"However, I will say this: if I searched long and hard, I could find multiple consumer complaints and/or lawsuits that the Chevette and Corsica..."
Defending Ford, the company that brought us the Pinto (rolling blowtorch) and the Crown Victoria (rolling time bomb), by bringing up GM's failures? Occasionally, you might have a GM product with a defective shift lock (86-87 Chevette), or a bad suspension (late -80's Corsica), but at least they don't catch fire and incinerate you just because you turned the air conditioning on.
That doesn't even count the Ford products rigged to explode by Dateline NBC or 60 Minutes, either.
As for engines, I'm not a real horsepower and foot-pounds-of-torque kinda guy. I can't discuss the in's and outs of engine details. Not my bag. I was never relaly interested in it. I can, however, speak from experience and based upon the advice my grandfather (a superb mechanic) gave me: ALWAYS buy a GM product because they are more reliable. He was right.
I've driven Fords, Nissans and other vehicles from time to time, but except for the wife's '03 Altima (which even though it's a good car, feels tinny to me), I can't find anything that feels and runs like a GM products, especially a Chevy.
Then again, the use to which the vehicle is put has a lot to do with it to. The Chevette was a great car for what it was: basic transportation. Sure, it did 0-60 in 48 hours (even going downhill, slightly longer with a headwind), but it would get you from A to B with a minimum of fuss, economically and reliably. Heck, I MOVED twice in my Chevette. It never got stuck in snow because it was so light (2440 pounds soaking wet) that even with that little engine power, you could still drive through a good 6-8" of snow. I never got stuck in that vehicle, no matter what the conditions were.
People laugh, but I still recall my Chevette with fondness. It was a really good little car, provided you didn't try to treat it like a street rod (which it never could be).
I'd still put any GM product head to head with it's competitor's equivalent and come out on top, I think.
"That doesn't even count the Ford products rigged to explode by Dateline NBC or 60 Minutes, either."
Those were GM pickups, not Fords. Their "defect" was just as overblown as the Crown Victoria that you're talking about. Crown Vics are "exploding" at a rate no higher than the Impala. Is there any vehicle out there that doesn't have a significant risk of fire when parked and rear-ended by a vehicle traveling 100 mph? If they're really that bad, then why are the police departments suing Ford still trying to buy more?
>>Defending Ford<<
You are not listening. I am not defending Ford. I agree with all your complaints about this stuff they've put on the market. I am only responding to your praise for GM by saying 1)Ford had some better ENGINES in the '80s (which you haven't disputed) and 2)Some people have as good things to say about Ford ENGINES as they do Chevy, which you also haven't disputed. Don't go off on tangents that aren't relevent while being defensive.
>>Ford products rigged to explode by Dateline NBC<<
First of all, that was a GM truck, not Ford, and second, it would be silly to hold the manufacturer responsible for what NBC intentionally did.
I'm more familiar with the Citation than the Chevette, as my sister had one (company car from Apple Computer) and a company I worked for in the early '90s had one as a location company car (it stayed in Houston for our use there). Both were pieces of crap, in my view, but the '76 Impala I had was a decent car and despite its size, pretty fast.