>Most of those models had thin paint like lots of GM product
Thin paint? Are you sure? Or was it new technology in paint that PPG, and perhaps other sources, said would work. This also was the period of water-based paints that didn't give off those evil polluting volatile carriers that were organic based. Paint quality suffered in some cases. Deteriorating clearcoats are one symptom. I believe PPG also said that two coats would work instead of 3 for the color coat.
I can get a picture of a black Honda from about 1996 with deteriorating clearcoat. It belongs to a friend of ours.
What a difference a year makes. The 1967 Grand Prix was beautiful, but the '68 just looks like a big fat slob of a car. I'd say full-size Pontiac styling peaked in 1967 and then went downhill. The 1970 model was particularly gruesome.
You need to bite the bullet and drive the heck out of that things so that as quickly as you can you hit that 80K on it so they can replace it. Maybe you can hire a kid with an iron back to just drive it around and around on a track somewhere for 25K miles....
The idea of pulling a Ferris Bueller and putting it on jack stands and leaving it in drive with a brick on the pedal has crossed my mind. LOL.
Oh yeah they looked really cool in the late 80s early 90s but they aged poorly.
Just like the early touch screen and HUD setups the technology was just too new. I would swap as much of that out for an aftermarket radio or a full carputer system. Probably pull the stock wheel out and replace it with an aftermarket one too. No way all those buttons would still work after 20 years.
I can get a picture of a black Honda from about 1996 with deteriorating clearcoat. It belongs to a friend of ours.
I think just about any car painted in the United States between approximately 1988-1988 is prone to that peeling. I've seen Accords do it too, and figured that's how you can tell the difference between the US-made Accords and the Japanese Accords!
My '89 Gran Fury had been repainted before I bought it, because the original paint had been peeling. And when I got rid of my '88 LeBaron, its paint was just starting to peel. It was around 10 years old at the time. Cars older than that, if they were metallic, would tend to fade as the little flakes got hot and burned the paint, and over time they'd start to crack and crows-foot, but the paint would usually hold tight. And if they were non-metallic, they'd usually buff back out without any trouble, although if you brushed up against one, you might get some of that paint on you! Whenever I scrape snow off my red Silverado or my midnight blue NYer, the snow pics up a hint of the color of the car. My 5th Ave is always garaged though, so its paint has held up much better.
It happened to my 1988 Park Ave as well. it didn't get really bad until a year before I sold it. Too bad. That blue was a really pretty color. If I was truly nuts or had money to burn, I'd have had it repainted.
Would that really work? Just don't put it in reverse and kick it like Cameron so it goes through the back of your garage.
Well you definitely can't reduce mileage that way, but if you lift the drive wheels it should work. Granted, you'd get an ABS malfunction light and you'd have to deactivate the traction control. On some of the older cars with first gen traction control it probably wouldn't work as you couldn't turn off the T/C on some cars.
I don't think 1970 was a bad year for the most part. IMO the big Chevies, Oldsmobiles, Buicks, and Cadillacs were all good looking cars. But that was the year Pontiac went for that skinny neoclassic grille and put in the fake horn ports, giving the car a bit of a 6-headlight effect. It's not totally grotesque, but not very handsome, either. I think it's a nice looking car from the side, though.
1970 was kind of a threshold year though, as it was about as good as things would get in many respects, until years later. For 1971, some of the high compression engines started getting their power cut, and it seemed like just about any car that debuted in 1971 or later managed to end up being worse than its 1960's counterpart.
Just as one example, my Mom had a 1968 Chevy Impala 4-door hardtop. My grandparents bought it brand-new, but in 1972 swapped with my Mom. They took her '66 Catalina convertible, that my Dad had trashed pretty thoroughly, and used it as a trade on a new '72 Impala 4-door hardtop. Mom drove that '68 Impala until 1975, when she got a new LeMans coupe. The Impala still looked good...decent paint and vinyl roof, no rust, engine and tranny were fine. But the rear end was starting to go out, and back then, I think people were just sort of programmed into thinking that after 7 years it was time for a new car, whether you really needed one or not. In contrast, I remember how the '72 Impala looked when it was about 7 years old. It was pretty rusty, although the paint was still shiny. The vinyl roof was starting to tear, and I think in 1977 or 1978 Granddad had to do a valve job on the car.
