You probably include me in that group. However, even though I do believe (correctly) that US cars stink.
OK, just for fun. I recently learned that the 2010 Camry V6 was rated worse-than-average for reliability by CR. I'm not sure about the V6, but I'm pretty sure the 2010 Malibu four was rated either average or better. Your opinion?
Also...if we walked out to the street and asked 50 passersby about that, do you think even one would know that the Malibu was rated more reliable than the Camry for the 2010 model year? I'm afraid I know the answer to that one. Perception lagging reality...again.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
My opinion is that Toyota definitely skimped on quality with the 2007-2010 Camry generation (though they had the best V6 in class for a while).
The Malibu is improved, but I'm holding off until we have about 10 years of data to prove long term reliability. Remember, with age, it's easy for red dots to turn black on a car built for short term reliability.
I'm not sure what CR's subscriber base is right now, but I'd imagine 1 or 2 out of 50 might be subscribers, and therefore be aware that the Malibu rated better than the Camry for 2010. However, they would also be aware that they can get a used 2001-2006 Camry that is extremely reliable, more so than the Malibu's of that era.
I expect the 2012 Camry to be much improved, but we'll see.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Funny, I prefer my cars from the USA, my sunglasses from the USA, and electronics from the USA! If I can't get it here, I'll do without unless it is absolutely imperative. I'd also much rather get anything Made in USA over something made in China, Bangladesh, Mexico, or India.
The new Sienna is also victim to cost-cutting. The previous one was much nicer, just touch the hard dash on the new one and you'll agree.
Toyota claims to have made upgrades to the new Camry's interior, so they've heard enough criticism to react.
FWIW, I always liked the current Malibu, especially the two-tone Mocha/Chocolate interiors. 08+ Malibus are average or better in reliability, so it falls between the 4 banger and V6 Camry in that regard. Keep an eye on the brakes. 07 and earlier show a few black dots, per CR's Buying Guide 2011.
Perception indeed lags behind reality, I usually say it takes about 5 years for the public to catch up.
Hyundai was a punch line to many a joke, and then the 2005 model Sonata was named the most reliable car in CR's whole survey. 5 years later...2010, who had giant sales increases?
Funny when I was at the COACH outlet (a store that sells $100-$1,000 purses/handbags), I noticed not only were all the bags made in China (as most clothes type products seem to be), but also the men's wallets and belts were too (one belt came from India). All of the sunglasses I looked at were made in China. I know that Chinese sunglasses are not good quality. I don't think Italy makes cheap sunglasses. Needless to say, I didn't buy anything from Coach, and neither did my better half thank goodness.
Dang! If jusy about everything at the COACH outlet was made in China, they ought to change their name to RICKSHAW. Outlet stores do have a tendency to sell cheaper versions of goods with designer names on them. Now, if I saw that nonsense at a regular COACH store, I'd absolutely cross them off my list forever. I'm not paying a premium for a handbag made in some Chinese sweatshop by some eight-year old kid chained to a 70 year-old sewing machine and a bayonet jabbed into his back every time he slows down.
No B-pillar meant a great view, but I never quite got why he got such a huge car with only 2 doors given he had 3 boys.
I can think of two reasons. First, a 4-door kind of says "I have a family" where a 2-door said "I'm hip and cool"...even if it was a big 2-door.
Second, back in those days, a lot of people with kids bought 2-doors, with the thinking that they were safer, as small kids couldn't open the door and fall out.
Those '71-76 Electras in general were handsome cars, although I didn't care too much for the '74. Something about the way the headlights were spaced apart a bit, and half in, half out of the grille. Here's a website that has a lot of pics of the '71-76 LeSabre and Electra. http://nicolya.livejournal.com/155963.html
I think it's interesting, how those big Buicks progressed in that timeframe. The earlier models seemed conservative and clean, yet still had a bit of sporty flair to them. In '73-74, they got a bit more cluttered up, but to be fair, most of the competition did, as well. Then in '75-76 they seemed to try going a bit more upscale in style, but IMO, they still struck a nice balance between the ostentation of a Cadillac, yet not quite as conservative, (IMO at least) as an Oldsmobile.
The 455 came in several states of tune, so they weren't all created equal. Some of them were pretty quick though, even in those big, heavy cars.
handbag made in some Chinese sweatshop by some eight-year old kid chained to a 70 year-old sewing machine and a bayonet jabbed into his back every time he slows down.
