Good God! If people thought the UAW-built versions of those cars were bad, the Chinese-built versions are going to make a Yugo look like a Lexus in comparison! They'll be the most hideous abominations since that travesty called a 1958 Packard! I'd sooner the Big Three went extinct than have them carry on like that into the future. It would be like the future of humankind in Planet of the Apes - most are primitive mutes and the rest hideous radioactive mutants!
That's crazy, I saw a guy yesterday driving one of these down my street, though it was a rust bucket and the motor was sputtering a bit. I couldn't believe he had the top down; it was in the 40s. Perhaps it had no top.
It would be like the future of humankind in Planet of the Apes - most are primitive mutes and the rest hideous radioactive mutants!
Well, there was a '61-62 Caddy in one of those Planet of the Apes movies, "Battle for the Planet of the Apes", I think. Can't remember if it was still running under its own power or horse-drawn, though.
You are exactly right about chinese cars. The whole reason why they aren't here yet is they can't pass our crash test. They were about to ship over a car I think called the 'cherry' and they conducted the crash test and it pretty much fell in half.
If you wonder how they build cars, go to Wall-Mart and buy a toy for your kid that was made in China and see how long it last.
China makes 100's of thousands of cars a year that meet all US requirements and there will be more. They are built by companies that are owned ~50% by outside companies. GM/Toyota/VW/ etc. GM builds the W body Buick LaCrosse right now (called a Regal there) and soon will be building the new LaCrosse which is identical to the one that will be sold there. They also build a Holden Statesmen copy as a Buick. Also Camrys. So they can build them. It's the independent companies that cannot design them very well to our standards.
But we have plenty of our engineers over there training them.
Yeah, I find that what Acura is lacking in product portfolio, they most definitely make up for in service and sales experience. My 2003 MDX was a great car serviced by an outstanding dealership in lower NH and I would definitely buy another car from them in the future (09 TL SH-AWD :shades: ). I've never really had a "terrible" dealership experience per se, but the Cadillac dealership I visited back in 2003 or 2004 (can't remember which) to drive the then-new CTS was hardly impressive. Long story... ugh.
Ironically, Cadillacs cross-town Rival, a Mercury/Lincoln dealership near where I used to live was also one of the most satisfying experiences I've ever had. Bought two pre-owned vehicles from them and had all my Fords serviced there. :shades:
It was "Battle for the Planet of the Apes" and the car was a 1961 Coupe DeVille if I recall and it was running under it's own power. It was one of the vehicles comandeered by the mutants during their attack on Ape City.
Just goes to show you how tough those early '60s Cadillacs are - they can survive a nuclear war!
As far as I'm concerned, the 1969 Cadillac is the most attractive vehicle ever made and a concours quality Fleetwood Brougham is my holy grail of automobiles. I'd take one of these cars over any new car including my own DTS.
I always liked the curves of the 1950s Caddies. To me they went down hill starting with 1959. Not many Caddies since that I have I liked. Then I am not as much of a car person as trucks. When GM came out with the new style Silverado in 1988 I thought that was and still is the best looking PU truck ever designed. When Dodge went to their new look I almost puked and then Ford followed in about 1997. Just very few vehicles I have liked the look of over the years.
I don't remember the year. I was in the Cadillac dealer with my Uncle that loved his Caddies. They had one with the first fake convertible tops. I told the salesman. That has to be the ugliest car I have EVER seen. He was not moved.
When GM came out with the new style Silverado in 1988 I thought that was and still is the best looking PU truck ever designed.
I liked the higher trim level that used the inset quad headlights above the turn signals. The base model (Scottsdale? Cheyenne?), with the big single headlights looked like a big Chevy LUV to me. Not vomit-inducing, but sort of a wallflower.
I didn't really like it when they went to composite headlights, though. The headlight was about the same size as the turn signal below, and it gave it sort of a Wagon Queen Family Truckster look.
I thought the 1999 Silverado looked good, though. At least until they gave it that "angry appliance" mid-life restyle.
I liked the current Silverado/Sierra when they first came out, but I guess I just got tired of the style pretty quickly. I sat in one about a month ago, and was kinda disappointed. It actually felt smaller inside than my old '85 Silverado!
I thought the 1999 Silverado looked good, though. At least until they gave it that "angry appliance" mid-life restyle.
