Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Worst car you have ever owned?


heymisterk

Recommended Posts

That is a way over-simplification of the problem.

 

Just as much of the problem was management and the white-collar end of the business: If you are constantly 10-20 years behind the Japanese brands in terms of design and reliability, don't be surprised if no one buys your car. In addition, my perspective is that management viewed the UAW membership as mere peasants.

 

The Big Three is starting to turn it around, and I hope they continue to do so.

 

I didn't say it was an explanation of the problem....I said it was a 'couple of points'.

 

The thread turned from a pleasant way to pass the time to a political issue, (which I'm not criticizing, since I've been guilty of doing that at times).

 

If we were REALLY worried about American Jobs, American Safety, American trade imbalance...... we could do ONE THING that would greatly help all those areas....

 

Explore and harvest energy from US Soil.... that simple.... Drill on land where there's oil..... unleash fracking in the greater Southwest and other areas....and

pay AMERICANS to do that, (jobs), any oil harvested, buy less oil from foreign countries, (trade imbalance), and give less 'oil money' to people who hate us, (safety).

 

But we don't....won't.... for a host of 'reasons'.....so..... the elk in ANWAR don't have to see oil rigs, but American soldiers have to continue to die.

 

Until we do the obvious, I'm not going to be too concerned with the loss of American jobs in the Automotive sector.

 

I am still allowed to have an opinion, (for now).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I didn't say it was an explanation of the problem....I said it was a 'couple of points'.

 

The thread turned from a pleasant way to pass the time to a political issue, (which I'm not criticizing, since I've been guilty of doing that at times).

 

If we were REALLY worried about American Jobs, American Safety, American trade imbalance...... we could do ONE THING that would greatly help all those areas....

 

Explore and harvest energy from US Soil.... that simple.... Drill on land where there's oil..... unleash fracking in the greater Southwest and other areas....and

pay AMERICANS to do that, (jobs), any oil harvested, buy less oil from foreign countries, (trade imbalance), and give less 'oil money' to people who hate us, (safety).

 

But we don't....won't.... for a host of 'reasons'.....so..... the elk in ANWAR don't have to see oil rigs, but American soldiers have to continue to die.

 

Until we do the obvious, I'm not going to be too concerned with the loss of American jobs in the Automotive sector.

 

I am still allowed to have an opinion, (for now).

 

Tea Party for one? [rolleyes]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say it was an explanation of the problem....I said it was a 'couple of points'.

 

The thread turned from a pleasant way to pass the time to a political issue, (which I'm not criticizing, since I've been guilty of doing that at times).

 

If we were REALLY worried about American Jobs, American Safety, American trade imbalance...... we could do ONE THING that would greatly help all those areas....

 

Explore and harvest energy from US Soil.... that simple.... Drill on land where there's oil..... unleash fracking in the greater Southwest and other areas....and

pay AMERICANS to do that, (jobs), any oil harvested, buy less oil from foreign countries, (trade imbalance), and give less 'oil money' to people who hate us, (safety).

 

But we don't....won't.... for a host of 'reasons'.....so..... the elk in ANWAR don't have to see oil rigs, but American soldiers have to continue to die.

 

Until we do the obvious, I'm not going to be too concerned with the loss of American jobs in the Automotive sector.

 

I am still allowed to have an opinion, (for now).

 

I must say I agree that America needs to take control and harvest our own oil and get out of places we shouldn't be. We need to take care of our own or no-one else will. But I really do think it's sad that you feel that until that happens, you aren't concerned with our manufacturing base. I read your passion in the beginning of your post, and I don't buy that you don't care about a loss of jobs in the Automotive industry.

 

For those of you following, please read this note from David MacNeil - CEO of Weathertech Floor Liners. I think what he is doing is amazing!

 

http://www.weathertech.com/assets/1/7/what_matters_to_you_1212.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1966 Corvair - this was the after they fixed the swing axle problem and it had the 140hp engine (4 weber carbs) so it would have been great except for one thing - it had the 2-on-the-dash Powerglide automatic. One of the worst transmissions ever designed. That and since it was air cooled the cabin never warmed up in the winter in Wisconsin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I already said, BMWs come with a bumper to bumper warranty of at least 4 years and 50,000 that can be extended to 100,000 miles for about $2,000 this includes all maintenance. Do you not think that such an awful product would bankrupt the company?.

