GM...again

muncybob

I've had Ford, GM, Chrysler and Toyota...can't say I'm in love with any one company/manufacturer. The 97 Cavalier I am still driving was my 1st ever new vehicle purchase...got it mainly on gas mileage rating and was reasonably cheap. Just turned 270k miles with very few repairs, not burning oil and still getting over 30mph. No doubt, it's a "cheap" car but it owes me nothing. I must have got mine built on a good day! Damn frame/body will give out before the engine.
I have to say though, I doubt I'll ever buy a new car again...just can't see the $$ on something that gets me point A to B and back again plus is one of the worst financial investments you can make. A used vehicle with an established repair record makes much more sense to me. I can think of many other things I would rather spend our $$ on.

BeefJerky

exalted512 wrote: »

Yeah...honda would never do that!

Wait, nevermind.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/07/report-honda-settles-class-action-lawsuit-over-premature-brake/
-Cody

I never claimed Honda was perfect. In reality, all corporations have their flaws; some just have more or worse flaws than others. In the end, both Toyota and Honda have a significantly better track record than either GM or Ford. This is both in terms of reliability and after purchase support.

I certainly wouldn't have hesitated to buy a Toyota either. I just preferred the CR-V over the Rav-4 after test driving them.

sucks2beme

muncybob wrote: »

I've had Ford, GM, Chrysler and Toyota...can't say I'm in love with any one company/manufacturer. The 97 Cavalier I am still driving was my 1st ever new vehicle purchase...got it mainly on gas mileage rating and was reasonably cheap. Just turned 270k miles with very few repairs, not burning oil and still getting over 30mph. No doubt, it's a "cheap" car but it owes me nothing. I must have got mine built on a good day! Damn frame/body will give out before the engine.
I have to say though, I doubt I'll ever buy a new car again...just can't see the $$ on something that gets me point A to B and back again plus is one of the worst financial investments you can make. A used vehicle with an established repair record makes much more sense to me. I can think of many other things I would rather spend our $$ on.

New car owned for 14 years? That seems like a good investment to me.
I plan on running my 1998 f150 and 2002 Mountaineer until they drop dead.
The 2002 has about 68k on it, so hopefully I can get 8 more years out of it!

tonyb

Cars in general are a bad investment seeing how much the value goes down in the first couple years. I probably would never buy a new car again, I'll take a 2 year old one that costs a hell of alot less than a new one.

VR3

The car I drive now appreciated 2,000 dollars from its release date.

Sold new for 16,500 - bluebook is now 18,500

muncybob

Vr3MxStyler2k3 wrote: »

The car I drive now appreciated 2,000 dollars from its release date.

Sold new for 16,500 - bluebook is now 18,500

an excpetion to the rule for most of us. Granted, my car was a good investment but again appears to be an exception. It seems most people grow bored with their vehicles and sell/trade them after a few years even though they may have run well. I normally run mine until they are about dead and unfortunately that time is getting near for the Chevy. I think the overall quality of vehicles has improved. Use to be a day when saying your car had 150k miles on it was considered an accomplishment...now we(rightfully) expect it.

Jstas

BeefJerky wrote: »

I never claimed Honda was perfect. In reality, all corporations have their flaws; some just have more or worse flaws than others. In the end, both Toyota and Honda have a significantly better track record than either GM or Ford. This is both in terms of reliability and after purchase support.

I certainly wouldn't have hesitated to buy a Toyota either. I just preferred the CR-V over the Rav-4 after test driving them.

But, they don't. They are just about even. The problem is that for many years, Ford and GM outproduced Toyota and Honda by drastic amounts. When you look at the actual statistics, for all the many thousands of people that Ford and GM affected with bad cars, their error rates were right there with Toyota and Honda. The problem is that for a very long time there were 5 Fords for every Honda on the road and 10 GM's for every Toyota on the road. That's changed recently but that's not the point.

When you have Toyota making 10 Toyotas with a 10% error rate, only one poor sap has a bad Toyota. But if GM is making 10 GM's for every Toyota, that means there are 10 poor saps with bad GM's. So the 1, singular guy who has a bad Toyota goes and **** on an Internet forum about what a pile of garbage it is. But nobody listens because there' a GM assbag bitching about how much his GM sucks with 9 others agreeing with him and 90 others disagreeing. Mean while, the 9 other Toyota owners get all smug and smug around in their smugness and Jesus-car Prii about how great they are.

