| Cobra_R |
where ever i got I here nothing but ford bashing and hating of there vehicles. now i got a question to ask.
WHY?
Ford makes great vehicles through and through but honestly there is no merit to some of the comments.
I work on acuras hondas toyotas and various other japanese cars. and after working on them seeing the conditions they are in and trying to aork under the hood I hate them I love working on Ford more then anything because there easy to work on and there tougher then all the Jap cars. dodge has some quirky shit same with GM. but overall north american vehicles are tougher and stronger.( I refer to them as jap cars because import would mean europe as well).
the only vehicle that is easy to work on that comes from japan is anything from subaru. |
|
|
| Insomniac |
Ford is garbage. Why do we even argue about it?
Drive any newer Taurus, Mustang, or F-150 with 60,000km+ and it feels like shit.
The only Ford I ever drove and liked was a Crown Vic. Not bad. I hear the Contours drive well too. Fusion is supposed to be good. I'll give them that.
The staples of the brand are grossly pathetic.
Jap>Euro>GM>Chrysler>Ford>Korean>Russisan. |
|
|
| 180sxforthewin |
Ford is not first in anything.
Only good fords are the fastbacks and the cobras |
|
|
| Thegnome |
I dont want to fuel any fires.
But I've owned two fords. An areostar (I know...I know :rolleyes: )
And a fairmont...Both gave me So many troubles!
Especially the van, just out of no where it would die because a solenoid failing or something.
I have my 85 300zx now, and I will admit it's hard to work on sometimes, Its old so I have done a ton of work tuning it up. But this thing is 5 years older than the van was and it's built so incredibly well! I can't believe it's older.
I'm with the imports from my mild experience :dunno: |
|
|
| Korry |
| My focus has around 65000k on it and i havn't really had any problems yet |
|
|
| SuperJay |
| You think working on a Ford is easy? Try changing ANYTHING on an Aerostar and we'll see if you have the same opinion. Honda's (including) Acura's are easy as fuck to work on. Toyotas are easy too. |
|
|
| Thegnome |
quote:
Originally posted by Korry
My focus has around 65000k on it and i havn't really had any problems yet
haha, he knows. Plugs took me so long, replacing the alternator took longer. |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
quote:
Originally posted by Insomniac
Jap>Euro>GM>Chrysler>Ford>Korean>Russisan.
I don't know why you would put Japan ahead of Euros. The only thing they have going for them is reliability. For everything else Euro > Jap |
|
|
| Insomniac |
| Well, if you factor in value and reliablity, I think Jap is better than Euro. But that's just my opinion. |
|
|
| Soulfly |
The only thing Ford has going for them.. is it's the only engine that can run under water.. as long as it has an Air supply to the intake..
And.. That's about it..
Oh.. And their Heater cores.... |
|
|
| Uglyoldnissan |
| I think a lot of it has to do witht the fact that Ford, Chevy and Dodge were considered the top of the heap back in the day and owners of these cars and truck thought they were hot shit. Ford a little more than most. They have been pioneers in a few fields. first pony/muscle car (sort of), the ass kicking GT40, the double ass kicking AC Cobra (about half and half with AC Motors) and they have the best selling truck out there. Jealousy breeds contempt. Nowadays Fords grasp is slipping away and people like to kick stuff when it's down. I own a Ford and love it (1985 F150 with the 300 inline six) but I would never buy a new Ford. Hell, I wouldn't drive one if you gave it to me. Or maybe I'm just a Nissan driving nutjob. |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverZ24
I don't know why you would put Japan ahead of Euros. The only thing they have going for them is reliability. For everything else Euro > Jap
i think euro cars are just as reliable as jap cars. when you go to a junkyard, you see alot more jap cars then euro cars.
im not sure why everyone hates ford(or domestics for that matter), but if you go to europe, they worship a few cars ford put out. |
|
|
| ChromeDragon |
quote:
Originally posted by Insomniac
Jap>Euro>GM>Chrysler>Ford>Korean>Russisan.
