the road because of a lab test. to do so shows nothing but ignorance.
  • 19491949 Member Posts: 59
    RedSilverado....since you chose to attack me in Post#198..how about your post #182:
    >care to elaborate on your portfolio? you claim >knowledge in the trades, so put your money where >your mouth is.
    What on earth does THIS have to do with crash testing? I used Coward McVeigh's name in jest, but I see I offended you, who must be a Liberal, an Aryan or a Militiaman. Hey my man..keep driving YOUR merchant of rolling death, the Chevy Silverado and send your portfolio profits to GM service department. Think about it...you could be driving a 4WD Tundra making money off of your stocks instead of rolling 'em over to your local Chevy Svc Dept.
    BTW, this thread actually died way back in the early 100's posting. Wish Coward McVeigh was already gone, too. One last word, since you've chosen to bash sedan fans, why don't you let everyone here know that instead of posting at Silverado Problems, you continue your yapping Chihuahua bantering and harrassing at the Toyota Tundra thread. THINK....SILVERADO....THINK...perhaps subconsciously, you lust for a Tundra since you wont't stick to Chevy threads.
  • redsilveradoredsilverado Member Posts: 1,000
    post#182 is by rat boy, so what are you talking about? never attacked you either, my post never used your user name. and it is my right to free speech that I made the post regarding your quote that has no place here. we all know what a terrible thing this individual is responsible for, and we don't need to be reminded, especially if someone here was affected by this guy. you on the other hand see fit to bring people down. must be the life of the party eh? this topic was dead way before it even got started as the usual bashing started way before 100 posts. reading has to do with comprehending. try it.
  • 19491949 Member Posts: 59
    Okay....Peace, Bro!!!
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    spellbound-GM is working on a sport wagon type thing, might have to continue to drive your truck for a few more years-the new car platforms come out in 2003/2004.

    proteus456: What you don't understand is that some people like harsh ride, truck handling, and spartan interiors. I don't like power windows or door locks, I like vinyl floor mats and bench seats, I don't care about handling in a truck, as far as safety well I figure if I hit a dumb car then I will be great if I hit a truck well won't be as good. What speeds are you commuting at, 100 I'm not quite shure if that is an arguing point because most of us can't afford a ticket for going 100. Outacclerate, in my experience from stoplights etc I go faster than most anybody else, I don't see people acclerating like a bat out of you know what when they are commuting, no need for it. Plus yes there is an image thing with trucks, I don't like the idea of having people think of me like I think of the euro sedan drivers. Gas Milege well honestly I don't care, Id rather pay high gas prices and drive something I like then drive a car. as far as $4 gas, that is very unlikely to happen, in Europe they let people that viewed 2$ a gallon tax as ok into office, here if you mention anything about higher gas taxes your out of office.
  • toddstocktoddstock Member Posts: 268
    GM is going downhill... These are facts my friends... GM could care less about their car part of their business... They care about their Satelite part of their business... That is where they are going to make all their money.... That is why you see GM losing ground in crashes and engineering quality... For those of you that know what I am talking about, you might want to go invest in GM's subsidiary company.. Won't tell you what it is, but will give you that much... You have to do the dd yourselves... It is Sunday, I'm off to church, and I can honestly say that I have helped my fellow friends on here... Do some dd and make some money.... See ya
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    Hmmm..you must be from a...how should I put this delicately..less developed state. I could never imagine anyone who LIKED a harsh ride, truck handling and spartan interiors, people usually settle for that out of necessity. Face it, you're in the minority, which is why car companies developed luxury SUV's. On the "image" thing? I could care less what people think about the badge on my vehicle. I wouldn't buy Audi, Mercedes or Lexus for their image, I prefer them for quality engineering, that can be felt, seen, and appreciated. US manufacturers used to be known for this too..perhaps someday they will again. I suspect Chrysler may make a comeback. I can just imagine a German engineer Durango....would ROCK.
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    as seen by the DC merger all german companies can do is screw up a company that was on the rise, nobody buys a german car without thinking status symbol. Personally I don't like german engineering, I don't like german designs. I know a lot of people that prefer a truck ride and handling, quite a few actually, for people that use trucks as trucks you get a liking for it and appreciate what a rough ride means-a heavy duty suspension.

