CIrvin1258@aol.com wrote:
>
> Okay...it's my turn...
>
> The Brits aren't the ONLY folks around here, that have put cars into
> production "without properly testing them"...Lest we forget:
>
> 1. Chevy Vega
> 2. Ford Edsel
> 3. Buick Special (with the PRE-ROVER 215 V-8 that blew up in 40,00 miles - or
> less - some fireball, eh?)
> 4. Dodge Daytona Turbo
> 5. Chrysler K-series
> 6. Ford Pinto
> 7. ANY G.M. product manufactured from 1978-1988 that had the wonderful peeling
> paintjobs! (Oh - the number of folks that were told "It was the soap you
> used, and
> NOT our prep work that caused it. It isn't covered under warranty.
> Sorry.")
> 8. The 1979 Mustang GT as used by the C.H.P. (remember that one? It had an
> ugly tendancy to flip over when it hit 100mph!)
> 9. Just about any AMC product
> 10. 1975-1985 Chevy Corvettes, and Camaros (so emission equipped, that my 1969
> MGB-GT could run rings around them - and often did)
> 11. Plymouth Volare/Chrysler LeBaron - Personal experience here: my dad had
> one
> and in 2 years' time, nearly every mechanical part short of the engine,
> had been
> replaced TWICE!
>
> Don't tell me that Brit cars were underdeveloped, friend - if it weren't for
> the lobbyists that the big three have, they would have been outta business
> long ago.
>
> I'll agree with you on one point - the folks at BL were pretty money hungry,
> and they did turn out mostly junk cars, BUT - the big three are equally money
> hungry. Don't believe me? Why do Land Rover Defenders require side air-bags,
> and Jeeps don't? They're similar designs, yet the American made one is okay -
> the foreign competition isn't? Who's at work here, I wonder?
>
> Incidentally - the TR-6 used a body-on-frame design, like American cars, which
> - by the way - is considered outdated, in favor of the monocoque (unibody)
> design of the MGB/MGB-GT - which is used by just about everybody and anybody
> these days, INCLUDING American automakers! If it's so prone to rust, then
> American cars are just as bad, right? And another thing - if the Hemi engine
> is so great, then why isn't it used today?
>
> Charles
Charles, do you know there is a $5,000.00 penalty tax added to a car that
cannot achieve a certain gas mileage figure ??? The Hemi was and is a
great engine for high performance people, it did not sell well in family
sedans, not because of problems, but, "Family Sedans", how would you like
to own a garage full of Hemi'S, mucho $$$. You speak of all Chrysler
products as being bad but only speak of one you know of (dads), if the
engine in the Chrysler cars were so bad, why did the same engine stick
around for over 40 YEARS = 318 & 225 =. Sale dictate production, and just
like fashion they have to be change quite often. Chevy Vega was a good
car for the money spent and if used the way it was intended would give
good service, do not compare price to quality, show me a person thats
sells a cheap product and I will show you a cheap product. The world
today is much more consumer oriented than 25 years ago, every county in
every state has consumer laws in place now, not then, all manufacturers
learned from mistakes and the no sales of bad products, but a blanket
remark of all of these cars were bad is just not so.
|