GM: Possible pitfalls could derail rebound

well, let's be honest here, a Corrado was unreliable from the start. It's not a typical "import" it's practically an "affordable" exotic. The experimental, not-ready-for-prime-time supercharger that needs rebuilt every 80K miles or less is just the tip of the iceberg.

Then why all the stories about intake gaskets etc? I've never had to replace any engine gasket on any VW (except for the oil pan gasket on the Corrado when I did the rod bearings.) And I've never heard of any "typical" problem that results in oil/coolant mixing as a matter of course on any VW. (they did have an oil/water oil cooler on some performance models that supposedly could allow this to happen, but I've never heard of any failing without a lot of miles and/or neglect.)

It still has that typical German car thing where it's always worth fixing - the basic mechanicals just keep going and going, everything is rebuildable (yeah, for a price) even though it's the cheap ass ghetto Porsche I can't imagine ever saying "man, my car's 20 years old... I better get a new one before this one leaves me stranded."

Well, to be fair, most of the problems I have with the car are ergonomic, so they're not going to be counted as "defects." It still makes me hate the car with a passion, however. Only 7K more miles to go until I can get something different!

nate

It's not that it's hard, it's that it's a sucky design. There's no possiblity of using the parking brake as anything other than a parking brake if you use that stupid foot pedal. Couldn't even use it as an "emergency brake" if your base brakes failed because it's either on or off (and doesn't work worth a s*it anyway - it feels like there's a spring in the linkage somewhere instead of a direct cable connection) Certainly couldn't use it to correct understeer in the snow...

nate

Mike hunt wrote:

The intake gasket debacle only applies to the 3.1L and 3.4L engines. GM has produced more than just those two engines over the years. It does represent one of the greater disappointments from GM in that they had many years to make good on that design and instead foisted it on the public for way too long.

If one does a search they will discover, gasket problems like, the previous pealing paint problems, were caused by the US government, not by any of the domestic or import vehicle manufactures, or the gasket and paint manufactures that made the paint or gaskets.

The government in its infinite wisdom chose to ban the use of asbestos and certain paint processes on dates certain, without allowing the gasket and paint manufactures sufficient time to develop suitable replacement materials with field testing. The result was the buyers were left to do the field tests in the vehicles they purchased. The result was buyers blamed the manufactures that use two of the four gasket material that were not up to the task. Those that used the one that failed early on were covered by the vehicle, manufactures warranty but those that used the other mater that failed around 70K had to wait until Ford litigation with the gasket manufactures was settled out of court to get relief.

Unfortunately many still blame the vehicle manufactures, not the environuts for those problems because the vehicles they bought were NOT made in the US and were still using asbestose

DUH! It is no harder to hold the brake release lever on a foot operated brake than holding down the button on a lever release ;)

There is no release lever on GM's current implementations of this design, you have to push it all the way to the floor to release the ratchet. Like I said, it's a sucky design. And yes, it is harder to hold the release lever of a foot operated brake while operating it with your left foot than it is to simply use your right hand to hold the button in on a handbrake and operate the lever with the same hand.

nate

=A0LOL- Hide quoted text -

No wonder you have a problem you don't know how it works. Actually it is a step ON step OFF design which allows one to use only the foot to opperate the brake and to keep both hands on the wheel. LOL

nate

I know how it works, it SUCKS. Even if it did work properly, you couldn't use it while the car is moving because you can't modulate it thus you would be risking rear brake lockup. LOL at you and the GM apologists. You can't even admit when GM makes something so clearly s***ty that it's indefensible.

nate

Mike hunt wrote:

Mike is suffering from cranial rectal inversion, have pity on him.

A guess we can assume when you said "you can't use it" you must have meant you personally, since no one else seem to have a problem using it as an emergency brake LOL

FORD didn't have the problem. Chrysler didn't have the problem.

And GM let the problem drag on for....... HOW MANY YEARS ?

So much for GM engineering/manufacturing expertise.

And GM owners are STILL being screwed by the failed manifold gasket problem !

You obviously did not do a search, since you don't know what you are talking about.. Ford did indeed have a "problem" as well as all the others that made cars in the US, Chrysler Toyota and Honda. It was Ford, who started the litigation against the gasket manufacturers that led to the out of court settlement and the resulting extended warranties by GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota and Honda for gasket related problems. LOL

Sticks an stones, in the NGs we are accustomed to personal attacks from those that have run out of facts to support their arguments. What will you resort to next, vulgarities? LOL

Go ahead, let's find a beat up GM car with that style parking brake, I'll cut your brake lines and let you go out on the highway and kick it up to 65 MPH. then you try to stop with that parking brake. I'll even adjust it first so it works. Don't worry, if you're stupid enough to try it I'll have the ambulance waiting. Would be safer (for you, not the car) to simply throw it into park while the car is moving.

I'll give you $100 if you can avoid spinning. seriously.

nate

Mike hunt wrote:

Hah, that is funny, since when did you ever post a single "fact" that wasn't pulled out of your ass? You're delusional.

nate

Mike hunt wrote:

I don't do that Mike, I just think you really do deserve pity.

And that sir, is what turned me from being a died in the wool GM bigot after

You just don't get it do you? It was not a design flaw. I was a material failure. According to the out of court settlement with Ford the gasket manufacturers agreed the failure of gaskets, after asbestos was removed, was a result of the gasket manufactures not meeting the design specs of the gasket made for the various vehicle manufactures.

The resulting settlement led to extended warranties being issued by the various manufactures including GM, by which the gasket manufactures would pay 80% of the cost and the vehicle manufacturer 20% of the cost of repairs directly relate to gasket failures including engine failures. If for some reason your particular vehicle was not repaired it would have to be that it was beyond the 100K, ten year, extension of the warranty.

If you owned one of the Toyota or other maufacturers vehicle on which the gasket had failed you would now be mad a Toyota etc. for the wrong reason just as you are mad a GM for the wrong reason. The person you should be pissed off at is your Congressmen who voted to ban asbestos, on a date certain, rather than allowing the gasket manufactures time to field test the alternative materials. ;)

If you do not want do a proper search for the facts or accept what I posted that is your prerogative. I could not care less what you or anybody else thinks.

I am simply try>> Sticks an stones, in the NGs we are accustomed to personal attacks from