What's wrong with GM???
Their 2004 models are still the same junk that's been the norm for the past
The only difference is the PRICE!!! Who would be foolish enough to pay the
prices they're asking for the same junk that's been available for the past
Compare Chrysler to GM, and you'll think you're looking at ads from the
How can they think they'll sell this junk at the prices they have them
The 2004 GM model line is sorry to say the least...
With GM's own confession that their vehicles are inferior to the
competition--it looks as though GM wants out of the "new-car" business.
Remember when GM went out on strike a few years back; who cared because what
they make is certainly not what the car buyers of today are looking for.
| It wasn't directed at me, but I read and post to the GM group because I
| to own them, and I WANT to see them succeed. They're an American company,
| and it pains me to see them being whomped by the Japanese, Germans, and
| Koreans because they're a huge bureacracy run by buffoons.
I agree with you 100%!!
Hmmm.. My brothers 92 w/mitsushitty engine went 190K when
he got a 2002. Other than normal maintanance, an oil seal
that blew in the distributor and one freeze plug rusting out
it was rock solid
Attributable to driving habits, brake job technique.
Fix the cause.
Not possible for the trans to over ride the shifter since a
92 w/3.0 would -not- have come with a 41TE transaxle.
There was no such system, all 92 minivans had vacuum brake
Probably corroded/binding throttle linkage, easily fixed
with a shot of PB Blaster and/or wire brushing the corroded
parts and a little lube.
So did the one on my 91 Caddy. You also couldn't keep a
water pump in it for much more than a year. The alternator?
Don't get me started... Rear disc brakes? What a joke.
The $1000 radio? I could have done better at Sams Club for
$150. The oil cooler lines? McDonalds has straws that are
tougher. The heater control with absolutely no options for
where it could be set to blow? Designed by a child.
Good thing I only kept it a year, because I don't think I
could stand any more fun or design features.
Happens to all makes from that era.
EPA jamming impossible standards down the OEMs throats.
Sounds like the common lifter tick that 3.0s develop when
the lifters bleed down, usually caused by stretching the oil
changes out too long. Either way, it's harmless, and BTW,
the chevy 60* V-6 has been a noise maker on cold starts
since it was introduced in 1978 in the 'oh weren't -they-
great' GM X body.
He had a gun to your head?
So, the two vehicles experienced different driving habits
and different conditions. Hardly a fair comparison.
meanwhile, my brothers old 92 caravan is still around,
driven daily, no holes in the body (Wisconsin) has the
original transmission which shifts just fine after I cleaned
and lubed the throttle detent linkage, and still gets mis to
high 20s fuel mileage.
That has what to do with reliability?
BTW, the 3.0 has ad many changes since 92.
What about them? The problem was corrected over 10 years
ago. Not to mention that there were at least three Chrysler
manufactured engines with solid reliability records
available instead of the 3.0 Mitsushitty engine.
Meanwhile, the Chevy 60* V-6 -still- knocks and bangs on
cold start until the pistons expand to fit the bore, they
-still- can't keep intake gaskets in them, they still can't
build a fuel injector that lasts worth a damn, they -still-
have camshaft problems although it's slightly different from
the 'worn lobe" problem that's been around on all Chevy V
engines for 40+ years, etc. etc. etc.
(now the cams just fall apart instead of wearing down
Then why do none of our other vehicles have this problem. I change the
brakes the same way and drive them the same way, if it were driving habbit
it would be more consistant.
It was the 3.3L with 4 speed auto. Its even listed n the owners manaul that
it will override.
Do some research on bendix system 10. There was a little electric motor
that ran every few times you ysed the brake to build up pressure. Its
listed on the NHTSA site under their recalls list.
no I maen I got ripped off because a garage kept, highway mile vehicle
should have been worth more, but its resale value is way too low because it
Driving habbits, if anything I was easier on the van, it was also garage
kept and highway driven before I had it. My S10 came from a repo auction
where some kid had spalled on a body lift, ran it through mud and even
wrecked it. The plemon had the 3.3L and was underpowered for the van, it
was constantly changing gears and reving high to get moving.
Again this was the 3.3L
I have seen Chrysler minivans with the cloud of smoke behind them in the 95
and up body style so it seems they haven't quite fixed the problem yet.
