minivans
raindog
i can tell the make, model, and year.
i know which ones suck,
and which ones really suck.
my brain is overflowing with previously irrelevant number letter
combinations:
2.2 4cyl, 2.4 4cyl 4, 2.7 4cyl, 3.0 6cyl, 3.1 6cyl, 3.3 6cyl, 3.4 6cyl, 3.8
6cyl
i am sick to death of auto reviewers that always opt for the hugest engine.
front wheel drive is the bane of long-legged fat men.
why must everything have power locks and power windows and now even power
sliding doors?
why must minivans be designed to wedge three rows of seats in? all i really
need is 2 or maybe 4.
i must find a new used vehicle soon. my 188k miles '76 G20 is very tired.
i've done so for over 10 years, but i cannot bear to continue feeding a
10mpg vehicle.
i am in torment.
good day
Pelysma
"raindog" <mlor...@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:n%Sxb.25345$Rk5....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> i see them everywhere i go.
> i can tell the make, model, and year.
> i know which ones suck,
> and which ones really suck.
Mid-90's Windstars really, really suck. Every one of them, 95-98 at least.
My 1999 Dodge Caravan hasn't sucked so far, though the engine is
threatening.
> why must everything have power locks and power windows and now even power
> sliding doors?
Huge benefit to those of us with children, probably irrelevant to others.
> why must minivans be designed to wedge three rows of seats in? all i
really
> need is 2 or maybe 4.
Do you really need a van? There are lots of cars with two or maybe 4 seats
that are far, far cooler.
> i must find a new used vehicle soon. my 188k miles '76 G20 is very tired.
> i've done so for over 10 years, but i cannot bear to continue feeding a
> 10mpg vehicle.
Considered a smallish, king-cab pickup?
Now my rant for the day:
It's time for the general population to boycott gas-hog, road-hog large
SUV's, and for the legitimate users of these monsters to demand utility,
space, and durability. Too many of them are overgrown outside, cramped
inside, too cushy to subject them to a load of firewood, and fitted with
inadequate passenger-car transmissions and suspensions.
End of rant.
raindog
news:xSVxb.7168$a54....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
>
> "raindog" <mlor...@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:n%Sxb.25345$Rk5....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > i see them everywhere i go.
> > i can tell the make, model, and year.
> > i know which ones suck,
> > and which ones really suck.
>
> Mid-90's Windstars really, really suck. Every one of them, 95-98 at
least.
yeah, i got that one figured. equipped with the 3.8L 6cyl, it has a habit
of blowing head gaskets. transmission is sub-par, body not well put
together. avoid avoid fer sure. many unhappy windstar owners out there are
wishing they'd kept their 3.0L 6cyl aerostars, and most that did are holding
onto them. i'm seriously looking into getting an aerostar.
> My 1999 Dodge Caravan hasn't sucked so far, though the engine is
> threatening.
not enuf driver's seat travel for my paunch.
> > why must everything have power locks and power windows and now even
power
> > sliding doors?
>
> Huge benefit to those of us with children, probably irrelevant to others.
ahh. trying not to be sarcastic - the kids wear seatbelts, yes? i suppose
i was a well-behaved child, but i had a brother that wasn't particularly.
still, my parents didn't have any trouble with him opening car doors in
transit, or him trying to dive out an open window. power doors and windows
are a huge benefit until they short out or the motors burn up.
> > why must minivans be designed to wedge three rows of seats in? all i
> really
> > need is 2 or maybe 4.
>
> Do you really need a van? There are lots of cars with two or maybe 4
seats
> that are far, far cooler.
i really need a minivan. i'm too poor to rent motel rooms and yet i like
crossing multiple state lines. with a vehicle i can stretch out in without
too much preparation i can snooze even where i'm not supposed to without
drawing as much attention to myself as i would with say...a towed pop-up
camper. secondary: my energizer canine companion who keeps going and going
and going and going has finally gone arthritic with a bum knee. he needs a
relatively low step in and non-convoluted entry. he's fairly large, and
though i can help him, i'd have a hard time stuffing him in the back of a
car.
