You guys make it sound like a "GM Exclusive"--that is the difference.
Well, since, for me, I had the GM that failed, why do I need to worry about Hyundai? BMW? Audi?
They all have their issues it's just that GM is so much closer to home for me since I WAS a customer for many decades....and they ultimately did go bankrupt because of their plethora of issues, including crappy quality and horrid customer service! Their wrenches might be "good" for the '60's era tech but not in my recent experience for current technology issues.
Sorry we do not see eye to eye when it comes to GM, the mega-failure of the automotive industry of All Time. But I am very glad you got good service from your cars over the many years you kept them. You were smart and kept the options low so less to fail, however. GM is not particularly ahead of the field when it comes to diagnosing complex technology issues, afaic.
BTW, check out the Yukon Denali forum under M&R...it's not a pretty board. Also was interested in the Buick Enclave but it seems some A/C issues have left their owners pretty "HOT" of late....
Defending GM by pointing out others issues will not help much in my view. Making sure they change for the good might help and, therefore, my constructive criticism but undying loyalty in the depths of failure didn't help much either.
Like I already posted, their products are getting better but remember that the Cruze came from Europe and the CTS was the first car I believe that GM bothered to test/develop on the 'Ring in Germany as far as I can remember. Caddy finally woke up and presented the potential GM has if they get their collective heads....you know where I'm going! 2008 Malibu was a great leap as was the 2010 LaCrosse and the Lambdas to a degree.
Andre, I was single and with some $$ to burn. I actually put a deposit on a new burgundy '85 Monte Carlo SS, but I'd had an '81 and an '82 and the '81 was stolen (never recovered) and the '82 was an attempted theft (went to work one morning and the steering column was in a hundred pieces across the front seat). I could see it happening again, so didn't go through on the SS.
My '81 was a 267, posi, no air, two-tone car (unusual even then), but my '82 was a V6 car and man it was a dog, power-wise! It did have the uber-plush interior that became called "CL" starting in '83. My Celebrity was the first (and last) car I actually ordered. It was solid dark plum (whatever they called it...I hated the lower being silver like so many were so avoided that), dark plum interior--buckets and console, 2.8 MFI, aluminum wheels and Goodyear Eagle GT's, the Delco radio with "ERS" (extended range speakers), and all instruments. It was supposed to take six weeks but took twelve. They made the mistake of telling me that they got a status update every Mon. a.m., so I'd call them every Mon. a.m.! I had to order the 4-speed automatic, against the advice of a friend's Dad who was a Chevy service manager, and I did lose 3rd and 4th gear at 37K miles. Chevy charged $100 and put a remanufactured unit in it and I never had an issue again. It cornered on rails compared to my Monte Carlos. Good power for the day too. I spec'd it out like the 6000STE all the mags were raving about then, but my car was a two-door.
The dealer I bought it from was Tim Timmers of Norcross, GA. I wonder if they're still there.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
What Kia of the same model year would have offered a similar size and interior capacity as that Grand Prix?
The Grand Prix may have a decent amount of measurable interior volume, but usable room was lacking. I couldn't sit in the back seat without my knees buried into the front seats and my head pressed against the roof. I've sat in compacts that were more comfortable. Plus with the sloping roof line the GP was not an easy car to get in and out of. Just a very uncomfortable car.
Not sure about interior volume, nor the capacity of any Kia product of that generation, my statement was regarding the build quality of the GP which was poor. The whole bubble dashboard, rubbermaid knobs and selectors and the stupid 2-bit HAL graphics display screamed cheap.
I guess a fair model comparison of the time would have been the 2004 optima
You must be lemkos evil twin....a broke toyota is better than a S-10? Having put 300K on my first S-10, and only normal oil changes etc, and no "oops my frame broke" I have a second, and the frame is fine.
You would rather try to drive that than have a S-10? Good luck, and I cant tell you how many times I've been asked if mine is for sale, it isnt.
I didnt agree with bailing em out, not defending the products they make now, but hope you have good shoes.
You must be lemkos evil twin....a broke toyota is better than a S-10?
LOL... I was being sarcastic. But in all seriousness, I know those S-10s and Rangers can last a long time. That doesn't mean I would drive one. Just to crude for my tastes.