Because they are different vehicles of different design.
Ford and Chrysler rear disc brakes do not suffer the
terrible reputation that GM rear disc brakes do (as an
example) and there are service techniques that do mitigate
the problems to a large degree if the person doing the brake
work has the iniative to do them.
I service quite a few Chrysler mini-vans with 14' wheels
which gets you the lesser brakes, and I have yet to see a
cronic problem as long as quality brake components are used
and all of the mounting hardware is dilligently cleaned up
and properly lubed before re-assembly.
My appologies, your comments about the 3.0 Mitsushitty near
the end of your post lead me to believe that -that- was what
I am intimately familiar with the Bendix 10 system.
Sorry, again due to the mistaken assumption that yours had
the Mitsu 3.0. Which would have had conventional vacuum
assisted brakes, yes yours was a bit of a sphincter clencher.
Then again, so were some of the Teves systems GM used.
Resale is low because the market is flooded. Flooded to the
point where it's deflationary, and has been for quite a
I never considered the 3.3 to be underpowered, and I'd guess
that there was some simple fault that wasn't properly
tracked down. I have salesmen customers with these things
going strong at 200K miles, but any company can make a lemon
occasionaly and do.
The 3.3 is a very stout engine, basically it's a 318
narrowed down with 2 cylinders lopped off.
The cronic cause (dropped valve guides was fixed), that
doesn't mean that people can't still destroy them just as
they do other brands.
The Cadillac was not the only GM I ever owned. I just
picked their flag-ship to point out how inept they can be.
FYI, I've been a mechanic for over 33 years, I've worked in
GM, Ford, Chrysler dealerships and one very large
metropolitan utility fleet , I see what goes wrong on all
brands. Yes, I think that Chrysler is better, but that is
based upon observing how the engineers impliment certain
things between the vehicle brands. Your perspective is
based upon the consumers viewpoint which is more often than
not influenced by emotion.
Either way, GM has now finally admitted that they suck eggs
and have for quite a while.
Meanwhile, the complaints still roll in from Chevy and GMC
full-size truck owners about spongy/goes to the floor brake
pedals.... Seems they haven't learned anything since 1980
and the "X" body brake fiasco.
Ya, it's not just the trucks either. I had two recent Oldsmobiles (Alero
and Intrigue) and a Chevy (Cavalier) which did the same thing. All three
cars ate rotors, pads, everything. My wife's Escape actually has pretty
good brakes, I was surprised. Between that car and my Maxima (sorry UAW),
there is just no way in hell I'm going back to GM. I used to say, "well,
give it a few more years, they'll iron things out and I'll fall back into
the fold". I also used to get upset when someone would say, "I owned a
Pontiac 6000 twenty years ago, it was a POS, I'll never buy GM again".
But now, after owning non-GM makes, I completely understand. Neither my
Ford or Nissan have had anything other than routine maintenance done to
them. I take that back, the Ford did have a latch on the rear hatch
replaced, it was rattling. Compare to my Alero which burned oil like a
madman, and Intrigue which had so many rattles SIX MONTHS AFTER PURCHASE it
sounded like I was driving around in a cargo van. I'm done wasting money on
crap, no more GM headaches for me. It kills me because a GM was my first
car, and I've been basically loyal to them. But after getting burned three
times in a row, I'm done.
I laughed at my wife (figuratively) for buying a Ford, but it was she who
had the last laugh. That Escape has been a dream compared to my GMs. And
the Maxima? PLEASE. GM will never, ever make a car that good. Ever wonder
why GM discounts the crap out of their cars, while mfgs such as Nissan only
throw you a bone occasionally? It sounds obvious, but when you make bland,
boring, unreliable junk you might as well just dump all your shit in one
giant fire sale. I never thought I'd see the days of $4000 rebates on cars,
but thanks to GM's "yeah, we make crap" spirit, here we are. Shit, give me
a Taurus. Boring, yeah, but I bet Ford didn't design it to be instantly
disposable like my recent string of GMs.
Well, you just got lucky with your GM diesels! I worked
on those things non-stop for 5 years when they came out and
they were nothing but junk. Your Pontiac 6000 was a decent
car, but depending on which engine it had, it had lots of
problems. From a mechanic's perspective, GM has continued
making crappy cars for the most part for the last couple of
decades. By the way, there has "always" been a problem
with coolant getting in the oil via the intake manifold gaskets
on the GM 60 degree v-6's. Nothing has changed there, other
then the design of the gaskets. The very first 2.8's had intake
gasket problems, and the very last 3100/3400's still have
intake gasket problems.
