Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There have been some exceptionally good detroit products over the last 3 decades that are worthy of mention. One was the 4.9 liter straight 6, the 300 CID you mention. What it lacked in get up and go and top end it made up for in spades with its longevity and low end torque. It was an incredibly good engine. I believe ford relegated those to agricultural duty after 1996.
THEY were a perfectvengine for those that wanted a simple workhorse engine. And while it didn't offset the weaknesses of the rest of the truck too numerous to mention, the motor was brilliantly simple. It seems whenever one of the auto manufacturers makes something right they find a way to kill it. The Chrysler, yes, Chrysler slant 6, 225 inthe 70's found in the dart and vans was a good motor as well. Simple with good longevity.
It seems they could make another great STRAIGHT 6 with railed fuel injection once more for those of us who would pay a slight premium for reliability. I'm not sure they understand that buyers are keeping cars longer as wages are not keeping pace with car prices. More and more of us are considering keeping cars much longer than before. While planned obsolescence has never strayed far from the minds of all US manufacturers, they would be well served to think like Toyota who spent 30 years convincing me they were the right choice.
I am not alone. In 1990 GM products were 62% of the products on the road. Today? 22% give or take. 22 year slide towards oblivion. If the shrinking 3 would go back to making a more reliable product with a good, simple engine and automatic transmission I think they could start to reverse the trend. Use technology to meet the EPA numbers and accept a 10-15 year stint in the consumer woodshed until you get things right. Steal toyotas best and brightest, raise the white flag, and start to copy their success. Hyundai did and in 25 years they went from laughable to a real contender and definitely winners of most improved award?
Until THAT day, it's Toyota across the board. I own the 99 Camry, soon to get my third after the last 21 years on the last two (daughter needs a car, guessvwhatbshe is getting?) as I pass his one down. Starting the NEXT generation off right. Again, big shrinking three, you forgot we, the consumers, are teaching the next generation of buyers to avoid you at all cost, not your commercials and dealer networks. Word of mouth is a....biotch? A2008 Siena (OUTSTANDING VEHICLE, BEAUUUUUTIFUL V6), 04 dodge quad cab with issues, 01 f150 with electrical issues, and a 99 maxima. Japs are winning 3-2 and it looks very much like my trucks will be replaced with a Tacoma and tundra respectively.
The shrinking three need to go back to work and make good products backed by no BS guarantees and quit being pension companies that make cars part-time.
Toyota, oh what a feeling! The former big 3? Na na na naaah, hey hey hey, goooooood bye...
My wife has a 2010 Rav 4 V6 that has been quite reliable, and is quite comfortable on the road. The V6 produces 270 HP, which paired to a 5-speed automatic transmission does very good on fuel consumption (somewhere around 29 MPG on the open road, and around 22 in the city).
I have a 1987 Civic Si that has over 260,000 on the odometer. It's parked now with a broken timing belt, but plan to repair it in the summer after the snow melts Has been a very good car, and in the '80s I drove it from Vermont to Alaska
Also drive a 1988 GMC Sierra 4x4 step-side truck with a 350 TBI motor, with a 5-speed manual transmission This one was sort of remodeled (body and interior) by the previous owner, and the motor was rebuilt from the ground up by a local shop (now has around 9,000 miles on the motor). It has headers and a few other bells and whistles. And yes, it burns fuel, but it's quite a nice and dependable ride.
Toyota makes very reliable cars and trucks that hold their value well. Just look at the used Toyota vehicles in the market. Even used these are expensive.
Don't hold up the Ford Taurus OF ANY ERA as the bastion of American reliability. I have never seen ANY model that has had the problems with disposable transmissions as the 1996-2005 models.
My friend built a new transmission shop AND PAID FOR IT in four years just repairing blown Taurus and Windstar transmissions.
It's not much worse than any other transmission out there as you would see if you visited a Taurus forum. They actually take care of their cars and have had few transmission problems.
