GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda...Who will sell you your next car?

perna · February 2006

front clip ???

Rocky

Err, ah... the correct name is the "front fascia", but I'm never sure how to spell that word, so i just say "clip".

The similarity is more striking in person, since you can't really see the similar headlight configuration in the Lucerne shot.

ubbermotor · March 2006

This must be what GM ment when they said they were going to try to make Buick more appealing to import buyers.

bumpy · March 2006

front clip ???

bumpy, "Essential Enthusiast Lingo" #36, 28 Aug 2005 7:26 am

perna · March 2006

If the Lucerne had slightly bigger foglights (what's up with GM and tiny fogs lately??) it would be a near identical match. The grille openings are spot-on, and the headlights are really, really close. Even the split air intake is similar, with Buick putting chrome strips in the middle to offset it somewhat.

nvbanker · March 2006

I am amazed at the similarity. Wanna bet though, it's accidental? I wonder if GM actually can be that strategic.

Unbelievable how behind GM really is.....

socala4 · March 2006

I am amazed at the similarity. Wanna bet though, it's accidental? I wonder if GM actually can be that strategic.

It's probably the result of groupthink, blended with complacency:

Recipe for disaster:
-Take unwillingness to accept that there is a problem
-Add complacency and a lack of interest in asking whether there may be some reasons why the company is losing market share and money
-Stir in corporate bureaucracy that makes it difficult to respond efficiently to competitive threats
-Heat this up in an environment in which nobody is willing to take significant risks to change the course of things

Result: A pretty bland and dull broth. Serves fewer and fewer customers as time goes on.

nvbanker · March 2006

How GM history is repeating itself with Buick. They're doing the same thing to a good brand, they did with Oldsmobile, that killed Olds. Renaming all the cars, taking out the things that make them popular now (bench seats) and virtually going after a whole different market - who unfornately will never buy a Buick. The old codgers who have been buying Buicks by the droves - will now consider Grand Marsquis and Avalons, and be happier in them anyway..... Nice strategy. But it's not your father's Buick.....

maple2 · March 2006

you guys are too much the buick doesnt look like the nissan you really think that gm would sink that low to copy a pos nissan?
furthermore if you want to talk about copying veichles you need look no farther than the honda ridgeline and the avalanche now who is copying who?

perna · March 2006

you guys are too much the buick doesnt look like the nissan you really think that gm would sink that low to copy a pos nissan?

Well, people actually want to buy Nissans.

This is in stark contrast to GM who seem content to dump their vehicles into fleets and various "employee pricing" fire sales to move the metal.

That said, I think the Lucerne is a decent car. In typical GM fashion, however, they decontented the interior too much to differentiate it from the DTS. However, they still charge a premium price for a car whose interior is only marginally better than an Impala that costs $10-15k less. And, is this even a car that is going to appeal to Buick's audience?

That Maxima that you call a POS, on the other hand, is 10x the car that any Buick is. It accelerates like a rocketship, handles like a sports car, and has an impeccable interior (mine is rattle free after 3 years and umpteen miles). No warranty issues at all.

How is GM going to sell a Buick to me, a 31 year old dude, when any one of their cars is going to be a step down from that Maxima? The next chance they have is the rumored '07 LaCrosse GNX, but it will take more than a big engine to get me interested in that hoss.

imidazol97 · March 2006

How are the JD POwer's ratings on the Maxima?

imidazol97 · March 2006

Look at how Honda Accord copied the LaCrosse rear to get away from their botched backed into a brick wall rear end look from 03-05.

nvbanker · March 2006

If Honda copied the Avalanche, they did a miserable job. Didn't even cross my mind.

andre1969 · March 2006

I thought that the Maxima kind of grew up and became mature and "Buicky" in 1995. Kind of a sporty Buick with 60's Dodge taillights. And even the 2000 Maxima looks a bit like a distored Regal up front, just with the grille dropped a bit, the emblem offset, and the headlights bigger and a bit slanted. Except for 2000 they swapped the 60's Dodge taillights for Neon taillights.