I'm not kidding about this. I try not to follow S-10's on the highway. Last October I was behind one on I57 while towing my boat to storage and the drive shaft fell out. I swear GM vehicles are trying to kill me. My wife and I both about crapped our pants while I was trying to swerve the expedition with boat in tow around a drive shaft bouncing down the road towards us. The two rednecks in the S-10 looked quite surprised too.
Am I supposed to be impressed with that Optima interior?
IMO, it looks nicer than what was found in most GM products of the time. Interiors are definitely an area GM has been improving.
Just about anything pre '07 or so was horrible. My Suburban, my wife's GP, I don't know how a cheaper designed and built interior would have been possible. But the newer product is much better. I don't like the interior of the Camaro, but everything else seems well done.
I have a friend who's mother has a 2002 or so Hyundai Sonata, basically what was badge-engineered into that Optima. Decent enough car. I remember the interior being a bit inconsistent with regards to quality. It had nice fabrics and carpeting, but some of the plastics looked cheap. But, considering it was built to come in at a low price, I'd say it was respectable enough. And, it was fairly roomy, too. A Grand Prix from that era would definitely have more shoulder room, but would lose points IMO for the horrible back seat. The Sonata/Optima was a much more comfy 4-seater.
And, then there was the Kia Amanti. Joke of a car, when you consider it was trying to be a knock-off of Lexus, Benz, etc back then, but it was a pretty roomy car. Probably would've been decent enough, if it didn't set its sights so high and try to be so pretentious. As is, it came off as something of a reincarnation of a Lincoln Versailles, which was a gussied up Granada, and didn't fool too many buyers.
The interior door panels alone are night and day IMO.
Both of the steering wheels are pretty cheap looking to me but the IP in the GP is just a disjointed mess. To me it looks like the designers threw darts labelled as functions at the mold to make the plastic shell and said "yup, that goes there". They were blindfolded when they threw them of course :P
Pontiac had been my least-favorite GM division since the early '80's, but put the exterior of a Grand Prix next to the 'Mediocrity', and I think that difference will be apparent to all who wish to see.
I did have a V8 GP as a rental about 3 or 4 years ago. It was the most-entertaining rental I'd had in a long time and it sounded great.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I actually bought a V8 GP - GXP, in 2005. I did find it entertaining - under most driving conditions. [ Edit: Particularly for the price! ] And I agree that it 'sounded great'. That distinctive V8 sound... - Ray Had to let a bit more of the stock G8 GT's exhaust note out ....
Like I already posted, their products are getting better but remember that the Cruze came from Europe and the CTS was the first car I believe that GM bothered to test/develop on the 'Ring in Germany as far as I can remember. Caddy finally woke up and presented the potential GM has if they get their collective heads....you know where I'm going! 2008 Malibu was a great leap as was the 2010 LaCrosse and the Lambdas to a degree.
I really am happy for GM's success, but my nagging worry is their ability to continue to execute. It seems that most of the recent successes come from foreign designs (G8/Cruze/Regal). Cars like the Malibu improved a lot but are still barely competitive, certainly nowhere near class-leading. Even though they've shed many divisions (thank goodness), it seems that they just have a bigger "empire" than they can realistically keep their arms around to make products that are great. They come out with one or two but a lot of the rest is just mediocre or worse. That's why before the BK I wanted them to can a bunch of divisions and shrink a lot, then put out GREAT stuff.
Just as it's hard to admire Toyota for a lot of things, it's hard to admire GM. But I *want* to admire GM. A bit smaller but much better would be admirable. Let somebody else (Toyota) be #1 in size with bland products.
I remember you agreed Chevy and Caddy should have been the go forward plan.
No Reason the Buicks couldn't go into Caddy and the GMC's go into Chevy. They have really got to be kidding that they need Buick and GMC. All of the top sellers are Chevy. GMC and Buick are low volume in comparison so the badge should remain for what???
Really. What sales would they loose? What costs would be saved?
So, Jeremy Anwyl and Danny A. want $1 addition to the gas tax per gallon. The government wants 56 mpg CAFE.
The UAW says better fuel economy is disastrous for jobs.
So the insane $1 gas tax would do what? Force us to buy more expensive vehicles AND reduce employment at the same time.
Sounds incredibly like OLD GM and D3 thinking to me (Edmunds wasn't around during the '74 gas embargo so Jeremy was riding a bike at the time!). You decide.
