Japanese cars are the best

> wrote in message
...
> A car or other vehicle of the same make and model or a coffee pot or
> vacuum cleaner,whatever.

Through high school and college, I worked as a radio and TV repairman.
These were the dark
ages of electronics, in many cases, where printed circuits were being
introduced and were
very troublesome, picture tubes failed after 3-5 years, etc.

Consumer Reports bragged on some of the sorriest crap to come down the pike.
Maybe the
styling was interesting, or the initial picture quality was okay, or some of
the features were
different from the rest, but the quality of some of their recommendations
was purely manure.

I have had doubts about CR from that time. They didnt seem to be doing the
customer a
service in those days.

I hope it is better now.

Some of my opinions about cars are based on my actual experience, not CR.
And they are just
opinions, but to me they are facts until proven different.

I have never cared much for Fords, my classic 57 Thunderbird and my 66
Mustang being possible
exceptions. I cant even rememeber, now, how the 57 rode in comparison with
cars today. The 66
was good for a Ford, but I also remember that it had 'jitter' problems.

I have owned a lot of GM cars, one American Motors, a couple of Passats, one
Dodge van, two
Fiats, plus the early Fords.

There are good (and bad) things to be said about most of them. I have had
more catastrophic failures
with GM cars, and have bitched more about crappy and poorly thought out
engineering on them, than
any other car. I have often said that there must be a special place
reserved in Hell for GM engineers.

But in defense, I have also said that I had rather push a Buick that ride in
a Ford. (strictly from the
standpoint of ride and driver comfort.)

To each his own. There is no easy answer.

My next will be a Toyota Avalon, and my learning curve will continue, I
guess.

>
> Tell you what Boob, when you've got 20 years and 291K miles
> on your Honduh, let us know. Just remember, the first time
> you run into something at over 10mph, they'll write the damn
> thing off...
>
>


Boob? that isn't very nice...
:~)>

I SO wish the 'write the damn thing off' statement was true. Last
summer I was hit in the driver's side door by a full-size late-model
dodge truck. Didn't do a thing to the truck, but I wasn't feeling so
good afterwards and neither was the car!

They fixed it and I am still driving it.
:~(

bob z.

> wrote:
>Somewhat off-topic question:
>Are any high-quality products made in the USA?

Yes, but not any high-quality mass-produced products. Part of the problem
is that labor is expensive in the US, which drives mass production facilities
offshore. Part of the problem is that once you start losing facilities,
you start losing the infrastructure base to support them. Used to be there
were dozens of contract machine shops in my area that did production work
for larger manufacturers, and if I needed something made I could take it to
them. When the big manufacturers go offshore, the small contractors go with
them, and so does the surplus equipment market as well.

>The "american" computers are actually made in
>the far east. The american cell phones are
>horrible. (This problem is due in part to the
>lack of cell phone standards.) The american
>rocket launchers are less reliable than russian
>rocket launchers...
>
>Americans surely make the best computer CPUs,
>the best nuclear bombs, the best movies and music.
>Not much to brag about...

Americans make a lot of high quality products that require skilled labor
and are made individually. That includes things like nuclear bombs, movies
and music, but surprisingly you'll find things like high-grade lenses
and precision parts made in the US. The stuff isn't cheap, but for the
most part American business can't compete when price is the main concern.
That still leaves plenty of other places to compete, if American businessmen
can get their head around where they are.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Nate Nagel > wrote:
>
>He's got a point. But the truth is, I'd rather have a 50 year old
>American car than a 10 year old American car.
>
>oh wait... I really do.

I agree. BUT, I'd much rather have a 10 year old American car than a 25 year
old American car. Things are getting better, even though for a while they
really hit rock bottom.
--scott
(who traded the 50 year old American car in for a 25 year old German one)

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

My old buddy said his 1991 Chevrolet Lumina car has a V 6 engine and
about 115,000 miles on the car.Do those engines have overhead cam
shafts? If so,I think it most likely needs a new cam belt on it.Is it
relativley easy enough to change out that belt,or difficult? I believe
(or I think so anyway) I can handle that job myself.I have never owned
any vehicles which had overhead camshafts before.
cuhulin

wrote:

> "Steve" > wrote in message
> ...
>
wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>No more Fords for me, in the foreseeable future.
>>
>>You ought to try a Fusion and/or a 500. I was pleasantly surprised.
>
>
> I looked at the 500, by the way, but havent driven it. It is supposed to be
> Volvo's influence, (which might be better for Ford than Ford's influence
> has been on Volvo.)

