Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/../photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg President Obama addressing Chrysler in a White House news conference this morning. (http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/30/news/companies/chrysler_bankruptcy/index.htm?postversion=2009043009)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/Chrysler_Logo.jpgChris Isidore - New York - April 30, 2009

Will they get better or worse? --Ed.

Chrysler LLC is going to file for bankruptcy "almost immediately," a senior Obama administration official said Thursday. But a deal has been reached to combine the company with Fiat that will allow Chrysler to stay in business.

The bankruptcy filing,which will be made in federal court in New York, comes after some of the company's smaller lenders refused a Treasury Department demand to reduce the amount of money the troubled automaker owed them.

A senior administration official said there will be no immediate job cuts or plant closings due to the bankruptcy filing, although he said that Fiat will be examining the cost structure of Chrysler to find additional savings. Fiat has promises to use Chrysler's existing plants to build the small cars it now sells in Europe for the U.S. market.... http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/30/news/companies/chrysler_bankruptcy/index.htm?postversion=2009043009

I can't really vote in this one, since I don't know much about any of them except for the Ram.

And I believe the Ram is a good vehicle for the niche market that does need it.

The poll is base on this article > http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/autos/0904/gallery.chrysler_trouble/index.html

My experiences with newer Chryslers were a Town & Country van and a Dodge Magnum, both rentals. I found the T&C roomy but a little underpowered. The Magnum felt claustrophobic due to the small windows. The view out the rear window was like looking thru a periscope, it was terrible!! This was a V-6 version and it was under powered, and felt cheap! The Pontiac G6 I rented recently was much better, handled well and was powerful enough to handle the mountain's of East TN.

I ended up with a PT Cruiser as a rental once. It was about the worst thing I have ever driven. It was basically new, 4,000mi, but it had awful wind noise on the highway. It was small, lacked power, and had such small windows that I felt cramped.

Rams are OK as far as trucks go, but the other makes are probably better. The only vehicle that I liked in recent memory that was Chrysler made was my dad's old Dodge intrepid. 94 I believe. It had decent power, and tons of room. Of course for a 3.3 litre it only got 18mpg highway.

And what about the bailout money they've received?

- 300C - The wrong car at the wrong time. Sold on style and image alone, not quality, reliability, or capability.
- Caliber - Competent but oversized and overweight replacement for the Neon. Scavenged sales from it's Avenger platform-mate, not from other brands.
- Jeep Commander - A hastily repackaged Grand Cherokee guzzler with a third row crammed in the back. Motor Trend's tag line for it was, "Room for seven... dwarves".
- Ram - Another style/image vehicle - competent but marketed with the tag line "That thing got a Hemi?" instead of stressing durability and capability. While I see lots of contractors rolling in their Silverado/Sierra and F150 work trucks, virtually all Ram trucks I see are the sport models hauling nothing but air in the back and a driver with something to prove inside the cab.
- Nitro - A hastily repackaged Jeep Liberty with Tonka truck styling, offered so that Dodge dealers could offer the same thing Chrysler/Jeep dealers offer. Rolled out just as gas prices doubled. Doomed before the first buyer ever signed on.
- Sebring - An enlarged Mitsubishi Lancer with odd styling cues that make it look like a robotic insect. Big car price and fuel consumption with small car room and ride.
- I didn't care for any of them - That's what I answered.

While I have great respect for Chrysler's engineering achievements over the years, what we have today is *nothing* like the old Chrysler of a generation ago. Today, we have a company that has changed hands a couple of times, with each new owner abusing and neglecting the company and then dumping it on another owner. If you were going to adopt a dog, would you want one that has behavior problems and has been adopted, abused and neglected, and then given to the next owner to do more damage? What Chrysler needs is an automotive "Dog Whisperer" who can teach the new owners (the UAW and Uncle Sam) how to eradicate the bad behavior and salvage what's left and rebuild it in the image of what it once was.

Chrysler "firsts" among the domestics - technologies introduced or embraced/enhanced by Chrysler:
- Hydraulic brakes and separate mechanical emergency (parking) brake
- Electric fuel gage
- Oil and air filters
- Aero styling (1934 Airflow flopped, but it marked the first attempt by a major manufacturer to streamline their cars)
- Power steering
- Air conditioning (AirTemp was the most effective and reliable at the time)
- Infotainment - the first to factory install a radio, and the first to offer a phonograph (that played special 16rpm records)
- Hemi engine (which offers better efficiency, it was used for power at the time but is feasible to tune for economy)
- Cross Ram intake (intake manifold tuning - used today by all automakers)
- Gas turbine engine (Chrysler's version of the EV-1. 50 built, none survived. Interesting idea, horrible FE)
- Electronic ignition (for hotter spark and longer service intervals)
- Antilock Brakes (debut on 1971 Imperial)
- LeanBurn (good idea, poor execution due to computer tech at the time; introduced as a means for greater fuel economy at steady speeds)
- Front wheel drive subcompact car (for domestic manufacturers, the '78 Omnirizon beat GM's '80 X-cars and Ford's '81 Escort/Lynx to market)
- Minivan - a small 4 cylinder 7 passenger van that fits in a garage and is was at the time the just about most efficient way to transport 7 people by car.
- Fully electronic automatic transmission - Replaced mechanical valve body and levers/switches/springs/valves with 5 solenoids, actuated by a computer, to shift the transmission. The only mechanical connection to that first-gen Ultradrive was the shift lever.

