while we've been on the subject, I happened to look out window, and lookt what I saw in the neighbor's driveway! And there's even a bit of eye candy there, a little tease for the GM enthusiasts! :P
A majority of Neons are scrapped prior to 18 months. Some people are as lucky as Lemko, and get the few outliers. It's possible to win the lottery, just as it's possible to get a reliable Chrysler product. Frankly, the odds are better playing the Mega Millions.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
while we've been on the subject, I happened to look out window, and lookt what I saw in the neighbor's driveway! And there's even a bit of eye candy there, a little tease for the GM enthusiasts!
The Stratus was a fine vehicle if you got it with the right engine (IIRC, only one, the smaller V6 was reliable), It was kind of like the last year of the Catera - the other years and models sucked so badly that you can get one for nearly nothing used.
Our tester was a manual, required for the 42 mpg highway rating. The automatic is rated 5 mpg less on the highway, but will get a 1-mpg boost, to 38 mpg, for the 2012 model, Chevy says.
But what a manual the Eco has. It's perhaps the easiest-shifting gearbox on the market. And the forgiving clutch makes it tough to accidentally kill the engine. Russell says 55% of dealer orders are for the manual transmission. Normally 10% would be a strong showing in the U.S.
Oh wow, a 1989-90 Cadillac DeVille - the baby sister to my Brougham!
Yep, and this particular example gave me a newfound respect for those FWD, aluminum-engine Caddies. Now this one has the 4.5, which was never as bad as the old 4.1, but I think I'd still be leery, especially as the car ages.
This one has made it to around 100,000 miles, which is downright impressive considering how she's taken care of it. A few years back, she said it was acting up, and wanted me to drive it and see what I thought. I asked her when was the last time she had the transmission serviced, and she said something like "oh, does it need that?"
I know she's had problems with it, such as electrical issues, and probably a starter or alternator, and so forth. And one year, just sitting in the driveway on a hot summer day, the rear window shattered! But it's still on the original engine and transmission. And I think she has been taking better care of it, since I got on her to get the transmission serviced.
Look at the first 10 reviews of your precious 2000 Neon. About half are of reviews of a score of 5 out of 10 or lower. That is horrible and terrible at the same time. Many reviews are 3's and 4's. What do they say, mostly "had to replace many many parts."
And half of them are much higher than 5, in fact, I saw a few reviews saying they got over 200K miles on them.
I'm not saying that the Neon was the best, most reliable car ever made, but it's nowhere near the disaster that you say it is, since there are still more than a few on the road around here. Considering we live in one of the snowiest areas in the US, that's no small feat.
So you had a bad experience with a Neon. I'll bet there's more than a few that's had bad experiences with Audi from that same time period, yet they were charged twice as much for repairs due to higher cost of parts and the aforementioned labor rate.
I gotta say, I've liked the couple of Cruze ECO's I've looked at, at dealerships. Unlike my admittedly pedestrian Cobalt XFE, the ECO is nicely finished inside and nicely equipped. If I were ready to trade, I'd seriously consider an ECO.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
While the Eco Cruze is certainly impressive, is it worth the $1,450 up charge over a regular Cruze?
I'd certainly have to drive both to witness first hand how low resistance tires and less sound insulation etc change the dynamics of the car. Plus, I don't know how much low resistance tires costs vs. conventional tires etc.
My rough calculation based merely on 33 vs 30 mpg overall ratings at $4 per gallon equal an 8 year pay back for the Eco at 15k miles per year. That's a tough call as that doesn't include the potential extra costs for tires.
I had a 1994 Cadillac DeVille finished in Carmine Red with a Parchment leather interior purchased new in November 1993. It had the 4.9 litre V-8 and, despite its mere 200 hp rating, it was no slouch! The car would effortlessly do 100 mph on the PA Turnpike and had such a smooth ride, you'd never know it until you looked down at the speedometer! I kept it until January 2002 when I got a new 2002 Cadillac Seville STS. It had 96K+ on it by then.
I don't know how much low resistance tires costs vs. conventional tires etc.
