Detroit auto makers try some new tricks

Really really.

Fine and dandy. Where did I mention "Honda" above?

Honda hasn't existed an "eon," only about 40 years.

Actually the Riviera wasn't the first GM front-drive, that would have
been the Toronado/Eldorado. And *THOSE* were prowling the roads before
Honda was even *building* cars. The Riv was moved to the FWD platform
some years later. About the time Honda was developing a car with a
rubber docking ring around the rear window and a motorcyle engine under
the hood....

 

Only an idiot would claim that Ford handled the Pinto correctly. That's
a textbook case of a car company MIShandling a problem that was solvable
with a *very* simple design change. Toyota seems to have studied the
text very carefully in the sludge fiasco, which is why I believe that
Toyota is indeed the next General Motors- in EVERY sense of the word.
With the huge size and utter market dominance comes complacency and
we're already seeing it. Sludge, Tundra brakes, Priuses that reboot when
the traction control engages.... But I digress.

What the "Pinto fans" (if there are any left) rightly pointed out was
that the actual engineering change needed for the car was really, really
small, and the car wasn't the grossly defective rolling piece of crap
that it was portrayed to be. But that only serves to highlight how
S-T-U-P-I-D-L-Y Ford dealt with the situation.

 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <>
Newsgroups:
alt.autos.gm,alt.autos.ford,rec.autos.makers.chrysler,alt.autos.toyota
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: Detroit auto makers try some new tricks

The S2000 is RWD. They also do RWD mini-vans in Japan. The first
production Honda, the S500 was also RWD (but by chain....).

There was a reason for this. The market for cars the size of the
original Civic was miniscule before the mid-70's. GM sold many small
cars in Europe before Honda even existed. Admittedly they were RWD,
but then so were Toyotas of the era.

GM's first mass produced FWD car in the US was the Oldsmobile Tornado,
not the Buick Rivera (although the last versions of the Rivera were
FWD as well). The Cadillac El Dorado also went FWD in the 70's. Honda
was not the first to build small fuel efficient FWD cars, but as a
"new" manufacturer they had little incentive to build rear wheel drive
cars. Since they were largely starting from scratch in the car
industry, they had no vested interest in choosing RWD over FWD. I
can't see how you can fault GM for continuing to build cars that sold
relatively well. If anything, GM when overboard in converting cars to
FWD in the 80's.

Ed

 

I flatly believe you're lying.

Oh, the 80s K-cars were about as appealing as beer cans pounded into the
general shape of a car, but the 2.2 engine is not part of their problem
Which is why the turbo-Mopar drag racers can get 400+ horespower out of
it and still drive it to and from the track while getting 25 mpg or
better. The main and rod bearings on that engine are the same size as
the 440 v8 and 426 Hemi v8. If you "warped" a crank-shaft, you did so
because you ran it without oil pressure, and that's your fault.

If you're going to make up failures, please at least make them
believable- like grenading 3 1990 Caravan transmissions. Or cracking 4
cylinder heads on a Reliant with the 2.6L Mitsubishi engine. Or having a
a 1989 Caravan with a 3.0L Mitsubishi v6 that burns a quart of oil per
tank of gas. Those are believable. Or just say you didn't like the 2.2
because it vibrates like a paint-shaker (no balance shafts). That's an
honest complaint about it, and the reason the 2.5 was introduced.

 

I like the Fusion as well... but let's be fair to the Japanese car fans
here- the Fusion is a shared platform between Ford and Mazda, with Mazda
being primarily responsible for the chassis.

