7th Apr 2009, 16:48

Not quite... I'm a mechanic and ALL my cars, foreign or domestic are always meticulously maintained. The Mazda received as much or more attention than our Fords, Chevys and Dodge, all of which lasted 2 and 1/2 to 3 times as long.

I've also WORKED ON these cars and can assure you they are NOT built very well at all. At 84,000 miles the front end on the Mazda could not be aligned because the front sub frame assembly had actually bent from just the weight of the car. My alignment shop even had a NAME for the condition: They called it the "Japanese Flimsies" and told me virtually ALL major frame/sub frame components on Japanese cars of the 80's were grossly under-engineered.

10th Apr 2009, 14:28

"They," were frustrated that they could not understand how to work on these foreign vehicles, therefore, declared them "under-engineered." Why couldn't they just admit they didn't know what they were doing? My Nissan built in February 1987 was perfectly engineered, (over-engineered if you ask me). I have not have a better car before or sense and I had it over twenty years. It had an alignment issue in 2007 but it was twenty years old then for crying out loud and I only paid $30 to get it fixed.

28th Apr 2009, 10:11

Yes and we all know how well American cars were built in the 80's. Why do you think Honda and Toyota have such loyal following? It all came about in the 70's and 80's when American cars were junk.

It seems we have more or less a tie on here with foreign brand drivers and American brand drivers going 200,000 miles with no problems. Can we call it even and move on? Do we really need to beat this to death any more at 195+ comments?

20th May 2009, 16:19

The lines of distinction between import and domestic vehicles are becoming blurred. Quality for domestic brands has generally improved over recent years, while the engineering and build quality for imports may well be slipping.

When considering repair frequency and costs, driving habits have a lot to do with that. My experience? My 86 Honda Accord hatchback will be 23 years old in July, and is still my daily driver for commuting, 380K miles, gets 31 mpg and does not burn or drip oil, on the original engine and tranny.

Had the clutch replaced twice, struts replaced, CV joints replaced, and fuel pump replaced, along with normal maintenance, oil changes, and timing belts. All the above is pretty much normal maintenance.

Being a SoCal car, no rust, but it does need to be repainted, and other cosmetic repairs, but remains a highly functional daily driver.

I also have a Toyota 4Runner, 10 years old now and 182K, no problems with the engine or transmission, and lots of towing every summer, for family boating excursions. Solid engineering and good build quality in both these vehicles.

GM, Ford and Chrysler have produced a lot of great vehicles, along with a lot of junk, unfortunately. I have a friend that just purchased a 2004 Corvette, really well engineered and good build quality and performance. Domestic car companies have constantly shot themselves in the foot, with poorly designed products, lousy service, and being out of tune with consumers.

22nd May 2009, 00:33

"The lines of distinction between import and domestic vehicles are becoming blurred. Quality for domestic brands has generally improved over recent years, while the engineering and build quality for imports may well be slipping."

The lines aren't too blurry. Just look at the shape GM and Chrysler are in as we speak. That's from years of mismanagement, manufacture of poor product, poor service. The main reason I can see why one would think the lines are blurring is because some foreign automakers are moving production to the US and this has caused quality to slip to some degree. If we look at foreign models built in their home country, we see consistently high marks for the most part. Of course there are always exceptions.

22nd May 2009, 09:02

You know, the Chevrolet Malibu and Ford Fusion are very good automobiles and are very competitive in their class (which includes the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry).

The Fusion is available with AWD and now is even available as a Hybrid.

Despite the mismanagement, domestic automakers do field some competitive products. Okay, so the Chrysler Sebring is not very competitive in its class (in my opinion most Chrysler products are inferior to their competitors).

Given what has gone on with government bail-outs. If I were in the market for a new vehicle, I would seriously consider a Ford product (something I probably would not have done in the past). Ford deserves our support, as the only American Automaker who is not (thus far anyway) using taxpayer money to pay for their corporate mistakes.

If Chrysler fails (and I believe they will) I only hope another manufacturer saves Jeep.

GM will probably only survive with Chevrolet, GMC and possibly Cadillac.

Hopefully Saab will become independent again, or be saved by another car-maker.

23rd May 2009, 01:06

I agree that the Malibu and Fusion are competitive in their mid-size class. Malibu should get the Most Improved designation for mid-size cars.

Proper management is key to establishing strong sales despite offering a competitive product. With bailouts and the unlikely future of certain automakers, potential buyers are less likely to look into a brand that could well be obsolete in the near-future. My favorite Chrysler product is the Dodge Charger and the Avenger doesn't look bad although quality is lacking.

I have seen the next-generation Ford Taurus and I will be in the market late next year for a new car. The top contender on my list is the Nissan Maxima. I owned a Maxima for 21 years and was everything I looked for in a car and more. If Taurus offers similar features to the Maxima, I may give Taurus serious consideration.

"If Chrysler fails (and I believe they will) I only hope another manufacturer saves Jeep."

I second this opinion.

"GM will probably only survive with Chevrolet, GMC and possibly Cadillac."

GM should probably either phase out GMC as their products are duplications of Chevrolet vehicles; badge only cars as Chevrolet and assign trucks to the GMC label. GMC can manufacture trucks from the base trim levels to the top-of-the-line models, thus relieving Chevy of manufacture costs. Cutting Pontiac seems to be a mistake. This was an opportunity to market already strong products like G6, G8, Vibe and Solstice. Cancellations should've been made to the G5 program. The Torrent was already slated to be discontinued.

I'm not sure that Cadillac has much future. The DTS and SLS programs are soon to be cancelled and are strong sellers. Senior citizen buyers go by brand-name recognition and changing Deville to DTS was not the wisest move. Also, they will look for a plush, large sedan with maximum comfort, luxury and seating capacity. Escalade is redundant and as mentioned before, GMC can manufacture all trim levels of SUVs and trucks. Therefore, slash Escalade production. STS will lose its place as CTS becomes the perfomance and sports-oriented Cadillac.

Buick should've been gone long ago. For years all the division has turned out are uninspiring and boring vehicles that turn few heads. Nonetheless, they are very successful in China and killing Buick here would put their reputation on the line in China.

"Hopefully Saab will become independent again, or be saved by another car-maker."

Agreed!