Had a 260, with a TH350 (thankfully not the dreaded 200C), in my 81 Calais Coupe. Had a floor shifter, with the gauge package, sport wheel and suspension package with the rare aluminum wheels - pretty much what the later 442s were except for the wheels. Was ok and was able to take it too almost 200K miles before two cylinders started to go with low-compression.
Replaced the tired 260 with an Olds 350 from an '76 Cutlass. Will agree, the quadrajet on the 350 was good, those smaller primaries with large secondaries were great. Man, I miss that car.
>those smaller primaries with large secondaries were great.
There was nothing like that sound when those rear secondaries opened and the motor roared on the quadrajet 350. The 260 I had also lucked out with the 350 THM instead of the metric experiment 200. It would have been nice to have a 4-speed I don't recall if that was an option or not in those days.
A television news article last night about how high fuel prices are affecting boating in the U.S.- and almost all of the people interviewed remarked that it has little to no effect- in fact, a dealer of big power boats said that his business has never been better. When asked why, he responded that the biggest costs by far in boat ownership are the capitalized costs of the boat itself- fuel is still minor. And maybe people just don't take long cruises.
Many people I know absolutely love their optioned up Chevy Tahoes/Suburbans and Cadillac Escalades- they almost just like looking at them, and when they want to drive something, they want something substantial.
But I did talk to a guy that was driving a new Toyota Yaris- and bragged about it getting over 40mpg around town and moderate highway. $25 to fill it up, can't be all bad!!!
came out in 1981, but I don't know if you could get it in the midsized RWD cars, such as a Cutlass Supreme, that early on. Cadillac offered it with the Buick 252 V-6 in their cars, but it wasn't strong enough for their 368 V-8, so those still used the old THM350C (or a THM400 in limos).
Initially in cars like the Cutlass Supreme, and even large cars like the Impala, Delta 88, etc, I think they only offered it with the 5.0 V-8. In this case, it helped out with boosting fuel economy for CAFE purposes, but I think the 3.8 V-6 and the variety of tiny V-8's (Olds 260, Pontiac 265, Chevy 267) had better economy even with the 3-speed automatic, so GM didn't bother to offer it with those engines.
Ironically, the lightweight THM200C in my 1980 Malibu never gave me any problems. I sold the car at 100,000 miles and saw it about a year later, with 115,000 miles. However, I had the THM350C in my Cutlass rebuilt around 61,000 miles. So, sometimes even the better trannies can have a failure, while the bad-rap trannies can have an occasional shining moment.
GM chose to build their 4-speed automatic in these cars off the lightweight THM200C, and earlier models were troubleprone, but they got the quality up pretty quickly. And in the end, they must have made them strong enough to handle increased power, because the Monte Carlo SS and the Grand National used them.
MY issue with some commentors is that they seem to thnk that their lifestyle/choices are the correct ones for everyone I think you are right, people choose cars that suit them. As I have said before, I had a 1995 Jeep Cherokee Ltd and then a 2000 Cherokee (thought the Ltd got too big) and they were perfect at the time. I had to carry heavy stuff and the Jeeps did it. I sometimes wonder how many people need a roof that opens up on the Envoy to carry a refigerator around, but hey, if it works go with it. Some people just want to get from point A to B in relative comfort at a reasonable price. There is a market for almost every car out there, or they will stop making them. IMO GM SUV's have nice styling and are solid work horses. Probably not a drivers car but a Cayenne isn't what you need. Probably the Explorers are greatly improved now too. But, I think your point is a good one, it isn't nice to diss a particular car unless there is some factual basis for doing it. ( I do reserve the right to comment on the styling of the 2000 Riviera in a little while though - because I think everyone can give an IMHO about styling)
After stepping out from behind the wheel, the driver can’t help being impressed by the SS’s power and its ability to generate astonishing numbers — 0 to 60 in 5.6 seconds, for one. The SS seems to have been created to produce impressive numbers on paper with little regard to driver enjoyment.
Thanks for picking up this review on the Impala SS; link title
Very interesting. Impressive numbers, but unimpressive handling. Well worth reading!
there was something sleek and sexy about the shape of the '95-99 Riviera. It's almost a little TOO tapered in the front and the back, but I still like it. I never really cared for the interior though...too spartan.
The '89-93 Riv wasn't bad looking, either. And in a twisted sort of way, I even kinda like those tiny little '86-88 models.
The SS seems to have been created to produce impressive numbers on paper with little regard to driver enjoyment.
It should be a criminal offense to offer a car with the power to get you into trouble but without the agility to keep you out of trouble.
I'm guessing if you can sue cigarette companies for cancer then someone will ultimately sue these car companies for putting serious power in family sedans and econo boxes that ultimately will kill a lot of people.
