Ford tried to add Edsel to their line up, but for some reason it did not do well.
IIRC think the Edsel didn't do well because of a recession in 1958...I could be wrong, if I am someone please correct me. Also some people were offended by the styling of the grill. I can't say what the comments were about the grill, as the moderator would probably throw me out if I do! But I think some may know.
I've reccommended this car plenty, haven't lost a friend yet!. No 3.8 liter in mine, I bought the cxs with the dohc 3.6 liter, 240 hp vs. 200 for the 3800. It steps out pretty well.... I concur that a 5 spd trans would have been a great upgrade.....
"You sound more optimistic than Wagoner! But don't recommend La Crosses to your friends unless you can afford to lose some. You may not lose friends if you recommend a Corvette or an Escalade, but you surely will if you recommend this loser with prehistoric pushrod, equally obsolete 4 speed tranny, and a look that resembles Taurus the king of rentals. And, of course, add to that the Buick's Great Grand Pa image and horrible resale value."
yeah, you're right in that the 1958 recession was probably the biggest factor in the Edsel's demise. It hit the middle priced brands, like Dodge, DeSoto, Chrysler, Pontiac, Olds, Buick, and Mercury and Edsel the hardest. Chevy, Ford, and Plymouth fared relatively well, as people will still buy cheaper cars even in rough times. And Cadillac back then was immune to just about anything, although Imperial and Lincoln took a beating.
Edsels were also poorly constructed. They didn't have their own dedicated assembly plant. Instead, they ran the cheaper, smaller Edsels on a sped-up Ford line, and the bigger, pricier Edsels on a rushed Mercury line. As a result, they threw them together faster and sloppier.
The middle-priced market was just getting too crowded and overlapped, as well. Dodges started getting bigger and plusher, while Chryslers started moving downscale a bit in an attempt to make the Imperial look much more prestigious. That put the squeeze on DeSoto. And Buick was running the gamut from the cheap Special, which actually wasn't much more than a V-8 Bel Air, on up to the Roadmaster, which was just a cut below a Cadillac. And Ford tried to squeeze the Edsel in between Ford and Mercury. A Mercury was a much more upscale car back then than it is today, but there still wasn't a whole lot of market gap between a Merc and a Ford. If the Edsel had been launched in 1955, it probably would have sold well for awhile. But in 1958 when it debuted, it came into an overcrowded market that the buyer was fast abandoning. What few buyers there were were going with Chevies, Fords, Plymouths, Ramblers, and VW Bugs and Renaults and such. The few luxury buyers were going for Cadillacs, although the 4-place T-bird proved to be a smash hit.
And you're right about the styling of the Edsel's grille. Absolultely right! The same people who were offended by it were STILL prudes in the 70's, which is why Dodge chose the name "Demon" instead of "Beaver" :surprise:
As for the pushbuttons, the Edsel system was electrical, and very troubleprone. Chrysler's was mechanical, and just about bulletproof. Chrysler even had safeguards in place to keep you from shifting into 1st or 2nd at too high of a speed. I think the maximum limits were 45 and 75 mph, respectively. I dunno; I'm not going to go test it out on my DeSoto! Also, there was a safeguard to keep the car from accidentally going into reverse. If you were moving forward more than 10 mph, I believe it would just go into neutral if you hit the reverse button. And then at 10, would shift into reverse. I'm sure that even that must have been quite a jolt, though!
No, I think sales will be up a little bit. About 363,523 units
That is 24.4% of the market up from 23.6% last August. I believe there was no employee pricing in August last year so we finally have a fair comparison.
Gas is at $2.60 here and it is labor day weekend. Next week it will be under $2.50 and will probably be under $2.50 for a while.
Will this bring all those truck sales back up or will Americans finally learn their lesson and buy smaller fuel efficient vehicles even if prices are low?
"You lose mystique buying a sports car when there is a mini-van parked near by. "
Does this explain why Mustang and Corvette sell so well? Freestar and Uplander aren't the most inspiring vehicles. Expedition and Tahoe don't help things either.