At least, though, the 2000-03 Maxima seemed to get a few minor tweaks each year, so that the later ones look nicer than the ones before. I just don't get the '04+ Maxima, though. Those fixed skylights that run the length of the roof make the car look like a sick animal with an exposed spinal cord. And I don't like that buck-toothed grille at all. And, I know I've used this analogy before, but remember the episode of "I Love Lucy", where Lucy lost her wedding ring and thought that it ended up in the cement Ricky used to build their barbeque grille? So Lucy and Ethel took it all apart one night and tried to put it back together again? Well, that's what the new Maxima makes me think of. Looks like Lucy and Ethel took an Altima apart, and then tried to put it back together and the Maxima is what they ended up with.

But it does seem to be selling well, so Nissan must be doing something right.

maple2 · March 2006

agreed honda did do a miserable job

andre1969 · March 2006

I think they're both ugly, but in different ways, so in that round I'm not going to declare a winner. Or would that be "loser"?

lemko · March 2006

...makes the Maxima look like a child's bank to me. The Nissan has an impecabble interior? All the Nissans I saw at the Philly Auto Show had crummy interiors. Shoot, the Altima looked better than the Max and it's supposed to be the lesser car. Some people really reach to praise a Japanese brand and bash an American one.

dieselone · March 2006

No doubt Nissan has taken the "GM way" to cut costs. Nissan interiors are noticably cheaper today in materials and contruction than they were 4-5 years ago (IMHO).

Before I got rid of my '01 Nissan Pathfinder LE (by far the best built, most solid vehicle I've owned to date) I test drove an Armada and when I got back in my PF, it felt newer, with its solid feel and better looking interior bits.

Still, Nissan powertrains are top notch (excluding thier 4cyl).

andre1969 · March 2006

I agree, I think Nissan pretty much shot their wad on powertrains...engines and transmissions, which are pretty much class-leading. But then to keep prices low, they had to cut corners somewhere.

I think Nissan had been cheaping out for awhile, though. My Mom & stepdad had a 1991 Nissan Stanza, and that was actually a pretty nice car for what it was. IIRC it was built on a modified version of the '89-94 Maxima platform. They now have a 1999 Altima, and IMO that thing is just a cheap, ugly car. While the Stanza was starched and conservative looking, the Altima just looked like it was going for shock value in its styling. Interior also seems kinda cheap, and it drives and rides like a cheap compact car. But in the long run it has proven itself.

The '02+ Altima still has its faults, but at least it has, IMO, enough good traits to balance them out. To me, its biggest problems are the interior quality and the coarseness and relatively poor economy of the 2.5 4-cyl. But on the plus side it handles well, looks good (IMO at least, I know that's subjective), is roomy and comfortable, doesn't feel like the cheap little car my Mom & stepdad's '99 does, and has great power with the V-6. And even though the 4-cyl is coarse, it does give good power, and quiets out pretty well at highway speeds.

If something happened to my Intrepid and I was forced to get a brand-new car, the Altima would be on my list.

dieselone · March 2006

Andre,

I agree regarding Nissan's 2.5L 4cyl. My brother has an '02 Sentra SE-R Spec V. Fun little car. The 2.5 is coarse/loud, and about the opposite of a Honda 4 cyl., but revs quick and just has tons of torque at a low rpm for a 4cyl. The car overall feels cheap, but is fun to drive.

socala4 · March 2006

Having been at the precipice of disaster (no, being a Japanese company does not guarantee success), the Renault-guided turnaround of Nissan has relied upon:

(a) Creating a competent Camry/Accord fighter that emphasizes styling and power (Altima)
(b) Reintroducing its image sports car (350Z) to bring positive attention and restore a connection to its sports car lineage
(c) Developing a sports sedan (G35) to improve the image of its premium brand and make it a fair contender in the sports sedan market

The downside is that some of this has come of the expense of interior quality and some loss of reliability, which may ultimately backfire on the brand over the long run.