    I'm was born and raised in California and now live in eastern washington. Mind you I'm from the good part of California-the Sacramento Valley which is about the most fertile land in the US, not too mention that fact the California is the #1 ag state.
  • bamatundrabamatundra Member Posts: 1,583
    " After losing nearly three percentage points of market share last year, U.S. car brands have lost another 1.3 points so far in 2001, continuing a trend that has persisted for a decade. Since 1993, the Big Three have forfeited market share worth $35 billion to their overseas competitors. "

    "Detroit is retreating on almost every front. Consumer Reports' 2001 list of the best vehicles in ten categories did not include one U.S. car or truck--not a single one! In California, domestic brands accounted for just 46.1% of sales in the first three months of 2001, vs. 43.4% for the Japanese and Koreans. Toyota, with 17.1% of car and truck sales on the West Coast, only narrowly trails Ford's 17.6% and GM's 17.9%, according to a California sales report by J.D. Power & Associates. "

    "Keeping up with Toyota, much less Honda, Hyundai, Mercedes, BMW, or VW, has long been a losing proposition for Detroit. In April the Big Three's U.S. market share fell to 64.2%, vs. 73.9% at the start of the current auto boom in 1993. Although most of the shrinkage has been at GM, whose share has dropped from 33.5% to 28%, Ford has also declined, from 25.6% to 21.9%. Chrysler is just half a point lower than in 1993 but two points below its 1998 peak."

    http://www.fortune.com/indexw.jhtml?channel=artcol.jhtml&doc_id=202790
  • bamatundrabamatundra Member Posts: 1,583
    "Detroit will likely take more casualties. Toyota, Nissan, and Honda, the largest Japanese automakers, are building truck plants in Indiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, respectively. Analyst Gary Lapidus of Goldman Sachs says the additional supply and stronger competition could cut the Big Three's truck profits by more than half by 2004. That would be a huge blow. Light trucks account for all the money Detroit makes in the car business, according to Lapidus, and help absorb some of the losses from passenger cars. "The profit margin on trucks is going," says Charles Fine, a member of MIT's International Motor Vehicle Program. "If that was Detroit's last refuge, I'm not sure what's left."

    "The real shock is why Detroit, having lost nearly half of the car business to foreign competitors--30% to Japan alone--wasn't better prepared to defend its light trucks. "This didn't happen overnight," says veteran industry consultant Jim Mateyka of A.T. Kearney. "It took the Japanese an awfully long time. Why haven't people noticed?"

    http://www.fortune.com/indexw.jhtml?channel=artcol.jhtml&doc_id=202790
  • bamatundrabamatundra Member Posts: 1,583
    "The Big Three's numbers would look even worse had they not relied on an assortment of BlueLight specials to hype results. GM, Ford, and Chrysler offer bigger rebates, cheaper financing, and more heavily subsidized leases than nearly all of their foreign competitors. In March, for example, they spent about $2,100 per vehicle on such incentives, vs. Toyota's $996, Volkswagen's $688, and Honda's $504. Furthermore, the U.S. companies sell up to 25% of their vehicles at wholesale prices to fleet buyers, and do a surprisingly large business with employees and retirees; 10% of the nearly five million cars and trucks GM sold last year went to friends and family at minimal markups.

    Investors have gotten the message about Detroit's decline and seem to have written off all three companies."

    http://www.fortune.com/indexw.jhtml?channel=artcol.jhtml&doc_id=202790
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    Boy thats a lot of reading will get back to you on it later, I have one question for you-why are you so proud of this?
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    well this story lost a lot of its edge when they start qouting consumer reports, come on.

    this article is about the japanese taking over the truck/suv market, it has been clearly shown this isn't the case whatsoever, Tahoe/Yukon growth is far outpacing Seqouia, Trailblazer in its first full month almost sold out the highlander whihc has been out 5 months, Tundra sales are down 3% or so on the year while Silverado sales are outpacing everyone. There talking about the big three not being able to defend against the japanese trucks, already proven they have no problem doing so. Then qouteing california sales to show how good toyota is doing, while not showing how in the rest of the US, especially in midwest/mountain/south regions the Big 3 outsell imports by amazing numbers, that clearly shows this article is biased.
    while it has some interesting numbers in it bama, this article is clearly biased.
  • spellboundspellbound Member Posts: 77
    Personally I think GM builds good trucks and if I was in the market for one I'd probably buy another Silverado. However they are facing more and more stiff competition on this front.

    The really bad news to me is that they are continueing to lose more and more of the car business. When the truck boom ends what kind of position will they be in? I believe the stats posted by bamatundra. In just about any given car market segment the big 3's products just don't compete well. A number of them have reputations of being problematic and they have to supply massive incentives to move them. This is reflected in their resale value.

