My brother was into muscle cars from the 60's in the early 90's and mid 90's. He had at least 2 GTO's, I think maybe 3!
First one had the engine blow not long after he got it running and restored. It was a gas guzzler.
Second one he crashed and wrecked severely while trying to take a left turn (ended up hitting a light pole and electrical junction box). Those things just handled like tanks and if you went fast as a teenager you probably wrecked it in short order.
No, I was never in to any type of car that required tons of shop time, down time, care, and gas. I prefer being planted and manueverable.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I lived in a small town hours from any exotic dealer. I still remember seeing my first Ferrari and Porsche 928, and I remember the various MBs and BMWs in the town. I must have been brainwashed pretty young by something :shades: ...wasn't by my parents, with their everyday domestic rides.
I can relate. I still remember dreaming about the 928 in Risky Business. My trips into Chicago I was always on the look out for cool cars. I was rarely disappointed.
I remember that T-Bird with the hood up on several occasions, my dad fixing (or making an attempt) whatever illness befell it. If anything, it shows how far domestics and really all cars have advanced - you don't do that to under 10 year old cars today.
Yep, my dad had a Ford Torino and a Chevy Caprice Classic wagon that always needed worked on. And they weren't little annoying problems like a window crank breaking. It was more of the "will it start and keep running long enough to get us home" types of problems.
Certainly haven't had those kinds of issues in a long time. Thankfully!
Same track. The Lexus skidded to the side, smoothly. Easy to find videos on YouTube if you didn't catch it.
The Grand Cherokee "hopped and skidded sideways", per their writing, arguably closer to a roll over than the GX ever was.
Chrysler was given access to their track to test other models (the V6 had problems, the V8 with air suspension did not) and could tune and test revisions at their site. Toyota had no such courtesy given to them, hence the fly-by. They had to repeat the test on their own course.
Anti-volt press conference claim is pretty darn vague ... got any links?
There's no way that's true, targeting a specific EV like that, by name. I call bull on that one.
Toyota openly held the opinion that Lithiun-ion batteries were not ready for prime time due to heat/fire issues. Given the number of laptop batteries we've replaced here at work, I tend to agree.
Some battery cell for EVs are submerged in liquid!
I don't care where Ford designed the Focus, as long as it's competent, which it is. Same for Fiesta.
Ford owned a big chunk of Mazda, so it made sense to let them design small cars while they focused on trucks and the Mustang. The strategy worked, plain and simple. Who makes the best selling truck? Pony car? That's right...
I like the Focus about as much as I'm disappointed in stale products like the Ranger.
It's all about the product. I'm a little disappointed in the iron block used for the Volt, and while I'm at it where's the DI? Bottom feeders from Kia and Hyundai have that, $41 grand and there's still cost cutting?
I don't care where Ford designed the Focus, as long as it's competent, which it is. Same for Fiesta.
Ford owned a big chunk of Mazda, so it made sense to let them design small cars while they focused on trucks and the Mustang. The strategy worked, plain and simple. Who makes the best selling truck? Pony car? That's right...
I agree 100%. My 89 Mercury Tracer (Mazda 323) was eons better than the '86 Escort I had in HS. The mazda 4cyl in the Tracer would actually rev without fuss. The 5 speed transmission was actually a joy to use, and it didn't keel over through the curves. Granted it was no sports car, but it was by far the best compact in the Ford stable at the time.
It's all about the product. I'm a little disappointed in the iron block used for the Volt, and while I'm at it where's the DI? Bottom feeders from Kia and Hyundai have that, $41 grand and there's still cost cutting?
I agree. I guess we need to remember the Volt is on the Cruze platform and uses the same engine block. I'd think DI with the turbo in the 1.4 would have added some performance w/o much fuel economy penalty or maybe even a slight boost.
Ford owned a big chunk of Mazda, so it made sense to let them design small cars while they focused on trucks and the Mustang. The strategy worked, plain and simple. Who makes the best selling truck? Pony car? That's right...
Last I saw, GM full-size trucks outsold Ford, and Camaro outsold Mustang.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
After all the love CU gave to Honda and toyota through the decades, it's amusing to see the depths toyota went to when the love is withdrawn slightly.
CU/CR never gave any love to Honda or Toyota. That is a fallacy.
All CU/CR did was report the facts. Straight, and to the point!