Not much at all, actually.
I looked up the specs, and the Eco runs with Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max (size 215/55R17). On Tirerack, they run $133 per tire, which is in the low range for tires of that size and speed ratings ($108 for a set of Bridgestones, all the way to $196 for Michelins).
Yeah, I've read about that. I believe the new Focus SFE has the same feature.
I wonder how much of a help that feature really is, how much the drag coefficient actually lowers with the grille covered compared to it open. I know it makes a difference in racing, but those are also at double or triple the typical speeds that the Eco cruises at.
I have to admit, the reduction in noise insulation in the ECO would concern me some. I like a quiet car. I wish they offered the LT in a 6-speed manual; I'd probably consider that at some point.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I believe the primary way to get a high mpg tire, is that the manufacturer uses a blend of materials that is harder. What you are doing is reducing the friction between the road and tire. Therefore with reduced friction you are going to be decreasing the performance of the vehicle in braking and lateral acceleration, as those are a factor of friction.
So there's a definite trade-off there. If higher mpg were that important to me that I was considering an inferior performance tire, I'd just go with a model that gets better mpg in the 1st place.
Maybe someone's tested a vehicle with and without the ECO tires? and we can see how much safety you sacrifice for the higher mpg.
> high mpg tire, is that the manufacturer uses a blend of materials that is harder.
I wonder if they also reduce the stiffness of the tread rubber and the layers in the tire to allow easier flexing as the rounded tire circumference goes flat at the contact patch. That also reduces resistance to rolling.
Except - that a car of this size and weight would be fine with modern *13* inch tires. It's already a couple of sizes over spec to begin with, so lowering it a bit hardly makes any difference short of taking it to a track day or something.
I'm not saying that the Neon was the best, most reliable car ever made, but it's nowhere near the disaster that you say it is, since there are still more than a few on the road around here. Considering we live in one of the snowiest areas in the US, that's no small feat.
The fact that a bunch of the 2000 Neon owners complain about faulty head gaskets that Dodge woudn't pay to fix, and a bunch of the 1995 model owners complain about the same thing, I'd call that a disaster of epic proportions. There are some here that like to say Dodge started to get the Neon right by 2000, when it just isn't so! They were making the same crap in 2000 they were making in 1994. Still having lots of complaint about head gaskets, lots of complaints about it being the worst car ever, lots of owners who said "Chrysler, NEVER AGAIN!"
Chrysler ONE, RIP 1935?-1970, resurrected by taxpayers 1971. RIP, Chrysler TWO 1971-2008, resurrected by taxpayers 2008. Chrysler Three 2009-2011 (how many years to live?) I've got annuities I'll sell you on Chrysler's lifespan!!!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Chrysler ONE, RIP 1935?-1970, resurrected by taxpayers 1971. RIP, Chrysler TWO 1971-2008, resurrected by taxpayers 2008. Chrysler Three 2009-2011 (how many years to live?) I've got annuities I'll sell you on Chrysler's lifespan!!!
Andres, I say this respectfully, but you need to hire a fact-checker.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
The fact that a bunch of the 2000 Neon owners complain about faulty head gaskets that Dodge woudn't pay to fix, and a bunch of the 1995 model owners complain about the same thing, I'd call that a disaster of epic proportions.
Fact? Really? Any proof?
A simple look onto the Edmunds owner reviews of the 2000 Neon has 67 reviewers on it. How many of them mention a head gasket? ONE
In fact, let me add that the car got 4 out of 5 stars, and also has many satisfied owners with over 100K miles on them, like I was. Hardly a "disaster of epic proportions".
And this will be my last post on this topic, since not only is it off-topic, I've grown tired of reading (and re-reading) false accusations with no proof, just because a teenager drove a Neon into the ground and has an axe to grind with Chrysler.
And do us all a favor, and take uplanderguy's advice.
