What is Digg?231 Comments
- harumph, on 10/12/2007, -6/+70this guy is spot-on. i used to be a mechanic for buick and the amount of nickel and diming customers had to endure on cars that were only a couple years old was totally obscene. after 5-6 years their interiors would be falling to pieces and major engine components would fail. they did have a few reliable engines but those have now all been phased out because they were pushrod engines and, hence, less efficient. even so, ancillary components like coil packs and fuel injection related sensors would fail regularly. by contrast, i once owned a 1980 toyota corona which never needed any major engine work on it, ever. i got rid of it at 300,000 miles and it got good mileage, had good performance and the a/c was still cold. it isn't just toyota either, honda, nissan and the rest still deliver a far superior car in longevity and driving experience.
sad stuff. - iching, on 10/12/2007, -3/+45"So what's wrong with GM? The cars. GM is famous for being run by bean counters and ad men. Toyota is run by engineers."
that summed up the whole article. - Tivor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+25Ditto on the scary brakes. I own a Hyundai Elantra, and I once rented a Chevrolet (I think it was an Impala) when I went on a trip.
People who laugh at Hyundai for making crappy cars obviously haven't compared it to a Chevy. That Impala's chassis squeaked every time I made a turn, interior finishes screamed "cheap", and, as numerously mentioned, the brakes were horrible. And that car had like only 3000 miles on it. Since then, I've avoided GM vehicles like a plague whenever I had to rent a car.
In comparison, my Hyundai, over the past six years (and 100k+ miles) I've owned it, has given me a surprisingly few troubles that I didn't cause. It may not be a Toyota, but it has certainly proven itself to be much more solid and trustworthy than the usual "haha, hyundai" jokes would lead one to believe. Better than GM, that's for sure. - diggless, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32Its GM's fault for not investing the pension funds properly. If they had allocated the funds to the correct investments as they were paying these people the burden wouldn't be so high. However, they thought that if they didn't allocate the funds and thus didn't have the money to spend come retirement time they could simply get out of the obligation to pay the benefits due to the hardship it would place on the company.
Additionally the unions played their role. The first duty of a union is to ensure the survivability of the company it works with. The UAW did a poor job ensuring GM was playing the game properly and thus should take some of the blame.
Labor unions are critical in the workers attempt to close the income gap and re-establish a middle class in this country. The average executive makes more in 1 hour than the average worker makes all year. I believe the discrepancy is somewhere around 700:1. This is appalling. Companies can afford to pay more, unions arent always being greedy, they are just asking for their share of what their labor produced for the organization. The problem is that people have a distorted view of what labor is worth in this county. Why should ALL the profits go to the share holders? Sure they deserve some, but the guy out in the factory running the presses deserves a comfortable life as well. And these companies can provide that. - zediker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26Horribly designed cars... yes! I recently had the displeasure of trying out a brand new cobalt for a rental car last month on a buisness trip. The car had some of the worst design ideas i've ever seen. The handbrake was UNDER the arm rest! The gas tank intake had such a poor entry angle that it splashed back on the fuel nozel causing the cutoff sensor to trigger and stop dispensing fuel. I had to sit there for 10 minutes clicking the fuel pump on and off to fill up. The brakes also scared the ***** out of me. Because they were so weak, I honestly didnt know if I could stop in time if I needed to. I honestly have NO IDEA how this car got passed their QA division...
- theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29I was about to say that the Buick 3.8 was one of the finest engines ever produced. Completely indestructible, and in the case of the Regal Turbos, some of the quickest factory cars the world has ever seen. A Buick GNX can toast pretty much toast any other of it's contemporaries. That includes the mid 80's Lamborghini's, Ferrari's and 911 Turbo's. But it completely destroyed the Corvette, and the brass at GM just couldn't have that, so they killed it. And that goes back to the bean-counters instead of Engineers running the company.
If GM would just go back to what they know, people would come back in droves. They used to make cars that were desirable. And yes, that means front engine, rear drive and comfortable. Nobody made those types of cars better than GM did. And front engine, rear drive pretty much sums up what a classic American car is. And no, that is NOT a bad thing. Why do you think that SUV's and truck sell so well in America? Because they are front engine, rear drive and comfortable.