Some ideas worked (or evolved) better than others. Many of the later ideas got off to a rough start due to great ideas not having enough time or funding to complete development and testing before initial sales. Others (ABS and LeanBurn) arrived too early for available technology to support their proper operation. But the engineers still deserve credit for the simplicity and brilliance of their ideas, and the hard work needed to develop them on short deadlines and scant budget.

An automotive "Dog Whisperer" is indeed and apt metaphorical solution.

(Love that show, by the way! :):thumbs_up:)

Nice list, Maxx.

I am pretty close to things Chrysler. I own, dailey drive, and hypermile a caliber. i also own a Wrangler. i have spent considerable time in and around the automobiles listed in your poll. I will give my opinions based on my driving time, and also info i receive from my brother, who is a dealer service manager.

300C. If you need a larger sedan, this is a great choice. Personally, i do not like cars of this size, but many people do. I have driven several versions, but the one i liked was the AWD hemi. It was VERY powerful, yet i had no problem getting close to 28 mpg out of it. The AWD traction was phenominal.

Caliber. I liked it enough to buy one. I bought the AWD R/T, I live in the country, and it is very hilly around here and we get a fair amount of snow. AWD is very useful. I owned a few neons, and the caliber is a huge improvement. I am working my way up to 30 with mine, and should exceed it as my HM skills are honed. The steering(at least on my version) is quite sharp. MIne has the 18" wheels, which may make a difference. The interior IS cheap plastic crap. Mine has leather seats, and they are top notch. I have the boston acoustics stereo option with sub, and i have never heard a factory setup that sounded anywhere near as good as this one. I am coming up on 2 years of 100% reliable ownership. Not one issue since new. Plus, i love the styling....it has personality. Honda civics and accords just leave me cold.

Commander. I still cannot figure out the purpose for this vehicle. Bad bad idea, Way to go Dr Z. They drive horribly. Reminded me of my 1992 Explorer.

Nitro. All the bad attributes of the liberty, without any of the good attributes. Another answer to a question no one asked. The white ones remind me of the storm trooper helmet from star wars.

Sebring. This is a real disappointment to me. I owned a 2004 stratus, which was the same car as the previous generation sebring. That 04 was a great sedan. It was roomy, comfortable, rode and handled great, and with the 2.7L V6. it was powerful with great economy. I got high 30's out of mine, and bet i could get into the 40's with some techniques i have learned here. My stratus NEVER went to the shop for anything other than the routine mtse stuff. The new one is awful. I drove one yesterday and today. I couldn't wait to give it back and get my caliber back. They would have been much better off to keep making the previous gen with refinements.

Ram trucks....i am not a truck guy, but have driven rmans and dakotas, as well as ford and chevy. They all suck as far as i am concerned, but i guess the dodge sucked the least?

Someone mentioned a PT cruiser. I have a soft spot for the PT. I bought a new one in 2000 and kept it for 6 years. It was the most trouble free car i have ever owned. Nothing broke, ever. It just ran and ran. Very comfortable and versatile car, i will own another one of these days. That PT was more reliable than the 3 Hondas i owned in the past.

For someone like me, the current offering is lean. Other than the caliber and the wrangler, there isnt much that interests me (other than a hemi challenger, which is way too expensive a toy, i would NEVER own one to DD). I hope that they survive, for a lot of reasons (many selfish). I would love to see a Fiat 500 built here and sold here. I would buy one with no hesitation.

I'm a little excited about this since Fiat is now going to partner with Chrysler. Now we'll get Fiats and Alfo Romeos here again!

Don't know why CNN/Money overlooked the PT Cruiser so I added it to the poll.

Anyone requesting a vote change, tell me and I'll deduct/add as wished.

I can't believe Chrysler put this commercial out

http://www.youtube.com/v/ZqnjUVrIA2g&hl=en&fs=1

Best Chrysler ever (in concept at least)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/chrysler_airflow.jpg

I don;t own any of these but have driven many of these as rental or company pool vehicles. Every time I do, I remind myself why I will never buy a Chrysler again.

I voted "didn't care for any of them", but I also have to give special mention to the Dodge Nitro which I drove for about 50 miles a couple weeks ago.

Small footwell, hard-to-reach center stack controls, struggled to reach 70-80 mph even with a 3.7L engine, no useful information from the trip computer...

Chrysler owes its suppliers about $7 billion, according to the latest figures available from the company. Some of those suppliers could still be hurt by the bankruptcy filing.

My guess is they borrowed that money and wasted it..


consequently, all my cars have been chrysler:

1996 chrysler sebring, 2001 stratus, 1999 dodge avenger. They served me quite well and I can't understand how they went from the company the were in the late 90's and early 21st century to what they are now...

When they redesigned the sebring and the avenger, they had a chance to do something good. One look at the designs and what the cars had to offer and I was immediately disappointed.