When we were looking at Malibus, my 17-year-old daughter went right over to the row of Camaros, of course! As a GM owner of long standing, I really wanted to like the Camaro, but I'm not crazy about it. Roof too low, toy-car front end styling, ridiculous back seat....I guess just like the '70's ones guys my age wanted while I was looking at Nova LN's and Malibu Classics and Monte Carlos!
It does feel 'retro', with the frameless door glass and much width. The rear styling is my favorite part of the car.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I always use a similar example, but if someone said they wouldn't have bought a new '67 Camaro because their '58 Biscayne was lousy, back then we'd have rolled our eyes and considered the guy a crotchety so-and-so!
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
"But as G.M. prepares to start selling them here by the end of this year, the Chinese government is putting heavy pressure on the company to share some of the car’s core technology.
"The Chinese government is refusing to let the Volt qualify for subsidies totaling up to $19,300 a car unless G.M. agrees to transfer the engineering secrets for one of the Volt’s three main technologies to a joint venture in China with a Chinese automaker, G.M. officials said. Some international trade experts said China would risk violating World Trade Organization rules if it imposed that requirement.
"The government’s demand is the latest example of China’s willingness to use the leverage of Western access to the vast Chinese market to extract concessions on advanced technologies. Policies to force technology transfers from non-Chinese companies have already helped this nation build big industries in areas like wind turbines, high-speed trains and water purification. "
FWIW, I always liked the current Malibu, especially the two-tone Mocha/Chocolate interiors.
I like those too. When my wife said she wanted navy blue, I guided her towards mocha/chocolate interior as I hate gray. When she saw one "live", she hated it. She liked the metallic black, so we got one with black cloth interior as well. With the 1LT wheels (polished but not chromed like a mirror), I constantly am admiring the car for how it looks more expensive than it was. It's understated.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
The most sanctimonious is calling someone racist because they prefer to buy American. It made me think the guy was living in his parent's basement while typing, or something.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I guess the thing I have the hardest time understanding--although you have every right to do it--is why post here if you hate GM's? And you guys do post routinely. I dislike Toyotas--I don't even look at their forums.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I usually post here to show some sins still exist although there are some with blinders that can't see them.
I keep posting they used to make the best cars and the tragedy is the historical destruction that became GM. I already had written Chrysler off after the first bailout. Perception did not lag too much on that count.
Now I'm interested to see what GM can do. What it can't do is grow faster than the growth leaders currently. That is reality. Are they too big? Are they behind in their transformation? Can they mitigate the UAW-Effect?
We will see. For now, they are desperately trying to execute change and I'm afraid it will affect their quality. We know the problems experienced on the new Camaro roll out.
There were some on this board that gloated at some of the early-early-new Camaro glitches, and that it didn't outsell Mustang right out-of-the-box. When it did, gee, no comments from those folks. That's what I mean when I talk about 'balance'.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
"Some international trade experts said China would risk violating World Trade Organization rules if it imposed that requirement. "
ROFL, like they care. Thanks, Kissinger and friends. Some here like being mad about past crimes...they should loathe that globalist cabal for the damage they are doing to what was western civilization.
I always use a similar example, but if someone said they wouldn't have bought a new '67 Camaro because their '58 Biscayne was lousy,
Well, heck, they could have had the same engine...... :P
I was really disappointed with the new Camaro but then again I remember an old girlfriend who had maybe a 72 Camaro. Plain old flat head six that my mom's Nova had. In fact mechanically it was nearly identical to my mom's Nova. It cemented in me the thought that a Camaro was a Nova stripped of all its utility. I had real trouble taking them seriously after that....
I do like the look of the new convertible a lot but would take the Mustang myself.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Yes, the Camaro is outselling the Mustang. My comment is that Ford at least kept the Mustang....their problem is thay are slow to make it great as was in the past.
Camaro is also outselling the Challenger, which is far more appealing than the Camaro afaic.
Some on these boards might not appreciate but the fact is Ford has upped it's game. Both the SS and 302 are sub-halo cars so sales will never be high but the HP wars continue....302 looks real good! :shades:
The Hondas are becoming more like some people complain about GM's being. Here are more recalls from a company that's perfect, except for transmissions and AC compressors on CRvs.