In fact, the evidence of impractical cars drawing people to the showroom is not that difficult to find. Chevy launched SSR (I hope that's what that 2 dr convertible truck is called... I find it hard to remember 3-letter names) in recent past not to sell a few extra vehicles, but to draw more people to the showrooms. And, to some extent Chevy succeeded. People just came to see SSR and then walked out with an Impala. Otherwise, the same people would have bought a Camry. Solstice should have been used to bring people to Chevy showrooms - Pontiac has fewer things to offer when compared with Chevy. Solstice turns more heads than SSR does.
I gotta disagree with Solstice turning more heads. The SSR is so different it turns any heads that see it. Issue is it is way too expensive for most folks. It is an expensive 2 seater with a small trunk bed. Maybe they should have called it the ElCamino and sold it for under $30k?
I just checked the photos of 2007 Honda CR-V and 2007 Honda MDX. UGGGGGGGGGGLY. Such styling will definitely kill Honda and save GM! I'm glad that I bought a 2006 CR-V - bland is better than UGGGGGGGGLY.
Yes, a lower price would have helped greatly with the SSR. Same goes for the resurrected Ford T-Bird (now dead also).
Andre, didn't "Demon" also turn out to be offensive to the religious crowd? IIRC, the name was dropped after two model years (1971-72) and changed to "Sport."
Styling of Honda has changed from bland to ugly in the past few years (started with 03 Accord), this can be attributed to their chief designer who was hired from GM.
I don't recall ever seeing anyone from the "younger" generation drving an SSR, probably because it was too expensive. I've seen mostly middle aged men, perhaps in a middle age crisis that couldn't afford a Corvette?
Styling is always subjective...The thing that will save GM is to prove there self to the public again. Just as the CR-V new style will not kill Honda a couple of new haircuts will not save GM....It is all about substance and perceived quality...just my 2 cents
I would've loved an SSR if it was priced more like a PT Cruiser and was made to be a practical truck instead of a toy with a laughably small payload. It would easily have been the most beautiful compact truck ever. I really loved the styling as the 1947-53 Chevrolet trucks were my favorite trucks. Instead, the SSR turned out to be GM's very late answer to the Plymouth Prowler. Why didn't Chevrolet put this much effort into the Canyon?
I just checked the photos of 2007 Honda CR-V and 2007 Honda MDX. UGGGGGGGGGGLY
Styling is subjective but I got agree. The last CR-V was one of the nicest looking SUV's around, especially the tail lights. Big mistake getting a designer from GM. The new one looks like a bloated Sante Fe or something.......
At the retail level, the divergence was more pronounced, with cars up 11 percent and trucks down 27 percent at Ford.
Although gas prices have subsided slightly from their highs, consumers are not showing signs of switching back to big vehicles.
"Consumers have come to understand that's a very volatile environment -- that we'll likely not have gas prices as low as we enjoyed in the 1990s and the early part of this decade," Pipas said.
Toprak said gas would have to drop to $2.50 a gallon and stay there for several months to change buying patterns.
Despite current trends, GM's new full-size SUVs are faring well. "I'd chalk up a lot of that to the fact that we have extremely competitive product," Ballew said. Their fuel-economy is comparable to the mileage of most midsize SUVs on the market, he said.
GM's sales were up 3.8 percent last month, reflecting a strong performance by its new full-size SUVs and growing demand for its cars, such as the Chevrolet Impala, Cobalt and Aveo, and the Pontiac G6.
GM is cutting production in the fourth quarter by 12 percent, or 150,000 vehicles, as it phases out old trucks and launches a new line of full-size pickups. GM also is paring output of cars sold at cut rates to rental fleets.
We figured we could sell a hybrid with a little kick to it, but found consumers equate hybrids with high fuel economy, not high-performance," said John Mendel in an interview. "And they want huge fuel economy from a hybrid, not just a little better as with the Accord."
So Honda misread the market, a mistake Japanese automakers typically avoid.
Mendel, senior vice president of American Honda and the man in charge of product planning for the U.S. market, was referring to the V-6 engine in the Accord.
Accord sales are so soft Mendel says Honda is exploring possible alternatives, such as teaming a 4-cylinder with the battery pack to boost m.p.g. or combining diesel with the electric for a major mileage jolt.