When you get down to the numbers though, it's all the same. If you want to say GM makes nothing but crap, well, statistically, so does Toyota in that respect. If you want to say that Honda makes great cars well, statistically, so does Ford.

But go ahead and keep using your anecdotal evidence, based on your individual experience with 1 car out of millions made by the company of your choosing to dismiss the entire company as a bunch of evil shysters 'cause people will listen and validate your opinion by agreeing with you. Some will argue too. The best part is, your personal experience is incomplete, likely remembered incorrectly and tells us nothing of what you consider "proper maintenance" vs. "abuse". So we are left to your maniacal rantings and passing off personal opinion as irrefutable fact. Which, in actuality, isn't actually irrefutable but since it's your opinion and you can spin it any what you want, those trying to argue against your mutating standpoint will never gain any ground because the target keeps moving. I realize this can make your argument seem irrefutable but in reality it's just circular logic laced with logical fallacies.

But I'm a "know-it-all" jerk with a penchant for American brands because I disagree with your statements, can form a cohesive and valid argument backed up by actual facts that don't jive with any of your personal stories and you're just gonna be mad at me because I'm looking at the whole thing objectively and pointing out where and why your subjective view is flawed.

exalted512

Jstas wrote: »

Blah blah blah

This thread is not for those of us with facts you know it all jerk.
-Cody

Jstas

Vr3MxStyler2k3 wrote: »

The car I drive now appreciated 2,000 dollars from its release date.

Sold new for 16,500 - bluebook is now 18,500

You can't go by current values as any indication of future value. Current used car prices are drastically inflated because of the credit crunch. It's difficult for most people to secure financing on a new car so used cars with lower prices became the go-to choice. With used cars flying off the lot, demand quickly outpaced supply and dealers took advantage of it by jacking up prices.

Now you see things like 3 year old BMW's selling within 1% of a new BMW of the same model.

Jstas

exalted512 wrote: »

This thread is not for those of us with facts you know it all jerk.
-Cody

You're a doo doo head.

I'm tellin' my mommy!

mrbiron

^^^ Jstas - You have an electronic hug coming your way...you are my inspiration :biggrin: You may have to widen your doorways after this dome swelling comment.
Well said! - The post above the doo doo head comment....haha

DMara

Here we go again, the dick size argument :biggrin:

BlueFox

Vr3MxStyler2k3 wrote: »

The car I drive now appreciated 2,000 dollars from its release date.

Sold new for 16,500 - bluebook is now 18,500

Out of curiosity, what year and model car is it? What options?

I have read that relatively new, low mileage, used cars that get good MPG are currently doing well on resale, but I have not heard of any current mass produced vehicle actually appreciating in value. Unless it is a 'classic', and most people do not have 20-30 years to wait for a 2k gain.

gdb

BeefJerky wrote: »

True, but he is also quite dead as well. He's bleedin' demised! He's passed on! This human is no more! He has ceased to be! He's expired and gone to meet his maker! He's a stiff! Bereft of life, he rests in peace! He's pushing up the daisies! His metabolic processes are now history! He's off the twig! He's kicked the bucket, he's shuffled off his mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible! This is an ex-human!!

As such, I really don't associate Henry Ford with the current Ford Motor Company, much less his personal views.

You forgot makin a call from the horizontal phonebooth !:biggrin:

frdranger

I would honestly eye Kia / Hyundai. I've heard many good things from their vehicle lineup from current and past owners.

My wife and I are looking to purchase a new vehicle after the holidays and we have our eyes on either a 2012 Kia Sorento or 2012 Hyundai Santa Fe.

TECHNOKID

Who makes the best cars?
Ford shows the biggest improvement
Last reviewed: April 2011

Getting a boost
Newer models such as the Flex SUV pumped up Ford's overall road-test score.Honda and Subaru still make the best vehicles overall, but Ford posted the largest gain in the past year, improving in its road-test and reliability scores. General Motors and Volvo also improved in both areas. On the other hand, Mercedes-Benz is the only manufacturer whose scores dropped in both measures.

Our automaker report cards reflect the performance, comfort, utility, and reliability of more than 270 vehicles that we've recently tested. Here are other highlights from this year's analysis:

Honda, Subaru, and Toyota are the top three automakers for the third year in a row. Most of their vehicles do well in our tests and are relatively trouble-free.