(I didn't find any new for toyota/lexus.)
"Honda Motor Co. said over the weekend that it will recall a combined total of about 100,000 CR-V and CR-Z vehicles within the United States to fix defects, none of which have been involved in injuries or deaths.
"Honda said it would voluntarily recall 80,111 CR-V vehicles from the 2006 model year within the United State to replace the power windows master switch. In addition, Honda will recall 5,626 CR-Z vehicles from the 2011 model year to update the software that controls the hybrid electric motor."
Also, more quality problems from Honda. This is getting bad.
"LOS ANGELES -- Honda Motor Co. says it is recalling 310,773 Pilot vehicles in the U.S. to inspect and potentially replace the front seat belts due to problems with the belts' stitching."
Back in late 2009 after my Intrepid got totaled, I looked at a 1991 or 1992 Caprice that a local lot had for sale. Compared to the more angular 1990 and earlier styles, I thought it sucked! The interior was cheaper and a lot more plasticky, and the thing just felt big and bloated, without making good use of interior space.
I was intrigued when the new Caprice came out in spring of '90. By then, I was very, very tired of the previous model. It was one of the first cars that came with an airbag and ABS standard. They advertised it as "the roomiest Caprice ever", but we had a new '93 and I question that. You had to really duck to get in the back seat because the top of the doors curved inward. It was more plasticky inside than the previous model, for sure. I will say I still see a fair amount of '91 and '92's in that mahogany color with the lacy aluminum wheels, that look in pretty good shape. After six years and 93K miles, we sold ours to an exporter. I constantly got postcards in the mail saying "We will buy your Caprice!"
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I was really disappointed with the new Camaro but then again I remember an old girlfriend who had maybe a 72 Camaro. Plain old flat head six that my mom's Nova had. In fact mechanically it was nearly identical to my mom's Nova. It cemented in me the thought that a Camaro was a Nova stripped of all its utility. I had real trouble taking them seriously after that....
Pretty sure that GM sixes in the '70's were OHV, not flatheads. The Camaro was based on the Nova, as the Mustang was on the Falcon. In fact, in some years the Camaro and Nova had the same owner's manual. I don't think I'd have done that!
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I know I'm biased, but I thought the '79 downsized big Fords were a poor copy of the Chevys. And they were on a shorter wheelbase too.
Well I'm biased towards Ford and I want nothing from them during that period. Dark days indeed. Some of the Tbirds and Lincoln Marks were interesting, but I certainly don't wish to see them again.
Pretty sure that GM sixes in the '70's were OHV, not flatheads.
I remember Chevy was an early adopter of OHV 6-cyl engines, but didn't realize how early. Just looked it up and wow, 1929! That was the year the Stovebolt first came out, and it lasted through 1936. The second generation came out in 1937, and lasted through 1963. They were good engines, but extremely heavy, something like 630 lb.
The 3rd-gen inline 6 came out as a 194.5 unit, optional in the 1962 Chevy II. It was around 440 lb. For 1963, a 230 CID version came became the base engine in the big cars, and for 1964, I tihnk it went into trucks.
The Camaro was based on the Nova, as the Mustang was on the Falcon. In fact, in some years the Camaro and Nova had the same owner's manual. I don't think I'd have done that!
Technically, I think the Nova was actually based on the Camaro! I don't think the '67 Camaro was related in any way to the '62-67 Chevy II, but when the '68 Nova debuted, it used a lot of the Camaro structure. Maybe they were both in development at the same time, but the Camaro just happened to debut first, as Chevy tried to hurry up and get a Mustang competitor out?
One good side effect of this was that the '68+ Novas were supposed to have pretty good handling...probably better than a same year Dart/Valiant or Falcon. In later years, when compact police cars started coming onto the scene, the Nova was very popular, and a great performer. Mopar offered a Dodge Dart police package, but it never caught on. When Aspen/Volare police cars became available, the Nova was still by far the police car of choice when it came to smaller models. Interestingly, when Chevy transferred the police package from the Nova to the Malibu in 1979, performance and popularity went way down, and that was what gave Mopar the edge in "compact" police cars.
Odd, since I'd think a Malibu would be more modern, up-to-date, better-handling, roomier, and lighter than a Nova, so it should've been a better performer all around. But, for whatever reason, it wasn't.