"They have really got to be kidding that they need Buick and GMC. "
Maybe they don't need GMC, but I doubt that it's costing them all that much to keep the label.........(Chevy and GMC pickemups are both made in the Fort Wayne plant), and it seems to me that Buick's star has been rising. I sure see a lot of them in Indiana, and on a recent 1800 mile roadtrip, for that matter. If GM got rid of Buick, they would have to replace those models with something that filled a pretty large and (recently growing) niche for them.Also, not all of the older Buick loyalists are going to die in the next five years....if there were no Buicks , what would those folks buy next time ? Not everyone's gonna want a Caddy....or a Chevy... without some skillful marketing and new models. I just don't see GM saving that much, from my ignorant layman's viewpoint .
Actually, Edmund's began in 1966 as a publisher of new and used vehicle guides. Hit the net in '94 as a gopher site on the Electronic Newsstand. Current ownership took over in the mid 80's so the embargo should have been in management memory.
I loved the reviews in the old Edmunds books. I remember a review of the then pretty new Corsica that ended with a sentence that said something like "If you are considering the Corsica we recommend that you first look at any other sedan being made."
The Corsica wasn't really that awful but it was a pretty funny line. They don't write like that anymore.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I remember you agreed Chevy and Caddy should have been the go forward plan.
No Reason the Buicks couldn't go into Caddy and the GMC's go into Chevy. They have really got to be kidding that they need Buick and GMC. All of the top sellers are Chevy. GMC and Buick are low volume in comparison so the badge should remain for what???
Really. What sales would they loose? What costs would be saved?
Your recollection is correct.
The only reason I could see to save Buick would be China. But they could keep Buick in China and eliminate it in the US. Although I suppose the other reason might be franchise contracts. Another thing they should have gotten rid of while they had the chance in BK.
What I really don't see is the reason for GMC. I could put up with GMC ("professional grade" - even though many are Chevy rebadges!) if they would make GMC the division for ALL trucks, and ALL rental cars. Then for example, the Impala could be purely fleet as a GMC, and the non-fleet cars would be Chevy. Rebadging just to keep a division name makes no sense to me. Part of what got them in trouble in the first place.
Reminds me of material you can still find in British-European press. Edmunds must not have been dependent on advertisers then.
One that sticks in my mind, IIRC from "CAR" magazine about an early Hyundai: "You'd have to be an idiot to buy one". And about several previous generation Caddys sent to the UK in primitive export attempts: "trashy luxury".
Holy smoke! Gopher? Now that's going back a bit! I remember how slow the internet was back then and how primitive the websites were. If I searched for a site, I could step away from the terminal, make a sandwich, eat it, wash the dishes, and then...maybe...the site would appear.
She still has it and drives it daily without any problems. She did have a pretty serious accident with it this past winter when somebody ran a stop sign and hit her. Fortunately, the car was repaired and is still with us.
Wow, that does bring back memories. Yeah, it would take a while just to bring up text.
I remember in '93 IIRC when my college roommate (computer science major) showed me a graphical website as we now see it on Mosaic. We had to go down to the the computer lab at the computer science building and there were like 150 or so total graphical websites to be viewed. Most were universities and government sites and I think a few tech companies.
Heck, you guys are just kids. I remember punch cards and languages like basic and PL/1 when I started college...or as Crosby, Stills & Nash sang - Long Time Gone.
The difference is, the UAW will still somehow justify employing these morons due to the mountains of red tape that their $1000/hr lawyers will generate.
The import builders would (and should) just cut them loose.
Leave it to you to always look at the other guy as an alternative to taking a stand that GM, C and F have a parasite that affects their business, products and reputation.
Again, ad infinitum, the UAW and the old GM (et al) business process was the route to total failure. Some things changed but how much?
IIRC when MB first opened up shop in that region, they had a hard time finding workers literate enough to follow procedures, and the early batches of cars are among some of the most troublesome in MB history.
IIRC when MB first opened up shop in that region, they had a hard time finding workers literate enough to follow procedures, and the early batches of cars are among some of the most troublesome in MB history.
That had to be the fault of inept management and HR people;)
I know those early MLs were horrible. I knew a poor sole that had one. MB bought it back and the replacement was nearly as bad. MB must have done something right, as that person now has their 3rd ML.