Newer GM models have performed well in our tests, but the company still fields a few lackluster cars that drag down its overall score. Reliability has improved, but it's still not stellar.

Chrysler came in last, with the lowest average test score by far. But the company, now run by Italian automaker Fiat, is currently overhauling its lineup. Newer models, such as the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Ram, have done better in our tests than older models, and we're encouraged by our early looks at upcoming redesigns. Chrysler's reliability needs to improve for the automaker to be competitive.

European cars perform well in our tests, but many have confusing controls and inconsistent reliability. Volvo is the only European make with an above-average reliability score.

Each automaker's overall score is based on a composite of road-test and predicted-reliability scores for all of its models that we've tested. The road tests comprise more than 50 tests we perform, covering performance, safety, fuel economy, comfort, and convenience. Reliability scores come from our Annual Auto Survey. We also show the percentage of each carmaker's tested vehicles that we recommend. We revised our methodology this year, now giving equal weight to reliability and test scores. Previously, test scores carried more weight. So the overall scores are not directly comparable with last year's. We also had insufficient data on one brand we included last year, Mitsubishi.

Asian makes lead the pack
Honda, including its Acura division, has had the best reliability record of any manufacturer and has made mostly good to outstanding vehicles. The subcompact Fit, midsized Accord, and Acura MDX SUV have been at or near the top of their categories for years. In fact, no Honda product scores less than average in reliability. But some new Hondas have been unimpressive, including the CR-Z and Insight hybrids, which didn't score well enough in our tests to be recommended. The redesigned Odyssey, still our top-ranked minivan, dropped a few points in our testing.

Subaru, which has the highest average road-test score, makes only about a half-dozen models, but almost all do well in our road tests and have been reliability stalwarts. The Forester is a top-rated small SUV, and the Legacy, a good-performing sedan, has improved with each generation. Only one model, the sporty Impreza WRX, has below-average reliability.

Toyota, Lexus, and Scion models remain solid choices overall, but some newer Toyotas have slipped in interior fit and finish, with the Sienna minivan and Venza wagon being two recent examples. Two Toyotas, the subcompact Yaris and the FJ Cruiser SUV, have shown superb reliability but scored too low in our road tests for us to recommend them.

Hyundai's overall road-test score is a bit higher than last year's and could further improve with the impressive new models we are now testing.

Ford rules Detroit
Ford has outpaced its crosstown rivals in reliability in recent years. In our road tests, we have been impressed by current Fords such as the Fusion, Flex SUV, and Mustang. Even the new small Fiesta drives nicely. But the Ford Escape and Edge SUVs are nothing special, the large Ford Taurus has limited visibility, and the touch-sensitive controls in some new Fords and Lincolns are difficult to use.

Newer GM vehicles
such as the Buick Enclave and LaCrosse, and the Chevrolet Equinox and Traverse, have done well in our road tests and have average reliability. The new Chevrolet Cruze performed well in our tests, but reliability remains to be seen. The below-average reliability of some Cadillac and GMC models hurts the automaker's overall score, as did subpar older models such as the Chevrolet Impala sedan, Colorado pickup, and the outgoing Aveo subcompact.

Europe is mixed
If front-seat comfort, fit and finish, and driving dynamics were all that counted, European cars would rule the roost. As it is, subpar reliability hounds some European brands. Volkswagen's brand reliability has improved of late, but Audi's spotty reliability brings the combined automaker's score down. If the new Jetta sedan, with its low-grade interior and mediocre fuel economy, is an indication of where Volkswagen is headed, it's going in the wrong direction. Mercedes-Benz and BMW, with below-average reliability, are near the bottom of our ranking. Their SUVs, especially, had reliability problems, according to our survey, despite being good performers. And although the BMW 1 Series has an excellent road-test score, it is hobbled by terrible reliability.

DMara wrote: »

Here we go again, the dick argument :biggrin:

Fixed!

gdb

mrbiron wrote: »

Yeah!! Lets pray GM goes down the tubes.....Send all of our money oversees for everything!! :rolleyes: Riiiiiiiiight

I love the talks about about 90's Cavaliers. "I won't buy another Chevy product because of that bum car". Hilarious! I ate an apple with a bruise on it and swore off fruits for the rest of my life!

Interiors have plastic and isn't crisp....it's a Chevy/GM not a Ferarri. Wow this is all mind blowing stuff here. Where's my carbon fiber?....WHERE!?!

Seriously people......