How about the fact that the car getting the top ratings for initial quality is Korean?
The Japanese and Euro manufacturers are so concerned about each other and the US that they are allowing the Koreans to catch up, and the Koreans are doing so very quickly. |
|
|
| Inzane |
quote:
Originally posted by Insomniac
Jap>Euro>GM>Chrysler>Ford>Korean>Russian.
I'd make a slight change to your order:
Chrysler > Ford > GM
GM can lick my _____. Major :thumbdown |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by ChromeDragon
How about the fact that the car getting the top ratings for initial quality is Korean?
The Japanese and Euro manufacturers are so concerned about each other and the US that they are allowing the Koreans to catch up, and the Koreans are doing so very quickly.
alot of people tend to stay away from korean cars. id be willing to bet that in the next 10 years, if they dont make a car that breaks down constantly and is able to keep up with toyota or honda in reliabilities, then we'd actually consider buying one ourselves. i actually wouldnt be surprised if thats how it would turn out |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
Just my opinion but Ford kicks ass. It kicks ass in SUV , Truck and some car status over alot of this foreign crap and useless garbage we got. The cars are almost as good as BMW's which are kinda overglorified IMO like alot of Jap cars. Koreans are catching up cus they always made decent cars for the price they ask of them. Now they are getting a lil more high end and possably taking over a mojority of GM.
As for the "Hating" its natural to hate a SUPER POWER in a industry. I dont give a flying fuck what most you think of my comments cus Im entitled to bash back and be a prick just like the rest of you. Infact I put up with bein bashed for quite awhile here and I compared cars from alot of companies. Most manufacturers are hyping there cars like they are gods gift. I think alot of you just fall for it.........
haha :beer:
Im not even angry just felt like typing a bunch of shit :thumbup: |
|
|
| oldraven |
Yeah, Ford is great.
Hey, could you find me some replacement struts and quads for my '87? No? Oh, that's right, they only build parts for cars ten years old or newer. (thanks Ford, for making a car with a gazillion specialized parts for only two years and then shelve all the designs, and let your suppliers destroy all the tooling. Genius work there.)
While we're at it........... There's a reason Fords are easy to work on. They have to be or no one would work on one, since you have to do so four or five times a year. I'd rather have a bitch of a time changing any part than have to do six easy jobs every time the car smells money in my pocket. Driving a Ford is like Russian Roulette.
I've never seen a company like FoMoCo for recalls. Under no circumstances should a car ever catch fire, to the manufacturer's fault.
Yeah, Ford's are great, two days at a time. |
|
|
| seevik |
| markgase2000, cant believe u actually compared a bmw to a ford, nowhere near is a ford to bmw, yes bimmers are pricey but you pretty much get wat you pay for, and yea fords do have a LOT of aftermarket parts when u need sum. but thats cuz they break down so much i personally hate ford but there is sum that i would drive |
|
|
| Wolfdio |
Ford has a really shitty reputation here than they do overseas. Wonder why? Cars like the 227hp (with a T35) awd turbo escort cosworth. Compare that to the 130hp fwd escort gt that we have here. Neither engines are fords, but they do last if well maintained. If ford had released more cars in america like the cossie, im sure their reputation would be better. The focus ST is better put together, looks more aggressive (and better IMO), and has more options than fords willing to give us here.
UK Focus ST |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by oldraven
Driving a Ford is like Russian Roulette.
I've never seen a company like FoMoCo for recalls. Under no circumstances should a car ever catch fire, to the manufacturer's fault.
Yeah, Ford's are great, two days at a time.
so true... and the first ones added to my sig:thumbup:
wasnt it ford that decided it would be nice to put the ignition coil packs right under the AC condenser? i cant remember who it was, but i know it was a domestic company |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
| haha I made a flame :thumbup: |
|
|
| Inzane |
quote:
Originally posted by Markgase2000
I think alot of you just fall for it.........