Had a 1991 Deville Touring sedan, neat car, bought new and broomed at 60k mi. after the Caddy factory installed a new 4.9 engine. While the new engine was being installed the dealer gave me a 96 Deville with the Northstar V-8, demo, and I went to another dealer 50 miles away and bought a new 96 Deville for the wife, and parked the re-engined 91 in my garage after 150 miles of breakin mileage..sold it couple months later..All Caddys were white w/sunroofs..My last Caddy was a 1999 Deville..
Had a brief encounter with a 1984 Eldo Biarritz w/4.1 V-8, one sorry automobile..inherited it from an outgoing company president, had less than 10k miles and put about 5k on it, sold it to a retired GM employee..a road car it was not!!!!!!
My son's last caddy was a 2002 STS and a 1993 Allante, the STS was traded in on a 2009 Chrysler Hemi, and the Allante was given away..The STS had a cracked block at around 150k, so the Chrysler dealer was the loser..
My son would have bought a CTS before the Hemi, but he couldn't find the CTS equipped to his liking...Lack of sunroofs and some other options, however he likes the Hemi, and only time will tell..
Personally I would not have another Caddy...Been down that road..
I'd avoid a 4.1, (HT4100) Cadillac like the plague. A friend of mine has a 1983 Cadillac Sedan DeVille with the 4.1 V-8 that's in mint condition, but he babies it and it only has about 23K miles on it. That, and many of the problems with the 4.1 Litre, which debuted in 1982, were resolved in 1983. It was still a slow boat anchor of an engine. Even the Cadillac-LaSalle Club ranks it among, if not the worst, Cadillac engine ever made.
The V-8-6-4 gets a bad rap because reliable "Displacement on Demand" technology just wasn't there in 1981. It relied on a system of clunky relays. If one disconects the DoD, the engine operates as a reliable 368 V-8.
I'd include the Diesel among Cadillac's engine hall of shame, but I believe it was actually an Oldsmobile unit.
As for me, I'm on my fifth Cadillac, a 2007 DTS Performance. My prior Cadillacs were a 1975 Sedan DeVille, 1994 Sedan DeVille, and a 2002 Seville STS. I still have my 1989 Cadillac Brougham and am keeping that one for life! :shades:
I think he's got Chrysler confused with the Penn-Central Railroad when he mentions 1970.
I'm a big fan of the Erie-Lackawanna Railway. Being from Philly, you're probably not aware of it, but it was a Chicago-NYC line (well, Hoboken, NJ) and it happened to go right through our little hometown in NW PA. We used to ride it in the sixties to NYC to visit my mother's family. Ironically, the town I live in now, in eastern OH, is on the same old Erie-Lackwanna mainline from Chicago to NYC. Great memories, gone forever, unfortunately.
In our small hometown in PA was headquartered a short-line railroad called the Bessemer and Lake Erie--which mostly hauled coal. My friend's Dad was an executive for them and used to always like to call the other two railroads in town the "Erie Lackamoney" and the "Penn Centless".
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
A simple look onto the Edmunds owner reviews of the 2000 Neon has 67 reviewers on it. How many of them mention a head gasket? ONE
1 in every 67 neons having head gasket issues early in life is still pretty Disastrous in my book. But let's look at MSN user reviews of the 2000 Neon again:
1) first review mentions "a total lemon, s*it box, had to replace just about every part by 100K miles." I think it's safe to say, there's one that includes head gaskets as that would fall into the "just about every part" category. 2) 16th review " constant engine problems." I think it's safe to include that in the head gasket category. 3) 17th review "Head gasket was replaced by Chrysler." 4) 21st review "This car honestly is a piece of junk. We have had so many problems with this car, there are to many to list. (mainly engine)." safe to include this one I think. 5) 28th review: "My head gasket has gone TWICE. From what I've heard this IS common with neons. Very bad...cost about $700 each time to fix. My sister also had a neon and it's headgasket went once and her engine went once, and even after her new engine her neon kept over heating. Mine right now has a leak as well. Never buying one again.
