Those are mostly options, not engineering technology, and products someone else developed in many, if not most cases. 90% of those were in Ford Expeditions years ago. Power fold rear seats were in the Expeditions since 03. And they power fold out of sight, leaving you a completely flat floor. But if you like it, be my guest. You asked the question, and I answered it, that's all I was saying.
It really is quite simple. Ford (can't speak for GM)needs to stop building vehicles that SUCK! I have a 2000 Windstar with a 3.8L V6. Power sliding doors do not work properly. Power door locks stick. Problems with ABS. Almost broke down on Christmas night because there is a problem with the fuel mixture. I am on my 4th Subaru and have NEVER EVER had a single problem with any of them. Ford should be ashamed of itself.
Well I'll take the Toyota... and next year we can trade vehicles... even up
First of all, the Slade's cousin... aka H2, is way more ugly than the FJ. Second, both the Slade and H2 are so clumsy I wouldn't try and park either in my garage. Third, even if I tried to buy one used so I didn't lose my [non-permissible content removed] in depreciation, all the gimmicks would be ready to go awry. Fourth, I don't like getting looked at when I drive something that costs more than most people's home, just so I can demonstrate my inferiority complex.
So how many Marines have to die in Iraq to support the diet of these egomobiles?
...is an awesome fuel-efficient engine at any age! I took my old 1988 Buick Park Avenue to my parent's house upstate for the holidays. The whole trip was about 260 miles and the car used less than a quarter tank of gasoline! Thinking the fuel gauge was defective, I filled the car, and indeed it only took less than a quarter tank of fuel! People are so quick to point out GM's gas guzzlers like the H2 while failing to see GM's fuel-efficient cars and the imports' own gas hogs like the Highlander, Land Cruiser, and FJ.
Yes, I've read articles on the net that GM is expiermenting with a few smaller Duramax versions for passenger cars and light trucks such as the Canyon/Colorado.
Fools. Isuzu has a whole set of diesels already used in the D-Max.
just for kicks I pulled up the EPA estimates for the '88 Electra/Park Ave. Even back then it was rated at a respecatable 19/29.
Fast forward to today, and the Lucerne with the 3.8 is only rated at 19/28! And I seriously doubt the Lucerne accelerates much better, because even though it's gained around 30 hp over those years, it's probably put on a good 500 lb or more weight over those old FWD Electras.
The domestics real achilles heel isn't horsepower or performance - it is RELIABILITY and QUALITY (mechanical and structural) thoughout the life of the vehicle. I am NOT talking about the JD Power and Associates surveys of initial quality that we keep hearing so much about from the big 2.5. I am talking about 4-6 years after driving it off the lot. At that point the squeaks, ticks, rattles, groans and other mechanical and electronic issues start to pop up. You don't hear about these problems being as prevalent in say - Toyota vehicles. Perhaps that is why a 5 year old Toyota can be sold for half of what you paid, versus 15-20% of what you paid if you are lucky with a domestic auto. And yet we keep hearing - OH things are changing. But are they really? Right now GM is touting DOD as the new "savior" of fuel effeciency. Funny that it hasn't seemed to improve the fuel economy of some of the vehicles it is in right now, like the Envoy. Time will tell whether it makes ANY difference at all on the Tahoe.
People see this and most shake their heads. GM in particular is in deep trouble. They need to change at a faster pace than they can manage. It's a bit like trying to turn an ocean liner on a dime. With their corporate structure, they can't do it - and the rocks are dead ahead. Ford will follow - not far behind.
I had my '88 Park Ave parked next to my girlfriend's LaCrosse and the Park Ave looks to be about the same length and wheelbase. The Park Ave might actually be shorter, but it's hard to tell with the dramatically different styling of the two cars. The Lucerne is most definately bigger and heavier.
Reliability and Quality? I already have 'em with my GM vehicles - two of which are 17 and 18 years old - no rattles or squeaks with either of them, and one has definately seen a hard life. My 2002 Cadillac Seville STS with 58,600 on it is going so strong, I'd be super-stupid to trade it despite the very desirable cars I see coming from Cadillac nowadays. If CamCords are so darn good, why trade 'em every three to five years? If Toyotas were made as well as you claim, I could've bought a Cressida when I was 16 and still have it when I retire. Resale value would be a fable.
Shoot, the problems you describe about electrical and mechanical gremlins seem more germane to the VWs my ex-girlfriend owned and my brother-in-law's Mercedes S430.
JDPower does a long term survey also. You might check that out. http://www.jdpower.com/pdf/2005089.pdf As you can see Buick is 4th, cadillac is 5th, chevy is above the industry average, saturn is just below average. Pontiac is better than Mercedes.
just get bored with their car quickly and simply want to trade after a couple years. And with a Cam/Cord, they hold their value well enough that it affords buyers that luxury.
well, to you and me it might be the same boring car, but in their minds, maybe they feel it gives them the chance to get back into a brand-new version of the same car for the same monthly payment?