Honda and Toyota really did build the highest quality vehicles in the early 90's. We are talking flawless vehicles designed to go 300,000 miles or more.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Also, the old video has a link at the top to watch the updated one, so most people won't ever even know about that issue. Bury it!
Did they treat Lexus the same way?
First, the press releases. CNN quoted them as "urging car shoppers not to buy the GX460, until this problem has been remedied". They issued Safety Alerts, put it on the front page (!), produced videos about the safety risk, and basically went on the full offensive.
Ironically in that same video they admit the driver lifted off the throttle in the middle of the turn. They demonstrated drop throttle oversteer, basically. You're a muscle car guy, right? I'm sure you know exactly what that means.
Controversy sells magazines, though.
OK, but why give Jeep a pass?
CR went after Isuzu/Acura and Suzuki, and now Lexus. Ford Escape rolled in a NHTSA side impact test, and they mentioned it but never even stopped recommending the Ford Escape.
So Ford and Jeep got a break, all the imports were targeted. All facts, and about as specific as can be.
I owned a '91 Escort GT, which used a Mazda platform and engine. Nothing wrong with that...except maybe that it led me to buy a Miata, and not a Ford, later.
The Volt is heavier than it needs to be, and that hurts it in a lot of ways.
My sightings were more mellow than what would have existed in Chicago then - a trip to Seattle or Spokane was fun for me. Heck, I saw my first Rolls Royce on the road in Yakima...now that's kind of pitiful :shades: But, I was the kid who would get excited about a W126, but couldn't care less about a big engined Camaro.
There would be issues today if people had to open the hood on their <10 year old cars with any frequency, or if said cars could wither away into nothing in that amount of time as they once did. That T-Bird would probably be the equivalent of a 40K car today...for it to be having problems so young, and eventually be off the road so soon would be intolerable.
>Anti-volt press conference claim is pretty darn vague ... got any links? >There's no way that's true, targeting a specific EV like that, by name. I call bull on that one.
Here's that beef requested. I have taken the liberty to leave in some criticisms of the media to which I alluded earlier as well as the uneven hand in criticising GM for their big cars.
"All of the initial coverage [of the Volt] was totally favorable. But beloved toyota Motor Company soon weighed in with strangely negative comments. They had, infact, been caught flat-footed. To make matters worse, toyota had selected the Detroit show for the full unveiling of the monstrously large, heavy, and fuel-addicted full size Tundra pickup, with emphasis on a long-wheelbase, four-door crew cab with huge wheels and four-wheel drive. IN short, their stand largely resembled what GM normally did: it emphasized the big V8 trucks!
"Toyota immediately labeled Volt a clever but meaningless PR exercise, using a battery chemistry, lithium-ion, which was dangerous, unreliable, and far from ready for automotive use. How much sounder, they trumpeted, was their own homely little Prius using (now eclipsed) nickel metal hydride batteries in their "tried and true, patented, toyota Synergy Drive." system. Soon after, toyota invited the world's media to a technical seminar in Japan, where their senior technical officer took great pains to point out the impossibility of litium-ion chemistry for the mobile sector." ...
"The theme of the technical seminar was "toyota knows best, toyota is conservative!" And they even made the statement that, unlike "some other" automobile company, toyota would never, ever place the safety of its customers at risk. It is a strange, and a further manifestation of the pro-toyota bias of the mainstream media, that in 2009 and 2010, the period when ten million toyotas were recalled for unintended acceleration and failing brakes (on the pious Prius, of all cars), not one journalist ever reminded toyota, despite thirty or more deaths being blamed on its failed enegineering, of its claim never to put the consumer at risk."
Lutz, Bob, Car Guys vs Beancounters, pp 157-158.
Note I did skip a paragraph (indicated by the ellipsis) about the need for careful manufacturing of LiIon power supplies to avoid problems.
And do your anti-GM points from long ago fit as news? 20-years old is not news. Is it about new models? Nope. Is it about market share? Nope.
"GM News, New Models and Market Share" is the title.
It's GM NEWS when past experiences taint current impressions of the company.
Re: Uplander - the original Honda comment had no GM context associated with it, which is why I made the comment. Perhaps it was implied, but not mentioned.
