Again, it sort of like comparing tread wear numbers of different brands or offset crash ratings between SUVs and sedans - Warranty Week says it's really not a good indicator trying to compare the warranty numbers between two car companies.
drive a car that is safe and drive with your heart.... take it from someone who has owned atleast one from every manufacturer... best car: user interface designed by Apple, electro mechanics designed by VAG (Volks/Audi group), manufactured at Subaru facilities.. does n't exist right now but the first two components are pretty close right now.. drive a Audi with MMI... all the others Toyotas, Hondas and their parallel parking exorbitant cousins are just a waste of ones life...
Bingo - Maytag is not Maytag anymore, just a high-line Whirlpool manufactured brand, as is Kitchen Aid, another once proud standalone former manufacturer (Hobart). You can count all major appliance manufacturers with only a few fingers these days. Now back to GM . . .
Now add that the Avalon has more torque, is larger, heavier, roomier, more comfortable, quieter, has better reliability, has larger trunk, larger gas tank, better suspension, better tires, better warranty, and lower cost.
that same info showed GM and Ford's warranty costs were trending down and were pretty low when compared to other indsutries.
Whether they are trending down or not, they are still twice as much as Honda and Toyota. Look at this other article linked from the main page and there is a clear correlation between these costs and quality.
The site doesn't suggest GM cars are unreliable, just offers strong evidence based on papers filed by the manufactures and customers that the Japanese automakers are still ahead in terms of quality.
As for the Toyota example, I would welcome that argument if there were some evidence of it. From personal experience, I test-drove a Saturn Outlook with 500 miles on the odometer, with a whirring noise coming from behind the dash, jiggling volume control buttons and a malfunctioning lid for the compartment atop the dash.
We had loved the car on the paper, and even tried to dismiss the buttons/lid malfunctions as customer abuse during test-drives, but the noise coming from behind the panel was just too much.
Whether other industries have worse numbers than GM, I think GM should make a big deal of it if it ever were to enter those markets.
We have dog of a Maytag refrigerator too. Hate cheap, noisy thing. We did have good luck in the past with their washer and driers. Perhaps one should quit while ahead. Anyway, we had bad luck with the thing from day one. Not to say ALL their stuff is bad. Kinda like a car company which comes to mind. Whirlpool, so far, has been good appliances, at a reasonable price.
That seems pretty funny I have owned 7 G.M cars in my 20 Years of driving. All have been very reliable, and I have never had a car that at 500 miles had a rattle or whirring sound. Sounds pretty Illigical to me. Anyway G.M now makes some great cars. I am sure that M1 miata will disagree but he disagrees with everyone. Anyway My girlfriend just traded her x5 for a Saturn Sky redline. We were driving around Washington D.C last night and people were stopping us all the time to ask what it was.
That seems pretty funny I have owned 7 G.M cars in my 20 Years of driving. All have been very reliable, and I have never had a car that at 500 miles had a rattle or whirring sound.
I wouldn't call it funny, probably poor judgment by the dealer to let customers test-drive the car. It was an intermittent noise, coming and going for 20 seconds every 10 minutes or so. I don't know whether modern cars still use cables to twist the needles in the instruments, but that's what it sounded like.
We were driving around Washington D.C last night and people were stopping us all the time to ask what it was.
Speaking of poor judgment, you are driving around Washington D.C in the middle of the night and stopping to answer questions from strangers?
It might of been the cooling fan for the radiator. They are electrical now and the car is so much quieter with it off. When it comes on it makes a whirring sound from the direction of the dash for a driver. With cars running so cool these days, they hardly ever have to come on. there might be a system check where they cycle on for ten seconds every once in a while, or that may be all the cooling from a fan that an outlook needs.
Mine is stuck on due to a problem on one of my cars. Before that it never came on. With it on now, it is 3 times louder than the engine at idle. Without it on, it would have to be a calm day to listen out the drivers window and hear the engine idling.
My friend had to get the little compartment cover repaired on his 2005 Accord and they are the greatest thing since sliced bread.
What is a jiggling radio button? Does the radio button dance to the music?
What is a jiggling radio button? Does the radio button dance to the music?
They didn't dance to the music, but rather to the road surfaces. There was noticeable travel before they would do anything.
Again, other than the whirring noise from behind the dash (which would be impossible to tolerate on a daily basis,) I must assume the other problems were caused by abuse from other people.