Also, I wonder if the way Japanese cars tend to do their servicing schedules might prompt some owners to trade more often? Most of them seem to want to hit you with a fairly intensive 30K/60K/90K servicing, so many buyers might trade in just before the next servicing. They might figure that instead of forking over that money for the servicing, they could just trade in and get a new car, and not have to worry about it for a few more years?
Never wrote that BMW makes an SUV with 400 hp. I wrote that getting the power you mentioned out of a massive 6.2 liter engine is laughable. BMW was getting 400 NA horses out a 4.0 long ago. 400 hp out a 6.2 liter engine is nothing to brag about.
By the way, GMs 6.x liter pushrod engines are physically smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient, and cost less to make than BMWs (or any manufacturer's) massive 4.x liter DOHC engines. So please do some research before bringing up the tired old "if x manufacture made a 6 liter engine" argument. They don't because the engine would not fit anything, and in the meantime GMs "low tech" pushrod V8s still continue to outperform these "high tech" DOHC engines in every measurable category.
I think, in spite of what lemko says, that some people trade more often, while others keep their cars longer. I have generally traded my cars in every 3-5 years. Mostly because the newer cars seemed like a better car for one reason or another. I bought the 71 Riviera because I hated the stick shift in my 69 GTO. Then I bought the diesel 78 Olds because gas prices exceeded $1. I bought my 2002 Seville because I miscalculated how low the dealer would go on the trade and they took my last offer on Holloween night.
well GM did claim that the V12 show engine would produce 750 hp out of 7.5 liters. While I have some doubts about the released specifications, GM does know how to build performance engines. In comparing various engines, one needs to take the tuning into consideration. BMW's 4.4 liter engine does somewhat better than Cadillac's northstar, but the BMW engine has a continuously variable intake manifold length and continuously variable valve lift, making this engine much more complex and expensive.
I looked at a Durango with a Hemi and a Grand Cherokee Limited. The discounts on these are so huge, that I thought maybe I should check them out.
I have become convinced that the Americans reliability has improved to be about the same as the Europeans, so that makes an American vehicle doable for me from that standpoint. However, once I looked, it was the same old story - cheap materials, awkward seating, bad engineering, and generally just too much cost cutting.
I guess that is why you can get a base (but well equipped) GC for $22K. I am just not cheap enough to sacrifice all tactile feel to save a buck, so it is back to the Honda/Acura dealers for me.
I rode in a 03 Taurus over the weekend...that thing will not get consumers into American brands. It didn't even have a digital odometer! Getting in it was like a time machine back to 1992.
An interesting point. My 95 Riviera had a digital odometer, but no driver information center. The 98 Aurora had a mechanical odometer, but did have a trip computer with the driver information center. The Aurora was really a hodge-podge of stuff and in total not very well done.
I am assuming it was 6 digits, but I didn't notice. It's a shame Ford let this car run down. It was also the old school 12V engine. The competition moves on, and Ford stays put. Also on the Taurus note, I hate getting into these, as my head hits where the A-pillar meets the roof every time.
"Focus/Neon/Cobalt. Are these cars good enough to form a foundation for any automaker?"
camderfill, You can't diis the Ford Focus the car has always gotten good reviews. Even car and Driver liked the Focus better than the 2001-2005 Honda Civic and the current Toyota Corolla. I think C&D rated the Focus SVT better than the VW GTI, Nissan Sentra SE-R, and Honda Civic SI a few years back. The car just needs a redesign. I;m with you on the Neon and the Cobalt though.
"Ford COULD HAVE had a Ford Focus off of this revolutionary Mazda platform, and they chose, in their infinite wisdom, to stay "Focused". "
Um the Mazda 3 is based off the Ford Focus platform. I think Mazda just tweaked the on Platform for the 3 a little bit. In an other ones they modified or upddated the Focus platform to make the 3 pefrom like 2004 car not a 2000 model car like the Focus. See, one of the problems with Ford is they wait too long too replace an existing deisign. Lincoln LS-dates back to 2000. Focus= dates back to 2000, and 2005 Tarus dates back to 1996. Why does Ford wait so long update cars?
Focus/Fusion/Ranger (10 years old?)
The Fusion we don't know yet. The Ranger I agree with you the current model dates back what to 1998? At the same time the market for a small truck like the Ranger has faded. Either Ford should just redesign the Ranger or put it on the shelf.
"I have become convinced that the Americans reliability has improved to be about the same as the Europeans, so that makes an American vehicle doable for me from that standpoint. However, once I looked, it was the same old story - cheap materials, awkward seating, bad engineering, and generally just too much cost cutting."
Uh well a year or two ago Consumer Reports for the first time in something like 20+ years rated American Car Makes better than European Car Makes. The average European Car had more problems than the average Domestic Big 3 car. As a matter of fact the Domestic Big 3 still has an edge over the Europeans in average reliability in CR.
American cars often have the advantage of simplicity.
You could argue that a plain old Jetta is about as complex as your average Cadillac, and that is why the Americans have caught up to them in reliability.
"If GM, Ford, and Chrysler go under, watch out U.S. Toyota worker! Can you say "Wal-Mart?" There would be no incentive to pay well. Heck, there would be no incentive to stay in the U.S. Not only will the landscape be dotted with abandoned Big Three factories, but empty transplants that packed-up and moved back to Asia."