>Chrysler was given access to their track to test other models (the V6 had problems, the V8 with air suspension did not) and could tune and test revisions at their site. Toyota had no such courtesy given to them, hence the fly-by. They had to repeat the test on their own course.
That was not right. toyota should have been given the chance to use the same surface to retest their vehicle and other configurations, such as tires, that might make the vehicle safer for the public.
Note that my comment about espionage was tongue in cheek. I suspect car companies are even using drones to get pictures of cars other companies test on the tracks and courses.
Brilliant. I'd wager they'd sell at least a few - and as it is an existing product, the overhead would be low. I wonder how many GM higher ups are the same overpaid empty suits responsible for issues 30 years ago - I bet more than a few.
Sure. I'm sure back in the day they were peeking under those covers of teh new cars to see of their notes were right....
Sorry to hear about the Regal wagon. I like wagons. That's something that could have tempted me.
Trailblazer transmissions - that's what killed GM as an option for my brother. Three trannies in 25K. He took a bath on it and became the last on the family to go Japanese.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Three complete trannies in 25K miles? Never heard anything like that in 30+ years of Chevy ownership. Our good friends have an '07 TrailBlazer too. Trans--AOK.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Three complete trannies in 25K miles? Never heard anything like that in 30+ years of Chevy ownership. Our good friends have an '07 TrailBlazer too. Trans--AOK.
With the problems i've experienced with that transmission along with people I know that have had multiple failures, it wouldn't shock me.
Last month it was the reverse, so maybe Ford's dropping and GM is picking up. You didn't mention Mustang versus Camaro.
I don't know the numbers for the Mustang or Camaro. My source was the WSJ and they only reported the top 20.
In August GM pickups outsold the F150 combined. I know GM has upped the incentives around here in farm country, so maybe that is helping boost GM sales as of late.
Looking at last months sales the shocker has to be the Jetta. It sold over 14k beating the Focus. I did read somewhere Ford is having supply issues with the Focus.
Equinox had another nice month outselling the CRV by a few hundred. Still 12k down YTD. 4th qtr will be interesting.
The Kia Sorento is taking off to. Over 13k sold which is only 3k less than the Equinox.
Escape sold over 20k. My God, Ford must be giving them away.
But...three? I have a little hard time believing it, but it's not my place. Kind of like the Vega holes around the windshield in 'under two years'. I know they did rust there, but not in that time. I just looked at a Vega on eBay that's in NW PA. It's just starting to get some scabs there...in 34 years.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I'd agree that would be excessive. But if it is indeed true it could be something stupid like the dealer changing out transmissions when the problem is a control module or other problem outside the transmission causing the trans to fail or not perform properly.
Actually I believe after two new ones (three including the original) was when he punted. Could have been snakebit or maybe there was something else causing the tranny to crap out (not that I could think of something). Things happen.
He isn't a car guy as such but at least he keeps up on maintenance. The three vehicles that preceded the Trailblazers were Chrysler minivans which didn't do something dramatically hideous like that were a bit trouble prone. He's got an old Celica convertible, a CRV and a RAV4 now. The CVR replaced an almost identical CRV that he hit a patch of ice with, and went into the woods, totaling the vehicle but leaving him pretty OK.
I will say that my older brother had a 72 Vega that went over 100K. Funny thing was he couldn't tell Chevy what a great thing that was because at maybe 60K the head gasket blew. His father-in-law was the service manager for a Chevy dealership and "reduced" the mileage by maybe 28K.... He replaced it with a 77 Nova that he'd probably still have but he let it sit for six months and when he started it again the engine seized. Another not so much of a car guy. He has a PT Cruiser these days.
Another brother has one of those first generation Kia Sportage that he bought because they'd finance him. He is not easy on cars but that thing just keeps going. He's never had a repair, Go figure.
I also have a brother who has owned two Saab 9-3s and never had an issue. Go figure. This is why anecdotal evidence doesn't work so well....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I've heard the same thing and other than his I can't think of one I've seen in years. It's almost like seeing a Yugo on the road these days....
I just saw one about 45 minutes ago. But it was on tv, in an episode of "Dexter". It got wrecked, in one of those spectacular flips that only happens in Hollywood...
wonder how many GM higher ups are the same overpaid empty suits responsible for issues 30 years ago - I bet more than a few.