As a coincidence I have a 2005 Accord. To my disappointment, quality has not been stellar. With 15000 miles, the internal handle for trunk release stopped working (a loose hook fixed during the next oil change...in the first visit to the dealer :-)
If we are going to compare Accords to Outlook, we can look into the execution of individual parts. Slam the door on both and listen. In the Accord, there is a solid thud. In the Outlook there is a slight shiver unbecoming of a 5000lb vehicle.
And when you climb into third row, there is no flooring panel beneath the carpet between the tracks of the reclined 2nd row seats.
>We have dog of a Maytag refrigerator too. Hate cheap, noisy thing.
Send an email to the address in my profile. If you have a side-by-side I may be able to help with the noises. I just did trouble-shooting and reengineering on mine; it's about 7 years old just before the changes started happening at Maytag for deterorating quality (like at Toyota).
No doubt what's going on in the housing industry will effect domestic truck sales more than Toyota. Since most contractors buy domestic, sales of Ford, Chevy, & Dodge are sure to suffer more than that of Toyota.
Plus Toyota seems to be aggressive with incentives to move Tundras.
I wouldn't say new cars run cool, but cooling systems seem to do a much better job removing heat from the engine.
Even when towing and being heavily loaded in my Suburban, I've towed some up some serious grades in 100+ degree heat w/o the temp gauge rising one bit. Now the cooling fan is another story. Mine is not electric, but it it is on a clutch. When it's 90+ outside along with towing my boat, it sounds like I'm inside a wind tunnel. Only noticeable when at higher rpm, such as, pulling up a hill and having to run in a lower gear and/or accelerating. When it's cooler outside I don't hear it much.
The motors in both our Maytag washer and dryer had to be replaced in less than 4 years. One was under warranty the other, not so lucky. The repairman that came out to fix the first one to go (fried motor in both) said that the motors that they put in them were junk. Too small for the size of the machine. It was replaced with a bigger motor in each case and we have had no problems since. Maytag went from great to junk overnight about 10 years ago. I will never buy another.
The motors in both our Maytag washer and dryer had to be replaced in less than 4 years. One was under warranty the other, not so lucky. The repairman that came out to fix the first one to go (fried motor in both) said that the motors that they put in them were junk. Too small for the size of the machine. It was replaced with a bigger motor in each case and we have had no problems since. Maytag went from great to junk overnight about 10 years ago. I will never buy another.
Sounds like they're starting to build appliances these days like they build cars. Sure, they're better in many ways than what came before, but once things start to go, you're better off just replacing, rather than repairing.
My grandparents got a new refrigerator in 1969, the year they remodeled their kitchen. It was an N-something...either Norcold or Norge. Ugly green thing that you had to defrost yourself. It was still running fine though, when they got new appliances in 1994. It went out in the garage, where it replaced this old yellow 50's thing that had the old style latch door where kids could lock themselves in. In fact, it was still running in 2004 when I replaced it with one of my old refrigerators! It was ugly, but still worked fine!
In contrast, I've had two refrigerators die on me. One was a 1982 or so model that my Mom gave me when she got a new one. Crapped out in 2002. The other was a 1989 fridge that was in my condo when I bought it in 1994. I remodeled the condo before I sold it, so I brought the fridge with me to use as a spare. Just crapped out this summer, at the ripe old age of 18. Oh, and I think it was a Japanese import, because it was actually RUSTING! :P But then, the fit and finish was pretty sloppy, and the orange peel was pretty noticable, so perhaps the domestics had a hand in it, too. :surprise:
Probably lots of reasons why newer refrigerators don't last as long as some of the models from 30-40 years ago. Energy efficiency and changes in freon are probably big reasons.
The first frige my wife and I purchased after we got married in '96 was a GE Profile top freezer model. I thought it was dying last year as it ran all the time and wasn't keeping food cold. After we purchased the Maytag, I figured out what was wrong with the GE. The inside light wasn't turning off. Well boys, I put that old frige in the garage and purchased a kegerator kit. Now it's the beer fridge with a keg on tap 24/7. Is it 5 o'clock yet?
Back to our regularly scheduled program..... With the updated powertrains in the new Taurus, Malibu, Accord etc. is GM going to offer the 3.6 6speed in the Impala? Or are they just going to wait for a replacement model?
Back to our regularly scheduled program..... With the updated powertrains in the new Taurus, Malibu, Accord etc. is GM going to offer the 3.6 6speed in the Impala? Or are they just going to wait for a replacement model?
Seems to me that it wouldn't be a hard thing to do, since that engine's already offered in the LaCrosse. But then, wiht the introduction of the new Malibu, I can see the Impala sort of going the way of mainly a fleet type car. Taxi companies, police departments, or people that just want a fairly big, inexpensive car. Sort of Chevy's version of a Crown Vic. Or a 1980's Diplomat/Gran Fury.
I wonder if putting that engine in the Impala would steal some thunder from the Malibu? It might be best to just leave the Impala as-is, until it's time to replace it.
October issue of CR rates Cobalt number 2 American brand after Focus in small car segment. But, in total list of 14 cars of American and foreign brands, Cobalt is number 12. Brands ahead of Cobalt were: Honda, Ford, Mazda, VW, Hyundai, Toyota, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Subaru, Kia. The Cobalt beat the Saturn Ion and Suzuki Forenza.
When will GM come out with a Cobalt upgrade or replacement that will be number one?
Considering the Focus is old, it's sad that the Cobalt is still rated behind it. I'd hope it was rated above the Ion, that thing is horrible. Now, we can't be quoting CU, they are biased ya know.
Considering the Focus is old, it's sad that the Cobalt is still rated behind it. I'd hope it was rated above the Ion, that thing is horrible. Now, we can't be quoting CU, they are biased ya know.
Funny thing is, the Cobalt and Ion are actually on the same platform! I remember when the Ion first came out though, it pretty much got slammed from the get-go. The Cobalt seemed to garner much better press, even if it is considered an also-ran by now.
In recent Business Week article, 4 GM cars were named as worst designed of all time. These were: Chevette, Corvair, Vega, Aztek. AMC was next best with 3 cars: Gremlin, Matador, Pacer. Ford had Pinto. Carmaker from Yugoslavia, Zastava Koral, had Yugo.
I remember when the Aztec came out and guy I work with said "They should put gun turrets on the roof of them and send em over to Iraq!"
I live near a guy with a Pristine AMC wagon (with the fuax wood paneling) and an Immaculate Rambler Ambassador. I bet he would disagree with that list!
1487 has been completely clear about this. The Cobalt is competing with the old Honda Civic, Mazda Protoge, Jetta, Excel, etc not the current models. What is so hard about this for CR to understand?????
Sad thing, since a Corvair Monza looks and perhaps is, a very cool car! And the Vega looked really good. Well it looked good in the showroom; if not looking so outside in the elements. Anyway, both are sharp looking designs. The Corvair, second generation looks good today. Just make it a mid-engine and bring it on back. If they are not interested in the Solstice Too Tall Door Coupe, which looks hot, then build some other hardtop, like a mid-engine targa top. If they need help, Toyota could lend a hand. L
Yes, and was losing that war too. Wouldn't you prefer the old Civic to the new Cobalt? Come to think of it, the Protege, and Jetta were dang good little cars. Well the Jetta has its problems, as ya know, but in this case, the car when running is sharp looking and handles - feel wise, well. Put it another way, all the others have something to say for their little selves. As for looks, a slightly updated Cavalier would look sharper. Just look at front, side and back and decide for yourself. They just tried to make it a bit more Japanese/Korean car look to the old Cav, and ended up with such. Loren
Styling aside, the Aztek was ahead of it's time. You could consider it one of the first crossover vehicles. It was the size of a SUV, but had the economy and ride of a car. I almost got one a few years ago. It was at the time where they were going to discontinue it and the dealers were practically giving them away. You could get one for thousands under invoice and the salesman would thank you for it. My wife (sensing a theme if you have read a lot of my posts) could not get past the looks. I liked the versatility and the inexpensiveness.
There is an ugly replacement, courtesy of Subaru called the Tribeca. It is almost as challenged in looks. Is Hyundai / Kia still topping the list for safety in smaller SUVs? How is it cars, like the Kia Sedona are topping the lists for safe cars. Where are the American Revolution battle wagons? Did we ever think the day would come when Korean cars are tested to be safer than an American car? Loren
Even at thousands under invoice, a late 2005 model will fetch less than $10K as a trade-in, that is, if it is not one of those bright yellow eye-sores that can turn onlookers into stone.
The Aztec looks modern, as something you would see in an old Star Wars, or whatever perhaps older movie about the future. Or is that the Smart car. Those look a bit like the car everyone had in the future, when people are taking up every square inch of land, and buzzing around in toy looking cars.