Do I really need to keep going? :lemon: :sick:
By the way, none of my accusations are false. All of my accusations are facts with 100% foolproof proof! You can spin it anyway you want, Chrysler went bankrupt twice in the last thirty odd years and that's a fact you can't spin. :sick: :lemon:
I don't need to get my dates perfect, as the fact their first bailout was officially 1981 only makes them look even worse. My case was strong enough even giving Chrysler the benefit of 10 years.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Now, I'm seeing enough bad in those reviews that, honestly, if I was looking for a cheap used car, I'd think twice about a Neon. But, if I found a nice, well-maintained lower mileage one for a cheap enough price, I wouldn't automatically rule it out.
Just out of curiosity, I checked out the reviews for a 2000 Cavalier. For as bad of a rap as the car seems to get, the reviews don't make it out to be TOO horrible.
Just out of curiosity, I checked out the reviews for a 2000 Cavalier. For as bad of a rap as the car seems to get, the reviews don't make it out to be TOO horrible.
My son bought a new 2000 Cavalier for $!0500, kept it 9 years and put 200,000 miles on it with not one major repair. The A/C gave out the last year or so and it overheated resultiing in a blown head gasket at the end. It wasn't worth fixing. The ride wasn't very good but he loved it and got his money's worth from it.
I don't think those old Cadavaliers were especially unreliable, just crude. Even by 2000, just way off the pace. I remember riding in a 1999 model brand new, and was shocked by the coarseness of everything. Of course, for a new 11K car, what did you expect. The 2003 facelift hurt even more, made it hideous.
Any vehicle with sides that big and tall are succeptible to cross winds, but it's heavy and has a very long wheelbase which compensates. I'd say it's about average in that regard.
Just drove across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge during a storm warning, and winds were high. It was fine, in fact I forget there even was a warning.
I'd rather be in my Sienna than, say, a Smart ForTwo.
I guess ideally you would want a very low, wide, sleek sports car.
Looks like the 2013 Malibu will have some home-soil competition. Thing is, Kia wins the race again as GM is too slow to reinvent the Malibu.
2012 Kia Optima release date set for third quarter of 2011. Kia Optima production moving to Georgia, USA!
Kia Motors America has officially announced it plans to transfer production of its 2012 Optima mid-size sedan to the USA. Starting later this fall, the all-new 2012 Kia Optima will be produced at the carmaker’s manufacturing plant in West Pont, Georgia which currently produces Kia Sorento and Hyundai Santa Fe crossover vehicles.
“The success of the West Point, Georgia plant and the high-quality Sorento CUV built there underscores the attention to detail and commitment to quality and craftsmanship exhibited by each KMMG team member and is the primary reason for Kia’s decision to add Optima to the plant’s production line,” told Byung Mo Ahn, group president and CEO, Kia Motors America.
The 2012 Kia Optima will be built alongside the brisk-selling Sorento crossover, which has been the most popular Kia vehicle in the US-market last year. With sales of more than 123.500 units in 2010, the US-produced Sorento crossover represented 30 percent of Kia Motors America’s total sales.
The move of the 2012 Optima production from South Korea to the USA will further increase the number of people working at Kia’s U.S. production plant. The automaker is currently accepting applications for a third wave of hiring to support the increased production. The total number of team members at Kia Motors Manufacturing Georgia is expected to reach nearly 3.000 by the year’s end.
Go KIA! :shades: Sorry, GM!
Regards, OW
P.S.: Targeting Monday for my purchase of the 2011 Optima SX. Second leg of my $50K leg to replace all things GM! :P
The funny part is come people don't think this cut in supply is what is affecting sales.
The funnier part is that some people think the cut in production would IMMEDIATELY affect the sales in the dealer lots as if the current dealer inventories fly away in magic.
Comments
The Stratus was a fine vehicle if you got it with the right engine (IIRC, only one, the smaller V6 was reliable), It was kind of like the last year of the Catera - the other years and models sucked so badly that you can get one for nearly nothing used.
2012 Cruze Eco
This was a surprise....
Our tester was a manual, required for the 42 mpg highway rating. The automatic is rated 5 mpg less on the highway, but will get a 1-mpg boost, to 38 mpg, for the 2012 model, Chevy says.