GM should be taking notes on this Nissan comeback, for both the positive and negative lessons that it offers. Build a few obvious winners in key segments, but don't allow mediocre quality or cheap interiors to pave the way for future problems by converting happy buyers into dissatisfied defectors.

andre1969 · March 2006

is that when the '02 Altima came out, it was a car that actually got me interested to go to the dealer and try one out. Despite still oweing something like 37 months on my '00 Intrepid and being really upside down (partly high miles, partly poor resale). If I wasn't so upside-down on my current ride at the time, I just might have sprung for it.

And even to this day, despite the Altima's shortcomings, it's still a car that I like and would be willing to take a chance with. I can't quite say that about any of GM's offerings. I kinda like the Lucerne, but not enough to go out and buy a new one unless the discounts were running deep. And there are some used models I kinda like, at the right price, like the Park Avenue, LeSabre, Regal, Impala, Aurora, Intrigue, Caprice, Roadmaster, etc. But buying a used car isn't going to help GM...unless it breaks down alot and I only use GM parts! And perhaps put it on a GMAC credit card! :P

lemko · March 2006

There's a lady at work who has a white Park Avenue from last year. I really like this car!!! Admit it, you like the cool 1955 Dodge-esque taillights on the Altima! It would be even better of they had three stacked round red lenses behind that clear cover so it would look like a DeSoto from behind!

perna · March 2006

How are the JD POwer's ratings on the Maxima?

JD Power doesn't buy my cars. I do. Therefore, I don't care, and honestly have no idea.

perna · March 2006

...makes the Maxima look like a child's bank to me. The Nissan has an impecabble interior? All the Nissans I saw at the Philly Auto Show had crummy interiors.

I'm talking about the 2003 Maxima whose picture I uploaded (and car I own). I don't have time to find 03/04 interior shots to compare, but I know what you're talking about.

Nearly everything between the '03 and '04 cars were changed, and not everything was for the better. I think the '03s interior is better, although they're supposed to be redoing it for the '07 model year.

dieselone · March 2006

Andre,

Once again, I agree with you. The a v6 Altima would definitely be on my list if I was shopping for a family sedan under $30k, which we maybe by the end of the year. While it certainly isn't perfect, what it does right, I place an emphasis on, powertain performance. I own a Suburban, so the interior would look/feel luxurious.

After having Nissan's 3.5VQ in my 01 PF, I've been hooked on Nissan engines. I like the fact that it offers smoothness, torque, and HP in equal portions and reliable. Plus you can get a manual trans in the Altima, which I would prefer. That alone would lead me to choose it over something like an Impala SS.

andre1969 · March 2006

I'll see an '05 Park Ave pop up on in someone's local used car inventory, and do get a bit of an urge. And yeah, I'll admit that I do like the Dodge-y taillight on the Altima. The first time I ever saw an '02 Altima was at night, and from the back its basic shape, with those taillights, did somewhat favor an old Checker, or maybe a '55-56 Dodge. I thought I was gaining on an old car, until I got close enough to see what it was. And then I thought "Oh, COOL!!"

andre1969 · March 2006

wants to get a new Xterra soon, and I have to admit, even though SUVs aren't my thing, and this sucker's interior is simply caked with plastic, somehow it ends up coming off with a cool enough image overall that I kinda like it. I think that it's a bit like the Altima's formula of having a good powertrain and a good looking body, so that you can kind of excuse its shortcomings. Besides, most base-level trucky SUVs are pretty plasticky inside, anyway.

As for a V-6 Altima versus an Impala SS, I'd probably pick the Altima as well, but for kind of a funny reason. Interior room. Even though the Impala is a larger car, and larger interior, the way it's laid out, once I put the seat to where I'm comfortable, the back seat is horribly cramped. No legroom AND no headroom. And it's tight enough that it would be bad for even average-height passengers, not just taller ones. In contrast, I fit just fine in the back of an Altima.

