22nd Sep 2011, 17:38
"Various consumer magazines and reports would beg to differ"
J.D. Power and Associates isn't one of them. As of March 2011, Lincoln was ranked above Lexus in long-term reliability. Based on actual owners experience, Lincoln knocked off Lexus as No. 1 in long-term reliability. The study was based on 3-year-old cars, so Ford's Lincoln brand has been the world's most reliable car since 2008. Even before that Lexus traded places with GM's Buick for the No. 1 spot. At best, Lexus has always held only a very, very tiny lead in the years it did make No. 1. With Toyota's dramatic fall in quality, it is no longer that good a car.
23rd Sep 2011, 12:35
Frankly as far as I'm concerned, there were not really many vehicles from the late 70's - early 2000's that fit the bill as being "sexy". From any producer. The 80's in particular was in a funk. That era is what many refer to as the "Malaise" era, where car design more or less took a back seat.
In regards to Lexus, they're at the top of most of the lists I've seen. Knocking them isn't going to change the fact that they earned their reputation through building good products.
Lastly, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If some people think a 90's Lincoln is a work of art... then great. Personally I think they're pretty boring. That is my opinion. You want to see great design? Look up the Cadillac Ciel concept. Now THAT is what I'd call stunning, beautiful, classic American car design. I also like the newer Caddy CTS models. It's a 1000% improvement over those ugly, bloated boats they used to make that only old people drove. Buick? Again - much, much better design and execution than the cars they made in the past- like the 96' Buick LeSabre my Grandma drives. What a totally boring, floaty, uninspiring car. As far as Ford, well their whole lineup is drastically better. The Fiesta, Focus, and newer Taurus are all fantastic cars. As mentioned, there are things being mentioned about Lincoln. As in they are working on a new lineup. Hopefully they won't simply be re-badged Fords. I can't wait to see what they do.
So instead of arguing about cars from the 90's, I would rather embrace what the Big 3 are doing NOW, which is to say that for the most part they have brought style back to a level of high priority, which was sorely lacking in the past few decades. MANY others like me feel the same way. A good example is that I am originally from the South and live in Cali. Back home people drove a lot of domestics. In Cali a lot of imports sold very well. People across the country have different tastes and I think it's a safe bet that the Big 3 were not making products that were as appealing to people who live in major US metros - AKA, where a big chunk of the population lives.
That has changed. I am now seeing a LOT of new Fiestas, Focuses, Chevy Cruze's and Malibus. This to me is further proof that the Big 3 have succeeded in bringing back style, which is what people demand. Good for them. I applaud them. Perhaps my next car will be a Cruze.
23rd Sep 2011, 17:29
Motor Trend magazine's 1990 car of the year "the redesigned Lincoln Town Car". Not bad for a car that is so uninspiring.
24th Sep 2011, 17:36
Did you know that in addition to its excellent styling, the Chevy Cruze Eco gets better mileage than a Toyota Prius (50mpg)?
27th Sep 2011, 05:51
The simple rule of thumb is - what do most people think? That's wrong.
Most people are enamored of the new, the flashy, and particularly 'advanced technology'. The height of reliable, durable, and comfortable motoring was based mostly on 1950s technology, refined a bit through the 60s, 70s, and 80s.
And the cheapest motoring in history was mostly based on one company - the parsimonious 'bean-counting' General Motors, whose inexpensive and copious parts-bin led to the cobbling together of many mediocre, but very frugal, durable, and trustworthy cars. (the examples are too numerous, but here are a few - Buick Century 89-93, Olds 88/98 77-85, Chevy Caprice 82-92, Buick LeSabre 88-93 - all comfortable, reliable, durable, and dead-cheap to operate)
27th Sep 2011, 14:13
My family was pretty poor when we grew up, we always had used 80's Chevys and they always treated us well.
Eventually they would rust out, as we live in north east Canada, otherwise they would last forever.
We had a Chevy Celebrity with over 350000 miles on it, and we sold it still running and not burning oil.
Also a Pontiac Parisienne with over 400k kilometres on it, original 305 not burning any oil, regret selling it.
I have tried a few other brands (Ford, Subaru, Dodge, Honda, Mitsubishi), but none have been as reliable and well built as the GM products. GM is not as good as they used to after about 2000, but the same can be said for Honda and Toyota. Rare to see any newer car get to high mileage without replacing a transmission or engine.
I will say it again "they don't make them like they used to".
27th Sep 2011, 21:23
"The height of reliable, durable, and comfortable motoring was based mostly on 1950s technology, refined a bit through the 60s, 70s, and 80"
Most people would probably say the total opposite. The truth is that back in the 50's-70's, you'd be awfully lucky to have a car make it to 100,000 miles. If it did, chances are the engine needed an overhaul. I know because that was most definitely the case with us. To be sure, parts were dirt-cheap and an engine could be overhauled in a good weekend. But to say that cars back then were more reliable and refined is a bit of an overstatement.
The fact that most any car will last 200,000 miles with absolutely minimal maintenance is testament to the fact that today's cars are vast improvements over yesterday's cars. Technology advances, and this applies to cars.
28th Sep 2011, 12:57
"Most people would probably say the total opposite."
Yes, that was precisely my point - most people are wrong. In fact it is a good rule of thumb in life to simply take note of what most people do and believe, and then do and believe the opposite - you'll be better off.
It is absurd to state that most older cars only lasted 100,000 miles - the old 70s and 80s GM cars generally lasted into the hundreds of thousands. I know this about many from my own experience.
28th Sep 2011, 18:58
As a mechanic and big fan of 50's car, I do have to agree that modern cars are far more trouble-free. We do own a 56-year-old GM car that is still in great shape at 260,000 miles, but it has had one engine overhaul. Modern GM cars (and Ford and Chrysler) easily make a quarter million miles now without any required repairs. That is good, because repairs on modern cars are outrageously difficult.
I get very frustrated with newer front-drive cars. The "check engine" light has been on in my 2006 Fusion I-4 for two years because the thermostat is stuck in the open position. Changing a thermostat on our '55 GM car is a 10-minute job. On the Fusion it requires half a day, because you can't get to the thermostat. Since it is actually less stress on the engine running cooler, I am just ignoring it. My gas mileage has actually gone up and the car runs perfectly.
22nd Sep 2011, 17:06
Repeating your same opinion on full-size domestics over and over again is getting old and nowhere, and I could care less the way you feel about Town Cars. Therefore I am done with that topic.
But what I would really like to know is what you refer to as a "sexy, inspiring" vehicle from the 70s and 80s, you have yet to tell me, and everybody else on this thread disagrees with you.