Oh, no doubt. But, there were probably many German and Japanese soldiers who tried to kill Americans, that were still building cars in their respective countries for export here, into as late as the late '80's as well.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Exactly! GM had the biggest and worst business model in the entire industry. Led to the inflexibility to change with market conditions that led to bankruptcy.
Some of that diaereses still exists today and some of the arrogance is communicated in their ads.
Agree they have changed for the better. Glad the foreign competition keeps upping the game. Everyone should at least be glad there is competition.
We all know what would happen if GM had 50% of the global market...history repeats itself.
Oh, no doubt. But, there were probably many German and Japanese soldiers who tried to kill Americans, that were still building cars in their respective countries for export here, into as late as the late '80's as well.
While we should never forget, at some point it's time to move on.
I think I've posted this before, but last year at my daughter's school Veterans day program, a survivor of the USS Indianapolis was in attendance. Yes, we have a survivor from that fateful ship in our community. As he was leaving the program, guess what he got into? A Toyota Camry. Honestly, I was a bit surprised too. Right on the bumper in big letters, he displayed proudly "USS Indianapolis survivor" on a Camry of all cars. If he can move on, I think I certainly can.
I'll tell you, I'd go back to as late as '78 or so in the auto industry if I could. True choice of models, colors, options, engines, appearance items, body styles, and decent resale that made it possible for most people to trade in three or four years. A lot more working-class people doing OK for themselves than now too (and no friends of mine nor family ever worked in the auto industry). And if they didn't last as long, there usually weren't the catastrophic type of repair expenses that some people see now. I see today's cars as over-regulated toasters. I was born in '58 and am at the late end of those who feel this way.
The Henry Ford of the '20's would like this market though.."Any color you want as long as it's an earth tone, and any interior color you want as long as it's gray, black, or beige."
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I'm happy he can. For me, and others, the events of that catastrophic period in world history aren't far enough back yet. I guess my point is, everybody forgives (forgets?) that, but hangs on to dear life for the sins of the UAW and Detroit. I think I know which side of that scale is heavier.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
While the options and colors options were nice from the late 70's I sure don't want a late 70's car. The styling was pretty bad on most cars, the interiors were dreadful regardless of color and performance was even worse. I don't desire any car from the late 70's. I just don't see the appeal. Avacodo green is ugly regardless of the year;)
While we should never forget, at some point it's time to move on.
Should the Justice Department just "move on" in its hunt for [non-permissible content removed] who moved here? It seems not. Google "John Demjanjuk" and you'll see what I mean.
Not trying to 'flame', but add some perspective to the conversation. I realize I'm older than a lot of the regular posters here.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
To this day I'd still love owning a '77-79 Chevrolet Caprice Classic coupe, 350 engine, F41 suspension, and room for six, even in a coupe. Multitude of color and interior choices. Ahhh....the memory. They were revolutionary when introduced, and even though smaller, actually had roomier interiors and trunks than the huge cars they replaced. I remember thinking it was hard to believe how absolutely quiet and silky-smooth a Caprice was back then, and the mags raved about its handling with the F41 suspension. Car and Driver had the essentially-same '83 model Caprice on its "Ten Best Cars" list six years after the model had been introduced.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Should the Justice Department just "move on" in its hunt for [non-permissible content removed] who moved here? It seems not. Google "John Demjanjuk" and you'll see what I mean.
I remember him. Jesus, that's the justice department for you. They guy was a UAW member for years. Guess union protection is stronger than I realized;).
I'm not saying we shouldn't go after war criminals. But I'm not going to put all of Germany or Japan or any country for that matter in the same classification. Particularly after 60 years (but that's me, I can forgive and move on). That's no different than saying everyone who lives in the 'hood' is a gangbanger.
To this day I'd still love owning a '77-79 Chevrolet Caprice Classic coupe, 350 engine, F41 suspension, and room for six, even in a coupe. Multitude of color and interior choices. Ahhh....the memory. They were revolutionary when introduced, and even though smaller, actually had roomier interiors and trunks than the huge cars they replaced. I remember thinking it was hard to believe how absolutely quiet and silky-smooth a Caprice was back then, and the mags raved about its handling with the F41 suspension. Car and Driver had the essentially-same '83 model Caprice on its "Ten Best Cars" list six years after the model had been introduced.
