10 Cars That Sank Detroit

[Lionheart]

The 10 Cars That Sank Detroit

This is an article in Yahoo's front page news.

Good to see an ole orange Pinto again! You know, the ones with built in self destruct rear bumpers.

:d

More here;
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/auto...5rLWRldHJvaXQ-


I havent had a chance to read it yet. I think some of those cars were bold moves that Detroit needed to take, but perhaps they could have been executed better, perhaps?

We had a couple of Vega's back then. A orange/red station wagon, and a 4 speed tan 2 door. Dad loved them both...



Bill

[N2056]

My first car was an old Vega station wagon...got me around, and put up with a fair bit of abuse. You could get a few guys to pick up the rear end, rev it up while in gear and then when they dropped it you could manage a burnout! :woot:

[safn1949]

I just read the article,I was a GM flat rate mechanic in the 80's and the cavalier was a piece of crap,but then so was the Cadillac 4100 engine,the 700R4 transmission,the 440T4 tranny,the 305 engine and so on.

I can't tell you how many power steering racks I replaced,but it was a multi year affair.On the other hand I had a 1990 Astro van and it was a fantastic vehicle.

[Drzook]

My parents had a Vega at some point. It was the first car I remember us owning (I was 3 at the time). A dark green Vega Panel Express IIRC. Dad would have to drive; Mom didn't have a license (and wouldn't get one until my sister was born about a year later--I know weird)
Going down the list of supposed lousy cars that sank Detroit:
My sister had a Cavalier-that was actually a fun car to drive around in; certainly better than my brother's Escort GT in any case.
My mother owned a Pinto-her first stickshift. She hated that car. I didn't mind it, nor did I mind Grandpa's Pinto, but then again I didn't have to drive either one.
My family also owned a Chevy Astro conversion van. Not bad...at least as long as you didn't have to drive it in winter.
We never owned a Ford Taurus but my sister had a Mercury Sable which, like most of my sister's vehicles, seemed to have a lot of...punch to them. This one could keep pace with our mother's Trans Am.
My dad owned a Ford Explorer for many years. It was the first vehicle that my dad actually put money into instead of just selling it off. He loved that truck. He sold it about ten years ago; it is still seeing use as a plow truck with nearly 300,000 miles on it. Who knew?
While we never owned a Hummer H2 my dad currently drives an H3. I'm not crazy about it but if Dad's happy with it that's fine.
My wife drives a Sebring convertible. I won't be caught dead in it.
My parents both drove his/her Jeep Liberties for a few years. My brother now owns one and Dad traded the other one for the aforementioned Hummer.
Most of the above mentioned cars were pretty decent (not sure about the Pinto but at least it never exploded). Just goes to show that these top ten lists are purely subjective.

[modelr]

As a mechanic for 37 years, and an automobile junkie for many more, I'll have to hold my tongue on this one, as most of that article is political BS. Not a single one of those people quoted have anything to do with the actual designing/building/maintaining of a vehicle. They all make their money as talking heads.

Yes, some of those vehicles were junk, others were very good vehicles. Some came into being because of the first gas shortage, (HAH!) which all the pundits say Detroit should have seen coming. We won't mention the fact that back then, it took 3-4 years for a vehicle to go from the drawing board to the showroom. Nor will we mention that the early Japanese vehicles were actually bigger pieces of junk, with just as long lifespans as the ones mentioned in the article. But they were comparitively inexpensive which was their real selling point. They also didn't have to conform to our new EPA and Hiway Safety regulations that were coming into being, and causing the prices of American vehicles to skyrocket, along with the added labor costs from recent huge union deals.

Some of those vehicles listed actually pulled Detroit out of the basement, and kept it afloat during some hard times, none of which were Detroit's fault. Others were kept going as loss leaders while to keep the government happy, while Detroit focused on what most American's really wanted, bigger, stronger, faster, sportier vehicles. But the government, and the militant environmental groups don't want us to have them, so they regulate them into the over-priced catagory, or out of existence. Our country no longer has freedom of choice, and that is what is hurting Detroit.

As for those who will say that Detroit should have seen this present gas shortage (HAH!) coming, as well as the econnomic crisis, which made some people get rid of their vehicles, (which, by the way, they are presently trying to buy back,) DID ANY OF THEM??!!!??? NO!!!

No, that article is written from just one side, without any credence given to the other side, nor any actual facts given for the statements made.

[GT182]

I gotta agree with Modelr. Some of that was biased to no end.

I have a 96 Taurus wagon I got when my mom passed away, and it's one of the most comfortable cars I've owned. Dependable and loads of room. Plus it seats 8 and has hidden cargo space. Mleage isn't all that bad either.