:lol:
quote:
Im not even angry just felt like typing a bunch of shit
No, but you might be a little drunk...? :dunno: |
|
|
| Talontsi96 |
quote:
Originally posted by Insomniac
Jap>Euro>GM>Chrysler>Ford>Korean>Russisan.
Chris you got some reading to do. The Koreans are catching up to the japs fast as a matter of fact Hyundai as a company is tied with Honda in second place after Toyota for initial quality by JD Power and Associates (beating Nissan, Subaru and Mazda). For mid size sedans Hyundai has actually beat all Japs including the big H and the big T for two years straight (again JD Powers Initial Quality ratings). I say your rating system is seriously skewed....
Also I think overal Chrysler is better than GM.
The revised rating should be something more like this:
Jap>/=Korean>Euro>Chrysler>GM>Ford>Russian |
|
|
| Murph |
my 10 year old ford left me stranded once when my fuel pump went and i knew it was going.... my 15 year old ford never left me stranded...
cars are as reliable if they have been taking care of no matter what the brand... |
|
|
| Talontsi96 |
quote:
Originally posted by Murph
my 10 year old ford left me stranded once when my fuel pump went and i knew it was going.... my 15 year old ford never left me stranded...
cars are as reliable if they have been taking care of no matter what the brand...
True to some degree, but not completely. Cars with better design, higher quality build materials, higher QC and tolerances tend to be Better cars..period. |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by Talontsi96
The Koreans are catching up to the japs fast as a matter of fact Hyundai as a company is tied with Honda in second place after Toyota for initial quality by JD Power and Associates (beating Nissan, Subaru and Mazda). For mid size sedans Hyundai has actually beat all Japs including the big H and the big T for two years straight (again JD Powers Initial Quality ratings). I say your rating system is seriously skewed....
initial quality ratings dont mean too much. i think all cars start off equal, its the long run that really matters. |
|
|
| SilverNeonRacer |
I haven't driven any new ford trucks, but the old ones sucked.
i worked for a highway crew and what hwe could load in a 1 ton ford, a 1/2 ton chev or dodge would handle no prob. Oh wait, my 86 D50 hauled more than the 1 ton fords we had. Fyi a 86 D50 is factory rated as a 3/4 ton
I drove a early 2000's Focus.. wasn't bad.... wasn't great either.. better than the 2004 base civic i drove though. Consider the Ford was at 38,000km and the civic was at 10,000km, both rental cars.
My dad had a Ford Cargo Van.. that was umm a cluster fuck and then some, if the stereo was on the drivers side asignals wouldn't work, but if the stereo was off, they would, but the stereo would turn on with the bulbs.
My dad had a Ford LTD, T-boned a little Honda, the honda had minor damage, the engine for th LTD was in the pass seat, and when the town truck tried to take it away the gas tank fell out.
My 87 fifth(with 186,000km) was parked for over 5yrs, All I needed was to put air in 1 tire, new batt and she fired right up. Fuel lines did rust so I had to replace them - which I did about a month after I started driving it.
My mom's 94 Thunder bird(with 17,000km) sat next to the fifth for 3yrs, needed a main fuse, alt, blower motor, stereo, battery.
I just don't like ford.. dunno.. if I was given one, like say I got the thunderbird instead of the fifth, yes I would drive it, but i wouldn't pay for one, unless it's like Elanor. |
|
|
| Inzane |
quote:
Originally posted by newaccorddriver
initial quality ratings dont mean too much. i think all cars start off equal, its the long run that really matters.
Agreed.
Look at 2-5 year data and the differences become obvious. |
|
|
| Talontsi96 |
quote:
Originally posted by Inzane
Agreed.
Look at 2-5 year data and the differences become obvious.