The third alternative is the most dramatic.
"We could drop the hybrid from the Accord lineup," Mendel said.
GM hasn't had a great designer since Bill Mitchell or maybe Chuck Jordan. Wayne Cherry was the hack who designed the Aztek. What's scary is that when I do see pictures of young designers' work, from when they were in art school or start working, they all look alike whether it's cars or letterhead designs. Looks like they're trying to please their professors or managers rather than come up with anything original. If anybody DOES come upwith something different - everybody rushes to copy it. Witness the "Bangle-butt" on the Camry.
I wonder how long it will be until GM gets a bangle-butt
The Saturnization of Honda is both amusing and nauseating. There's just this ugly heavy-handedness to some of the styling cues - not homogenous designs, they will age poorly.
What's scary is that when I do see pictures of young designers' work, from when they were in art school or start working, they all look alike whether it's cars or letterhead designs. Looks like they're trying to please their professors or managers rather than come up with anything original. If anybody DOES come upwith something different - everybody rushes to copy it. Witness the "Bangle-butt" on the Camry.
That's what going to places like College of Art and Design gets you. You churn out stuff that the group-think environment of these places and professors find to be acceptable. And it's all curvy and bubbly and just reeks of the soullessness of academia.
Blech. Now take a look at a RX-8. Someone did their own thing on that one and it looks great. Or even look at last year's MR2 - it's an older design, but it looked sharp. GM's stuff five years ago didn't look anywhere as nice as that. Even the aging S2000 blows the doors off of the Solstice in styling. It's clean and pure and to the point. It looks like the Cappuccino's bigger brother.
And it is on Mercedes and I saw it on a new Lexus or Infinity. It is like the new Camry though, you get used to it. It is like the bustle back on the Seville, only not as extreme. It will grow on you after awhile (I know, like a fungus....)
Checked MDX too, and they really uglied that one up too! What were they thinking. Both CR-V and MDX were nice looking SUV's and they had to give it that new bloated bubbly look.
I think the comments about designer school are probably correct. Taking a course will drive all the creativity out of someone. Independent designers should send their ideas in and the best ones chosen. At least in the 50's and 60's there was individual thought. I saw a Mercedes that must be about 20 years old, it was in white and had white matching wheel discs and that looked better than any new car I know of!!!
Even the aging S2000 blows the doors off of the Solstice in styling. It's clean and pure and to the point. It looks like the Cappuccino's bigger brother.
Now lets not get to far ahead of ourselves
A bigger Solstice 4 seater if one could be equiped would sit in my driveway. :shades:
Still thinking that the HHR in a truck form would be a hit. Sort of looks like the early '50's truck front. And yes, a practical SSR would make sense. It had the looks, but did not need a retractable top, small bed area, was pretty darn heavy to be a sports car. What it is may be OK though as a special class of truck, for a limited production auto, I suppose it hits the mark. Why, with limited resources, as in profits, they are making such low volume vehicles is beyond me. If GM was in a position of strength, as in low debt, and a proper number of employees to match specialty building, then all sorts of cool limited editions may make sense. I am thinking somewhere in the middle is the key for now. Make interesting cars, for more mass sales, while slowly backing out of the rental fleet image.
When going HEAD2HEAD as the ads begging people to compare GM to the rest, it would first of all be important to make sure you have something above and beyond the competition. Perhaps for now, they should shoot for hiring people to style good looking cars, like the Solestic, and advertise GM as stylish cars for a similar price to Japan makes. So far the HEAD2HEAD is not going to cut it. Japan and Korea have more bang for the buck. And if they come close people will just say why not buy the other make with the better resale or warranty. Only short term hope is to make style and performance key to an advertising push. -Loren (back online post Internet crash and having to change provider)
S2000 is good looking enough, yet typical sports car look -- nothing really new about it. The Solstice is very sharp looking. Where ya put the front license plate will be a problem. RX-8 is interesting. Not sure I like it as I do the wonderful RX7 last model. It hit the mark! The hardtop, targa top, MR2 is the Toy I liked the most looks wise. Yes, last MR2 pretty good too. -Loren
By last August the employee pricing had sold most of the excess inventory so August sales were off. My prediction was made before the numbers were released. The track record for August has been more than 400,000 units, so this years August is not that great. While the August numbers are up, the year to date numbers are also important and are down for the year.