The 94 Lincoln "Executive Series" Towncar was the best car I've ever owned. I'm surprised it wasn't in that list too. :costumes:

[cheezyflier]

the cavalier was the only new car i've ever owned. i hated it.
the intermitent brake feature was not something i wanted in a new car. or any car, for that matter. i took it back to the dealer 3 times who said he couldn't duplicate the problem. liars.

the article was kinda biased. they way they knock ford is a real reach.
i don't have much love for ford because of their pro gay policy, but i do admit they are in a heck of alot better shape financially than the others.
putting the explorer on their list they credit it's popularity for the suv craze that hurt the others. no matter how you slice it, that's flat-out retarded.

[safn1949]

I have to agree that the article is biased,I wrote about my experience only.I am in Moab Utah writing this with my 94 Ford Explorer that I went over Elephant hill yesterday in....stock with 128,000 and 235/75/15 at's.I had a 88 Lincoln town car that was fantastic,smooth and comfortable at 19 mpg.Oh and the explorer gets 19 mpg also.The only reason I got rid of the astro van was I got sick and out of work,couldn't keep up the payments.It really is personal preferance,78 Bronco? Great. 80 Ramcharger? Junk. 88 Jeep Cherokee? great vehicle.88 Plymouth Aclaim (K car) junk.

[jhefner]

We owned Chryslers through the 1970s and 1980s when everybody said they were junk; (K-Cars included); and had few problems with them. Put 110,000 miles on my "Bluesmobile"; a 1974 Plymouth Fury, before a mechanic caught it on fire.

I have a 1995 Ford Taurus wagon sitting in the driveway now that I would love to get running again; it has been a great car with plenty of room that gets milage as good as many new, smaller cars today. While other reviews also mention the fact that Ford made little effort to improve it over the years; it usually shows up on the top ten lists; and is credited with saving Ford.

Oh, yeah, those Japanese cars. Several friends of mine owned Hondas during the mid-1970s. Every single one of them had zero problems with them right up to 75,000 miles -- then everything started falling apart. One of them kept pouring money into his Civic, replacing one thing after another, trying to keep it going; before his dad made him get rid of it. Another one of them went to work with GM....

I agree, another talking head with an axe to grind; getting all excited about the blood in the water.

-James

[Cazzie]

Well, if Ford had half a brain, they would be selling the real European Focus here in the states and not thet generic POS made in Mexico and sold here as the Focus.

I owned a 2001 Focus Wagon and it saved my life. It did everything well. I would have another Focus wagon today in lieu of my Honda Fit, if Ford had seen fit to bring the European Focus Wagon to the US. But no and I cannot understand why, there is no more Escort, there is no Fusion Wagon, what line in their brand does Ford fear the Focus Wagon will hurt?

America's auto makers have too long thought planned obsolescence and that folks need to trade-in every 3 years. That school of thought went out on the late 70s. And I have talked about SUV and big luxury pick-ups unril I am tired in the face, simply no purpose for them as a general family vehicle.

And when was the last time a construction worker or farmer could get a plain-jane pick-up, no frills; vinyl flooring, bench seats, straight drive on the column, no A/C, just heat and "maybe" an AM/FM radio. That's all that's needed for a working man darn it, you cannot buy a pick-up like that any more.

Americans themselves are to blame too, because they want it all and they want it now. Big expensive vehicles that root them out from the common man. We ask for it and Detroit gave it to you.

Both Chrysler and GM should be forced to declare bankruptcy, because even with all the bail out, they will still have to eventually, they simply cannot and will not meet the demand that the world calls for, they only wish to satisfy the demand for American customers, who do not have the affordable income to buy them anymore.

The age of dinosaur automobiles are over, time to rethink micro and get on with it. If you are so big that you cannot fit into a compact micro car, then that is another problem most American, you eat too much too!

Caz

[Wiens]

That writer is biased!!!! He's a whiner..............

Those cars didn't sink Detroit (GM & Chrysler, Ford is still financially viable) the union bosses, poor management, overly excessive federal & state (California) regulation, "environmentalism" and the consumers did.

I agree; GM & Chrysler needed to go into bankruptcy last year. They will go this year but it will be a "modified" bankruptcy, the unions won't have to make concessions.......:faint:

Kevin :d

[Lionheart]

I thought the Cavalier was a great car. The interior and the styling were exceptional and rare for American makers back then. The plastic dashes were high quality even by todays standards.