My 1970 Chevelle was an example. After honking down the road several times and not being able to slow down in time to turn into my driveway I broke down and put on a set of MasterPower disc brakes. WoW what a difference. Then all I had to worry about was the vague overpowered power steering and the poor cornering ability. You know though, I grew up on these types of cars and knew how to drive them (although back then a lot of kids were dying trying to speed around "dead man's curves in every town that today could be handled by most any car at 20 more mph than the mussle cars). Tires and suuspensions have saved a lot of lives.
Today, people, especially our kids can't be expected to handle these if all they have ever driven is their dad's Lumina. Also the roads are more crowded than in the 60's and it's just not safe to offer these to the masses as "normal" family haulers.
Sorry, can't believe I actually feel this way after driving just about every hot rod and sports car made or sold in America (other than exotics).
the biggest costs by far in boat ownership are the capitalized costs of the boat itself- fuel is still minor.
That may be true for yatch's but for the "everyday" guy on the lake with a $25,000 boat and a $35,000 SUV to pull it, $75 for gas every saturday in the summer is not a "minor" issue
My two Jet Ski's make me choke. It's easily $50 for a couple of hours on the lake. Since I live so close to the lake it's something I could do every evening, but who's got that kind of dough to blow?
BTW, if you're considering a 215hp SeaDoo Supercharged Intercooled RXT, ride one first. If you don't like the thrill of speed this is not for the light hearted.
And in a twisted sort of way, I even kinda like those tiny little '86-88 [Riviera] models.
Twisted - a good way to put it! Those cars were abominations, IMO. The best looking Rivs were the 63-65, 66-67, and 79-85. I hated those 1995-99s also -- weird.
What difference does your 230S have from say a 220S, save for the engine and mechanicals?
My old MB tech had a couple of W112s, a coupe and a convertible. The convertible was an unrestored car with the impossible to find 5 speed. I believe he sold it and got a pretty penny. He still has the coupe, which has been restored - woodwork to shame a Jag or dare I say it a Rolls. Those coupes are timeless designs.
He also has a W112 fintail LWB that unfortunately is beyond redemption. I'd love to find a pristine original W112 sedan.
1994 was by far pre-sludging problem, which occurs on some, but not all cars by Toyota 1997-2002. My Dad has a 2000 Camry which is covered by the extended warranty for the sludge problem. So far, he has had no problems, a ways past 50K miles. I do believe it effect the resale of the car a bit.
So far, Toyota Camry included, my Japanese cars owned have been the most trouble free. My new PT had a noisy fan, which was replaced with a slightly less noisy one. Uses a little oil compared to Japan engines, but overall is screwed together well ( Mexico assembled ).
GM engines, like the 3.8 mentioned here as bullet proof evident can fail if you leave the coolant in up to 150K miles, as recommend. Some had manifold gaskets fail earlier on. Doesn't mean all the engines are failing. I had an Olds. with that engine in 1987 and it would stop for no reason, then start up again. They replace the mass air sensor, programmable operation unit, tweaked setting, and finally replaced a crank case sensor. I think that did it. After a couple years of trying different remedies. The next year, they worked out a lot of kinks, including a better tranny. Mine failed at 62K. The paint on the top was bad too. Wind leaks on the top of the windshield, and the parking brake cable broke. Little fun stuff, like the rear view mirror falling off, kept one amused at how GM quality was back when. I guess the good news is that they worked a lot of problems out, and today you can get an Impala, Monte, or Buick with an improved engine and such from the 80's - 90's. I guess that is good It may be OK to have an older - new car? Problem is, now they are putting throttle-by-wire and electric assist steering and such on the new - old cars? Hummm? Wonder if they screwed with the Monte? -Loren
You don't think reputations will suffer if quality slips for too long? Don't bet on it. Honda itself is worried; there was a front-page story in Automotive News a couple of weeks ago on this very point. Luckily for them, their hard-earned good reputation will tide them over for a while longer.
Toyota sludge: It's never been clearly established if this was a design problem or some people skimped on oil changes. WARNING: ANECDOTE AHEAD. I had one of the supposedly sludge-prone Camrys. Absolutely no problems with sludge, and very reliable overall. Sold after 7 years and 111K miles because I wanted to get a newer Camry with side curtain airbags.
I think they took the lines to the extreme. The last Olds Aurora is pretty clean. The Riv. is just too big to carry the cigar look. The Lexus sports car use to look like a Tylenol capsule. The smallest Seville was interesting. I don't know why, but it intrigued me. Speaking of which, the Intrigue is pretty fair in looks. -Loren
One guy up the road from me has two of those last Rivieras, and they are nice-looking from the outside (except for the Cavalier-sized tail that really hoses up the rear). The interior and drivetrain were the typical mid-90s GM disaster, though. The older Rivieras you can keep, even the boattails.