Exactly, what was with that change? I kind of liked the looks of my 2005 GMC. The new GM trucks since 2007 do nothing for me. They are foo foo trucks. All of the brands. I am looking to replace my current beater 99 Ranger with a 1995 vintage Ford Diesel 3/4 ton. Trying to find one with less than 200k miles. Not easy around here. The 99 Ranger V6 is a gutless gas guzzler.
I know that GM and other companies are over in China building some good cars. I was talking about the companies like Cherry, and I think Geely is the other one, and there cars are terrible.
If it's the case that the Union has been black mailing the Big 3 for decades, then why sit down and take it, and not just stop it cold by filing for bankruptcy and ending the contracts with the Unions (possibly before the bad deals were even signed). Why make the tax payers suffer for your decades of bending over backwards and taking it in the rear from Unions?
The BIG 3 could have been smart instead of stupid and filed for bankruptcy 20 years ago, rather than making overpriced crap for the last 30 years. Sounds like the BIG 3 were more interested in padding their own wallets than in the customer's best interests.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I call on all Americans to boycott all of the bailout companies. If the company has received, or even just requested a government bailout/loan/handout/whatever you want to call receiving tax payer money, then I call on all Americans to boycott their products, avoid purchasing their products and/or services.
All of the goods they make will sit on the shelves or parking lots. The companies will eventually go bankrupt or the Gov't will have to REBAIL them out which in turn could lead to our Gov't going bankrupt and requiring a bailout from the Chinese so we can be the United States of China instead. The government will finally learn its lesson that bailouts will backfire and will NOT work. Chrysler was a GIGANTIC bailout failure from long ago, as they sold nothing but lemons since then, costing Americans millions in mechanics bills, and then requesting another 9 BILLION to boot this year for just another bailout yet again!
To that, I say good riddance to the bailout seeking companies as obviously my government representatives are not listening to the voice of the people when they say NO to all of the bailouts!!! Since the Senators and Congressmen won't listen to the people, maybe the gov't and bail out companies can hear our wallets when we boycott them.
No to Big 3 vehicles. No to AIG Insurance. No to Bailout Banks including Citigroup/Citibank. No to bailout Investment Wall Street Firms.
BOYCOTT all of these companies and the US will be a much happier finer place in the years to come!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Sane members of Congress are calling for a financially solvent provision that puts a stop-gap if viability is deemed elusive.
UAW needs to concede pay parity at the end of the day. Costs rule this plan. Reality bites. You can fight bankruptcy but without a team effort from all sides, failure is certain and bankruptcy will be the final answer.
Cerebus does not want to fund Chrysler...why should Congress loan them billions?
OK. I figured you would request this, so in advance of your formal presentation, I bought a Honda.
Like I wrote previously, if the product is second-rate, it gets second-rate considerations. With a capital good, good luck on your business model based on sheer patriotism to your brand.
Funny, I just heard from 62vette's barber that auto sales would receded another 11% in 2009.
My case for $200B bailout costs are warming up quite nicely, thank you very much!
Boycott is a ridiculous idea re the US automakers. It's right up there with all those who gleefully bought foreign brands through the years hoping to bring vindication on the US automaker workers and their families along with the citizens of our country.
If you want vindication, go after the banks who have received bailout money with no strings attached by our CongressFolk and used the money to buy other banks. The story I heard or read was the Citibank used some of the money to buy Guatamalan banks. Yup, that helps our country's credit flow problems a whole lot.
Indeed, I had thought of picking up a used something or other for the kid whenever he decides he wants something short of a Corvette for school. I may buy a new GM car. I fear stepping onto the lot because the deal might be Deal instead of No Deal and the Price Might Be Right. My real problem is knowing which I'd like to end up with, planning for the youngster as well as a vehicle that I'd like. I suspect two cars and trading one of the current ones is in the cards by tax time.
Been in serious consideration about what I should buy to replace my aging Lexus. Another Lexus immediately comes to mind....but in the spirit of patriotism, I wonder if I should maybe THIS TIME, buy a Lincoln MKS.....would save a trunkload of cash for one thing, and though it's not really comparable, it is nice, and I have good luck with Fords generally - it would be a "nice thing to do"....... Can't resurrect Detroit all by myself though, and I already have a boatload of Fords in the livery.....
That's why I bought the CR-V as a future car for my daughter. Why would I buy a GM, F or C when they are inferior (all criterion, particularly support by the corporation)?? Please explain.