> > i must find a new used vehicle soon. my 188k miles '76 G20 is very
tired.
> > i've done so for over 10 years, but i cannot bear to continue feeding a
> > 10mpg vehicle.
>
> Considered a smallish, king-cab pickup?
i have. except for reasons listed above, though more suitable than a sedan,
a pickup is less suitable than a minivan.
> Now my rant for the day:
> It's time for the general population to boycott gas-hog, road-hog large
> SUV's, and for the legitimate users of these monsters to demand utility,
> space, and durability. Too many of them are overgrown outside, cramped
> inside, too cushy to subject them to a load of firewood, and fitted with
> inadequate passenger-car transmissions and suspensions.
> End of rant.
it's a disturbing trend. viva la ELF. there are no legit 4WD SUV users.
people who off-road have 4WD pick-ups or jeeps caked in mud. since i live
off the beaten path, and frequently head off into the wilderness, i'd
considered a 2WD 4cyl toyota 4runner - for all intents and purposes, a high
minivan with near identical mpg (20/24).
i t r i n 1 9 7 0 @hotmail.com kitrin
"raindog" <mlor...@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:n%Sxb.25345$Rk5....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
the gasguzzling type of vehicle at all is we need to seat 6 in a vehicle.
otherwise i would opt for a mini.
=^.^=
<mlor...@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote:
>it's a disturbing trend. viva la ELF. there are no legit 4WD SUV users.
>people who off-road have 4WD pick-ups or jeeps caked in mud. since i live
>off the beaten path, and frequently head off into the wilderness, i'd
>considered a 2WD 4cyl toyota 4runner - for all intents and purposes, a high
>minivan with near identical mpg (20/24).
having a new Dodge Ram 3500 with the Cummings diesel iz lunacy
many who live in Bellvue and commute the few miles to Microsoft
have-em, and then you have the luxury SUV despots to contend with
I don't have to contend...
I have a Large Utility Vehicle; a valid threat to-em;; they chill...
soundz like you need something like a `70s Dodge one-ton van
with the 225 C.I. Slant Six, with a four speed and a 4WD retrofit
mine hazza 318, but still getz 21MPG on an interstate run, loaded
izza tall suckah, with a set of decent-sized meats to accent that
someone caught me smiling. hey, that shit haz happened...
http://xserverz.zapto.org/beenseen.jpg
itzz just a feeling (tm. Stevie Nicks - That's Alright.mp3)
Pelysma
>there are no legit 4WD SUV users.
Well, not in the circles we ordinarily travel in, anyway. Nobody has any
business commuting in one. There are certain industrial uses, however. The
ancestor of the breed was the "crummy" -- usually a Chevy Suburban -- that
could hall a logging crew or a fire crew and its gear up a mountainside.
These vehicles were bread-and-butter in the logging and forestry industries
in my Northern California youth. They had hard, blocky-treaded truck tires
on split rims, four on the floor with a granny grinder, rubber mats and
canvas seats inside, typically a 240 inline Six or 260 V-8, and must have
come with the dents from the factory, because you couldn't dent them with a
splitting maul. Winches and roof racks were common. Most of them were
painted dark green, except the Forest Service ones (and surplus ex-USFS
rigs) which were pale green.
Can't say much about gas mileage, though, I was too young to drive anyway,
aside from haytrucks. But that's another subject.
=^.^=
wrote:
>Can't say much about gas mileage, though, I was too young to drive anyway,
>aside from haytrucks. But that's another subject.
manure spreaders and `50 Dodge (bought for $5)
San Luis Obispo County. start of the roots journey...
raindog
news:mi=JP3tNEZkDpF=CHBxfe...@4ax.com...
>it's a disturbing trend. viva la ELF. there are no legit 4WD SUV users.