Motown Buzz: Pontiac May Go RWD Across Its Line To Promote Performance Date posted: 05-30-2006
DETROIT — Pontiac could be betting its survival on a gradual shift to rear-wheel-drive cars and a renewed emphasis on performance, although the future of the troubled brand still hangs in the balance.
According to a report in industry trade publication Automotive News, General Motors executives are building a business case to revive and save the brand, similar to the strategy that GM adopted for Cadillac and is in the process of implementing at Saturn.
Pontiac gradually would eliminate trucks, vans and SUVs from its lineup and would phase out front-wheel-drive cars over the next five years, according to the publication.
Among the future products under consideration for Pontiac's evolving portfolio are a rear-wheel-drive successor to the Grand Prix sedan and a potential GTO replacement based on the upcoming Chevrolet Camaro.
At the moment, Pontiac sells only two rear-wheel-drive models: the Solstice roadster and the GTO coupe. The GTO is being phased out of the U.S. market at the end of this year, and there is no immediate successor on the boards.
Pontiac is plugging what it perceives to be a gap in its current portfolio this fall when it adds a sibling to the Chevrolet Cobalt, a front-wheel-drive compact called the G5 Pursuit.
But the G5 apparently is a short-timer in the Pontiac lineup. It will likely be phased out by 2010 as the brand begins to add new rear-drive performance models.
In the meantime, several other Pontiac products will also be dropped without replacements, including the Torrent crossover (a near clone of the Chevrolet Equinox) at the end of model year 2009, and the Montana minivan later this year. The compact Vibe, which shares its platform with the Toyota Matrix, is also expected to be phased out later in the decade.
GM has a replacement for the front-drive G6 penciled in for 2010, but those plans could shift, depending on how quickly it wants to convert the Pontiac portfolio to rear-wheel drive.
The Grand Prix currently is scheduled to end production at the end of model year 2008, according to suppliers. GM has considered giving Pontiac both a sport sedan and a coupe off the new Zeta-based platform that will underpin the 2009 Camaro.
The Pontiac cars would get distinctive sheet metal and possibly different names. The GTO badge might be revived on a sporty coupe in 2009. But GM sources say planners are resisting a suggestion to revive the Firebird name because Pontiac wants to better differentiate its future products from Chevrolet and does not want simply to sell a clone of the new Camaro.
Pontiac reportedly is considering the G8 name on the sport sedan since the performance-oriented four-door would be engineered to accommodate a high-output, small-displacement V8, according to GM sources.
The Automotive News report said Pontiac will unveil a rear-drive concept sedan in January at the 2007 Detroit show. The sedan supposedly will reflect the evolving design language for the brand and hint at future production models.
What this means to you: There may not be a Firebird in Pontiac's future, but look for a decided shift toward more performance.
Having owned both a 95 Riviera and a 98 Aurora, I can say that the Aurora's interior was smaller than the Riviera's. However, I will have to say that the 95 Riviera was really a big car for a coupe, although not really bigger than the 63, but for the 90's too big.
Yes, could not live w/o rear seat DVD. Remember there are people still in this country that have kids.
come on, vette - I have kids and I don't have a rear-seat DVD system. Very few of my friends do. And those that do - well, let's say that I don't approve of how they use them. If the kids are in the car, the DVD is on. I guess they figure their kids haven't watched The Little Mermaid enough times.
I like the 1993 Riviera too. And I like almost every Toronado especially near the end. But, I still think the 1999 Riv looks like a catfish or a cigar. It seems like a lot of car for a very small interior too.
What people forget is that GM's reputation wasn't ruined overnight. I grew up in the 1970s, and even though the lousy reputation of the Vega was well known at that time, the bigger GM cars still had a good reputation. GM's intermediates and full-size cars were considered the "safe" bet by most buyers, even compared to the Ford and Chrysler competition.
If Honda produces faulty products for 10-20 years running, its reputation will go down the drain, too.
It will take even LESS time for Honda's reputation to go south than it did for GM's reputation, as we are now in the age of the Internet.
From the late 1970s to the mid-1990s (when GM went downhill, and then hit its nadir), sites such as this where owners could ask for help with problem vehicles or post their experiences with lemons either did not exist or were not widely known.
Interestingly, as you noted, the transmission problems with selected Hondas and Acuras do show up in the annual Consumer Reports reliability surveys, which is strong proof that Honda owners are not inclined to cover up major problems with their vehicles to "protect" Honda's reputation.
Look at the new Tahoe, both inside and out. Gorgeous. GM knows how to build large SUV's that people want. They just can't do the same with passenger cars.
