Oh, and I agree that it APPEARS that the general has gotten a lot better as far as quality and reliability goes, but I think I'll wait a little longer to find out. I work at a shop, and we replace 2-3 Ecotech engines a week, usually due to chucking timing chains out of nowhere, and usually with fewer than 120k on the clock. We're talking '02-'05 model cars. That's only 4 to 7 years old. I'll think I'll wait before I buy one.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
-
Jan. 20, 2009 10:59 a.m. 16vCorey SuperDork
-
Jan. 20, 2009 10:59 a.m. Chris_V SuperDork
I drove a rental Contour. I owned an SVT Contour. If I had based my idea of what all Contours were like by that boring, base level automatic 4 cyl rental, then yeah, I'd have a lower opinion of them. But I'll never base an opinion on a car by renting one. That SVT was a fantastic car.
And the only way to put up with a car breaking a lot and excusing it with "well, it's fun to drive" is if that car was dirt cheap (like only paying $7500 for my $70k BMW E38).
-
Jan. 20, 2009 11:59 a.m. 93celicaGT2 Reader
P71 wrote:
Now, more fuel efficient cars? Did you know that GM's 5.3 V8 1/2-tons get 21MPG and Toyota's V6 Tundra only gets 17? Or how about the Traverse's trumping of the Honda? Or the fact that both Ford and GM have better overall CAFE numbers then Toyota and beat them model-for-model on the majority? Come on pinchvalve, don't spew rhetoric without some actual data to back it up!
An underpowered engine in a huge behemoth of a truck won't get good gas mileage.... A (fairly) similar correlation would be the fact that my celica GT gets better gas mileage than my old celica ST. The ST weighed 200lbs less, had a 1.6 litre. GT had a 2.2. Both are/were in tip top shape.
I'd bet good money that in the real world, if i compared a V8 Tundra (5.7 PLEASE!!!! :) ) i would get comparable gas mileage to the V8 offerings of the Big 3.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:02 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
^ Look at the Tundra's V8 mileage figures. They only get worse. 13/17 for a 2wd ext cab compared to my 16/21 CC 2wd GMC. THose are window stickers. Real world we average 20mpg city/highway, 22-24 highway where as the the Tundar is LUCKY to see 17mpg unloaded from multiple owners I've talked with.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:03 p.m. walterj HalfDork
Chris_V wrote:
And the only way to put up with a car breaking a lot and excusing it with "well, it's fun to drive" is if that car was dirt cheap (like only paying $7500 for my $70k BMW E38).
I'll just assume that you were never a candidate for a new brit or italian then :)
I would phrase my opinion as "I'd never pay any money for a reliable car unless it was fun to drive" or maybe "I'd rather have one cool car and a backup than one awful one".
We have somehow managed to accumulate 5 licensed and two unlicensed vehicles for 2 drivers here. Redundancy over reliability is not a problem these days :D
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:05 p.m. P71 HalfDork
Real world is the Tundra V8 gets poorer economy then the comparable Ford, GM, and Dodge offerings. Sorry.
I love being accused of being a domestic fanboy when I drove a Mazda to work today.
To 16vCorey: You have it backwards. If one pair of shoes looked really stylish and impressed your friends but broke shoelaces every 10 days, that would be the VW. The pair of shoes that came from a $10 bargain bin and looked like it yet were comfortable and worked every day would be the GM. Sure, they're not as cool, but they work. My shoes you ask? You guessed it, bargain bin specials (NSS is what they say on them). Paid half of what Van's cost yet they outlasted my Van's and are more comfortable. I do miss that the Van's were a sweet blue and these are only black, but I'd rather be comfortable than stylish.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:09 p.m. Jensenman UltimaDork
A little while back, I had an opportunity to drive a newer ('07?) Malibu with around 18k on the clock. It actually came across as screwed together pretty tight, the interior was sorta cheapish but that could really just be subjective. As I said earlier yes the Big 3's products have gotten better but they still have to battle the 'we don't give a crap' stigma they brought on themselves through their earlier actions. In this respect Chrysler has a lot further to go than the other two right now, for an example check out the dash mounted automatic shifter on the new minivan. That has GOT to be the worst feeling shifter since the BMW manual.
I predict the imports will recover from this economic downturn a LOT faster than the US car companies, particularly if (er, when) gas prices go back up.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:11 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
^ The Wife and I DD a pair of Hyundai's and I'm building a Suzuki. I get called LOTS of things, trust me!
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:16 p.m. P71 HalfDork
Jensenman, The 07 is the previous-generation model. Try sitting in the 08+ and tell me the interior sucks. It's wonderful! Especially the 2-tone leather one in the brick/charcoal or saddle/tan combo.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:16 p.m. pinchvalve UltraDork
Strizzo wrote:
pinchvalve, its obvious you're trolling now. P71 said that toyota only outsold GM for one quarter, and you go and find sales data from that very quarter! wow, congratulations, you found the MONTH OF JUNE, when gas was roughly $4/gallon and people were panicking. how about showing sales figures from the last quarter of 08. toyota sales down 45%, GM down 35% wow, thats really sticking it to those mean old domestic companies.
Let's stick to the facts, which is all I am trying to do here. Forgetting recent panics, lets look at sales trends for the past 8 years. I took the top 10 selling vehicles, and removed trucks, SUV's and minivans. We all know that they sell like crazy. The F-150 and Silverado are the top 2 except once when the Camry made #2, and the Explorer and Caravan are in the top 10 practically every year. This is a point that the media has made over and over again, that domestic automakers have been relying on big iron too long, and has gotten away from making good cars.
Top 10 Cars:
2000 Camry Accord Taurus Civic Focus
2001: Accord Camry Taurus Civic Focus
2002: Camry Accord Taurus Civic
2003: Camry Accord Taurus Civic Impala
2004: Camry Accord Civic Taurus Impala
2005: Camry Accord Civic Altima Impala Malibu
2006: Camry Accord Civic Impala Corolla Altima Cobalt
2007: Camry Accord Corolla Civic Impala Altima
2008: Camry Accord Civic Corrola Altima Impala
If you do a little more research, you will see that Honda and Toyota really only offered one compact and one medium-sized car during most of that period, compared to how many from GM and Ford and Dodge? The domestics also leaned heavily on fleet sales, and discounts which is why you see so many Impala sales. When the Cavalier was replaced with the Cobalt, it was such an improvement it actually showed up on the charts! And the Focus is arguably the best small-car that the domestics have had in a long while (thanks to Ford Europe) and the proof is there on the charts because people responded by buying them. Further proof that good cars sell well to a large market, and crap does not.
Or look at domestic luxury cars. Cadillac has some good cars, but they are going it alone against Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Infiniti, Audi, Jaguar, and even Hyundai without much help from Lincoln (The Blackwood? Seriously?) or Chrysler (The 300 owes much to its German heritage). The sales numbers show how impressive the CTS is:
2008 BMW 3 series - 38,414 Mercedes C class - 23,991 Cadillac CTS - 22,103 Lexus IS - 16,516 Audi A4 - 13,431
That's a single sedan (no CTS-v) against the Coupe, Sedan, Convertible and M3 versions of the 3-Series. Yes, the CTS is a good domestic car and yes it sells well against its foreign counterparts. The CTSv halo helped, but moreso, the fact that is is a good solid car in its V6 forms. Further proof that when the domestics make a good car, it sells.
Or how about minivans? January 2008
- Toyota Sienna: 10,406
- Chrysler Town & Country: 9,091
- Honda Odyssey: 8,746
- Dodge Caravan: 8,095
- Chevrolet Uplander: 4,309
- Kia Sedona: 2,100
- Nissan Quest: 1,875
- Hyundai Entourage: 368
In 1991, the Previa sold 8500 units all year. The redesigned 1998 Sienna started to climb the sales charts, eventually unseating even the mighty Dodge products by early last year. Good minivans sell well. And the Odyssey? Ended 2008 with sales of 135,493 to last Chrysler's Dodge Caravan with 123,749 in sales. Both companies were down over 20% from last year, but still, the minivan market used to be owned by the Big Three, and now GM doesn't even make a minivan. (They called the Uplander a crossover sport van, and replaced it with the Traverse. Now that is a decent car, and a good strategy. Way to go Chevy!)
I could go on, but really, do I need to convince anyone that domestic product has suffered in the face of the imports over the past 30 years? There are a lot of cars out there today, or over the past 5 years even, that prove that we can make great cars. You see the passionate responses on this thread defending many of them. All I ask is that the Big three use whatever money they get to expand upon these foundations, don't put it all into some new hybrid technology. I won't buy a Volt for $400000, but a 260hp Cobalt Sedan with a great interior, thoughtful touches, quality switchgear, fabric and plastics? Certainly.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:20 p.m. walterj HalfDork
P71 wrote: If one pair of shoes looked really stylish and impressed your friends but broke shoelaces every 10 days, that would be the VW.
HAHAHA... stylish and impress friends.... with a VW.... HAHAHA. Thats like impressing them with your upscale Super Walmart instead of Kmart.
Just put some neon green triple wipers on that Sundance and wow them with your GM awesomeness. No really, its the same thing.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:27 p.m. P71 HalfDork
In reply to walterj:
I guess you didn't get that that was a joke...
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:28 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
If you're adding. . you should add #8 and #6 as well. Doesn't really accomplish anything, but they're the same thing too.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:28 p.m. 93celicaGT2 Reader
P71 wrote:
Real world is the Tundra V8 gets poorer economy then the comparable Ford, GM, and Dodge offerings. Sorry.
I love being accused of being a domestic fanboy when I drove a Mazda to work today.
I hope you're not referring to me... i'm not trying to accuse anyone of anything. I don't know the sticker ratings off the top of my head, nor do i really care to. I buy a truck to haul crap, i really don't care about the mpg, to be brutally honest.
Was just trying to throw out an idea as to why the mileage is so bad, nothing more.
The way i personally view it.... it's a truck. The 5.7 V8 in the Tundra is a ridiculous motor. I'd buy the truck for the motor, regardless of mpg.
Your results may vary.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:32 p.m. walterj HalfDork
P71 wrote:
In reply to walterj:
I guess you didn't get that that was a joke...
Maybe not... I have a degree in sarcasm but I still often find this medium difficult to pick it up in :)
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:32 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
^ I do care. That's why we have our GMC and not a Toyoduh. Hauls, tows and cruises well, returns great fuel economy and is comfy enough for 30 hour trips straight through from indy to tucson.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:33 p.m. P71 HalfDork
In reply to pinchvalve:
Wait, so domestics are failing after you remove all of the data from trucks, vans, SUV's, and fleet sales? That's called "data manipulation". If you wanted to compare cars only, then just pull up sales for cars only.
New domestic cars from the last 5 years to make huge inroads on the imports: Cobalt, Cobalt SS/SC, Cobalt SS/TC, Malibu, Solstice GXP, Sky Redline, Fusion, Taurus, Focus, Grand Prix, G6, G8, G8 GT, 300, 300C, Charger R/T, Corvette, Z06, ZR1, etc, etc
Coming soon: Fiesta, Ka, Volt, EcoBoost engines, Cruze, etc.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:35 p.m. P71 HalfDork
And oh yes, you MUST add the Dodge/Chrysler twins and the Hyundai/Kia twins. That's how sales are reported! Domestic vans won again. (Hell, even VW's van is just a Dodge)
-
Jan. 20, 2009 12:48 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
derek, I meant that adding Kia/Hyundai didn't accomplish anything. . . they didn't have enough sales combined to beat anyone else.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 1:02 p.m. Bobzilla Reader
^ You mean like Accord=TL, ES300=Camry, MAxima=I30. . . those kinds of things? Only in those cases people pay MORE to get the same car. . . . I never understood that. Why pay $35k for an accord that costs $27k?
-
Jan. 20, 2009 1:08 p.m. Chris_V SuperDork
walterj wrote:
Chris_V wrote:
And the only way to put up with a car breaking a lot and excusing it with "well, it's fun to drive" is if that car was dirt cheap (like only paying $7500 for my $70k BMW E38).
I'll just assume that you were never a candidate for a new brit or italian then :)
I would phrase my opinion as "I'd never pay any money for a reliable car unless it was fun to drive" or maybe "I'd rather have one cool car and a backup than one awful one".
We have somehow managed to accumulate 5 licensed and two unlicensed vehicles for 2 drivers here. Redundancy over reliability is not a problem these days :D
I'v ehad upwards of 20 cars at once (including parts cars for the runners).
Interstingly, out of the hundred plus cars I've owned, the only NEW cars I've bought have been domestic, and have been fun as well as reliable, and none were, to use your word, "awful."
-
Jan. 20, 2009 1:26 p.m. 16vCorey SuperDork
P71 wrote: To 16vCorey: You have it backwards. If one pair of shoes looked really stylish and impressed your friends but broke shoelaces every 10 days, that would be the VW. The pair of shoes that came from a $10 bargain bin and looked like it yet were comfortable and worked every day would be the GM. Sure, they're not as cool, but they work. My shoes you ask? You guessed it, bargain bin specials (NSS is what they say on them). Paid half of what Van's cost yet they outlasted my Van's and are more comfortable. I do miss that the Van's were a sweet blue and these are only black, but I'd rather be comfortable than stylish.
Actually, he never mentioned the looks at all. What he liked about it is that it was "tight as a drum, excellent to drive", "drives like a dream and has NO rattles", and "ergonomically excellent". The other car was more reliable, but "drives like a little red wagon". So really, I'd say my analogy was spot on.
BTW, my last shoes were NSS. I had never heard of them before, but they were quite comfortable and lasted a long time.
And really, who's impressed by a Passat?
-
Jan. 20, 2009 1:38 p.m. poopshovel Dork
Yawn.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 1:45 p.m. John Brown UltimaDork
derekshannon wrote:
Like what's with VW using the Chrysler platform? Even if the drivetrain is VW. We LOVE our Chrysler minivans but I would never buy that VW minivan simply because it's really a Chrysler underneath.
The vans are powered by Chrysler as well and outside of the body differences there is only a few suspension tweeks.
Honestly our owner has a Town and Country and now a Routan... same vehicle, two completely different feeling vans.
-
Jan. 20, 2009 1:49 p.m. Jensenman UltimaDork
Bobzilla wrote:
^ You mean like Accord=TL, ES300=Camry, MAxima=I30. . . those kinds of things? Only in those cases people pay MORE to get the same car. . . . I never understood that. Why pay $35k for an accord that costs $27k?
I guess for the same reason people will pay stupid money for a Cadillac that's really just another variation of a GM platform only with leather guts and a wreath on the nose. Or maybe buy a Lincoln Town Car that's an overweight Crown Vic.
Honestly, it's stupid to me too. Like the guy who swore up and down that a GMC was NOT the same as a Chevy. Or another guy who flipped when the radiator in his SC300 Lexus was found to have the Toyota name stamped on it. There's a saying: some people will buy a bag of cowshi+ if you paint it gold.