But what a manual the Eco has. It's perhaps the easiest-shifting gearbox on the market. And the forgiving clutch makes it tough to accidentally kill the engine. Russell says 55% of dealer orders are for the manual transmission. Normally 10% would be a strong showing in the U.S.
Regards,
OW
Yep, and this particular example gave me a newfound respect for those FWD, aluminum-engine Caddies. Now this one has the 4.5, which was never as bad as the old 4.1, but I think I'd still be leery, especially as the car ages.
This one has made it to around 100,000 miles, which is downright impressive considering how she's taken care of it. A few years back, she said it was acting up, and wanted me to drive it and see what I thought. I asked her when was the last time she had the transmission serviced, and she said something like "oh, does it need that?"
I know she's had problems with it, such as electrical issues, and probably a starter or alternator, and so forth. And one year, just sitting in the driveway on a hot summer day, the rear window shattered! But it's still on the original engine and transmission. And I think she has been taking better care of it, since I got on her to get the transmission serviced.
And half of them are much higher than 5, in fact, I saw a few reviews saying they got over 200K miles on them.
I'm not saying that the Neon was the best, most reliable car ever made, but it's nowhere near the disaster that you say it is, since there are still more than a few on the road around here. Considering we live in one of the snowiest areas in the US, that's no small feat.
So you had a bad experience with a Neon. I'll bet there's more than a few that's had bad experiences with Audi from that same time period, yet they were charged twice as much for repairs due to higher cost of parts and the aforementioned labor rate.
I'd certainly have to drive both to witness first hand how low resistance tires and less sound insulation etc change the dynamics of the car. Plus, I don't know how much low resistance tires costs vs. conventional tires etc.
My rough calculation based merely on 33 vs 30 mpg overall ratings at $4 per gallon equal an 8 year pay back for the Eco at 15k miles per year. That's a tough call as that doesn't include the potential extra costs for tires.
Okay, I didn't realize the up charge was over a base Cruze with the non turbo engine.
The rims on the ECO are nice. I was looked at a couple last week at my local dealer.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Yeah, I've read about that. I believe the new Focus SFE has the same feature.
Not much at all, actually.
I looked up the specs, and the Eco runs with Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max (size 215/55R17). On Tirerack, they run $133 per tire, which is in the low range for tires of that size and speed ratings ($108 for a set of Bridgestones, all the way to $196 for Michelins).
I wonder how much of a help that feature really is, how much the drag coefficient actually lowers with the grille covered compared to it open. I know it makes a difference in racing, but those are also at double or triple the typical speeds that the Eco cruises at.
I have a Miata and a Sienna. Guess which one I'd pick for a highway trip?
The Miata is loud and cramped out on the highway. It's geared too short for high speeds, too.
Fantastic point-and-shoot city car, though.
The Sienna is ultra-quiet, smooth, and the long wheelbase helps it track straight. In the city, it feels big and awkward compared to the Miata.
They pretty much serve opposite needs, so they complement each other well. :shades:
Back to the ECO's class...I wonder if Hyundai got it right with 40mpg across the board. You don't give up any insulation, even the top models get 40.
So there's a definite trade-off there. If higher mpg were that important to me that I was considering an inferior performance tire, I'd just go with a model that gets better mpg in the 1st place.
Maybe someone's tested a vehicle with and without the ECO tires? and we can see how much safety you sacrifice for the higher mpg.
I wonder if they also reduce the stiffness of the tread rubber and the layers in the tire to allow easier flexing as the rounded tire circumference goes flat at the contact patch. That also reduces resistance to rolling.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The fact that a bunch of the 2000 Neon owners complain about faulty head gaskets that Dodge woudn't pay to fix, and a bunch of the 1995 model owners complain about the same thing, I'd call that a disaster of epic proportions. There are some here that like to say Dodge started to get the Neon right by 2000, when it just isn't so! They were making the same crap in 2000 they were making in 1994. Still having lots of complaint about head gaskets, lots of complaints about it being the worst car ever, lots of owners who said "Chrysler, NEVER AGAIN!"