There have been some exceptionally good detroit products over the last 3 decades that are worthy of mention. One was the 4.9 liter straight 6, the 300 CID you mention. What it lacked in get up and go and top end it made up for in spades with its longevity and low end torque. It was an incredibly good engine. I believe ford relegated those to agricultural duty after 1996.
THEY were a perfectvengine for those that wanted a simple workhorse engine. And while it didn't offset the weaknesses of the rest of the truck too numerous to mention, the motor was brilliantly simple. It seems whenever one of the auto manufacturers makes something right they find a way to kill it. The Chrysler, yes, Chrysler slant 6, 225 inthe 70's found in the dart and vans was a good motor as well. Simple with good longevity.
It seems they could make another great STRAIGHT 6 with railed fuel injection once more for those of us who would pay a slight premium for reliability. I'm not sure they understand that buyers are keeping cars longer as wages are not keeping pace with car prices. More and more of us are considering keeping cars much longer than before. While planned obsolescence has never strayed far from the minds of all US manufacturers, they would be well served to think like Toyota who spent 30 years convincing me they were the right choice.
I am not alone. In 1990 GM products were 62% of the products on the road. Today? 22% give or take. 22 year slide towards oblivion. If the shrinking 3 would go back to making a more reliable product with a good, simple engine and automatic transmission I think they could start to reverse the trend. Use technology to meet the EPA numbers and accept a 10-15 year stint in the consumer woodshed until you get things right. Steal toyotas best and brightest, raise the white flag, and start to copy their success. Hyundai did and in 25 years they went from laughable to a real contender and definitely winners of most improved award?
Until THAT day, it's Toyota across the board. I own the 99 Camry, soon to get my third after the last 21 years on the last two (daughter needs a car, guessvwhatbshe is getting?) as I pass his one down. Starting the NEXT generation off right. Again, big shrinking three, you forgot we, the consumers, are teaching the next generation of buyers to avoid you at all cost, not your commercials and dealer networks. Word of mouth is a....biotch? A2008 Siena (OUTSTANDING VEHICLE, BEAUUUUUTIFUL V6), 04 dodge quad cab with issues, 01 f150 with electrical issues, and a 99 maxima. Japs are winning 3-2 and it looks very much like my trucks will be replaced with a Tacoma and tundra respectively.
The shrinking three need to go back to work and make good products backed by no BS guarantees and quit being pension companies that make cars part-time.
Toyota, oh what a feeling! The former big 3? Na na na naaah, hey hey hey, goooooood bye...
GM never had a 60% market share. It was 51% at its peak in 1962. Today's market place is much more competitive anyway. On top of that they had what, eight brands back then? You will never see numbers like that again unless companies merge in the future, which is possible. The funny thing is, the Big 3 have actually gained market share in the past few years. In our household Domestics are winning 4-0 and that won't be changing anytime soon. Have fun with your worst in class Tundra, though the Tacoma is very good.
GM never had a 60% market share. It was 51% at its peak in 1962. Today's market place is much more competitive anyway. On top of that they had what, eight brands back then? You will never see numbers like that again unless companies merge in the future, which is possible. The funny thing is, the Big 3 have actually gained market share in the past few years. In our household Domestics are winning 4-0 and that won't be changing anytime soon. Have fun with your worst in class Tundra, though the Tacoma is very good.
62% of the cars rolling does not equate to 62% overall. It's a fact though. In 1990, they had 6.2 CARS out of every 10 on the highways. If they were any good, they would never have shrunk to 2.2/22%. That's not an accident, that's a tradition. The Japanese auto makers just kept quietly gobbling up marketshare. Again, if they were any good overall, why did they almost go bankrupt?
The quality is much, much better today but, still not as good as Toyota or Honda. From fit, finish, reliability, quality, etc....etc....just can't stack up...they just can't.....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Has been a very good car, and in the '80s I drove it from Vermont to Alaska 