 

I've had my BMW since '06 and never had an issue, except for those darn run flat tires. My BMW was the first car I bought over 25K but I drove a bunch of other cars first. I wasn't biased one way or the other. For me BMW blows away all the others on my two biggest factors: 1) engine and 2) handling. I drove a Vette with a ton a horsepower, but it did not handle well at all. My wife had her X3 now for a week and loves it. It has a 2.0 liter engine (double turbo) that gets 240 horsepower with 21 City / 28 Hwy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say I agree that America needs to take control and harvest our own oil and get out of places we shouldn't be.

 

 

We get a majority of our oil from Canada.

 

Americans need to stop living like crude oil is a clean and infinite resource.

 

What we need is more hybrid and electric car technology to reach the masses and be more affordable.

 

After owning a Prius, I will never own another regular car again. I feel that every dollar that doesn't go to Big Oil is a victory for America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I feel that every dollar that doesn't go to Big Oil is a victory for America.

 

...and makes the World a safer place. So glad we don't even have a drop of it, or my country would been already "bombed to democracy" :D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daewoo Nubira from 1999 to 2001. A brand new car that had a complete brake failure as well as needing it's front wishbone replaced after two years (through normal wear). Bought new for £15,000 and I was lucky to get £5,000 on a trade-in for a Honda Civic two years later. I learnt my lesson from this piece of automotive garbage and have only bought quality cars since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1977 'Vette. The engine sat at an angle where the back was much lower than the front. The belts would break constantly, leaving me without power steering at 70+ mph! Give you an idea about cost of living...drove it off the show room floor fully loaded for...$11,400. J.D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say I agree that America needs to take control and harvest our own oil and get out of places we shouldn't be. We need to take care of our own or no-one else will. But I really do think it's sad that you feel that until that happens, you aren't concerned with our manufacturing base. I read your passion in the beginning of your post, and I don't buy that you don't care about a loss of jobs in the Automotive industry.

 

For those of you following, please read this note from David MacNeil - CEO of Weathertech Floor Liners. I think what he is doing is amazing!

 

http://www.weatherte...to_you_1212.pdf

 

I suspect my saying that I won't care is too extreme. I am the Executive Director for the largest 100% American owned bus manufacturing company, and I take great pride in creating and maintaining over 700 US jobs.

 

Our factory people are Teamsters, and as 'anti-union' as some think I sound, we have a wonderful relationship with our people and the Teamsters. The people I deal with in the union are mostly my friends, (even the union officials).

 

I still don't agree with some of their positions, they are good people, and have worked with us to grow our company.

 

My complaint is with people who complain about all the areas I mentioned, but refuse to any domestic oil/gas exploration, (pretty much all the democrats in congress).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We get a majority of our oil from Canada.

 

Americans need to stop living like crude oil is a clean and infinite resource.

 

What we need is more hybrid and electric car technology to reach the masses and be more affordable.

 

After owning a Prius, I will never own another regular car again. I feel that every dollar that doesn't go to Big Oil is a victory for America.

 

Hey..... Americans should continue to work towards eliminating carbon fuels...but....we ain't there yet...and until that time, we need

to use the oil that's available to us.

 

I believe oil IS an infinite resource..... now, we can use oil faster than the earth can make it, but let's face it....oil didn't come from dead dinosaurs.

 

I've probably said this before....but we manufacture hundreds and hundreds of hybrid buses every year...and have for several years now.

 

The hybrid package, (the drive unit...sometimes called the Transmission; the Energy Storage System...sometimes called the batteries & the Dual Power Inverter Module...sometimes called the brain), costs

almost $200K. During the life of the bus, (12 years/500,000 miles), that bus will not save enough fuel to pay for that 'up-charge').

 

However, because the Federal Government pays 80% of the cost of the bus, and the local taxes, (or money from the farebox) is only 20% of the cost, the hybrid vehicle WILL save enough fuel over it's life to

more than pay for the up-charge. i.e. 20% of $200K = $40K. But the hybrid technology still isn't good enough to sustain itself.

 

And I suspect you got a tax break for your purchase of the Prius? If so, then we all helped you pay for your car, (the least you can do is give us a ride every now and then!).

 

And I won't even get into the disposal of the batteries, or the fact that hybrids have more 'garage fires' than standard internal combustion powered vehicles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, where I live I'm literally far more afraid of deaths from hybrids and electric cars than I am of bad guys with firearms.

 

Even the current run - the past 15 years worth - of computer run engines is a bit frightening when you figure what's going on in the computer itself when you start to get cold and the batteries are stressed. Below a certain temperature the computer won't even let you try to start your vehicle if the battery, stressed by cold, lacks a certain level of power. 30 years ago you could still probably start the car, warm the engine and recharge the battery. Also, once the computer on more than a few models loses power, it may start to think you have another vehicle - e.g., you have a Ford v8 and it may think you have a 4-banger and it won't run at all.