The warranty on my Seville has expired as I have more than 50,000 miles now. I did consider extending, but I think 3 more years and 45,000 miles would have cost over $3000. By keeping the $3000, I can use it over the next 3 or 4 or even 5 years if nothing much happens soon. So far the Seville has not needed much. The water pump will probably need work sometime, but the coolant level is still full.
I think a standard 5 years-70,000 or 6 years-80,000 would be nice. I think though that after 4 years/50,000 miles most of the problems should have shown up. What would be good is a ten year unlimited mileage warranty for the original owner only.
What would be good is a ten year unlimited mileage warranty for the original owner only.
That would be great for the owner but not the manufacturer. I could see all those owners puting on 25,000 miles per year and 250,000 miles in 10 years. Sorry but we all hear about vehicles that get to 200,000 but they are pretty rare for all manufacturers. Even if 75% made it the other 25% would put the company out of business.
Most people putting over 15,000 miles per year on their car tend to trade in after about 3 years. Perhaps 10 years/100,000 miles? I would have liked a 5 year 70,000 mile warranty on my Seville, but I don't expect much to go wrong in the next 20,000 miles, apart from the water pump. The water pump may last another 25,000 even.
No doubt the first generation Hyundias and Kia Sephia were terrible cars. So they have proven how long they will run. However IMO in the last few years the Hykia's are light years ahead of where they were in the beginning. With that said, I don't think enough time has not past for them to have "proven" themselves, that they will "run that long". Just based on my expirence alone with my '02 Kia Rio Cinco I bought new (which my mom now drives)....35,000 trouble free miles. And my '04 I bought new...12,000 trouble free miles. I think they will run that long....much longer.In my case I have no doubt that they will run that long. Would it makes a difference, that I put a lot lower miles a year than the average? I don't know, or could my good expirence be different if I put average or more than average miles on them? All I know is that I have been extremely happy with mine. Of course like with any car routine maintanence is important. I am very religous with oil changes etc.
So you are saying a 7 year warranty with say 85,000 miles is better than say 6 years with 100,000 miles?
I would think the best warranty would cover me until I sell the car. So if I keep a car 5 years and drive 15,000 miles a year I would want a 5 year/75,000 warranty.
The OEM should figure out what the average length of ownership is and the average mileage at that length and offer that.
no no no.... you said GM did a good thing with the Lucerne... what i meant is that everything comes at a price... and in the case of the Lucerne that is $26k... I`d say that`s not much, but other ppl will think "THAT IS OUTRAGEOUS". It`s a great car, with a "great" price. You pay what you get, I hope for the best with the Astra, I really want to see how Saturn will "rebadge" it, they have to change the looks like they did with the Aura *which is awesome*. Will see, I hope it won't be a Cobalt or Pursuit.
Just match the best warranty out there = Hyundai. Seems great to me. Five years bumper to bumper, and ten years on powertrain is more than fair. The 100K miles is really more than fair. The old Chrysler 7/70K wasn't bad. So you are covered the first 4.5 years say - not too bad. Most people get tired of driving the same old car and trade in for a another one before five years are up. And even if you go seven years, the first four being covered helps at 15K + miles per year. The Hyundai ups the cover time at 15K per year to nearly seven years. Hey, unless you go something special, like a BMW or classic, most people want to try something new by that time.
I would say 7 to 10 years and 70k to 100k warrantees are good to excellent. The GM 3 year / 36K is old school. The same can be said of Honda -- poor warranty. Great engine builder however :shades: -Loren
then I don't want one within 200 feet of my home or garage. I'd consider a car that needs a new engine or transmission rebuild or replacement prior to 10 years or 100K miles to be a total, complete, and utter failure.
sorry, but 100K isn't more than fair, it is what the standard auto industry warranty should be. Honda's lame warranty is tempered by the fact that if something goes wrong within 12K of the warranty ending, they will most likely fix it free of charge.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
My friend has a 1995 Ford Explorer with 189,000 miles. I swear the only thing that has been replaced, is an alternator (at 188,000 miles) and a new transmission (at 165,000 miles). Unbelievable for a Ford! Even his mechanic is amazed it past the last smog test!