You can have it. It's still dog slow and boring. Those v8's from the 70's and 80's are wheezy and slow. I don't doubt a Caprice could made to handle okay, but all the suspension tuning in the world in 1978 wouldn't change the fact that the PS is over boosted, the brakes are weak, and the car is slow. My dad had a '79 Carpice Classic, I remember nothing remarkable about that car other than it was big. Sure it was great then, but not many people want a lumbering sedan anymore.
I'm still old enough to remember the cars from the 70's. Sure, many had a soft ride, a few would handle okay, but honestly, I'm much happier with the cars today.
My FIL has a '95 Tahoe with the old tech TBI 350. Jesus is that thing awful. Sure it's been fairly reliable with 160k on it. But driving that compared to my expedition is drastic (quality vs. reliability is easily discernible), the brakes are scary bad, the steering is completely devoid of any type of feed back. It's loud, slow, and sloppy. It does ride softer than the Expedition, but that period 350 is horrible. Slow to rev, not particularly smooth, and it doesn't have much power. Pretty much how I remember the 350 in my '75 Buick Regal. It was a reliable engine, but compared to a modern v8 or even a v6 it's unremarkable IMO.
Probably the only Caprice I recall liking (though I wouldn't want one for myself). Was my grandpa's 87 Caprice Classic Brougham LS. It was a nice car. Drove halfway decent, rode nice, and it looked nice for the day. It's just not the type of car I like. I actually liked it better than his '92 Roadmaster which I did not like at all.
That's just our tax money being burned. When Cheney and Kissinger remain free men, but a zillion dollar pursuit against a 90 year old man with tenuous at best evidence is launched like that, you know what is what.
I suppose Germans and Japanese should have then also rejected our products (well, they did as we mostly made crap during that era) as the "liberators" committed their fair share of crimes, and of course the same for British products as Britain was a wholesale criminal - but really, they didn't. It's amazing for me to see such a moral high ground being taken here.
At least the Russians don't make much of value, so that bloody mess can't be protested with wallets :shades:
Maybe Native American Indians shouldn't buy American products, certainly we shouldn't buy anything from England seeing how they treated revolutionary war POWs, people from the south shouldn't buy stuff from the north, nobody in Africa or Asia should buy anything British, and so on.
Comments
That's why we don't call those "the good old days".
My g/f at the time had the 2.8l in her Beretta. Power was good but it really drank gas for the size. EPA was only 19 city.
My brother was into muscle cars from the 60's in the early 90's and mid 90's. He had at least 2 GTO's, I think maybe 3!
First one had the engine blow not long after he got it running and restored. It was a gas guzzler.
Second one he crashed and wrecked severely while trying to take a left turn (ended up hitting a light pole and electrical junction box). Those things just handled like tanks and if you went fast as a teenager you probably wrecked it in short order.
No, I was never in to any type of car that required tons of shop time, down time, care, and gas. I prefer being planted and manueverable.
I can relate. I still remember dreaming about the 928 in Risky Business. My trips into Chicago I was always on the look out for cool cars. I was rarely disappointed.
I remember that T-Bird with the hood up on several occasions, my dad fixing (or making an attempt) whatever illness befell it. If anything, it shows how far domestics and really all cars have advanced - you don't do that to under 10 year old cars today.
Yep, my dad had a Ford Torino and a Chevy Caprice Classic wagon that always needed worked on. And they weren't little annoying problems like a window crank breaking. It was more of the "will it start and keep running long enough to get us home" types of problems.
Certainly haven't had those kinds of issues in a long time. Thankfully!
No, no, no...
Same track. The Lexus skidded to the side, smoothly. Easy to find videos on YouTube if you didn't catch it.
The Grand Cherokee "hopped and skidded sideways", per their writing, arguably closer to a roll over than the GX ever was.
Chrysler was given access to their track to test other models (the V6 had problems, the V8 with air suspension did not) and could tune and test revisions at their site. Toyota had no such courtesy given to them, hence the fly-by. They had to repeat the test on their own course.
Anti-volt press conference claim is pretty darn vague ... got any links?
There's no way that's true, targeting a specific EV like that, by name. I call bull on that one.
Toyota openly held the opinion that Lithiun-ion batteries were not ready for prime time due to heat/fire issues. Given the number of laptop batteries we've replaced here at work, I tend to agree.
Some battery cell for EVs are submerged in liquid!
They are much, MUCH better today.