Also, while the SS is cool for having a V-8, and gets good economy for having that much power, The Altima V-6 would just be a better balance of power, and get slightly better fuel economy.

dieselone · March 2006

I agree the backseat room in the Impala is not impressive. When my wife had the choice of an Impala, GP, and Ford 500 to replace her Taurus company car, we went out and looked at all 3. The GP was simply horrible, as my head rested on the rear window, the Impala was better, but I swear it lost rear leg room in the redesign. How can that be? Since my wife needs as much room as possible for people, gear etc, the 500 was the obvious choice (I feels like a limo in comparison, and you put the whole Gotti family in the trunk), plus it had some features standard the Impala doesn't and she isn't able to pick options, making the 500 the obvious choice, but the extra room was the deciding factor.

Regarding the 500, many mention the lack of front leg room. I must be missing something cause it seems to me to have just as much leg room in the drivers seat as my Suburban. I haven't looked up the specs, but I'm over 6' tall and find it to have plenty of leg room.

Still if it was my money, I wouldn't buy a 500, just not enough refinement/power. The 3.0 works for a base engine, but it seriously needs a smoother engine.

andre1969 · March 2006

I just looked it up, and the 500 has 41.3" of published legroom. In comparison, the Impala and Taurus, and Intrepid/Concorde/300M, all have 42.2"

I take these measurements with a grain of salt, though. For instance, the Charger/300/Magnum has something like 41.8" of legroom up front, but feels roomier to me than my Intrepid. But then the Camry has something like 41.7", and it feels a bit tight to me. I think the Altima's at something like 42.9".

dieselone · March 2006

Interesting.

I just looked up my Suburban and it is listed at 41.3" front and 39.1" rear. So the 500 actually has more rear leg room.

perna · March 2006

Some people really reach to praise a Japanese brand and bash an American one.

I forgot to address this. Here are the cars I've owned over my lifetime:

1983 Pontiac 6000
1989 Ford Escort
1996 Volkswagen Jetta
2000 Olds Alero
2002 Olds Intrigue
2003 Max

Out of the bunch, the Jetta was by far the most unreliable. It was a fun car to drive, but was so horrible I can't bring myself to look at Volkswagen ever again.

The American brands were fine. However, in March of '03 when I bought the Nissan, neither Ford nor GM had any "4 door sports cars" on offer. The ones they did have - Lincoln LS and Cadillac CTS - were vastly overpriced.

It was only after buying the Maxima that I realized what a well built and appealing car was supposed to be like. I came with no preconceived notions of "Japanese Automotive Superiority" or any of that nonsense, and I still don't when I'm car shopping. However, this was such a such a vastly better car than the Intrigue or anything I'd owned prior, I'm a lot pickier now when looking at potential Maxima replacements.

I honestly have no idea whether my next car will be Japanese or American. I'd LIKE to buy American, and will do my share of test driving (the best part of car buying!), but I'm not going to settle. Why should I? GM can play their divisions off against each other by not offering auto climate control in an Impala or removing Homelink from a Grand Prix. In the meantime, I can spend the same money and go with a Nissan or some other make that will give me both these options, and anything else I could possibly want. The Grand Prix GXP is so stinking close to being my next car, but GM has done several things to decontent the car just so it doesn't compete with a LaCrosse or CTS that I'm not buying it on that principle alone. Screw them.

At times I feel like the Autoextremist guy posting here; the only reason I bash the domestics is because I have completely hit the end of my patience with their brand mismanagement and not shooting for the stars with their new automobiles. I WANT to buy a Ford or GM product, but right now I'd feel like I was settling for the 2nd or 3rd best car out there.

So for now, I'm biding my time. The reason I haven't replaced my car is because I'm still enjoying it, and see no reason to part with it yet. And, more importantly (CCB speaking out here), there is nothing on the market that I think is a worthy replacement.

Ford or GM has about 2-3 more years to come up with something that has a better interior, has a faster engine, and handles better than my car.

