My comments on the disappearing american car

Ohmess

I wanna DRIVE!
Site Donor $
Messages
4,888
Reaction score
2,714
Location
Aiken, SC
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/06/the-steadily-disappearing-american-car.html

So, the conventional wisdom is that people are foregoing US cars and flocking to US trucks because they don't care about fuel consumption, like sitting higher, and because newer trucks are more comfortable.

Conventional wisdom misses several important factors:

Perceived Safety: If you look at actual crash test data, there is a huge disparity between heavier and lighter vehicles in both death and injury rates for occupants. And the most dangerous accidents are those involving the largest disparity between the weight of the vehicle you are in and objects you may encounter. Obviously, the heavier the vehicle you drive, the less likely it is that you will become involved in an accident with a much heavier vehicle. Moreover, about half of all accidents are classified as single vehicle accidents, and in these accidents the mass of the vehicle in comparison to some stationary object is a major factor in protecting occupants. People know this, even though available composite ratings don’t fully bear this out.

Of course, larger heavier vehicles are more difficult to drive safely, but because most people view accidents as acts of God, they ignore this.

Durability: As our roads are allowed to deteriorate, trucks are better able to withstand the stresses of poor road conditions. In the area where I live, the pavement quality is rated as "deficient" by the state of Virginia on two thirds of the roads. (I think that is far too generous.) And if forced to commute into DC, the roads there are worse. I own a truck because I go into DC from time to time (and to get me moving in the event it snows because our local governments can’t be bothered to learn snow removal techniques).

Crappy US Cars: US car manufacturers have never truly embraced making small, functional, efficient vehicles. Back in the 1990s I used to say that if I ran a US car company, I would make a Camry every bit as good as the one Toyota makes. Obviously, with a four year development cycle, this car would be behind the times by the time it hit the showrooms, but at least a US company would prove they could make something like this. And until very recently, everything the US car companies thought was competitive with BMW was a joke.

Power: Many of us experienced powerful heavy vehicles in the past and liked them. Moreover, US car companies spent decades seeking to sell size and power in order to entice consumers to buy larger more profitable vehicles. Accordingly, there are lots of people in the US who like the feel of a large heavy vehicle that accelerates rapidly. Heavy powerful trucks still feel this way, but because of the fuel economy standards applicable to cars, they generally don’t.
 

deQuincey

Quousque tandem...?
Site Donor
Messages
8,418
Reaction score
2,431
Location
BIO - 43°15'46.5"N 2°56'03.7"W
Dear Ohmess, that is a very accurate preception of today`s reality
you are absolutely right,
only point i can add is that the SUV and crossover trend seems to be gaining addepts here too, (generally speaking we do not buy trucks), they might be slightly more efficient due to fuel prices here, but basically it is the same s**t
 

autokunst

Well-Known Member
Site Donor $$
Messages
3,610
Reaction score
2,623
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Interesting article and comments. It seems to be a sadly accurate picture of the US automotive climate. Perhaps the stock photograph they used in the article paints a telltale picture. Travelers driving through the Arizona desert. You'd think that after logging a fair amount of seat time, they would relish the opportunity to stand up and stretch. But no, they can't seem to be bothered with posture. Rather, they slump their weight onto the rear quarter of their car and relax while filling their tanks. Embarrassing.
105115205-GettyImages-932358146.1910x1000.jpg
 

Ohmess

I wanna DRIVE!
Site Donor $
Messages
4,888
Reaction score
2,714
Location
Aiken, SC
And if you were writing an article seeking to generate sympathy for US cars, why in the world would you use a picture of two massive, poorly built Chrysler cars from the period right after the 1979 government bailout? These cars were junk when they were brand new (and did not get better with age).

Why remind us that even after the oil shock, US car manufacturers pushed their refusal to make small, functional, fuel efficient vehicles so far that Chrysler was not only bankrupt, but no one wanted to buy them because their pension plans were so underfunded that the company was worthless.

And why remind us taxpayers that we had to pony up because it was cheaper to keep the company running than it would have been to pay off the pension liabilities through the PBGC.
 

dang

Administrator
Site Donor
Messages
4,260
Reaction score
3,280
Location
Rocklin, CA
From someone who sees a lot of different vehicles every day, buying from private party owners with problem vehicles and familiar with used parts sales, which correlates to part demand, I can tell you that most of the car market is based on perception. "I only own Toyota's and never have any problems with mine", and conveniently forgets about all the dealer visits to fix problems. Some Toyota engines are not great, some Honda transmissions are usually the weak link in the drive train and can fail at 100k, but you don't hear about that. On the flip side, people say "I'd never own a small Ford car like a Focus" because their opinion it's based on cars from 20+ years ago. The "Big Three" sell more trucks and SUV's because that's what they know. You can't increase your small car sales if you don't offer small cars. Drive to the store and try to count the Camry's on the road. People still drive sedans.

That said, I get a lot of family and friends asking me about which used cars to buy since I have a lot of experience with it. No Chrysler products, period. You can do okay with a truck with certain engines but it's easier just to tell people to stay away completely. The cost of a used 4-cyl Camry engine is two to three times the cost of used 6-cyl engine. I'll let you figure that one out. Early 2000 Ford Focus' had two different engines used in the cars. One engine self destructed, sometimes at 60k miles, and the other engine could last for 300k miles. This is part of the perception people have about small U.S. built cars. "Saturn's are garbage!". Not really. Most of the old Saturns we buy have well over 200k on them. They're actually decent cars but have the perception of being bad, which lowers their value to nearly nothing.

You can over pay for perception, and you can under pay for good cars for the same reason.
 

Nicad

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Messages
3,517
Reaction score
542
Location
Toronto
Good advice on the Chryslers. I saw one of those Jeep Compass' with 30K and a sheared off ball joint at the side of the road last year. If in the Salt belt, don't buy a Ford, they still rust. I think a low to the ground CUV is probably what I will stick with for my next vehicle. I also think I don't much care for fancy features any more. Hopefully will focus on motorcycles for my 60's. I like the handling of my SUV. I probably won't buy a domestic. They will have to win me back. Canadians bailed out GM/ Chrysler for twice the amount the US tax payer did per capita. They are bit by bit abandoning production up here. Mostly due to the worst Provincial and Federal Government regimes in my lifetime. Still Corporations are not too big to fail.
 
Last edited:

teahead

aka "Rob"
Site Donor $
Messages
6,392
Reaction score
1,848
Location
Tacoma, WA, USA
My wife's 300c SRT8 has 168k on it. Only issues was a water pump leak which got the alternator wet. And the alpine navigation went out (replaced it with a mygig). My coworkers Durango has 200k on it. No issues . My 2004 2500 ram diesel has no issues except an ignition switch issue which let's the heater fan stay on after the key is out. That's it with 167k on it.
 

Nicad

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Messages
3,517
Reaction score
542
Location
Toronto
There ya go,great service from Chryslers. I take it back . A good friend thinks his Chrysler minivan is the greatest vehicle made. His other vehicle is a ZX14R, which I believe is now the 2nd fastest production vehicle to date sold.
 
Last edited:

w. chen

Well-Known Member
Messages
103
Reaction score
12
Location
los angeles, ca
When I was a teenager, never thought highly of Chrysler’s stuff. They were third rate compared to gm n Ford. Fast forward to my 40s, got a 96 Dakota pick up with 26,000 miles n now with 310,000 on the clock, still original unopened block with ac compressor n alternator replaced in the past two years. Tho trans was replaced at 180,000. Everything else held up well. Even the dreaded in tank fuel pump lasted over 250,000 miles.
Also, got the third generation of their mini vans, ran like a top with just the tranny going bad n everything else held together till my son totaled it with 180,000 in less than 8 years. That’s my experience.
Some folks have mis fortunes with different brands, some brands more than others. With our bmws, I’m sure we have our ups n down too.
 

craterface

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Messages
1,665
Reaction score
908
Location
Sanibel Island
Our 2012 Chrysler Town and Country has 75k miles, and literally nothing has broken. Zero. (My 2011 BMW with 45k has had some failures--coils, charge pipe, etc.) And once I wore out the stock Kumhos on the van and put Michelins on it, it drives great. Paid 27500 brand new with all the power options except nav. I love the damn thing. I like it better than the Odyssey it replaced. I was raised on foreign cars, but I am sold on this product. I can't speak for other Chrysler stuff, however. The ones I have rented have mostly been a POS (Journey, Avenger, etc).
 
Top