Wonder why people did not buy a Matador? Not a bad looking car. Wish I had an AMX right now, in mint condition. Those are a rare find. Heck, even the Javelin. GM was right on the mark with the first Camaro. We need not talk about the Mustangs Pinto era, though it actually is not bad looking at all -- pretty much Pony car looking. Guess things sort of peaked in '67 Mustang looks, though in a way the '69 had some interesting lines to it. Size matters, and Mustang got fat. Oh wait, the New Camaro dimensions :surprise: , don't ask, don't tell. Sorry, but this is not your father's Camaro, nor mine. Please, keep width and tall doors on Hummers. ramblin' on.... L
I wonder if you could put sycronized red LED lights that go in a back-and-forth pattern on the older Tribeca...
There is a white late model Aztec (without all the awful black cladding) at the apartment building where I drop my youngest off for day-care. It does not look too bad. It looks more similar to my Outlook than I would care to admit.
I saw one of the Subaru sports cars yesterday. Now they were pretty neat looking cars. Ferrari looking, compared to the WRX Not to say the WRX is not tops in what it does. I was amazed at how few sedans they have on the lots at Subaru. Try to find a base model Legacy -- I found none. Seemed like wagons, and small specialty looking stuff is their mainstay. L
xrunner2: In recent Business Week article, 4 GM cars were named as worst designed of all time. These were: Chevette, Corvair, Vega, Aztek. AMC was next best with 3 cars: Gremlin, Matador, Pacer. Ford had Pinto. Carmaker from Yugoslavia, Zastava Koral, had Yugo.
I don't put much stock in lists such as this...if I recall correctly, Business Week included the 1977 Chevrolet Caprice on a list of all-time terrible cars, which is complete nonsense.
The Chevette wasn't a bad car...just a very average one. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad, either. Just basic, reliable transportation - nothing more, nothing less.
Both Corvairs were widely admired for their styling, and even the 1960-63 models were about 90 percent there. GM needed to sweat a few more details to get the car right, but the basics were there.
I'd say the 1977-90 Chevrolet Impala/Caprice should be on a list of the best cars of all time. Everybody I knew, including myself, had extremely good luck with these cars.
It's all in the marketing. If the Aztek were to have come from Honda it would have been marketed to the chic and would have accepted by the reviewers just like the Element, Xb, etc., as a wonderful step forward from stodgy old designs.
Yeah, market it as the next Star Wars or Star Trek vehicle The Element is odd, and marketed to be so. Not a huge success, or was it? Those plastic panels are yuk, but oh well, it is what it is. Unfortunately, no one knew what the Aztek was suppose to be. I am thinking it needed a spokesperson -- how much would it cost for Captain Kirk? Captain, we are getting larger. Anyway, the xB is a wonderful success. A cute, yet functional car. In no way a comparison to the Aztec, IMHO. no cr-v is doesn't stand for california redemption value - i asked. Loren
The press ditched the looks of the Honda Ridgeline, but then Car&Driver added this to their 40000 miles evaluation of the beast:
Just as significant, the Ridgeline seemed just as new at 40,000 miles as it did when it actually was new—no squeaks, no rattles, no loose trim pieces, no mechanical idiosyncrasies, with the feel of something carved from a single chunk of billet.
Well I have no idea about the car during that time span, but am I to assume those to all be RWD cars with the basic good ol' V8 engines? I am thinking that is what GM did the best. During the FWD era, things just came undone. We did have a couple of Impala/Caprice cars for a company car where I worked, and they seemed roomy inside. The oldest being the widest. The air conditioning worked. The ride was soft. Can not recall anything too exciting about them, but the looks was pretty good, come to think of it. So good style, good ride down the freeway. Made a good car for the boss to use overall. I liked the '71 Cutlass Supreme for looks. Did the Impala use the 350V8 most of those years, or was it the 5.0 engine, whatever that is? As for driving excitement, I think most people under 60 were not buying these cars, but I could be wrong. I did buy a large car in '86, but was the exception to the rule back then, and had traded in a Mustang, which my usually sized and type of vehicle. Just trying something different. Let me tell ya, the Stealth after the larger Olds was so much more rewarding to drive. L
Wonder why people did not buy a Matador? Not a bad looking car. Wish I had an AMX right now, in mint condition. Those are a rare find. Heck, even the Javelin.
I think the Matador just got old and wasn't adequately updated as the years rolled on. IIRC, that design first came out in 1967. Rambler/AMC didn't have the money to field a separate full-size and mid-size lineup, so they came up with one basic design and offered it in different lengths. The bigger models were Ambassadors and the smaller ones were Rebels, which were renamed Matador for 1971.
They sold tolerably in the earlier years, but AMC just didn't have the resources to redesign their cars every few years. About all they could muster was a heavy facelift. And back then, the styles changed quickly. For 1968, Mopar and GM intermediates were new. I don't know if the Mercury/Ford intermediates were all-new, but they were heavily revised from the 1966-67 style.
Then, in 1970, the Ford intermediates were heavily redesigned again. I still don't think it was all-new, though. Chrysler fielded new intermediates for 1971, then for 1972, Ford redesigned theirs (and this time it WAS all new, going from unitized to body-on-frame). GM's new midsizers came out for 1973, the last to be designed in that "big on the outside, small on the inside...heavy, posh, and thirsty" idiom.
So by 1974, the AMC products were looking pretty tired. To top it all off, they blew way too much money designing the goofy, frog-eyed Matador coupe. Supposedly it was pretty slick, designed with NASCAR in mind, but it was a huge flop. The Matador went to an awkward "coffin nose" look.
By 1974, the fuel crisis was in full swing, and bigger cars just never were AMC's strong point to begin with. So that, plus the awkward styling, really sunk them. I think 1974 was also the Amabassador's last year, so it was Matador-only from then on out.
In 1976, the Aspen/Volare came onto the scene, and showed that a compact car could serve as good or better than many midsized cars on the market (when it wasn't rusting or stalling out). And then in 1977, the radically downsized Chevy Caprice and its siblings instantly made every old-school midsized car on the market obsolete.
The Matador was dropped after 1978, and by that time I think they were mainly purchased by gov't agencies, police departments, etc. They were just too outdated and thirsty for most buyers by that time.
I don't think they were particularly bad cars, although finding parts could be annoying. Especially when the transmission came from Chrysler the wheels came from Ford, God-knows what else came from GM, etc!
All I remember was they came with either a 4.3l V6 or a 305. The 350 went to the SS model, or was that a 396?
I think most Impalas came with the 283 from 1959 through the 60's, although the 327 was a popular option. By around 1967 or 1968, a 307 replaced the 283 as the base V-8. The cars themselves were getting heavier by this time, so the 327 was probably more popular. For the 1971 redesign, the cars were so heavy that the 350 was the standard V-8. You could get an inline-6, but you really didn't want 110 hp in a 4000+ pound car, so it was rarely ordered.
When they were downsized for 1977, I think there were initially three engine choices...250 6-cyl, 305 V-8, 350 V-8. There was a 267/4.4 V-8, but I don't think it was offered until a few years later. Most common engine by this time was most likely the 305, as buyers in the late 70's probably thought a 350 was too much of a guzzler. It was dropped after 1979, except for in police cars.
A 229 V-6 became the standard engine for 1980, replacing the inline 6. For 1985, that engine was increased to 262 CID (the 4.3). At some point, you could get the 350 again, maybe in 1991? It was a 185 hp TBI version. Not much more hp than the 305's 170, but a lot torquier. I think eventually the 4.3 V-6 was dropped and the 305 V-8 made standard.
In 1994, they changed the engines again. The 305 was dropped, and a new 4.3 V-8 was introduced. This caused a lot of confusion, because most people remember the 4.3 V-6 as well. The 4.3 V-8 had 200 hp, but these cars were pretty heavy, so it still felt underpowered. Meanwhile, the 350 got boosted to a healthy 260 hp. This was standard in the Impala SS, Roadmaster, and Fleetwood, as well as the Caprice wagon. And optional in the Caprice. The 4.3 was limited to the Caprice sedan, and was dropped when the B-body was ditched, after 1996. As for the 350, it lasted a few more years in cars and trucks. It was eventually replaced in trucks by the 4.8/5.3/6.0 engines. The Camaro used the 350 until its end. The Corvette went to a 6.0 or something like that.
As for the 396, it first came out in 1965 I think, to replace the 409. It was an all-new big block engine, whereas the famous 409 was actually derived from an old 1950's truck motor. My Dad had a 1965 Impala SS with a 396...425 hp version. It would probably be worth something today, but back then it was just an old car. It threw a rod late one night on a lonely back road, in 1970 or 1971 I guess, and he just abandoned it there!
In those days though, the Impala SS was just a dress-up package. If you wanted a big engine, you had to order that separate. Some Impala SS'es had the 6-cyl! The ones to have though, from what I've heard, are the 425 hp versions of the 409 and 396.
The 396 itself was enlarged slightly to 402 CID around 1970, and I think it went away after 1972.
Comments
Again, it sort of like comparing tread wear numbers of different brands or offset crash ratings between SUVs and sedans - Warranty Week says it's really not a good indicator trying to compare the warranty numbers between two car companies.
Whether they are trending down or not, they are still twice as much as Honda and Toyota. Look at this other article linked from the main page and there is a clear correlation between these costs and quality.
The site doesn't suggest GM cars are unreliable, just offers strong evidence based on papers filed by the manufactures and customers that the Japanese automakers are still ahead in terms of quality.
As for the Toyota example, I would welcome that argument if there were some evidence of it. From personal experience, I test-drove a Saturn Outlook with 500 miles on the odometer, with a whirring noise coming from behind the dash, jiggling volume control buttons and a malfunctioning lid for the compartment atop the dash.
We had loved the car on the paper, and even tried to dismiss the buttons/lid malfunctions as customer abuse during test-drives, but the noise coming from behind the panel was just too much.
Whether other industries have worse numbers than GM, I think GM should make a big deal of it if it ever were to enter those markets.
Now back to scheduled programing....
L
I wouldn't call it funny, probably poor judgment by the dealer to let customers test-drive the car. It was an intermittent noise, coming and going for 20 seconds every 10 minutes or so. I don't know whether modern cars still use cables to twist the needles in the instruments, but that's what it sounded like.
We were driving around Washington D.C last night and people were stopping us all the time to ask what it was.
Speaking of poor judgment, you are driving around Washington D.C in the middle of the night and stopping to answer questions from strangers?
Which cars are you saying are great? Is that the Corvette? The CTS is very good. Other than Corvette, which are great?
Just curious,
L
Mine is stuck on due to a problem on one of my cars. Before that it never came on. With it on now, it is 3 times louder than the engine at idle. Without it on, it would have to be a calm day to listen out the drivers window and hear the engine idling.
My friend had to get the little compartment cover repaired on his 2005 Accord and they are the greatest thing since sliced bread.
What is a jiggling radio button? Does the radio button dance to the music?
Oh, DC is definitely like that...you just have to know where to look.
They didn't dance to the music, but rather to the road surfaces. There was noticeable travel before they would do anything.
Again, other than the whirring noise from behind the dash (which would be impossible to tolerate on a daily basis,) I must assume the other problems were caused by abuse from other people.
As a coincidence I have a 2005 Accord. To my disappointment, quality has not been stellar. With 15000 miles, the internal handle for trunk release stopped working (a loose hook fixed during the next oil change...in the first visit to the dealer :-)
If we are going to compare Accords to Outlook, we can look into the execution of individual parts. Slam the door on both and listen. In the Accord, there is a solid thud. In the Outlook there is a slight shiver unbecoming of a 5000lb vehicle.
And when you climb into third row, there is no flooring panel beneath the carpet between the tracks of the reclined 2nd row seats.
I believe the housing slump has a lot to do with this, but the Tundra sales are still climbing so I don't write that off as a coincidence either.
Send an email to the address in my profile. If you have a side-by-side I may be able to help with the noises. I just did trouble-shooting and reengineering on mine; it's about 7 years old just before the changes started happening at Maytag for deterorating quality (like at Toyota).
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Plus Toyota seems to be aggressive with incentives to move Tundras.
I'm sure gas prices don't help either.
Even when towing and being heavily loaded in my Suburban, I've towed some up some serious grades in 100+ degree heat w/o the temp gauge rising one bit. Now the cooling fan is another story. Mine is not electric, but it it is on a clutch. When it's 90+ outside along with towing my boat, it sounds like I'm inside a wind tunnel. Only noticeable when at higher rpm, such as, pulling up a hill and having to run in a lower gear and/or accelerating. When it's cooler outside I don't hear it much.
Sounds like they're starting to build appliances these days like they build cars. Sure, they're better in many ways than what came before, but once things start to go, you're better off just replacing, rather than repairing.
My grandparents got a new refrigerator in 1969, the year they remodeled their kitchen. It was an N-something...either Norcold or Norge. Ugly green thing that you had to defrost yourself. It was still running fine though, when they got new appliances in 1994. It went out in the garage, where it replaced this old yellow 50's thing that had the old style latch door where kids could lock themselves in. In fact, it was still running in 2004 when I replaced it with one of my old refrigerators! It was ugly, but still worked fine!
In contrast, I've had two refrigerators die on me. One was a 1982 or so model that my Mom gave me when she got a new one. Crapped out in 2002. The other was a 1989 fridge that was in my condo when I bought it in 1994. I remodeled the condo before I sold it, so I brought the fridge with me to use as a spare. Just crapped out this summer, at the ripe old age of 18. Oh, and I think it was a Japanese import, because it was actually RUSTING! :P But then, the fit and finish was pretty sloppy, and the orange peel was pretty noticable, so perhaps the domestics had a hand in it, too. :surprise:
The first frige my wife and I purchased after we got married in '96 was a GE Profile top freezer model. I thought it was dying last year as it ran all the time and wasn't keeping food cold. After we purchased the Maytag, I figured out what was wrong with the GE. The inside light wasn't turning off. Well boys, I put that old frige in the garage and purchased a kegerator kit. Now it's the beer fridge with a keg on tap 24/7. Is it 5 o'clock yet?
Back to our regularly scheduled program..... With the updated powertrains in the new Taurus, Malibu, Accord etc. is GM going to offer the 3.6 6speed in the Impala? Or are they just going to wait for a replacement model?
My main beef was the gas mileage, but people buying a vehicle that size aren't expecting 30 mpg.
Seems to me that it wouldn't be a hard thing to do, since that engine's already offered in the LaCrosse. But then, wiht the introduction of the new Malibu, I can see the Impala sort of going the way of mainly a fleet type car. Taxi companies, police departments, or people that just want a fairly big, inexpensive car. Sort of Chevy's version of a Crown Vic. Or a 1980's Diplomat/Gran Fury.
I wonder if putting that engine in the Impala would steal some thunder from the Malibu? It might be best to just leave the Impala as-is, until it's time to replace it.
When will GM come out with a Cobalt upgrade or replacement that will be number one?
Funny thing is, the Cobalt and Ion are actually on the same platform! I remember when the Ion first came out though, it pretty much got slammed from the get-go. The Cobalt seemed to garner much better press, even if it is considered an also-ran by now.
I live near a guy with a Pristine AMC wagon (with the fuax wood paneling) and an Immaculate Rambler Ambassador. I bet he would disagree with that list!
L
Loren
Maybe you should still buy one. It might be worth something in a few decades. Kind of like an Edsel.
Even at thousands under invoice, a late 2005 model will fetch less than $10K as a trade-in, that is, if it is not one of those bright yellow eye-sores that can turn onlookers into stone.
Wonder why people did not buy a Matador? Not a bad looking car. Wish I had an AMX right now, in mint condition. Those are a rare find. Heck, even the Javelin. GM was right on the mark with the first Camaro. We need not talk about the Mustangs Pinto era, though it actually is not bad looking at all -- pretty much Pony car looking. Guess things sort of peaked in '67 Mustang looks, though in a way the '69 had some interesting lines to it. Size matters, and Mustang got fat. Oh wait, the New Camaro dimensions :surprise: , don't ask, don't tell. Sorry, but this is not your father's Camaro, nor mine. Please, keep width and tall doors on Hummers.
ramblin' on.... L
There is a white late model Aztec (without all the awful black cladding) at the apartment building where I drop my youngest off for day-care. It does not look too bad. It looks more similar to my Outlook than I would care to admit.
I saw one of the Subaru sports cars yesterday. Now they were pretty neat looking cars. Ferrari looking, compared to the WRX
L
I don't put much stock in lists such as this...if I recall correctly, Business Week included the 1977 Chevrolet Caprice on a list of all-time terrible cars, which is complete nonsense.
The Chevette wasn't a bad car...just a very average one. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad, either. Just basic, reliable transportation - nothing more, nothing less.
Both Corvairs were widely admired for their styling, and even the 1960-63 models were about 90 percent there. GM needed to sweat a few more details to get the car right, but the basics were there.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
no cr-v is doesn't stand for california redemption value - i asked.
Just as significant, the Ridgeline seemed just as new at 40,000 miles as it did when it actually was new—no squeaks, no rattles, no loose trim pieces, no mechanical idiosyncrasies, with the feel of something carved from a single chunk of billet.
L
I think the Matador just got old and wasn't adequately updated as the years rolled on. IIRC, that design first came out in 1967. Rambler/AMC didn't have the money to field a separate full-size and mid-size lineup, so they came up with one basic design and offered it in different lengths. The bigger models were Ambassadors and the smaller ones were Rebels, which were renamed Matador for 1971.