The voice of reason ! ^^^^^^

sucks2beme

Jstas wrote: »

But go ahead and keep using your anecdotal evidence, based on your individual experience with 1 car out of millions

So I should dismiss input from a bunch of relatives and my own cars
and go with the stats? Not damn likely. In total, there was about 10
of us that bailed on GM cars. These weren't guys that tried one and
didn't like it. About half of them were true GM diehards that would
NEVER buy a Japanese car(something about WWII, you might of heard about it?) and weren't likely to own a Ford.
They all went Ford, myself included. The one uncle had a new Caddie every
2 years since 1948. After two that were in and out of the shop, he went
Lincoln in the late 90's. At the time both the Caddies maybe had 5k on them
when he dumped them.

I think the new Corvettes and Camaro's are great.
Some of the new ones like the Cobalt get great reviews and the people
that own them are very happy. Yes, that's "anecdotal evidence".
As far as Malibu or Impala, The latest crop may be alright, but
I won't be the one risking the $20-30k to see.

AsSiMiLaTeD

Jstas wrote: »

But, they don't. They are just about even. The problem is that for many years, Ford and GM outproduced Toyota and Honda by drastic amounts. When you look at the actual statistics, for all the many thousands of people that Ford and GM affected with bad cars, their error rates were right there with Toyota and Honda. .

I'm hesitant to event start down this road because I know the inevitable outcome, but stats I've seen from JD Powers and the like actually show that the RATE of defects is higher in some brands vs others. For example, Ford is typically above GM in that list (as in they have fewer defects per car), bust still below Toyota and Honda, in that they have, on average, more defects per car.

I'm not going to get drwan into an argument or further discussion and I know 'what counts as a defect' and all the standard arguments like that, I've said my piece and that'll be my last words on the subject.

rdb2001

Well through personal experiences I will pick chevy over ford anyday of the week. I have had two fords in my life. Started with a contour and had a 2003 Lincoln lS V8. Both stayed in the shop. The lincoln ls I think was the worst and that was the worst piece of junk I have ever seen in my life. I will never forget when the throttlebody went out and stranded me on the interstate in 5pm traffic. The toy truck guy that towed me in said, Man I tow at least 1 or 2 of these in a week. That was enough for me. Hell my sister had a 06 nissan maxima that was babied to the tee, and the transmission went out at 65000 miles. I know drive an 07 avalanche that I bought new in 07. My wife drives one of the new malibu's. Its an 08 LTZ we bought in 08. The avalanche has 60000 and the the malibu 45000. Knocking on wood, they have been great cars. Outside of gas mileage, I absolutely love my avalanche. It has one of the smoothest rides ever. The truck just floats. As others of have stated, I think all car makers are close in reliablility. I think personal experiences are why people chose what they chose. Everybody makes a lemon. You just dont want to be the one that gets it.

Jstas

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

I'm hesitant to event start down this road because I know the inevitable outcome, but stats I've seen from JD Powers and the like actually show that the RATE of defects is higher in some brands vs others. For example, Ford is typically above GM in that list (as in they have fewer defects per car), bust still below Toyota and Honda, in that they have, on average, more defects per car.

I'm not going to get drwan into an argument or further discussion and I know 'what counts as a defect' and all the standard arguments like that, I've said my piece and that'll be my last words on the subject.

You have to look at what the numbers mean. You also have to look at the sample sizes and survey criteria. Places like JD Powers and Consumer Reports and such cite trade secrets for their surveys and never list any of the information about how they collected data and compiled the information to get the stats they produce. You have no idea what's weighted how and where the data actually comes from.

So when you tell me there is a difference, I wonder how much of a difference there is. Mainly because when I see survey results where the numbers are within a couple percentage points of each other for different companies, it makes me question the results. Mainly because without knowing the statistical weighting of the data points, how the data was gathered and where it came from then I don't know what critical things like "margin of error", "mean data values", any control group information and what constitutes an invalid survey result.

When stuff like that is a concern for me and I see result like the 2007 survey by JD Powers I believe it was where the top 10 manufacturers, Asian, European and American alike are separated by .5 percentage points then to me, that says that they are equal because .5% is reasonable to assume that it would be covered by a margin of error and thereby negated in the survey.