P.S. There are only three brands of cars that I refuse to look at. 1. Kia, 2. Chrysler, and 3. Volkswagen. Call me ignorant for writing off entire brands of cars, but the VW is due to my Jetta, and after watching what people have gone through with the other two brands.. no thanks. There are some life lessons that I don't need to learn for myself.

perna · March 2006

As for a V-6 Altima versus an Impala SS, I'd probably pick the Altima as well, but for kind of a funny reason. Interior room.

I think that may be the curse of the W-bodies. The Grand Prix is even worse, but I didn't mind so much because it will mostly just be my son riding back there (he's 2). There were a bunch of other things that annoyed me about the Pontiac, but that's for a whole different forum. :P

It's a sweet, sweet ride though. I only drove the GXP, but man is it fast. My Maxima's engine just sounds like a freakin machine, where the GXP's V8 has that unmistakable exhaust rumble that you might remember from an 80's IROC-Z or something. It's kinda like the difference between an F1 car and a stock car in sound.

bumpy · March 2006

My Maxima's engine just sounds like a freakin machine, where the GXP's V8 has that unmistakable exhaust rumble that you might remember from an 80's IROC-Z or something.

I've never understood what anyone likes a V8 exhaust note. Even with straight pipes, the individual pulses just smear together at idle, and adding rpm's or "tuned" exhaust systems just make it worse. Maybe the V6 in my truck has spoiled me. Give me an unrestricted 4 or 6 any day.

andres3 · March 2006

I purchase a car from another foreign based auto manufacturer that does worse than my 95 Neon Sport did reliability and repair cost per mile wise.

sid1200 · March 2006

I'll use my example to tell you guys about the problem with GM. First some background, I've owned 3 GM cars 89 Pontiac Grand Prix, 88 Fiero GT, and 91 Chevy Camaro, and my parents currently have a 99 Chevy S-10 P/U. Each of these cars was mediocre, the Grand Prix had the pealing paint problem, and poor interior trim quality, the Camaro always felt loose, the Fiero had certain stupid unfinished design items such as the windows not rolling all the way down into the doors, while the S-10 is fine, but the dash quality does feel super cheap and it rides pretty poorly.

Still I would like to give GM a chance, however they make nothing that I want to buy, besides maybe a Solstice. (Currently drive a 01 BMW 525i with 86k that has been pretty good though not perfect, but still feels brand new, and all the interior buttons, etc, looks/feel brand new)

GM- Please make your cars appeal to the young urban consumer ( I am 31, educated professional). None of my friends even want to think GM, the cars are huge.
why is a grand prix and impala, 10 inches longer then accord/camry and have no more interior space.
What's the point?
Why is the ION/Cobalt equally large, compared to the imports, w/o more space.

Why does GM have no rear wheel drive cars to compete with the BMW 3's and Lexus IS, sorry CTS is way way longer.

About the only GM car that interest me know is the 07/08 CTS, but there is no info on it, and I don't think I can wait that long..

sorry to rant, but I keep getting disappointed, though hope for the best.

nvbanker · March 2006

The Aztek is the biggest loser, Andre..... Ridgeline, then Avalance, IMO.

nvbanker · March 2006

Clearly, you're from another generation, planet or just plain crazy......nothing personal.

ubbermotor · March 2006

Nice list.

The S-10 and Camaro were consistantly, not only GM's worst rated vehicles in regaurd to reliability, but were considered the worst, and second worst domestic vehicles for some 15 years.

Buy the time the GT Fiero came out, it was past the point of burting into flames, but not a shining moment for GM.

The late 80's Grand Prix was supposed to be a pretty good car, but my mother-in-law had one, and I hated it.

explorerx4 · March 2006

nv... i'm with you on this one.

perna · March 2006

I purchase a car from another foreign based auto manufacturer that does worse than my 95 Neon Sport did reliability and repair cost per mile wise.