Research and test drive. I've read the MKS is a typical Lincoln with ho-hum performance...IOW, nice try but mo cigar. What else is new?
Introduction
Lincoln hasn't always kept up with the competition in the luxury sedan segment. As rivals evolved with more avant-garde styling, better handing and the latest technology, Lincoln lagged behind, struggling to break free of its antiquated image. Earlier in this decade, the brand introduced its midsize LS sedan to much fanfare, but sales numbers fell short of expectations. More recently, Lincoln rolled out the entry-level MKZ sedan, but in our eyes, this model doesn't do enough to distinguish itself from its mundane Ford Fusion sibling. Now, Ford's premium division is trying again with the 2009 Lincoln MKS.
The MKS is the company's new full-size flagship. It's based on Ford's D3 platform, the same one used on the previous-generation Volvo S80 and the current-generation Ford Taurus. Given this pedigree, you're pretty much guaranteed a roomy interior and good safety scores, but we question whether it's an appropriate choice for what Lincoln identifies as its "luxury flagship." The base MKS is a front-wheel-drive sedan, but an all-wheel-drive option is available. For now, the MKS comes with just one engine: a 273-horsepower 3.7-liter V6. Next year, Lincoln promises a twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter V6 that should produce about 340 hp.
The 2009 Lincoln MKS has some things going for it, including a bevy of standard features, an attractively laid out interior and a remarkably comfortable backseat. If these traits appeal to you, Lincon's newest sedan is worth a look.However, overall performance frankly isn't up to snuff, and the interior loses some of its luster upon closer inspection, evincing too many low-quality plastics. There are plenty of other choices to consider at this elevated price point, including the Acura TL, Lexus ES 350 and Volvo S80. The MKS also sits price-wise near the new rear-wheel-drive Hyundai Genesis, and those looking for a similar front-wheel-drive package at a lower price may find the Hyundai Azera or Toyota Avalon more to their liking. In other words, the 2009 MKS -- with a price tag of more than $45,000 when well equipped -- is up against some stiff competition.
I wish you luck. I bought my daughter a Honda Civic. During its period of ownership with her it: 1. Destroyed its driver's window mechanism twice to the tune of $150 each. 2. Cracked its exhaust manifold - requiring a $1000 repair. 3. Decided at 86K miles to start using a quart of oil every 400 miles - -dealer indicated that engine needed rebuilt. At that point she swapped it for a new Ford Escape. I bought a new Accord that was so bad, I dumped it at 20K miles. My oldest son had an new Altima that ate 4 transmissions - all under warranty. My other son bought a Nissan Sentra that was a black hole for cash after the warranty ran out. My nephew's Corrolla ate its transmission at 36K miles - requiring a $4000 repair. Sorry - not buying your "inferior" remark - based on our experience. Have I owned bad domestics - Yes - 3 of them (1 Chevy and 2 Chryslers). However, IMO, the new GM and Ford models are very competitive and reliable, and, Chrysler still has major problems.
My sister has a 2008 Honda CR-V with 9,000 miles and the engine and transmission had to be taken out to replace the rear main seal. Come to find this is a common problem. I don't call that superior.
And somebody mentioned boycotting the big three because of the bail out. I guess you don't know that Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, most German cars, they are all subsidized by their governments. So I guess you are going to have to boycott them also. So, what are you going to drive?
I agree with you, I have had two Honda Accords, a Mitsubishi Galant, and a couple of Saturns. The best of all of them were the Saturns. And now I drive a Dodge Ram that is absolutely bulletproof. I agree with you that Chrysler still has a way to go, but it seems every five years they put out a car that everyone just must have.
1. In the 80's it was the Dodge Caravan. 2. In the 90's it was the LH cars, Intrepid, Concord, LHS. 3. In 2005 they put out the 300c, and that was a huge hit. 4. Now they have put out that amazing Dodge Challenger.
So to say they haven't put out some great cars is not true in my book.
I agree with you, I have had two Honda Accords, a Mitsubishi Galant, and a couple of Saturns. The best of all of them were the Saturns. And now I drive a Dodge Ram that is absolutely bulletproof. I agree with you that Chrysler still has a way to go, but it seems every five years they put out a car that everyone just must have.
1. In the 80's it was the Dodge Caravan. 2. In the 90's it was the LH cars, Intrepid, Concord, LHS. 3. In 2005 they put out the 300c, and that was a huge hit. 4. Now they have put out that amazing Dodge Challenger.