...I can't understand how they went from the company the were in the late 90's and early 21st century to what they are now...
The "merger of equals" with Daimler-Benz was actually a hostile takeover. The parent company could never understand the culture or processes within Chrysler, and replaced all their management with M-B folks, who then were horribly out of touch with the workers below. They wanted Chrysler because they wanted to share parts/components to lower development and manufacturing costs. What happened was that they took the money Chrysler earned, and gave them a last-gen M-B platform in return. Well, not exactly "gave"... Chrysler still pays a royalty to M-B for every LX car it sells. Currently, all Chrysler cars are either Mitsubishi Lancers/Galants or late '90s Mercedes E-Class. M-B never gave them much money for product development, and the myopic product planners spent what they had on pickups and SUVs while merely bolting little 5-pointed stars on the grilles of the Mitsu-cedes sedans they sold.
The Chrysler of the late '90s didn't have a parent company treating them the way Tony Soprano treats the local merchants. ...Which is to say you hand them your envelope, you sell what they tell you to sell for the price they tell you to sell for, and nobody gets hurt. Nobody can really shine under those circumstances.

About the commercial Delta-Flyer posted...

Was the point of the commercial that the Nitro is extremely heavy? I guess it is supposed to seem tough, but that thing is so small that it can't possibly be tough.

About the commercial Delta-Flyer posted...

Was the point of the commercial that the Nitro is extremely heavy? I guess it is supposed to seem tough, but that thing is so small that it can't possibly be tough.

Chrysler's marketing intended to imply it could go thru Hell and back, but that's not how everybody took it. One environmental group cloned the video and put a statement at the end promoting ultralight vehicles.

I took the commercial as a joke

Overhearing NPR as an analyst stated common knowledge here: Chrysler put all their eggs in the SUV/truck basket in the 90's and ignored fuel economy. Even replacing the Neon with the Caliber was a statement of this direction.

The Caliber, like most of the Chrysler line is so polar opposite of the Airflow of 1934. I know this is going to sound like flame-throwing, but seriously, they could have been called Hummer, Inc - they build all their vehicles boxy, to convey that same image for those needing wheels to address manhood. It just gets me that Chrysler among others made vehicles look Hummer-like, which means they are inherently gas guzzlers, to cater to the market asking: "Am I a Man?" "Am I a Man?" "Am I a Man?" For the ones that chose to steer Chrysler down this path, I have no sympathy. I do feel for the subordinates that must suffer the consequences.

GM will be observing the Chrysler bankruptcy as what might be in store for them.

Overhearing NPR as an analyst stated common knowledge here: Chrysler put all their eggs in the SUV/truck basket in the 90's and ignored fuel economy. Even replacing the Neon with the Caliber was a statement of this direction.

The Caliber, like most of the Chrysler line is so polar opposite of the Airflow of 1934. I know this is going to sound like flame-throwing, but seriously, they could have been called Hummer, Inc - they build all their vehicles boxy, to convey that same image for those needing wheels to address manhood. It just gets me that Chrysler among others made vehicles look Hummer-like, which means they are inherently gas guzzlers, to cater to the market asking: "Am I a Man?" "Am I a Man?" "Am I a Man?" For the ones that chose to steer Chrysler down this path, I have no sympathy. I do feel for the subordinates that must suffer the consequences.

To an extent i have to agree with you. But remember, when you are talking styling, you are really getting into subjectives. If i was trying to convey "manhood", i would not own a triple white VW cabby, a smart, or a Scion xB. I like the styling because it is different. I truly HATE how pretty much every Honda(except the S2000) looks. I think they are either boring or ugly. I think the Camry is UGLY. (i like the yaris though)
BTW, MPG in my AWD Caliber is superior to what i got in any of my first gen neons.

Blackbelt,

I don't think this applied to you or everyone that bought Chrysler, but the marketers did go overboard on this theme. It makes you wonder about this country though that many are obcessed with it....it comes up with hybrids....you give up your "Man card" driving one. :rolleyes:.

I can't really vote in this one, since I don't know much about any of them except for the Ram...

With the PT Cruiser up there, I have one I can vote for.

I have to say I was extremely excited about it before it actually came out. It was a very nice looking car (to me).

However, after taking a ride in one (taxi cab), I found it very cramped inside. As far as the engine goes, it is totally gutless; but that would have been fine if it got any kind of FE.

Blackbelt,

I don't think this applied to you or everyone that bought Chrysler, but the marketers did go overboard on this theme. It makes you wonder about this country though that many are obsessed with it....it comes up with hybrids....you give up your "Man card" driving one. :rolleyes:.