Chrysler ONE, RIP 1935?-1970, resurrected by taxpayers 1971.
RIP, Chrysler TWO 1971-2008, resurrected by taxpayers 2008.
Chrysler Three 2009-2011 (how many years to live?) I've got annuities I'll sell you on Chrysler's lifespan!!!
RIP, Chrysler TWO 1971-2008, resurrected by taxpayers 2008.
Chrysler Three 2009-2011 (how many years to live?) I've got annuities I'll sell you on Chrysler's lifespan!!!
Andres, I say this respectfully, but you need to hire a fact-checker.
Fact? Really? Any proof?
A simple look onto the Edmunds owner reviews of the 2000 Neon has 67 reviewers on it. How many of them mention a head gasket? ONE
In fact, let me add that the car got 4 out of 5 stars, and also has many satisfied owners with over 100K miles on them, like I was. Hardly a "disaster of epic proportions".
And this will be my last post on this topic, since not only is it off-topic, I've grown tired of reading (and re-reading) false accusations with no proof, just because a teenager drove a Neon into the ground and has an axe to grind with Chrysler.
And do us all a favor, and take uplanderguy's advice.
The first bailout was in 1981 and Chrysler paid off the government loans early in 1984.
I think he's got Chrysler confused with the Penn-Central Railroad when he mentions 1970.
Had a brief encounter with a 1984 Eldo Biarritz w/4.1 V-8, one sorry automobile..inherited it from an outgoing company president, had less than 10k miles and put about 5k on it, sold it to a retired GM employee..a road car it was not!!!!!!
My son's last caddy was a 2002 STS and a 1993 Allante, the STS was traded in on a 2009 Chrysler Hemi, and the Allante was given away..The STS had a cracked block at around 150k, so the Chrysler dealer was the loser..
My son would have bought a CTS before the Hemi, but he couldn't find the CTS equipped to his liking...Lack of sunroofs and some other options, however he likes the Hemi, and only time will tell..
Personally I would not have another Caddy...Been down that road..
The V-8-6-4 gets a bad rap because reliable "Displacement on Demand" technology just wasn't there in 1981. It relied on a system of clunky relays. If one disconects the DoD, the engine operates as a reliable 368 V-8.
I'd include the Diesel among Cadillac's engine hall of shame, but I believe it was actually an Oldsmobile unit.
As for me, I'm on my fifth Cadillac, a 2007 DTS Performance. My prior Cadillacs were a 1975 Sedan DeVille, 1994 Sedan DeVille, and a 2002 Seville STS. I still have my 1989 Cadillac Brougham and am keeping that one for life! :shades:
And as much as the critics despise these SUVs, and gas keeps creeping up, there will still be a market for them.
Okay, so I was 10 years off. Does it really matter if they started a few years before I guessed, or had a bailout #1 a few years after.
The point of the story is that were on Chrysler version 3.0. Chrysler 3 coming to a theater near you.
By the way, Chrysler going bankrupt happened only 14 years after the introduction of the Neon.
I'm a big fan of the Erie-Lackawanna Railway. Being from Philly, you're probably not aware of it, but it was a Chicago-NYC line (well, Hoboken, NJ) and it happened to go right through our little hometown in NW PA. We used to ride it in the sixties to NYC to visit my mother's family. Ironically, the town I live in now, in eastern OH, is on the same old Erie-Lackwanna mainline from Chicago to NYC. Great memories, gone forever, unfortunately.
In our small hometown in PA was headquartered a short-line railroad called the Bessemer and Lake Erie--which mostly hauled coal. My friend's Dad was an executive for them and used to always like to call the other two railroads in town the "Erie Lackamoney" and the "Penn Centless".
1 in every 67 neons having head gasket issues early in life is still pretty
Disastrous in my book. But let's look at MSN user reviews of the 2000 Neon again:
1) first review mentions "a total lemon, s*it box, had to replace just about every part by 100K miles." I think it's safe to say, there's one that includes head gaskets as that would fall into the "just about every part" category.
