Author Topic: 2006: The year GM loses top spot. (Read 4380 times)

Skuzzy · « **Reply #90 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:21:14 AM »

There is no doubt any car can be abused and it will show it. There is also no doubt if one takes meticulous care of a car it will show it, for the most part.

I wanted a Mustang when I was shopping for a new car. I was excited by the prospect of having one, but I did not get one. I did not even drive one. I sat in one, then after 1 minute of looking it over, I got out of it and walked away. I was really disappointed in it. The interior is cheap. It shows.

The engine selection is terrible. Either a V8 (not a bad engine at all mind you, but not for the economy minded either), or a pathetic 4.0L V6 (a freakin truck engine!!!) with enemic power. What are these people thinking?

So I end up with a 2.5L V6 producing 50% more horsepower than the Ford V6, and getting over 31 MPG in a car that weighs several hundred pounds more than the Mustang. It did cost more, but I will pay for something I think is a good value. I keep cars 10 years, so cost of ownership is a big deal to me. And the sound system in it is superb. The Mustang sound system was pathetic.

I also drove a Corvette. I liked it too. More than ample power, but the dang thing was already squeaking and rattling before I pulled off the dealership lot for the test drive.
----
I had a set of criteria for my new car and was not going to settle for anything less. I wanted a car that handled well (read, sporty), got good gas mileage, had a nice sound system, rear wheel drive, and was quiet (getting older, I enjoy listening more to music than exhaust notes). All other points were optional, within some limits. Pretty simple criteria as far as I was concerned. Look around though. Not many cars met that criteria and no American made car was close.

phookat · « **Reply #91 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:24:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
some of the best features are American ones.... poorly executed.

Which features would those be? I really can't think of anything. OTOH, I can think of design features which US cars lack, like OHC engines. There's no excuse for that, UAW included.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #92 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:25:42 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
The engine selection is terrible. Either a V8 (not a bad engine at all mind you, but not for the economy minded either), or a pathetic 4.0L V6 (a freakin truck engine!!!) with enemic power. What are these people thinking?

Hey, that V6 was an upgrade! Remember the older v6 ford engines in the mustangs stolen from the Taurus?

Also, 25 mpg isn't bad for a V8 that produces 300 hp.

Thats the '05 Mustang.

Interiors are like exteriors, what you think looks good others may not. My wife loves the interior of her Mustang, I love the interior of my BMW. If it works for her, who am I to tell her "its looks cheap"...thats my opinion, not hers.

beet1e · « **Reply #93 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:27:50 AM »

Quote

In Britain only 40% of cancer patients are even permitted to see an oncologist to treat the disease.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #94 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:31:53 AM »

Rip, I get 24MPG in town, which is where I spend most of my drive time.

You talking about the earlier Mustang, or the 06 Stangs in reference to what your wife has?

It was not the look of the interior. It was the material selection and how it was put together. Cheesy is the best way I can describe it. even my wife was disappointed and she wanted me to get the Mustang too.
The seating was pretty bad too. Felt like a padded bench seat.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #95 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:34:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Rip, I get 24MPG in town, which is where I spend most of my drive time.

You talking about the earlier Mustang, or the 06 Stangs in reference to what your wife has?

It was not the look of the interior. It was the material selection and how it was put together. Cheesy is the best way I can describe it. even my wife was disappointed and she wanted me to get the Mustang too.
The seating was pretty bad too. Felt like a padded bench seat.

Wife has an 05. (New body style)

Like I said, thats your (and your wifes opinion) Mine too I might add, but I see alot of Mustangs on the roads (new ones) so its not everyones opinion.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #96 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:35:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
I don't know about the cars, but the Toyota trucks last forever. Quite common to see them with 250,000 miles or more on em.

The motor and tranny may and the rest of the major mechanicals but the rest will be falling apart just like everyone elses car.

my Buddies 2000 toyota trucks interior is already falling apart and it has 80k on it.

Reminds me of an 80s GM car as a mater of fact.

Plus he has replaced:
The starter, the ignition switch, the parking brake switch is bad, the AC and radio nobs fall off and the sun roof handle falls out.

Real great qaulity there.

J_A_B · « **Reply #97 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:54:07 AM »

"Which features would those be? I really can't think of anything. "

I can't think of any really useful features that a Honda Civic has. When I see one, all I see is a tiny, cheap, uncomfortable, flimsy sardine can. I can't understand why anyone who lives outside a city would ever want one.

As someone else noted, the US automakers have a lot of baggage just in how nearly everyone everyone under age 30 automatically assumes they're crap without even driving them. Heck, people called my 3400 pound Cadillac a "boat" just based on the name alone, sight unseen (never mind the car weighed about the same as a Ford Taurus). Oddly enough--every single person I ever let drive the Cadillac, hasn't bought a Japanese car since.

