20th Nov 2008, 10:13
Your comment repeated the statement just prior to yours. Lines from Lexus, Infiniti and Acura are still sometimes produced in Japan and certain models from Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen and BMW are manufactured in Japan, Volvo from Sweden. The cars made in their home country have fewer problems. The reason the big 3 are in trouble is because they overpay workers, think they can skimp consumers on the quality they are looking for in a vehicle, overcharge them and now it's costing them BIG.
20th Nov 2008, 14:12
It's people always buying this Japanese junk that's killing big three.
I'm 19 and am the proud owner of a 1998 Ford Crown Victoria. It's safer, better built, and in my opinion better looking than any ugly spaceship-looking Honda.
If more vehicles were constructed with body-on-frame construction and rear-wheel-drive, I believe there would be far less reliability complaints.
Big Three needs to go back to their body-on-frame cars and quit building cheap Japanese wannabees!
If anyone wants to argue about the reliability of a Crown Vic/Grand Marquis/Town Car, go ahead but those little Japanese cars can't hold up to the streets of NYC or police duty like these cars. Just look it up. There was a big safety and reliability issue with these front-wheel-drive econoboxes not being able to take the abuse of a taxi and not being near as safe in a crash. So once again body-on-frame, rear-wheel-drive is tried and true, and the Japanese will never get that!
20th Nov 2008, 17:35
A MAJOR misconception. High fuel costs and a recession are hurting U.S. auto makers, not product quality. Except for Hyundai no import manufacturer has the confidence in their products to offer the same warranty as Ford, GM and Chrysler.
For the 4th straight year, the highest rated car in reliability in the world is a Ford (the Fusion). In a survey of very high-mileage vehicles featured in the October 2007 issue of Consumer Reports, the longest running vehicle with no engine or transmission repairs was a Ford (Ranger truck) with 488,000 trouble-free miles. The one featured with the LOWEST overall miles in that article was a Honda.
Ad hype leads to many urban myths. One of the biggest myths is that U.S. auto companies build less reliable cars than Japanese companies. Not so.
22nd Nov 2008, 01:59
You have your opinion and I have mine. As the owner of both a domestic and import vehicle, long-term ownership costs for my import were far less than that of my domestic car.
Consumer reports are sometimes biased in that they encourage consumers to "buy American," so they get higher reviews.
My '96 GMC Sonoma pickup did last me 225K miles but was nickel and dimed every step of the way. I actually kept my truck serviced and odd things went wrong with it. As soon as I had it out the shop for one thing, something else was falling apart on it. Cheap plastic materials were used inside and pieces began falling off my dashboard for no apparent reason. I'm sure I could've put a down payment on another vehicle with the amount of money I put in repairing that wreck on wheels.
My 1987 Nissan Maxima on the other hand gave 20+ years of reliable service. Even after the car was 20 years old NOTHING was ripped, torn or falling off the dash of my car. Only routine brakes, alignment, tune-up, timing belt, tires and oil change service was done on the car. The biggest irritation was my sunroof that leaked during a heavy ran or a run through the car wash.
I used my car on a 120 mile commute 3 days a week and the car NEVER left me stranded. I can't say the same for the Sonoma, which left me stranded several times, leaving constant doubt in the back of my mind everytime I drove it.
Ford Fusions have not been in production long enough to determine long-term reliability or ownership costs, so that is a poor example to use. I do however see MANY Honda Accord, Civic and Toyota Camry, Corolla models on the road constantly that are 15 years old or more. I see few Ford models on the road that are over ten years old. GM models are better, but not by much, and let's not even talk about Chrysler.
All models from the Big 3, typically with the exception of trucks and SUVs have poor resale values. That is not the case with the Japanese Big 3. The Detroit Big 3 sunk their own ship by mass manufacturing poor quality vehicles using little or no quality controls, then charging a hefty price tag. My uncle purchased a 2006 Cadillac DTS brand new, he wanted to trade the car in earlier this year with 23K miles and was told the trade in value was a mere $25,000!
The Big 3 all deserve to be shut down due to their mismanagement of money, overproduction, badge-engineering and high prices. Sorry to burst your bubble, but high gas prices played only a small part in their failure. Sales have slipped across all model lines for the Big 3. I could see if it was only trucks and SUVs only, but that is not the case. They deserve NOT A PENNY of the taxpayers money. I don't buy the crap coming off their lines anyway!
22nd Nov 2008, 02:08
Also, if the Big 3 were so confident in their products they would not need to offer such a long warranty. I did not purchase an extended warranty beyond the 3yr./36K warranty when I bought my Maxima in '87 and a similar warranty for my 2004 Sentra. NEITHER had major issues even long after the warranty expired.
As for comparing a Ford Crown Vic./Mercury Grand Marquis/Lincoln Town Car to Honda Accord or Toyota Camry, it's like comparing apples and MILK. They're in completely separate classes.
Crown Vics are billed as taxi and police interceptors, while Grand Marquis and Town Cars are marketed in the luxury segment.
Honda and Toyota market cars that are economical, dependable and for those who are not auto-enthusiasts.
Any vehicle with side impact and front impact airbags is a safe car. So yes, Ford big cars are safe, but they are designed for a completely different market than are Hondas and Toyotas.
When shopping for a Honda Accord, few people will cross shop for a Mercury Grand Marquis in deciding which vehicle to purchase.
22nd Nov 2008, 21:38
I haven't seen anyone comparing Crown Victorias with Accords. That would be like comparing a Mercedes to a Yugo. The Crown Vic is light years ahead of any Honda. The Accord should be (and has been) compared to the world-class Fusion. In every comparison the Fusion has come out ahead. My family has owned imports and domestics. No domestic ever required a major repair, including several that went over 250,000 miles, and no import (including a Honda) ever made it to 100,000 miles with the original engine or transmission.
As for "nickle and diming", our current domestics are 8 years old, 6 years old and 2 years old. Our TOTAL expense for all three in the past 8 years has been a whopping $17.
24th Nov 2008, 11:26
A comparison was made between Ford's large cars and Honda models, otherwise the latter would never have been mentioned on here.
Crown Vic and Grand Marquis offer little by the way of standard options, and the option are getting fewer each year. For the price I would pay, I'd pick a Honda over the Ford each day.
Despite what you say about the Fusion coming out atop in all comparison tests, is not true though that is what you would like to believe. In fact, Honda was the best selling model in the U.S. 15 consecutive years and as recently as 2001, where are those stats for the Fusion. The Fusion DOES NOT EVEN RIVAL an Accord nor Civic for annual U.S. sales. You're one of those I can imagine who believes, "A Honda can go 200K with no problems." Not true, if the car is not maintained it will fall apart like any other.
I know from experience that U.S. automakers nickel and dime consumers and they want my money to bail them out, haha, puhhhhLEASE! I hope they fail so they can quit turning out hunks of junk every year at inflated prices.