So to say they haven't put out some great cars is not true in my book.
Back in the 1990's, Chrysler really seemed to be on top of their game. In addition to the 1993 LH car, the first of the "retro/big-rig" style Rams (can't remember if it was 1993 or 1994 now) was a pretty big deal. So was the Neon, which came out in early 1994 as a 1995 model. The "cloud cars", the Cirrus/Stratus/Breeze and Sebring convertible also seemed like a winner. At first.
Unfortunately, Chrysler has a knack for building cars that look beautiful and do just about everything right...except when it comes to reliability. The LH cars were pretty troublesome for the first few years, especially with the 3.5 OHC V-6. I think they had most of the problems licked by 1996, but their 4-speed automatic has always been a weak spot, and might still be, to this day. I've also heard that the Rams were pretty bad their first few years out, and those newer, powerful "Magnum" 5.2 and 5.9 V-8's weren't nearly as durable as the older, lower power 318 and 360.
The Neon was pretty bad as well, especially in its early years. And I don't know if they ever, truly, got it right. I've heard that the later 90's models were much improved, and especially the redesigned 2000 model. But then I've heard even they had problems.
Even the "cloud cars" were plagued with problems in the early years. I think the main culprit was transmissions, but I'm sure there were other issues as well.
As for other "got to have cars", don't forget the PT Cruiser! Essentially a Neon in a zoot suit, but it was enough for people to pay above sticker for awhile.
Hopefully they'll be around in another 5 years to pull off another "got to have" car. But I'm not holding my breath. :sick:
Funny, I just heard from 62vette's barber that auto sales would receded another 11% in 2009.
Oh that is absolutely probable.
The big cuts in vehicle sales (annual rates close to 10 million) did not happen til October. The first half was much higher. So for this year we may be down 10% from last year. So for the year next year will be down at least 11% from this year.
What about their current crop? I wouldn't hesitate to buy a 300 or a Charger. I just wouldn't buy it from the big Chrysler dealer near me. I hear he's a crook.
I don't think the current ones are too bad. I heard the 5-speed automatic transmission was troublesome when the car first came out...ironically, a component supplied by Mercedes Benz! The 4-speed, which has its roots in the old "Ultradrive" unit from the late 80's that plagued Dynasties and New Yorkers, was actually pretty reliable by this time!
I don't know if the 5-speed they use today is still the Benz unit or not. I wouldn't be afraid to buy a 300 or Charger. I'd definitely stay away from the 2.7 V-6 though. It just doesn't have the power a car this size needs. I know you'd probably want to go full bore and get the Hemi, Lemko. I'd be happy with the 3.5 V-6. More economical than the Hemi, but still quick enough for my needs.
Heck you're not alone! I do my part for GM as we have 4 GM vehicles in our fleet
I've got 3 GM and 4 Mopar. However, considering the newest GM is 24 years old, and the newest Mopar is 9, that's not really helping the Big 2.5 much. :sick:
I guess you don't know that Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, most German cars, they are all subsidized by their governments. So I guess you are going to have to boycott them also.
I don't pay any taxes to those governments, so the automakers based in those countries have to win my business on the merits of their product rather than the influence of their lobbyists. So yeah, I'm boycotting the domestics that do take a bailout since they've chosen to extort my money rather than earn it.
I don't pay any taxes to those governments, so the automakers based in those countries have to win my business on the merits of their product rather than the influence of their lobbyists. So yeah, I'm boycotting the domestics that do take a bailout since they've chosen to extort my money rather than earn it.
So it's OK to buy from a company that extorts money, just so long as it's someone else's money? :shades:
I do have to agree with you on that. My mom had the LHS, my aunt had the Concord, and my other aunt had the Eagle Vision. My aunt with the Concord did have a lot of transmission problems, but the others were ok. I have to disagree with you on the 5.2 and the 5.9 engines. My dad had the 5.2 and he put about 200k miles on it with no engine problems, he did have to have tranny rebuilt. My uncle has the 5.9, its a 96 with 240k miles on it with not many problems, and everyone I have talked to with these engines have been pretty happy.
And somebody mentioned boycotting the big three because of the bail out. I guess you don't know that Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, most German cars, they are all subsidized by their governments. So I guess you are going to have to boycott them also. So, what are you going to drive?
