30th Dec 2006, 09:00
I thought Chevy built way less Impalas then Accords... especially Camrys. There should be at least 1.2 million 98-2002 accords alone just in America and probably more Camrys than that. I do not think there are that many Impalas on the road in that small amount of time... but I do not have the production spread sheets so hey, what do I know?
30th Dec 2006, 11:39
"If Chevrolet and Ford stayed smaller like Toyota and Honda all of these years, they would have a much better reputation, too. That's because they wouldn't have as many vehicles on the road and the probability of a lemon emerging would be less likely."
Where do people get this stuff? Ford and Chevy had and have ZERO interest in quality control. My Ford Focus, bought nearly 20 years AFTER Ford started their "Quality is Job 1" campaign had endless recalls and was in the shop 10+ times in three years. NO Japanese car I've ever owned has done that - not a single one from my 1980 Tercel to my current Subaru Impreza.
Remember why Japanese became synonymous with quality in the first place. It was because of an AMERICAN. Dr. Deming took his concepts of just in time and quality control to American companies, mainly car manufacturers, and they REJECTED them since they had NO interest in quality control.
So he went to Japan and the rest is history.
It is foolish to say just because a company is big it must by its nature make inferior products. And just because you are small does not mean you make quality products either, as Rolls Royce, TVR, and countless others prove on a daily basis.
3rd Aug 2007, 09:22
It's ridiculous what you are arguing about! The facts are here on THIS site! Just check them out! Of all the cars that are made now, the newer they are, the worse the quality is. But in the 90s, Japanese cars definitely held the ball in reliability. Sure, there ARE in fact Buicks that were made reliable, and perhaps the 98 Expedition and some other "accidental" decent cars.
But generally Japanese quality is simply superior. In 1989, the 1990 LS400 for Lexus was on the market, HMMMMM I wonder... What was the most high end American car made at that time? Some ugly looking Cadillac I bet with that ridiculous NorthStar engine that wouldn't last 4 years without problems... C'mon there's hype - and there's fact, and hype starts with fact, BTW.
28th Nov 2007, 20:32
My 2007 Honda Ridgeline is a lemon. With only 5,000 miles the trans. light went off.
After a week in the shop, it went off again the day after I got it back.
After the first showdown with the service manager, they then changed the computer.
Two weeks later, they changed the instrument cluster (resulting in a squeaky dashboard).
Round one with the squeaky dash.
Round two with the squeak and also the windshield seal (Honda Corp. even got in on the fun).
Round three with the squeak and windshield seal.
Round four with the same problems (squeak & seal) was especially enjoyable. The dealer scheduled me in, but refused to do anything when I got there.
Honda Corporation has been unbelievable. My regional case manager acts like nothing is wrong, and they are not standing behind their product.
8th Mar 2009, 23:26
I agree, Ford is the only other company that makes sense here with getting another vehicle, we considered the Ridgeline and the F150, but went with the Ridgeline due to options, fuel, safety, reliability, and resale value.
Glad we did, this truck is awesome, and to all you other people who buy a Ridgeline, leave your original oil in until 5000 miles due to a special blend that adheres to the metal. My first thought was to run it for about 1000 and then change it, but don't, the dealer told me to pay attention to the maintenance minder on your dash, and not until 5k. The oil they put in is a special blend of moly, afterward I will run Castrol full synthetic 5w30.
We finally got away from our awful Chevy Blazer 2000 model LT, which I had 4000 in repairs in and only 102k on it. I won't ever buy another. It is no wonder why Chevy is going out of business.
A 2008 Ridgeline and a Subaru Forester 04 is what I have now, and either company makes a quality car. Live in Michigan, get a lot of snow, and the Ridgeline is the best in handling, very wide wheels with them set a long ways away in length.
I don't think you could tip this thing over if you tried! Very happy, my wife was sold as soon as she saw the trunk in our RTL loaded with navigation, power everything, test drive one. If you test drive one, you will buy it. We test drove the F150 Crew, Tundra Crew, and decided for the money this was the best. Read Consumers Reports, it ranks this a solid 79 out of 100 well into the very good category, with almost nothing but solid red down the listing.
For all you people that are bad mouthing this truck, I think either you never drove one or own a domestic or (semi domestic) Mexico, Canada, or wherever else they make them now, 75% of my Honda truck was made in North America Engine in USA, Tranny in Japan, and assembled in Ontario Canada. Must be you are mad already at all your repair bills you've sunk into your truck. Honestly, my old Blazer was like clockwork - every 3 months it was bleeding something.
16th Aug 2009, 22:25
For the American's who are comparing the Ridgeline to the F-150 and the like, STOP. Honda didn't design the Ridgeline to compete with the Big 3 trucks. They designed it to be used by the 95% of people who need less than a Tacoma, but more than a CR-V. The Ridgeline is meant for light to medium duty work. It's not meant to be used for hauling thousands of pounds of dirt or construction materials. It's meant to get Mom, Dad, their 2.4 kids and Fido up to the campsite with a small box camper. It's more utility than it is truck, yes, but it was designed to be that way. If you need a truck with the capability of hauling 10,000 LBS. everyday, then buy a truck with that kind of capability. But don't bad mouth people who buy the Ridgeline for their needs.