Oh, and as far as the Toyotas go, my dad bought an 81 1/2 Toyota Long Bed Diesel. In 25 years, he put a water pump and alternator and new batteries in it. General maintenance items. - AngryOx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22I use to have a job cleaning cars for Hertz Rental Car so I got to spend a lot of time in a lot of different American cars. Almost every American car that we had there felt like the interior was made by Fisher-Price. The plastics inside were huge and bulky and it was all cheap looking and had a bad texture to it. However Ford was not innocent of this. The inside of the new mustang is horrid. We also had some Mazda's and Toyota's and a few Infinities and every single one of those cars were fantastic.
- Karmalary, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22Having been a life-long advocate of Chevy pick-ups, 2006 found me the proud owner of a new Toyota Tundra. Which was made right here in the USA and has a level of refinement Detroit hasn't even dreamed of in years.
- ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Tell me about it. I have a nissan sentra 87 hatchback. The body of the car is getting pretty rusted. I had to solder some plates in the back where the suspension is lodged because it was thorned open due to rust. My main point is that the whole body is giving up on me while the engine still runs like a charm, no oil loses and, most of all, it still has no problem to start at -30 in winter. It's a damn 20 year old car!
- torifile, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16"You know what's also bad about GM? $2000 of the sticker is used directly to fund retirement pay to past UAW workers"
How does that make them continue to produce the crap they put out? Cheap interiors and bad design decisions aren't related to healthcare costs. - wingnut21, on 10/12/2007, -9/+23You know what's also bad about GM? $2000 of the sticker is used directly to fund retirement pay to past UAW workers. These people didn't make your car; this is money that has nothing to do with the car you just bought. Other companies have significantly lower amounts of the sticker that is used for retired pay, including Toyota. Gotta love unions!
- jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Front engine and rear wheel drive sounds disastrous to those of us living in snow prone areas. I for one am glad that the mainstream is now front wheel drive, at least in my area it makes sense.
On the record though, I have a 1996 Honda Accord, I am the third owner, It has 150,000 miles on it and it purrs as if it was just coming off the lot. Although the cigarette lighter for charging my cellphone just quit working which is a shame but should be cheap to fix, If GM cars had this kind of reputation I doubt anyone would have moved to a foreign car. - bardamu, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19Good riddance to GM. All they do is make big dumb SUV's. Now they are whining because the government wants to start raising the gas mileage saying it will kill their business. I say it's about time. Seriously it's 2006 and they are still pumping out mammoths that need a pushrod V8 just move these boxes at highway speeds. What does a Yukon get in town, maybe 16mpg? That should be considered a crime against nature in this day and age. Toyota is ahead because they make better, smarter, more reliable cars, that most of the world use to get to work everyday. GM makes dinosaurs, because GM is a dinosaur!
If the new gas mileage legislation goes into place Toyota loses what 2 cars? The suckoilya and the takoma. GM loses most of their fleet.
Change or become extinct GM. The clock is ticking. - McShaken, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15You're right... This guy is "spot on". I've owned 4 GM vehicles over my lifetime, and all but one were garbage. They had to give the GM employee discount last year to get their numbers up, and also lost over 10 billion dollars that same year.... not a good way to run a business. People aren't going to spend $30,000 on something that needs continuous repairs, or lacks basic functionality (like a passenger side keyhole (especially on models that don't have keyless entry)).
GM could have saved their own neck if they would have continued with the EV1 (or a hybrid gas/electric option). Instead, they decided to sue CA and run away from the technology...
Lots of good info here:
http://www.gmsucks.net - ZenPirate, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14 Too many companies *don't* offer good benefit/retirement packages for blue collar workers today. GM's failings can be blamed entirely on arrogance, and running a business to cater to shareholders instead of on building quality products first. I'm by no means pro-union, but they're really not the problem contrary to what you may have read.
- JorgeGonzalez, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Because Toyota makes great cars and therefore many people love them.
- drlha, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Blame Unions all you want, but they didn't design the crappy GM cars.
- Tivor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13With such a shoddy quality, it's a wonder that GM held on to the title of "top-selling automaker" for so long.