    I believe the big 3 have some excellent engineers working for them and conceivably could produce great cars but they (especially GM) suffer from poor management that frequently know nothing about cars and are more concerned with the short term (their job, salery bonuses and next qtr's earnings) rather than a long term strategy of improving their company and vehicles. GM is bloated, too slow to move and make decisions and can't seem to anticipate or adjust to the market quick enough. I'd like to see them use more subcontractors and hire outside engineering companies to develop niche products quickly. What would it have taken a couple of years ago to hire SLP or Lingenfelter or someone to develop a Silverado SS quickly? Or take a risk and produce some of their cool concept vehicles (some of the Old's ones). Instead they've chopped Olds. Or why'd they kill the Impala SS and gone with the current Impala platform? Why no modern engines (ie ohc multivalve adjustable cam timing, advanced engine management etc.? (just now with the new TrailBlazer engines) Why no rwd cars with irs? Why no awd cars? No wagons? When these products finally come to market I hope they are good but I worry at first they'll be problematic and have quality problems as compared to their competition. Then they'll spend the next few years refining them while failing to act and be ready for the next market move.

    I only rant so much because I am or was a GM loyalist and it bothers me to see them screw up so much. Meanwhile I continue to discover and admire little engineering touches that went into my VW Passat, like the damping of the grab handles or the way the vanity lights go on when I slide the cover for the mirror. The thought that went into this car impresses me.I don't know what kind of long term reliability my Passat will have but I am hoping for the best. I sort of expect to have more maintenance issues than say a Honda or Toyota but am willing to take the risk because I like the car more. But unless I want a SUV or truck, GM's products just don't compete.
  • eric2001eric2001 Member Posts: 482
    I think the competition will do the domestics some good from the consumer point of view. It will make them offer better (reliability/quality) vehicles at a lower price (read - less profit). Don't get me wrong, I am definitely biased, but in the long run, I feel it will only help.

    I love my GMC, and can't wait for my new HD, but I don't think that GM (or any other manufacturer) needs to make $10 to $15K on it.

    Wouldn't it be better if all manufacturers reduced the profit margin by either decreasing the price, or increasing the quality of the parts. No I am not saying they are using sub-standard parts, but all manufacturers cut corners. If they made them just that much better, wouldn't the sales increase, then the profits are still there through quantity. In the end, the customer is that much more satisfied.

    Or am I way off-base here?
    -Eric
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    Spellbound, I think you hit the nail on the head. Many of us Americans would LIKE to buy domestic, but....
    As for chevytruckfan, as a Seattle resident, I kind of figured you were one of those "other side of the cascades" folks.
    Face it, most people live in the city or suburbs, they need a suspension that handles well on the road, not off it. GM/Ford already have products, like Silverado and F150 that are designed for rural residents, they need more products designed for where the majority of population resides.
    Fine, you like unrefined cars with a rough ride. You're wayyyyy in the minority. Simple demographics...people started leaving the farm a long time ago.
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    lol dang westsiders anyway lol we can always tell when their a westsider by what they drive lol

    actually I spent 10 years on the westside and my parents still live there- but out by maple valley enumclaw.

    proteus I'm glad to hear that you would like to buy a domestic, whats the newest domestic you have driven?
  • oldharryoldharry Member Posts: 413
    If you like conspiracy theories, how about this? The IIHS performs tests to give the insurance companies excuses to raise rates, the worse the test results, the higher the rates. The Tundra, that has about 200K vehicles sold since its introduction, total, is rated best(?). The F series Ford, that has sold about 3/4 million a year for over twenty years and still has maybe 10 million on the road is rated worst. Hmmm.

    If you don't like conspiracy theories, ignore this post.

    Harry
  • ryanbabryanbab Member Posts: 7,240
    It was so nice being out of town.

    I guess since i am a city dweller I shouldnt own a truck (this is what i got from the last 50 or so posts)

    Would have been intersting driving home with a lawn tractor strapped to the top of a sedan, and a boat motor and fishing supplies in the trunk (1200lbs appx total)

    I am with CTF i like the harsher ride of a pickup. Also i cant stand driving in a car. Its not comfortable for me (6'3 190lbs). Oh and i am not from an undeveloped state.

    Ryan
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    ryan you should drive a truck, I now you use yours for work but if you didn't who cares not me, you enjoye the truck drive it!

    there are a lot of us who like harsh rides.
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    The U.S. manufacturers are not in dire straits with the imports. Actually many of the imports are owned , at least in part, by Ford and GM. Ford has done wonders to improve several brands, particurly Jaguar. As far as CA is concerned, they are a weird bunch, out of touch with reality. They scream and yell about not wanting new power plants despoiling their environment and then want the rest of the states to give them a free ride.

    The crash tests really prove little. The media loves to take a snapshot and build a story around it. The question is whether or not there is room for improvement and the answer is always. Toyota did OK in those test but I would never own one of those yuppie pickups anymore than I would own a Volvo. I find most buyers of Japenese vehicles are drawn in by the mindset rather than the reality. It is like the fact that most accidents are single vehicle involving small cars. The mindset is that the big bad SUVs are mowing down the defenseless cars. And this is most predominent with liberals and others who do not understand the basics of common sense.
  • abc246abc246 Member Posts: 305
    Back to the topic, the Silverado had the best driver protection, better than the Tundra, Dodge or Ford. The test results prove that.

    Combine that with the weight of the truck and you should have one safe vehicle in the real world.
  • ryanbabryanbab Member Posts: 7,240
    "First the Good news: I walked away with only some stiffness. My truck handled the wreck admirably.

    What happened: I had just picked up some lumber to do some roof repair, and a Blue-Haired old lady ran a Red light and T-Boned me at 30+ MPH. She hit even with the pass door and front pass wheel. The force was enough to physically move my truck 4 to 6 feet sideways. She was driving a mid 80's Chevy mid-size car. Her front end was demolished. The firewall was pushed back and one of her legs was broken in the crash. She went to the hospital and hopefully is doing well.
    My truck sustained (from my observation) a bent frame (where the smittybilt nerf bars are mounted), the front passenger side front suspension is bent and the sway bar is broken. The Police had me start and drive my truck around 40 feet to get it out of the intersection while waiting for a tow truck, and I found that my engine doesn't exactly run right. It started and it moved that 40 or so feet, I wouldn't call it driving though. So there is at least some powertrain problems as well.

    So my truck took the impact and I walked away. This is the kind of impact that the NTSA is trying to mandate testing on: 30MPH side impact. I think the new Silverado will pass the test with flying colors.

    I took pictures with my digital camera and will post some when I get a moment away from work here. "
  • proteus456proteus456 Member Posts: 65
    The last domestic I owned was a '91 Taurus SHO. I was very happy with it, had over 115k miles on it.
    Recently, I've driven Pontiac Firebird, Bonneville SSEI, 2002 Explorer, and Buick Rendezvous.
    For the money, they aren't bad..but not the best either. The Firebird impressed me the most with its raw power..but it was just that..raw. It handled slopily, and felt much heavier than I liked. The Explorer was ok, but I was looking for more luxury and better fit and finish. The Rendezvous was real nice, but was underpowered.
    No doubt domestics are improving, they just have a ways to go.
    On the truck issue, I'll admit I have limited experience. However, from what I've seen, domestics trucks seem more "pure". They are designed to be trucks. Toyota trucks seem to be more car-like in nature...which seems wierd. If you need a truck, buy a real truck. If you want a car, buy a car.
  • ryanbabryanbab Member Posts: 7,240
    image

    Pics from the above posting
  • redsilveradoredsilverado Member Posts: 1,000
    you make more sense than you know. to me, this whole test is a scam. all trucks were tested minus payload. not saying that everyone drives with a load, but why not test a vehicle under the conditions it was designed for. all trucks can no doubt be used as a daily commuter, but the majority of pickups on the road are used for work. so why not take all four trucks and put some agreed upon payload in the beds and then crash em. seeing how they crumpled with a no load crash condition means diddly to me. i'd like to see how they look with the beds loaded as they were designed for. not saying that anyone of the four would come out better than before, but it seems that to test a truck, you need to test the whole truck, not just the part you sit in. how does this test tell you how safe you are when carrying a load? it doesn't, which like i said seems sorta invalid, since you have no way of seeing just how safe each truck is when crashing with a load in the bed. will the box hold up? we don't know now do we. don't know about you, but i'd like to see what i'm in for if i'm using a truck as it was designed for.
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    bum deal man, but looks like your truck did well. wonder if they are going to total it if your frame is too out of wack?
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    Soloman Smith Barney raised its rating of Ford stock to "buy" today, see link below. Now, what was all this gobbity-goo about Detroit car makers going out of business? Haters of US industry have been saying this since 1973.


    These "anti-big business" types driving their "Consumer Reports Correct" boring, biege CamCords think that the world will be a better place if "Japan, Inc." controls the marketplace. Do they really think that if Toyota and Honda had a duopoly that they would not want to gouge buyers for money? They are a big business too, not a charity, like some CR fanatics seem to think.


    They produce cars that contibute to "the problem" of congestion and pollution, too. But, never do eco-terrorists suggest shutting down import companies, it's always, "Bomb Detroit".


    http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/

  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    Soloman Smith Barney raised its rating of Ford stock to "buy" today. Now, what was all this gobbity-goo about Detroit car makers going out of business? Haters of US industry have been saying this since 1973.

    These "anti-big business" types driving their "Consumer Reports Correct" boring, biege CamCords think that the world will be a better place if "Japan, Inc." controls the marketplace. Do they really think that if Toyota and Honda had a duopoly that they would not want to gouge buyers for money? They are big businesses too, not charities, like some CR fanatics seem to think.

    They produce cars that contibute to "the problem" of congestion and pollution, too. But, never do eco-terrorists suggest shutting down import companies, it's always, "Bomb Detroit".
This discussion has been closed.