Again the is only your opinion. You believe what you do because you know
nothing about the fleet business. Because of federal corporate tax
depreciation laws corporations keep their vehicles for five years of 300K,
WOF.. Vehicles are just one more tool used in their business and like a
tool many keep them to the wheels fall off. That is far longer and greater
mileage than the average US new vehicle buyer.. The average new car vehicle
buyer in the US replaces their vehicle with another new vehicle in three to
four years with 30K to 45K on the clock. Only a small percentage of buyers
keep a vehicles longer than ten years in any event. ;)
Maybe I run with a strange crowd. My partner is the only person I know who
doesn't own any cars more than ten years old. In my household of five adults
we have two 2002 Toyotas, a 1994 Acura, a 1993 Honda and a 1985 Volvo. We
traded in the 1984 Nissan for the first Toyota four years ago. My retired
former partner still drives the GTO that was his first car back in 1965, but
he has an early 70s Ford pickup, too. I figure if a car is good at 100K
miles it will probably go another 200K. Automatic transmissions are the main
exception to that expectation, and that applies only to certain ATs.
IMO, of course. And in my experience. You're free to ignore both.
Obviously you, like I, do not fall into the category of the average new car
buyer in the US. I seldom keep a vehicle longer than two years. I
generally run at least two cars. I sell the one that is two years old, to
friend or relative, and buy another new car every year. My current
vehicles are a 2007 and 2006 Some I have kept longer. I own also 1941,
1965, 1971, 1972 and a 1983 all of which are in mint condition, with mileage
between 100K and 300K on the clock.
DUH I never said we did not have problems with trannys on some of the
Taurus. What I said was the failure rate for Taurus Trannys was no worse on
average than for any other brand. The Taurus is Fords number ONE selling
car brand in 2006 as fleets placed early orders before production ends. If
they were eating trannys fleets would not still be buying them No
manufacturer makes a fail proof vehicle, ALL manufactures make some that
are not up to snuff on occasion. The manufacturer with the most recalls in
2006 was Toyota, and they make great stuff. Your assertion that Ford can
not offer a decent tranny defies logic, you stubborn fuckwit ;)
Mike Hunter wrote:
(top posting fixed - GODDAMNIT ASSHOLE LEARN TO POST CORRECTLY)
> DUH I never said we did not have problems with trannys on some of the
> Taurus. What I said was the failure rate for Taurus Trannys was no
> average than for any other brand.
Then you're either lying or very exceptional. Consumer reports said
that for one model year, I forget which one, drivers reported
transmission failure at a rate 4x that of the average of all vehicles
made that model year.
> The Taurus is Fords number ONE selling
> car brand in 2006 as fleets placed early orders before production
That just proves that people buy shitty cars.
> they were eating trannys fleets would not still be buying them
But it is a proven FACT that they eat transmissions.
> manufacturer makes a fail proof vehicle, ALL manufactures make some
> are not up to snuff on occasion. The manufacturer with the most
> 2006 was Toyota, and they make great stuff. Your assertion that Ford
> not offer a decent tranny defies logic, you stubborn fuckwit ;)
How does it defy logic when it took them NINE YEARS to address an oiling
system problem? That sounds like a company that I don't ever want to
buy anything from. No Japanese or German manufacturer would let a
problem go that long without addressing it. Look at how quickly the
sludging issues were addressed by the Japanese (hell, they replaced
whole engines for free, even those without complete service records)
compare and contrast with F**d letting a faulty design remain in
production for NINE YEARS.
And Mike, if you're going to call me a fuckwit, you don't need to put a
smiley in. Your opinion of me means jack shit so I really don't give a
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
My old rep at the contracting company has his wife's Camry dealer serviced
and their engine died due to sludge and he has been fighting them for a
couele years now as they are refusing to honor the warranty.
Yes, it goes against what I have heard too, Nate. Toyota was very generous
about replacing or repairing those
V6 engines that were the most susceptible...They made a statement, iirc,
that most of these engines had in general not been
serviced properly, but they made good anyhow. There is some conflict about
the oil change schedule
because it seems the Toyota printed schedule was 7500 miles, which they
later altered to 3,500 or
somesuch...A moving goalpost, if true.
When Toyota owners first began experiencing problems with "gelling," as
Toyota refer to their sludge problem. Toyota blamed owners for not
performing the proper maintance. When the problem appeared in Toyotas
serviced, under the proper procedures at deanships, things changed. The
problem was attributed to a new head design that was intended to improve
emissions. The problem it seems was oil was "coking" around the valves.
Toyota basically went back to the old head design on all of the effected
engines built after August of 2003. Toyota initiated a long term warranty
on the engines for up to eight years, unlimited mileage. Dealers were
authorized to "clean, repair, and replace any engine exhibiting "gelling."
I reality what happed was (is) dealers are cleaning engines, while serving
the vehicles and adding synthetic oil without notifying owners. Work orders
simply say serviced oil and filter $xx.xx, completed
outstanding recall, NC. For owners that keep their cars for longer than the
average, as do many Toyota type buyers, that is simply putting off the
inevitable to after eight year of the start date for all warranties.
Contact an attorney if your car has a start dated of less than eight years,
In 1993 we bought a new Camry. It was a couple of thousand more than
the Taurus I was also considering. Neighbor across the street bought a
Taurus at the same time. A few years later he bought another Taurus.
Now he and his wife both drive Hondas. We still have that Camry. Just
broke $100 in non-maintenance repair parts last year.
None is so blind as he who will not see.
Make one wonder doesn't it? Particularly when I have never owned a foreign
vehicle that was any better than the domestics I have owned, even though
they cost me more to drive them home, when new
Makes one wonder what your ass is made out of, then, that you can't
tell the difference. Probably the same substance as that of the
"mechanics" I've taken my 944 to, they can't feel the horrible
vibration at 75 MPH that wasn't there when I bought it. Perhaps
they've been driving too many late model American cars.
The difference in ride, handling, and NVH between any of the old,
beater German cars (mostly 15+ year old VWs bought for under $1000)
that I've owned and a near-new Impala is striking, and not flattering
to the Impala.
Mike Hunter wrote:
a FWD VW handles a hell of a lot better than a FWD GM POS. A FWD VW
Corrado will handle a hell of a lot better than some RWD cars.
I can't imagine a WORSE handling car than my Impala. It grinds the
front tires something awful in normal driving. It's also much louder,
rattlier, and overall less refined.
GM doesn't make a car that handles as well as my (cheap beater) 944,
save maybe the C6 (dunno, never driven one.)
Mike Hunter wrote:
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.