were american cars ever reliable? (2011, gasket, versus, brake)
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.
i think since like the 90s they would break down a lot compared to japanese cars. or did it begin earlier? i suppose the unions have something to do with this but i wonder if they were good cars during the early years and if they were, what happened?
Why blame the union workers?
The fault was the manufactures wanted them to break down to make money on parts and repairs. I had a friend working for Dodge. He told me how the Japanese had brought over a diesel and said it would be trouble free for 300,000 miles. Dodge said not good enough, it needs to break down in 30,000.
Why blame the union workers?
The fault was the manufactures wanted them to break down to make money on parts and repairs. I had a friend working for Dodge. He told me how the Japanese had brought over a diesel and said it would be trouble free for 300,000 miles. Dodge said not good enough, it needs to break down in 30,000.
The last truly reliable American car I had was a 1962 Rambler Classic. It was tough and bulletproof. Since then, Detroit has gotten progressively worse, and I swore off Detroit FOREVER after I bought the worst car I ever had in 1990. It was a 1990 Plymouth Acclaim. I had more problems with that POS in the first month than my Nissan pickup has given me in 17+ years! The union, corruption upstairs, the dealers, and the zone managers are all lacking in Detroit vehicles. Even if they ever got their act together and would approach Japanese or Korean quality, they will not get my money except through mandatory taxation, which is another reason I will never buy another Detroit POS.
Sunspirit, it's interesting how the '60s cars many people owned contradict your claims. And I don't mean just a dozen. Family members, friends, friends of friends, friends of friends of friends, etc.
You apparently have missed my point that folks who owned/operated FLEETS of vehicles were not able to justify keeping domestic vehicles on the road for more than 2 years/50,000 miles through that 1950's- 1960's era. You may have some anecdotal experience of "friends" ... but my 1st shop's business partner was formerly in Ford corporate fleet sales dept ... and he had personal experience with well over 100,000 vehicles in fleets, not including rental cars ... in the 8 years he was with Ford. Those folks were well aware of their competition and what Ford had to meet or exceed to satisfy their marketplace.
Years later, one of my current flying friends retired from a 30+ year career with Ford Corporate Fleet sales. The experience he relates with Ford (and their competitors) for rental fleets, police and first responder vehicles, and service fleets ... literally, millions of unit sales that he was involved with ... bears out my experience with the cars of the era.
It's also interesting that your claims of Cadillacs contradict those who own them. As for the carbon build-up, many times that is the fault of the owner (many short trips in which the engine isn't allowed to fully warm up). Many owners of Cadillacs were housewives who drove them one mile to the supermarket and back and rarely or never drove their car on the freeway to allow the engine to fully warm up and prevent carbon build-up. Some of them also drove slow, like never going over 40 mph.
I'm not buying your excuse that the poor running of these cars was the fault of the owners via customer abuse. The simple fact is that they had poor intake airflow/distribution, and crappy carburetor set-ups. Proof of the pudding is to look at the huge business that evolved in the aftermarket tuners to improve or correct these problems. If the car was used by little 'ol ladies for local errands ... a large segment of their marketplace, then they could have had adequate heat to the intake manifold and better warm-up cycles on the automatic chokes, as well as better water flow to promote more rapid motor warm up to running temp.
FWIW, during HS, I worked (part time, summers) for Louie Mattar in San Diego. You probably don't know of him ... but his claim to fame was being a shop specializing in Cadillacs. He built up a 1949 Cadillac as "the Fabulous Car", complete with running boards/shower/port-a-potty/clothes washer/hydraulic jacks that could be lowered behind a wheel while the car was running ... and a host of other long distance driving equipment, which was carried on the matching trailer. Louie and friends made a number of historic trips, such as Toronto to Mexico City, or LA to NYC ... without any stops enroute. American-Syrian Lebanese federation "goodwill tours", he was a close friend of Danny Thomas who helped with the international border crossing arrangements and other details. The car was refuled enroute to the trailer, which transferred to the car as needed, and they could change tires while still driving down the road ... usually at airstrips. Anyway, to the point ... I learned to re-line riveted brake shoes and rebuild wheel cylinders at his shop, as well as do a lot of grunt work cleaning parts for all the motors he did valve jobs/ring&valve jobs on. Cadillacs all .... and, I'd bet ... many hundreds more in his clientele than all of your friends and their friends ever have owned through the years.
Okay, your 289 needed a valve job at just over 50,000 miles... do you realize how many 289 engines ran for 100,000 to 200,000 without requiring a valve job?