"come on, vette - I have kids and I don't have a rear-seat DVD system."
As a parent of a couple of trike motors, I thought I'd chime in here....
We intentionally avoided a DVD system in our last vehicle purchase (minivan) precisely because we didn't want to get into the rut of plugging in another Disney baby-sitter EVERYTIME we were in the car.
For long trips (more than 2 days on the road) we have a portable DVD player which gets used sparingly (actually, I'm pretty sure my wife used in more than the kids got to on our last driving vacation).
Twisted - a good way to put it! Those cars were abominations, IMO. The best looking Rivs were the 63-65, 66-67, and 79-85. I hated those 1995-99s also -- weird.
Interesting Info about the history of the Riviera at; link title
Some of the sales figures are interesting too..... 1975 - 17306, 1976 - 20,082, 1985 - 65,305, 1989 - 21,189, and 1993 at 4,555. I guess not too many liked that big ceeegar shaped model.
The 1993 was not cigar shaped, and was IMHO classy looking. The smaller size makes it a good all around city and highway driver. Sure, a 1965 would be nice too -- you buy me the gas :shades: The cigar model was 1995, in honor of Bill.
The Lexus sports car use to look like a Tylenol capsule. I agree, and I don't understand that look. Maybe it is supposed to look like a racing car. Also, has the big cigar look! Good design is when it looks like what it is supposed to be ....a car (not disguised as a Tylenol capsule, or rocket ship or cigar).
I like all the Sevilles... link title But I do have mixed feelings about the bustle back!!!
that will apologize for Toyota/Honda/Nissan and make excuses for everything, while at the same time hating everything domestic and taking every opportunity to call anybody who buys one a fool.
However, I'm sure that gets balanced out by the people who swear by domestics, think anything foreign is crap, and that if you buy one you're selling the United States to the devil.
On a smaller scale, I see a bit of this whenever I go to the shows at Carlisle. I usually put my Intrepid and my '79 NYer in the Mopar show, and last year started putting my '76 LeMans in the GM show. At either show, you don't have to look far before you find hatred spewed about anybody else's product, and I tend to be selective in my conversations with others about also going to and supporting the "enemy camp's" products! I guess it's a good thing I don't own a Ford product too, since Ford and Chevy-heads rarel see eye-to-eye! :P
One advantage of building the same old car, with a new skin is that you know more of what to expect for problem areas. In this respect, GM cars may be obtaining an advantage. Not sure what happens though when they finally build something new. Will see how the Solstice does. Good test for the General. What happened to the 6 speed tranny? Fusion has it, but not the GM cars? I thought this was a joint effort. There we go, as yet another good test. Will the new transmission work. Toyota is having some difficulties. Of which we hear about time and time again. Come on give them a break, they are only leveling the playing field. -Loren
if we're beginning to hit a point of diminishing returns with these multi-speed transmissions? They seem to be doing some good in the Hondas and Toyotas, but in cars like the Fusion and Five Hundred, fuel economy doesn't seem so hot.
For instance, the Fusion with the 3.0/6-speed is EPA-rated at 21/29. The Malibu with the 3.5/4-speed is rated at 22/32. Now on the plus side, I believe the Fusion is quicker than the Malibu, although the Malibu is no slouch.
Further up the ranks, a FWD Five Hundred with the 3.0/6-speed is EPA-rated at 21/29. The Impala with the 3.5/4-speed is rated at 21/31. And in this case, I think the Impala might be the better performer, as well.
Another example is the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger. With the 3.5/5-speed, they're EPA-rated at 19/27, no better than the 2005 models which just used a 4-speed automatic. FWIW, the 2004 Concorde with a 3.5/4-speed was also 19/27.
Now in the case of Chrysler, I'm actually impressed that they kept the economy up, as the 300/Charger are heavier than the Concorde was, and the RWD no doubt saps the powertrain more. It's still kinda interesting though, that taking the 300 from the 4-speed to the 5-speed did nothing for fuel economy. I dunno what it did for performance, though.
Also, the 3.5 Chrysler uses has a lot more hp than the 3.5 that Chevy uses. That advantage is offset by more weight, but the 300/Charger 3.5 are still a bit quicker than the Impala, IIRC.
Anyway, what's the problem with Ford here? Is it just that their 6-speed isn't so hot? Or is it more a factor of being mated up to a sucky engine? Either way, in Ford's case, I'm just not seeing a quantifiable advantage of the 6-speed, versus GM's 4.
don't some of those leave a bit to be desired as well? I think the CVT in the 500 only gets something like 20/27! That Saturn Ion had a CVT available at first, but I think they've ditched it by now.