They sold tolerably in the earlier years, but AMC just didn't have the resources to redesign their cars every few years. About all they could muster was a heavy facelift. And back then, the styles changed quickly. For 1968, Mopar and GM intermediates were new. I don't know if the Mercury/Ford intermediates were all-new, but they were heavily revised from the 1966-67 style.
Then, in 1970, the Ford intermediates were heavily redesigned again. I still don't think it was all-new, though. Chrysler fielded new intermediates for 1971, then for 1972, Ford redesigned theirs (and this time it WAS all new, going from unitized to body-on-frame). GM's new midsizers came out for 1973, the last to be designed in that "big on the outside, small on the inside...heavy, posh, and thirsty" idiom.
So by 1974, the AMC products were looking pretty tired. To top it all off, they blew way too much money designing the goofy, frog-eyed Matador coupe. Supposedly it was pretty slick, designed with NASCAR in mind, but it was a huge flop. The Matador went to an awkward "coffin nose" look.
By 1974, the fuel crisis was in full swing, and bigger cars just never were AMC's strong point to begin with. So that, plus the awkward styling, really sunk them. I think 1974 was also the Amabassador's last year, so it was Matador-only from then on out.
In 1976, the Aspen/Volare came onto the scene, and showed that a compact car could serve as good or better than many midsized cars on the market (when it wasn't rusting or stalling out). And then in 1977, the radically downsized Chevy Caprice and its siblings instantly made every old-school midsized car on the market obsolete.
The Matador was dropped after 1978, and by that time I think they were mainly purchased by gov't agencies, police departments, etc. They were just too outdated and thirsty for most buyers by that time.
I don't think they were particularly bad cars, although finding parts could be annoying. Especially when the transmission came from Chrysler the wheels came from Ford, God-knows what else came from GM, etc!
I think most Impalas came with the 283 from 1959 through the 60's, although the 327 was a popular option. By around 1967 or 1968, a 307 replaced the 283 as the base V-8. The cars themselves were getting heavier by this time, so the 327 was probably more popular. For the 1971 redesign, the cars were so heavy that the 350 was the standard V-8. You could get an inline-6, but you really didn't want 110 hp in a 4000+ pound car, so it was rarely ordered.
When they were downsized for 1977, I think there were initially three engine choices...250 6-cyl, 305 V-8, 350 V-8. There was a 267/4.4 V-8, but I don't think it was offered until a few years later. Most common engine by this time was most likely the 305, as buyers in the late 70's probably thought a 350 was too much of a guzzler. It was dropped after 1979, except for in police cars.
A 229 V-6 became the standard engine for 1980, replacing the inline 6. For 1985, that engine was increased to 262 CID (the 4.3). At some point, you could get the 350 again, maybe in 1991? It was a 185 hp TBI version. Not much more hp than the 305's 170, but a lot torquier. I think eventually the 4.3 V-6 was dropped and the 305 V-8 made standard.
In 1994, they changed the engines again. The 305 was dropped, and a new 4.3 V-8 was introduced. This caused a lot of confusion, because most people remember the 4.3 V-6 as well. The 4.3 V-8 had 200 hp, but these cars were pretty heavy, so it still felt underpowered. Meanwhile, the 350 got boosted to a healthy 260 hp. This was standard in the Impala SS, Roadmaster, and Fleetwood, as well as the Caprice wagon. And optional in the Caprice. The 4.3 was limited to the Caprice sedan, and was dropped when the B-body was ditched, after 1996. As for the 350, it lasted a few more years in cars and trucks. It was eventually replaced in trucks by the 4.8/5.3/6.0 engines. The Camaro used the 350 until its end. The Corvette went to a 6.0 or something like that.
As for the 396, it first came out in 1965 I think, to replace the 409. It was an all-new big block engine, whereas the famous 409 was actually derived from an old 1950's truck motor. My Dad had a 1965 Impala SS with a 396...425 hp version. It would probably be worth something today, but back then it was just an old car. It threw a rod late one night on a lonely back road, in 1970 or 1971 I guess, and he just abandoned it there!
In those days though, the Impala SS was just a dress-up package. If you wanted a big engine, you had to order that separate. Some Impala SS'es had the 6-cyl! The ones to have though, from what I've heard, are the 425 hp versions of the 409 and 396.
The 396 itself was enlarged slightly to 402 CID around 1970, and I think it went away after 1972.