Indeed, I do. Thanks to my friends who were Ford corporate execs ... I now know that 289's were a frequent victim of dropped valves at sub-100K mileages, and that my car eating an exhaust valve at the mileage it did wasn't unusual. Similarly, my contacts in Fleet operations ... at Public Service Company of Colorado, as well as PG&E ... told me of their experience with many thousands of vehicles through the years. Again, they confirmed that the anticipated economic service life of the cars was a couple of years and 50,000 miles, tops ... after that, the costs of keeping the cars in good repair and functional was far in excess of simply replacing the fleet. If it had been more economic to keep the cars for a longer time frame, they would have done so. FWIW, they also ran tests on routine maintenance issues in the 1960's and 1970's ... and determined that it wasn't even economic to do routine oil and lube services on the fleet cars; it worked out to just top off the oil when needed and lube the cars once a year. They got no better or worse service life out of the cars by aggressive routine & frequent servicing.
Many. Even today, I still see cars at car shows with the original, unrebuilt engine. Like a '70 Dodge Charger with a 383 and A/C. A sign on the engine compartment said "400,000+ miles, engine not rebuilt." And a '68 Chrysler 300... again, over 400,000 miles with the original engine.
And about the Falcon, if you mean '60s and '70s Falcons, you do realize those cars are now 35-45+ years old? Do you really expect to see a lot of cars that age on the street? How many 1920s cars were driving around in the '50s? Very, very few.
I don't expect to see them on the road, but my comments were directed to the concern that they came off the road in droves so quickly.
Incidentally, my '66 Plymouth Fury VIP (383) is 45 years old this year... original engine and transmission and still has plenty of power. And believe me, there are many more examples like that out there.
I won't doubt your assertion that "there are many more examples like that out there" ... but I do know what came off the road and to the boneyards through the years. Many many many more than your examples .... My source? my friends in the towing/wrecking business through the years ... I know what they've sent to the crusher because there wasn't a demand on the vehicles.
BTW, my dad also owned a shop in the '50s and into the '60s and he also dealt with hundreds of cars and owners.
OK, that's great that your dad "also owned a shop in the 50's and 60's. But did you have actual contact with the shop operations? Do you know what parts/materials they went through on a weekly basis? I know what my shop and my competitors were doing for work through the era ... as well as I know what my Dad was doing for extra income (he was an Engineer at Sperry Gyro for his "real" job) at home for many years. We did a lot of valve jobs, for example ... it's where I learned the trade as a small kid.
What's really flying in the face of the industry with your assertions? I've driven by way too many Sears or Monkey Wards auto service stores on weekends for a lot of years in that era ... and seen the cars lined up before they opened up for the day. In those couple of years before I opened up my storefront partnership auto repair shop, I worked part-time at a MWards service center. I saw brakes, shocks, suspension components, mufflers and exhaust systems, and a host of routine tune-up items .... installed by the hundreds every day. That didn't include the JC Penny or PEP Boys or other chain service centers that were nearby, nor the chain muffler centers or the franchised transmission shops.
Why do you think that HS auto shop in that era taught GM automatic transmission overhauls? Because there was a huge demand for techs with training to overhaul them .... every gearhead kid in my HS knew how to do this type of work, which was considered to be a higher value item than doing clutch jobs on cars. If auto transmission work was so rare and unneeded, they wouldn't have focused on such training to the extent that they did.
OK, that's great that your dad "also owned a shop in the 50's and 60's. But did you have actual contact with the shop operations? Do you know what parts/materials they went through on a weekly basis? I know what my shop and my competitors were doing for work through the era ... as well as I know what my Dad was doing for extra income (he was an Engineer at Sperry Gyro for his "real" job) at home for many years. We did a lot of valve jobs, for example ... it's where I learned the trade as a small kid.
What's really flying in the face of the industry with your assertions? I've driven by way too many Sears or Monkey Wards auto service stores on weekends for a lot of years in that era ... and seen the cars lined up before they opened up for the day. In those couple of years before I opened up my storefront partnership auto repair shop, I worked part-time at a MWards service center. I saw brakes, shocks, suspension components, mufflers and exhaust systems, and a host of routine tune-up items .... installed by the hundreds every day. That didn't include the JC Penny or PEP Boys or other chain service centers that were nearby, nor the chain muffler centers or the franchised transmission shops.
Why do you think that HS auto shop in that era taught GM automatic transmission overhauls? Because there was a huge demand for techs with training to overhaul them .... every gearhead kid in my HS knew how to do this type of work, which was considered to be a higher value item than doing clutch jobs on cars. If auto transmission work was so rare and unneeded, they wouldn't have focused on such training to the extent that they did.