I wonder how long that '68 Impala would've lasted if Mom had just had the rear-end rebuilt?
any company that wants to be the biggest on the planet will start out with the customer in mind but end up getting greedy and forgetting about value.
Amen to that, I couldn't agree more. We can argue about whether "Greed" played a role, but that is exactly what happened to GM, and I am (slightly) sad to say that is more than likely what is happening to Toyota as we speak, unless they do a radical reversal of course in the next couple of years. These companies get so big they forget the customer first, then they forget the product and quality control, and 20 years down the line they wonder where all their customers went......
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
My brother had the rear-end rebuilt in my 1968 Buick Special Deluxe - in 1991! That Impala may have lasted that long. Recall the Motor Trend article about the 1975 Dodge Dart stating that it was like buying a new 1965 car - which by that time was actually a pretty good thing.
I remember how the '72 Impala looked when it was about 7 years old. It was pretty rusty, although the paint was still shiny. The vinyl roof was starting to tear, and I think in 1977 or 1978 Granddad had to do a valve job on the car.
Some really bad cars in the early 70's. My dad had a '73 Grand Torino that by '78 only had 38k, needed a valve job, was rusted out, and the vinyl roof was all but gone.
We also had a '71 Mustang Convertible, which I thought was cool, but junk. Rust, engine issues, build quality issues. Man, I think the doors came from the factory sagging with the bottom portion sticking out a 1/2 inch from the rear qtr panel.
Seems like some of GMs large cars held up much better than Ford's of those days. My grandpa always had a big Buick that seemed to hold up okay back then.
There must be a black hole where dieselone is that he doesn't see them.
LOL! Seeing a Buick on the road has been such a rare experience in my neck of the woods for the last 15 years, if I had $1000 for every time I saw one I would be a poor man. Pontiacs would be the same, except for rental GPs and G6s. I do recall that my local Buick dealer still had an unsold '05 Park Avenue on the lot early last year, right before he folded.
I have always thought it would be intriguing to visit these parts of the midwest and east coast outside New York and New England where one actually sees lots of American cars on the road. I should make a trip. It was fascinating when I visited Chicago for exactly that reason - there were actually American cars (not trucks or SUVs) on the road at every corner.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
My Dad had a 1972 Ford LTD Country Squire wagon that rusted with a vengeance. Not only that, Dad was forever under the hood of that beast fixing one malady or another. I heard more profanity than all "The Sopranos" episodes put together during the period he owned that car. One night my Dad was going to take my Mom out to dinner and that beast refused to start. Dad is out there in the street in his good suit fumbling around with the car in the dark spewing enough profanity to make Joe Pesci blush. Finally, Dad gave up and borrowed my Grandpop's super-reliable 1974 Chevrolet Impala.
I grew up in a Ford house, my other grandpa sold Fords, but man there were some bad ones, particularly in the late 70's to early 80's.
I remember my grandpa having an early 80's T-bird demo, that the digital dash was broke within a week of being new. My aunt bought an '82 Mustang that literally died on the way home from the dealer. Within 10 minutes of driving it off the lot (my grandpa ordered it for her), it overheated, spewing out black smoke and fried the engine. My Grandma had one of the first Escorts, and it was so bad my Grandpa (a long time ford man) had to threaten lawsuits to get the car bought back, after transmissions and steering rack issues had kept the car at the dealer more than at home. I can go on and on about stories like that. Make me wonder sometimes how Ford is still in business, granted they were very close to bankruptcy in the early 80's. Go figure.