I don't know, Volvo was hard on the skids with the early S-80 fire
recalls and huge reliability problems. I think Volvo benefitted almost
as much as Jaguar from Ford's influence. As to why Ford can turn around
foreign makes but can't clean its own house... there's a question for
the ages!

> but the components appear to include Aisin tranny (in some models), and
> Volvo bits, as well as some Ford influence.

S-80 related chassis, Ford drivetrain and sheet metal.
>
> I havent paid much attention to the Fusion, but believe that is a
> cooperative
> effort with Mazda.

Yes, Ford styling and sheet metal, Ford V6 engine or Mazda 4-cylinder,
don't know about the transaxle, shared platform with the Mazda 6. The
v6, at least, is a *nice* driving car.

bob zee wrote:

> On Mar 1, 1:59 pm, Steve > wrote:
>
>
>>At 59k miles, its not even broken in yet. The car I mentioned above
>>currently has 247,000 miles on it. It's now had a few repairs, but
>>nothing huge. Call me back in 10 years and tell me how that Honda is doing.
>
>
> I will. You can guarantee it. While you are at it, give me your
> phone number, your home address and your bank debit card number!
> What do you consider a few repairs that are nothing huge?
>
> Only an idiot would give me that information! Some would say only an
> idiot would buy an american car!
>
> bob z.
>

I leave it as an excercise to the reader to determine who is the idiot
here... but it aint the guy driving the American car in this case.

wrote:

> Somewhat off-topic question:
> Are any high-quality products made in the USA?

You bet. Appliances (eg. Kitchen-aid/Whirlpool) , HVAC equipment (York,
Trane, Lennox, Carrier), electric machinery (General Electric),
locomotives (General Electric, EMD), cars (GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota,
Honda).

Its the disposable consumer electronics that are mostly made overseas.

> The american cell phones are
> horrible.

I wouldn't trade my Razr for a truckload of Samsungs and LG crap, but
then I doubt the Razr is actually made here either.

On Mar 1, 2:18 pm, Ray > wrote:
> bob zee wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 1:59 pm, Steve > wrote:
>
> >> At 59k miles, its not even broken in yet. The car I mentioned above
> >> currently has 247,000 miles on it. It's now had a few repairs, but
> >> nothing huge. Call me back in 10 years and tell me how that Honda is doing.
>
> > I will. You can guarantee it. While you are at it, give me your
> > phone number, your home address and your bank debit card number!
> > What do you consider a few repairs that are nothing huge?
>
> > Only an idiot would give me that information! Some would say only an
> > idiot would buy an american car!
>
> > bob z.
>
> to quote George Carlin, some people are f*cking stupid.
>
> Buying a car based solely on reliability scores is like buying a house
> based on square footage alone.
>
> I bought a Trans Am because I WANTED one.
> I bought a Subaru wagon because I needed a family car with 4wd.
>
> Cost to buy, Cost to repair, Cost to insure are all parts of the car
> ownership experience. So's utility and "grins-per-mile."
>
> And, fwiw, I'm stuck with the wife's old car as a winter beater until it
> dies. It's a 90 Beretta with 150k miles, and the damn thing just won't
> die. (I used to wish it would, now I'm hoping to make 200k miles on it.)
>
> I do wonder, who around here has the oldest/highest mileage vehicle that
> they're still using as a semi-regular daily driver?

I've read threads like this here before, and they quickly become
emotional, just as this one has. I've always said that when the
emotion train pulls into the station, the logic train is the first one
to leave.
I'm driving a 1995 Toyota T100 pickup that's currently showing 326K on
the odometer. It still runs and drives very well. I also do my own
maintenance.
My experience with my son's 1990 Silverado and my wife's 1988 Plymouth
minivan tells me that the Toyota is built better, and is waaaayy
easier to work on than either one of those vehicles.
Anyway, I've decided the T100 truck will be a project for me. I'm
going to drive it until it literally won't go anymore just to see how
long that will be. I have every confidence that i'll see a half
million miles.

>
> - Show quoted text -

wrote:
> My old buddy said his 1991 Chevrolet Lumina car has a V 6 engine and
> about 115,000 miles on the car.Do those engines have overhead cam
> shafts? If so,I think it most likely needs a new cam belt on it.Is it
> relativley easy enough to change out that belt,or difficult? I believe
> (or I think so anyway) I can handle that job myself.I have never owned
> any vehicles which had overhead camshafts before.
> cuhulin
>

no, it's a chain and it's not an overhead cam.
Probably the 3.1L variant of the 2.8/3.1/3.4 family.

Unless it says Twin Dual Cam on it, in which case it's a DOHC, but I
believe those had chains as well, and I don't think they came in 91 Luminas.