 

Urban concerns and politics surrounding them are, again, a different issue from where your vehicle is itself a mobile weather shelter. No hybrid or electric car can survive such conditions at this point of technology, nor anything I've heard of that's gonna come within what's left of my lifetime.

 

My concerns are more that, as usual, economic and safety issues will far disproportionally affect rural areas, and the more rural, the more impact.

 

Having helped move a guy frozen solid when it wasn't really all that cold and known more than a few folks saved by their gasoline-engined cars or pickups or SUVs that had enough room for them to wiggle and keep blood flowing to their extremities, I'm no fan of stuff that won't work in rural areas.

 

The oddest thing is to see urban drivers in little cars designed for urban driving caught in just a normal winter town driving here.

 

The worst is having to work with the highway patrol to write about yet another batch of folks caught in a storm and dead within hours because their car couldn't move, the engine couldn't keep them warm and the close confines wouldn't allow much if any survival techniques. Meanwhile the folks caught in a bigger SUV or pickup are uncomfortable but usually can handle a cupla days even in a non-functional vehicle. Survival rates were a lot better up into the 80s than with today's crop of "safer" cars - safer perhaps in urban environments, but not here.

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, where I live I'm literally far more afraid of deaths from hybrids and electric cars than I am of bad guys with firearms.

 

Even the current run - the past 15 years worth - of computer run engines is a bit frightening when you figure what's going on in the computer itself when you start to get cold and the batteries are stressed. Below a certain temperature the computer won't even let you try to start your vehicle if the battery, stressed by cold, lacks a certain level of power. 30 years ago you could still probably start the car, warm the engine and recharge the battery. Also, once the computer on more than a few models loses power, it may start to think you have another vehicle - e.g., you have a Ford v8 and it may think you have a 4-banger and it won't run at all.

 

Urban concerns and politics surrounding them are, again, a different issue from where your vehicle is itself a mobile weather shelter. No hybrid or electric car can survive such conditions at this point of technology, nor anything I've heard of that's gonna come within what's left of my lifetime.

 

My concerns are more that, as usual, economic and safety issues will far disproportionally affect rural areas, and the more rural, the more impact.

 

Having helped move a guy frozen solid when it wasn't really all that cold and known more than a few folks saved by their gasoline-engined cars or pickups or SUVs that had enough room for them to wiggle and keep blood flowing to their extremities, I'm no fan of stuff that won't work in rural areas.

 

The oddest thing is to see urban drivers in little cars designed for urban driving caught in just a normal winter town driving here.

 

The worst is having to work with the highway patrol to write about yet another batch of folks caught in a storm and dead within hours because their car couldn't move, the engine couldn't keep them warm and the close confines wouldn't allow much if any survival techniques. Meanwhile the folks caught in a bigger SUV or pickup are uncomfortable but usually can handle a cupla days even in a non-functional vehicle. Survival rates were a lot better up into the 80s than with today's crop of "safer" cars - safer perhaps in urban environments, but not here.

 

m

 

Milod,

 

I get it, but I don't think the strictly internal combustion method of transport is anywhere close to dying. It is, however, worth noting that my hybrid has endured seven Cleveland winters with not even a hiccup. But yeah, I admit that I am not driving on the Great Plains.

 

I think a fair compromise would be that people in truly rural areas can keep their SUVs and pick-ups; people in cities and the 'burbs? Well, let's just say I am less sympathetic.

 

I think this idea that "Because I am an American, I DESERVE to pick up my kids from school in a Range Rover" has run its course. You want that choice? Fine, but you should pay for it. (I have lots of ideas on how, but I will spare you.)

 

We as Americans need to smarten up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually there are a cupla problems for rural areas with what's gone on the past number of years in the name both of "fuel efficiency" and "pollution controls."

 

To put it bluntly, the cost of the only truly practical vehicles out here in the "American Outback" is put through the roof and so we have people driving older versions and small cars that they can afford - but aren't all that safe, especially in poor weather.

 

My guess is that somewhere between 35 and 50 percent of the cost of a "regular size" SUV or pickup is federal requirements that have nothing to do really with fuel mileage or pollution - out here, anyway.

 

In that type of vehicle, much of the cost is also politics, pure politics, that penalize those in a certain type of vehicle anywhere in the country. You don't think it's "right" in Cleveland - so it costs that much more here.