My Dad was a Ford man...and his AWFUL experiences and the excellent experiences of my Grandpop as a Chevrolet man is the reason I'm such a huge fan of GM. Dad bought a new 1981 Ford Thunderbird Town Landau and he was so proud of the car. The car wasn't particularly troublesome, but it had absolutely no guts. It had an emasculated 255 cid V-8 that you had to floor to get the car up a hill. I swear the 250 inline six in his prior 1978 Ford Granada had more power. That Thunderbird also had that super-stupid turn signal mounted horn! Whose dumb idea was that?
but it had absolutely no guts. It had an emasculated 255 cid V-8 that you had to floor to get the car up a hill. I swear the 250 inline six in his prior 1978 Ford Granada had more power. That Thunderbird also had that super-stupid turn signal mounted horn! Whose dumb idea was that?
Who knows, the horn on the turn signal was on a lot of Fords until almost the mid 80's think. Just stupid.
The 255 v8 probably was no worse than GMs 260 and 301 v8s. Those were horribly under powered too, as were many early 80's and late 70's cars. Had a friend with a '79 Cutlass with the 260 and that might be a the slowest car I've ever driven, reliable though, he put like 260k on it. Looked cool with T-tops and the center console shifter and full gauges etc. Another buddy in high school had an '80 or so Trans Am with the 301 and it could barely outrun my '86 Escort with a 4speed. To 40 or so I'd beat him.
Have you ever had the luxury of driving a late 70's or early 80's GM diesel in the Oldmobiles and Cadillac's etc. Man those were slow. Had several of those in my neighborhood growing up. Not long though as everyone dumped them quick. A kid I know took a stop watch for his moms 98 Regency and it was close to 20 seconds to 60. That could get you killed today, at least you'd have some metal around you though.
Oh, I drove a 1981 Cadillac Sedan DeVille with a diesel. It was a beautiful white car with a plush blue interior, but boy, was it s......l......o......w! Zero-to-sixty could be measured with a calendar. It sounded like a city bus. You couldn't just start the car, you had to turn the key one click, let the glow plugs warm for a few seconds then start the car. Besides, where was I going to get diesel fuel in my neighborhood? I'd have to drive out to the truck stop on the turnpike to fuel up.
Getting diesel isn't nearly an issue today as would have been back then I'd imagine. Back in '00 when I had a diesel Jetta, I rarely had an issue finding diesel. I'd love to have a diesel today. They are definitely a lot better than they were then. I never had any starting issues with the Jetta. I only had to wait for the glow plugs if it was under 40 degrees or so. The colder it was the longer you'd have to wait, but even on a sub zero day it wasn't more than a few seconds and it always started right up. Took a while to warm up though. Heated seats in a diesel is a must.
Even in 2000 people still remembered the GM diesel fiasco. I still remember people asking me why I bought a diesel, getting the usual aren't they unreliable, stinky, and slow.
I remember waiting for the school bus in the winter and our neighbor had a late 70's or early 80's Toronado diesel. If it was under 20 degrees out, AAA was almost always there to give him a jump. Probably wasn't a good car to leave out side during northern Indiana winters.
Even in 2000 people still remembered the GM diesel fiasco. I still remember people asking me why I bought a diesel, getting the usual aren't they unreliable, stinky, and slow.
That might partly be because there were still some recent Diesels like that around at that time! My uncle briefly owned a used 1994 GMC with a 6.5L TurboDiesel, and that thing was stinky, unreliable, and slow. He finally got fed up with it and traded it after about 6 or 7 months, dumping it for the 1997 4.3 Silverado that he still owns.
for someone buying a GM car today, why would it matter if GM disappeared in 5 years? wouldn't the parts/service industries for the GM cars would continue for decades afterwards?
>You'd drive down the road and wipers would turn on and off on their own
Did the car have the rain-sensing wipers? Those are sensitive to oily films on the windshield in the area of the sensor. Our 03 has an infrared sensor and needs a clean windshield to work right consistently--and it does. Otherwise, I would suspect a ground problem causing it to cycle when the connection to ground is remade.
>the hvac controls also had a mind of their own
Is this separate from the hot drivers side and cold passenger side? That's an actuator motor that moves the vane for the temperature unless it's in hot weather and AC is in use. In that case it's a low freon charge.