3 problems with that:
1) The subsidies that other nations give to their automakers don't have any negative effect on me (dont use my tax money), and actually help me buy a better product for less cost. 2) The Japanese and German Automakers actually use their subsidies and gov't assistance into improving and providing a superior product. The money goes into making better cars. 3) The Big 3 only use the money to pad their own wallets and those of the lazy incompetent UAW workers. There certainly wasn't much money put into the vehicle.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I don't think that is going to go over well, calling auto workers lazy. Granted GM is stuck paying their employees a very high wage, but it is hard work.
Ratings from me for 9 GM cars and 1 Ford car I have owned for well over a million miles: perfect, perfect, great, very good, very good, very good, good, OK, and OK are the reliability ratings I give them. I still have 5 of them. 22, 22, 11, 15, 7, 20, 14, 13, 11, 10 were/are years old for each. Only twice in 30 years was it necessary to spend as much as $325 on a repair. 203, 187, 168, 165, 158, 125, 115, 113, 111, and 25 are the miles on them now or when sold, in thousands. Only one puppy in the bunch. For me, Buying American has meant several cars over many miles between big issues, and I consider a bill fom a shop for $300 a big issue. There is nothing from Japan that the above experience is inferior to.
I drove Chryslers for years - had about a dozen of them. However my last 2, a 01 Sebring and an 05 Sebring were troublesome, and, I dumped both as soon as the powertrain warranty expired. In May I traded the 05 Sebring for a 08 Saturn Aura. The Aura has been a joy so far - I've put 19K on it so far. My favorite Chryslers were the 95 and 98 Cirrus models I once owned. Put 100K on both of them with no problems.
OW - I understand how you feel. However, a friend of mine at work has had a similar experience with a late model Toyota 4 Runner. I guess my point is - Given my experience with imports, I won't pay a substantial out of pocket premium over a new Ford or GM mid size to get a comparably equipped Toyota or Honda for my business driving. When I buy expensive cars like yours, I negotiate for a factory extended warranty no matter who builds it.
It really is depending on the model. The problem with the Sebring is that they were basically a rebadged Mitsubishi Eclipse which haven't been the most reliable. A friend of mine has a 2005 300c and it has been a great car. Good job though on the Aura, a lot of people forget to even go look at those cars and they are very nice for the money. In my family we have had 11 Saturns and been very happy with all of them. The latest one is the Saturn Outlook, it's a great car and could compare with any foreign car.
That may well be true, but the American auto industry needs more than one or two satisfied customers. And they need to be a for-profit operation, as in net-net cash positive. Just the shear debt is mind boggling. Hope it all works out. As for customer base, it became a question of less loyal customers, as in dissatisfied or simply not impressed buyers.
I suppose if the Charger looked as good as the old '70, and was a tad less bloated looking, I could love the design more. Come to think of it, the New Challenger is a bloated version of the absolute stunning looking 1970. Seems that the Big Three had the best looking cars between '68 and '70. The current Mustang is pretty good effort. Could use a better looking interior, beyond the update, and the 3.5V6 with its better gas mileage / performance as in around 300HP. That would have been the winner car for 2010. As is, if gas was to stay below $2, the Bullitt and all the GT Stangs are a good deal, if $6K or more off sticker. Guess the last great Chrysler was 300, and second oldest the PT Cruiser. That said, the Charger is good value as a cheap RWD drive and the look kinda grows on you. Certainly not an eye candy like the Duke's of Hazard mobile, but tall slab doors and all, it ain't too bad. What is the new fetish with wagon wheels? People must have a desire to buy more expensive tires and support that industry. Heck, I recall Porsche's with 15" wheels. Got a retro car I guess - the Miata has 14" wheels. Hate the old 13" wheels though, which back when seemed impossible to balance. Imagine a balance is easier now, but go-cart wheels a bit too small. :shades:
OW - We actually think a lot alike. I also own an import - an 06 Jaguar X Type 3.0, and, I equipped her with the 7yr - 100K warranty. I've put 40K on her so far with no problems. The Jag's stablemate, a Saturn Aura, came with a long powertrain warranty, so I passed on the extended bumper to bumper add-on the dealer offered. Glad you have the extended warranty on your Denali - payed off for you. My friend at work with the 4 Runner traded it off instead of spending $5K to fix it. He bought a low mileage used 4 Runner that came in off a lease.