I think that if you do your research that for instance the Sonata is ranked quite high in the reliability ratings for that time period. And if they all start off equal in initial quality there would not be a first, second, third and so on in the ratings..
The research shows that when the Japanese entered the market they were considered junk. This was the same for the Koreans, however, the articled I've read indicate that the Koreans managed to get their act together in about 20 years whch is in about half the time of the Japanese. This shows in the quality ratings we see in current times.
The current data for long term reliability is skewed because the Korean cars have been drastically (more so than anyone else) improving in the past years, therefore comparing models that are 5-10 years old for reliability for instance is like comparing the older junky stuff to the new. The new are drastically different cars when it comes to design and quality even though they come from the same manufacturer.. Hyundai of 10 years ago is no Hyundai of today...this is quite obvious...
Initial quality ratings give you an idea about the current model car's quality not the car of 5 to 10 years ago. In some manufacturers there is not much difference in others there is a huge difference. If you checked the Korean manufacturers' quality ratings 5 or 10 years ago you'd see that the initial quality ratings correspond pretty well with the reliability ratings for those cars. |
|
|
| Insomniac |
Talontsi96, I just put that comment there to see if you were listening!!!:D You are!
ps.. anyone who has the new Car and Driver with yellow Porsche on the cover, read the letters to the editor and look for some comments from a hometown boy. |
|
|
| Talontsi96 |
quote:
Originally posted by Insomniac
Talontsi96, I just put that comment there to see if you were listening!!!:D You are!
ps.. anyone who has the new Car and Driver with yellow Porsche on the cover, read the letters to the editor and look for some comments from a hometown boy.
Hey Chris, before I responded to your post I checked the date of it and was somewhat surprised that you would post that after our recent comunications... Now I understand your reasoning....Pretty Sneakey..:thumbup: |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
I fail to see hondas as hard to work on.. You can take my whole car apart using the follow tools.
32mm <- only needed for front axel nuts
19mm
17mm
14mm
12mm
10mm
and I belive the fuel rail bolts are a 8mm
and a philips screwdriver..
The cars are extreamly easy to work on. You can't say something is hard to work on because you don't know how. At least when your working on a Japanese car you know you will only need metric tools.. I don't understand how a car company would even consider putting out cars that have a mix of the two.. There are examples of this in both ford and GM that I know about.. likley dodge aswell. |
|
|
| Talontsi96 |
| I agree...I find imports easier to work on, hands down.. |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
But do you guys seriously rate reliability as your number one reason for choosing a car?? I don't know why you would only rate cars based on reliability. It is pretty widely agreed that Toyota and Honda are probably the #1 and #2 companies for reliability right now. But would I drive an ugly and boring Toyota car just because it is more reliable than everything else? Hell no. I wouldn't be caught dead in one (I'm generally speaking of their current line-up before everyone starts piping in that supras are wicked cool lol).
If 5 years from now Hyndai and Kia and ranking #1 and #2 for quality and long term reliability and their product line is similar to what it is now would all you guys trade your Japanese cars for Korean cars and start saying Japanese companies are shit because they have more problems and recals then Korean companies. I somehow doubt it.
If I was to be in the market right now for any type of vehicle less than 5 years old, reliability would be one of my lowest priorities on my list. Looks, handling, power, comfort and price would all be way more important. And those things probably wouldn't put me into a single new Toyota car on the market right now. Long term reliability would only be an issue if I was planning on driving the car for the next 10 years, but few people ever do that. |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
| Oh, and on the Ford vs BMW thing... I currently own one of each and while I love my Explorer and think it is a great suv there is simply a huge difference between it and the BMW. :beer: |
|
|
| 95EagleAWD |
| The number of DSM and RX-7 owners on this board can attest to reliability not being an important factor in purchasing a car... :p |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverZ24
Long term reliability would only be an issue if I was planning on driving the car for the next 10 years, but few people ever do that.