Since i am on a number of different auto forums, i hear that kind of crap all the time.
"that's a chick car" (why? does it have breasts?)
"Hybrids are for Greenie Vegans"(Are all vegans "greenie')
"VW's drivers are all gay" (does that mean they are happy?)
And on and on and on.
I see your point about going overboard on the theme. That actually seems to be the Dodge division that did that, moreso than the Chrysler/Jeep end of things. Looking at the cars in its size and price class, (Cobalt, Focus, Civic, Sentra, Corolla, etc) i saw a big sea of boring sameness. Also, looking for an AWD car at that price point that offered good fuel economy narrowed my choice. I see where they tried to style the Caliber as "macho", but honestly, when i bought mine, all i saw was "different". As you can see by what i drive, i do not have to drive a certain vehicle to "prove my manhood" LOL.
Which brings the following cartoon to mind.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v103/davepenn/hummer_toon1.jpg

Taliesin, it is interesting how differently you an i saw the PT. Considering its size, i found the car very roomy, with tremendous cargo carrying utility. I found the ride to be comfortable, the handling to be sharp, and the power to be sufficient(mine was a 5 speed). I owned mine for 6 years, loved every moment behind the wheel, and regret trading it in. I actually owned 2 at the same time, having bout a used 02 in 03. The 02 was an automatic, which i did not care for, but still loved that car also.
One thing i do agree with you on was its economy. They simply made that car too heavy. That was great for durability, but horrible for economy. The weighed nearly 3200#, which IMO was about 500# overweight.

Taliesin, it is interesting how differently you an i saw the PT. Considering its size, i found the car very roomy, with tremendous cargo carrying utility. I found the ride to be comfortable, the handling to be sharp, and the power to be sufficient(mine was a 5 speed)...

Do remember that I was only in it for a short time, and in the passneger seat as well.

I felt like the dash was too close and the windows were too small. The ride was comfortable enough, and your are quite right about cargo capacity.

I might not have made myself understood. The power would have been sufficient if it had better FE. More power would have given it an excuse for it's poor FE (I wasn't a hypermiler at the time).
I feel sorry for the poor sap that bought this with the towing package option.

Also realize that at the time I had been driving a '88 Nissan Pulsar. Much more room for the driver for it's size, easy to see out of, and cargo capacity to haul me and my fishing equipment. It also got better FE with more power.

It's no surpise to me at all that Chrysler was the first to go. For as long as I can remember they have had the worst fuel economy in nearly every car class. The Durango got worse gas mileage that the Excursion. How is that even possible? You start putting up numbers close to single digits and you won't have too many cars leave the lot when gas hits >$3/gallon.

My experience with Chrysler does not really center on the recent models but rather those from about 97-03. Can't say anything back then was something to write home about. I liked the driving experience of the Dakota Quad Cab when it came out, but yet again this was a mid size truck that suffered worse fuel economy than any full size out there. My first car was an 88 Aries K car. Do I really even need to detail the problems with that car or is it pretty obvious?

Do remember that I was only in it for a short time, and in the passneger seat as well.

I felt like the dash was too close and the windows were too small. The ride was comfortable enough, and your are quite right about cargo capacity.

I might not have made myself understood. The power would have been sufficient if it had better FE. More power would have given it an excuse for it's poor FE (I wasn't a hypermiler at the time).
I feel sorry for the poor sap that bought this with the towing package option.

Also realize that at the time I had been driving a '88 Nissan Pulsar. Much more room for the driver for it's size, easy to see out of, and cargo capacity to haul me and my fishing equipment. It also got better FE with more power.

The PT had 3 big strikes against it when it came to FE. First, as i mentioned, was the weight. Second, the only engine available was the 2.4. That engine has never been particularly efficient. I had a 2.7 V6 in my stratus that got better MPG than the same car with that 2.4. Third was the aerodynamics. There were compromises in that car due to the unique styling. I had no problem living with them, but many did. It was a polarizing car when it came out. You either loved it or hated it. I loved it.

It's no surpise to me at all that Chrysler was the first to go. For as long as I can remember they have had the worst fuel economy in nearly every car class. The Durango got worse gas mileage that the Excursion. How is that even possible? You start putting up numbers close to single digits and you won't have too many cars leave the lot when gas hits >$3/gallon.

My experience with Chrysler does not really center on the recent models but rather those from about 97-03. Can't say anything back then was something to write home about. I liked the driving experience of the Dakota Quad Cab when it came out, but yet again this was a mid size truck that suffered worse fuel economy than any full size out there. My first car was an 88 Aries K car. Do I really even need to detail the problems with that car or is it pretty obvious?

When talking about the K car, you have to evaluate it with the cars of it's era, not the cars we drive today. The K car was a simple rugged cheap easy to fix sedan that could carry six people, get MPG over 30, and basically saved Chrysler. It actually was a lot of car for not a lot of money, and it was FWD, which was just beginning to become popular. When the K car came out, the GM answer was the X car, which actually made the K car look good. Ford had the RWD Fairmont, which traced it's lineage back to the 1960 Falcon.
The K car was the basis for the Minivan, which was another Chrylser innovation(if yo don't count the VW microbus). The problem with the K car was that it existed twice as long as it should have, while it was passed up in technology along the way. IMO no auto manufacturer in the 80's built a very good product, including the Japanese (unless you don't consider rusting to powder in 5 years a problem).

With the exception of the Caravan, I can't think of any Chrysler product in the past 15 years that stood as an equal or superior to its competitors.

The Fiat products will take at least a year to pass US crash and emissions and at least another to be manufactured. Maybe the country should focus on the domestic brands that actually have a chance of making it without continual injections of billions of taxpayer dollars. Let this lemon company die.