>people who off-road have 4WD pick-ups or jeeps caked in mud. since i live
>off the beaten path, and frequently head off into the wilderness, i'd
>considered a 2WD 4cyl toyota 4runner - for all intents and purposes, a high
>minivan with near identical mpg (20/24).
having a new Dodge Ram 3500 with the Cummings diesel iz lunacy
many who live in Bellvue and commute the few miles to Microsoft
have-em, and then you have the luxury SUV despots to contend with
I don't have to contend...
I have a Large Utility Vehicle; a valid threat to-em;; they chill...
soundz like you need something like a `70s Dodge one-ton van
with the 225 C.I. Slant Six, with a four speed and a 4WD retrofit
*i'm considering a buick lesabre. vast back seat plenty big for napping -
dog or raindog. suprisingly good mileage for a land barge... 19/30.
-rd
=^.^=
<mlor...@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote:
>soundz like you need something like a `70s Dodge one-ton van
>with the 225 C.I. Slant Six, with a four speed and a 4WD retrofit
>*i'm considering a buick lesabre. vast back seat plenty big for napping -
>dog or raindog. suprisingly good mileage for a land barge... 19/30.
>-rd
um, thazza car... sure you didn't mean "Rainear"?
....speaking-ov Ranier, eh, itz out, today. Sun, too. OMG
so, if I gotta-go downtown to dump sumone @ the Greyhound
then I won't hafta mess with evil sleet and the naasty wet road
>itzz just a feeling (tm. Stevie Nicks - That's Alright.mp3)
(..."itz not alright", again, tm. Mz. Nix, re. "I Can't Wait")
to be standing inna-line just ain't fine; so thinx Jamesyz BF
boy, did he have the long hound-dawg face when he came-in...
definite security issuez going-down
Spacey Staci
i must find a new used vehicle soon. my 188k miles '76 G20 is very
tired. i've done so for over 10 years, but i cannot bear to continue
feeding a 10mpg vehicle.
i am in torment.
good day
===================
Could be much worse. I had a a 68 Continental that got 7 mpg on the
highway. I ran out of gas on the freeway in Orange County one time on a
107 degree day.
*******************************************************
None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me
by Luther and Ferdinand, the five inch tall space aliens who live under
my bed. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat
any dust bunnies they may find under there.
*******************************************************
http://community.webtv.net/spaceystaci/SpaceyStacisSpace
Lars Janqqvist
>tired. i've done so for over 10 years, but i cannot bear to continue
>feeding a 10mpg vehicle.
>i am in torment.
>good day
We have a 93 Grand Voyager. Bought it used in 97, good condition
then, and we've taken care of it. Get maybe 20-22 mpg from the
3-liter V-6. Three-speed automatic tranny (4-speeds have a bad
rep)
If you could find one like that, still has a lot of useful life
left in it, might be the way to go.
--
To reply, DO NOT remove spam from the return address!
***************************
If you can't learn to do something well... learn to enjoy doing it poorly.
***************************
raindog
news:l1vqsvkr84btmg5rg...@4ax.com...
> >i must find a new used vehicle soon. my 188k miles '76 G20 is very
> >tired. i've done so for over 10 years, but i cannot bear to continue
> >feeding a 10mpg vehicle.
> >i am in torment.
> >good day
>
> We have a 93 Grand Voyager. Bought it used in 97, good condition
> then, and we've taken care of it. Get maybe 20-22 mpg from the
> 3-liter V-6. Three-speed automatic tranny (4-speeds have a bad
> rep)
>
> If you could find one like that, still has a lot of useful life
> left in it, might be the way to go.
thanks, but the voyager, caravan, town 'n country group have steering wheels
that embed themselves about 4 inches into my sizeable gut. i think i've
narrowed my search down to aerostars. the van-like ride i'm accustomed to
sittin' on top of the world, rear-wheel drive, solid construction, a stylish
bod i can improve on, 3.0L ford V6, all the windstar owners who wish they'd
held onto their aerostars.
i've even got one in mind - a '95 with 60k miles. now if i can just get the
dealer to come down 2k to blue book value for that vehicle...