I agree with that. Unfortunately, my employer specifies mid sizers to qualify for the company auto reimburesement plan. When you compare the current Sebring to anybody else's midsize, it's shortcomings are obvious. My last Sebring, an 05 2.7 Signature Model, was in the shop a bunch- coolant leaks, 3 major transmission repairs, brake problems, suspension problems, etc. Part of the problem was the dealer - their mechanics were idiots, and, I filed a formal complaint with Chrysler against them. To Chrysler's credit, the zone guy took the car to a larger dealership and had them fix it properly, and, he cut me a check for my out-of -pocket expenses associated with the botched repairs. At least they made the car servicable enough to get 70K miles out of it, and, I didn't get skinned when I traded it off.
Comments
Regards,
OW
Good God! If people thought the UAW-built versions of those cars were bad, the Chinese-built versions are going to make a Yugo look like a Lexus in comparison! They'll be the most hideous abominations since that travesty called a 1958 Packard! I'd sooner the Big Three went extinct than have them carry on like that into the future. It would be like the future of humankind in Planet of the Apes - most are primitive mutes and the rest hideous radioactive mutants!
Here's a 1969 ad with a Cadillac that looks just like my then-girlfriend's car:
Well, there was a '61-62 Caddy in one of those Planet of the Apes movies, "Battle for the Planet of the Apes", I think. Can't remember if it was still running under its own power or horse-drawn, though.
If you wonder how they build cars, go to Wall-Mart and buy a toy for your kid that was made in China and see how long it last.
But we have plenty of our engineers over there training them.
Ironically, Cadillacs cross-town Rival, a Mercury/Lincoln dealership near where I used to live was also one of the most satisfying experiences I've ever had. Bought two pre-owned vehicles from them and had all my Fords serviced there. :shades:
Just goes to show you how tough those early '60s Cadillacs are - they can survive a nuclear war!
I don't remember the year. I was in the Cadillac dealer with my Uncle that loved his Caddies. They had one with the first fake convertible tops. I told the salesman. That has to be the ugliest car I have EVER seen. He was not moved.
I am just to practical to like sedans.
http://www.chooseyouritem.com/classics/files/993000/993487.html
I liked the higher trim level that used the inset quad headlights above the turn signals. The base model (Scottsdale? Cheyenne?), with the big single headlights looked like a big Chevy LUV to me. Not vomit-inducing, but sort of a wallflower.
I didn't really like it when they went to composite headlights, though. The headlight was about the same size as the turn signal below, and it gave it sort of a Wagon Queen Family Truckster look.
I thought the 1999 Silverado looked good, though. At least until they gave it that "angry appliance" mid-life restyle.
I liked the current Silverado/Sierra when they first came out, but I guess I just got tired of the style pretty quickly. I sat in one about a month ago, and was kinda disappointed. It actually felt smaller inside than my old '85 Silverado!
Exactly, what was with that change? I kind of liked the looks of my 2005 GMC. The new GM trucks since 2007 do nothing for me. They are foo foo trucks. All of the brands. I am looking to replace my current beater 99 Ranger with a 1995 vintage Ford Diesel 3/4 ton. Trying to find one with less than 200k miles. Not easy around here. The 99 Ranger V6 is a gutless gas guzzler.
The BIG 3 could have been smart instead of stupid and filed for bankruptcy 20 years ago, rather than making overpriced crap for the last 30 years. Sounds like the BIG 3 were more interested in padding their own wallets than in the customer's best interests.
I call on all Americans to boycott all of the bailout companies. If the company has received, or even just requested a government bailout/loan/handout/whatever you want to call receiving tax payer money, then I call on all Americans to boycott their products, avoid purchasing their products and/or services.
All of the goods they make will sit on the shelves or parking lots. The companies will eventually go bankrupt or the Gov't will have to REBAIL them out which in turn could lead to our Gov't going bankrupt and requiring a bailout from the Chinese so we can be the United States of China instead. The government will finally learn its lesson that bailouts will backfire and will NOT work. Chrysler was a GIGANTIC bailout failure from long ago, as they sold nothing but lemons since then, costing Americans millions in mechanics bills, and then requesting another 9 BILLION to boot this year for just another bailout yet again!
To that, I say good riddance to the bailout seeking companies as obviously my government representatives are not listening to the voice of the people when they say NO to all of the bailouts!!! Since the Senators and Congressmen won't listen to the people, maybe the gov't and bail out companies can hear our wallets when we boycott them.
No to Big 3 vehicles.
No to AIG Insurance.