Which is probably why now that I'm looking for another
car for my wife, I'm leaning towards a Honda or some
other Japanese vehicle. I would prefer to buy a GM vehicle
as I have access to all the knowledge, special tools, and
scanners for these vehicles...but they are such bad quality
I may just take my chances elsewhere.
Of course, the poor quality is a boon to me personally
as a GM technician. Certainly never out of work.
I'll second that... it got so bad that by 1985, the dealer
I worked for refused to sell anyone a new vehicle with a
diesel engine, a last ditch attempt to keep the dealerships
name from being tarnished.
I think my hands are still stained from diesel soot.
I have a customer ith a 90 6000 wagon w/3.1, it just clicked
over 200K miles this winter. It's had the injectors
replaced, new radiator, the usual odds and ends, it's
getting a new fuel tank, sender, pump and straps tomorrow
because he plans on getting 300K out of it and you can damn
near see thru the fuel tank.
I think the 2.8/3.1/3.4 is a fairly tough engine, it's the
detail stuff that usually does 'em in.
When the Nova came back in 85, it changed my mind on how
well the japanese can build a car. Seems the only stuff we
were fixing under warranty was the domestic NUUMI components.
The three Toyotas we owned after that gave me very little
aggrevation other than body rot.
Towards the end, we were buying Olds 350 gas engines
from the wreckers, stripping them down and having them
completely rebuilt, and installing them in trucks instead
of replacing the diesel engine. It was a nice little swap
as there was only the throttle cable and TV cable brackets
that had be jury rigged.
> I think my hands are still stained from diesel soot.
Yes, my wife hated that period of time as I would
be just covered with the stuff day in and out. Of course,
I did shower, but as you say, the stains on the arms
and hands took a while to come out.
No doubt....I was thinking more about the Iron Duke.
I loved that engine. So much to repair on it, so little
effort to repair it.
> I think the 2.8/3.1/3.4 is a fairly tough engine, it's the
I agree, we actually see very few of them actually
"blow up". As you say, it's the detail stuff. I'm
actually quite amazed how well they stand up to
running for long periods of time with coolant in
We have had one Toyota, and it gave us well over 300K
kilometers of trouble free driving. I've never been very
impressed with Isuzu or Mitsubishi, but I suppose that's
because I saw the crap that they turned out under the
GM and Chrysler badges.
Anecdotal I know, but my personal experience with Chrysler, the dealer and
their products (the overall experience deals with all of those) since 1987
has been nothing short of stellar (my purchases and those of my kids). But,
I know surveys say differently, so maybe we've just been lucky. We've not
experienced the situations you and your family have had with them, that's
for sure. My brother did have to have the tranny rebuilt on his 97 Caravan
recently though (at about 90+K miles, I think it was)
Interesting you mention trade value. The 1987 Grand Caravan 3.0 V6 (1st
year for the V6 and the Grand) I bought new for $12K, I got $3.5K for it in
1997 (10 years later) when I got rid of it... Rust?? My son's 89 Dakota
4x4...not one spot of rust anywhere as you say your S-10 has...he has a '96
Dakota LE model now since he wanted a V8 and the larger cab with power
stuff. Paint peeling? My wife's 97 Neon had that problem...no paint
problems on any of the others (about 6-7 cars total between all of us).
Ooops that isn't right...87 Caravan had a clearcoat problem after 7
years...Chrysler paid half the cost to fix it, even though it was well out
of warranty...I bet GM wouldn't have done that!! Chrysler made the same
offer with the Neon paint as well...but we didn't take them up on it that
time. I've seen paint problems on GMs driving around, so I don't think that
that is only a Chrysler thing. Current paint on the 97 Caravan still looks
Although I don't completely share the sentiments of the original poster, I
do think GM comparatively falls short. More so in the way the customer is
treated by corporate _after_ the sale then just the product shortcomings.
Customer service is just AWFUL!! I do think the product is a little better
now than it used to be though! Since GMs own press release says they know
they have fallen short and have essentially admitted it, not sure how we can
argue that they don't! Their "solutions" sure seemed lame though!!