My gripe isn't about people and their stupid opinions. My gripe is that people routinely offer their own opinion as fact and then further offer these magical surveys with secret methods off deduction unbeknownst to the logical world as proof that their opinion (as if it really mattered) is legitimate and based in fact. Especially when we all know damn well it isn't because if that same person that you agree with now bashed something you liked later on, you'd jump their junk in an instant to tell them how wrong they were and then offer those same flawed results from those same statistical companies as proof to the contrary.

You really want stats that matter, get the prospectus documentation offered to investors and potential investors for the companies you are comparing. They are often filled with hard numbers, of course in a fancy wrapper to entice you in to shoveling your money their way. But, you can be sure that people who have that kinda money to throw around are not interested in losing it. Therefore that investment documentation and yearly report better be honest or there's going to be a visit from the Securities and Exchange Commission.

And that "you" is the generic "you", not you specifically.

tonyb

Heck, I've owned plenty of american made cars, none, let me say that again, NONE, have been as dependable as their foreign competition. Thats not to say they can't make a good car, because they can and have, but few and far between in my book. Thats also not to say foreign cars have lemons too, but no nearly as much as American cars.
Surprisingly yet, so many foreign cars are build...here. Which leads me to believe one side has the better buisness model.

Regardless, didn't mean for this to morf into a pissing match between Ford and Chevy. Just wanted to point out the lie on the warranty issue.

AsSiMiLaTeD

Hah, you should know you can't post anything auto related without this type of argument breaking out...

I'm so beyond the point of caring anymore, I realized long ago how dumb these arguments are and how they turn otherwise intelligent people into raving, raging lunatics. It's just dumb.

I'm gonna buy whatever I like. If the f*cker breaks down or looses half it's resale value in 2 weeks then so be it, I'm gonna enjoy it while it works. We always have new cars and always have a warranty, and the kinds of cars I like tend to hold their resale value anyway. The only thing along those lines that I will look at is safety, if I go careening into another car I'd like a decent chance of survival.

I was caught in the whole "must buy Toyota, need reliable car" mindset for long enough, and while it never failed me, I'm just done with that. I'm gonna buy whatever I want and if it ends up being a giant piece of **** then so be it.

Having said all that, both the cars we own (a 2010 4Runner and a2011 Infiniti M) are both Japanese, but reliability and resale value didn't factor into the buying decision. The 4Runner had the right mix of on and off road capability (the new Jeep GC had not come out yet) and the Infiniti had the right mix of performance and comfort. Before the Infiniti we had a BMW 5 series 'loaner' which was an excellent driving machine, but lacked some of the comfort and refinement we wanted (as in we hated the interior). We also drove the Challenger which felt very 'disconnected' like driving a boat and the Camaro which felt more involved but not very comfortable, we skipped the Mustang because every chick in Texas drives one...ugh.

gdb

But Mitsubihi.......they bombed Pearl Harbor

tonyb

Yeah, we men take our iron seriously.

Look, buy whatever tickles you, your right,nobody gives a f#$K. However, the ones that do, don't have the coin to keep buying a new car every couple years so a tad more thought goes into that decision for alot of people. Personally, I've been down that "I don't care" route,and it cost me a small fortune. Never again. Some of you guys put more thought into your 1000 buck piece of audio gear than a 30-40g car. Thats of coarse if your actually buying the vehicle and not just leasing a new one every few years. Then I can see where you wouldn't give a crap. Having a hassle free car for many years is of value to me anyway, and in my experiences, G.M. doesn't fit into that catagory.

AsSiMiLaTeD

Whoa there, I never said I didn't put any thought into what I buy. I said I'm done playing the 'buy reliable toyota' game. Alot of thought and research goes into whatever I buy, but alot less of that now revolves around 'oh my god what's the most reliable vehicle' and more around 'is it what I really want'. A Lexus may have been a more reliable choice than the Infiniti, but the ones we looked at were boring and not fun to drive, so we opted for the Infiniti. The Lexus IS-F is very nice though....

I will likely never own a Kia, Hyndaui, GM, etc, not because they're unreliable or 'more defective' but because they simply dont make a car that interests me.

That was my point.

mantis

Suck it Chevy.

exalted512

mantis wrote: »

Go suck it GM.

mantis wrote: »

GM go SUCK IT!!!!

mantis wrote: »

Suck it Chevy.

srsly?
-Cody

sucks2beme

When I was a teen, you were either a Ford, GM or Mopar guy.
And the other guys sucked. The only difference is there's a couple more
players in the game. Get over it.

sucks2beme

Sorry, I forgot AMC. Your grandmother bought those.