Detroit auto makers try some new tricks

Page 5 of 16  


So, the Crown Vic is one of the "worst cars ever made", and yet is still the number one Police cruiser? The things are tanks, and they stand up to just about anything. If you go to Ford's website, you can see the harshest test an auto manufacture puts a car through. A Crown Vic being smashed in the rear-end by another car going 75 MPH. And, guess what? No gas tank explosion either.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gyzmologist wrote:

That sounds like a contradiction.
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This statement is just total BS. 90's era Toyota 4Runners had a much higher rollover rate than 4 door Explorers. Crown VIctorias are on of the safest cars you can buy.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I feel the same way about leaving GM and trying to buy another brand of automobile. I just dont have the resources to take the gamble and lose. Been buying them for over 30 years and all they do is run and run, look nice, and get good gas milage. I wonder what I am doing right and what you are doing wrong>

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

There speaks Mike Hunter under another nym :-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Naw, just coachrose speaking here, for himself. I'm sure Mike Hunter can speak for himself and handle himself equally well..
Now, are you calling me a LIAR????
Every thing I have ever posted about my GM cars in this site has been factual. Sorry if you have ever had problems with your GM's, if indeed, you have ever owned any. My 31 year track record of reliablity from GM cars will probably influence me into buying several more in the upcoming years, if , God willing, I am able to do so. Continue to bash away. I'll continue to get where I want to go in my GM vechicles.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

I gave up on GM cars when I started buying from Chrysler. Yes many aspects of GM cars are very solid, but many aspects are unreliable and GM does nothing about it. Then we have the very poor handling and drivability of GM cars. A few years ago I had a 2005 Impalla rental for two weeks and drove it a good mix of highway and city. A very spacious car, but it's drivability reminded me of cars of the early 80s. An OK car for chugging along on straight flat roads. No way I would even straight trade my 10 year older 1995 Chrysler Concorde for it!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm probably missing something here, so enlighten me. I assume you are meaning your Chrysler's gave you trouble, so you decided to not buy GM???? Makes no sense to me. GM does not make Chrysler's, but neither does Toyota, nor Nissan or Honda, or whatever you wound up buying, so why blame GM for a bad Chrysler?????

Been hearing this argument for about 20 years and am quite frankly, getting sick of it. Gm is there, statistically, or however any other way you want to put it, with other companies, in terms of quality.
The VERY few times I have ever had problems with my GM cars, they have taken care of it. Period. What do you mean by "GM does nothing about it????????"

Cant even come up with an answer to that one!!!!
Comparing an Impala to a Concode??? Did the Impala have tires on it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

Seven (!) in 10 years? What, you trade up every 18 months? Even GM knows to build their cars so that most of them make it through the warrantee period...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've done that when we had 4 drivers in the house.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

We've got 5 drivers now in the extended family and we have 4 Toyotas, 3 Corollas and 3 95's All of the Corollas are AE10x.
At one point we had 3 TE7x Corollas and one TE31 Corolla. We've also helped a friend buy a BR12x Corolla, and I just recently sold a 93 Corolla AE109E with 230,000 miles on it. Our first Toyota was a TA12 Carina that we managed to put 36,000 miles a year on, until we finally bought a second car (the aforementioned TE31 Corolla) I also owned a 1501 KE30 along the way somewhere and 2 different TE72's.
Charles of Schaumburg
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
n5hsr wrote:

WTF are TE7x and AE10x and TE31?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Been waiting for someone to try to pull this one on me. I usually buy or trade because I WANT to, not because I NEED to or HAVE to.
Of the 7 I have owned in ten years, I still own 4 of them. Instead of going over the 4 I currently own (and love), I;ll mention the 3 I no longer have.
1. Chevy Lumina Z-34. Black. Bought new. Nice looking. Ran great, good gas milage. Realiable. Broke a belt at 94k, kinda disappointed in that, otherwise, no problems at all, until my 19 year old daughter rolled it over a hill and totalled it at 105k. If you can convince me that the Japanense cars would not have sustained similar damage in the same crash, you might convince me to buy one.
2. 1995 Pontiac Grand AM SE. Black. Quad 4 four-cylinder. Not loaded with a whole lot of options, but was a very nice car. Drove for over 80000, miles. Changed tires once, oil and filters a few times, and that was it. NEVER in the shop for ANY other reason. Traded it for a car I currently have owned for over nine years, with little trouble out of it.
3.2003 Pontiac Grand AM. White. Beautiful car. Every option offered at the time, other than On-Star. V-6. Leather, All-Power. Sun-roof. Monsoon sterero system (awsome sound) Great all-around car. Traded it at 60000 miles, (never in the shop for ANY reason), problably foolishly on on impluse, for a larger new GM car, which in the 15 months I have owned it, has not been in the shop for any reason, either.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've had two Chryslers in 22 years, an 87 and 95. I believe I know a bit more about reliability than coachrose!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I, on the other hand, have only owned two non-GM cars in my 31 years of driving, both were Chrysler products. My first was a 1983 Charger, bought new, mostly because of the new 50000 mile drive-train warranty they offered. I needed the warranty, many times over. This car was LITTERALLY in the shop more than it was on the road. Threw a rod in this highly-touted 2.2 four banger at 41000 miles, and that was it. Guess I couldnt believe that the engine could be that bad, so I foolishly bought another Dodge with the 2.2. Warped a crank-shaft at 30000 miles, at which time I returned to my GM roots, where I am still working on destroying my first engine or transmission.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote: Threw a rod in

I flatly believe you're lying.
Oh, the 80s K-cars were about as appealing as beer cans pounded into the general shape of a car, but the 2.2 engine is not part of their problem Which is why the turbo-Mopar drag racers can get 400+ horespower out of it and still drive it to and from the track while getting 25 mpg or better. The main and rod bearings on that engine are the same size as the 440 v8 and 426 Hemi v8. If you "warped" a crank-shaft, you did so because you ran it without oil pressure, and that's your fault.
If you're going to make up failures, please at least make them believable- like grenading 3 1990 Caravan transmissions. Or cracking 4 cylinder heads on a Reliant with the 2.6L Mitsubishi engine. Or having a a 1989 Caravan with a 3.0L Mitsubishi v6 that burns a quart of oil per tank of gas. Those are believable. Or just say you didn't like the 2.2 because it vibrates like a paint-shaker (no balance shafts). That's an honest complaint about it, and the reason the 2.5 was introduced.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I really dont care what you think. Well, no, I really do. I have no reason to lie. Everything I have stated is the truth, Furthermore, I dont know you, you might be twice my size, but I promise you, if you called me a liar to my face, one of us would get an old-fashion ass whipping.

Yeah, those 440 and 426 Hemis were (I guess I should say ARE) real realible, werent they? You could depend on them to get a couple of hundered thousand miles on them, couldnt you, just like I got on those similar 2.2's The car I had that warped the crankshaft at 30000 miles was no different than any other car I have owned either before or after, I checked and changed the oil regualry, no engine lights came on, but I guess it was somehow my fault anyway.

Making nothing up here at all. I still remember nearly getting stranded in the mountains of western Virginia with my pregnant wife and two year old daughter on Labor Day weekend, 1984 with this great reliable Chrysler product,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

Absolutely! Given the fact that I've put over 300,000 miles on a couple of them, YES they are. My present daily-driver is a 440, and my show car has its never-out-of-the chassis 440 (although it only has 160,000 miles). I pulled the heads on that one when I bought it (at 140,000 miles) and found no ridge, and in fact no detectable wear on the cylinder walls at all. The pistons were the factory orignals with the factory part numbers, as were the rods and bearings so that was clearly the first time it was ever opened that far. I did replace the bearings while I was in there, put in hardened valve seats for unleaded fuel, and buttoned it right back up without lifting it out of the engine bay. Big-block Chryslers are without a doubt some of the most reliable and over-engineered production car engines ever built.
>The car I had that warped the crankshaft at 30000 miles

OK, I'll assume you aren't making it up. It just strikes me as very weird that after 30+ years of driving, restoring, tinkering with, and associating with clubs of dozens of other people who own, drive, restore, tinker with, and even race Chrysler engines (everything from 2.2s to 440s and Hemis), I have *never* once heard of a crankshaft failure in ANY engine that didn't lose lubrication first, or that wasn't being pushed to 4x its stock power output for racing. I've personally put about 3/4 MILLION miles on Chrysler engines in my driving life, not even counting dozens of friends who have similar amounts of mileage. I've seen people do a lot of dumb things to their cars, and I've seen more than a few odd, inexplicable failures too, but why haven't I seen crank failures? Blown 2.2/2.5 head gaskets? YES- aluminum heads on iron blocks in the early days before MLS head gaskets would do that. Burned pistons? yes, sometimes especially on poor quality 80s fuel. Broken rods- occasionally, but extremely uncommon and far less frequent than small-block Chevrolets or Chevrolet v6s. Slipped timing chains that put a valve through a piston (back in the days of plastic-coated "silent" timing gears- a huge mistake by American v8 builders admittedly) YES. But CRANKSHAFTS? On a NORMALLY ASPIRATED 2.2, pulling about 110 horsepower out of a crank with geometry almost identical to one that easily produces 375 in a 440 and close to 500 in a stock 426 Hemi? I'm sorry, it just doesn't add up.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wickeddoll wrote:

I did that in 1992 and won't do it again. My car wasn't that bad, but Ford's attitude toward defects was very different from Toyota's or Nissan's, and they actually told me that lumpy body filler above the front doors wasn't really a defect because every car of that model was like that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"larry moe 'n curly" ...
Wickeddoll wrote:

I did that in 1992 and won't do it again. My car wasn't that bad, but Ford's attitude toward defects was very different from Toyota's or Nissan's, and they actually told me that lumpy body filler above the front doors wasn't really a defect because every car of that model was like that.
LMC
So you think they're irredeemable? I don't. I think they may have learned to put the customer's needs first. At least I hope they do. Why would they try the same shit that ruined them? That doesn't even make good business sense.
Natalie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    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.