I don't care where Ford designed the Focus, as long as it's competent, which it is. Same for Fiesta.
Ford owned a big chunk of Mazda, so it made sense to let them design small cars while they focused on trucks and the Mustang. The strategy worked, plain and simple. Who makes the best selling truck? Pony car? That's right...
I like the Focus about as much as I'm disappointed in stale products like the Ranger.
It's all about the product. I'm a little disappointed in the iron block used for the Volt, and while I'm at it where's the DI? Bottom feeders from Kia and Hyundai have that, $41 grand and there's still cost cutting?
My 1980 Mustang Ghia had that 3.3l straight six. That thing was a slug, though, and I got a disappointing 17mpg overall.
I don't care where Ford designed the Focus, as long as it's competent, which it is. Same for Fiesta.
Ford owned a big chunk of Mazda, so it made sense to let them design small cars while they focused on trucks and the Mustang. The strategy worked, plain and simple. Who makes the best selling truck? Pony car? That's right...
I agree 100%. My 89 Mercury Tracer (Mazda 323) was eons better than the '86 Escort I had in HS. The mazda 4cyl in the Tracer would actually rev without fuss. The 5 speed transmission was actually a joy to use, and it didn't keel over through the curves. Granted it was no sports car, but it was by far the best compact in the Ford stable at the time.
It's all about the product. I'm a little disappointed in the iron block used for the Volt, and while I'm at it where's the DI? Bottom feeders from Kia and Hyundai have that, $41 grand and there's still cost cutting?
I agree. I guess we need to remember the Volt is on the Cruze platform and uses the same engine block. I'd think DI with the turbo in the 1.4 would have added some performance w/o much fuel economy penalty or maybe even a slight boost.
Last I saw, GM full-size trucks outsold Ford, and Camaro outsold Mustang.
CU/CR never gave any love to Honda or Toyota. That is a fallacy.
All CU/CR did was report the facts. Straight, and to the point!
Honda and Toyota really did build the highest quality vehicles in the early 90's. We are talking flawless vehicles designed to go 300,000 miles or more.
I'll disagree. A Hummer can't get you from point A to point B any faster than an Aveo.
The exotic could get you from SF to LA in half the usual time it takes in a normal vehicle, traffic willing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6O9zSr-yAc
"the tail slid out and the electronic stability control was really late to intervene. This can be particularly disconcerting on a tall SUV".
Yet no "DO NOT BUY" stamp on it.
"The emergency handling issue we saw with our V6 test vehicle needs to be addressed."
Yet no "DO NOT BUY" stamp on it.
The printed copy said it "hopped and skidded sideways".
Yet no "DO NOT BUY" stamp on it.
Incredibly, they re-edited the video and took all that criticism out. They don't even show that test at all, note the length of the video is shorter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OionK7W8mvo
Also, the old video has a link at the top to watch the updated one, so most people won't ever even know about that issue. Bury it!
Did they treat Lexus the same way?
First, the press releases. CNN quoted them as "urging car shoppers not to buy the GX460, until this problem has been remedied". They issued Safety Alerts, put it on the front page (!), produced videos about the safety risk, and basically went on the full offensive.
Ironically in that same video they admit the driver lifted off the throttle in the middle of the turn. They demonstrated drop throttle oversteer, basically. You're a muscle car guy, right? I'm sure you know exactly what that means.
Controversy sells magazines, though.
OK, but why give Jeep a pass?
CR went after Isuzu/Acura and Suzuki, and now Lexus. Ford Escape rolled in a NHTSA side impact test, and they mentioned it but never even stopped recommending the Ford Escape.
So Ford and Jeep got a break, all the imports were targeted. All facts, and about as specific as can be.
The Volt is heavier than it needs to be, and that hurts it in a lot of ways.
There would be issues today if people had to open the hood on their <10 year old cars with any frequency, or if said cars could wither away into nothing in that amount of time as they once did. That T-Bird would probably be the equivalent of a 40K car today...for it to be having problems so young, and eventually be off the road so soon would be intolerable.
>There's no way that's true, targeting a specific EV like that, by name. I call bull on that one.
Here's that beef requested. I have taken the liberty to leave in some criticisms of the media to which I alluded earlier as well as the uneven hand in criticising GM for their big cars.