I don't think Toyota would pack up and go back to Aisa with the jobs. If they did that of would be tarriff city to ship all those cars to America. They can do that with Lexus because Lexus is a specialty product. In the early-mid 80's I would think when most Japanese Cars were made in Japan Hobda and Toyota would have to ship over parts if people needed a part for a Honda or Toyota car. I don't think Toyota would ever treat their workers like Wal-mart. If they did that they would have a severe backlash and I think Toyota management is too smart too have something like Wal-Mart happen.
Perhaps I am different ... I don't buy vehicles based upon emotions. I look past which car gets to 60 mph the fastest. The body style won't have me reaching for my check book. What is paramount importance is reliability. How can you tell what is reliable? I use my ears. If the engine makes rude noises, it is probably not designed to run smoothly and will likely experience problems sooner. When you open the door and close it, does it rattle? when you accelerate gradually, does it complain or does it sing a sweet tune. After 25,000 miles, does it still pass these tests? How many times has it been taken back to the dealer for repairs or adjustments? I have purchased 18 new cars since I began driving. The one that has most impressed me is the 2004 Camry. Fastest? not by a long shot. Exciting? Hardly. But it is comfortable, quiet, reliable, economical and has never been to the service department in 28,000 miles. I do my own inspections, change the oil when it tells me to (it has an oil life monitor) and put gas in it every 400 miles or so. It replaced a Chevy Malibu. The Chevy required major repairs in its first 10,000 miles, and was the only car I have ever owned that actually left me stranded. The Chrysler products I owned were more reliable, but there was always that shake, rattle and buzzing that made them seem cheap. Now about that "buy American" sentiment... my lat Dodge was made in Canada by a company that is run by Germans. The Camry was made in Tennessee by a company that is 8% owned by GM. So, what is an "American car"? gearhead4
So, you want to kick transplants out of the states?
Please show me where I said that in any previous post.
Don't want to kick them out! Never said that. A simple 3% federal tax on Toyota's 4-5 billion US profits would go a long way to helping folks on the Gulf Coast, and supplying our troops with proper armor and equipment. They currently walk away with <1%, while the companies that have made America great for the last 100 years continue to struggle, and pay their fair share of federal corporate income tax (when profitable).
You guys are spinning my story.
One more time: Buying from American companies is generally better for America, and those who live here because the taxes on the profits stay in America. <b>this does not mean kick everyone else out I never said that in any post. Just change the laws to level the playing field so the competition is fair on our own soil.
The US has a debt to GDP ratio of a third world country (approaching 60%). If all this foreign investment is good for the US, then why are we broke? I think it speaks for itself. You can continue to kid yourself that Honda will make the US an economic superpower again, but I think the fact stated above proves that they are extracting more wealth than they are creating.
Back in the 50's and 60's, the way the car door sounded when closed was all it took to convince people they were buying quality. It took a while but you can tell that even the most basic models sound solid in that department. Things have changed and people want much more than that to be sold on a car. The asians have been working hard at smoothing out the drivetrains so that those models at the middle to top of their lineups are very silky to drive. Whether real or perceived, that translates to quality. When the american automakers start paying attention to that aspect of carbuilding, things will improve. Hard shifts and engine harshness should be found nowhere in their entire lineup. Comfy seats are nice too.
Most of what you speak of is nothing more than a red herring. Perhaps, in your mind, it is rationale and true, but we are talking about cars here, not wars, not deficits.
Tax Toyota and they will sue the USA in the WTO - just like Canada has been doing over softwood tariffs (I live in Canada, and really don't know or care who is right, all I know is that it creates huge [non-permissible content removed]-for-tat problems between countries that are supposed to be good neighbors). Toyota is investing big-time in the USA and is provides thousands upon thousands of jobs for Americans. Toyota got where they are because they took a long-term approach to building customers . Same for Honda. The big 3 tended to focus too much on the next quarter IMO, and not enough on getting the best product out to the market. Markets can be brutal, but Toyota is simply an automotive manifestation of Darwin's theory. What we are seeing is a repalcement of union jobs with nonunion plants. It is a swift and massive change, and I really do feelfsorry for the average job who is just doing his job but is nevertheless caught in the middle.
Oh, and by the way, other Asian country just signed on to buy another big batch of Boeing planes. Good products create jobs and wealth, poor products die on the vine.
So if we dont buy from the BIG 3 who is it hurting??? FROM USA TODAY:
"Woes in U.S. auto industry expected to hurt Midwest most.. The Midwest, with its heavy dependence on factory employment, had higher unemployment than the nation this year... overall growth is being hurt by problems at domestic auto manufacturers, including Ford Motor and General Motors, as well as auto-parts maker Delphi"
"Experts expect the Midwest to underperform other regions in the near term, as distress in the auto sector hurts wages and employment and filters through to such related industries as construction"
I know we look for different things in a vehicle. you seem concerned with impressing other people as you continually mention "bling." To each his own. I want a manual and great handling, thus eliminating 95% of the SUVs sold.