 

"Basic transportation" is far more expensive than just a good solid and safe vehicle. My old Grand Wagoneer was less expensive for the day, safer, far more comfortable, carried more stuff if needed, ate less fuel, probably polluted less - and didn't have the computer shutoff concerns of its modern counterpart.

 

The computer engine controls have more than their share of concerns. Only a shop with specialized equipment to work on them can get your vehicle reprogrammed once it's lost its memory. The old 6 and 8 cylinder cars, station wagons and pickups of the '50s and early 60s could be maintained by an average human being. That was a selling point of more than a few cars - they were kept simple to keep purchase and maintenance costs down.

 

Apparently current policy is to raise purchase and maintenance costs to make personal transportation more expensive for lower and middle income folks, especially in rural areas - where it matters most...

 

I get peeved in winter with the mandatory front bucket seats. That's so air bags can target the driver and passenger, but will kill a smaller front seat passenger such as my wife. Yet many, if not most, late model pickups now come with a switch to turn off the air bags you have to buy anyway. Sheesh.

 

You still have the console taking up room for a person. So... there is less space for movement in bad weather, hence greater danger. Knowing that, around here the most popular pickup configuration has changed from a bench front seat short cab for 3 people, and now is the crew cab that works well for 3 people and a week's family groceries. Larger SUVs are purchased for the same reason. Smaller ones ain't practical.

 

Set government requirements and costs on those SUVs and pickups much higher? You're further penalizing rural people.

 

Yeah, who cares. Just farmers, cowboys and Indians and the idiots who serve them in small towns who, were they bright enough, would move to a city and drive small cars.

 

There also are the longtime catalytic jobbies on exhaust systems that have caused batches of wildfires every year and... I do wonder what "pollution" one gets from those compared to what might be "saved?"

 

As I've said, I've helped pack a body frozen solid in just one night. I've known those who have had far too close calls in city cars and I've had to write about dead bodies that wouldn't have been dead if folks had even a four-door 1955 Chevy - but didn't have a chance in our current stuff.

 

Yeah, I get passionate. Dead bodies, folks missing body parts and urban standards and perspectives that price rural folks out of safe transportation does that to me.

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually there are a cupla problems for rural areas with what's gone on the past number of years in the name both of "fuel efficiency" and "pollution controls."

 

To put it bluntly, the cost of the only truly practical vehicles out here in the "American Outback" is put through the roof and so we have people driving older versions and small cars that they can afford - but aren't all that safe, especially in poor weather.

 

My guess is that somewhere between 35 and 50 percent of the cost of a "regular size" SUV or pickup is federal requirements that have nothing to do really with fuel mileage or pollution - out here, anyway.

 

In that type of vehicle, much of the cost is also politics, pure politics, that penalize those in a certain type of vehicle anywhere in the country. You don't think it's "right" in Cleveland - so it costs that much more here.

 

"Basic transportation" is far more expensive than just a good solid and safe vehicle. My old Grand Wagoneer was less expensive for the day, safer, far more comfortable, carried more stuff if needed, ate less fuel, probably polluted less - and didn't have the computer shutoff concerns of its modern counterpart.

 

The computer engine controls have more than their share of concerns. Only a shop with specialized equipment to work on them can get your vehicle reprogrammed once it's lost its memory. The old 6 and 8 cylinder cars, station wagons and pickups of the '50s and early 60s could be maintained by an average human being. That was a selling point of more than a few cars - they were kept simple to keep purchase and maintenance costs down.

 

Apparently current policy is to raise purchase and maintenance costs to make personal transportation more expensive for lower and middle income folks, especially in rural areas - where it matters most...

 

I get peeved in winter with the mandatory front bucket seats. That's so air bags can target the driver and passenger, but will kill a smaller front seat passenger such as my wife. Yet many, if not most, late model pickups now come with a switch to turn off the air bags you have to buy anyway. Sheesh.

 

You still have the console taking up room for a person. So... there is less space for movement in bad weather, hence greater danger. Knowing that, around here the most popular pickup configuration has changed from a bench front seat short cab for 3 people, and now is the crew cab that works well for 3 people and a week's family groceries. Larger SUVs are purchased for the same reason. Smaller ones ain't practical.

 

Set government requirements and costs on those SUVs and pickups much higher? You're further penalizing rural people.

 

Yeah, who cares. Just farmers, cowboys and Indians and the idiots who serve them in small towns who, were they bright enough, would move to a city and drive small cars.

 

There also are the longtime catalytic jobbies on exhaust systems that have caused batches of wildfires every year and... I do wonder what "pollution" one gets from those compared to what might be "saved?"

 

As I've said, I've helped pack a body frozen solid in just one night. I've known those who have had far too close calls in city cars and I've had to write about dead bodies that wouldn't have been dead if folks had even a four-door 1955 Chevy - but didn't have a chance in our current stuff.

 

Yeah, I get passionate. Dead bodies, folks missing body parts and urban standards and perspectives that price rural folks out of safe transportation does that to me.

 

m

 

I would never say that about rural folks: I graduated in a class size of 32 less than a mile away from a run down trailer park with Confederate flags in the windows.

 

I am not trying to force city living on the good folks of South Dakota,nor am I forcing my hybrid on others. I bought it because it makes moral sense to me. I don't have to worry about rescuers removing my lifeless body from my Prius; if I were worried about that that, I doubt I would drive one.

 

You clearly do worry about it, and you must have reason to. But yeah, if you ask me if people should pay the true cost of crude oil and for the impact it has, I issue no apologies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is absolutely NO reason why anyone should be penalized for what they drive. It's downright un-American.

 

Poeple should have the right to drive what they want, and the right to pay for whatever quality vehicle they want.

 

Imposing taxes or "penalties" in which the tax-payer is not the benifactor of the taxes paid is wrong, unconstitutional, and shouldn't be considered any kind of solution for anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is absolutely NO reason why anyone should be penalized for what they drive. It's downright un-American.

 

Poeple should have the right to drive what they want, and the right to pay for whatever quality vehicle they want.

 

Imposing taxes or "penalties" in which the tax-payer is not the benifactor of the taxes paid is wrong, unconstitutional, and shouldn't be considered any kind of solution for anything.

 

I disagree. You want to buy a car that pollutes more? Fine, but put your money where your right foot is: I am tired of subsidizing Big Oil in the form of tax breaks. Let people who drive gas guzzlers around town subsidize it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Imposing taxes or "penalties" in which the tax-payer is not the benifactor of the taxes paid is wrong, unconstitutional, and shouldn't be considered any kind of solution for anything.

 

Awesome: I want the portion of my taxes used to pay for the Iraq war and the wall street bailout. After all, I received no benefit from either..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the way the computers currently are in use on at least some vehicle lines, it's pretty dangerous.

 

But... Actually you are putting extra costs on rural folks. "if you ask me if people should pay the true cost of crude oil and for the impact it has, I issue no apologies."

 

The problem is that current vehicles don't really use less energy, fossil fuel or otherwise, than they did in the '50s.

 

That's because of a complex batch of federal regulations that don't see a whole, just whatever the current politically correct complaint might be. It appears that's roughly doubled the cost of personal transportation compared to 1960. Vehicle regulations and increasing fuel costs add to it. Making cars impossible for the average person to handle for maintenance adds to those costs, but aren't included in cost-benefit discussions that focus on, as you note, petroleum.

 

Cars today just, in theory at least, pollute less. And yet note how the old "let's check your engine emissions before we give you a new license plate" has disappeared. Or is it before your time when the political emphasis shifted from "air pollution" to "evils of fossil fuels" to add costs to personal transportation for the working classes - and put it beyond the reach of many?

 

The cost of dead battery pollution from electric cars never is mentioned in some of the currently politically correct agenda, let alone ignoring whence comes the electricity. Oddly the cost of old tires that all of our vehicles bring seldom is mentioned - yet I'll wager we're almost all on the same side of that particular argument.

 

Honestly, long term I'm far more worried for this continent and the world due to population growth and diminishing production. The standard of living for most of "us" is lessened. Only a few government and corporate nabobs and their families thrive.

 

The ag sector is increasingly controlled by mega corporations that manage market manipulation that city folks seldom recognize. It's easier to blame weather and farmers when they don't understand the system.

 

Part of the reason the ag sector is giving way to corporate concentration is the increased costs of production that come from ... yup, increasing costs of fuels both on the farm/ranch and transportation.

 

That and increased value of land that then is purchased as a hobby by a few rich folks - literally including such as Ted Turner. Turner, for example, doesn't need to break even on land he paid far more than production value to add to his hobbies.

 

He doesn't care about fuel costs, fertilizer costs, feed costs or market manipulation by the ag processors whether meats (about four companies "own" the marketplace, for example, including a big Brazilian family corporation) or other basic commodities such as Cargill.

 

Ah, well. Honestly I'll be glad I doubt I'll be alive in 20 years 'cuz I don't care for what I'm seeing as a future.

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...