I'm not much of a Dodge/Chrysler fan, but the old Satellites were absolutely gorgeous cars. They don't make them like that anymore!
Posted on 01/26/2006 11:13:00 AM PST by Dan Nunn
With all the bad news coming out of Detroit these days, many have a disarmingly simple suggestion: Ford and General Motors should simply build better cars.
"I read that Ford plans to cut about 30 000 jobs in North America alone," one CNNMoney.com reader wrote. "How about building better cars instead?'
How about that?
A perception of poor quality certainly isn't the only reason Ford and GM cars can have trouble in today's market. But it's a factor.
We looked at J.D. Power and Associates Long-term Dependability Surveys to get a sense of where American cars rank in terms of reliability and how much they've improved. That survey measures the number of problems vehicle owners have after 3 years of ownership.
We also checked with Consumer Reports to see what they thought about GM and Ford's performance in terms of reliability.
The answer is that, overall, GM and Ford cars are not that bad. In fact, depending on which survey you believe, they may even have become pretty good.
The problem is that "pretty good" has become "not quite good enough" in a world where quality standards have been raised so high and which many consumers still have bad memories of General Motors and Ford cars that have failed them in the past.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
1972: bought a 1966 Volkswagen Campmobile, drove it until 1979 when I got hired on an out-of-town job and knew I'd need something better. I kept it until the late 80's and sold it to a kid who completely restored it.
1979: bought a new Honda Accord. Drove that one 170,000 miles.
1986: bought a second Honda Accord. Drove this one 192,000 miles. Sold it for $800 to a guy who was driving by as I was putting the "for sale" sign into it.
1993: bought an Acura Integra. I kept this one for 12 1/2 years with no major problems. I just sold it after New Year's for $500 with 300,060 miles on it.
2005: bought a Toyota RAV4. At the rate I'm going, this may be my last car!
A challenge to any Freeper reading this message: how many of you have bought a brand-new car, and driven it over 300,000 miles?
- John
Your example is key to understanding the J. vs. U.S. mgmnt. mindset.
The J's were quick to identify the 2 (newly encountered - for them)different rust (geography) conditions & address them.
This was years before the domestics adopted anti-rust measures.
As if the domestics were saying F'em to their customers.
Oh man, you nailed it so well!
It really is just a feeling. I am completely in love with the way the Chrysler 300 looks, but when I drove it it felt like a toy compared to my Lexus, like it just had too much plastic in it and not enough steel. It wasn't solid, and I pictured what it might look like after a minor collision.
I have heard nothing about Volvos yet. I hope they are good I bought one this week. 2006 S60 Please tell me I made a good choice.
Speaking as a former salesman, I can assure you that new vehicles have the absolute lowest profit margin out of any industry. How much profit do you think that engagement ring you bought had in it?
I'm not being mean, just a point. :)
Looks like you've "got a thing" for Cragars !
I want one that starts when I turn the key, not one that I have to ask the computer to do it for me.
I want to be able to turn the headlights off when I want them off, not have them disabled in the "on" condition because that's what the computer wants.
Etc.
Etc.
Never have bought a "new" car... but my wife (then girlfriend) bought a 91 Chevy Beretta with 8000 miles on it - we just retired it with 354,000 two years ago. Still running , but was getting pretty ugly.
Except Toyota was still building rust buckets for Camrys up until 1992... That's not that fast of a learning curve.
Faster would be the bad paint fade problems cars made in the us had after EPA changes on paint shop regs back in the 90s. Those were horrible paint jobs, and the companies had little warning to formulate new paints ahead of time, but they adjusted within just a couple years....
You're on the right track about perception. But something most people aren't talking about is that most GM and Ford cars are just butt ugly. Trucks are a different story.
How about that lovely Aztec. Or the Monte Carlo they came out with a couple years ago. There isn't a Pontiac that looks the least bit interesting besides that new convertible. Cadillac is finally getting away from that slab sided look that dominated the 90s which I utterly loathed. Lumina--do they even still make it? The Cobalt--please.
I really should have contained the above to just GM. Ford actually has some interesting cars. I like the new 500 (but isn't it a rebadge of a Ford Europe model?). Of course the new Mustang is the best looker they have built in a while.
Let's face it. Most American cars that the average family can afford are either ugly or just plain boring. Shouldn't that be thought about also? I think that is a perception issue that isn't being talked about enough.
Ya can't put zinc coated metal in your cars if the steel mills don't produce it.
Looks like somewhere in northeastern Ohio, sometime in mid to late January, outside temperature about 39-45 degrees F; left side of car has had significant body damage and hood is a replacement part.
You probably live on the Northeast side of a rather busy street, no cul-de-sac and you don't count beans for a living.
Instead of making "gottacha" Ford commercials of gay clown cowboys riding in their truck, maybe they could start doing commercials talking about the quality and durability of their product? Maybe that would help change the public's perception.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.