As for the Camaro, honestly I like the '67-69 better than the '70+, but I can understand the appeal. As the 70's wore on, they became a bit of a joke compared to the glory days. But, once the Challenger/Barracuda went away, and the Mustang went II, the Camaro/Firebird were about the only performance game in town.
>He makes it sound like they called their own car ugly.
The quote is:
"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. "
I read that as Lutz's description of the Prius. And I think most have to agree it could fit into that description. Those clearly were Lutz's words, not the words of the toyota folks.
If toyota had left the Prius like this, would they have sold nearly as many? Is this based on the Echo?
Or if this resultant were to have come from a GM/F/C factory, would some, some, have labelled it "homely."
Is this better?
It appeals to the green crowd and has an aura which makes them feel different than ordinary folks. That's the Simson's term they made famous as a "smug alert."
The second, to my eye, is less automobile practical than the first. I wouldn't have kicked either out of my garage were I to have won one.
I think there's a lot to be gleaned from Lutz's book. He clearly explains the awful structure at GM with lots of MBA's doing checkmarks and getting bonuses for cars that dogs won't eat. And what was needed and is needed is someone who understands and loves cars and can say thata particular car design/engineering is not going on the market without major improvement. He clearly understands the strengths of having a person in control (of toyota) who can say they will take a whirl on losing money with the Prius concept and gain PR and eventually, maybe, profits if it does sell well.
GM did not have that. He even was blamed early on after a couple of years as models came out that were designed before he was at GM. The press was quick to criticize.
As most of us like cars of a certain ilk for our own use, many of us could see that some cars won't sell in bulk to the general population. Lutz compared the business to making dogfood. If the product is perfectly engineered nutricionally, appearance-wise, shelf-placement wise, package appearance-wise, what counts is whether the dogs eat it. If the dogs won't eat the product, all that effort of perfection in marketing was wasted.
GM for several years has had product that many people didn't eat. So they have had to change (as they should) to a food that has a better taste--Cruze, Cadillacs, and one.
I know I'm biased, but I thought the '79 downsized big Fords were a poor copy of the Chevys. And they were on a shorter wheelbase too.
I guess all three downsized cars had their strengths and weaknesses. One thing I remember about the Panthers, a problem that persisted up through the 1990's even, was some fairly serious hood/cowl shake on rough roads. The GM B/C and even Mopar R-bodies seemed better composed in this regard.
Supposedly, the Panthers had the same amount of passenger volume as the Caprice...about 110-111 cubic feet. The Mopar R-bodies, for comparison, were rated at 108. However, I notice more intrusion from things like frame rails, wheel cutouts, transmission/driveshaft hump, dashboard, etc, in the Panther. Incidentally, I think GM's B/C bodies are a bit worse than the Mopars in this regard as well, which is one of the reasons I prefer Mopar's R-bodies.
When CR tested their '79 Caprice with the 130 hp 305, they also tested an LTD with a 129 hp 302 and a St. Regis with a 135 hp 318. I forget whether they preferred the LTD or the Caprice, but do remember the St. Regis was a VERY distant third. And I do remember them saying that the '79 Caprice wasn't as impressive as the '77 had been.
By 1983, I think CR was preferring the Panthers to GM's B-bodies, mainly because the Panthers were usually scoring better in their reliability ratings.
I think that was South Park with the "Smug Alert" (car was named "Pious", which also fits). First one in my eyes is just JDM style awkwardness, later versions are dorky green efficiency. Makes me want to go fire up my fintail right now, just to cancel out a few dozen of them. It's a hybrid too, burns both gas and oil :shades:
"He clearly explains the awful structure at GM with lots of MBA's doing checkmarks and getting bonuses for cars that dogs won't eat."
Indeed he's right there, and I wonder how much of that has changed. People who claim the executive crowd has earned their rewards are smoking some pretty strong stuff, IMHO. Good line, too, reminds me of what I said about my brother's old Lumina "Euro" - drive it down the street and all the neighborhood dogs start barking and howling :P
By 1983, I think CR was preferring the Panthers to GM's B-bodies, mainly because the Panthers were usually scoring better in their reliability ratings.
That's almost hard to believe. But didn't Ford start using FI on the 302 in the panthers prior to GM with the 305 in the Caprice? IIRC in the mid 80's or so the 305 generally had more HP, but the 302 IIRC had more torque.
I never have found a Prius attractive or desirable. Granted I appreciate the technology and FE.
Outside of the tech, FE, and reliability, I've yet to read a positive review on one. The car rags never taut how great it is to drive. It appears to be purgatory for any of enthusiast outside of the "green" movement.
Nationalistic, maybe, but racist, no. Racist would mean refusing to buy a Detroit car because it might've been assembled by an African-American or Japanese car because it was assembled by an Asian.
I remember a review of the Lumina Eurosport in Motor Trend back in ther day. The headline read "A Little Euro, a Little Sport, But Not Much of Either."
Yeah, Ford went to fuel injection with the 302 starting in 1980 for Lincolns, and the other big cars for 1983. I think the Mustang first offered a fuel-injected 302 in 1984, but my Consumer Guide has a test of a 1985 GT with a 302-4bbl, having 210 hp and 256 ft-lb of torque.
I forget when Chevy first fuel-injected the 305. My same Consumer Guide has a Camaro IROC-Z with a PFI 305 that has 215 hp and 275 ft-lb of torque. However, I don't think the regular passenger cars got fuel injection until 1989, and then it only had 170 hp, which is about what they had gotten the 4-bbl up to by 1988.
My Consumer Guide shows the regular 302 putting out 140 hp, 250 ft-lb of torque (I think the dual-exhaust version put out 155 hp, dunno about the torque). They tested a Pontiac Parisienne with a 165 hp 305-4bbl that had 245 ft-lb of torque, and a few Olds 307's that had 140 hp, and 255 ft-lb of torque.
The Hondas are becoming more like some people complain about GM's being. Here are more recalls from a company that's perfect, except for transmissions and AC compressors on CRvs.
I think you're the only poster on this forum that I've seen say Honda is perfect. :surprise: :P
Comments
Cool, my dad had an Electra coupe, I think it was a '72?
No B-pillar meant a great view, but I never quite got why he got such a huge car with only 2 doors given he had 3 boys.
Either way, he LOVED that car. If I hit the lottery, I'd buy a restored one for him just to see the look on his face. :shades:
OK, just for fun. I recently learned that the 2010 Camry V6 was rated worse-than-average for reliability by CR. I'm not sure about the V6, but I'm pretty sure the 2010 Malibu four was rated either average or better. Your opinion?
Also...if we walked out to the street and asked 50 passersby about that, do you think even one would know that the Malibu was rated more reliable than the Camry for the 2010 model year? I'm afraid I know the answer to that one. Perception lagging reality...again.
The Malibu is improved, but I'm holding off until we have about 10 years of data to prove long term reliability. Remember, with age, it's easy for red dots to turn black on a car built for short term reliability.
I'm not sure what CR's subscriber base is right now, but I'd imagine 1 or 2 out of 50 might be subscribers, and therefore be aware that the Malibu rated better than the Camry for 2010. However, they would also be aware that they can get a used 2001-2006 Camry that is extremely reliable, more so than the Malibu's of that era.
I expect the 2012 Camry to be much improved, but we'll see.
Toyota claims to have made upgrades to the new Camry's interior, so they've heard enough criticism to react.
FWIW, I always liked the current Malibu, especially the two-tone Mocha/Chocolate interiors. 08+ Malibus are average or better in reliability, so it falls between the 4 banger and V6 Camry in that regard. Keep an eye on the brakes. 07 and earlier show a few black dots, per CR's Buying Guide 2011.
Perception indeed lags behind reality, I usually say it takes about 5 years for the public to catch up.
Hyundai was a punch line to many a joke, and then the 2005 model Sonata was named the most reliable car in CR's whole survey. 5 years later...2010, who had giant sales increases?
You guessed it...
Dang! If jusy about everything at the COACH outlet was made in China, they ought to change their name to RICKSHAW. Outlet stores do have a tendency to sell cheaper versions of goods with designer names on them. Now, if I saw that nonsense at a regular COACH store, I'd absolutely cross them off my list forever. I'm not paying a premium for a handbag made in some Chinese sweatshop by some eight-year old kid chained to a 70 year-old sewing machine and a bayonet jabbed into his back every time he slows down.
I can think of two reasons. First, a 4-door kind of says "I have a family" where a 2-door said "I'm hip and cool"...even if it was a big 2-door.
Second, back in those days, a lot of people with kids bought 2-doors, with the thinking that they were safer, as small kids couldn't open the door and fall out.
Those '71-76 Electras in general were handsome cars, although I didn't care too much for the '74. Something about the way the headlights were spaced apart a bit, and half in, half out of the grille. Here's a website that has a lot of pics of the '71-76 LeSabre and Electra. http://nicolya.livejournal.com/155963.html
I think it's interesting, how those big Buicks progressed in that timeframe. The earlier models seemed conservative and clean, yet still had a bit of sporty flair to them. In '73-74, they got a bit more cluttered up, but to be fair, most of the competition did, as well. Then in '75-76 they seemed to try going a bit more upscale in style, but IMO, they still struck a nice balance between the ostentation of a Cadillac, yet not quite as conservative, (IMO at least) as an Oldsmobile.
The 455 came in several states of tune, so they weren't all created equal. Some of them were pretty quick though, even in those big, heavy cars.
It almost sounds like you've been there. :P
small kids couldn't open the door and fall out
I wouldn't put that beyond my lil' bro, either.
His engine was powerful, but that thing was massively heavy and definitely tuned for a cushy ride.
He's very nostalgic for it. We named it Charlie Brown, because even though it wasn't too flashy you could always rely on it. :shades:
I also never got why he went with a white vinyl!
His was definitely the '72, same light green color as that convertible, but his was a 2 door hardtop.
By '76 they spoiled the styling, that's awful, yuck.
Thanks for the trip down memory lane...
580 horses, mama-mia!
Regards,
OW
It does feel 'retro', with the frameless door glass and much width. The rear styling is my favorite part of the car.
"The Chinese government is refusing to let the Volt qualify for subsidies totaling up to $19,300 a car unless G.M. agrees to transfer the engineering secrets for one of the Volt’s three main technologies to a joint venture in China with a Chinese automaker, G.M. officials said. Some international trade experts said China would risk violating World Trade Organization rules if it imposed that requirement.
"The government’s demand is the latest example of China’s willingness to use the leverage of Western access to the vast Chinese market to extract concessions on advanced technologies. Policies to force technology transfers from non-Chinese companies have already helped this nation build big industries in areas like wind turbines, high-speed trains and water purification. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/06/business/global/gm-aims-the-volt-at-china-but-- chinese-want-its-secrets.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2
There's a lot more about other companies in the article.
The Chinese are willing to violate WTO rules extorting secrets of technology in vehicles and requiring partnerships with their own companies.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Put simply, you got good GM's? You are right.
We got crap GM's? So are we.
At least the crap GM's are diminishing as they die off slowly...
Regards,
OW
I like those too. When my wife said she wanted navy blue, I guided her towards mocha/chocolate interior as I hate gray. When she saw one "live", she hated it. She liked the metallic black, so we got one with black cloth interior as well. With the 1LT wheels (polished but not chromed like a mirror), I constantly am admiring the car for how it looks more expensive than it was. It's understated.
I keep posting they used to make the best cars and the tragedy is the historical destruction that became GM. I already had written Chrysler off after the first bailout. Perception did not lag too much on that count.
Now I'm interested to see what GM can do. What it can't do is grow faster than the growth leaders currently. That is reality. Are they too big? Are they behind in their transformation? Can they mitigate the UAW-Effect?
We will see. For now, they are desperately trying to execute change and I'm afraid it will affect their quality. We know the problems experienced on the new Camaro roll out.
Besides, I'm still working on the 'Vette-Plan.
Regards,
OW
ROFL, like they care. Thanks, Kissinger and friends. Some here like being mad about past crimes...they should loathe that globalist cabal for the damage they are doing to what was western civilization.
I've seen entire threads on blatant Chinese knock-offs of other cars.
Well, heck, they could have had the same engine...... :P
I was really disappointed with the new Camaro but then again I remember an old girlfriend who had maybe a 72 Camaro. Plain old flat head six that my mom's Nova had. In fact mechanically it was nearly identical to my mom's Nova. It cemented in me the thought that a Camaro was a Nova stripped of all its utility. I had real trouble taking them seriously after that....
I do like the look of the new convertible a lot but would take the Mustang myself.
Camaro is also outselling the Challenger, which is far more appealing than the Camaro afaic.
BTW, Camaro is outselling Ferrari.