In theory though, the CVT sounds like a great idea. But what happened in the translation? :confuse:
CVTs are becoming more common on ATVs with mixed results.They tend to be pretty reliable but I don't know if they translate well to cars. I have a Polaris 700 with CVT and it works fine but given my drothers I preffer the Geared transmissions on my Suzuki and Honda.
I heard that CVT's tended to be best-suited to smaller engines, but I don't know if that's necessarily the case any more. But when you think about it, smaller engines are usually the ones that benefit the most from additional gears in regular transmissions, anyway.
WEll, I guess good for you. Most everybody I know with kids has some kind of rear tv whether it be a built-in or a TV hanging off the front seats. Just took a 8 hour one way trip thru nowheres land and it was wonderful. I guess we could have taken a protable but then no wireless headphones. Again to each his own.
I do not think there will be any issue with quality for the majority of the OEM's. They are all too good to be a problem. There are a couple on the fringe but overall the big makes will not go down unless they really screw up which I doubt will happen. Over time they will all even out as far as perception and reality. Reality is the major volume makers are all about the same.
Funny thing is that the new trucks have hard plastic IP's. I could not believe it after all the positive comments. I guess Lutz and his low gloss standards paid off big time.
>I don't understand what you are saying here. ... And the point is? The point is in the tone of the article about the recall. The tone would have been different if it were to have been a GM recall. Sheeesh.
The tone would have been different if it were to have been a GM recall.
As my grandfather used to say, "who says so?"
Oh, I forgot, we've got a liberal anti-American media here in the US (just ignore Rush on the AM band).
Recalls are not a good thing. But at least Toyota is admitting the problem early and taking care of it.
Contrast this with some of the stonewalling that went on in the past -- Ford as one example never having to recall the millions of cars with automatic trannies that had a bad habit of self-shifting from Park to Reverse. Many drivers were run over and killed by their own cars. All Ford had to do was send stick-on warning labels to the affected owners.
How about GM fighting the move to recall the FWD X-cars for overly aggressive rear brakes, taking NHTSA to court and ultimately prevailing? Car and Driver noted this problem when they first tested a Citation in 1979 -- the car could swap ends in panic braking.
The point is in the tone of the article about the recall. The tone would have been different if it were to have been a GM recall. Sheeesh.
Don't worry the rest of us here get your point. You believe there is a media conspiracy to make Toyota seem more responsible than GM. I swear I tried to listen to the tone of that article but perhaps I had my speakers down too low. It seemed to me to be simple unbiased reporting of facts and figures without any subversive plot to fool the readers
Nahhh, they are so use to GM recalls, they probably just use a standard template for the news release.
Keep an eye on Toyota and Honda, and if the reliability slips, you know you have other options. We have Hyundai, with new engines and lots new cars, GM with the good old days cars, with pretty good gas mileage for a V6, and then there is Ford. I have had really good luck with Toyota, and others in my family have as well. If the new parts they are using from US and other sources are poor, then it will show as time goes by.
Since Toyota and GM do make so many cars with the same parts shared between models in their lines, the report states when something goes wrong it means a large recall. Seems like the facts. -Loren
Comments
Replaced the tired 260 with an Olds 350 from an '76 Cutlass. Will agree, the quadrajet on the 350 was good, those smaller primaries with large secondaries were great. Man, I miss that car.
There was nothing like that sound when those rear secondaries opened and the motor roared on the quadrajet 350. The 260 I had also lucked out with the 350 THM instead of the metric experiment 200. It would have been nice to have a 4-speed I don't recall if that was an option or not in those days.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Many people I know absolutely love their optioned up Chevy Tahoes/Suburbans and Cadillac Escalades- they almost just like looking at them, and when they want to drive something, they want something substantial.
But I did talk to a guy that was driving a new Toyota Yaris- and bragged about it getting over 40mpg around town and moderate highway. $25 to fill it up, can't be all bad!!!
Larry
Initially in cars like the Cutlass Supreme, and even large cars like the Impala, Delta 88, etc, I think they only offered it with the 5.0 V-8. In this case, it helped out with boosting fuel economy for CAFE purposes, but I think the 3.8 V-6 and the variety of tiny V-8's (Olds 260, Pontiac 265, Chevy 267) had better economy even with the 3-speed automatic, so GM didn't bother to offer it with those engines.
Ironically, the lightweight THM200C in my 1980 Malibu never gave me any problems. I sold the car at 100,000 miles and saw it about a year later, with 115,000 miles. However, I had the THM350C in my Cutlass rebuilt around 61,000 miles.
GM chose to build their 4-speed automatic in these cars off the lightweight THM200C, and earlier models were troubleprone, but they got the quality up pretty quickly. And in the end, they must have made them strong enough to handle increased power, because the Monte Carlo SS and the Grand National used them.
I think you are right, people choose cars that suit them. As I have said before, I had a 1995 Jeep Cherokee Ltd and then a 2000 Cherokee (thought the Ltd got too big) and they were perfect at the time. I had to carry heavy stuff and the Jeeps did it. I sometimes wonder how many people need a roof that opens up on the Envoy to carry a refigerator around, but hey, if it works go with it.
Some people just want to get from point A to B in relative comfort at a reasonable price.
There is a market for almost every car out there, or they will stop making them.
IMO GM SUV's have nice styling and are solid work horses. Probably not a drivers car but a Cayenne isn't what you need. Probably the Explorers are greatly improved now too.
But, I think your point is a good one, it isn't nice to diss a particular car unless there is some factual basis for doing it. ( I do reserve the right to comment on the styling of the 2000 Riviera in a little while though - because I think everyone can give an IMHO about styling)
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
just like cigarettes
Actually, I think I have got it better....it looks like a giant cat-fish;
link title
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Thanks for picking up this review on the Impala SS;
link title
Very interesting. Impressive numbers, but unimpressive handling. Well worth reading!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
The '89-93 Riv wasn't bad looking, either. And in a twisted sort of way, I even kinda like those tiny little '86-88 models.
It should be a criminal offense to offer a car with the power to get you into trouble but without the agility to keep you out of trouble.
I'm guessing if you can sue cigarette companies for cancer then someone will ultimately sue these car companies for putting serious power in family sedans and econo boxes that ultimately will kill a lot of people.
My 1970 Chevelle was an example. After honking down the road several times and not being able to slow down in time to turn into my driveway I broke down and put on a set of MasterPower disc brakes. WoW what a difference. Then all I had to worry about was the vague overpowered power steering and the poor cornering ability. You know though, I grew up on these types of cars and knew how to drive them (although back then a lot of kids were dying trying to speed around "dead man's curves in every town that today could be handled by most any car at 20 more mph than the mussle cars). Tires and suuspensions have saved a lot of lives.
Today, people, especially our kids can't be expected to handle these if all they have ever driven is their dad's Lumina. Also the roads are more crowded than in the 60's and it's just not safe to offer these to the masses as "normal" family haulers.
Sorry, can't believe I actually feel this way after driving just about every hot rod and sports car made or sold in America (other than exotics).
That's why I traded it after 6 months. Then again the Vette I traded for was not much better.
That may be true for yatch's but for the "everyday" guy on the lake with a $25,000 boat and a $35,000 SUV to pull it, $75 for gas every saturday in the summer is not a "minor" issue
My two Jet Ski's make me choke. It's easily $50 for a couple of hours on the lake. Since I live so close to the lake it's something I could do every evening, but who's got that kind of dough to blow?
BTW, if you're considering a 215hp SeaDoo Supercharged Intercooled RXT, ride one first. If you don't like the thrill of speed this is not for the light hearted.
Twisted - a good way to put it!
My old MB tech had a couple of W112s, a coupe and a convertible. The convertible was an unrestored car with the impossible to find 5 speed. I believe he sold it and got a pretty penny. He still has the coupe, which has been restored - woodwork to shame a Jag or dare I say it a Rolls. Those coupes are timeless designs.
He also has a W112 fintail LWB that unfortunately is beyond redemption. I'd love to find a pristine original W112 sedan.
So far, Toyota Camry included, my Japanese cars owned have been the most trouble free. My new PT had a noisy fan, which was replaced with a slightly less noisy one. Uses a little oil compared to Japan engines, but overall is screwed together well ( Mexico assembled ).
GM engines, like the 3.8 mentioned here as bullet proof evident can fail if you leave the coolant in up to 150K miles, as recommend. Some had manifold gaskets fail earlier on. Doesn't mean all the engines are failing. I had an Olds. with that engine in 1987 and it would stop for no reason, then start up again. They replace the mass air sensor, programmable operation unit, tweaked setting, and finally replaced a crank case sensor. I think that did it. After a couple years of trying different remedies. The next year, they worked out a lot of kinks, including a better tranny. Mine failed at 62K. The paint on the top was bad too. Wind leaks on the top of the windshield, and the parking brake cable broke. Little fun stuff, like the rear view mirror falling off, kept one amused at how GM quality was back when. I guess the good news is that they worked a lot of problems out, and today you can get an Impala, Monte, or Buick with an improved engine and such from the 80's - 90's. I guess that is good
-Loren
Toyota sludge: It's never been clearly established if this was a design problem or some people skimped on oil changes. WARNING: ANECDOTE AHEAD. I had one of the supposedly sludge-prone Camrys. Absolutely no problems with sludge, and very reliable overall. Sold after 7 years and 111K miles because I wanted to get a newer Camry with side curtain airbags.
