Yeah - Chrysler sucks

[defiance]

Sorry, but I just don't think there's nearly as much of a build quality difference anymore - and I've got a fairly reasonable basis of comparison; I've owned several samples of several manufacturers - '92 chevy S-10, '95 Olds Achieva, '96 (I think) Dodge Avenger, '93 Mazda MX-3, '92 Buick Roadmaster (it's my charger's backup now, until I donate it ), and now I drive a '72 Dodge Charger, and the wife drives an '03 Subaru WRX.  All of them had some minor issues, and none of them had major ones...  Excluding the charger, since I bought it from a field .  I don't think quality and reliability is nearly as major an issue anymore.  I think the deciding factors are simple value metrics, depending on the individual.  Price, Performance, comfort, image, or whatever that individual buying the car is looking for.  And, unfortunately, many of those metrics find US lagging.  I mean, the power/weight ratio of the Subaru was completely without competition for under $25k in '03, at least among backseat equipped vehicles.  That, plus it having 4 doors and AWD made it very attractive to me personally (I have a 6-year old son now).  The image of the WRX (as well as cars mentioned earlier such as EVOs, Skylines, etc.) is unrivaled in American cars as well.  The Mustang did actually start edging into those (on the budget performance AND image issues), and the charger could have (but failed to execute).  Chevy doesn't seem interested, however.  And it's going to take more than one car to make such a dramatic change of image. 
Meanwhile, Japanese manufacturers are beating American on nearly every other ground.  Performance we just discussed.  But the price point leaders are nearly always japanese, the most innovative are often japanese, etc,etc...  The only area that the US has consistently led has been beastie-cars (SUV's, Hummers, that sort of thing).  Which, I suppose, is fitting...  Our country has the image of being a bunch of fat, wasteful, inefficient people, why not make our cars the same way?  I know, I know, many SUVs actually do serve a purpose, and they're getting more efficient, but my point is, the *image* is turning pretty dramatically negative, and that's the only automotive front we've been able to compete in.  But now, with BIG japanese SUV's like the Armada starting to show up, can we even hold that front??

Anyway, it's just sad.  Sorry, I'll stop ranting, I'm just depressing myself.

[Big Lebowski]

The Mustang did actually start edging into those (on the budget performance AND image issues), and the charger could have (but failed to execute). 

  Yep, that moron VP Daimler/Chrysler Trevor Creed COULD be selling TONS of V-6 Challengers and 6.1 Hemi Challengers, but he's not, which proves my point. And saying the Challenger was "in" the works before the Charger is a load of kaka.

[Brock Samson]

ok,..

ya got me started..
GM is in deep Doo Doo,. they dont need several redundant makes anymore,.. Buick?.. GMC?... Saturn?.. Pontiac?.. Saab?.. maybe Chevy and Caddilac...  there's about half a dozen decent products in their entire portfolio...
They should'a folded several models into a simplified Brand line-up years ago and im talkin late '90s here..
  all they did was deep six Olds last yr... and with it the oldest line in the History of G.M. incl. the excellent Achiva and Aurora, (at the time of their introduction). the achiva and aurora should've went to Saturn but really Buick was the make that should'a been canned. (IMO)
As far as DCX it seems to me the Company was sold down the river... in '00. 
Ford has squandered Their Lincon and Mercury nameplates and are compounding the damage with the names changing to letters and numbers and a tepid line-up. Volvo is a hit though,, let's not even talk about Jaguar.   

[89MOPAR]

I know of a guy that owned one...it never ran, only would blow head gasket one after another one. Btw, didnt they use Mitsu engines/turbo? And civic is N/A car, so it doesnt make sense comparing turbo cars to N/A power

Firstly , your buddy owned a car that has a "torque to yield"  head bolts.  That means he cannot re-use the bolts, because they are designed for a certain amount of stretch, and only to be used once. So, putting an inept mechanic behind the cause of frequent head gasket failures pretty much takes chrysler out of the reasoning.

Secondly - ever seen the repair bill on a civic or accord that broke its timing belt ?  Interference engine, valves smack pistons = very expensive fix !!   I have, you can bet that owner quit ranting about his cheap Honda after that.

Thirdly - no they didn't use mitsu engines, they used the american 2.2liter.

Fourthly, If the initial price is close, or the used price, what does it matter if one is turbo and one is N/A, except the N/A is Slow.....

[defiance]

In n/a's defence, turbo does have a bit of a learning curve...  My wife put the rex through a bit of hades before she really got used to it ... For a while, her old MX3 with - what, half the power? - would've outperformed it when she was driving!    (both standard, too, that wasn't the problem)

'course, now she's much better   

[Nupe]

Not to start an argument  :

I guess you never owned a 90 Daytona Turbo? Hell of a lot better than a Civic.

rant:  I've owned an '85 Daytona, two '88 Shelbys, an '87 Shelby auto, '87 Lebaron K car style, and a '91 Shadow.  They always left me walking for stupid reasons like waterpumps going to crap, head gaskets, that wonderfully engineered alternator bracket and adjuster set up that never aligns correctly... the list goes on.    Yes the imports rot faster.  My Shadow decided to rot to nothing in the rockers one year and the Daytonas love to rot at the e brake hole and the rear quarters.

Have my second Honda now and the first was an '89 Prelude with 180,000 miles that wouldn't die even when brought to redline daily.  All it ever needed was tires and the typical rear quarter repair after a year of abuse.  My current beater is a '93 Civic coupe with 180,000 plus miles still going strong and I put over 30,000 on it since buying it last May.  It has only needed tires, rear brake shoes to replace originals, and some rear quarter rust repair.  NO WAY a modern domestic vehicle could be that reliable unless brand new.  Sad, but true. 

And I also recently took a quick vacation and rented a 2004 four door Stratus.  It was fairly comfortable and had a decent ride.  And the 4 cylinder was underpowered in typical Chrysler fashion and the transmission was garbage just like the cars in the 80's.  Maybe 15 years from now the newer Chryslers will make decent beaters? 

:rant off:

[Arthu®]

I know of a guy that owned one...it never ran, only would blow head gasket one after another one. Btw, didnt they use Mitsu engines/turbo? And civic is N/A car, so it doesnt make sense comparing turbo cars to N/A power

Secondly - ever seen the repair bill on a civic or accord that broke its timing belt ?  Interference engine, valves smack pistons = very expensive fix !!   I have, you can bet that owner quit ranting about his cheap Honda after that.

That is also the result of low or no maintenance. I didn't say they were flawless, but man did you ever work on a Pontiac Transport V6. They have to be one of the worst cars ever produced. Just in the end I believe the japanese cars are better put together than the american cars especially in the 90's. I haven't been able to compare a lot of the modern cars. I really like the Chrysler 300, it looks great. But seriously my dad has had nothing but trouble with his new Caravan. But than again it doesn't really matter how expensive a car is. My stepdad used to have a 2003 Jaguar S-Type R which seriously kept blewing it's transmission along with various other problems. The Jag's probably the worst new car we have had in the family. It for starters got almost half the mpg that it was advertised with, than the R should have the "better" suspension and brakes but it failed to be able to stop normally. Than it blew 2 transmissions. All in the 1 1/2 years we owned it. My stepdad switched to a 2005 Audi A4 S-line 3.0 V6 Twin Turbo TDI Quattro. Which really is not a whole lot better, technically there is nothing wrong but the interior is already coming apart. The cupholders won't fold back the glovebox got locked but will never open again. It took the dealer 3 whole days to get the glove box working again. I am not much of a fan of modern cars, too much stuff that can go wrong. My mom loves gadgets but when we were looking for a used car for her. I got her a 2001 Volvo V40 1.8i with no options whatsoever. We have had it for half a year now, I did the cambelt and did a small service. It doesn't use oil, water or anything. A good 20k in kilometers so far. It is possibly the best car we own. These are the cars we own (My mother, stepdad, father and stepmom).
-2005 Audi A4 (Interior coming apart)
-2001 Volvo V40 (The Best)
-1998 Volvo S40 (Some tranmission linkage problems I keep fixing, rubbers melt next to exhaust)
-1995 Mini Cooper 1.3i (Your worst nightmare)
-1999 Renault Twingo (2nd worst nightmare)
-2005 Chrysler Caravan (Keeps breaking it's window mechanisms, mirror mechanisms, keeps pulling to the left (which the dealer can't seem to fix) and countless of other little things)
-2000 VW Golf 1.6i (2nd Best)

As you can see no japanese cars as my family is not much of a fan of the styling. Plus I am an pretty good mechanic so mechanical problems are not much of biggie for me on older cars but rust is. And if there is one thing the Japanese cars are good at it is rusting. The Mini does a hell of job on that too.

Arthur

[89MOPAR]

 If you ever see me within 15 feet of a Pontiac Transport V6 , please have me taken away to the mental hospital.  I don't care how many children are in my future to suggest I need a minivan.... .
  Yes, you are right, many times maintenance is of utmost importance.

[Arthu®]

If you ever see me within 15 feet of a Pontiac Transport V6 , please have me taken away to the mental hospital.  I don't care how many children are in my future to suggest I need a minivan.... .

I took my placement at a shop that refused them, we just wouldn't work on them. They are seriously nothing but trouble. Even the Caravan V6's are better than those. Who ever got the idea to seriously almost place the engine behind the front glass and have no way of getting to it from the inside? Really never in my lifetime will I own one of those.

Arthur

[Brock Samson]

Isn't the Pontiac Transport V-6 just one of a family of GM. cars?...

ever seen the sparkplugs onna 302 V-8 Chevy Monza?..