Regards,
OW
302 Power
Some on these boards might not appreciate but the fact is Ford has upped it's game. Both the SS and 302 are sub-halo cars so sales will never be high but the HP wars continue....302 looks real good! :shades:
Granted, it costs $10K more than the SS.
Regards,
OW
(I didn't find any new for toyota/lexus.)
"Honda Motor Co. said over the weekend that it will recall a combined total of about 100,000 CR-V and CR-Z vehicles within the United States to fix defects, none of which have been involved in injuries or deaths.
"Honda said it would voluntarily recall 80,111 CR-V vehicles from the 2006 model year within the United State to replace the power windows master switch. In addition, Honda will recall 5,626 CR-Z vehicles from the 2011 model year to update the software that controls the hybrid electric motor."
Also, more quality problems from Honda. This is getting bad.
"LOS ANGELES -- Honda Motor Co. says it is recalling 310,773 Pilot vehicles in the U.S. to inspect and potentially replace the front seat belts due to problems with the belts' stitching."
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/09/3897511/honda-recalls-310773-pilots-in.html#ixz- - z1XV7H4Bpk
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I was intrigued when the new Caprice came out in spring of '90. By then, I was very, very tired of the previous model. It was one of the first cars that came with an airbag and ABS standard. They advertised it as "the roomiest Caprice ever", but we had a new '93 and I question that. You had to really duck to get in the back seat because the top of the doors curved inward. It was more plasticky inside than the previous model, for sure. I will say I still see a fair amount of '91 and '92's in that mahogany color with the lacy aluminum wheels, that look in pretty good shape. After six years and 93K miles, we sold ours to an exporter. I constantly got postcards in the mail saying "We will buy your Caprice!"
Pretty sure that GM sixes in the '70's were OHV, not flatheads. The Camaro was based on the Nova, as the Mustang was on the Falcon. In fact, in some years the Camaro and Nova had the same owner's manual. I don't think I'd have done that!
Well I'm biased towards Ford and I want nothing from them during that period. Dark days indeed. Some of the Tbirds and Lincoln Marks were interesting, but I certainly don't wish to see them again.
I remember Chevy was an early adopter of OHV 6-cyl engines, but didn't realize how early. Just looked it up and wow, 1929! That was the year the Stovebolt first came out, and it lasted through 1936. The second generation came out in 1937, and lasted through 1963. They were good engines, but extremely heavy, something like 630 lb.
The 3rd-gen inline 6 came out as a 194.5 unit, optional in the 1962 Chevy II. It was around 440 lb. For 1963, a 230 CID version came became the base engine in the big cars, and for 1964, I tihnk it went into trucks.
The Camaro was based on the Nova, as the Mustang was on the Falcon. In fact, in some years the Camaro and Nova had the same owner's manual. I don't think I'd have done that!
Technically, I think the Nova was actually based on the Camaro! I don't think the '67 Camaro was related in any way to the '62-67 Chevy II, but when the '68 Nova debuted, it used a lot of the Camaro structure. Maybe they were both in development at the same time, but the Camaro just happened to debut first, as Chevy tried to hurry up and get a Mustang competitor out?
One good side effect of this was that the '68+ Novas were supposed to have pretty good handling...probably better than a same year Dart/Valiant or Falcon. In later years, when compact police cars started coming onto the scene, the Nova was very popular, and a great performer. Mopar offered a Dodge Dart police package, but it never caught on. When Aspen/Volare police cars became available, the Nova was still by far the police car of choice when it came to smaller models. Interestingly, when Chevy transferred the police package from the Nova to the Malibu in 1979, performance and popularity went way down, and that was what gave Mopar the edge in "compact" police cars.
Odd, since I'd think a Malibu would be more modern, up-to-date, better-handling, roomier, and lighter than a Nova, so it should've been a better performer all around. But, for whatever reason, it wasn't.
As for the Camaro, honestly I like the '67-69 better than the '70+, but I can understand the appeal. As the 70's wore on, they became a bit of a joke compared to the glory days. But, once the Challenger/Barracuda went away, and the Mustang went II, the Camaro/Firebird were about the only performance game in town.
The quote is:
"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. "
I read that as Lutz's description of the Prius. And I think most have to agree it could fit into that description. Those clearly were Lutz's words, not the words of the toyota folks.