 

It seems you'd like to forget Toyota's past problems. Can you do the
same for Domestic brands? It seems to me that Toyota apologist are
always comparing new Toyotas to domestic cars from the 60's and 70's.
I agree that "new" Toyotas don't have the same sludge problem as was
alleged for certain past engines (Toyota/Lexus 3.0L V-6 1997-2001 and
Toyota 2.2L I-4 1996-2001). Also, I am quite willing to believe that
the people who had problems with sludge did not change there oil every
3000 or 5000 miles. It should be noted that in the past Toyota
specified longer drain intervals (I know they were as long as 10,000
miles in the 80's). Before you completely discount the "sludge
whiners," you, and other Toyota owners, should consider why it seems
certain Toyotas have sludge problems more than other brands (or even
Toyotas from different years and/or with different engines). You
should also consider how harshly Toyota initially treated the "sludge
whiners." Toyotas has repeatedly emphasized the reliability of Toyota
vehicles. Surely you can see why some people might whine when their
supposedly bullet-proof Toyota failed becasue of sludge when it was
treated the same as some old domestic iron. Some Chryslers and VWs
shared the problem, but by and large it was a Toyota-centric problem.
Do you think the people who bought the allegedly sludge prone Toyotas
were especially stupid, or much less likely to do routine maintenance,
than people that bought other cars, or who bought Toyotas from other
periods? Even Toyota Reports...err I mean Consumer Reports,
acknowledged that there was a problem. I'll make you a deal - I won't
mention Toyota and Sludge together in any reply to you, if you don't
bring up any problems with Doemstic products from more than 5 years
ago in any discussions with me.

September 15, 2007. Listen at
http://www.cartalk.com/Radio/Show/04.smil . The call was not for a new
Toyota.

......

As far as I can tell Toyotas are not significantly diffrerent than
other brands. Toyota apologist often discount horror stories about
Toyotas as either over blown or the Customers fault. Similar horror
stories about domestic brands are often treated as proof that domestic
cars are horrible, There is a clear double standard at work. Hundreds
of thousands of Toyota trucks were recalled becasue of ball joint
failure that have killed at least 7 people and no one notices. Less
that 1000 Focus SVTs are recalled becasue the cruise control cable can
detach and the Toyota crowds considers this is proof that domestic
cars are junk. It is my opinion that Toyota does everything it can to
deny problems. When that doesn't work they try to blame the owners.
And when all else fails, they work to divert attention. Try to get a
list of Toyota TSBs for your car - it is not easy. Try it for a
Chevrolet - no problem.

Toyota dealers are rated as having Customer service similar to Ford
and Chevrolet dealers (actually a little worse). The Toyota sales
departments around Raleigh are on my "do not consider list." The
nearest Toyota dealer I will talk to is in Henderson (40 miles away).

http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2007112

As far as I can tell, Toyota is doing well despite their horrible
Customer service. I still shudder when I remember my last visit to one
of the local Toyota delaers to buy a part (admittedly a long time ago
now). If they had pulled a gun on me, it would not have been much
worse.

Ed

 

IIRC, they did the same thing some ten years earlier with the Mustang on a
$25 part.

I know GM did something similar on my Avalanche. They decided it cost $50 in
parts/labor to add a glove compartment light to the truck in '02. By '04,
the light was gone. Hence, my $34,000 '06 does not have the $50 part.

 

I've heard those vans often take on Z28s.

http://www.turbovan.net/van.html

LOL!

 

Pinto Fan Here! I owned two. Both got the gas tank fixes. In my
opinion, the only thing stupid Ford did was fight an outrageous
lawsuit and loose. Pintos were not particularly fire prone, no matter
what the faux history suggests. And you are incorrect when you imply
that the changes made were "really, really small." There was not one
relatively minor change made to satisfy the critics - three things
were done - 1) the filler pipe was lengthened, 2) the filler pipe to
body attachment point was reinforced, and 3) a polyethylene shield was
added underneath the gas tank. During the first trial Ford presented
crash test results for a number of cars that had gas tank located in
the same place (behind the rear axle, under a separate floor panel)
that demonstrated that not only did the Pinto meet all applicable
Federal Safety Standards, but that it performed better in crash tests
than many other contemporary vehicles. You should contrast the Pinto
with the Chevette. Early US Chevettes had a much worse record of fires
following rear end collision than Pintos but no one ever thinks of
Chevettes as fire bombs. Why is this? Mostly because GM never let a
lawsuit go to trail.