I didnt care for the Vegas. Dad sure loved them, but man, they were kind of 'rough'. I remember reading John Deloreans book 'On a Clear Day, You Can See General Motors'. On day one of the Vega on the test track, pre-production prototype stage, the prototype 001 suffered a structural failure on the test loop. The entire front suspension sub-assembly fell off. :d

Also, it was a first (in a while, the Buick V8 and V6 were actually first) for All Alum. Block/heads construction was done, and heating of the heads was happening in which they began leaking. Buick though had done some brilliant engines that were all alum. One was sold to Rover and for decades had high ratings in quality and service life. (Range Rover V8 was designed by Buick).

I really really wish gm hadnt crushed all those electric cars. I wish gm had taken the inniciative to make more, and some sedans. They would be where Toyota is today with the Prius, and not just American sales, but world wide sales. They are loved and coveted (Prius' ) in England and parts of Europe. Its a market that was in the very hand of gm, and they chose to bury it instead of going with the people (customers, money source, market, survival needs).




Bill

[EasyEd]

Hey All,

Interesting article. It illustrates the main points - forward looking foreign companies (from a US perspective - perhaps just normal in their own countries) vs arrogant short term profit seeking companies assuming government and American consumer habits would keep them going. What do you expect the outcome of that to be in a world now solidly engaged upon a great economic leveling where developed nations lose standard of living (defined here as raw economic purchasing power and domination of world resources) as underdeveloped nations gain standard of living. Since government couldn't find a way or even looked for a way to that painlessly they threw it to the market to do. The fallout will continue for decades - automakers are just part of it.

-Ed-

[GT182]

You wouldn't believe how some of the GM cars and truck were delivered to the dealers. I mean manufacturing wise, not from us drivers. There were GM cars I saw, loaded and delivered in the 80s that I wouldn't have driven if they were given to me. Maybe the model had an overall good reputation but there were individual vehicles that came out of the plants that should never have left. We were told to not ask questions, just...."Deliver it!" And that was from every GM plant in the North East, Ohio, and Canada. I loaded and delivered units from every one of them.

[Piglet]

I took my first driver's test in a Pinto. I thought it was fun car to fool around with.

[Willy]

I had a couple of Vegas and liked them. Once you got the troublesome aluminum cylinder bores taken care of they had a pretty reliable engine in them. Starting with the 75 models, Chevy fixed the problem with the blocks. It was the 71 to 74 models that had the aluminum cylinder bores.

[modelr]

Well, if Ford had half a brain, they would be selling the real European Focus here in the states and not thet generic POS made in Mexico and sold here as the Focus.

I owned a 2001 Focus Wagon and it saved my life. It did everything well. I would have another Focus wagon today in lieu of my Honda Fit, if Ford had seen fit to bring the European Focus Wagon to the US. But no and I cannot understand why, there is no more Escort, there is no Fusion Wagon, what line in their brand does Ford fear the Focus Wagon will hurt?

America's auto makers have too long thought planned obsolescence and that folks need to trade-in every 3 years. That school of thought went out on the late 70s. And I have talked about SUV and big luxury pick-ups unril I am tired in the face, simply no purpose for them as a general family vehicle.

And when was the last time a construction worker or farmer could get a plain-jane pick-up, no frills; vinyl flooring, bench seats, straight drive on the column, no A/C, just heat and "maybe" an AM/FM radio. That's all that's needed for a working man darn it, you cannot buy a pick-up like that any more.

Americans themselves are to blame too, because they want it all and they want it now. Big expensive vehicles that root them out from the common man. We ask for it and Detroit gave it to you.

Both Chrysler and GM should be forced to declare bankruptcy, because even with all the bail out, they will still have to eventually, they simply cannot and will not meet the demand that the world calls for, they only wish to satisfy the demand for American customers, who do not have the affordable income to buy them anymore.

The age of dinosaur automobiles are over, time to rethink micro and get on with it. If you are so big that you cannot fit into a compact micro car, then that is another problem most American, you eat too much too!

Caz

Caz, have you actually been to a dealership lately?? Unless something has really changed since I left Ford in 2004, you could buy your Ford pickup in as baseline as you wanted it. All you had to do was mark DELETE on the options list. We had quite a few of those go thru our dealer for farmers and fleet pickups here in Iowa.

As for the Ford Focus US version v European version. Don't blame Ford for what they were/are allowed to sell here in the US. Blame the EPA and the Hiway Safety Administration. THEY set the rules! Ford WANTED to do exactly as you wanted, but COULDN'T, because the US GOVERNMENT said NO!

And why can't another American have a big SUV or pickup for their family vehicle, if they want it and can afford it?? As long as they don't ask you or me to pay for it, I thought that's what one of the great things about America was... Freedom of choice. You may choose not to drive them, that's your choice, but why force me not to? Maybe I have a real need in my life/work for one, but don't have any need/desire for a little micro mini. I shouldn't be forced into one I don't want, any more than you should.

I agree that GM and Chrysler should have gone into Chapter 11 bankruptcy right off the bat. They should have NEVER been given ANY taxpayer money. NONE! They would have emerged on the other side stronger, leaner, and better for it. Or, if they had to go out of business, the profitable lines would have been picked up by someone else. Think Jeep. Sure, some people may not have trusted them while in bankruptcy, but those people don't trust their own mothers, I'd be willing to bet. Myself, wouldn't have mattered. The infrastucture to take care of the vehicles was, and always will be, (IF government doesn't completely destroy THAT industry, like they ARE trying to do,) and it is possible to buy an extended warranty from private sources, (not from the manufacturer,) that would take care of all the possibilities. ALL extended warranties, even those sold when the car is new, are from outside companies. Basically mechanical insurance policies is all they are. BTW, when the airline companies go into bankruptcy, people don't stop flying, so...

Yes, there were, and will be, a LOT of stupid decisions made over the years. The old Dinosaurs are dead, thanks to modern engineering. But man still wants to fast, and far. And Americans are NOT the only ones who think this way. You want expensive, fast, big?? You can find EVERY ONE of these characteristics in at least one vehicle line from EVERY country that manufactures vehicles. (Except, perhaps, Russia.) But, the MICRO MINI IS NOT the vehicle of the future in America. There will always be a market for them, just as there will ALWAYS be a market for the big and expensive. We are to diverse a people for there not to be. That is, IF we don't go Communist/Socialist first. Then, when we've lost ALL our freedoms, we'll all be just as rich as the poorest of countries. Is that what you want???? It's not what I want. I want EVERYONE to be ALLOWED to TRY to be the best they can be. And fail if they must! Failure is part of the learning curve! The old addage "If at first you don't suceed, try, try again." is only part of the complete thought. "But try it ANOTHER way!"

I'm getting off track, here, and longwinded, so I'll stop, for now.

(No offense meant towards you, Cazzie, and I hope none is taken. If it was/is, I'll apologize right here, in public.)

Don H

[Quicksand]

I can kinda(?) see the author's viewpoint, but in rebuttal, my wife and I kept a Mercury Bobcat (luxury Pinto:costumes from the time she bought it new in '79 until it accrued 100,000 miles in 1988, and we thoroughly enjoyed owning it, because, other than routine maintainance, it never was any extra expense, and it was a really sporty car in its own right. It was not a bad investment at all.

[Moparmike]

Caz, have you actually been to a dealership lately?? Unless something has really changed since I left Ford in 2004, you could buy your Ford pickup in as baseline as you wanted it. All you had to do was mark DELETE on the options list. We had quite a few of those go thru our dealer for farmers and fleet pickups here in Iowa.

Don,

Yup you can still order a stripped-down "work truck" from all three of the US makers. That is IF you can find a dealer that will use that special order form anymore. Most of the dealers around here (and I am in a rural area) will do anything possible to not special order a truck if it isn't one of the "prefered equipment" packages that they get a bulk price on. They can actually buy those optioned out trucks just as cheap or a little cheaper than they can special order a stripper. The other dealerships claim it's because of resale value...a stripper will be harder for them to sell when you trade it back in. I say BS on that.

There are still a couple of dealers in ND and SD that will order what the customer wants...and there are people who will travel 200-300 miles (or do a sight-unseen phone deal) just to buy from those few dealers too.
My folks have special ordered every Ford that they've purchased new since 1967...and every one of them that was traded in didn't spend much time on the lot after the deal...there are plenty of farmers looking for a truck that is optioned to be a decent farm truck with no extras on it.

Same goes for every work truck that I tried to buy for the shop. Every dealer I talked to tried to talk me into all the extra goodies so they would have extra resale value when I traded it in. I told every one of them that I was planning on buying it to use not to trade in and if they didn't think they could sell me a work vehicle that wasn't gonna last 200,000+ miles and ten trouble-fee years then I wasn't interested in what they had.
I spent most of my 11 years of daily service calls driving a '67 Dodge van or a 78 F150 "stripper" that my folks' special ordered back in 1977. My van is enjoying it's semi-retirement with 250,000miles and that F150 is still being used daily around the farm with 180,000...both of them will still get the job done even though they aren't decked out with every option on the sheet. Most dealers just can't understand that...

[Moparmike]

Back to the article...

Pinto: Just like the first-gen Mustang, that fireball gastank caught a lot of flak. Otherwise it was a damn solid little car. They've got a bulletproof little inline 4-cylinder that is basically still in use today in the Ranger.