Well I got a 2005 PT. Come to find out that Chryslers 7/70K warranty went all the way back to GM territory in 2006 with a 36K warranty. I got the last of the Chrysler longer warranties.
Was considering at one time the 300 or Charger, but I don't know. Still not a fan of small windows and high window sills. I guess some really liked those chop top Mercury cars people custom built over the years. That is what they look like. Too each his/her own. The 300 is stylish in a way. I still prefer windows on a car. Looking at a new Stang rolling on by today, it looked like the windows were shrinking and the window sill was to the chin of the gal driving it. Hummmm? Now a BMW3, with low doors you can hand an elbow out of is a throw back to a better time. Next car may be a used car. -Loren
My friend has a 1995 Ford Explorer with 189,000 miles. I swear the only thing that has been replaced, is an alternator (at 188,000 miles) and a new transmission (at 165,000 miles). Unbelievable for a Ford! Even his mechanic is amazed it past the last smog test! --end quote--
Guess that is one of those mathematical extremely rare possibilities, like being struck by lightening. I would bet on the lightening strike, over a zero problem Ford. :surprise: Does happen, and Ford parts should be less expensive than average import vehicle. Lots of people like the Vic for durability. I think most Japan cars look better ten years down the road, but I could be wrong. Could be struck by lightening too -- oh no! -Loren
Comments
IIRC think the Edsel didn't do well because of a recession in 1958...I could be wrong, if I am someone please correct me. Also some people were offended by the styling of the grill. I can't say what the comments were about the grill, as the moderator would probably throw me out if I do!
Rocky
"You sound more optimistic than Wagoner! But don't recommend La Crosses to your friends unless you can afford to lose some. You may not lose friends if you recommend a Corvette or an Escalade, but you surely will if you recommend this loser with prehistoric pushrod, equally obsolete 4 speed tranny, and a look that resembles Taurus the king of rentals. And, of course, add to that the Buick's Great Grand Pa image and horrible resale value."
Edsels were also poorly constructed. They didn't have their own dedicated assembly plant. Instead, they ran the cheaper, smaller Edsels on a sped-up Ford line, and the bigger, pricier Edsels on a rushed Mercury line. As a result, they threw them together faster and sloppier.
The middle-priced market was just getting too crowded and overlapped, as well. Dodges started getting bigger and plusher, while Chryslers started moving downscale a bit in an attempt to make the Imperial look much more prestigious. That put the squeeze on DeSoto. And Buick was running the gamut from the cheap Special, which actually wasn't much more than a V-8 Bel Air, on up to the Roadmaster, which was just a cut below a Cadillac. And Ford tried to squeeze the Edsel in between Ford and Mercury. A Mercury was a much more upscale car back then than it is today, but there still wasn't a whole lot of market gap between a Merc and a Ford. If the Edsel had been launched in 1955, it probably would have sold well for awhile. But in 1958 when it debuted, it came into an overcrowded market that the buyer was fast abandoning. What few buyers there were were going with Chevies, Fords, Plymouths, Ramblers, and VW Bugs and Renaults and such. The few luxury buyers were going for Cadillacs, although the 4-place T-bird proved to be a smash hit.
And you're right about the styling of the Edsel's grille. Absolultely right! The same people who were offended by it were STILL prudes in the 70's, which is why Dodge chose the name "Demon" instead of "Beaver" :surprise:
As for the pushbuttons, the Edsel system was electrical, and very troubleprone. Chrysler's was mechanical, and just about bulletproof. Chrysler even had safeguards in place to keep you from shifting into 1st or 2nd at too high of a speed. I think the maximum limits were 45 and 75 mph, respectively. I dunno; I'm not going to go test it out on my DeSoto! Also, there was a safeguard to keep the car from accidentally going into reverse. If you were moving forward more than 10 mph, I believe it would just go into neutral if you hit the reverse button. And then at 10, would shift into reverse. I'm sure that even that must have been quite a jolt, though!
That is 24.4% of the market up from 23.6% last August. I believe there was no employee pricing in August last year so we finally have a fair comparison.
Will this bring all those truck sales back up or will Americans finally learn their lesson and buy smaller fuel efficient vehicles even if prices are low?
Does this explain why Mustang and Corvette sell so well? Freestar and Uplander aren't the most inspiring vehicles. Expedition and Tahoe don't help things either.
In fact, the evidence of impractical cars drawing people to the showroom is not that difficult to find. Chevy launched SSR (I hope that's what that 2 dr convertible truck is called... I find it hard to remember 3-letter names) in recent past not to sell a few extra vehicles, but to draw more people to the showrooms. And, to some extent Chevy succeeded. People just came to see SSR and then walked out with an Impala. Otherwise, the same people would have bought a Camry. Solstice should have been used to bring people to Chevy showrooms - Pontiac has fewer things to offer when compared with Chevy. Solstice turns more heads than SSR does.
Andre, didn't "Demon" also turn out to be offensive to the religious crowd? IIRC, the name was dropped after two model years (1971-72) and changed to "Sport."
Same for T-Birds but most are mature women.
CR-V new style will not kill Honda a couple of new haircuts will not save GM....It is all about substance and perceived quality...just my 2 cents
Styling is subjective but I got agree. The last CR-V was one of the nicest looking SUV's around, especially the tail lights.
Big mistake getting a designer from GM. The new one looks like a bloated Sante Fe or something.......
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Wonder if it will continue to drop for the rest of the year? Maybe it will hit $2????
Then again something will probably happen and it will go up again.
There goes E85.
At the retail level, the divergence was more pronounced, with cars up 11 percent and trucks down 27 percent at Ford.
Although gas prices have subsided slightly from their highs, consumers are not showing signs of switching back to big vehicles.
"Consumers have come to understand that's a very volatile environment -- that we'll likely not have gas prices as low as we enjoyed in the 1990s and the early part of this decade," Pipas said.
Toprak said gas would have to drop to $2.50 a gallon and stay there for several months to change buying patterns.
Despite current trends, GM's new full-size SUVs are faring well. "I'd chalk up a lot of that to the fact that we have extremely competitive product," Ballew said. Their fuel-economy is comparable to the mileage of most midsize SUVs on the market, he said.
GM's sales were up 3.8 percent last month, reflecting a strong performance by its new full-size SUVs and growing demand for its cars, such as the Chevrolet Impala, Cobalt and Aveo, and the Pontiac G6.
GM is cutting production in the fourth quarter by 12 percent, or 150,000 vehicles, as it phases out old trucks and launches a new line of full-size pickups. GM also is paring output of cars sold at cut rates to rental fleets.
We figured we could sell a hybrid with a little kick to it, but found consumers equate hybrids with high fuel economy, not high-performance," said John Mendel in an interview. "And they want huge fuel economy from a hybrid, not just a little better as with the Accord."
So Honda misread the market, a mistake Japanese automakers typically avoid.
Mendel, senior vice president of American Honda and the man in charge of product planning for the U.S. market, was referring to the V-6 engine in the Accord.
Accord sales are so soft Mendel says Honda is exploring possible alternatives, such as teaming a 4-cylinder with the battery pack to boost m.p.g. or combining diesel with the electric for a major mileage jolt.
The third alternative is the most dramatic.
"We could drop the hybrid from the Accord lineup," Mendel said.
I looked at Kia and they have a 10 year/100k warranty. Does the 10 years really mean anything since almost all buyers will hit 100k in 6 years or so?
Would a longer warranty at GM really sell more cars?
The Saturnization of Honda is both amusing and nauseating. There's just this ugly heavy-handedness to some of the styling cues - not homogenous designs, they will age poorly.
That's what going to places like College of Art and Design gets you. You churn out stuff that the group-think environment of these places and professors find to be acceptable. And it's all curvy and bubbly and just reeks of the soullessness of academia.