One of the guys in my S2k club has a couple of older Mercs including a 98' (first model years) ML320 that he still has. Easily has well over 200k by now and it's rusting pretty badly but in the immortal words of Monty Python "I'm not dead yet!".
I believe he's also got a late 90's build E-class as well that has a ton of miles and his wife still drives that one as well.
I know it'll be disputed here, but I remember hearing that M-B's quality at the time of the Chrysler takeover was actually below Chrysler's and dragged it down some.
Ah, that "merger of equals"!
(And I'm not a Chrysler buff.)
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
One of the guys in my S2k club has a couple of older Mercs including a 98' (first model years) ML320 that he still has. Easily has well over 200k by now and it's rusting pretty badly but in the immortal words of Monty Python "I'm not dead yet!".
I still see them on the road here and there, so they haven't all died off yet.
I believe around the time of the merger, Mercedes was either beginning or in the process of cost-cutting models for increased profit.
There were things that Chrysler did (and still does IMO) very well (great styling, early adopters of the "cab forward" design, ergonomics, space efficiency) and there were things they did not so well (those 4-speed trannies for the minivans were spotty). Mercedes probably introduced some pretty stringent standards and build practices that the UAW probably fought tooth and nail against. I would guess there was some pretty chaotic times trying to mesh the two and the product suffered on both sides.
but I remember hearing that M-B's quality at the time of the Chrysler takeover was actually below Chrysler's and dragged it down some.
Come on now, we all know it was Chysler that dragged down MB into the pits where Chrysler has always exisited (2 bailouts, bottom of the ranking EVERY year in CR). I could have told you that merging with Chrysler would doom any company. Heck, if Toyota bought Chrysler all of a sudden Toyota's would begin to fall apart at 40K miles instead of 400K.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
MB started cost cutting in the early 90s as a reaction to Lexus - the Chrysler nightmare just made it worse. From what I know about some weak engines and transmissions in Mopars of that era - not to mention general fall-apart issues, I'll still take the German steel. I have a merger-era car and it isn't that bad. The whole episode was just a little revenge for 1945, that's all :shades:
Comments
Well, since, for me, I had the GM that failed, why do I need to worry about Hyundai? BMW? Audi?
They all have their issues it's just that GM is so much closer to home for me since I WAS a customer for many decades....and they ultimately did go bankrupt because of their plethora of issues, including crappy quality and horrid customer service! Their wrenches might be "good" for the '60's era tech but not in my recent experience for current technology issues.
Sorry we do not see eye to eye when it comes to GM, the mega-failure of the automotive industry of All Time. But I am very glad you got good service from your cars over the many years you kept them. You were smart and kept the options low so less to fail, however. GM is not particularly ahead of the field when it comes to diagnosing complex technology issues, afaic.
BTW, check out the Yukon Denali forum under M&R...it's not a pretty board. Also was interested in the Buick Enclave but it seems some A/C issues have left their owners pretty "HOT" of late....
Defending GM by pointing out others issues will not help much in my view. Making sure they change for the good might help and, therefore, my constructive criticism but undying loyalty in the depths of failure didn't help much either.
Like I already posted, their products are getting better but remember that the Cruze came from Europe and the CTS was the first car I believe that GM bothered to test/develop on the 'Ring in Germany as far as I can remember. Caddy finally woke up and presented the potential GM has if they get their collective heads....you know where I'm going! 2008 Malibu was a great leap as was the 2010 LaCrosse and the Lambdas to a degree.
Regards,
OW
My '81 was a 267, posi, no air, two-tone car (unusual even then), but my '82 was a V6 car and man it was a dog, power-wise! It did have the uber-plush interior that became called "CL" starting in '83. My Celebrity was the first (and last) car I actually ordered. It was solid dark plum (whatever they called it...I hated the lower being silver like so many were so avoided that), dark plum interior--buckets and console, 2.8 MFI, aluminum wheels and Goodyear Eagle GT's, the Delco radio with "ERS" (extended range speakers), and all instruments. It was supposed to take six weeks but took twelve. They made the mistake of telling me that they got a status update every Mon. a.m., so I'd call them every Mon. a.m.! I had to order the 4-speed automatic, against the advice of a friend's Dad who was a Chevy service manager, and I did lose 3rd and 4th gear at 37K miles. Chevy charged $100 and put a remanufactured unit in it and I never had an issue again. It cornered on rails compared to my Monte Carlos. Good power for the day too. I spec'd it out like the 6000STE all the mags were raving about then, but my car was a two-door.