Pelysma
> i've even got one in mind - a '95 with 60k miles. now if i can just get
the
> dealer to come down 2k to blue book value for that vehicle...
>
The original rap on the Aerostar, and the reason for the Windstar, was that
its body and frame were two separate pieces bolted together, like a pickup
truck. That's a good arrangement for cargo, and it was intended as a cargo
van originally, but as a passenger van it was really dangerous in a major
collision as it tended to disintegrate. The Windstar body, for all its
passenger-car looks, is integrated with the frame and really durable. That
and passenger comfort were its only benefits.
What the Windstar did wrong was pack an inadequate Taurus engine and
transmission in too small a space and give it too heavy a load. The engine
had a basic design flaw in the head -- oil and water lines separated by only
an eighth of an inch of head gasket -- and the transmission was just plain
crappy. (I saw the inside of mine twice in two years, and never would I have
put that kind of force on the parts that predictably failed.) The water
pump was redesigned to sit flat against the block because the fender was
there where the standard one stuck out, and even then it rubbed now and then
and, in my case, broke. Like the Caravan, the block had to pivot down out
of position to access the back row of spark plugs, so I guess they knew in
advance it would have to come out of there once or twice in the life of the
car.
The result was a really, really expensive car-owning experience that I will
not repeat or recommend. Newer ones are better, but none of them are
anywhere close to adequate.
raindog
>
> "raindog" <mlor...@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:lrkzb.2265$Oe5...@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> > i've even got one in mind - a '95 with 60k miles. now if i can just get
> the
> > dealer to come down 2k to blue book value for that vehicle...
> >
>
> The original rap on the Aerostar, and the reason for the Windstar, was
that
> its body and frame were two separate pieces bolted together, like a pickup
> truck. That's a good arrangement for cargo, and it was intended as a
cargo
> van originally, but as a passenger van it was really dangerous in a major
> collision as it tended to disintegrate. The Windstar body, for all its
> passenger-car looks, is integrated with the frame and really durable.
That
> and passenger comfort were its only benefits.
yeah. i found the windstar i test drove (before i learned of the head
gasket monster) to be super comfy - better than the rest.
i suppose that aerostar thing might bother me if i were planning on having
any passengers, but any passenger van i have will be so in name only. i
don't do passengers. i'll be yanking the second and third row seats out to
make room for my home away from home that'll only be occupied in the parked
position.
Di
[...]
> We have a 93 Grand Voyager. Bought it used in 97, good condition
> then, and we've taken care of it. Get maybe 20-22 mpg from the
> 3-liter V-6. Three-speed automatic tranny (4-speeds have a bad
> rep)
>
> If you could find one like that, still has a lot of useful life
> left in it, might be the way to go.
Hello, Lars - I have missed you. How are you and the Mrs doing?
redoubtable stalagmite
So what do you hear about Dodge Grand Caravans? I had to let go the lease
on mah 2001 truck (it wasn't worth what they wanted me to pay for it and the
steering really, really sucked) and we wound up with a program vehicle with
guarantees - a 2003. I really hate the negotiating part. We kept getting
up to leave and they kept coming down <G>.
I actually had my hand on the door and that knocked another $1000 off
justlikethat.
Lars Janqqvist
>Hello, Lars - I have missed you. How are you and the Mrs doing?
Mostly good. Lotta things going on, and not so much time to just
sit and play computers lately. The mrs is still doing the job
hunt, but seems that nobody has anything that would be right for
what she knows about and would like to do.
--
To reply, DO NOT remove spam from the return address!
***************************
This calls for a careful blend of
clever psychology and extreme violence.
***************************
Lars Janqqvist
>So what do you hear about Dodge Grand Caravans? I had to let go the lease
>on mah 2001 truck (it wasn't worth what they wanted me to pay for it and the
>steering really, really sucked) and we wound up with a program vehicle with
>guarantees - a 2003. I really hate the negotiating part. We kept getting
>up to leave and they kept coming down <G>.