Ed

 

The 1978 Ford Fiesta was imported from Ford of Germany. The Festiva
was much later, and was made by Kia (back when Ford had a cooperative
arrangement with them, before Hyundai took them over). I had a Fiesta
-- nice car, gutsy 1.6 L engine. A little too small though.

Corolla in 1983, Tercel 1980, Camry in 1983.

 

I've never seen that type of hood support. I guess this means that I'm
very middle class. So what kind of car would come with this spring
type support? Sometging in the $75k range? Oh wait a minute - that's
what used to be in cars all the time. DOH!

That's like a comedian I heard the other day talking about the latest
text messaging devices that will come with voice recognition - you speak
and it takes the message you speak and sends it to the other person.
They already have that - it's called a telephone!!

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

And the Passport they borrowed from Isuzu. Oh, and the current S2000.

Toronado, 1966. Riviera was rwd until 1979.

 

Funny - I read her post the opposite from what you did. I read it as
"I'm no engineer - like you are an engineer..." I guess only she can
say what she meant.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

We had spring supports on the old Chevy II, but not the Corvair. I've had
prop supports ever since, including on the S-10.

Charles of Schaumburg.

 

Hah! I still remember the TV ads with the front half of a Citation
(with a hidden support under the rear of that front half) propelling
itself along with its front wheels, and everyone was supposed to
ejaculate "How the heck is that car propelling itself!!".

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Um, this is not a site, dude(?) it's a newsgroup. Also, unmoderated, which
accounts for the excess OT stuff. I've seen hyperbole regarding Toyotas,
but I have yet to see anyone say they're perfect all the time. I think
you're doing some selective memory stuff.

Been reading posts here for about a year, been responding to some for
a few months, and I seen several, that state EXACTLY that, or very
close to it. Probably the reason I started posting here myself. just
to add a little balance. Not very likely, but there MAY be someone out
there he reads this stuff and thinks "Japanese is great, American is
junk" and believes it. The poor soul has probably already been
negativly infuenced by articles he has read in Consumer Reports.

*** Um, no, they're going by what their friends, relatives and other Toyota
owners have said. But I agree that one should never lump all products in
one category or another - they need to look at the class and record of a
vehicle, though.

Naw, just the truth.

In your domestic-colored glasses, apparently.

GM bugs me to death on recall notices if I dont return the car for
repairs. Guess I'm just special, maybe because I have bought more than
a couple of cars from them.


*** You're the only one they have left - they can't lose you! hehehe Just
messing with you. Couldn't resist.


*snipping what CR didn't respond to for brevity*

Natalie

 

Couldnt resist, so I went out and checked the odometers of three Chevy
Cavaliers my kids and/or their spouces own. The three vechicles total
a little over 570000 miles combined, two of them are over 200000
miles. They run them to death almost every day. All three have
original engines and transmissions. I guess these cars qualify as
being "low-end". Chevy must have done something right with these
veheicles, as they sold a whole bunch of them.

***I'm glad they improved the Cavalier - my hubby's '85 was a total POS.

I believe my kids could attest to that statement.

***As can mine.

Natalie

 

<>
"Wickeddoll®"
wrote:

OK, how about the TI@@ne problems the Tundras have been having?

Coach Rose

Show some proof that Toyota blamed the customer.

Natalie

 

"jor"
Some O :

Hubby's Scion xA has *terrible* blind spots. I hate the stiff feel of the
thing, too. But he likes it, so that's what counts.

Natalie

 

"Bill Putney" ..

LOL but it's free - usually.

A long-distance call might cost more than the cost of monthly unlimited
text, depending on how you use it.

Personally, text-messaging is a pain in the ass for me, but my kids swear
they can't live without it.

They make fun of me if they see me texting, because I use my *fingers*
instead of my thumbs. "Mom, that's so 90s!"



Natalie