The dealer I bought it from was Tim Timmers of Norcross, GA. I wonder if they're still there.
The Grand Prix may have a decent amount of measurable interior volume, but usable room was lacking. I couldn't sit in the back seat without my knees buried into the front seats and my head pressed against the roof. I've sat in compacts that were more comfortable. Plus with the sloping roof line the GP was not an easy car to get in and out of. Just a very uncomfortable car.
I guess a fair model comparison of the time would have been the 2004 optima
You would rather try to drive that than have a S-10? Good luck, and I cant tell you how many times I've been asked if mine is for sale, it isnt.
I didnt agree with bailing em out, not defending the products they make now, but hope you have good shoes.
LOL... I was being sarcastic. But in all seriousness, I know those S-10s and Rangers can last a long time. That doesn't mean I would drive one. Just to crude for my tastes.
I'm not kidding about this. I try not to follow S-10's on the highway. Last October I was behind one on I57 while towing my boat to storage and the drive shaft fell out. I swear GM vehicles are trying to kill me. My wife and I both about crapped our pants while I was trying to swerve the expedition with boat in tow around a drive shaft bouncing down the road towards us. The two rednecks in the S-10 looked quite surprised too.
Although to be fair mediocre might outclass one of those GPs in most areas.
IMO, it looks nicer than what was found in most GM products of the time. Interiors are definitely an area GM has been improving.
Just about anything pre '07 or so was horrible. My Suburban, my wife's GP, I don't know how a cheaper designed and built interior would have been possible. But the newer product is much better. I don't like the interior of the Camaro, but everything else seems well done.
And, then there was the Kia Amanti. Joke of a car, when you consider it was trying to be a knock-off of Lexus, Benz, etc back then, but it was a pretty roomy car. Probably would've been decent enough, if it didn't set its sights so high and try to be so pretentious. As is, it came off as something of a reincarnation of a Lincoln Versailles, which was a gussied up Granada, and didn't fool too many buyers.
Both of the steering wheels are pretty cheap looking to me but the IP in the GP is just a disjointed mess. To me it looks like the designers threw darts labelled as functions at the mold to make the plastic shell and said "yup, that goes there". They were blindfolded when they threw them of course :P
I did have a V8 GP as a rental about 3 or 4 years ago. It was the most-entertaining rental I'd had in a long time and it sounded great.
I did find it entertaining - under most driving conditions.
[ Edit: Particularly for the price! ]
And I agree that it 'sounded great'.
That distinctive V8 sound...
- Ray
Had to let a bit more of the stock G8 GT's exhaust note out ....
I really am happy for GM's success, but my nagging worry is their ability to continue to execute. It seems that most of the recent successes come from foreign designs (G8/Cruze/Regal). Cars like the Malibu improved a lot but are still barely competitive, certainly nowhere near class-leading. Even though they've shed many divisions (thank goodness), it seems that they just have a bigger "empire" than they can realistically keep their arms around to make products that are great. They come out with one or two but a lot of the rest is just mediocre or worse. That's why before the BK I wanted them to can a bunch of divisions and shrink a lot, then put out GREAT stuff.
Just as it's hard to admire Toyota for a lot of things, it's hard to admire GM. But I *want* to admire GM. A bit smaller but much better would be admirable. Let somebody else (Toyota) be #1 in size with bland products.
No Reason the Buicks couldn't go into Caddy and the GMC's go into Chevy. They have really got to be kidding that they need Buick and GMC. All of the top sellers are Chevy. GMC and Buick are low volume in comparison so the badge should remain for what???
Really. What sales would they loose? What costs would be saved?
Regards,
OW
The UAW says better fuel economy is disastrous for jobs.
So the insane $1 gas tax would do what? Force us to buy more expensive vehicles AND reduce employment at the same time.
Sounds incredibly like OLD GM and D3 thinking to me (Edmunds wasn't around during the '74 gas embargo so Jeremy was riding a bike at the time!). You decide.
UAW Concerned with CAFE, Meets with Feds, Detroit Three
Very interesting....BUT STUPID!
Regards,
OW
Maybe they don't need GMC, but I doubt that it's costing them all that much to keep the label.........(Chevy and GMC pickemups are both made in the Fort Wayne plant), and it seems to me that Buick's star has been rising. I sure see a lot of them in Indiana, and on a recent 1800 mile roadtrip, for that matter. If GM got rid of Buick, they would have to replace those models with something that filled a pretty large and (recently growing) niche for them.Also, not all of the older Buick loyalists are going to die in the next five years....if there were no Buicks , what would those folks buy next time ? Not everyone's gonna want a Caddy....or a Chevy... without some skillful marketing and new models. I just don't see GM saving that much, from my ignorant layman's viewpoint .
Actually, Edmund's began in 1966 as a publisher of new and used vehicle guides. Hit the net in '94 as a gopher site on the Electronic Newsstand. Current ownership took over in the mid 80's so the embargo should have been in management memory.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The Corsica wasn't really that awful but it was a pretty funny line. They don't write like that anymore.
No Reason the Buicks couldn't go into Caddy and the GMC's go into Chevy. They have really got to be kidding that they need Buick and GMC. All of the top sellers are Chevy. GMC and Buick are low volume in comparison so the badge should remain for what???
Really. What sales would they loose? What costs would be saved?
Your recollection is correct.
The only reason I could see to save Buick would be China. But they could keep Buick in China and eliminate it in the US. Although I suppose the other reason might be franchise contracts. Another thing they should have gotten rid of while they had the chance in BK.
What I really don't see is the reason for GMC. I could put up with GMC ("professional grade" - even though many are Chevy rebadges!) if they would make GMC the division for ALL trucks, and ALL rental cars. Then for example, the Impala could be purely fleet as a GMC, and the non-fleet cars would be Chevy. Rebadging just to keep a division name makes no sense to me. Part of what got them in trouble in the first place.
One that sticks in my mind, IIRC from "CAR" magazine about an early Hyundai: "You'd have to be an idiot to buy one". And about several previous generation Caddys sent to the UK in primitive export attempts: "trashy luxury".
-Rocky
OK, fugheddaboudit! Keep Buick!
Regards,
OW
Surfing with that was sort of like driving a '57 Chevy. It got you there, but it's no 'vette.
Wow, that does bring back memories. Yeah, it would take a while just to bring up text.
I remember in '93 IIRC when my college roommate (computer science major) showed me a graphical website as we now see it on Mosaic. We had to go down to the the computer lab at the computer science building and there were like 150 or so total graphical websites to be viewed. Most were universities and government sites and I think a few tech companies.
EMBARRASEMENT
Go UAW!
Regards,
OW
Surely no one will condone that, but do we actually think similar stuff doesn't happen down in Alabama where some of the captive imports are built?
The difference is, the UAW will still somehow justify employing these morons due to the mountains of red tape that their $1000/hr lawyers will generate.
The import builders would (and should) just cut them loose.
Again, ad infinitum, the UAW and the old GM (et al) business process was the route to total failure. Some things changed but how much?
Certainly not the UAW, that's for sure. :P
Regards,
OW
It's called "balance".
Like Groucho Marx used to say, "Are you still beating your wife?"
I do not believe the current UAW will allow that type of behavior to ride unpunished, and I can't believe you would either.
It's 2011, buddy.
Regards,
OW
That had to be the fault of inept management and HR people;)
I know those early MLs were horrible. I knew a poor sole that had one. MB bought it back and the replacement was nearly as bad. MB must have done something right, as that person now has their 3rd ML.
I believe he's also got a late 90's build E-class as well that has a ton of miles and his wife still drives that one as well.
Ah, that "merger of equals"!
(And I'm not a Chrysler buff.)
I still see them on the road here and there, so they haven't all died off yet.
There were things that Chrysler did (and still does IMO) very well (great styling, early adopters of the "cab forward" design, ergonomics, space efficiency) and there were things they did not so well (those 4-speed trannies for the minivans were spotty). Mercedes probably introduced some pretty stringent standards and build practices that the UAW probably fought tooth and nail against. I would guess there was some pretty chaotic times trying to mesh the two and the product suffered on both sides.
Come on now, we all know it was Chysler that dragged down MB into the pits where Chrysler has always exisited (2 bailouts, bottom of the ranking EVERY year in CR). I could have told you that merging with Chrysler would doom any company. Heck, if Toyota bought Chrysler all of a sudden Toyota's would begin to fall apart at 40K miles instead of 400K.