im not sure why people barely drive a car for 10 years before selling it for a new one. is it because they want something newer and more updated? |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
The number of DSM and RX-7 owners on this board can attest to reliability not being an important factor in purchasing a car... :p
DSMs are pretty reliable, you just gotta walk the crank every one in a while:p
i still dont get why mitsubishi didnt do a recall on it though. |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
| I would have to agree with silver24 about the fact Toyota cars lack anything to make them really interesting. But the fact of the matter is. With the exception of Honda, all Japanese car companies were started by corporations withe the intention of making money. That is the number one driving force. Realistically if all your going to look at is the bottom line. The passion in both design and performance take a back seat. The majority of car buyers are looking for something to get them from A to B.. not for something super sexy that handels like its on rails and runs a 13 second quarter. |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
| the supra was interesting for its time, that is until they killed it due to poor sales. since then, i havent seen anything really interesting from toyota. |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
quote:
Originally posted by newaccorddriver
im not sure why people barely drive a car for 10 years before selling it for a new one. is it because they want something newer and more updated?
Don't you get bored of driving the same thing year after year? Especially when newer models are built so much better and have so many better features. I can't trade my wife in every few years for a new improved model so I will enjoy myself doing that with my car. :p :beer: |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by Nightstalker
The majority of car buyers are looking for something to get them from A to B.. not for something super sexy that handels like its on rails and runs a 13 second quarter.
i think the A to B thing is kinda a given, but i think looks has something to do with it as well. it doesnt have to look as nice as a ferrari, but it also shouldnt look like ass as well. it doesnt have to handle really well as long as it can be used as a daily driver. and it doesnt have to be too fast, but it should be able to keep up with traffic well enough |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverZ24
Don't you get bored of driving the same thing year after year? Especially when newer models are built so much better and have so many better features. I can't trade my wife in every few years for a new improved model so I will enjoy myself doing that with my car. :p :beer:
im just curious on the trading it in for a new model part. doesnt it cost ALOT to do that?
i guess i find that having 2 cars to drive around all year(325Xi for winter, accord for summer) kinda keeps it interesting. although the 325Xi lacks some things the new 3 series has(mainly the mp3 compatable head unit), i can put up with it easily. the new 3 looks like ass while the old 3 looks alot better. the new one might have more features, but the only thing im lacking right now is a standard transmission.
my accord lacks ALOT of things, but i can easily live with it. its nowhere as nice as the BMW, but thats probably why i like it so much. i can bottom out at rundall park all day and not even care. and the things so easy to work on, i managed to do a 5 speed swap pretty much on my own. and for a car thats 20 years old, its still pretty reliable, so i can probably have many more years of fun with it |
|
|
| Inzane |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverZ24
while I love my Explorer and think it is a great suv
My parents have an Explorer ('97). As soon as it hit ~5 years old EVERYTHING started breaking. I'm surprised they've kept it this long but they will be ditching it sometime this year. |
|
|
| GT34 |
quote:
Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
The number of DSM and RX-7 owners on this board can attest to reliability not being an important factor in purchasing a car... :p
Try finding someone to touch your wankle ( I usually do at least once a day).
Now lets get down to business here and get some subjective information out of the way here. I don't wanna hear any of you guys piping in with your uneducated comments regarding a certain car manufacturer unless you've, first hand, owned, drivin or seen these cars cause problems. I'm talking about you guys who just hate a car manufacturer just because of what you've heard.
I work as a tow truck driver and I see cars, trucks, vans you name it get towed for one reason or another. Let's break it down shall we. Dodge is notorious for having shitty trannys, no question about it. I have seen more newer chrysler vehicles go in for tranny repairs than any other vehicle. Does that make dodge a shitty company, no they just have shitty trannys. Now I understand for the 2005/06 model year they've redesigned their trannys. On our fleet of tow trucks we use the super dutys. Did some guy just go out and choose ford? No, they made educated choices and from a number of reasons to go with ford. Was it the best one, no there isn't a best one. The newer 03-05 6.0 engine blows. There have been more problems with the 6.0 than we have ever had with any other truck before. But that's the engine, not the company. All problems we've had with them we're so far covered under waranty. So does that make ford a crappy auto maker? No, because they're doing something about it and we haven't had to pay a cent to get them to fix it. Watch out for the 6.4.
I know there is a lot of biased information out there regarding cars. Some of it is true, but most of it is just someones opinion and has no real objective information. Even car and driver is biased when it comes to testing out cars. The magazine is a media outlet producing their own form of propaganda. What it really matters is the driver. I'm not sure what the ratio is, 3:5 new vehicles will have a major problem with them in their first 5 years on the road or something. That's not something the driver can controll. Nonetheless, PM is key to a longer lasting vehicle no matter what you drive. But in the end it will see the inside of a shop for one reason or another.
The breakdown is I've towed them all. You can't tell me one car maker is better than another. They all have their problems. It's just how often the occur and the people that are telling the stories through word of mouth that create the hype. So it all comes down to which car you want to drive. Choose for fav manufacturer and model. Get the most expensive of the cheapest you can find. Pick the fastest or the one with the nicest interior. Because no matter what one it is, you'll end up forking out money and fixing that thing for as long as you own it. :) |
|
|
| dc2696 |
| I don't have the time to read everyones posts so I'll just sum it up. Anyone thats works up north or in the bush knows that theres nothing but Ford up here, I've seen maybe one GM work truck and you do see the odd welder with a dodge. Fact is I know ppl who won't hier you if you drive anything but a Ford. I hate em but they always start and never break (this only applies to diesel trucks) |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
| Most oilfield trucks are ford because they are cheaper and the companies usually get rid of them after 5 years. |
|
|
| dc2696 |
quote:
Originally posted by Nightstalker
Most oilfield trucks are ford because they are cheaper and the companies usually get rid of them after 5 years.
More like two years, but still they always start, hardly ever break and I've done some serious bagging in a f250 crew truck before, we got it with 1200 k on it, by the end of the winter it was totally destroyed but still ran and drove from Fort St. John to Blackfalds in one day.:) |
|
|
| GT34 |
| Yeah, our trucks don't stay on longer than 5 years. |
|
|
| Wolfdio |
| but they get more than 500,000k on them before you sell them |
|
|
| dc2696 |
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfdio
but they get more than 500,000k on them before you sell them
The truck we have right now is five months old and has 50k on it, not a whole bunch but still more than my truck that I've had since May. |
|
|
| 95EagleAWD |
quote:
Originally posted by dc2696
I don't have the time to read everyones posts so I'll just sum it up. Anyone thats works up north or in the bush knows that theres nothing but Ford up here, I've seen maybe one GM work truck and you do see the odd welder with a dodge. Fact is I know ppl who won't hier you if you drive anything but a Ford. I hate em but they always start and never break (this only applies to diesel trucks)
I drove the wheels off an F-350 a couple years ago... Awesome truck :thumbup:
My baby in the bush... Don't mind the Chevy in front... not our truck, just a customer. We were Ford and International, and those trucks ruled.
 |
|
|
| dc2696 |
quote:
Originally posted by Nightstalker
I fail to see hondas as hard to work on.. You can take my whole car apart using the follow tools.
32mm <- only needed for front axel nuts
19mm
17mm
14mm
12mm
10mm
and I belive the fuel rail bolts are a 8mm
and a philips screwdriver..