Most recently my wife and I both bought brand new cars at the same time. I
bought a 03 Malibu LS and she a 03 Stratus SE. We both paid roughly the
same price...within a couple hundred (~ $17K). Much to my chagrin, the
Stratus she bought is so much more quiet, smooth and pleasant to drive with
about a 3-4 more miles per gallon mileage compared to the Malibu (both have
the V6). The Malibu seems to have better interior cosmetic fit and finish
and feels more "rough and rugged". But noisy!!! Geesh!! It's suspension
noises, for example, are quite a bit louder than the Stratus making one
think that everything is loose under there...(certainly the suspension
doesn't seem nearly as "tight" and responsive as the Stratus' does)
Warranty problems so far? Malibu had a severe leak that filled the trunk
spare tire well with rain water...dealer had it for 5 days to fix the seals
at the body seams. They weren't sealed at the factory at all!!! (piss poor
quality control that could be caught before it went out the door!!) Stratus
had the cabin blower motor fail...one day at the dealer to replace it
(hardly a "catchable" at time of build since it worked fine initially).
I'll probably give the Malibu LS to my youngest daughter when she gets her
license in a couple of years...it will be plenty good enough for her. It's
a adequate car, but I'm certainly not nearly as happy with it in comparison
to what I had been used to. I would prefer to buy a US product (Chrysler
now being German owned by Daimler is why I bought the Malibu). I guess I
will have to just face the fact that there isn't a US-built car any more I
can be happy with...sad as I feel to come to that conclusion after 30+ years
of buying US cars. As big as GM is, I can't believe they can't do
| Compare GM to Chrysler? I made the mistake of buying a Chrysler minivan
| voyager to be exact). I spent every weekend fixing that thing. It ate
| rotors yearly and got worse gas milage than my parents Chevy Blazer. It
| dangerous driving in the mountains because the transmission would override
| the selector and up shift going downhill and cause me to have to ride the
| brakes and have them fade at the bottom. The ABS want out twice and this
| was the system that the ABS provided the power assist. Our transmission
| problems shifting into reverse and when reverse worked it would bind up
| sometimes and cause a big bang that felt like you hit a car ( I got out
| looked the first couple times it did it). The power seat stopped working,
| the paint fell off an it had less than 100k miles and had a knock on cold
| starts when I finally got a dealer to give me a trade in price before
| it. I still got ripped off on the trade in, but I couldn't bring myself
| sell it to someone and worry about them driving it. I bet the dealer sold
| it as scrap. My 88 S-10 may be rusting out like every other vehicle 15
| years old but it still runs better that that van did and it has 170k and I
| drove it hard all through college and through a job hauling equipment
| putting 3000 miles on it per month. My inlaws bought a 99 Chrysler and
| open the hood and its the exact same engine as our 92, not a thing has
| changes except it sets furthur back under the windshield which is
| why the newer van has a worse safety rating than the old one. How about
| those quality Mitsubishi engines that keep the bugs away with the blue fog
| behind them? I will probabally never buy another Chrysler. I'll keep my
| 2000 S-10 for 10-20 years.
far? Malibu had a severe leak that filled the trunk
Yeah, my Alero did that as well (additionally, it also leaked by the rear
passenger door, soaking the carpet).
I'm surprised to hear such positive experiences with Chrysler, but then
again from anecdotal evidence around work I think it highly depends on which
models you buy. Everyone with Grand Cherokees love them, Caravans are fine,
but God help you if you own a Town & Country. Which cracks me up, because
aren't the Caravan and T&C basically the same thing, just trim differences?
I do think that Chrysler makes the best looking vehicles of the Big 3. I was
sitting behind a black Pacifica at a light the other day, and I thought,
"boy, that is the nicest looking station wagon I've ever seen.. we've come a
long way since the 'Woodies' of the 70s!".
I paid the price I believed was reasonable for my Envoy--and I've been
quite happy with the results. It's quiet, comfortable, reliable, feature
laden, and is the favorite of my three vehicles. (An Acura, a Honda, and
I don't consider myself to be foolish, but I suppose it's all relative.
I do agree that GM should improve their interiors. But overall, I think
their product lineup has improved signficantly.
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.