Dude. You have to let the Neon go. My wife owned a '92 Tempo that was an affront to mankind, but we went ahead and bought another Ford. Why? Because that Tempo that Ford made 14 years ago has no relation to a modern Ford that you can buy today. She's actually owned two Fords since then (an Escape and Explorer) and they've both been fine.

lilengineerboy · March 2006

That's not the mentality of most consumers. They have been scorned and wronged and it will take some gesture of kindness to restore faith. VW had a deal where they gave $500 or $1000 to anyone who had ever owned a VW (I don't even think you had to currently own it). I figure it was their way of paying people back for all the power window motors ignition modules they had to buy.
I think the lease loyatly deals are rediculous. Why do you have to give a deal to someone who already likes what you have? Or is what you have so bad that its easier to get a new conquest custormer than hold on to your old ones?
It took a lot of campainging to get my folks to by a Grand Voyager after having a Reliant that was, eh, poor. If they had waited a year and gotten an ultradrive Chrysler, I am sure it would've been their last. The Voyager was a great car and lasted a long time.
The point isn't so much that things have improved, its that when things sucked we got hung out to dry.

gagrice · March 2006

The point isn't so much that things have improved, its that when things sucked we got hung out to dry.

Personal experience means a lot more than JD Powers or CR. I would not look at a Toyota for 30 years after all the trouble I had with the engine in my new 1964 Land Cruiser. Then I bought a 1994 toyota PU and it was not that great either. I guess most people have great luck with Toyota. I have had great luck with my last 5 GM trucks. Never bought a new GM car.

nvbanker · March 2006

You bring up an excellent point. The K-cars (the cars that saved Chrysler, by the way) should have absolutely killed the brand, they were so bad. Yet, people today buy Chryslers, and the brand endures, albeit under German ownership now.

lilengineerboy · March 2006

Eh, in fairness to Chrysler, the early 80s weren't that great a time for anyone. The domestics were having trouble with quality control. The Reliant's door feel off because the spot welds failed and it had some mechanical issues. Its hubcaps would fly off, the windshield wipers would fly off, the outside mirror fell off, it makes me wonder who put the thing together. Its the only car i remember my parents having that didn't make it to 100k, and was sold not running (strike that, they had a Vega).
That Voyager was great though, it had the tow package that upgraded the brakes and cooling system to what should've been standard, and I think that really helped that car's longevity.
Next up for the folks is a Volvo station wagon, because they always wanted one, although I am campaigning for a Ford 500.

harrychezt · March 2006

http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Car_Shows/Geneva_Motor_Show/2006_Genev- a_Show_Preview_Part_II.S288.A10047.html

The Dodge Hornet, if built(and perhaps at least as long, total length, of the upcoming Suzuki sx4-around 162-163inches, versus this 151 inch deal, another foot longer than the concept, and maybe nearly 11 inches shorter than the current Caliber)...and they did not de-tune it.... I'd consider Dodge(I'd consider caliber, if not for the nearly 20K msrp for what we want on the sxt, and still only get about 10 seconds to 60).
If I wanted to spend 20K on a somewhat slow car, I'd get the new Civic(I read 0-60 is around 9 seconds), and get 40MPG. Problem is, Honda dumped their 3 door/hatch! Guess they did not read about the Scion tC's selling 75,000- or so- units in 05, and look to easily pass that number this year(for less cash, and 160HP, I may add. Sure, I lose 6mpg, but have hatchback versatility, Civic does not have that any more, and the fun and cost factors).

That C'eed is ok. I have seen better photos with the hatch open, interior, etc. If they price it right... and may replace the Spectr 5 with this.... sales will fly.

SOrry to digress:
get to the point:
WIll consider:75% chance of purchasing from them:
Scion/Toyota
50/50 chance we will buy from in a few years:
Suzuki(if they get that sporty sedan/Reno I have read about in 07-08,on many future vehicles columns...claim they will actually be fun, like the motorcycles)
Mitsu(Eclipse, if they aren't folded and gone frm the USA shores).
Dodge/Chrysler(Due to using GEMA engines these days in newer cars and "things").
Mazda
Hyundai
25% chance:
Kia: they tend to take Hyundai platforms, tweak them,and make them look nice, but quality is sort of not as good, it appears.
Honda(due to those high priced version of Civic. base model with auto is 15,199, add sunroof and cruise=19,000+ msrp).
Chevy(If they ever make that HHR larger, more headroom-when sunroof is installed- more leg room, and maybe 4-6 inches more width to the thing, so ya don't bump shoulders with your passenger!
Ford: fusion is ok, but so are many other cars.
maybe if they made a car, even if regular engine, like that Reflex concept car....