-Loren
Date posted: 05-30-2006
DETROIT — Pontiac could be betting its survival on a gradual shift to rear-wheel-drive cars and a renewed emphasis on performance, although the future of the troubled brand still hangs in the balance.
According to a report in industry trade publication Automotive News, General Motors executives are building a business case to revive and save the brand, similar to the strategy that GM adopted for Cadillac and is in the process of implementing at Saturn.
Pontiac gradually would eliminate trucks, vans and SUVs from its lineup and would phase out front-wheel-drive cars over the next five years, according to the publication.
Among the future products under consideration for Pontiac's evolving portfolio are a rear-wheel-drive successor to the Grand Prix sedan and a potential GTO replacement based on the upcoming Chevrolet Camaro.
At the moment, Pontiac sells only two rear-wheel-drive models: the Solstice roadster and the GTO coupe. The GTO is being phased out of the U.S. market at the end of this year, and there is no immediate successor on the boards.
Pontiac is plugging what it perceives to be a gap in its current portfolio this fall when it adds a sibling to the Chevrolet Cobalt, a front-wheel-drive compact called the G5 Pursuit.
But the G5 apparently is a short-timer in the Pontiac lineup. It will likely be phased out by 2010 as the brand begins to add new rear-drive performance models.
In the meantime, several other Pontiac products will also be dropped without replacements, including the Torrent crossover (a near clone of the Chevrolet Equinox) at the end of model year 2009, and the Montana minivan later this year. The compact Vibe, which shares its platform with the Toyota Matrix, is also expected to be phased out later in the decade.
GM has a replacement for the front-drive G6 penciled in for 2010, but those plans could shift, depending on how quickly it wants to convert the Pontiac portfolio to rear-wheel drive.
The Grand Prix currently is scheduled to end production at the end of model year 2008, according to suppliers. GM has considered giving Pontiac both a sport sedan and a coupe off the new Zeta-based platform that will underpin the 2009 Camaro.
The Pontiac cars would get distinctive sheet metal and possibly different names. The GTO badge might be revived on a sporty coupe in 2009. But GM sources say planners are resisting a suggestion to revive the Firebird name because Pontiac wants to better differentiate its future products from Chevrolet and does not want simply to sell a clone of the new Camaro.
Pontiac reportedly is considering the G8 name on the sport sedan since the performance-oriented four-door would be engineered to accommodate a high-output, small-displacement V8, according to GM sources.
The Automotive News report said Pontiac will unveil a rear-drive concept sedan in January at the 2007 Detroit show. The sedan supposedly will reflect the evolving design language for the brand and hint at future production models.
What this means to you: There may not be a Firebird in Pontiac's future, but look for a decided shift toward more performance.
come on, vette - I have kids and I don't have a rear-seat DVD system. Very few of my friends do. And those that do - well, let's say that I don't approve of how they use them. If the kids are in the car, the DVD is on. I guess they figure their kids haven't watched The Little Mermaid enough times.
I like the 1993 Riviera too. And I like almost every Toronado especially near the end. But, I still think the 1999 Riv looks like a catfish or a cigar. It seems like a lot of car for a very small interior too.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
If Honda produces faulty products for 10-20 years running, its reputation will go down the drain, too.
It will take even LESS time for Honda's reputation to go south than it did for GM's reputation, as we are now in the age of the Internet.
From the late 1970s to the mid-1990s (when GM went downhill, and then hit its nadir), sites such as this where owners could ask for help with problem vehicles or post their experiences with lemons either did not exist or were not widely known.
Interestingly, as you noted, the transmission problems with selected Hondas and Acuras do show up in the annual Consumer Reports reliability surveys, which is strong proof that Honda owners are not inclined to cover up major problems with their vehicles to "protect" Honda's reputation.
The Corvette, maybe the new Cadillacs, obviously the Solstice/Aura... but what else?
If you want a ordinary, everyday-use car with sporty handling, you simply have to walk away from GM.
As a parent of a couple of trike motors, I thought I'd chime in here....
We intentionally avoided a DVD system in our last vehicle purchase (minivan) precisely because we didn't want to get into the rut of plugging in another Disney baby-sitter EVERYTIME we were in the car.
For long trips (more than 2 days on the road) we have a portable DVD player which gets used sparingly (actually, I'm pretty sure my wife used in more than the kids got to on our last driving vacation).
Interesting Info about the history of the Riviera at;
link title
Some of the sales figures are interesting too.....
1975 - 17306, 1976 - 20,082, 1985 - 65,305, 1989 - 21,189,
and 1993 at 4,555. I guess not too many liked that big ceeegar shaped model.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
-Loren
I agree, and I don't understand that look. Maybe it is supposed to look like a racing car. Also, has the big cigar look! Good design is when it looks like what it is supposed to be ....a car (not disguised as a Tylenol capsule, or rocket ship or cigar).
I like all the Sevilles...
link title
But I do have mixed feelings about the bustle back!!!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
like this article in the media:
c2rosa, "Toyota Corolla: Problems & Solutions" #2476, 30 May 2006 12:12 pm
Naaaah. Probably not.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Toyota is will be there to repair the cars. They are not going out of business any time soon.
-Loren
However, I'm sure that gets balanced out by the people who swear by domestics, think anything foreign is crap, and that if you buy one you're selling the United States to the devil.
On a smaller scale, I see a bit of this whenever I go to the shows at Carlisle. I usually put my Intrepid and my '79 NYer in the Mopar show, and last year started putting my '76 LeMans in the GM show. At either show, you don't have to look far before you find hatred spewed about anybody else's product, and I tend to be selective in my conversations with others about also going to and supporting the "enemy camp's" products! I guess it's a good thing I don't own a Ford product too, since Ford and Chevy-heads rarel see eye-to-eye! :P
-Loren
For instance, the Fusion with the 3.0/6-speed is EPA-rated at 21/29. The Malibu with the 3.5/4-speed is rated at 22/32. Now on the plus side, I believe the Fusion is quicker than the Malibu, although the Malibu is no slouch.
Further up the ranks, a FWD Five Hundred with the 3.0/6-speed is EPA-rated at 21/29. The Impala with the 3.5/4-speed is rated at 21/31. And in this case, I think the Impala might be the better performer, as well.
Another example is the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger. With the 3.5/5-speed, they're EPA-rated at 19/27, no better than the 2005 models which just used a 4-speed automatic. FWIW, the 2004 Concorde with a 3.5/4-speed was also 19/27.
Now in the case of Chrysler, I'm actually impressed that they kept the economy up, as the 300/Charger are heavier than the Concorde was, and the RWD no doubt saps the powertrain more. It's still kinda interesting though, that taking the 300 from the 4-speed to the 5-speed did nothing for fuel economy. I dunno what it did for performance, though.
Also, the 3.5 Chrysler uses has a lot more hp than the 3.5 that Chevy uses. That advantage is offset by more weight, but the 300/Charger 3.5 are still a bit quicker than the Impala, IIRC.
Anyway, what's the problem with Ford here? Is it just that their 6-speed isn't so hot? Or is it more a factor of being mated up to a sucky engine? Either way, in Ford's case, I'm just not seeing a quantifiable advantage of the 6-speed, versus GM's 4.
Consider a CVT? (or in the case of the Camry Hybrid a "power splitting device"). Do you call it 1 gear or unlimited gear equivalency
In theory though, the CVT sounds like a great idea. But what happened in the translation? :confuse:
Possibly has a lot to what it is attached to and how they programmed it to match up with the engine load.
On my hybrid it works quiet well.
The point is in the tone of the article about the recall. The tone would have been different if it were to have been a GM recall. Sheeesh.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
As my grandfather used to say, "who says so?"
Oh, I forgot, we've got a liberal anti-American media here in the US (just ignore Rush on the AM band).
Recalls are not a good thing. But at least Toyota is admitting the problem early and taking care of it.
Contrast this with some of the stonewalling that went on in the past -- Ford as one example never having to recall the millions of cars with automatic trannies that had a bad habit of self-shifting from Park to Reverse. Many drivers were run over and killed by their own cars. All Ford had to do was send stick-on warning labels to the affected owners.
How about GM fighting the move to recall the FWD X-cars for overly aggressive rear brakes, taking NHTSA to court and ultimately prevailing? Car and Driver noted this problem when they first tested a Citation in 1979 -- the car could swap ends in panic braking.
Don't worry the rest of us here get your point. You believe there is a media conspiracy to make Toyota seem more responsible than GM. I swear I tried to listen to the tone of that article but perhaps I had my speakers down too low. It seemed to me to be simple unbiased reporting of facts and figures without any subversive plot to fool the readers
Keep an eye on Toyota and Honda, and if the reliability slips, you know you have other options. We have Hyundai, with new engines and lots new cars, GM with the good old days cars, with pretty good gas mileage for a V6, and then there is Ford. I have had really good luck with Toyota, and others in my family have as well. If the new parts they are using from US and other sources are poor, then it will show as time goes by.
Since Toyota and GM do make so many cars with the same parts shared between models in their lines, the report states when something goes wrong it means a large recall. Seems like the facts.
-Loren