Kind of hard to reply when you put your quotes within my quotes, but I'll try...
The reason fleet cars were retired at 50,000 miles is obvious... the replacement car with less miles would be in better condition than the car is replaces. It doesn't mean that the fleet car is useless. In fact, some people would buy retired fleet cars and use it as their daily driver.
It's not a "poor excuse" or any excuse at all when I mentioned carbon build up. We both know that in many instances, owners do not take care of their cars. One friend bought a '66 Ford Fairlane with a 390 V-8. The former owner was an old lady who never drove it over 40 mph. The engine had loads of carbon inside. It was overhauled and there was no carbon problem after that because my friend used the engine as intended... speeds of under and over 40 mph.
As for Cadillacs and valve/ring jobs, I'm sure glad my '69 Cadillac doesn't know about that! (Original, non-rebuilt engine and transmission). Or a friend's '67 limousine, also with the original non-rebuilt engine and transmission. I am a member of the Cadillac-LaSalle club and the above experience is repeated over and over... cars with the original engine and transmissions.
Of course my dad had actual contact with the shop operations... he owned it and was there 5 days a week! He specialized in brakes and front end but did general work, too.
G.M. automatic transmission overhauls? Those were excellent transmissions and would last a long time with proper care (meaning keeping the correct amount of fluid in them and not abusing them). It's not unusual for them to last 10, 15, 20+ years. I should know, I and my family have owned quite a few cars with that transmission (and the excellent Mopar Torqueflite). Again, the transmissions in my '69 and '76 Cadillacs have not been overhauled or rebuilt.
You can go right on thinking that '60s and '70s cars did not last long and I will keep on driving my 45-year-old, 42-year-old and 35-year-old cars! (All of which have not had rebuilt transmissions or engines.)
I was just thinking about this a little while ago...have improved lubricants improved durability any? I imagine motor oil and transmission fluid are far better than they used to be. Just by reading the bottles in the store, the oil is at something like "SM" standard now and when I first heard of this standard, it was "SF" iirc. Likewise with transmission fluid- I remember buying a bottle of Dexron II a long time ago, now there's Dexron III.
There seems to be some confusion on the two posts about the 3.8L / 3800 V6 engines.... I think one person is thinking of the old 3.8L that GM used in the RWD cars like the 78-87 Buick Regal, Olds Cutlass Supreme, Pontiac Grand Prix, Chevrolet Monte Carlo.... those did have some issues... ours failed in our 85 Regal in 1995 at only 90K miles.
However, the 3800 V6 used in the FRONT WHEEL DRIVE mid-size GM cars which I think started in 1988 was a very good engine started to be used in even the bigger cars like the Ninety-Eight, Park Avenue, Bonneville, etc in the late 80s-90s. My 92 Park Avenue had the 3800 and it was a good car.
Sadly, the 3800 Series II engine (which was basically an update of the 3800 series I) that came around the mid-late 90s (1995 to be exact I think) did have some troubles, but nothing really the fault of the actual engine... seems like GM had changed the engine design so that somehow the car would start leaking oil and the way it was designed it was channeled to leak down onto the hot manifolds and catch fire. Check youtube and you will see several late 90s/early 2000s Grand Prix's on fire in the engine bay... same goes for the other GM cars with that engine. There was a recall where the oil leak was channeled to a different direction, but so many were not taken in and have already burned up. Hopefully no more on the road with this woe.
I think 1970 was when Detroit went to no quality control. They were arrogant, and never thought the Japanese would build anything but econoboxes and mini pickups. They didn't care about the small car segment, or small truck segment, as they sold Japanese mini trucks with Detroit badges. The "gas shortage" hit, and people started buying Toyotas, Hondas, and Datsuns, and realized they were very reliable. Detroit was spewing out Vegas, Pintos and Gremlins. UGH! When the Japanese started building bigger cars, people bought them..Detroit did nothing to match the quality of Japanese cars. Throw in the greed, corruption, and bad work ethic of the UAW, beancounters cutting corners, and denial of problems from the dealers and zone reps made the Detroit 3 go down the tubes. Unfortunately not much has changed.
The only Detroit cars I would consider are classics from the early 60s back.
Why blame the union workers?
I had a friend working for Dodge. He told me how the Japanese had brought over a diesel and said it would be trouble free for 300,000 miles. Dodge said not good enough, it needs to break down in 30,000.
total BS. The cummings diesel in the Ram trucks are on top of all diesel reliability lists. 30k miles.. lol.. Your friend is pulling your leg
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.