"I drive a Dodge Stratus." - Will Ferrell, SNL

You either loved it or hated it. I loved it...

Don't get me wrong. I loved the looks and had great hopes for it.

But it fell very short of my expectations.

With the exception of the Caravan, I can't think of any Chrysler product in the past 15 years that stood as an equal or superior to its competitors.


Jeep Wrangler.- Has no competition
PT Cruiser--Had no competition, but now has imitators
Jeep Cherokee-Original compact ute
LH cars-original cab forward design-set new standards for interior room
SRT4-Nothing within $10,000 could equal it's performance.

I know i swim against the tide by defending a domestic car company, but i am used to swimming against the tide. I am probably the only person here who hates Hon-duhs too. Like i said, swim against the tide..LOL

Jeep Wrangler.- Has no competition
- FJ Cruiser.....

PT Cruiser--Had no competition, but now has imitators

:biglol: :biglol: :biglol:

Jeep Cherokee-Original compact ute

Cherokee = Luxury Land Boat.


SRT4-Nothing within $10,000 could equal it's performance.


http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s149/mdub25200/dubblackwheels.jpg

...I know i swim against the tide by defending a domestic car company, but i am used to swimming against the tide. I am probably the only person here who hates Hon-duhs too. Like i said, swim against the tide..LOL

I also have an "all-domestic" driveway, and have never had any reliability issues with any of the cars - GM, Ford, or Chrysler. I base my buying preferences on what my extended circle of relatives, friends, and business contacts experience. And I don't agree with the way the domestic manufacturers are being run, and I am not a fan of their truck-heavy lineup.

I've never owned a Honda, and very likely never will. But I certainly don't hate them, and I don't have a problem recommending them for those seeking auto buying advice. As you noted, there are many Honda owners here. And I rely on the experiences of these people to gather my own information as to which Honda models are a "safe" buy or a "not so safe" buy. Each member - whether they own a Honda or other make - will bring along real-world experience from different climates and terrains and traffic conditions. And they drive with different techniques at different times of the day/night. And the members here are people who are knowledgeable and mature and can be considered a reliable and honest source of information.

The whole composite shows us how the cars perform in everyday use, and I thank everyone here for sharing their experiences - both the good and the bad. When somebody says, "I hate xyzabc - they're junk", my first question is "How many of them have you owned? Within the last 10 years? How was it driven? And maintained?" If their in-law or cousin owned one in the '80s, I dismiss the whole statement. If they say their '88 version was crap because the dashboard creaked, I smile and promptly forget about it. It's irrelevant.

Car companies change their products all the time and one car can go from horrible to stellar with one redesign. My brother owned a '90 Hyundai Excel. Well driven, well maintained. Over the years/miles, it developed its quirks but he'd fix whatever broke. He'd say it was "reliable". Others who need to go to a dealer for a repair would find it "unreliable". In the year before it was totaled by a bouncing loose truck tire on the expressway, he was still driving it 90 miles a day to work. The neutral safety switch was bad, so he'd start it by holding the key on "start" with his left hand while finagling the shift lever with his right hand. It'd start every time when you got the lever in the right spot. He left it that way figuring it was the world's best anti-theft device. Would I recommend a 2009 Hyundai Accent after remembering my brother's '90 Excel? Without question, yes. The Hyundai cars of today are nothing like those of 20 years ago. When I hear of a '90 Ford Tempo with a bad head gasket and bad trans, I do not count that as a cause to avoid the '10 Ford Fusion.

Blackbelt,
I'll swim with you on this one and add this:

I believe the Ram is a very good vehicle for those that really do need one of that type.

The unfortunate part is that they advertised to those that don't really need it.

I also have an "all-domestic" driveway, and have never had any reliability issues with any of the cars - GM, Ford, or Chrysler...

Our driveway is all domestic right now:

Chevy HHR
Chevy cavalier
Ford Ranger
Dodge Ram (Kansas City Plant)
Nitro 898 boat (built in Clinton, MO)

The only real issue we have had is with the cavalier transmission. It's a sealed tranny that does not require adding fluid under "normal" driving conditions. However, my room mates often drove over "mountain terrain" which meant they needed to add fluid. There is no way to add fluid to it though.

From what I've seen of the original FJ Cruiser, I'd call it a Wrangler imitator. It hasn't been made in years. During most of that time the Wrangler had no competition. The new FJ is more of the 'pick-up with cab' SUV design than the Wrangler's iconic 'jeep'.

The Grand Cherokee was and is a luxury land boat. The original Cherokee was pretty no-thrills and close in size to the Wrangler.

I voted "Ram" as the worst model based on two factors. I had experience with the mid 90's Rams as work trucks. While they always ran they always threw codes or had ABS system troubles --lack of dealer mechanical expertise may have been an issue. We hated it when the company made us replace our '91 F150s with '95 Rams. Probably the mechanical issues have been worked out by now.

More importantly, they are also worst because they broke new ground in the styling and marketing of trucks as an aggressive macho "take life by the horns" fashion accessory. That trend, IMHO, led to uglier, larger and less useful pickups over the last fifteen years.

Our driveway is all domestic right now:

Chevy HHR
Chevy cavalier
Ford Ranger
Dodge Ram (Kansas City Plant)
Nitro 898 boat (built in Clinton, MO)

The only real issue we have had is with the cavalier transmission. It's a sealed tranny that does not require adding fluid under "normal" driving conditions. However, my room mates often drove over "mountain terrain" which meant they needed to add fluid. There is no way to add fluid to it though.

I have an HHR now, and noticed the lack of dip stick for checking the tranny fluid. It is, however, a flat-towable auto.

The only real issue we have had is with the cavalier transmission. ... There is no way to add fluid to it though.
There is a fill plug that is accessible from under the car. In severe service, the trans fluid should be changed, and there are provisions to do that via the plug. Since they found that most people and/or low-budget oil-change shops overfilled the transmissions or used the wrong fluid, resulting in increased warranty costs, they sealed the trans and said "change it at 60k only if used during mountain driving, towing, solar eclipse, etc". The only time the fluid level will drop will be when there is a leak, and the sealed transmission encourages owners to take the car to a shop to get the leak fixed and then have the fluid topped off.

There is a fill plug that is accessible from under the car...

Unfortunately this model was the first year with that tranny, and they hadn't put in that fill plug yet.

Fortunately my room mate worked in a mechanic shop and can do it with his eyes closed.

Also, they no longer have those ddriving conditions so it's not as big a deal anymore. I think their biggest beef with it was that there was no way to check the level. how do you know if something is wrong if you can't check it?

I think I'd be able to concede the Wrangler, though how realistic is it that it would survive when gas got back to $4/gallon. Its primary role as a frat boy mover would quickly be replaced by something more practical (save on gas = more dough for beer).

The rest of the vehicles are niche at best.

I drive a Ranger; it isn't an anti-Ameircan bias it is a anti-junk bias. My old neighbor is a mechanic, owned 5 Chrysler vehicles, and spent 95% of his free time repairing them. It is probably better to say they owned him. One was a brand new (2006) Ram 2500. All but one was "late model." When vehicles with a few thousand on the odometer leak oil, you got to wonder...

Of the fleet vehicles I have driven, the GM truck and the Ford cars did well. We have a new Prius that is pretty nice.

Jeep Wrangler.- Has no competition
PT Cruiser--Had no competition, but now has imitators
Jeep Cherokee-Original compact ute
LH cars-original cab forward design-set new standards for interior room
SRT4-Nothing within $10,000 could equal it's performance.

I know i swim against the tide by defending a domestic car company, but i am used to swimming against the tide. I am probably the only person here who hates Hon-duhs too. Like i said, swim against the tide..LOL

- FJ Cruiser.....



:biglol: :biglol: :biglol:



Cherokee = Luxury Land Boat.



http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s149/mdub25200/dubblackwheels.jpg

The FJ does not compete with the Wrangler. If you ever took an FJ off road, you would know that. Troll bait summed it up quite nicely

You LOL all you want about the PT, but the fact is that car started the current 'retro' era of styling that is still going on. Such as the HHR, the Mustang, the Camaro, and the Challenger.

The Cherokee has never been a "luxury land boat". Do you even know what a Cherokee is? :confused:

The SRT4 was introduced in 2004. The Cobalt SS didn't come out until 2006. As i said, when it was introduced it had no competition.

I also have an "all-domestic" driveway, and have never had any reliability issues with any of the cars - GM, Ford, or Chrysler. I base my buying preferences on what my extended circle of relatives, friends, and business contacts experience. And I don't agree with the way the domestic manufacturers are being run, and I am not a fan of their truck-heavy lineup.

I've never owned a Honda, and very likely never will. But I certainly don't hate them, and I don't have a problem recommending them for those seeking auto buying advice. As you noted, there are many Honda owners here. And I rely on the experiences of these people to gather my own information as to which Honda models are a "safe" buy or a "not so safe" buy. Each member - whether they own a Honda or other make - will bring along real-world experience from different climates and terrains and traffic conditions. And they drive with different techniques at different times of the day/night. And the members here are people who are knowledgeable and mature and can be considered a reliable and honest source of information.

The whole composite shows us how the cars perform in everyday use, and I thank everyone here for sharing their experiences - both the good and the bad. When somebody says, "I hate xyzabc - they're junk", my first question is "How many of them have you owned? Within the last 10 years? How was it driven? And maintained?" If their in-law or cousin owned one in the '80s, I dismiss the whole statement. If they say their '88 version was crap because the dashboard creaked, I smile and promptly forget about it. It's irrelevant.

Car companies change their products all the time and one car can go from horrible to stellar with one redesign. My brother owned a '90 Hyundai Excel. Well driven, well maintained. Over the years/miles, it developed its quirks but he'd fix whatever broke. He'd say it was "reliable". Others who need to go to a dealer for a repair would find it "unreliable". In the year before it was totaled by a bouncing loose truck tire on the expressway, he was still driving it 90 miles a day to work. The neutral safety switch was bad, so he'd start it by holding the key on "start" with his left hand while finagling the shift lever with his right hand. It'd start every time when you got the lever in the right spot. He left it that way figuring it was the world's best anti-theft device. Would I recommend a 2009 Hyundai Accent after remembering my brother's '90 Excel? Without question, yes. The Hyundai cars of today are nothing like those of 20 years ago. When I hear of a '90 Ford Tempo with a bad head gasket and bad trans, I do not count that as a cause to avoid the '10 Ford Fusion.