By the way, i wrote LR3 when I mentioned the Land Rover Discovery as I wasn't sure if you'd recognize LR3 name. I know the vehicle, a close friend has one (it's her third Land Rover Discovery (they may call it the LR3 but like the Miata, even if Mazda calls it an MX-5 the loyalists won't).
I have finally figured out your point after all of this rambling. You want me (and everyone else) to acknowledge that there is no domestic car that meets the exact specs of the 330i which happens to be the only car you really wanted to by. I will agree with you that the 330i has no direct competition from the Big 2.5 and the brand new 330i is better than the 5 year old CTS. Happy now?
You obviously have a set of requirements that automatically excludes anything not made in Germany or Japan in your mind. If you want a car with very high resale value than you almost have to buy foreign. You and I both know that so it's pointless to bring that up. You and others posting here seem to feel that resale value and whether or not the assemblers of your vehicle are in the UAW are the most important factors when choosing a car. Resale value is a good thing, but what is the point in talking about resale value if one of the points in buying foreign is that you want to keep your car for well over 100K miles. If you keep a car for 8-10 years resale value is kind of a moot point. As someone on here said before, cars are not good investments so it makes no sense to buy a car based strictly on how well it will depreciate over time. On top of that resale value ONLY means something if the car you are buying with the high resale value costs the same as one with poor resale value. If an Accord costs $2500 more than a Malibu and then is worth $2000 more than the Malibu at trade in didn't accomplish anything. It's a simple concept, but one that import lovers seem to miss repeatedly.
"The G6 GTP gets 18/29 mileage and somehow GM can only manage 240 hp out of a 3.9 L engine?! My god, the germans and japanese get more out of 3.0 (255 hp) and 3.5 (307) liter engines. What is wrong with american engineering?"
This is one of the most tired import lover arguments of all time. First of all it ignores torque, specifically the fact that if you compare the torque per liter ratings of OHV to OHC engines the two types don't differ that much. Secondly, the fact that OHC engines make more hp per liter doesnt prove superior engineering, it just means that OHC engines can force more air into the cylinders because of the number of valves per cylinder. The design of an OHC engine lends itself to higher specific output, but that really doesnt mean anything. I have been asking people on here for years what advantage does higher specific output give to the customer. They really don't answer and if they do they are wrong. It's not weight, because OHV engines are lighter than comparable OHCs (even with iron blocks sometimes) and its not mileage, especially since some OHVs have DOD now. Specific output means nothing. The RL has 290hp from 3.5L and gets 18/26 while the Impala gets 18/28 with a 5.3L v8 and 4 speed auto. The RL has AWD which lowers mileage, but the bottom line is when a car weigh's 3800 lbs a 3.5L engine isnt going to cut it in terms of acceleration or economy. The TL gets about 21/30 which is great, but only about 2mpg better than the Impala/GP GXP in spite of the fact the TL's engine is over 2 liters smaller and has two fewer cylinders. The G35 has similar hp and mileage numbers to the "old tech" Impala/GXP as well and it has one more gear in it's auto and two more with the manual. The Impala gets 21/31 with a 3.5L engine and the Fusion gets 21/29 with a 3L engine and 6 speed auto. The current camry 3L V6 gets about the same mileage as 3800 equipped GM cars like the Lacrosse and it has less hp to boot.
"I'm still waiting for American alternatives to the Accord V6 and the 330i in their respective classes. The CTS you mentioned is over my weight limit and it's massive engine gets lousy gas mileage. As you know I've driven the car (nightmarish experience) and in that class, the chassis can't hold a candle in terms of roadfeel or handling to the e46/e90, IS350, C350 or G35. "
As I said before, your analysis of the CTS is inaccurate and continues to be so. I could either take your word for it (a man who says the Ford GT is garbage) or take the word of the automotive media as whole mixed with some of my own experiences. The CTS is dated and is too large to compare with the 330. In fact the only cars that really compare to the 330 in terms of size and inflated price are the A4 and IS350. I think the 2008 CTS will be better equipped to compete with the new 2006 3 series. If BMW couldnt beat a 5 year old Cadillac something would have been wrong in Bavaria. As for the Accord the best domestic competitors would be the G6, Malibu SS, Fusion/Milan. Chrysler doesnt have a credible midsize car at this point in time. As of July 2006, you can add the Saturn Aura (you probably havent heard of it) to the list because it will be attractive, have DOHC power and a 6 speed auto. I would also expect 18" wheels, stability, remote start, and a great interior. Naturally those things wont matter to you because it wasn't designed in Japan, but in my opinion it will be a great Accord competitor. Would it help if I told you it was partially designed by Germans?