2) 16th review " constant engine problems." I think it's safe to include that in the head gasket category.
3) 17th review "Head gasket was replaced by Chrysler."
4) 21st review "This car honestly is a piece of junk. We have had so many problems with this car, there are to many to list. (mainly engine)." safe to include this one I think.
5) 28th review: "My head gasket has gone TWICE. From what I've heard this IS common with neons. Very bad...cost about $700 each time to fix. My sister also had a neon and it's headgasket went once and her engine went once, and even after her new engine her neon kept over heating. Mine right now has a leak as well. Never buying one again.
Do I really need to keep going? :lemon: :sick:
By the way, none of my accusations are false. All of my accusations are facts with 100% foolproof proof! You can spin it anyway you want, Chrysler went bankrupt twice in the last thirty odd years and that's a fact you can't spin. :sick: :lemon:
I don't need to get my dates perfect, as the fact their first bailout was officially 1981 only makes them look even worse. My case was strong enough even giving Chrysler the benefit of 10 years.
Now, I'm seeing enough bad in those reviews that, honestly, if I was looking for a cheap used car, I'd think twice about a Neon. But, if I found a nice, well-maintained lower mileage one for a cheap enough price, I wouldn't automatically rule it out.
Just out of curiosity, I checked out the reviews for a 2000 Cavalier. For as bad of a rap as the car seems to get, the reviews don't make it out to be TOO horrible.
My son bought a new 2000 Cavalier for $!0500, kept it 9 years and put 200,000 miles on it with not one major repair. The A/C gave out the last year or so and it overheated resultiing in a blown head gasket at the end.
It wasn't worth fixing. The ride wasn't very good but he loved it and got his money's worth from it.
No more so than a couple posters in this forum :P
Regards,
OW
zaken1, "Chevrolet/Geo Metro" #1804, 27 May 2011 3:37 pm
Just drove across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge during a storm warning, and winds were high. It was fine, in fact I forget there even was a warning.
I'd rather be in my Sienna than, say, a Smart ForTwo.
I guess ideally you would want a very low, wide, sleek sports car.
At least it got 50 mpg. That's about the only good thing about it, though.
The funny part is come people don't think this cut in supply is what is affecting sales.
The domestics should be capitalizing, but I think Hyundai is benefitting the most.
2012 Kia Optima release date set for third quarter of 2011. Kia Optima production moving to Georgia, USA!
Kia Motors America has officially announced it plans to transfer production of its 2012 Optima mid-size sedan to the USA. Starting later this fall, the all-new 2012 Kia Optima will be produced at the carmaker’s manufacturing plant in West Pont, Georgia which currently produces Kia Sorento and Hyundai Santa Fe crossover vehicles.
“The success of the West Point, Georgia plant and the high-quality Sorento CUV built there underscores the attention to detail and commitment to quality and craftsmanship exhibited by each KMMG team member and is the primary reason for Kia’s decision to add Optima to the plant’s production line,” told Byung Mo Ahn, group president and CEO, Kia Motors America.
The 2012 Kia Optima will be built alongside the brisk-selling Sorento crossover, which has been the most popular Kia vehicle in the US-market last year. With sales of more than 123.500 units in 2010, the US-produced Sorento crossover represented 30 percent of Kia Motors America’s total sales.
The move of the 2012 Optima production from South Korea to the USA will further increase the number of people working at Kia’s U.S. production plant. The automaker is currently accepting applications for a third wave of hiring to support the increased production. The total number of team members at Kia Motors Manufacturing Georgia is expected to reach nearly 3.000 by the year’s end.
Go KIA! :shades: Sorry, GM!
Regards,
OW
P.S.: Targeting Monday for my purchase of the 2011 Optima SX. Second leg of my $50K leg to replace all things GM! :P
The funnier part is that some people think the cut in production would IMMEDIATELY affect the sales in the dealer lots as if the current dealer inventories fly away in magic.