Before we had the Voyager, we had a 92 Caravan, and that was a
pretty good car for us.
>I actually had my hand on the door and that knocked another $1000 off
>justlikethat.
When we brought the Voyager, we did a lot of research about the
prices. Low blue book was 12k, this one was fairly nice. They
let us start and we said 12k. They laughed at us and said how
about 17k? We laughed and said, no no, if we wanted to pay for a
new one, we'd have picked out a new one. They said how about 15?
Nope nope, too much, but this is what we'd like (list of things)
and if you get one in that you can sell at 12 call us up....
Wiat they said, how about 14? Nope, nope, can't do it, here's
the list, here's our number, let us know.
Finally, they said, how about an out-the-door price of 13k?
That's tax and everything.
We do some math, and that makes the car about 12-2 plus 800 tax
etc, so we went with that.
And so, it pays to do your homework, and (as shown above) it pays
to be willing to walk away.
--
To reply, DO NOT remove spam from the return address!
***************************
junkman
> Pelysma wrote:
> > "raindog" <mlor...@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:lrkzb.2265$Oe5...@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >
> >> i've even got one in mind - a '95 with 60k miles. now if i can just
> >> get the dealer to come down 2k to blue book value for that vehicle...
>
> on mah 2001 truck (it wasn't worth what they wanted me to pay for it and the
> steering really, really sucked) and we wound up with a program vehicle with
> guarantees - a 2003. I really hate the negotiating part. We kept getting
> up to leave and they kept coming down <G>.
>
> I actually had my hand on the door and that knocked another $1000 off
> justlikethat.
..ok me thinks you are doing the right thing...
your best bang for the car buying $$$$ is to
get a 2-3 year old vehicle with 30-40K miles
you will pay about 1/2 of new and still have
2/3 to 3/4 the life of the vehicle left.
one of my daily drivers is a 91ish dodge caravan
c/v. ice box white. got from a fruit/veg company
few block from the yard only had 72k. it a cargo
van rubber mats and when i got it the hard plactic
seats and door panels. They told me it has a weak
trans. Well it does sort of, but some of that magic
tranmission exlir in it, sort of better. Does run
good 3.3 no a/c has the big brakes and wheels. and
with no 2/3 row seats or interior, while not slow
it/s not bad, changed out the seats and door panels
from a grand carvan i had in the yard, but 72k miles
in the proudce market...damm does it rattle and all
the doors are woren out....out on the freeway it's
not bad to drive, got up to the playa and back like
3-4 times....and it damm nears goes 100....
redoubtable stalagmite
> "redoubtable stalagmite" <calc...@get.in.my.eyes.net> wrote in
> message news:<MOnAb.86667$yJ.5307@okepread02>...
>> So what do you hear about Dodge Grand Caravans? I had to let go the
>> lease on mah 2001 truck (it wasn't worth what they wanted me to pay
>> for it and the steering really, really sucked) and we wound up with
>> a program vehicle with guarantees - a 2003. I really hate the
>> negotiating part. We kept getting up to leave and they kept coming
>> down <G>.
>>
>> I actually had my hand on the door and that knocked another $1000 off
>> justlikethat.
>
> ..ok me thinks you are doing the right thing...
> your best bang for the car buying $$$$ is to
> get a 2-3 year old vehicle with 30-40K miles
> you will pay about 1/2 of new and still have
> 2/3 to 3/4 the life of the vehicle left.
>
Thanks for the info. It was a year old with 12,000 miles and an 8 yr
warranty.
Thats way new enuff to suit me! I didn't even have to have new (warranty is
enuff for me), so will keep above info for later purchases! This is just
the sort of stuff I need to know.
