[kms61]

I own a 92 Chevy S10 that's given me almost no trouble in ten years. (knock wood). My mom has a new Cadillac CTS that's a very nice car and IMO comparable in quality to the midsize BMW. My dad has a Chevy Avalanche which I at first thought was a gimmicky concept, but have come to realize is a very practical vehicle. And my brother and his wife own a Chevy full size pickup and a Jeep Cherokee, which are trouble free vehicles.

I have driven all of the above, and have been very satisfied with both the quality and handling of these vehicles. GM gets a thumbs up from me.

[FateAmenableToChange]

Unfortunately for General Motors, a reputation for quality once spoiled takes a long time to win back -- especially when lots of older GM vehicles that never won anything in surveys remain on the road in great number.

I feel about GM like I feel about voting Democrat - burned bad once and I'll never go back. I really want to buy and own American. But, tossing in my parents' and siblings' experiences with my own, every Toyota we've owned since 1980 (6) has lasted over 200,000 miles. Every Ford (2) and GM (2) has performed miserably, usually going to the Salvation Army or the sales block at about 125,000. GM has to start from zero and rebuild its quality reputation.

[NativeNewYorker]

GM made awful cars for so many years, and alientated so many people, that it may take a decade of producing decent cars (if in fact they are any good), before people will trust them again.

Problem is, GM doesn't HAVE a decade to turn itself around.

[js1138]

I'm not impressed by "initial quality". I want to know what a car's like in its second 100,000 miles.

[mgstarr]

It will take a lot more than that to get me to forget the cr@p they turned out in the 70's and 80's.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[Hodar]

In the 2002 initial quality survey, General Motors vehicles scored an average 130 defects per hundred vehicles. Toyota vehicles scored an average 107 defects per hundred, compared with the industry average of 133 defects per hundred.

GM has 130 defects/100; or 1.30/vehicle
Toyota has 107/100; or 1.07/vehicle
Therefore, Toyota has (1.3-1.07)/1.07 = 21.5% better Quality than GM.

As for reliability goes, Consumer Reports tends to have a very good report demonstrating the superiority of Toyota products. American car companies have improved tremendously from where they were; but the Japanese haven't been sitting still either.

[Aquinasfan]

It takes a long time to get your reputation back.

My '89 Toyota pickup is running fine and when it dies many years from now I may consider a GM truck.

[RightWhale]

Nothing cruises the Interstate quite as smoothly as the Chevy Caprice. Quiet, plenty of power, lots of room. However, the warranty is 60,000 miles, and that's exactly where things start falling off the vehicle.

[AgentEcho]

I don't know if it's real or perceived, all I know is that fir every beautiful Caddy CTS they have five Aztec ugly designs. I'll stick to my '95 Dodge Stratus ES and '02 Dodge Ram...

Æ

[Woahhs]

I notice the American car manufacturers STILL refuse to "get it." They are calling quality "defects per car" at the manufacturing end. Everyone with a brain calls quality "how far can I go without a breakdown"

So far, I have logged well over 300,000 miles in three toyotas (two pickups and an Echo) and the TOTAL mechanical failures have been ONE thermostat that went bad.

Dear Mr. GM man...try getting in MY face about quality.

[cruiserman]

I've been buying Toyotas for years. I've got a knowledge base investment in tools, repair manuals, and how the rigs are put together. It would hard for me to switch to another maker, much less GM.

Why take a chance when I've been very happy with Toyota?

[HamiltonJay]

THis is my personal oppinion of what GM needs to due to turn itself around:

1) Retire Pontiac, you cannot shake the image of shoddy and crap as long as you have a division of vehicle that will put plastic flairs and spoilers on anything, and produces the ugliest vehicle ever. Just retire this entire brand, if need be, repackage some of the more successful models under a nother brand, but get rid of it.

2) Long term reliability - GM, vehicles are a LONG TERM investment, your products don't last.

3) Build a 4 banger worth a damn! Just because you offer a 6 banger, doesn't mean everyone wants one! Why is it you guys can't build a 4 banger worth a damn?

4) Update the saturn line... of course after you create a 4 banger worth a damn. These designs are more worn than madonnas crotch.

5)Caddy division needs to make more appealing vehicles.. this trend has been happening in a few models... needs to continue.. no younger person who has the money is going to choose a caddy over a beamer until you get the styling right (this area they are improving).

6) Entry level rebirth, your entry level cars are sadly old, worn and more often than not crap, when compared to other alternatives. Everyone knows that if you get the customer young you will, provided you don't screw them over, keep them for life generally... Honda Civic runs circles around anything you guys have out there, and is affordable... Cavalier, Sunfire, etc... just look like jokes when side by side. Not to mention styling is outdated as well, been 7 years since style update.

8) Quality quality quality... and reliability. Reliability.. realiability. With Car costs going higher and higher, realiability has to be number one.

I have personally been burned by GM's sub par vehicles, when against my better judgement I let the wife pick out a GM vehicle. Its' transmission died at 70k... and it was taken care of, damn thing was in the shop all the time... worst vehicle I EVER owned. Until GM stops producing crap, they are going to have a hard time turning around... of course they are a company that tolerates and even promotes mediocrity at all levels, so its not overly suprising.


Those are my bigger thoughts.

[RightOnline]

I've owned my share of imports, but for my money, NO one builds a big-block engine like Chevy. NO one.

I've owned my share of those, including my current '93 Chevy Suburban with over 140,000 miles and still purring like a kitten.

Could GM use some "help" on cosmetics? Yes. Interior parts that don't break or fall off after 100k miles? Yes. Definitely. Still, I have loved this Suburban and would buy another one in a New York minute.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

Regaining share will require closing the quality perception gap, though it won't be easy. The automaker must convince buyers it's no longer building bland, shoddy-looking ``airport rental'' cars.

LOL, that's exactly how I picture them. I wish them luck, Ford and Chrysler as well, but its too late for me. I've owned & driven Ford, GM, and now Chrysler and all they are good for is keeping mechanics rich. The GM models that I have had the pleasure of renting in the past years have left me completely unimpressed...the best I can say is that some of them are fun to drive but the build quality, interior quality, and/or ergonomics is usually lacking. I don't want to hear a bone-jarring thud when I close the door.

I hope they can succeed in what they are trying to do, but initial quality is only the start. My next vehicles will be Toyota and Lexus, and there's pretty much nothing Detroit can do about it at this point.

[Las Vegas Dave]

BAD PAINT JOBS!

My '87 Pontiac 6000 developed blisters on the trunk, one at a time, after a few months of this, a HAND print developed, of course GM painted it, then the paint came off of the roof and hood, they offered a free paint job (for $300), I declined, (did I mention the front rotors warping-frequentely ?)

I test drove a new '01 Grand Prix demo, damn rotors thumping as I braked, said to the salesman, no thank you!,

[gcruse]

GM? When they successfully got a limit on imports in the 70s, having stood the unions down, GM promptly jacked up car prices and gave the managers huge bonusses. I said at the time I would never buy another GM car. I haven't and I won't.