No to Bailout Banks including Citigroup/Citibank.
No to bailout Investment Wall Street Firms.
BOYCOTT all of these companies and the US will be a much happier finer place in the years to come!
UAW needs to concede pay parity at the end of the day. Costs rule this plan. Reality bites. You can fight bankruptcy but without a team effort from all sides, failure is certain and bankruptcy will be the final answer.
Cerebus does not want to fund Chrysler...why should Congress loan them billions?
Does anyone smell politics as usual??
Regards,
OW
Like I wrote previously, if the product is second-rate, it gets second-rate considerations. With a capital good, good luck on your business model based on sheer patriotism to your brand.
Funny, I just heard from 62vette's barber that auto sales would receded another 11% in 2009.
My case for $200B bailout costs are warming up quite nicely, thank you very much!
Regards,
OW
If you want vindication, go after the banks who have received bailout money with no strings attached by our CongressFolk and used the money to buy other banks. The story I heard or read was the Citibank used some of the money to buy Guatamalan banks. Yup, that helps our country's credit flow problems a whole lot.
Indeed, I had thought of picking up a used something or other for the kid whenever he decides he wants something short of a Corvette for school. I may buy a new GM car. I fear stepping onto the lot because the deal might be Deal instead of No Deal and the Price Might Be Right. My real problem is knowing which I'd like to end up with, planning for the youngster as well as a vehicle that I'd like. I suspect two cars and trading one of the current ones is in the cards by tax time.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
What to do......what to do.....
Regards,
OW
Introduction
Lincoln hasn't always kept up with the competition in the luxury sedan segment. As rivals evolved with more avant-garde styling, better handing and the latest technology, Lincoln lagged behind, struggling to break free of its antiquated image. Earlier in this decade, the brand introduced its midsize LS sedan to much fanfare, but sales numbers fell short of expectations. More recently, Lincoln rolled out the entry-level MKZ sedan, but in our eyes, this model doesn't do enough to distinguish itself from its mundane Ford Fusion sibling. Now, Ford's premium division is trying again with the 2009 Lincoln MKS.
The MKS is the company's new full-size flagship. It's based on Ford's D3 platform, the same one used on the previous-generation Volvo S80 and the current-generation Ford Taurus. Given this pedigree, you're pretty much guaranteed a roomy interior and good safety scores, but we question whether it's an appropriate choice for what Lincoln identifies as its "luxury flagship." The base MKS is a front-wheel-drive sedan, but an all-wheel-drive option is available. For now, the MKS comes with just one engine: a 273-horsepower 3.7-liter V6. Next year, Lincoln promises a twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter V6 that should produce about 340 hp.
The 2009 Lincoln MKS has some things going for it, including a bevy of standard features, an attractively laid out interior and a remarkably comfortable backseat. If these traits appeal to you, Lincon's newest sedan is worth a look. However, overall performance frankly isn't up to snuff, and the interior loses some of its luster upon closer inspection, evincing too many low-quality plastics. There are plenty of other choices to consider at this elevated price point, including the Acura TL, Lexus ES 350 and Volvo S80. The MKS also sits price-wise near the new rear-wheel-drive Hyundai Genesis, and those looking for a similar front-wheel-drive package at a lower price may find the Hyundai Azera or Toyota Avalon more to their liking. In other words, the 2009 MKS -- with a price tag of more than $45,000 when well equipped -- is up against some stiff competition.
Happy shopping!
Regards,
OW
1. Destroyed its driver's window mechanism twice to the tune of $150 each.
2. Cracked its exhaust manifold - requiring a $1000 repair.
3. Decided at 86K miles to start using a quart of oil every 400 miles - -dealer indicated that engine needed rebuilt.
At that point she swapped it for a new Ford Escape.
I bought a new Accord that was so bad, I dumped it at 20K miles. My oldest son had an new Altima that ate 4 transmissions - all under warranty. My other son bought a Nissan Sentra that was a black hole for cash after the warranty ran out. My nephew's Corrolla ate its transmission at 36K miles - requiring a $4000 repair. Sorry - not buying your "inferior" remark - based on our experience. Have I owned bad domestics - Yes - 3 of them (1 Chevy and 2 Chryslers). However, IMO, the new GM and Ford models are very competitive and reliable, and, Chrysler still has major problems.
My 2 cents worth.
OLDCEM
And somebody mentioned boycotting the big three because of the bail out. I guess you don't know that Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, most German cars, they are all subsidized by their governments. So I guess you are going to have to boycott them also. So, what are you going to drive?
1. In the 80's it was the Dodge Caravan.
2. In the 90's it was the LH cars, Intrepid, Concord, LHS.
3. In 2005 they put out the 300c, and that was a huge hit.
4. Now they have put out that amazing Dodge Challenger.
So to say they haven't put out some great cars is not true in my book.
Regards,
OW
1. In the 80's it was the Dodge Caravan.
2. In the 90's it was the LH cars, Intrepid, Concord, LHS.
3. In 2005 they put out the 300c, and that was a huge hit.
4. Now they have put out that amazing Dodge Challenger.
So to say they haven't put out some great cars is not true in my book.
Unfortunately, Chrysler has a knack for building cars that look beautiful and do just about everything right...except when it comes to reliability. The LH cars were pretty troublesome for the first few years, especially with the 3.5 OHC V-6. I think they had most of the problems licked by 1996, but their 4-speed automatic has always been a weak spot, and might still be, to this day. I've also heard that the Rams were pretty bad their first few years out, and those newer, powerful "Magnum" 5.2 and 5.9 V-8's weren't nearly as durable as the older, lower power 318 and 360.
The Neon was pretty bad as well, especially in its early years. And I don't know if they ever, truly, got it right. I've heard that the later 90's models were much improved, and especially the redesigned 2000 model. But then I've heard even they had problems.
Even the "cloud cars" were plagued with problems in the early years. I think the main culprit was transmissions, but I'm sure there were other issues as well.
As for other "got to have cars", don't forget the PT Cruiser! Essentially a Neon in a zoot suit, but it was enough for people to pay above sticker for awhile.
Hopefully they'll be around in another 5 years to pull off another "got to have" car. But I'm not holding my breath. :sick:
Oh that is absolutely probable.
The big cuts in vehicle sales (annual rates close to 10 million) did not happen til October. The first half was much higher. So for this year we may be down 10% from last year. So for the year next year will be down at least 11% from this year.
Can't resurrect Detroit all by myself though, and I already have a boatload of Fords in the livery.....
Heck you're not alone! I do my part for GM as we have 4 GM vehicles in our fleet.
I don't know if the 5-speed they use today is still the Benz unit or not. I wouldn't be afraid to buy a 300 or Charger. I'd definitely stay away from the 2.7 V-6 though. It just doesn't have the power a car this size needs. I know you'd probably want to go full bore and get the Hemi, Lemko. I'd be happy with the 3.5 V-6. More economical than the Hemi, but still quick enough for my needs.
I've got 3 GM and 4 Mopar. However, considering the newest GM is 24 years old, and the newest Mopar is 9, that's not really helping the Big 2.5 much. :sick:
I don't pay any taxes to those governments, so the automakers based in those countries have to win my business on the merits of their product rather than the influence of their lobbyists. So yeah, I'm boycotting the domestics that do take a bailout since they've chosen to extort my money rather than earn it.
So it's OK to buy from a company that extorts money, just so long as it's someone else's money? :shades:
3 problems with that:
1) The subsidies that other nations give to their automakers don't have any negative effect on me (dont use my tax money), and actually help me buy a better product for less cost.
2) The Japanese and German Automakers actually use their subsidies and gov't assistance into improving and providing a superior product. The money goes into making better cars.
3) The Big 3 only use the money to pad their own wallets and those of the lazy incompetent UAW workers. There certainly wasn't much money put into the vehicle.
perfect, perfect, great, very good, very good, very good, good, OK, and OK are the reliability ratings I give them. I still have 5 of them.
22, 22, 11, 15, 7, 20, 14, 13, 11, 10 were/are years old for each.
Only twice in 30 years was it necessary to spend as much as $325 on a repair.
203, 187, 168, 165, 158, 125, 115, 113, 111, and 25 are the miles on them now or when sold, in thousands. Only one puppy in the bunch.
For me, Buying American has meant several cars over many miles between big issues, and I consider a bill fom a shop for $300 a big issue. There is nothing from Japan that the above experience is inferior to.
Regards:
OldCEM
Given my experience with domestics, I'll give the imports a shot. I can tell you that after 45K, the 2006 330xi I leased was perfect.
So far the CR-V seems rock solid.
Regards,
OW
Regards:
OldCEM
Regards:
OldCEM