>intake issue at 80k,
That's not very likely since it was fixed during the 99 run of the 3800s. However a few did develop deterioration of the UIM EGR passage or coolant seals on passages to the throttle body. But it is possible.
>blew a head gasket by 90k
A mechanic working on 3800s or anyone on H-body discussions will tell you that's extremely low in frequency. Most likely it leaked around the lower intake seals on the manifold to heads. Usually oil seeps at the ends or coolant leaks around the head to LIM contact and bleeds into the cylinders causing misfires and check engine light or hydrolock if leak continues under pressure after car is stopped. Head gasket to block failures are extremely rare and usually only after overheating.
Did your grandpa buy this car new? Or used abused by someone?
Resale needs to be compared with selling price, not MSRP. The Hondas in this area would have been priced above MSRP most of the year because they were considered "special" by the dealers. The Park Avenues would have been discounted as well a factory rebate.
Yeah it did, but with the wiper switch on off, the wipers would work occasionally turn on by themselves for a swipe or two.
Is this separate from the hot drivers side and cold passenger side? That's an actuator motor that moves the vane for the temperature unless it's in hot weather and AC is in use. In that case it's a low freon charge.
I don't remember what caused it, but I know it was going be expensive to fix and it was stuck that way year round.
I know what your talking about because I had that happen in my Suburban, but the heat wasn't stuck on all the time. I had to have the actuator replaced along with a damper because cold air was always allowed to enter the passenger compartment. I think the dealer nailed me for like $600 on that fix.
IIRC, the intake and head gasket issue happen close to each other. I don't know if it overheated causing the the head gasket or not. That is certainly possible.
I think he bought the '00 used in '01 with like 10k miles on it. I know he bought it from his favorite Buick dealer, but he problems didn't really start until 60k. By 110k it was in really bad shape.
I don't believe it is a gamble to buy a GM car. To me, it is a rock-solid blue chip investment. My General Motors cars have given me years of faithful reliable service. I need only to look to the Buick and Cadillac automobiles from GM for all my automotive wants and needs.
caddys are nice. i've gotta test-drive one of their manual transmission cars. meanwhile, pontiac is still sending me their quarterly performance magazine. hmm, could there be a "cadillac performance magazine too ?!
Lemko: You refer to GM as General Motors, but since the company was taken over by the Federales, it should now be called Government Motors. We cannot let the Feds continue to take over and control privately owned companies. It is highly unfair to companies that did not accept the bailouts (like Ford) for comsumers like you to buy GM products. If GM starts to falter for whatever reason, they have the taxpayers to help to bail them again (you and I). If Ford goes into trouble, the company and their shareholders suffer. The Feds should have let GM to undergo bankruptcy and let them emerge stronger on their own
I say boycott GM to make the government fail in the car business. That means to boycott the other Fed owned car company, Chrysler. I say this as a concerned taxpayer. Hopefully shoppers of GM cars will feel guilty about buying a GM car now.
If it makes you feel any better, I bought my Cadillac DTS prior to the bailout. Of course, not buying a GM only ensures they'll never be able to pay back the govt. which means all that money was flushed down the toilet. If the bailout is such an issue to you, why not worry more about the Fed's bailout of the big banks which dwarfs that of GM and Chrysler. The banks have been monstrously ripping us off for longer than GM or Chrysler have existed.
The Feds made all the banks take the TARP money, so which particular bank should we boycott? I feel we should support the companies that did not take the bailout money. On the insurance company side of the issue, I say we should avoid giving any business to AIG, since they are gov't owned too! It is frightening to see what is happening to our once great country in a movement from Capitalism to Socialism.
Of course, not buying a GM only ensures they'll never be able to pay back the govt. which means all that money was flushed down the toilet
The thing is that a great many people already believe that the money was flushed down the toilet. They need no further evidence.Several GM SUV owners at work (and one PT Cruiser owner) have already said to me that when the time comes for replacement, they will avoid Chrysler and GM because of the bailouts.
I don't support or oppose their POV, but I can understand it.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Of course, not buying a GM only ensures they'll never be able to pay back the govt. which means all that money was flushed down the toilet.
Wait a minute, so basically you're saying we need to spend money on them so they can return 10% of the money we already spent on them? Blah, no thanks. :mad: Anything taking bailout is a no no in my book.
It means nothing to mean. I only see the cars and I like what I see coming from GM. Suppose GM and Chrysler come up with some truly fantastic vehicles? Foreign governments help out their major industries from time to time as well. I heard Toyota's getting $5 billion from the Japanese govt. to help them through this rough patch.
What if they gave it ALL back? Would that change your opinion? If I lost my job and the bank was about to foreclose on my house, but my mother-in-law offered me a loan to get me through this rough patch and I took it, would that make me any more of a [non-permissible content removed] than losing my place and her daughter to become homeless on the streets? Would you have rather GM & C collapse exacerbating an already severe unemployment problem by adding several million more to the jobless rolls? Do you think Toyota, Honda, and Nissan would have absorbed all those workers? (HA! Like they'd even think of hiring former UAW people)? Do you think Ford could when they are on the ropes themselves? Who the heck would even be buying cars if everybody is out of work?
What if they gave it ALL back? Would that change your opinion? If I lost my job and the bank was about to foreclose on my house, but my mother-in-law offered me a loan to get me through this rough patch and I took it, would that make me any more of a [non-permissible content removed] than losing my place and her daughter to become homeless on the streets?
Well that would depend. Apples and oranges comparison IMO, but if someone loses their job, and they had car payments on a couple of expensive cars, a 400k mortgage and no savings, then yeah, I'd consider that person an idiot. If a family member wants to bail them out that's fine, they are not putting me on the hook for it. Unless of course that family member borrows the money to lend and then defaults on it, raising the cost of borrowing for all of us.
My real problem with the GM bail out is GM has been making stupid decisions for nearly 40 years. During the 30 years I've followed the auto industry GM has continued to over promise and under deliver. Most of the country doesn't like their products and I don't want to be blackmailed to support GM with overly exaggerated job losses due to GM closing up. GM's bankruptcy risk has been an issue for over a decade, when is the last time they had a good credit rating? Just think of how many other ways that money could have been used to better Michigan's economy and that of the US. I do hope it works out now, as we are up to our eye balls in this mess.
And I know many blame GM and Ford' problem on imports, but my god, how bad would our cars be today if the competition would have been kept out or essentially kept out of the market with tariffs and taxes. If GM vehicles were good enough, the consumer would have kept buying them.
Interestingly, the Nytimes had an article about how the University of Michigan saw the righting on the wall in the mid 70's. They realized back then the state wasn't going to maintain it's income status relying on it's manufacturing base. So instead of letting U of Ms budget go down the toilet like the rest of Michigan, the university began pursuing income from private sources and today only 7% of the U of Ms budget comes from the state of Michigan and it's being debated if they will even stay as a state funded school at all. Unfortunately, they seek students from abroad that can pay expensive out of state fees which leaves the many kids from Michigan out, but that has allowed U of M to maintain it's near Ivy league status.
The University of Michigan and many top American Engineering schools seek advanced engineering students from abroad especially from Asian countries like China and India because those students are the best qualified academically. Look at the masters and doctoral engineering and science programs at top universities like MIT, Stanford and you will see more than 60% are foreign born. This convinces me it is only a matter of time before the auto industries of China and India catch up with the developed nations.
The thankfully, that 60% is spread out over dozens of countries, so the actual impact is largely mitigated. The U.S. still leads in technological innovation. Our only real worry is that those countries will start outsourcing workers from us to work over there. I expect that to start happening very soon, unfortunately. Even this week I heard about NASA thinking about teaming up with China in space...
