That is good to hear that american quality is that high. I know for my next sedan it will most likely be the CTS (I would love to have the V at the end but that may not be financially responsible).
I do love my chevy (first one) and I am pretty hooked on them. I have always known chevy trucks were the trucks to get but never really put to much thought into the cars.
Location: siberia or some place with similar weather
Posts: 253
Re: Interesting info on auto makers
I've got a CTS with 10,000 miles and my clothes STILL smell like leather after driving in it for an hour or two. You get in and the smell rolls out and greets you, relaxes you. The smell of the car is worth the MSRP. I wonder what a Bentley or a Rolls smells like? CTS sure smells better than any German car i've ever been in, even an S-class benz. Not as good as the big MB, but smells better.
Anyway, we're the only country on the planet with a media that works to lower our percpetion of ourselves and our products. Watch Top Gear and see how Clarkson smooches up to Euro and Brit cars, watch japanese car things on youtube and learn than an RX7 is actually better than a Ferrari.
But here in the US, our press bashes our cars and as someone mentioned above makes BIG news out of domestic car makers problems, and no news out of their successes. And perception is reality, and our media works hard on building the perception that American=junk.
> Pick the brand from each group that has the highest initial quality.
> Which midsize sedan has the highest initial quality?
> Which large sedan has the highest initial quality?
> Which midsize pickup has the highest initial quality?
I think many people's beef with American cars was not initial quality, but more like "chance of making it to 200K miles". Everyone can trot out their favorite anecdote about what they want to believe, but there's little doubt that for quite a while, GM was turning out, well... crap. Unfortunately, the public's perception of car quality tends to lag the reality by around 15 to 20 years (since you still see the old cars around), so while GM has improved by leaps and bounds since then, and makes a lot of good stuff now, they're still being penalized for the horrible crap they cranked out in the 80's. For quite a while, Toyota was just hammering GM relentlessly on quality. GM has done a commendable job of closing the gap, and has some standout individual brands (and some poor individual brands), but perception needs time to catch up. And in fact, a number of GM brands still lag the industry average in longer term dependability.
Also it still seems like you can get a nicer interior and better quality materials for the same money from Toyota or Honda. This makes some degree of sense since it costs GM more to make the same car than it costs Toyota - that money has to be made up somewhere. Obviously some of it comes from GM hemorrhaging money, but some also comes from "value-engineering" the cars half to death.
I want to see GM succeed as much as anybody, but pretending there are no problems does no one any favors. If GM wants to make it through their next 100 years, they've got to face some tough issues.
Watch Top Gear and see how Clarkson smooches up to Euro and Brit cars
If you ever watch Top Gear episodes that have nothing to do with the Corvette, or any other U.S. made car, you'll see they verbally trash European made cars all the time, including British made vehicles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by K M
Funny thing about that is I've had friends who are also into cars tell me that an Rx7 is better than the Z for racing. I just shook my head.
In a manner of speaking, that's true. Mazda's support for amateur racing is far beyond that of GM's, which is practically non-existent. Note: that statement is not intended to make a comparison between any two vehicles.
Ever notice how people will usually support the opinion of a magazine, TV show or even a relatively unknown and obscure reviewer when the test or review supports their personal belief and opinion. Yet, when the same test or review makes a claim that does not support their belief and opinion they claim the magazine or reviewer/s are “biased”; “have no idea what they are talking about” or "can't drive", etc.
Furthermore, one shouldn't refer to a reviewer or magazine as being biased one day, then turn around and use them in support of their argument the next.
That is called hypocrisy. And it is all too common when discussing tests or reviews’ dealing with things one has an interest and passion for, such as automobiles.
Location: siberia or some place with similar weather
Posts: 253
Re: Interesting info on auto makers
Quote:
Originally Posted by novetteyet
> Pick Unfortunately, the public's perception of car quality tends to lag the reality by around 15 to 20 years (since you still see the old cars around), so while GM has improved by leaps and bounds since then, and makes a lot of good stuff now, they're still being penalized for the horrible crap they cranked out in the 80's.