Blech. Now take a look at a RX-8. Someone did their own thing on that one and it looks great. Or even look at last year's MR2 - it's an older design, but it looked sharp. GM's stuff five years ago didn't look anywhere as nice as that. Even the aging S2000 blows the doors off of the Solstice in styling. It's clean and pure and to the point. It looks like the Cappuccino's bigger brother.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Cappuccino
And it is on Mercedes and I saw it on a new Lexus or Infinity. It is like the new Camry though, you get used to it. It is like the bustle back on the Seville, only not as extreme. It will grow on you after awhile (I know, like a fungus....)
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Checked MDX too, and they really uglied that one up too!
What were they thinking. Both CR-V and MDX were nice looking SUV's and they had to give it that new bloated bubbly look.
I think the comments about designer school are probably correct. Taking a course will drive all the creativity out of someone. Independent designers should send their ideas in and the best ones chosen.
At least in the 50's and 60's there was individual thought. I saw a Mercedes that must be about 20 years old, it was in white and had white matching wheel discs and that looked better than any new car I know of!!!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Now lets not get to far ahead of ourselves
A bigger Solstice 4 seater if one could be equiped would sit in my driveway. :shades:
Rocky
What's up with all these "carbon copy" interior and exteriors lately ????
Rocky
When going HEAD2HEAD as the ads begging people to compare GM to the rest, it would first of all be important to make sure you have something above and beyond the competition. Perhaps for now, they should shoot for hiring people to style good looking cars, like the Solestic, and advertise GM as stylish cars for a similar price to Japan makes. So far the HEAD2HEAD is not going to cut it. Japan and Korea have more bang for the buck. And if they come close people will just say why not buy the other make with the better resale or warranty. Only short term hope is to make style and performance key to an advertising push.
-Loren
(back online post Internet crash and having to change provider)
-Loren
Yes!
-Loren
I think a standard 5 years-70,000 or 6 years-80,000 would be nice. I think though that after 4 years/50,000 miles most of the problems should have shown up. What would be good is a ten year unlimited mileage warranty for the original owner only.
That would be great for the owner but not the manufacturer. I could see all those owners puting on 25,000 miles per year and 250,000 miles in 10 years. Sorry but we all hear about vehicles that get to 200,000 but they are pretty rare for all manufacturers. Even if 75% made it the other 25% would put the company out of business.
Rocky
Rocky
I would think the best warranty would cover me until I sell the car. So if I keep a car 5 years and drive 15,000 miles a year I would want a 5 year/75,000 warranty.
The OEM should figure out what the average length of ownership is and the average mileage at that length and offer that.
We're at 210K miles on our '94 Mercury Villager. Of course it has a Nissan engine and tranny. Never any major work. We're buying a new car soon!
I would say 7 to 10 years and 70k to 100k warrantees are good to excellent. The GM 3 year / 36K is old school.
The same can be said of Honda -- poor warranty. Great engine builder however :shades:
-Loren
sorry, but 100K isn't more than fair, it is what the standard auto industry warranty should be.
Honda's lame warranty is tempered by the fact that if something goes wrong within 12K of the warranty ending, they will most likely fix it free of charge.
Was considering at one time the 300 or Charger, but I don't know. Still not a fan of small windows and high window sills. I guess some really liked those chop top Mercury cars people custom built over the years. That is what they look like. Too each his/her own. The 300 is stylish in a way. I still prefer windows on a car. Looking at a new Stang rolling on by today, it looked like the windows were shrinking and the window sill was to the chin of the gal driving it. Hummmm? Now a BMW3, with low doors you can hand an elbow out of is a throw back to a better time.
Next car may be a used car.
-Loren
--end quote--
Guess that is one of those mathematical extremely rare possibilities, like being struck by lightening. I would bet on the lightening strike, over a zero problem Ford. :surprise: Does happen, and Ford parts should be less expensive than average import vehicle. Lots of people like the Vic for durability. I think most Japan cars look better ten years down the road, but I could be wrong. Could be struck by lightening too -- oh no!
-Loren