> one of my daily drivers is a 91ish dodge caravan
> c/v. ice box white. got from a fruit/veg company
> few block from the yard only had 72k. it a cargo
> van rubber mats and when i got it the hard plactic
> seats and door panels. They told me it has a weak
> trans. Well it does sort of, but some of that magic
> tranmission exlir in it, sort of better. Does run
> good 3.3 no a/c has the big brakes and wheels. and
> with no 2/3 row seats or interior, while not slow
> it/s not bad, changed out the seats and door panels
> from a grand carvan i had in the yard, but 72k miles
> in the proudce market...damm does it rattle and all
> the doors are woren out....out on the freeway it's
> not bad to drive, got up to the playa and back like
> 3-4 times....and it damm nears goes 100....
Sounds good. This one had only a few nicks and scrapes so we bought and
used touch up paint. We've had it 2 mos and already racked up 2,000 more
miles on it. The amazing thing to me is that after 12,000 miles it still
had new car smell. And had it yesterday, too, at 14,000 miles! Only thing
I don't like is it only seems to get 16 mpg...I guess that's not bad
considering it's mostly in-city driving.
Again, thank you so much for the info. I have often wondered what the 'life
span' of a vehicle was. I drove an 87 Pont for 13 years, but by this time
it had a rebuilt tranny and new steering. When they could not fix the a/c
or the brakes to work correctly (I nearly had an accident AFTER they were
supposed to be 'fixed') decided enuff wuz enuff.
=^.^=
<calc...@get.in.my.eyes.net> wrote:
>I actually had my hand on the door and that knocked another $1000 off
>justlikethat.
they still profit. drive it to Mexico City and sell it
...take two or three, and make mondo $$$$$$
six figures? take five, 2-be sure
Pelysma
"redoubtable stalagmite" <calc...@get.in.my.eyes.net> wrote in message
news:MOnAb.86667$yJ.5307@okepread02...
>
Ours (which is not a "Grand") has been a breath of fresh air after the
Windstar, but there are a few things to watch out for. At around 100k, most
of them (including ours) burn more oil than they should. You can't ignore
that... it will run a long time burning oil, but if you let it burn all of
it, it's toast. (***official disclaimer: [toast] not a reference to anyone
here***) The burning-oil thing also applies to the older of the two
Caravans my brothers drive.
We have heard of poor trannies, but ours has been trouble free. It was in
the shop today for front brakes; that could be an ongoing annoyance and
expense, since this isn't the first time it's been in for that since we've
had it. The biggest trouble we've had, honestly, is the front end dragging
on curbs and parking-lot wheelstops. It's all torn up under the front and
the only way to fix it would be to replace that whole huge plastic front
cover.
Kolbenfresser
One thing's got me wondering. You're all talking cars I've never even
heard of. Do you have any Japanese or European vans over there?
The Japanese seem to offer good build and service quality, I hear.
Mind, I don't know much about US cars.
We had a Chevrolet Blazer back in the 70s.
It handled like a drunken cow and came prerusted straight from the
dealership. I sure hope they're a LOT better than that these days.
I remember a conversation I had with my dad in the late 80s.
He said that now the Japanese are the enemy because they had
these trade barriers against imported cars. He was a right wing
Reaganomic all the way. Anything Ronnie said was brilliant.
I said: "I don't hear European car manufacturers complaining,
American cars don't even fit into the average Japanese garage,
and honestly, would YOU buy another Chevrolet?"
That shut him up.
There were huge trade negotiations all through the 80s trying to
force the Japanese to buy the derelicts Detroit was churning out
back then. When you can't beat them, sue them...
American car tastes are so different from the rest of the world.
The only American car you see on our streets seems to be the
PT Cruiser. Apparently that's the yuppie fun mobile here.
Maybe it's the roads. Ours have all these curves and tight corners
in them that I don't see in your movies.
--
Kolbenfresser
An Alt5 FAQ:
http://www.sumutia.com/alt5/newFAQ.html
raindog
news:h2NBb.265$lj5...@reader1.news.jippii.net...
> One thing's got me wondering. You're all talking cars I've never even
> heard of.
http://tinyurl.com/yobd
that cover's most of them.
>Do you have any Japanese or European vans over there?
honda odyssey (expensive), toyota previa (weak & expensive), volkswagen
eurovan (gas hog & expensive)
> The Japanese seem to offer good build and service quality, I hear.
>
aye, but parts are is prohibitively expensive though
> Mind, I don't know much about US cars.
>
most cars in the US are made by 3 megacorps. as i recall them...general
motors (which also makes saturns and hummers and gobbled up chevrolet,
pontiac, oldsmobile, buick, cadillac, opel, izuzu, saab, daewoo, and
holden), chrysler (which gobbled up plymouth, dodge, jeep, maybach,
mitsubishi and daimler-benz ), ford (which gobbled up lincoln, mercury,
mazda, volvo, aston martin, land rover, and jaguar)
so actually...you might know more about them than you thought ;)
but as a rule, US designed fords have good transmissions, fair engines , and
weak exteriors/interiors. US designed gms have good engines, fair
transmissions, and weak exteriors/interiors. US designed chryslers have
good exteriors/interiors, fair engines, and weak transmissions. I say "US
designed" cuz so many 'american' cars are made elsewhere these daze.
> We had a Chevrolet Blazer back in the 70s.
> It handled like a drunken cow and came prerusted straight from the
> dealership. I sure hope they're a LOT better than that these days.
>
blazers always sucked. still do.
> I remember a conversation I had with my dad in the late 80s.
> He said that now the Japanese are the enemy because they had
> these trade barriers against imported cars. He was a right wing
> Reaganomic all the way. Anything Ronnie said was brilliant.
>
> I said: "I don't hear European car manufacturers complaining,
> American cars don't even fit into the average Japanese garage,
> and honestly, would YOU buy another Chevrolet?"
>
> That shut him up.
>
i'm considering buying another gm product. we got this thang called aamco
in the US - substandard transmission shop nationwide chain, but they sell
lifetime (as long as one owns the vehicle) warranties on any transmission
they rebuild. this means whenever it breaks (and often where ever it
breaks) there's a handy aamco shop nearby that fixes it for about 250 bucks
for the first warranty repair (cost of the lifetime warranty), and all
subsequent repairs are gravy.
> There were huge trade negotiations all through the 80s trying to
> force the Japanese to buy the derelicts Detroit was churning out
> back then. When you can't beat them, sue them...
>
> American car tastes are so different from the rest of the world.
> The only American car you see on our streets seems to be the
> PT Cruiser. Apparently that's the yuppie fun mobile here.
>
we likes 'em spacious with enuf engine haul that mass around and be able to
survive rush hour on the chicago beltway.
> Maybe it's the roads. Ours have all these curves and tight corners
> in them that I don't see in your movies.
yeah...we got nothin' like them roads in Ronin. two of the best damn movie
car chases ever and both in the SAME movie. and chock full of my fav actors
too.
Kolbenfresser
> "Kolbenfresser" <rene...@dlc.fi> wrote in message
> news:h2NBb.265$lj5...@reader1.news.jippii.net...
>
>
> honda odyssey (expensive), toyota previa (weak & expensive), volkswagen
> eurovan (gas hog & expensive)
>
>>The Japanese seem to offer good build and service quality, I hear.
>
> aye, but parts are is prohibitively expensive though
Ah, okay. Must be some import barrier raising prices. Or they don't
bother importing bread and butter vans into heavily fought US markets.
Or not enough competition in the spare parts sector for rarer models.
I can imagine a Honda dealer practically owning his city's spare parts
market.
>>Mind, I don't know much about US cars.
>
> most cars in the US are made by 3 megacorps. as i recall them...general
> motors (which also makes saturns and hummers and gobbled up chevrolet,
> pontiac, oldsmobile, buick, cadillac, opel, izuzu, saab, daewoo, and
> holden), chrysler (which gobbled up plymouth, dodge, jeep, maybach,
> mitsubishi and daimler-benz ), ford (which gobbled up lincoln, mercury,
> mazda, volvo, aston martin, land rover, and jaguar)
Tut tut, it was Daimler that gobbled up Chrysler. There's a lawsuit
going on that issue right now, as Chrysler's biggest shareholder,
Kirk Kerkorian, was promised a 'merger among equals'. After the merger,
Chrysler turned out to be so feeble that Daimler's been carrying it
- they kicked most Americans off the board of directors. Cooked
books in the good old Enron tradition...
Next year's Chrysler models are blessed with Daimler-Benz engineering
assistance. Let's see if that means Mercedes style pricing, too.
I can see why they don't advertise this situation in the US.
"Chrysler is German? Gah!"
> so actually...you might know more about them than you thought ;)
I do, but I meant vans. US designed vans have about 0% market share
here. Cultural difference again. Vans are for hauling produce here.
So the only buying argument is loading volume and running economy.
That 70s wave of vans as fun vehicles never hit Europe. Don't know
why. The idea appeals to me, at least. My dream would be puttering
around Europe playing one man gigs with a small amplifier rig that
would leave space for a mattress in the van. Pity I'm mentally too
unstable to make any part of that work. A wuss, in other words.
> but as a rule, US designed fords have good transmissions, fair engines , and
> weak exteriors/interiors. US designed gms have good engines, fair
> transmissions, and weak exteriors/interiors. US designed chryslers have
> good exteriors/interiors, fair engines, and weak transmissions. I say "US
> designed" cuz so many 'american' cars are made elsewhere these daze.
Oh, that was exactly what I meant. GM makes some perfectly European
cars under the Opel/Vauxhall brands, but since they're designed and
built by Europeans, and GM only collects the profits, I'd say they
don't count.
The same goes for Ford. Factories in England and Germany.
Do they even sell the Ford Ka in the US? Little eggshell of a car?
>>We had a Chevrolet Blazer back in the 70s.
>>It handled like a drunken cow and came prerusted straight from the
>>dealership. I sure hope they're a LOT better than that these days.
>
> blazers always sucked. still do.
Ah. Thanks. That explains a lot. Pardon my prejudice caused by that hog.
> we likes 'em spacious with enuf engine haul that mass around and be able to
> survive rush hour on the chicago beltway.
Gasoline is heavily taxed in Europe. E1.07 for a liter of 97 octane
at the moment (1 Euro = 1.20 USD, 1 gallon = 3.6 liters, I think).
Imagine quadrupling your gas bill and then paying for hauling all that
spacious steel. Average European wages may be somewhat lower after
taxes, too, so fuel economy is high on the list.
Never seen a Hummer on European streets. Don't think I ever will.
It's an obscenity in European eyes. Yes, I know that many Americans
think so, too, but not 99.9% like here. For us, it's a symbol:
"Americans don't give a shit about global warming."
No, let's be precise here, so I won't sound simply anti-American.
America was the birthplace of the green movement, which still has
a huge following there. This has engendered equally rabid opposition
from Republicans, and the Hummer was built as their banner, symbolizing
mastery over nature and military might over the planet.
It's a symbol for a 'Let's sweep all problems under the rug' mindset.
I do know that probably less than half of US Americans subscribe to
that. The rich half.
>>Maybe it's the roads. Ours have all these curves and tight corners
>>in them that I don't see in your movies.
>
> yeah...we got nothin' like them roads in Ronin. two of the best damn movie
> car chases ever and both in the SAME movie. and chock full of my fav actors
> too.
I just saw that one on tv. Rather lovely.
There's a French movie called Taxi 2 (better than Taxi 1 - will wonders
never cease!) - that has even more insane car chases across Marseille
and Paris. All those piled up French police cars, ah...
European cities were mostly built for horse carriages - and real estate
is expensive. If our cities sprawled out like Los Angeles, Europe would
starve, as we'd run out of fields. Makes for shorter commutes, too, so
we spend less time in cars.
Japanese streets were designed for hand-drawn carts. You should see
the tiny boxes on toy wheels that they call vans. They cause laughter
even in Europe.