THe_DeTAiL3R Posted January 9, 2004 Report Posted January 9, 2004 Got this from the bank used (charity thing) for $0.25. Interesting! They really know what they're talking about!! How many miles are on my original 2.8 engine??? Quote
Justin Posted January 9, 2004 Report Posted January 9, 2004 Yeah, does anyone use the "automatic" seatbelts? At least there are no expensive tracks to go to hell like on the fords of the same era. And if 150,000+ miles is much worse than average, then what the hell is average? Quote
Robby1870 Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 Excellent brakes.........HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Quote
gimp19 Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 I must have get a special edition cutlass, cause my brakes athough they work fine need to be replaced every 2 years or 15,000 miles and my 16+ year old 2.8litre is the most reliable maitinance free thing in the world and I'm not kidding. Quote
conley3.1 Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 What a bunch of retards. 15 mpg city, 37 highway? What kind of crack were they smoking??? Did Chevy even make a 2l i4 for the Lbody? Quote
5speedz34 Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 Consumer Reports is very biased on the domestic manufactuers. My dad has a subscription and they seriously probaly only pic 4 GM vehicles per year that they recommend. Quote
quaddriver Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 Got this from the bank used (charity thing) for $0.25. Interesting!They really know what they're talking about!! How many miles are on my original 2.8 engine??? One datapoint does not a trend make. Thier predictions have been shown to be pretty much on the money. ESPECIALLY the cars quoted. Quote
Vegeta Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 Yeah, our brakes kick ass and the 2.8 sucks, its right there in the book! We all know the quad 4 has less problems than the 2.8 as well, which is why its rated better in their book. 1 star wars quote does not a relevant point make. Edit, i see they are talking about the 2.0...omg what a piece. Quote
BurneroftheRice Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 I hate those "Consumer Report" books. They make out American cars to look like ass...always complaining about "engine noise" and "too much body cadding". I sware they accept lobbies from honda just to make it seem like their cars are the shit. My mom trusted the consumer report books untill she found out that when lookingn for a SUV that most forign cars have no power out of their dinkey 4 cylinders. So she ended up buying a Jeep Grand Charokee. And shes very happy with it Quote
quaddriver Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 From flipping through the pages, I have not seen one domestic vehicle that was rated higher than 'average'. Many imports were rated "much better than average" :? Its all biased. that was how it was 14 years ago, trust me, I lived and drove thru it. gm and ford put out a lot of 'less than inspired' vehicles. find a 1995 'used car buying guide' from edmonds and look at what models had what go wrong with them. fer instance, I had an 89 escort GT, speedy little bugger, handled great with minor mods, I raced it at lime rock nearly every chance I got, but damn, light duty car - switchgear, clutch, cv joints got a 90 ford truck - still going on the original power plant with >220K, but then again, ford trucks tend to have that >96% still on the road after 10 years rating (so do chevy btw) so it was clear where the automakers had been sinking the R&D dollars. Had a 93 corsica LT-3, it suffered the same gremlins you will find listed in the used car buyers guide (never mind that I liked the car, it ran fast when I was done with it, got great mileage and was cheap to own - but many people not mechanically inclined, let alone shop owning dont want to fix cars) A toyota camry DX 4cyl 5spd from the same year wont even dream of breaking till well over 150K, and the history backs that up too. I think it really took until the 94/95 model years that the us automakers started to get similar ratings such that the import lemons started showing up. If you ask my opinion, GM shoulda delayed the W body until the 90's and it was well tested. You will find few long term A/J/L/N/W bodies from say 82-92 (depending on body year of course) that are satisfied overall. that 'new car feeling' rarely lasts outside of one year. Yet I drive my 98 Cutlass GLS (aka malibu, alero etc) now, and it is still cleaner now at 105K than most anything produced in 1990 after 1 year/12K Of all the 50 or so cars I have ever owned, I have purchased brand new, off the lot in 87, 89, 90, 93, 94 and 98 and while enamored with each one at the time (I had better been, I was paying for it) the difference in quality each time was very noticable (save the 90 truck, we covered that) Quote
supreme_style21 Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 I always check carpoint.msn.com and look at their used car reviews. The reliability ratings and problem reports have been right on in everything I've looked at on there. Quote
gimp19 Posted January 10, 2004 Report Posted January 10, 2004 I have never driven a new W-body, but have had mine since it was 12 years old and it runs, stops, and handles just as good as any 2 year old car I have driven. Most GM cars if cared for properly can last alot longer then in import and still have a new car feel to them. I have not 1 single complaint about my cutty aside from the crappy digital dash, the brakes and peeling dash. But for a 16 year old car I guess I'm lucky those are my only problems Quote
rudefyet Posted January 11, 2004 Report Posted January 11, 2004 ok this is a forum for w-body entushiasts...but you know GM cars are sold cheap...they aren't always the fanciest looking cars either back in them days...but no offense to anyone in here...many of those cars were bought but low income joe blows living in a trailer that smells like ass...doesn't have a clue about cars or how they work and has no money to fix it and the only reason he bought it was cause it was "cheap" if you did the same thing to a japanese car it be just as bad...but domestics sell cheaper and are easier to find...but people who go out and buy an american made car with the intent of keeping it in the best shape possible shouldn't be amazed that it's still running at 200,000miles...but they need to realize most the people who have broken down domestics probably don't know oil from antifreeze...if you take care of a car of course it'll last...just so happens imports are usaually better taken care of cause the owners paid more for them...they're babied not more reliable...if someone babies an old ford pinto...i guarntee it'll hit over 200 grand on the odometer...but hey thats my 2 cents Quote
excelsior Posted January 11, 2004 Report Posted January 11, 2004 any car can be maintained any car can be neglected. ive got a buddy here who has an 86 cavvy that is still goin strong & then i know a girl w/an 00 sunfire thats in bad shape....my dads 97 avalon is in immaculate shape yet me & another guy test drove a 99 celica w/ problems....its on how u take care of it most of the time Quote
RareGMFan Posted January 11, 2004 Report Posted January 11, 2004 ok this is a forum for w-body entushiasts...but you know GM cars are sold cheap...they aren't always the fanciest looking cars either back in them days...but no offense to anyone in here...many of those cars were bought but low income joe blows living in a trailer that smells like ass...doesn't have a clue about cars or how they work and has no money to fix it and the only reason he bought it was cause it was "cheap" if you did the same thing to a japanese car it be just as bad...but domestics sell cheaper and are easier to find...but people who go out and buy an american made car with the intent of keeping it in the best shape possible shouldn't be amazed that it's still running at 200,000miles...but they need to realize most the people who have broken down domestics probably don't know oil from antifreeze...if you take care of a car of course it'll last...just so happens imports are usaually better taken care of cause the owners paid more for them...they're babied not more reliable...if someone babies an old ford pinto...i guarntee it'll hit over 200 grand on the odometer...but hey thats my 2 cents FINALLY! This is what I've been trying to tell everyone that I've gotten into a dispute with over this domestic vs. import thing! I still think over-all that imports cut a few less corners in expenses, but the disparity people put between them is disgusting and WAY off base. Like I said on another thread about this subject, I've been around both kinds of vehicles for too long to believe in that uneducated, idiotic stereotypical non-sense. Quote
Bolt_Crank Posted January 11, 2004 Report Posted January 11, 2004 if the proper maintenance is done, any vehicle will last practically forever my auntie wrapped the odometer 3 times on her 89 astro before she sold it Quote
digitaloutsider Posted January 11, 2004 Report Posted January 11, 2004 Yeah, does anyone use the "automatic" seatbelts? At least there are no expensive tracks to go to hell like on the fords of the same era. And if 150,000+ miles is much worse than average, then what the hell is average? I think I tried the whole "automatic" seat belt thing for a week. I finally got tired of having to push like hell to open my door. Quote
god910 Posted January 12, 2004 Report Posted January 12, 2004 Well, I'm fat so the auto seatbelt is out for me. I think I've tried it maybe twice. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.