I drive a Buick now, but that Cadillac was the best-designed 4-door car I've ever seen. It was almost mind-boggling. They managed to fit a large car into a midsize package. The interior was massive; its back seat had more legroom than most cars FRONT seats. It severely needed a better engine, but all engines from the '80's were crap--give that car a modern engine and you'd have a world beater. And that style sold very well; it was one of Cadillac's best-selling models ever. So what did Cadillac do? They replaced that style with a larger, bulkier, uglier design and jacked up the price $10K more and sales plummeted like a rock. Idiots. How people so utterly stupid make it into such high management positions?

That's the REAL advantage the Japanese builders have--their managemet isn't a bunch of retards. The only thing GM's management is good for is comming up with excuses for their incompetence. (Pontiac Aztek anyone?) I maintain that GM can find all the excuses they want, but their problems are inherentently caused by mismanagement on a monumental scale. Heck, I'm about as pro-american-cars as a person can get, and not even I'm willing to buy the crap GM is building now.

J_A_B

J_A_B · « **Reply #98 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:55:19 AM »

And why do people hate bench seats so much? Your wifey can't slide across if you have bucket seats.

J_A_B

Sandman · « **Reply #99 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:56:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GtoRA2
The motor and tranny may and the rest of the major mechanicals but the rest will be falling apart just like everyone elses car.

my Buddies 2000 toyota trucks interior is already falling apart and it has 80k on it.

Reminds me of an 80s GM car as a mater of fact.

Plus he has replaced:
The starter, the ignition switch, the parking brake switch is bad, the AC and radio nobs fall off and the sun roof handle falls out.

Real great qaulity there.

Too new. Look to the 70's and 80's stuff.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #100 on:** February 23, 2006, 12:07:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
And why do people hate bench seats so much? Your wifey can't slide across if you have bucket seats.

J_A_B

There is a reason I like sporty suspensions. I hate to slow down. I have to have buckets which have good lateral support and grip due to my driving style. While most people slow down when they enter a curve on the freeway, I speed up. Part of the fun of driving for me.

Choocha · « **Reply #101 on:** February 23, 2006, 12:11:13 PM »

JAB,

Pontiac Aztek was a swing for the fences thing...they missed. Management has turned around Cadillac. The STS's are the best built American cars now. How'd they do it. By getting the UAW to accept unprecendented concessions at the Lansing Grand River plant. Basicly, the car is build in a "modular" process, where most of the subassemblys are built by suppliers...most with no UAW. The only thin the UAW does is final assembly, and that is it.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #102 on:** February 23, 2006, 12:40:39 PM »

Sandy
I owned a 78 toyota hilux longbed, and it was the worst pile of **** I EVER owned. Rusted, never ran right, gas tank rusted out, the drivers door window fell out, the bumper in the back fell off, the radiator started to leak, the back brake cylinders all went out in under 80k.

Granted, I never changed the oil, (it leaked out so I figured at a qaurt a week it was getting an oil change every month anyway.)

It stopped running at 80k all together so I let it get towed and forgot about it.

Granted, that was prolly a combo bad luck on that particular toyota truck and lack of taking care of it. But every modern toyota I have delt with has been crapy as well. Maybe I am toyota cursed or expect to much.

beet1e · « **Reply #103 on:** February 23, 2006, 12:41:01 PM »

^ Indeed.

And J_A_B, if you have a car with manual transmission (I hate that "stick shift" expression) a bench seat isn't really practicable, except if it's one of those ghastly column shift efforts. Also, you need a handbrake with manual (not one of those American style pedal operated "emergency" brakes), so that you can start on hills without rolling back. Being able to do that is part of the British driving test - you fail the test if you can't coordinate the controls to be able to do it properly.

The roads here are very different from the roads you're used to, J_A_B, and I need a car that can corner well - so mushy suspension wouldn't cut it for me. I chose the 4WD "quattro" option on my aluminium can because the cornering and traction are so much better than with 2WD - "due"? The 4WD, ABS and ESP systems all interact to provide the best traction, roadholding and cornering ability - these are important on our wet and winding roads...

mtndog · « **Reply #104 on:** February 23, 2006, 01:28:44 PM »

I think Gm and Ford have a way to go yet. Ford actually made 2billion last year but lost 1.5 billion on N American operations. Gm has some 13 billion in cash on hand.
Kirk kerkorian is buying as many gm shares as he can, hes a suuccessful investor....buy now on the downswing!

Also, great article in forbes magazine. Basically suggest Catepillar as the model for GM and Ford to fight the jap auto makers. Cat faced this same problem in the 80's from jap and foreign competiton, they're now stronger than ever. This was mostly accomplished by moving factories to areas in the country that were not controlled by the UAW.

mtndog