Cavalier (and clones):
Tinny boxy little things...good basic transpo though. That's what they sold em as and that's what folks bought em for.

Astro:
I still think this was the best of the "mini-van" craze from the 80s. Not the best if you ever rolled one (or hit three deer at 65mph) but with a solid S10 pickup based drivetrain they would actually hold together when you used em for work vehicles. I had a basic cargo Astro with a 4.3 and 5-spd for a few months...until those deer ran into mine...and I was very pleased with it. I looked for another like it for several years but at the tail end all you could get was those AWD versions that did have more than their share of drivetrain problems.

Taurus:
Not bad when used as a basic commuter car but they did have their share of long-term problems with the transaxles. I don't remember many mid/late-80s ones that didn't have the tranny go out at least once. Ugly, but they worked just fine.

The rest of em on the list I don't have any personal experience with, but the way this writer "spun" his article I suspect they're not as evil as he makes em out to be.

I was somewhat surprised that Chrysler Corp's biggest joke didn't make his list...but then with the agenda he's spinning I doubt he even knows what an Aspen/Volare is. The first couple years they made it as the Dart/Valiant replacement they practically rusted away when they were still in the showroom...not to mention a lousy front suspension and a bunch of other quality control problems. It continued through the 80s as Chrysler's "big" car, the 5th Avenue, and it made it all the way to 1989 with a V8 under the hood and no overdrive transmission to allow it to make any decent fuel mileage. Rough riding, poor handling, poor mileage, and not even comparable to Ford or GM's big luxury cars...

[cheezyflier]

oh man you ain't kidding! i had a mental block about the aspen i once owned. i hated that car with all of my heart. i didn't want it, it was forced on me by my father in-law.

about the pinto, i learned to drive in a pinto wagon, but other than that, i didn't have alot of experience with them.

the cavalier, like i said, mine had a brake problem, and a dealership problem. i only had it 6 months before the wife tangled with a tractor trailer, and lost.

[wombat666]

The age of dinosaur automobiles are over, time to rethink micro and get on with it. If you are so big that you cannot fit into a compact micro car, then that is another problem most American, you eat too much too!
Caz

Eloquently put Caz!!!!

[kjb]

Well, if Ford had half a brain, they would be selling the real European Focus here in the states and not thet generic POS made in Mexico and sold here as the Focus.

According to AutoWeek they are considering the European Focus RS (305 hp). The articles I've seen on the RS have been very positive.

[Lateral-G]

I remember my boss bought a Cavalier in 1980. In two years the paint was chipping/fading/blotching....remember that fiasco when car mfg's switched to low VOC paint?

I hate how current lines (especially those by Chrysler) get "diluted". It irks me to see Dodge's new Avenger. It's basically a "dumbed down" Charger (it realy bugs me since I have a Daytona R/T). Yeah, I get they like to swap body parts and chassis between models to save money but what was the point in the Avenger? Or how they "cross" lines between each others divisions; Chrysler has the Town 'n Country and Dodge has the Caravan...they are the SAME vehicle. Ford has the Expedition, Lincoln has the Navigator and how many times can GM repackage their Suburban/Yukon/Jimmy, et. al.?

They shoot themselves in the foot by offering too many versions of the same vehicle. If Detroit wants to get lean they need to reduce their product lines and stop saturating the market with the same cars with different names/badges.

-G-

[n4gix]

My very first car -and so far the best!- was a 1962 Plymouth Valiant with the venerable slant-six and a four-speed manual transmission. I replaced the stock floor shift with a Hurst unit. I (mis)treated that Valiant like a tank, and it held up quite well. If I had been a less irresponsible know-it-all teenager, and had not neglected to check the oil before my final drive, I wouldn't have have snapped a rod and ruined the engine...

Even so, I'd paid only $1000 for the car to begin with. A woman rear-ended me at a traffic light and her insurance company declared it a total loss and paid me $1200, but let me keep the car. I continued driving it for another eight months until blowing the engine. I ended up "parting it out" for $800, finally selling the remains to a salvage yard for $25.

After having driven the car for nearly three years, I wound up actually making money when the dust finally settled. Try doing that today! :faint:

Contrast the Valiant with the absolute worst car I've ever owned, which was a 1982 Plymouth "Reliant K." Bought new, before I finally got rid of it six years later, the engine had been replaced nine times under warranty, and after the warranty expired I wound up rebuilding it another four times. The main problem seemed to be that the cooling system was inadequate for the furnace heat of the South Texas coastal area, and the head gasket would keep "blowing out..." :whistle: