As late as the early '80s , or whenever GM stopped using full frames
on their cars, GM also had a SERIOUS frame rusting problem.
The early Ford Taurus line had a serious problem with subframe mounts
rusting off, litterally drolpping the subframes off the body. (due to
body-mount washers disintegrating) The 80-81 Tercel rear suspension
rustout was fairly limitted to the "rust belt" and when doing the
recall, well less than 10% even here in "salt central" Ontario
required replacement. The recall involved punch testing, and
rustproofing those that passed the punch test. Some had internal
coating (like paint) from the factory, and some did not. I THINK it
was a dual source situation.
Toyota used to ALWAYS have 2 sources for everything.
2 different brake suppliers. 2 different tail-light suppliers. 2
different headlight suppliers, 2 different suspension strut suppliers,
etc way back when all toyotas were made in Japan. They were
interchangeable as an assembly although parts did not necessarily
interchange between assemblies.
for the floor mat issue, virtually NEVER without warning. The sticky
throttle has ALWAYS been a "progressive failure" - with pedal effort
increasing before the throttles stuck.
it only shows up in situations where braking is affected already -
like rough and/or slippery roads - where if you are driving sensibly
for the conditions it will NOT cause an accident. Nothing mechanical
governments to pass a law laying out automatic controls as P-R-N-D-L.
I remember our government passing it after a series of AT cars went
backward instead of forward, I remember one horrific incident where an
old lady in an AT car was on a Ferry on the Tamar, but instead of going
forward her car lurched back off of the ferry into 30feet of water, her
body was recovered the next day.
That why they don't sell US designed cars there?
The UK version of the Escort was pretty close to the US version.
OTOH, GM had to buy Vauxhaul to get an 'in' in European markets.
I've heard they're junk, too...
A large part of why there are different cars for different markets is
that the markets have different needs. The Japanese and European markets
have fuel that is like 3 or 4 times higher than the price of fuel in the
US. SO fuel economy is more important than in the US. In addition, both
Europe and Japan are much more interested in fuel economy than we are in
the US. In both markets, there is less room for cars, so smaller cars
are more useful.
And, besides this, the people have different tastes. In the US, for
years people have liked big boat-type cars. In Europe, people have
preferred smaller, more nimble cars. For example, Olds was advertising
that it had the first 4-wheel independent suspension car made in the US
in 1987 or 1988. The Peugeot 504 on which I learned to drive had
four-wheel indpendent suspension 13 years earlier.
And the emissions and safety requirements are different, too.
vw have been 4-wheel independent since the 30's. those french citroen
2cv's were in the 40's. the fiat 500 was independent in the 50's. it's
basically only detroit garbage that is /still/ being sold with
horse-and-cart solid axles.
On 02/11/2010 05:59 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
well, the "truck based stuff" includes suv's, and they used to be 50% of
the market. then you have all the taxi's, highway patrol vehicles, and
all that larger stuff like the camaro, impala, etc. there really is no
All the highway patrol vehicles up here, virtually, were either Crown
Vic based (RWD) or FWD Chevys untill the Charger took a bite out of
the market. ALL of the RWD passenger car offerings from Chrysler are
independent rear suspension. The Camaro is also 4 wheel independent.
The Crown Vic /Pursuit Special is history.
SO - what is still being sold with the "horse and cart" axle is the
Mustang and a FEW of the compact SUVs. - and most of the light trucks
and BIG SUVs
On 02/12/2010 10:10 PM, email@example.com wrote:
not anywhere else in the world either. and that's my point - we are
[were more so] being sold cheap outdated garbage none of the rest of the
world will accept. and paying the same price for this cheap crap as the
more-expensive-to-produce stuff that performs better and is safer.
agreed, this is a move in the right direction, but after 50 years of
laggardly profiteering, detroit just needs to bite the bullet and move
on. sure, they make more money, but horse-and-cart suspension is
significantly less safe.
TOTALLY not true. You Americanns were DEMANDING that stuff. Good
european style cars ARE available in the USA. Good small american cars
HAVE been designed and built. You Americans just refuse to buy them.
You cannot put all the blame on the American manufacturers
On the interstates of North America the safety difference between a
live axle rear end and an indepdendent rear end is almost microscopic.
The difference in ride is significant.
On rough roads (think urban Detroit) independent suspension CAN keep
the tires more firmly planted on the road, but the installation of
MASSIVE tires and wheels on everything from a golf cart to a Hummer
negates that advantage pretty quickly (Talking unsprung weight - the
REAL reason independent is better.
On 02/13/2010 08:33 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
sorry dude, that's not true. people show up and buy what's on the
forecourt. detroit ships and sells the stuff with the highest margins -
the crap with donkey-cart suspension.
well, frod, much as i dislike their ethics, have good business acumen.
as the market has shifted away from gas guzzlers, they brought, and have
been selling like hotcakes, their euro line-up to the states. gm otoh,
has been trying to sell their obsolete high margin crap, and failing.
they have a euro line-up they could sell here, but they refuse to do so.
it's not the consumer - frod have shown that.
oh yes we can! see above.
untrue. it's not what happens when the vehicle is cruising in a
straight line that matters, but what happens when it needs to suddenly
deviate. in that regard, donkey-cart suspension has poor lateral
stability and poor ground control. all other conditions being equal,
the donkey cart is going to lose control first, hence it's more dangerous.
true, unsprung weight is a factor, but that's not the whole story. when
cornering, you can configure independent to assist in cornering force,
/and/ retain lateral stability. donkey-cart just can't do that.
But you CAN vote with your wallet and buy something else.
If you refuse to buy the big crap, they WILL bring in the Euro stuff..
You need to vote with your wallet, not just bitch on the internet.
If GM or whoever your favourite is does not sell what you want, vote
with your FEET and your wallet. Buy Ford. Buy Volvo. Buy whatever from
who-ever. Ford's ethics are no worse than GM or any of the others -
Old Henry's long gone (His ethics WERE defnitely questionable)
cover the distance from NYC to Detroit - much less from Tampa to
Seattle or Bangor Maine to SanDiego??????
In Britain it's pretty hard to drive 100 miles in a straight line. In
most of Continental Europe it is the same.
American iron makes poor rallye cars too. When I was ralllying in my
(relative) youth we had a 1972 Renault R12..
On the rough roads of central Africa the American cars would not have
stood up well either. Killed my '67 Peugeot too. The '49 VW stood up
pretty well, considering!!!
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.