Maxx, a well thought out and logical post as usual. I hate Honda because i owned 3 of them, and all three were trouble prone. I owned 2 accords and a prelude. I treat my cars like family(family that i like..LOL). Both Accords needed automatic trannies before 60K miles. One was in the shop 4 times for brake issues. One had the AC compressor blow out at 39K. Plus a bunch of other issues. Plus, i just think they are boring, even ugly. I, like you, take a lot of the "IT's GARBAGE" opinions with a grain of salt and ask the same kinds of questions that you do. Like you, i listen to an appreciate when people share info. I have learned a lot. But i also have owned over 85 different vehicles in my life form almost every manufacturer, so i do have practical experiences to back up some of my assertions. I just can't help but be saddened that people seem glad to see Chrysler and GM on the ropes.


I think I'd be able to concede the Wrangler, though how realistic is it that it would survive when gas got back to $4/gallon. Its primary role as a frat boy mover would quickly be replaced by something more practical (save on gas = more dough for beer).

The rest of the vehicles are niche at best.

I drive a Ranger; it isn't an anti-Ameircan bias it is a anti-junk bias. My old neighbor is a mechanic, owned 5 Chrysler vehicles, and spent 95% of his free time repairing them. It is probably better to say they owned him. One was a brand new (2006) Ram 2500. All but one was "late model." When vehicles with a few thousand on the odometer leak oil, you got to wonder...

Of the fleet vehicles I have driven, the GM truck and the Ford cars did well. We have a new Prius that is pretty nice.

Chumby, At the tender age of 52 i am sure my wife would be shocked to learn i am a "frat boy":biglol::biglol: since we own an 08 Wrangler. BTW, it isn't even broken in yet and i have gotten it up to 24.5MPG. I will get it past 30.
I agree that the SRT4 and maybe the PT were niche vehicles. But the Jeep Cherokee and Concorde/Intrepid are about as mainstream as you can get.
As i mentioned above, i have owned over 85 vehicles. MANY of them were Chryslers and all were very reliable cars. The worst car i owned in terms of reliabilty happened to be a Ford. That couldgive me an anti junk bias against Ford, but that wouldn't be fair, as some out there have had good luck with them.

Hi All:

___A few more tidbits within the last few hours...

Chrysler LLC Vice Chairman and President Tom LaSorda to Retire

Aubrun Hills, MI. -- Tom LaSorda, Vice Chairman and President, Chrysler LLC announced to the Chrysler Board Thursday, April 30, his intention to retire from the Company with immediate effect.

LaSorda -- Chrysler's top executive responsible for Manufacturing, Procurement and Supply, Employee Relations, Global Business Development and Alliances -- was appointed to his current position in August 2007, serving in both the Office of the Chairman and on the Board of Managers.

"As the head of our global business development, Tom LaSorda arranged the first meeting with Fiat and played a pivotal role in developing the alliance," said Bob Nardelli, Chrysler Chairman and CEO. "His leadership has been instrumental in steering Chrysler through many challenges and has helped our company lay the foundation for a great future. Tom is the fourth generation of LaSordas to work for Chrysler, so he truly has the company in his blood. We thank him for his many contributions and wish him all the best in his future endeavors."

Many of Chrysler's boldest and most successful operational initiatives of the 21st Century were borne by LaSorda. One example, the Toledo Supplier Park in Ohio, home of the Jeep(R) Wrangler, incorporates suppliers into major elements of the vehicle manufacturing process and went on to become North America's most productive assembly plant.

He was also known for being active in community and charity events, such as United Way, the Rehabilitation Institute of Michigan and the Delray Neighborhood House.

LaSorda was appointed President and CEO of the Chrysler Group in 2005 after serving as Chief Operating Officer for the Chrysler Group. Prior to joining the company in 2000, he was employed by General Motors Corporation where he served in many capacities including President of Opel Eisenach GmbH and Vice President of Quality, Reliability and Competitive Operations. He earned a reputation as an authority on lean manufacturing by helping to launch the GM-Suzuki joint venture plant, CAMI, in Canada and Opel Eisenach, GM's pioneering venture in the former East Germany.

In June 2006, LaSorda was presented with an honorary Doctorate of Laws by the University of Windsor in Ontario, Canada. The Automotive Hall of Fame also awarded LaSorda the "Distinguished Service Citation" in 2004.

LaSorda was born on July 24, 1954, in Windsor, Ontario. He has been married to Doreen, his high school sweetheart, for 32 years. They have two daughters, Jackie (26) and Christine (23).

Chrysler Financial Remains Focused on Running Its Business Operations

Farmington Hills, MI. -- In response to Chrysler LLC's April 30, 2009, decision to file for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Act, Chrysler Financial today emphasized that it continues in business as an independent and separate legal entity from the automobile manufacturer, and remains focused on running its business operations.

Chrysler Financial will continue to provide standard rate financing for retail consumers and to service its existing portfolio. However, as a result of Chrysler LLC's bankruptcy filing, Chrysler Financial is now required to temporarily suspend dealer wholesale financing in the United States and Canada, effective immediately, as it works to implement new procedures with its lenders. Also, the Company will suspend participation in Chrysler LLC's subvented A.P.R. programs while assessing the situation.

"In support of the decision made by President Obama and the Automotive Taskforce to move forward with the Chrysler Financial and GMAC transition, the Company is committed to working with our lenders, employees, dealers and customers to manage through the results of this decision," stated Tom F. Gilman, Chairman and CEO - Chrysler Financial.

Chrysler Financial customers should expect no disruption to the servicing of their account as a result of these announcements.

You LOL all you want about the PT, but the fact is that car started the current 'retro' era of styling that is still going on. Such as the HHR, the Mustang, the Camaro, and the Challenger.

Actually, I think you'll find that the VW New Beetle started that trend.

I think I'd be able to concede the Wrangler, though how realistic is it that it would survive when gas got back to $4/gallon. Its primary role as a frat boy mover would quickly be replaced by something more practical (save on gas = more dough for beer).

The rest of the vehicles are niche at best.

I drive a Ranger; it isn't an anti-Ameircan bias it is a anti-junk bias. My old neighbor is a mechanic, owned 5 Chrysler vehicles, and spent 95% of his free time repairing them. It is probably better to say they owned him. One was a brand new (2006) Ram 2500. All but one was "late model." When vehicles with a few thousand on the odometer leak oil, you got to wonder...

Of the fleet vehicles I have driven, the GM truck and the Ford cars did well. We have a new Prius that is pretty nice.


I've owned three chryslers. I spent day in and day out fixing them..why? I WANTED TO. I experimented and I broke things so I repaired them. looking from the outside, someone would say they are problem cars, but I don't buy that. They only thing that comes remotely close to either of the cars having a problem I didn't cause (my current car) is when I bought it used in '07, a couple months later the tranny failed. It was in march and we had a couple blizzards where I'd get stuck and overheat the fluid a few times.

Actually, I think you'll find that the VW New Beetle started that trend.

Sean you are correct, and as a VW fan who has owned at least one VW since 1980 i should have known that. The New Beetle came out in the 98 model year. I was never a fan of the NB, so i guess i just blocked it from my mind...LOL

Side note...How far have we come? My 1980 Rabbit Diesel with 4 speed manual got 55MPG.:cool:

"I drive a Dodge Stratus!" - Will Ferrell, SNL

I STILL love that skit even though I don't watch SNL anymore. I shout that line out loud and crack myself up every time I see one of these cars, or drive past Sterling Heights Assy Plant (which is only a few miles away).

:Banane29:

I also quote, in a slightly softer voice, Dr. Evil's line about "Hot Pockets" when I'm in the frozen food aisle...

-Raj

Side note...How far have we come? My 1980 Rabbit Diesel with 4 speed manual got 55MPG.:cool:

I hear you. I wanted a Metro XFi, Civic HX, or a CRX HF for quite a while. I lost the back seat when I got the Insight but it is one vehicle that actually is an improvement in mileage without adding hundreds of pounds to the weight. It is also fairly spartan by modern standards, and I like that.

I'm also a Beetle nut, by the way. :o

(No, the NB doesn't count. :p)

Hi All:

___A few more tidbits within the last few hours...

Chrysler LLC Vice Chairman and President Tom LaSorda to Retire

Aubrun Hills, MI. -- Tom LaSorda, Vice Chairman and President, Chrysler LLC announced to the Chrysler Board Thursday, April 30, his intention to retire from the Company with immediate effect.

LaSorda -- Chrysler's top executive responsible for Manufacturing, Procurement and Supply, Employee Relations, Global Business Development and Alliances -- was appointed to his current position in August 2007, serving in both the Office of the Chairman and on the Board of Managers.

"As the head of our global business development, Tom LaSorda arranged the first meeting with Fiat and played a pivotal role in developing the alliance," said Bob Nardelli, Chrysler Chairman and CEO. "His leadership has been instrumental in steering Chrysler through many challenges and has helped our company lay the foundation for a great future. Tom is the fourth generation of LaSordas to work for Chrysler, so he truly has the company in his blood. We thank him for his many contributions and wish him all the best in his future endeavors."



Oh, so THAT's who I saw getting thrown out of the Pentastar window yesterday...

I hear you. I wanted a Metro XFi, Civic HX, or a CRX HF for quite a while. I lost the back seat when I got the Insight but it is one vehicle that actually is an improvement in mileage without adding hundreds of pounds to the weight. It is also fairly spartan by modern standards, and I like that.

I'm also a Beetle nut, by the way. :o

(No, the NB doesn't count. :p)

Back in the late 60's early 70's. before i had my license, i was a typical teen of the day. With one exception. All my friends went crazy over the Vette. I loved and wanted a Beetle.
My 80 rabbit was also pretty spartan. No A/C, manual steering etc, but it handled like a sports car(of its era), and never got less than 40MPG(dead of winter -15 degree temps) I had a set of studded snow tires on that car and i would pass stuck 4x4's with it...LOL.
I loved that car!