Comments
Thin paint? Are you sure? Or was it new technology in paint that PPG, and perhaps other sources, said would work. This also was the period of water-based paints that didn't give off those evil polluting volatile carriers that were organic based. Paint quality suffered in some cases. Deteriorating clearcoats are one symptom. I believe PPG also said that two coats would work instead of 3 for the color coat.
I can get a picture of a black Honda from about 1996 with deteriorating clearcoat. It belongs to a friend of ours.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The idea of pulling a Ferris Bueller and putting it on jack stands and leaving it in drive with a brick on the pedal has crossed my mind. LOL.
Just like the early touch screen and HUD setups the technology was just too new. I would swap as much of that out for an aftermarket radio or a full carputer system. Probably pull the stock wheel out and replace it with an aftermarket one too. No way all those buttons would still work after 20 years.
I think just about any car painted in the United States between approximately 1988-1988 is prone to that peeling. I've seen Accords do it too, and figured that's how you can tell the difference between the US-made Accords and the Japanese Accords!
My '89 Gran Fury had been repainted before I bought it, because the original paint had been peeling. And when I got rid of my '88 LeBaron, its paint was just starting to peel. It was around 10 years old at the time. Cars older than that, if they were metallic, would tend to fade as the little flakes got hot and burned the paint, and over time they'd start to crack and crows-foot, but the paint would usually hold tight. And if they were non-metallic, they'd usually buff back out without any trouble, although if you brushed up against one, you might get some of that paint on you! Whenever I scrape snow off my red Silverado or my midnight blue NYer, the snow pics up a hint of the color of the car. My 5th Ave is always garaged though, so its paint has held up much better.
Of course for really hideous designs you can't hardly beat 1958.
Wow!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Yeah, I remember my wife's uncle having like a '89 or '90 Dakota that the clear coat started peeling within a few years. It was bad.
Well you definitely can't reduce mileage that way, but if you lift the drive wheels it should work. Granted, you'd get an ABS malfunction light and you'd have to deactivate the traction control. On some of the older cars with first gen traction control it probably wouldn't work as you couldn't turn off the T/C on some cars.
1970 was kind of a threshold year though, as it was about as good as things would get in many respects, until years later. For 1971, some of the high compression engines started getting their power cut, and it seemed like just about any car that debuted in 1971 or later managed to end up being worse than its 1960's counterpart.
Just as one example, my Mom had a 1968 Chevy Impala 4-door hardtop. My grandparents bought it brand-new, but in 1972 swapped with my Mom. They took her '66 Catalina convertible, that my Dad had trashed pretty thoroughly, and used it as a trade on a new '72 Impala 4-door hardtop. Mom drove that '68 Impala until 1975, when she got a new LeMans coupe. The Impala still looked good...decent paint and vinyl roof, no rust, engine and tranny were fine. But the rear end was starting to go out, and back then, I think people were just sort of programmed into thinking that after 7 years it was time for a new car, whether you really needed one or not. In contrast, I remember how the '72 Impala looked when it was about 7 years old. It was pretty rusty, although the paint was still shiny. The vinyl roof was starting to tear, and I think in 1977 or 1978 Granddad had to do a valve job on the car.
I wonder how long that '68 Impala would've lasted if Mom had just had the rear-end rebuilt?
Amen to that, I couldn't agree more. We can argue about whether "Greed" played a role, but that is exactly what happened to GM, and I am (slightly) sad to say that is more than likely what is happening to Toyota as we speak, unless they do a radical reversal of course in the next couple of years. These companies get so big they forget the customer first, then they forget the product and quality control, and 20 years down the line they wonder where all their customers went......
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Some really bad cars in the early 70's. My dad had a '73 Grand Torino that by '78 only had 38k, needed a valve job, was rusted out, and the vinyl roof was all but gone.
We also had a '71 Mustang Convertible, which I thought was cool, but junk. Rust, engine issues, build quality issues. Man, I think the doors came from the factory sagging with the bottom portion sticking out a 1/2 inch from the rear qtr panel.
Seems like some of GMs large cars held up much better than Ford's of those days. My grandpa always had a big Buick that seemed to hold up okay back then.
LOL! Seeing a Buick on the road has been such a rare experience in my neck of the woods for the last 15 years, if I had $1000 for every time I saw one I would be a poor man. Pontiacs would be the same, except for rental GPs and G6s. I do recall that my local Buick dealer still had an unsold '05 Park Avenue on the lot early last year, right before he folded.
I have always thought it would be intriguing to visit these parts of the midwest and east coast outside New York and New England where one actually sees lots of American cars on the road. I should make a trip. It was fascinating when I visited Chicago for exactly that reason - there were actually American cars (not trucks or SUVs) on the road at every corner.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Maybe I just don't notice them. Now that it's on my mind, I'll probably see a dozen or more this weekend on my trek to the family get together.
I remember my grandpa having an early 80's T-bird demo, that the digital dash was broke within a week of being new. My aunt bought an '82 Mustang that literally died on the way home from the dealer. Within 10 minutes of driving it off the lot (my grandpa ordered it for her), it overheated, spewing out black smoke and fried the engine. My Grandma had one of the first Escorts, and it was so bad my Grandpa (a long time ford man) had to threaten lawsuits to get the car bought back, after transmissions and steering rack issues had kept the car at the dealer more than at home. I can go on and on about stories like that. Make me wonder sometimes how Ford is still in business, granted they were very close to bankruptcy in the early 80's. Go figure.
Man, things must really be bad out there! LOL
Who knows, the horn on the turn signal was on a lot of Fords until almost the mid 80's think. Just stupid.
The 255 v8 probably was no worse than GMs 260 and 301 v8s. Those were horribly under powered too, as were many early 80's and late 70's cars. Had a friend with a '79 Cutlass with the 260 and that might be a the slowest car I've ever driven, reliable though, he put like 260k on it. Looked cool with T-tops and the center console shifter and full gauges etc. Another buddy in high school had an '80 or so Trans Am with the 301 and it could barely outrun my '86 Escort with a 4speed. To 40 or so I'd beat him.
Have you ever had the luxury of driving a late 70's or early 80's GM diesel in the Oldmobiles and Cadillac's etc. Man those were slow. Had several of those in my neighborhood growing up. Not long though as everyone dumped them quick. A kid I know took a stop watch for his moms 98 Regency and it was close to 20 seconds to 60. That could get you killed today, at least you'd have some metal around you though.
Even in 2000 people still remembered the GM diesel fiasco. I still remember people asking me why I bought a diesel, getting the usual aren't they unreliable, stinky, and slow.
I remember waiting for the school bus in the winter and our neighbor had a late 70's or early 80's Toronado diesel. If it was under 20 degrees out, AAA was almost always there to give him a jump. Probably wasn't a good car to leave out side during northern Indiana winters.
That might partly be because there were still some recent Diesels like that around at that time! My uncle briefly owned a used 1994 GMC with a 6.5L TurboDiesel, and that thing was stinky, unreliable, and slow. He finally got fed up with it and traded it after about 6 or 7 months, dumping it for the 1997 4.3 Silverado that he still owns.
wouldn't the parts/service industries for the GM cars would continue for decades afterwards?
Did the car have the rain-sensing wipers? Those are sensitive to oily films on the windshield in the area of the sensor. Our 03 has an infrared sensor and needs a clean windshield to work right consistently--and it does. Otherwise, I would suspect a ground problem causing it to cycle when the connection to ground is remade.
>the hvac controls also had a mind of their own
Is this separate from the hot drivers side and cold passenger side? That's an actuator motor that moves the vane for the temperature unless it's in hot weather and AC is in use. In that case it's a low freon charge.
>intake issue at 80k,
That's not very likely since it was fixed during the 99 run of the 3800s. However a few did develop deterioration of the UIM EGR passage or coolant seals on passages to the throttle body. But it is possible.