Dang I thought the miata was easy with; 8mm,10mm,12mm,14mm,17mm,19mm,21mm23mm,24mm, you can take everything apart and off the car. The larger sockets are only needed for drain plugs. And a philips screwdriver ofcoarse
:D |
|
|
| dc2696 |
| Yup we go places with the 350 that would puzzle gm owners haha, to GM's defence I've also beat the shit out of a 03 2500 and it had zero torque converter left after 160k but dam that thing went thru everything pulling a heavy ass trailer most of the time too:D |
|
|
| Insomniac |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverZ24
But do you guys seriously rate reliability as your number one reason for choosing a car?? I don't know why you would only rate cars based on reliability. It is pretty widely agreed that Toyota and Honda are probably the #1 and #2 companies for reliability right now. But would I drive an ugly and boring Toyota car just because it is more reliable than everything else? Hell no. I wouldn't be caught dead in one (I'm generally speaking of their current line-up before everyone starts piping in that supras are wicked cool lol).
Agreed. I would rate reliability low on the scale in general for new cars but it seems that the new BMW's are atrotious (sp?) compared to the Japs. When there is that much of a difference, it comes into play for me. I want to enjoy a car, not have to worry about bringing it in often for warranty work. I've talked to guys who bought recent BMW's (E46 M3, 5 series) and the vow to never buy another BMW again... oh well.
Speaking of warranty, here's a reason why reliability is important to ME. I've never owned a car on warranty. My cars have always been used. Anything that goes wrong with a car I own, I have to pay for out of pocket. Hence, I no longer have a rotary, LOL. I am willing to compromise though, they money I have in my BMW could have easily gone towards a brand new econobox, but shit, I can't roll like that.
:lol: |
|
|
| Inzane |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverZ24
But do you guys seriously rate reliability as your number one reason for choosing a car?? I don't know why you would only rate cars based on reliability.
It is pretty widely agreed that Toyota and Honda are probably the #1 and #2 companies for reliability right now. But would I drive an ugly and boring Toyota car just because it is more reliable than everything else? Hell no. I wouldn't be caught dead in one.
Looks, handling, power, comfort and price would all be way more important. And those things probably wouldn't put me into a single new Toyota car on the market right now.
I totally agree with these points. :thumbup:
I too am totally disinterested in Toyota's product line, for mostly the same reasons. (the only exception might be comfort... I'm not aware that Toyotas aren't comfortable. If anything I've found they're TOO comfort oriented). |
|
|
| Inzane |
quote:
Originally posted by Insomniac
the money I have in my BMW could have easily gone towards a brand new econobox, but shit, I can't roll like that.
:thumbup: :beer: |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
quote:
Originally posted by Inzane
My parents have an Explorer ('97). As soon as it hit ~5 years old EVERYTHING started breaking. I'm surprised they've kept it this long but they will be ditching it sometime this year.
Mine is the newer generation and they seem to be considerably better than the old ones. Only one recall (hinge on the tailgate) and 2 very minor warranty issues. Only thing I have had to pay for myself is a light bulb, the tires at about 80k and according to the phone call from my wife today, a new windshield since a big rock hit it on the deerfoot today. lol
And I plan on replacing mine this year, but I plan on getting another Explorer again, just newer and with the V8. :thumbup: |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
quote:
Originally posted by Inzane
I totally agree with these points. :thumbup:
I too am totally disinterested in Toyota's product line, for mostly the same reasons. (the only exception might be comfort... I'm not aware that Toyotas aren't comfortable. If anything I've found they're TOO comfort oriented).
I mainly mean the combination of those features wouldn't put me in any current toyota, not that there isn't a comfortable toyota. :) |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
And on the Ford truck issue, we just got an 05 F350 back from rent with 153k in just 3 months. The bad thing is, that was with zero maintenance. The guy said he didn't know there was a km limit between oil changes, just that you had to do them every 3-6 months. lol
Still pretty good considering he never even checked the oil or changed the air filter or anything (and he even admited all of that lol). |
|
|
| 95EagleAWD |
We brought ours back with 7 cylinders firing :D
I think I put close to 21,000 kilometers on that thing in 2 and a half months... great trucks. |
|
|
| Fish_e_o |
well i have liked the fords i've had..