"All of the initial coverage [of the Volt] was totally favorable. But beloved toyota Motor Company soon weighed in with strangely negative comments. They had, infact, been caught flat-footed. To make matters worse, toyota had selected the Detroit show for the full unveiling of the monstrously large, heavy, and fuel-addicted full size Tundra pickup, with emphasis on a long-wheelbase, four-door crew cab with huge wheels and four-wheel drive. IN short, their stand largely resembled what GM normally did: it emphasized the big V8 trucks!
"Toyota immediately labeled Volt a clever but meaningless PR exercise, using a battery chemistry, lithium-ion, which was dangerous, unreliable, and far from ready for automotive use. How much sounder, they trumpeted, was their own homely little Prius using (now eclipsed) nickel metal hydride batteries in their "tried and true, patented, toyota Synergy Drive." system. Soon after, toyota invited the world's media to a technical seminar in Japan, where their senior technical officer took great pains to point out the impossibility of litium-ion chemistry for the mobile sector."
...
"The theme of the technical seminar was "toyota knows best, toyota is conservative!" And they even made the statement that, unlike "some other" automobile company, toyota would never, ever place the safety of its customers at risk. It is a strange, and a further manifestation of the pro-toyota bias of the mainstream media, that in 2009 and 2010, the period when ten million toyotas were recalled for unintended acceleration and failing brakes (on the pious Prius, of all cars), not one journalist ever reminded toyota, despite thirty or more deaths being blamed on its failed enegineering, of its claim never to put the consumer at risk."
Lutz, Bob, Car Guys vs Beancounters, pp 157-158.
Note I did skip a paragraph (indicated by the ellipsis) about the need for careful manufacturing of LiIon power supplies to avoid problems.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
"GM News, New Models and Market Share" is the title.
It's GM NEWS when past experiences taint current impressions of the company.
Re: Uplander - the original Honda comment had no GM context associated with it, which is why I made the comment. Perhaps it was implied, but not mentioned.
The "consumer at risk" part is pure comedy given the side-saddle gas tanks in GM pickups.
Also, we'll have to see how well those Li-ion batteries hold up. On our laptops, 3 years max, for the ones not already recalled. Good luck.
We've seen 10 year old Prius tests where they still perform like new. Will the Volt be able to make the same claim? We'll see...
Looks nice...too bad.
That was not right. toyota should have been given the chance to use the same surface to retest their vehicle and other configurations, such as tires, that might make the vehicle safer for the public.
Note that my comment about espionage was tongue in cheek. I suspect car companies are even using drones to get pictures of cars other companies test on the tracks and courses.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
YTD Ford F series 361,978 GM trucks 346,176
Chevy Silvy 252,738
GMC Sierra 93,438
No question about that.
Sorry to hear about the Regal wagon. I like wagons. That's something that could have tempted me.
Trailblazer transmissions - that's what killed GM as an option for my brother. Three trannies in 25K. He took a bath on it and became the last on the family to go Japanese.
With the problems i've experienced with that transmission along with people I know that have had multiple failures, it wouldn't shock me.
I don't know the numbers for the Mustang or Camaro. My source was the WSJ and they only reported the top 20.
In August GM pickups outsold the F150 combined. I know GM has upped the incentives around here in farm country, so maybe that is helping boost GM sales as of late.
Looking at last months sales the shocker has to be the Jetta. It sold over 14k beating the Focus. I did read somewhere Ford is having supply issues with the Focus.
Equinox had another nice month outselling the CRV by a few hundred. Still 12k down YTD. 4th qtr will be interesting.
The Kia Sorento is taking off to. Over 13k sold which is only 3k less than the Equinox.
Escape sold over 20k. My God, Ford must be giving them away.
I'd agree that would be excessive. But if it is indeed true it could be something stupid like the dealer changing out transmissions when the problem is a control module or other problem outside the transmission causing the trans to fail or not perform properly.
He isn't a car guy as such but at least he keeps up on maintenance. The three vehicles that preceded the Trailblazers were Chrysler minivans which didn't do something dramatically hideous like that were a bit trouble prone. He's got an old Celica convertible, a CRV and a RAV4 now. The CVR replaced an almost identical CRV that he hit a patch of ice with, and went into the woods, totaling the vehicle but leaving him pretty OK.
I will say that my older brother had a 72 Vega that went over 100K. Funny thing was he couldn't tell Chevy what a great thing that was because at maybe 60K the head gasket blew. His father-in-law was the service manager for a Chevy dealership and "reduced" the mileage by maybe 28K.... He replaced it with a 77 Nova that he'd probably still have but he let it sit for six months and when he started it again the engine seized. Another not so much of a car guy. He has a PT Cruiser these days.
Another brother has one of those first generation Kia Sportage that he bought because they'd finance him. He is not easy on cars but that thing just keeps going. He's never had a repair, Go figure.
I also have a brother who has owned two Saab 9-3s and never had an issue. Go figure. This is why anecdotal evidence doesn't work so well....
Like I said - anecdotal evidence doesn't work really well.
I just saw one about 45 minutes ago. But it was on tv, in an episode of "Dexter". It got wrecked, in one of those spectacular flips that only happens in Hollywood...
Oh, no doubt. But, there were probably many German and Japanese soldiers who tried to kill Americans, that were still building cars in their respective countries for export here, into as late as the late '80's as well.
Some of that diaereses still exists today and some of the arrogance is communicated in their ads.
Agree they have changed for the better. Glad the foreign competition keeps upping the game. Everyone should at least be glad there is competition.
We all know what would happen if GM had 50% of the global market...history repeats itself.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
While we should never forget, at some point it's time to move on.
I think I've posted this before, but last year at my daughter's school Veterans day program, a survivor of the USS Indianapolis was in attendance. Yes, we have a survivor from that fateful ship in our community. As he was leaving the program, guess what he got into? A Toyota Camry. Honestly, I was a bit surprised too. Right on the bumper in big letters, he displayed proudly "USS Indianapolis survivor" on a Camry of all cars. If he can move on, I think I certainly can.
The Henry Ford of the '20's would like this market though.."Any color you want as long as it's an earth tone, and any interior color you want as long as it's gray, black, or beige."
Should the Justice Department just "move on" in its hunt for [non-permissible content removed] who moved here? It seems not. Google "John Demjanjuk" and you'll see what I mean.
Not trying to 'flame', but add some perspective to the conversation. I realize I'm older than a lot of the regular posters here.
I remember him. Jesus, that's the justice department for you. They guy was a UAW member for years. Guess union protection is stronger than I realized;).
I'm not saying we shouldn't go after war criminals. But I'm not going to put all of Germany or Japan or any country for that matter in the same classification. Particularly after 60 years (but that's me, I can forgive and move on). That's no different than saying everyone who lives in the 'hood' is a gangbanger.
You can have it. It's still dog slow and boring. Those v8's from the 70's and 80's are wheezy and slow. I don't doubt a Caprice could made to handle okay, but all the suspension tuning in the world in 1978 wouldn't change the fact that the PS is over boosted, the brakes are weak, and the car is slow. My dad had a '79 Carpice Classic, I remember nothing remarkable about that car other than it was big. Sure it was great then, but not many people want a lumbering sedan anymore.
I'm still old enough to remember the cars from the 70's. Sure, many had a soft ride, a few would handle okay, but honestly, I'm much happier with the cars today.
My FIL has a '95 Tahoe with the old tech TBI 350. Jesus is that thing awful. Sure it's been fairly reliable with 160k on it. But driving that compared to my expedition is drastic (quality vs. reliability is easily discernible), the brakes are scary bad, the steering is completely devoid of any type of feed back. It's loud, slow, and sloppy. It does ride softer than the Expedition, but that period 350 is horrible. Slow to rev, not particularly smooth, and it doesn't have much power. Pretty much how I remember the 350 in my '75 Buick Regal. It was a reliable engine, but compared to a modern v8 or even a v6 it's unremarkable IMO.
Probably the only Caprice I recall liking (though I wouldn't want one for myself). Was my grandpa's 87 Caprice Classic Brougham LS. It was a nice car. Drove halfway decent, rode nice, and it looked nice for the day. It's just not the type of car I like. I actually liked it better than his '92 Roadmaster which I did not like at all.
At least the Russians don't make much of value, so that bloody mess can't be protested with wallets :shades:
Maybe Native American Indians shouldn't buy American products, certainly we shouldn't buy anything from England seeing how they treated revolutionary war POWs, people from the south shouldn't buy stuff from the north, nobody in Africa or Asia should buy anything British, and so on.