Also it still seems like you can get a nicer interior and better quality materials for the same money from Toyota or Honda. This makes some degree of sense since it costs GM more to make the same car than it costs Toyota - that money has to be made up somewhere. Obviously some of it comes from GM hemorrhaging money, but some also comes from "value-engineering" the cars half to death.
.
Awesome point on the 15-20 years. It was the 70's and 80's when American cars really blew, but the "americna cars suck" thing didn't get popular until the early 90's. It lingers today past its time.
I don't agree on the Japanese interiors. Today GM has among the nicest looking interiors at alot of price points, while Toyota and Honda seem to be getting techy and odd. And rattly if its a Camry. To automatically knock GM interiors is partly, I think, a function of this being the habit of the press for many years and people are prone to going along with what others say to aovid looking dumb. For example, if you made the exact same interior but shoved it in a BMW, a Toyota, and a Chevy, then blind polled 1000 people each and asked them how nice it was I have ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that the % of people rating it highly would go
1. bimmer
2. yota
3. chebby
The time to really bash american products was years ago, when they actually were much below standard. Today its time, IMHO, to get behind the domestics because lets face it, every time you buy an import you ship $10k or $100k or whatever out of the country to somewhere else. That cash circulates there instead of here, and we in this country are all worse off.
The rest of the world is biased for themselves and against imports, especially american ones. We, the biggest concentration of buying power on earth still, should at least give our own products a fair shake.
Location: siberia or some place with similar weather
Posts: 253
Re: Interesting info on auto makers
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Doubt
If you ever watch Top Gear episodes that have nothing to do with the Corvette, or any other U.S. made car, you'll see they verbally trash European made cars all the time, including British made vehicles.
I do not agree even 1% at all if you are suggesting that they aren't biased towards euro cars in general and brit cars in particular. AND THEY SHOULD BE, they're british for gods sake.
Quote:
In a manner of speaking, that's true. Mazda's support for amateur racing is far beyond that of GM's, which is practically non-existent. Note: that statement is not intended to make a comparison between any two vehicles.
Ever notice how people will usually support the opinion of a magazine, TV show or even a relatively unknown and obscure reviewer when the test or review supports their personal belief and opinion. Yet, when the same test or review makes a claim that does not support their belief and opinion they claim the magazine or reviewer/s are “biased”; “have no idea what they are talking about” or "can't drive", etc.
Furthermore, one shouldn't refer to a reviewer or magazine as being biased one day, then turn around and use them in support of their argument the next.
That is called hypocrisy. And it is all too common when discussing tests or reviews’ dealing with things one has an interest and passion for, such as automobiles.
Go to ANY reference for long-term vehicle ownership/maintenance/repair frequency, and simply compare the "ratings" for a Toyota Matrix vs. a Pontiac Vibe...any year/model...
Tell me what you find...
SAME damn cars, made in the SAME plant (Fremont CA [Canadian Matrix versions from Cambridge for certain years]), by the SAME workers installing the SAME parts, radios excepted...
BIAS? Draw your own conclusions...
You don't find Toyota offering a 5/100 Powertrain Warranty WITH Roadside AND Courtesy Vehicle, do you? At more attractive interest rates, generally?
Then, take a look at Sales Figures...
BIAS? Draw your own conclusions, again...
__________________ PowerPro01 sez "STAY TUNED"................ GarettO's the SigGod! "NOTHING Matters...until you CARE..." Bob Gibson If RACING was EASY, they'd call it WINNING ! Anonymous
Last edited by PowerPro01 : 09-17-2008 at 03:16 PM.
I do not agree even 1% at all if you are suggesting that they aren't biased towards euro cars in general and brit cars in particular. AND THEY SHOULD BE, they're british for gods sake.
Did I say biased? Did I use the word "biased"? No, I didn't. I said "they verbally trash Eurpoean made cars all the time", and they do.