If toyota had left the Prius like this, would they have sold nearly as many? Is this based on the Echo?
Or if this resultant were to have come from a GM/F/C factory, would some, some, have labelled it "homely."
Is this better?
It appeals to the green crowd and has an aura which makes them feel different than ordinary folks. That's the Simson's term they made famous as a "smug alert."
The second, to my eye, is less automobile practical than the first. I wouldn't have kicked either out of my garage were I to have won one.
I think there's a lot to be gleaned from Lutz's book. He clearly explains the awful structure at GM with lots of MBA's doing checkmarks and getting bonuses for cars that dogs won't eat. And what was needed and is needed is someone who understands and loves cars and can say thata particular car design/engineering is not going on the market without major improvement. He clearly understands the strengths of having a person in control (of toyota) who can say they will take a whirl on losing money with the Prius concept and gain PR and eventually, maybe, profits if it does sell well.
GM did not have that. He even was blamed early on after a couple of years as models came out that were designed before he was at GM. The press was quick to criticize.
As most of us like cars of a certain ilk for our own use, many of us could see that some cars won't sell in bulk to the general population. Lutz compared the business to making dogfood. If the product is perfectly engineered nutricionally, appearance-wise, shelf-placement wise, package appearance-wise, what counts is whether the dogs eat it. If the dogs won't eat the product, all that effort of perfection in marketing was wasted.
GM for several years has had product that many people didn't eat. So they have had to change (as they should) to a food that has a better taste--Cruze, Cadillacs, and one.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I guess all three downsized cars had their strengths and weaknesses. One thing I remember about the Panthers, a problem that persisted up through the 1990's even, was some fairly serious hood/cowl shake on rough roads. The GM B/C and even Mopar R-bodies seemed better composed in this regard.
Supposedly, the Panthers had the same amount of passenger volume as the Caprice...about 110-111 cubic feet. The Mopar R-bodies, for comparison, were rated at 108. However, I notice more intrusion from things like frame rails, wheel cutouts, transmission/driveshaft hump, dashboard, etc, in the Panther. Incidentally, I think GM's B/C bodies are a bit worse than the Mopars in this regard as well, which is one of the reasons I prefer Mopar's R-bodies.
When CR tested their '79 Caprice with the 130 hp 305, they also tested an LTD with a 129 hp 302 and a St. Regis with a 135 hp 318. I forget whether they preferred the LTD or the Caprice, but do remember the St. Regis was a VERY distant third. And I do remember them saying that the '79 Caprice wasn't as impressive as the '77 had been.
By 1983, I think CR was preferring the Panthers to GM's B-bodies, mainly because the Panthers were usually scoring better in their reliability ratings.
"He clearly explains the awful structure at GM with lots of MBA's doing checkmarks and getting bonuses for cars that dogs won't eat."
Indeed he's right there, and I wonder how much of that has changed. People who claim the executive crowd has earned their rewards are smoking some pretty strong stuff, IMHO. Good line, too, reminds me of what I said about my brother's old Lumina "Euro" - drive it down the street and all the neighborhood dogs start barking and howling :P
That's almost hard to believe. But didn't Ford start using FI on the 302 in the panthers prior to GM with the 305 in the Caprice? IIRC in the mid 80's or so the 305 generally had more HP, but the 302 IIRC had more torque.
Outside of the tech, FE, and reliability, I've yet to read a positive review on one. The car rags never taut how great it is to drive. It appears to be purgatory for any of enthusiast outside of the "green" movement.
They have absolutely no respect for intellectual property.
I forget when Chevy first fuel-injected the 305. My same Consumer Guide has a Camaro IROC-Z with a PFI 305 that has 215 hp and 275 ft-lb of torque. However, I don't think the regular passenger cars got fuel injection until 1989, and then it only had 170 hp, which is about what they had gotten the 4-bbl up to by 1988.
My Consumer Guide shows the regular 302 putting out 140 hp, 250 ft-lb of torque (I think the dual-exhaust version put out 155 hp, dunno about the torque). They tested a Pontiac Parisienne with a 165 hp 305-4bbl that had 245 ft-lb of torque, and a few Olds 307's that had 140 hp, and 255 ft-lb of torque.
You are, of course, correct.
But that Camaro really did drive life a lowered Nova....
I think you're the only poster on this forum that I've seen say Honda is perfect. :surprise: :P