No Way:
Subaru, Isuzu, VW
Nissan(due to poor dealership treatment in this area..You have a problem? Good luck getting it fixed under warranty without an argument).
of course, luxury cars= out of my price range, so forget them, too.

grbeck · March 2006

It's one thing to buy a lemon. Every manufacturer from Honda to GM to Mercedes-Benz lets one slip through to customers.

It's another thing to buy a vehicle with a known, widespread defect and have the manufacturer and dealer stonewall on fixing it. In this day of the internet and widely publicized quality surveys by JD Powers and Consumer Reports, it's absolutely ridiculous for a company or a dealer to say "We've never heard of head gaskets failing on this one before," when any customer with a computer and knowledge of how to use it can pull up the stories of hundreds of owners with similar experiences.

How the company and the dealer handle the problem are really more important than the problem itself. My parents are loyal GM owners...in 1988 they bought a brand-new Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale with numerous, niggling problems. But the dealer really did try to fix them (and succeeded), and today they are still loyal GM owners.

ubbermotor · March 2006

The Hornet.

Dodge says they are looking for a partner to help with the Hornet. Considering that Volkswagen is getting a Caravan and the origins of the show car (A car based on a VW Polo using a Mini powerplant), I don't think they are looking to far.

nvbanker · March 2006

I have good success moving Civic and Corolla customers over to the Mazda 3. Once they drive one, or sit in one, they're instantly sold. IMO, it's the best alternative to the Civic/Corolla without putting them into a Hyundai. It's better looking than any of them, has some slick gizmos inside, and seems to run great - for less than a Honda, but more than a Hyundai. It's the middle ground car.

andre1969 · March 2006

I had one K-car derivative, a 1988 LeBaron turbo coupe that my uncle bought in 1990, and sold to me and my wife in 1995 when we got married. It actually wasn't that bad of a car when it was new, but it didn't age very well. Beyond the 90,000 mile mark was when the problems really started. Thankfully, that was also around when the wife and I got divorced, and I gave her the car, so the really big problems hit on her dime, not mine.

For the time, they were certainly competitive. They wouldn't have the rugged durability of the Aspen/Volare they replaced, but on the plus side, their earlier years would prove to be more reliable. Things didn't break or fall off as quickly on them, and driveability was much better, as the 2.2 was designed with emissions controls in mind. The slant six was not, and took to them horribly.

They were certainly less troubleprone than GM's X-bodies, and were more space-efficient and economical than Ford's Fairmont/Zephyr, which were its closest Dearborn competition, until the underwhelming Tempo/Topaz came out.

As for Japanese cars? Well, back then they still tended to rust, automatic trannies were iffy, and so were a/c systems. So if you wanted some stripper economy model with a 5-speed and no a/c, you were better off with a Japanese car. But once you got into automatics, a/c, etc, the playing field was much more level.

They weren't the most sophisticated things in the world, but they were serviceable appliances. And around the time they were introduced, 1981, they truly did represent a major leap ahead. Fuel economy, maneuverability, space efficiency, etc were a big jump over the old Aspen/Volare. The 6-passenger seating was also a big selling point. Now to be fair, GM could have gotten 6-passenger seating out of its X-bodies, but instead they chose to eliminate the center seatbelt, and on bench seat models they put a little plastic storage bin where the center spot would have been on the bottom cushion, while the backrest looked like it was designed for 3-across seating. They did this to save a few bucks.

imidazol97 · March 2006

Does Mazda have the past reputation for quality mechicals and reliability? Serious question. I hadn't considered them an alternative based on coworker's comments years ago.

GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda...Who will sell you your next car?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles