8th Jul 2006, 22:01
I had my transmission replaced at 20,000 miles and again at 80,000 miles and I was thinking the very same thing. If I had a GM car, I would be ranting and raving about what a piece of crap it was.
What's the difference, you ask? Two things.
First, except for the buggy transmission (which the dealer says is a known issue) the driving experience is otherwise exceptional. There is nothing like the feeling of gunning that 3.2 TL on the freeway, with the standard Bose stereo cranked up.
Second, unlike having to argue with a Ford or GM dealer over whose resposibility it was for the repair, and then having to deal with the inconvenience of not having a car for a week, I drove right to the dealer, took my car in, and they gave me a 2006 TL loaner to drive. Didn't skip a beat.
I think giving loaners to your customers would go a long way toward keeping customers satisfied. If you aren't inconvenienced, it's not a big deal. But if your car is gone for a week on two or three separate occasions, and you don't have wheels, you get pissed.
9th Dec 2005, 01:40
I recall a well-known American manufacturer that had this exact title in the mid 90's also due to problematic transmissions in their minivans. That company had also built some of the best cars on the road... and continues to today, es in the Euro market.
Just because the cars cost less, does not mean they are of less overall quality in comparison to the Euro and Japanese market cars.