If anything, it's a sign that seemingly-patriotic "Buy American" sentiment doesn't really work. A company has no incentive to improve upon itself if the public will continue to hand over money despite the prevalence of superior products.
Consumers' money should go where quality is. That's the capitalistic way, and ultimately, the American way. - Kale, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I made the choice to drive an American car, a Firebird, knowing I would run into some problems, I just figured I would put up with it to have a car with so much "history". I didn't realize the wiring problems I would have.specifically, the connectors for the wiring. I've had dozens of connectors corrode and stop working, and it's become habit to check the connectors for oxidation as a first step in troubleshooting (I do all of my mechanic work myself, if I can).
Having owned an old VW GTI, I know that the suspention in the Firebird is not optimal for a sport car, and I'm having them re-worked as soon as I get the funds. Cars like the GTI, Subaru Impreza, or RX-8 come with a nice, tight suspention "right out of the box", it's a shame US automakers thought people driving a sports car would want a smoother ride and opted for lower performance shocks. - Frinlythegnome, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Similar to what i was going to say. American car companies continue to pump out Suvs and trucks when the price of gas continues to rise while the Japanese companies are making a killing on small fuel efficient cars.
- betterth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@theblooms
Oh, he forgot. It's your /right/ as a free citizen to drive a car that is the equivalent to an assraping of the environment. How /dare/ someone imply you should drive a more efficient car. I mean, the NERVE of those people! You love your V8 and V10 monsters that weigh 5000-6000 pounds. They're not any faster than some 4 cylinders, but who cares! The sound of the engine when you rev completely justifies 12 mpg!
Grow up and get a life. If you believe for one second low mileage vehicles will be around for much longer, you in a dream world. High efficiency is the progression for any technology, and cars too. You're going to lose your low mpg vehicles, and that's a fact.
It's irritating how when change for the better comes about, you have some ass holes whining about they can do what they want and resist the change. - drk1t, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15 GM and Ford union employees in the USA are pricing themselves out of their jobs.
- aquamato, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9being a bit older now, and owning and selling many cars. i was a gm freak! i had a Buick as my first car. (crap) Then i went to the Chevy Montecarlo. I loved that car, but again, i was a new driver and i was young and naive, from there there was the Dodge Ram. A couple of transmission problems , but not bad. These were all used cars. Now as i got older, had some money, i bought my first new car 95 Impala SS. This car was so sweet. I absolutely fell in love with this thing. Until the 3 yr 35000 mile warranty went, along with the water pump. and of coarse, in hind sight my hood and trunk panels never lined up right, the paint was rubbing off some corners, and the clear coat actually started to peel off the p.side door. Looking back, non of these cars, although looked nice, ever ran right. The interiors, both new and old had so many flaws. I now own three Toyotas. My 98 Avalon, my 87 4runner, and 05 scion. although not perfect, they feel, and drive great. and they didn't break the bank on price. My dad now owns a Nissan. The whole family switched over. not because we hate American cars, but because we learned from our mistakes.
- Karmalary, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Toyota makes great pickups too. I'm not so much a fanboy as I just did a year of careful research before making my decision. The overall workmanship is supurb, the 20+ owners I talked with were very happy with their trucks, and customer service has been wonderful. I sure couldn't say that about my last GM product.
- neilparis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11"Additionally the unions played their role. The first duty of a union is to ensure the survivability of the company it works with. The UAW did a poor job ensuring GM was playing the game properly and thus should take some of the blame."
The UAW workers don't design the cars, they build them. If the quality of the parts is poor, or the design is bad, how can you blame the guys assembling the car? If GM under funds its pension fund and now has to make up for the shortfall, how can you blame the workers? Furthermore, how can you blame the UAW for getting health care for its members? Other countries have nationalized health care, so it's an uneven playing field. Then there is trade. The cost to build cars in Mexico is significantly less than it is to build them here, but GM can still sell the cars here. Look at sales of American cars in Japan (dismal) and look at sales of Japanese cars in America (Obviously doing well, with Toyota set to surpass GM--yes I know there are Toyota plants in America).
The UAW has, for a long time, evaluated the company's financial situation before making demands. They are not as unreasonable as they frequently are made out to seem. If you want to blame the UAW, go ahead. But ONLY blaming the UAW is outrageous and naive. - theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"Why do you think that is?"
Because most Americans abhor *****. Most Americans like big, roomy, comfortable vehicles that float down the highway. Which is why you see an F-150, Explorer, Tahoe and Suburban in every other driveway. They aren't this nation's best selling vehicles by accident.
And if you don't think that's true, why does that Honda Ridgeline, Toyota Tundra and Nissan Titan exist? - theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7hammydude: "Americans do not want SUVs"
Then please explain why at least HALF of every single car on the road is a truck, van or SUV.
Please explain the Honda Odyssey, Ridgeline and Pilot, theToyota Tundra, Tacoma, Land Cruiser, Sequoia, 4Runner, RAV4, FJ, Highlander and Sienna, and the Nissan Frontier, Xterra, Murano, Quest, Pathfinder and Titan.
If Americans didn't want SUV's as you assert, these vehicles wouldn't exist here. Just because YOU don't want an SUV doesn't make it universally true. For better or worse, MOST American in fact DO want trucks, vans and SUVs. That's why there are so many on the road. - keeblerkhan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8GM's vehicles are good for one thing, low used car prices. We had a second generation body-style Transport. We bought it used for the price of a compact car with only 17,000 miles. After a year, the weather stripping was falling out, then the ABS started making noise, etc. We still liked the versatility of the interior and some fore-thought for families. When it came time to retire it lately, what did we replace it with? A Toyota Sienna. Why? All minivans are almost equal in prices, Chrysler, Dodge, Toyota, GMs clones - even Hyundai's new minivan, are all within $2,000 of each other. When push came to shove, the Toyota won in our eyes. The main thing was that safety of the owners was paramount for Toyota. GM preferred to glorify the entertainment package. GM has entertainment packages standard on their latest Transport. Not bad, DVD, hard-drive capable radio if you want it, all standard and no additional cost. The safety features for the Transport were front airbags and ABS. The Toyota on the other hand - entertainment was optional, but since this is to haul the family, safety was paramount. The Sienna has ABS, stability control, front air bags and side curtain air bags. Maybe GM executives need to drive their product more often with their family.........
- thebudda, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Unions ruin the company more than anything else, the crappy cars are just what follows with the company's overall mentality. Unions were a good thing early in the century when people needed representation and protection from employers. They have been out of control for over 50 years. Unions have become nothing more than a powerful gang, bullying and extorting everything they can from the company (usually wants, not needs) which in turn we as consumers and taxpayers end up paying for. It's bad enough that we as a consumer have to pay for this, but yes we all pay for it every time the government give them subsidies, massive tax breaks, lucrative contracts, and bail them out every time they get into trouble. Why do you think we still have GM, the whole airline and rail industry around today? US tax dollars hard at work.
I had to testify last year in a case up in NYC. The detective I dealt with was telling me about all of the public service unions (police, fire, garbage pick up, etc.) and how great they were. Just after telling me how much money he made, benefits he got, entitlements the union got him and such, he proceeded to complain that he had to drive 2 hours to work each day from his small $350,000 house he can that he pays an ungodly amount of taxes on each year, the taxes that are excised on everything, government fees everywhere you turn, and how much "them bastards take us for." And he just couldn't believe we do not have hardly any unions where I was from and how low our taxes are, and how cheap our cost of living is. Gee, wonder how that happens. - smeep2k4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It's funny you should say that. My Dad bled GM for close to 40 years. He owned GM vehicles almost his entire life. He recently bought a Toyota Tundra and has since said he'd never go back to GM. I have a Chevy Truck, and I think my next truck might be a Titan or a Tundra. There are too many quirks on this truck (ie. I have to kick just to the right of the gas pedal if I want the fan to start running in the winter, my windshield wipers work... except when it rains, etc etc.)
- madtinkerer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9First, sorry for the long post, but I hope it is informative.
I went to Japan about a year ago and spent most of the day in a park in Hiroshima. As I was about to leave, an elderly Japanese man came up to me and we started to speak. He seemed like a nice guy so we ended up going out for dinner together. He told me that he used to be an engineer for Nissan and we talked a little about the Japanese automobile market. I asked him why Japanese cars were such a dominant force on the world market and he summed it up in three basic points.
First, American workers are paid too much for their jobs and the work atmosphere in the factories is laid back compared to Japan. Japanese assembly lines are more efficient and there is more attention paid to minute details in the construction phase. He said it was a constant problem he had to deal with when he worked in the Nissan factories in America - the quality of production was just not there.
Second, and this agrees with the article, Japanese engineers have much more input in the design of the cars than their American counterparts. He told me that while American designers were given a production cost estimate they had to meet from the drawing board, Japanese engineers design the car and after it is designed, the production team has to figure out how to make the car for a certain cost per unit. Of course there is some sacrificing of quality, but not as much as in the American system. (As a teacher, I can tell you that if you start your students at 100% and take off points rather than starting at 0% and add points, their scores will be higher every time.)
Finally, he said American business strategies have no long term vision. He was amazed to know that sales were reviewed DAILY by the management. For example, if on Monday Ford sold 100 cars, but on Tuesday they sold 75, the management would react with cost cutting measures, shakeups on the line, etc. They seemed to have no business strategy that extended more than a few months. The Japanese, on the other hand, have basic engine and parts designs that are in use for 10+ years, and business strategies to match. Imagine how this effects their design process. Every part of a car has time to mature and be review and improved, not totally redesigned to suit a whole new car design every model year. - belfastboi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7When the Japanese first arrived in Europe the 70's, they competed by imitating and producing high quality copies of euro cars and with the exception of the Germans, it took the euro-box makers 20 years to catch up in terms of build quality and craftsmanship. Having had the pleasure of working in the USA i was totally shocked when i was given a brand new ford focus lease car, expecting it to be like my euro built one but with the wheel on the other side. But inside it was so so cheap and tacky and the engine died at 7k. If they can make high quality versions for us Europeans, why do our American friends settle for such utter and blatant cost cutting in their purchases? Continue to vote with your dollar, eventually even the most arrogant conglomerate will take notice!
- Pile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7There's an episode of that English car show Top Gear where they take an old Toyota pickup truck and try to destroy it but it seems impossible. After watching this episode, that pretty much convinced me there is no competition for Toyota when it comes to pickups.
Watch this and cry if you own an American pickup truck:
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=9a1f6477beb1e1486dc10138285bee51.505090 - Pile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I'm on my fourth Toyota. I will never ever buy an American car again, with the exception of some old collectable car like a 63 Vette if I had money to blow. Otherwise, I laugh when I see people driving around in crap like Escalades. They're just throwing money away and rewarding people and companies who produce crappy work.
I have two Toyotas right now. The combined mileage on both vehicles is nearing 400,000 miles. Aside from an occasional brake job and replacing the batteries, the only thing that has ever happened is I blew the timing belt on one of the Toyotas. I was going to trade my old Toyota in for my new one but I decided to keep them both because even though they maintain their value better than american cars, they're even more valuable than the published blue book value and it's better for me to keep maintaining them than even buy a new car. Toyotas rule. The only drag is that they discontinued the Celica line.. that's really a shame. - tmiller51, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Are you saying we should all read our TPS reports?
- wallet55, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6after the engine of my gm car had to be removed to replace a 2 dollar part, i took a holy vow never to buy a GM car again. that was more than a decade ago. they will never get me back
- belfastbiker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9"American auto manufacturers take a loss on their small cars. They do this because the EPA requires them to have an Average fuel economy"
How come we in Europe can make a profit on small cars and have higher average fuel economy than you?
"Americans like big cars and always have, and the big 3 have never really figured out the compact car thing"
Why do you think that is? - Kale, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Ah crap. Ate my comment. We need a different editing system!
I was making mention how much more polished the Subaru Impreza, VW GTI, or RX-8 is compared to a Firebird. I'm replacing the suspention soon since it's much to soft for a sports car. I had a GTI and I miss the tight suspention it had. I kind of knew this would happen with a GM car, though.
Both GM cars that I have owned have also had significant problems with wiring connector corrosion. The connectors are way oversized, yet they still corrode and stop working. - mousky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6You seem to forget that it takes two to tango. It was GM, Ford and Chrysler that agreed to wage demands of the unions. Management is as much to blame as the unions. When times were good for the Big3, they had no problem or issue overpaying for labour. Unfortunately, that has come back to haunt them (and the unions).
- shiftless, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Laid back American workers have made some of the finest products in the world. Lots of Toyota cars are made by factories IN America. It all depends on how the company is run and if you actually have people that want to make a decent product.
- chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7So the unions would rather let their whole industry go under than take a pay cut? Makes sense to me!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5lol stuff made overseas are not nessesary better. But did you know that a Toyota Camry have more American made parts in it than a Ford Mustang? I guess you're agreeing with that article all along ROFL. Because of Unions, American car companies have to go to Canada/Mexico to cut down cost, and Japanese companies keep putting up American manufacturing plants.
".....Toyota currently operates 12 manufacturing plants in North America and will open two additional facilities in the future; Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Texas in San Antonio, Texas in late 2006 and Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada's second plant in Woodstock, Ontario in 2008.
Additionally, Toyota will begin producing the Camry at Subaru of Indiana Automotive, Inc. (SIA) in Lafayette, beginning in Spring 2007.
In 2005, Toyota produced more than 1.55 million vehicles, more than 1.3 million engines and nearly 400,000 automatic transmissions at its North American manufacturing facilities.
By 2008, Toyota will have the annual capacity to build nearly two million cars and trucks, 1.44 million engines, and 600,000 automatic transmissions in North America.
Annual purchasing of parts, materials, goods and services from North American suppliers total more than $28 billion................."
"http://www.just-auto.com/article.aspx?ID=88247&lk=np"
The guy is right on IMO, GM is obviously capable of making good cars, the Corvette is probably the best American car for the past decade. High operational cost is one thing, but poor design and quality play a much bigger role in the downfall of GM. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8One can only hope the day GM and all its gas guzzling, SUV and crappy cars goes out of buisness...
(and I live in detroit)
Only then will American Car Companies realize the mistakes they are making, their horrible designs on their cars. Americans do not want SUVs, they want fuel efficient trustworthy cars. Until then, u.s. citizens (myself included) will continue buying foreign cars. Cheaper, and far superior. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5watched the video. If this doesn't make you switch to toyota, I don't know what will.
- brimg87, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6So this entire article is centered around the fact that the Pontiac G6 has poorly located locks and that a 93 year old woman got car sick so therefore the steering is poor? Give me a break.
- belfastbiker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7All companies who offer pension schemes will pay for some of the pensions of people who no longer work there.
Isn't that to be expected? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Unions help secure a better life for middle-class employees."
That maybe used to be true, but these days unions seem to be in business to support unions. It would be hard to argue that the Director's Guild was more concerned with quality than protecting their racket.
I agree working class people need some type of protection from over-reaching corporate greed, but I'm not sure unions are the answer these days. Most unions came into being before labor laws and I'm not sure what value they provide. Unless you count collecting union dues as a value proposition. - antechinus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It is really only the American GM cars which are so poor. GM makes some very decent vehicles in other parts of the world, for example GMH (Holden), SAAB, and Opel to name some.
The problem is that American auto engineering is way behind the rest of the world. In fact American cars are a joke. - Bluejaye, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Digg really needs a threaded reply system, but since it doesn't...
"Front engine and rear wheel drive sounds disastrous to those of us living in snow prone areas. I for one am glad that the mainstream is now front wheel drive, at least in my area it makes sense."
I live in Michigan, which has considerable snow (just no mountains). My rear wheel drive car drives much better than my last front wheel drive. But, it has stability/traction control. Something you won't find available on most domestic cars.
Personally, I'd like to buy a Mercury(Ford/Mazda) Milan for several reasons, but I won't because it doesn't have traction/stability control even as an option.
The former Big-3 (GM, Ford, Chrysler) only have themselves to blame for losing out. The cars they offer are junk (imo). - tumult, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If you'd left out that part about Google, people would be digging your comment.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 228 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is