U.S. automobile magazines for example trash U.S. made cars as well. There is no bias. I have always stated there is no bias. Magazines do not bias reviews, as that would not be journalistic integrity. They test and review vehicles and offer the results as well as their opinion, both good and bad as the case may be. The same is true for Top Gear.
The only "bias" stems from a viewer or readers own perception, beliefs and desires, etc. Hence, one can presume that readers and members of this forum either own or are interested in Corvettes and the Z06 in particular. Thus, there is a clear 'bias' shown in favor of those cars over others and anything that is stated as a negative is often met with disdain for the one making the statement.
When a magazine or TV series claims they like a certain car it does not mean they are 'biased' toward that car, its manufacturer or country of origin. It is nothing more than their subjective opinion, although it may be based on objective and empirical data as well.
By its very nature, this forum and others like it are inherently biased. Therefore, to call a TV show that is intended to be both educational and entertaining "biased" is hypocrisy of the first order. The same can be said for calling magazines biased.
Simply put, Corvette owners are biased toward Covettes. Surprise! So, to call something or someone else "biased" is, once again, being a hypocrit.
Location: siberia or some place with similar weather
Posts: 253
Re: Interesting info on auto makers
No doubt: "there is no bias, magazines do not bias reviews as that would not be journalistic integrity".
For 1, its outside of the sphere of human possibility to not have some bias, and for 2, are youb eing serious or just arguing for the sake of argument again because thats what you enjoy? (not that theres anything wrong with that). You can't be serious, the mags are pages of bias, sometimes bought and paid for.
Bias is of course not represented by any individual review, but by patterns across the whole of someones review.
PowerPro: where can I look up statistics like you mention? I don't doubt that the Vibe gets worse reviews and ratings, but i'd love to see it for msyelf.
Go to google, or join/buy Consumer Reports, or Consumer Best Buys, or any other source of supposedly unbiased auto data...
As a matter of fact, to "prove" journalistic integrity, or rather the lack of it, Consumer Reports was forced to admit, last year, they would no longer give Toyota products "automatic" Approved status, a practice they "enjoyed" doing for some time... This came to light after they admitted the '07 Camry was "rated" without benefit of specific data for a substantially-changed product...
The key criteria today should be "VALUE"...what you pay, under what circumstances, not only initially but also throughout the vehicle's intended usage period.
The "imports" have done a terrific job of moving periodic expenses from the "repair" column to the "maintenace" column. Things like cam belts...I don't care if something costs $1,000 as a "maintenance item" instead of a "repair item"...it's STILL $1,000!!!
Last edited by PowerPro01 : 09-18-2008 at 09:02 AM.
If you go to Consumer Guide and pull up Matrix and Vibe, for some reason the Matrix is considered a "10" for Value, even though it enjoys NINE Trouble Spots to Vibe's FIVE, has lower Resale Values ('03-'05), GREATER RESALE as an '07 even though the Vibe has a 5/100 mile Powertrain Warranty instead of Toyota's 5/60, and Toyota does NOT include Roadside or Courtesy Vehicle over their complete Powertrain Warranty period. Vibe's Value Rating is "9"...
Here in Ontario, at the moment, Toyota's Financing on new '09 Matrix is 5.9%, while the '09 Vibe enjoys 0% for up to 60 months or up to $3,000 incentive IF 72-month financing is done through other-than-GMAC-sources...and their Base MSRP's are within $300 (Vibe within $100 of U.S. Base!) while the Vibe includes 1yr OnStar, Traction Control and StabiliTrak and the aforementioned Warranty advantages...and far more Dealer Service locations coast-to-coast-to-coast, at lower costs, without arm-twisting that "you MUST have your Matrix serviced @ Toyota"...
Perception is Truth???
Last edited by PowerPro01 : 09-18-2008 at 11:21 AM.
AutoForums.com is the premier network of enthusiast-owned
enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
We operate more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share
experiences and opinions as a community.
). 
Linear Mode