I have responded to your request for competitors. Now what about cars such as the 300 SRT8, CTS-V, Vette/Z06, Solstice/Solstice GXP, Sky, GTO, Charger SRT, STS-V, XLR/XLR-V, new GM suvs, Mustang etc. I find those to be all highly competitive domestic products that, in some cases, represent an outstanding value. Think about it, a 300 SRT8 cost about $7K less than an Acura Accord, I mean RL (sorry cant tell the difference) and to me it is clear which one holds the advantage in power, exclusivity, handling and styling. For $50K there is no way in Hades I would choose an Accord clone RL over a 400hp CTS-V than goes 0-60 in 4.7secs and looks good doing so. The RL has a superior interior (as it should as the newer car) but is that enough to ignore the fact it's based on a $17K accord, has lame styling, is slower than most cars in it's class, lacks a V8, rides on smallish 17" rims and requires me to study the manual to change the stations? don't think so. For you to be a supposed sports sedan guy and not to see where I'm coming from is testament to your bias. All I am saying is give respect where it's due.
It goes back to the "old story" of the butcher getting paid "X" amount for a pieces of meat. With that "X" amount of profit, the Butcher goes buys a car, tv, refridgerator, etc etc. If the people aren't able to afford a piece of meat, then they do without. That puts the butcher out of buisness.
The same can be applied to the auto-industry and american manufactoring. If ordinary Joes can't afford to buy goods, the buisness owners in the "service-industry" will be damaged greatly. If everyone goes into the service sector, then everyone who's in that field will see a reduction in wages and benefits because their will be more people than enough people to fill those jobs.
You currently are seeing it in these fields- i.e. computer programmers, engineers, electricians, etc etc.
If American Manufactoring like GM/Ford/Chrysler becomes extinct then where is your avg. Joe going to work ???? Not everyone is college material, or is a person who can wear a suit and tie for a living for a variety of reasons.-That's just a fact. look around at some of your fellow citizens and imagine them doing a service job such as real estate, police officer, etc etc.
I have looked around and can't see everyone I know doing a service job for a career.
Budget Deficit has nothing to do with American People buying Toyotas and Hondas. During the late 90's American consumers were also purchasing many Toyotas and Hondas, but the government was in the black. We had a $250 Billion surplus. The only reason that we are now in deficit is because of George W's tax cuts for the rich. Lets not blame Toyota and Honda for Washington's deficit spending.
Think about it, a 300 SRT8 cost about $7K less than an Acura Accord, I mean RL (sorry cant tell the difference) and to me it is clear which one holds the advantage in power, exclusivity, handling and styling.
It is very funny how you compare the merits of a German Car made in Canada with a Mexican engine (300 SRT8) to a Japanese car made in Japan.
There are many discussions here about how profits from Transplants are going to Japan. Where do you people think the profits from Chrysler are going? Yes they go to Germany. How is having a car made in Canada help American economy? It does not. The only part of SRT8 which is made in America is the Mercedes transmission which is made in Indiana. Very nice you proved that German cars are cheaper then Japanese cars.
Now how about proving that AMERICAN cars are better then German or Japanese cars.
You however forgot to note that Honda and Toyota don't pay taxes to the local communities, and recieved multi-billion dollar tax incentives if they built plants here. I'm not against them providing jobs, however I am against them doing everything they can to resist organized labor. If you speak the word union, you will be fired. That's not right, and is hard for me to support their efforts. Yes Dubya's tax break for the rich harmed the deficit. However if our jobs keep going south or over sea's who's going to pay income taxes to reduce that deficit ????
When Ford introduced the 6.0 Power Stroke diesel back in 2002 they had no idea that this engine would come back to haunt them, Well "haunt them" it has done—big time.
Early Power Strokes were plagued with problems. Even now, it appears Ford may still have problems with new trucks being delivered with this engine. The problems are so extensive that it has cost Ford dearly in terms of warranty repairs. In fact Ford has now cut back honoring some of the claims, saying some of the problems resulted from owners not properly following maintenance procedures. Needless to say, this warranty policy change has further angered many Ford truck owners. So Ford now has a huge PR problem here, as they are at risk at losing a lot customers to competing truck brands—just what Ford does not need to have happen, with everything else that is happening on the business front.
In addition, these engine problems have caused a rift between Ford and International, the builder of these diesel engines, further complicating the issue and solution.
You might not want to buy a Ford Diesel in the near future when they when they are moved to other vehicles.
Actually if you looked at history the bill was fast tracked before G. Bush Sr. left office. The only thing Clinton could of done was add human rights laws to the bill. Just like when Clinton fast tracked the national forest bill through congress to "prevent" lumber company's from chopping down forest before he left office. Yes Bill could of done more to protest the NAFTA bill. The american working people along with the unions hated him for not standing up to the bill. Actually alot of working people democrats will vote for John Edwards, because he's anti-nafta/cafta and is where him and Kerry had strongly differed.
Comments
First of all, the Slade's cousin... aka H2, is way more ugly than the FJ. Second, both the Slade and H2 are so clumsy I wouldn't try and park either in my garage. Third, even if I tried to buy one used so I didn't lose my [non-permissible content removed] in depreciation, all the gimmicks would be ready to go awry. Fourth, I don't like getting looked at when I drive something that costs more than most people's home, just so I can demonstrate my inferiority complex.
So how many Marines have to die in Iraq to support the diet of these egomobiles?
Fools. Isuzu has a whole set of diesels already used in the D-Max.
Fast forward to today, and the Lucerne with the 3.8 is only rated at 19/28! And I seriously doubt the Lucerne accelerates much better, because even though it's gained around 30 hp over those years, it's probably put on a good 500 lb or more weight over those old FWD Electras.
People see this and most shake their heads. GM in particular is in deep trouble. They need to change at a faster pace than they can manage. It's a bit like trying to turn an ocean liner on a dime. With their corporate structure, they can't do it - and the rocks are dead ahead. Ford will follow - not far behind.
Shoot, the problems you describe about electrical and mechanical gremlins seem more germane to the VWs my ex-girlfriend owned and my brother-in-law's Mercedes S430.
As you can see Buick is 4th, cadillac is 5th, chevy is above the industry average, saturn is just below average. Pontiac is better than Mercedes.
Also, I wonder if the way Japanese cars tend to do their servicing schedules might prompt some owners to trade more often? Most of them seem to want to hit you with a fairly intensive 30K/60K/90K servicing, so many buyers might trade in just before the next servicing. They might figure that instead of forking over that money for the servicing, they could just trade in and get a new car, and not have to worry about it for a few more years?
By the way, GMs 6.x liter pushrod engines are physically smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient, and cost less to make than BMWs (or any manufacturer's) massive 4.x liter DOHC engines. So please do some research before bringing up the tired old "if x manufacture made a 6 liter engine" argument. They don't because the engine would not fit anything, and in the meantime GMs "low tech" pushrod V8s still continue to outperform these "high tech" DOHC engines in every measurable category.
I have become convinced that the Americans reliability has improved to be about the same as the Europeans, so that makes an American vehicle doable for me from that standpoint. However, once I looked, it was the same old story - cheap materials, awkward seating, bad engineering, and generally just too much cost cutting.
I guess that is why you can get a base (but well equipped) GC for $22K. I am just not cheap enough to sacrifice all tactile feel to save a buck, so it is back to the Honda/Acura dealers for me.
I totally disagree but to each his own. Have a good day.
camderfill, You can't diis the Ford Focus the car has always gotten good reviews. Even car and Driver liked the Focus better than the 2001-2005 Honda Civic and the current Toyota Corolla. I think C&D rated the Focus SVT better than the VW GTI, Nissan Sentra SE-R, and Honda Civic SI a few years back. The car just needs a redesign. I;m with you on the Neon and the Cobalt though.
"Ford COULD HAVE had a Ford Focus off of this revolutionary Mazda platform, and they chose, in their infinite wisdom, to stay "Focused". "
Um the Mazda 3 is based off the Ford Focus platform. I think Mazda just tweaked the on Platform for the 3 a little bit. In an other ones they modified or upddated the Focus platform to make the 3 pefrom like 2004 car not a 2000 model car like the Focus. See, one of the problems with Ford is they wait too long too replace an existing deisign. Lincoln LS-dates back to 2000. Focus= dates back to 2000, and 2005 Tarus dates back to 1996. Why does Ford wait so long update cars?
Focus/Fusion/Ranger (10 years old?)
The Fusion we don't know yet. The Ranger I agree with you the current model dates back what to 1998? At the same time the market for a small truck like the Ranger has faded. Either Ford should just redesign the Ranger or put it on the shelf.
Uh well a year or two ago Consumer Reports for the first time in something like 20+ years rated American Car Makes better than European Car Makes. The average European Car had more problems than the average Domestic Big 3 car. As a matter of fact the Domestic Big 3 still has an edge over the Europeans in average reliability in CR.
You could argue that a plain old Jetta is about as complex as your average Cadillac, and that is why the Americans have caught up to them in reliability.
I don't think Toyota would pack up and go back to Aisa with the jobs. If they did that of would be tarriff city to ship all those cars to America. They can do that with Lexus because Lexus is a specialty product. In the early-mid 80's I would think when most Japanese Cars were made in Japan Hobda and Toyota would have to ship over parts if people needed a part for a Honda or Toyota car. I don't think Toyota would ever treat their workers like Wal-mart. If they did that they would have a severe backlash and I think Toyota management is too smart too have something like Wal-Mart happen.
After 25,000 miles, does it still pass these tests? How many times has it been taken back to the dealer for repairs or adjustments?
I have purchased 18 new cars since I began driving. The one that has most impressed me is the 2004 Camry. Fastest? not by a long shot. Exciting? Hardly.
But it is comfortable, quiet, reliable, economical and has never been to the service department in 28,000 miles. I do my own inspections, change the oil when it tells me to (it has an oil life monitor) and put gas in it every 400 miles or so. It replaced a Chevy Malibu. The Chevy required major repairs in its first 10,000 miles, and was the only car I have ever owned that actually left me stranded. The Chrysler products I owned were more reliable, but there was always that shake, rattle and buzzing that made them seem cheap. Now about that "buy American" sentiment... my lat Dodge was made in Canada by a company that is run by Germans. The Camry was made in Tennessee by a company that is 8% owned by GM. So, what is an "American car"?
gearhead4
Or possibly you are just sending more good money after bad money. The concept is called buying all the way down.
Please show me where I said that in any previous post.
Don't want to kick them out! Never said that. A simple 3% federal tax on Toyota's 4-5 billion US profits would go a long way to helping folks on the Gulf Coast, and supplying our troops with proper armor and equipment. They currently walk away with <1%, while the companies that have made America great for the last 100 years continue to struggle, and pay their fair share of federal corporate income tax (when profitable).
You guys are spinning my story.
One more time:
Buying from American companies is generally better for America, and those who live here because the taxes on the profits stay in America. <b>this does not mean kick everyone else out I never said that in any post. Just change the laws to level the playing field so the competition is fair on our own soil.
The US has a debt to GDP ratio of a third world country (approaching 60%). If all this foreign investment is good for the US, then why are we broke?
I think it speaks for itself. You can continue to kid yourself that Honda will make the US an economic superpower again, but I think the fact stated above proves that they are extracting more wealth than they are creating.
Excuse me while I wipe my tears with $100 bills.
Comfy seats are nice too.
Tax Toyota and they will sue the USA in the WTO - just like Canada has been doing over softwood tariffs (I live in Canada, and really don't know or care who is right, all I know is that it creates huge [non-permissible content removed]-for-tat problems between countries that are supposed to be good neighbors). Toyota is investing big-time in the USA and is provides thousands upon thousands of jobs for Americans. Toyota got where they are because they took a long-term approach to building customers . Same for Honda. The big 3 tended to focus too much on the next quarter IMO, and not enough on getting the best product out to the market. Markets can be brutal, but Toyota is simply an automotive manifestation of Darwin's theory. What we are seeing is a repalcement of union jobs with nonunion plants. It is a swift and massive change, and I really do feelfsorry for the average job who is just doing his job but is nevertheless caught in the middle.
Oh, and by the way, other Asian country just signed on to buy another big batch of Boeing planes. Good products create jobs and wealth, poor products die on the vine.
answer is Japan and China
Rocky
Rocky
FROM USA TODAY:
"Woes in U.S. auto industry expected to hurt Midwest most..
The Midwest, with its heavy dependence on factory employment, had higher unemployment than the nation this year... overall growth is being hurt by problems at domestic auto manufacturers, including Ford Motor and General Motors, as well as auto-parts maker Delphi"
"Experts expect the Midwest to underperform other regions in the near term, as distress in the auto sector hurts wages and employment and filters through to such related industries as construction"
Who will feel the pain next.......... :surprise:
By the way, i wrote LR3 when I mentioned the Land Rover Discovery as I wasn't sure if you'd recognize LR3 name. I know the vehicle, a close friend has one (it's her third Land Rover Discovery (they may call it the LR3 but like the Miata, even if Mazda calls it an MX-5 the loyalists won't).
You obviously have a set of requirements that automatically excludes anything not made in Germany or Japan in your mind. If you want a car with very high resale value than you almost have to buy foreign. You and I both know that so it's pointless to bring that up. You and others posting here seem to feel that resale value and whether or not the assemblers of your vehicle are in the UAW are the most important factors when choosing a car. Resale value is a good thing, but what is the point in talking about resale value if one of the points in buying foreign is that you want to keep your car for well over 100K miles. If you keep a car for 8-10 years resale value is kind of a moot point. As someone on here said before, cars are not good investments so it makes no sense to buy a car based strictly on how well it will depreciate over time. On top of that resale value ONLY means something if the car you are buying with the high resale value costs the same as one with poor resale value. If an Accord costs $2500 more than a Malibu and then is worth $2000 more than the Malibu at trade in didn't accomplish anything. It's a simple concept, but one that import lovers seem to miss repeatedly.
"The G6 GTP gets 18/29 mileage and somehow GM can only manage 240 hp out of a 3.9 L engine?! My god, the germans and japanese get more out of 3.0 (255 hp) and 3.5 (307) liter engines. What is wrong with american engineering?"
This is one of the most tired import lover arguments of all time. First of all it ignores torque, specifically the fact that if you compare the torque per liter ratings of OHV to OHC engines the two types don't differ that much. Secondly, the fact that OHC engines make more hp per liter doesnt prove superior engineering, it just means that OHC engines can force more air into the cylinders because of the number of valves per cylinder. The design of an OHC engine lends itself to higher specific output, but that really doesnt mean anything. I have been asking people on here for years what advantage does higher specific output give to the customer. They really don't answer and if they do they are wrong. It's not weight, because OHV engines are lighter than comparable OHCs (even with iron blocks sometimes) and its not mileage, especially since some OHVs have DOD now. Specific output means nothing. The RL has 290hp from 3.5L and gets 18/26 while the Impala gets 18/28 with a 5.3L v8 and 4 speed auto. The RL has AWD which lowers mileage, but the bottom line is when a car weigh's 3800 lbs a 3.5L engine isnt going to cut it in terms of acceleration or economy. The TL gets about 21/30 which is great, but only about 2mpg better than the Impala/GP GXP in spite of the fact the TL's engine is over 2 liters smaller and has two fewer cylinders. The G35 has similar hp and mileage numbers to the "old tech" Impala/GXP as well and it has one more gear in it's auto and two more with the manual. The Impala gets 21/31 with a 3.5L engine and the Fusion gets 21/29 with a 3L engine and 6 speed auto. The current camry 3L V6 gets about the same mileage as 3800 equipped GM cars like the Lacrosse and it has less hp to boot.
"I'm still waiting for American alternatives to the Accord V6 and the 330i in their respective classes. The CTS you mentioned is over my weight limit and it's massive engine gets lousy gas mileage. As you know I've driven the car (nightmarish experience) and in that class, the chassis can't hold a candle in terms of roadfeel or handling to the e46/e90, IS350, C350 or G35. "
As I said before, your analysis of the CTS is inaccurate and continues to be so. I could either take your word for it (a man who says the Ford GT is garbage) or take the word of the automotive media as whole mixed with some of my own experiences. The CTS is dated and is too large to compare with the 330. In fact the only cars that really compare to the 330 in terms of size and inflated price are the A4 and IS350. I think the 2008 CTS will be better equipped to compete with the new 2006 3 series. If BMW couldnt beat a 5 year old Cadillac something would have been wrong in Bavaria. As for the Accord the best domestic competitors would be the G6, Malibu SS, Fusion/Milan. Chrysler doesnt have a credible midsize car at this point in time. As of July 2006, you can add the Saturn Aura (you probably havent heard of it) to the list because it will be attractive, have DOHC power and a 6 speed auto. I would also expect 18" wheels, stability, remote start, and a great interior. Naturally those things wont matter to you because it wasn't designed in Japan, but in my opinion it will be a great Accord competitor. Would it help if I told you it was partially designed by Germans?
I have responded to your request for competitors. Now what about cars such as the 300 SRT8, CTS-V, Vette/Z06, Solstice/Solstice GXP, Sky, GTO, Charger SRT, STS-V, XLR/XLR-V, new GM suvs, Mustang etc. I find those to be all highly competitive domestic products that, in some cases, represent an outstanding value. Think about it, a 300 SRT8 cost about $7K less than an Acura Accord, I mean RL (sorry cant tell the difference) and to me it is clear which one holds the advantage in power, exclusivity, handling and styling. For $50K there is no way in Hades I would choose an Accord clone RL over a 400hp CTS-V than goes 0-60 in 4.7secs and looks good doing so. The RL has a superior interior (as it should as the newer car) but is that enough to ignore the fact it's based on a $17K accord, has lame styling, is slower than most cars in it's class, lacks a V8, rides on smallish 17" rims and requires me to study the manual to change the stations? don't think so. For you to be a supposed sports sedan guy and not to see where I'm coming from is testament to your bias. All I am saying is give respect where it's due.
The same can be applied to the auto-industry and american manufactoring. If ordinary Joes can't afford to buy goods, the buisness owners in the "service-industry" will be damaged greatly. If everyone goes into the service sector, then everyone who's in that field will see a reduction in wages and benefits because their will be more people than enough people to fill those jobs.
You currently are seeing it in these fields- i.e. computer programmers, engineers, electricians, etc etc.
If American Manufactoring like GM/Ford/Chrysler becomes extinct then where is your avg. Joe going to work ???? Not everyone is college material, or is a person who can wear a suit and tie for a living for a variety of reasons.-That's just a fact. look around at some of your fellow citizens and imagine them doing a service job such as real estate, police officer, etc etc.
I have looked around and can't see everyone I know doing a service job for a career.
Rocky
WHOA !!!!!!!! That might be the best rebutal I've ever read since I being a memeber--->
Rocky
It is very funny how you compare the merits of a German Car made in Canada with a Mexican engine (300 SRT8) to a Japanese car made in Japan.
There are many discussions here about how profits from Transplants are going to Japan. Where do you people think the profits from Chrysler are going? Yes they go to Germany. How is having a car made in Canada help American economy? It does not. The only part of SRT8 which is made in America is the Mercedes transmission which is made in Indiana. Very nice you proved that German cars are cheaper then Japanese cars.
Now how about proving that AMERICAN cars are better then German or Japanese cars.
Rocky
When Ford introduced the 6.0 Power Stroke diesel back in 2002 they had no idea that this engine would come back to haunt them, Well "haunt them" it has done—big time.
Early Power Strokes were plagued with problems. Even now, it appears Ford may still have problems with new trucks being delivered with this engine. The problems are so extensive that it has cost Ford dearly in terms of warranty repairs. In fact Ford has now cut back honoring some of the claims, saying some of the problems resulted from owners not properly following maintenance procedures. Needless to say, this warranty policy change has further angered many Ford truck owners. So Ford now has a huge PR problem here, as they are at risk at losing a lot customers to competing truck brands—just what Ford does not need to have happen, with everything else that is happening on the business front.
In addition, these engine problems have caused a rift between Ford and International, the builder of these diesel engines, further complicating the issue and solution.
You might not want to buy a Ford Diesel in the near future when they when they are moved to other vehicles.
Rocky