>blew a head gasket by 90k
A mechanic working on 3800s or anyone on H-body discussions will tell you that's extremely low in frequency. Most likely it leaked around the lower intake seals on the manifold to heads. Usually oil seeps at the ends or coolant leaks around the head to LIM contact and bleeds into the cylinders causing misfires and check engine light or hydrolock if leak continues under pressure after car is stopped. Head gasket to block failures are extremely rare and usually only after overheating.
Did your grandpa buy this car new? Or
usedabused by someone?2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Here is one you can talk about, however.
Regards,
OW
Resale needs to be compared with selling price, not MSRP. The Hondas in this area would have been priced above MSRP most of the year because they were considered "special" by the dealers. The Park Avenues would have been discounted as well a factory rebate.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
R.I.P.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Yeah it did, but with the wiper switch on off, the wipers would work occasionally turn on by themselves for a swipe or two.
Is this separate from the hot drivers side and cold passenger side? That's an actuator motor that moves the vane for the temperature unless it's in hot weather and AC is in use. In that case it's a low freon charge.
I don't remember what caused it, but I know it was going be expensive to fix and it was stuck that way year round.
I know what your talking about because I had that happen in my Suburban, but the heat wasn't stuck on all the time. I had to have the actuator replaced along with a damper because cold air was always allowed to enter the passenger compartment. I think the dealer nailed me for like $600 on that fix.
IIRC, the intake and head gasket issue happen close to each other. I don't know if it overheated causing the the head gasket or not. That is certainly possible.
I think he bought the '00 used in '01 with like 10k miles on it. I know he bought it from his favorite Buick dealer, but he problems didn't really start until 60k. By 110k it was in really bad shape.
Like AIG? :P
meanwhile, pontiac is still sending me their quarterly performance magazine.
hmm, could there be a "cadillac performance magazine too ?!
I say boycott GM to make the government fail in the car business. That means to boycott the other Fed owned car company, Chrysler. I say this as a concerned taxpayer. Hopefully shoppers of GM cars will feel guilty about buying a GM car now.
Socialism.
The thing is that a great many people already believe that the money was flushed down the toilet. They need no further evidence.Several GM SUV owners at work (and one PT Cruiser owner) have already said to me that when the time comes for replacement, they will avoid Chrysler and GM because of the bailouts.
I don't support or oppose their POV, but I can understand it.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Wait a minute, so basically you're saying we need to spend money on them so they can return 10% of the money we already spent on them? Blah, no thanks. :mad: Anything taking bailout is a no no in my book.
Well that would depend. Apples and oranges comparison IMO, but if someone loses their job, and they had car payments on a couple of expensive cars, a 400k mortgage and no savings, then yeah, I'd consider that person an idiot. If a family member wants to bail them out that's fine, they are not putting me on the hook for it. Unless of course that family member borrows the money to lend and then defaults on it, raising the cost of borrowing for all of us.
My real problem with the GM bail out is GM has been making stupid decisions for nearly 40 years. During the 30 years I've followed the auto industry GM has continued to over promise and under deliver. Most of the country doesn't like their products and I don't want to be blackmailed to support GM with overly exaggerated job losses due to GM closing up. GM's bankruptcy risk has been an issue for over a decade, when is the last time they had a good credit rating? Just think of how many other ways that money could have been used to better Michigan's economy and that of the US. I do hope it works out now, as we are up to our eye balls in this mess.
And I know many blame GM and Ford' problem on imports, but my god, how bad would our cars be today if the competition would have been kept out or essentially kept out of the market with tariffs and taxes. If GM vehicles were good enough, the consumer would have kept buying them.
Interestingly, the Nytimes had an article about how the University of Michigan saw the righting on the wall in the mid 70's. They realized back then the state wasn't going to maintain it's income status relying on it's manufacturing base. So instead of letting U of Ms budget go down the toilet like the rest of Michigan, the university began pursuing income from private sources and today only 7% of the U of Ms budget comes from the state of Michigan and it's being debated if they will even stay as a state funded school at all. Unfortunately, they seek students from abroad that can pay expensive out of state fees which leaves the many kids from Michigan out, but that has allowed U of M to maintain it's near Ivy league status.