92 f150 w/351
87 lariat f150 on propane w/302
and the good ol' 96 taurus w/3.0L
the 92 f150 had tons of power and was fun as hell off road never once broke down
the 87 lariat had 328 xxx km's on it before a semi ran over the back half at our shop.. damn thing ran like a dream too
and the 96 taurus wow the slowest car i've ever driven.. never had a problem though even took the thing off of jumps at my friends farm drove the hell out of it and it still runs like a top....
but i'd say the only thing wrong with fords is that they're always 5 years behind in the technology and looks
p.s. people pick on mustangs because the people driving them (which may i add is mostly old ladies) think they are drivng a sports car... lets put it this way when my once stock neon puts a hurtin on a mustang... it's bad... |
|
|
| crazy240sx |
| my ford is the most reliable car i've owned yet, and i've owned a few domestic and import cars |
|
|
| srt-4toys |
| i had a two door ford explorer sport with only the a power window problem and i also currently have a ford explorer eddie bauer edition witch hasnt had a single problem i just hope it stays that way |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by Fish_e_o
p.s. people pick on mustangs because the people driving them (which may i add is mostly old ladies) think they are drivng a sports car... lets put it this way when my once stock neon puts a hurtin on a mustang... it's bad...
Why are you trying to race old ladies driving V6 stangs? :dunno: |
|
|
| 95EagleAWD |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
Why are you trying to race old ladies driving V6 stangs? :dunno:
He drives a stock Neon... he's gotta race something he can win against... ;) |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
He drives a stock Neon... he's gotta race something he can win against... ;)
neons can win againest V6 mustangs?:omg: |
|
|
| SilverNeonRacer |
quote:
Originally posted by newaccorddriver
neons can win againest V6 mustangs?:omg:
Why not?
Anyhow.. they other person said old ladies in mustangs.... I think thats what the comment was refering too.. more the drivers than the car.
First numer is 0-60 second is 1/4mile
quote:
1996 Dodge Neon Highline 9.1 16.8
1998 Dodge Neon R/T 7.5 15.9
2000 Dodge Neon R/T 7.7 16.4
2000 Dodge Neon ES 8.8 16.9
2001 Dodge Neon R/T 7.6 16.1
quote:
1964 Ford Mustang (289ci V8 w/4spd) 7.5 15.7
1966 Ford Mustang (289ci V8 Auto) 10.9 17.9
1967 Ford Mustang (390ci V8 w/4spd) 7.4 15.6
1971 Ford Mustang (351ci V8 w/4spd) 5.8 13.8
1973 Ford Mustang 351ci 8.9 16.3
1974 Ford Mustang II 4sp 14.2 18.8
1974 Ford Mustang II Auto 15.6 19.4
1975 Ford Mustang II (302ci V8 w/3spd) 9.6 17.5
1977 Ford Mustang II 302ci 11.3 17.7
1971 Ford Mustang Boss 351 5.8 13.8
2001 Ford Mustang Bullitt GT 5.6 14.1 (MT 01)
1980 Ford Mustang (255ci) 11.8 18.5
1980 Ford Mustang Cobra (225ci) 11.3 18.4
1981 Ford Mustang M81 McLaren (2.3L Turbo) 9.7 17.3
1984 Ford Mustang SVO 7.9 15.8
1982 Ford Mustang GT 8.0 N/A
1991 Ford Mustang GT 7.3 15.6
1992 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 6.2 14.8
1993 Ford Mustang Cobra 5.9 14.5
1993 Ford Mustang GT (auto) 8.0 16.1
1994 Ford Mustang Cobra 5.4 14.0
1994 Ford Mustang GT 6.7 15.1
1995 Ford Mustang 3.8 9.9 17.3
1999 Ford Mustang Convertible V6 8.6 16.5
1999 Ford Mustang GT 5.5 14.1
2001 Ford Mustang Roush Stage 3 4.3 12.9
Soo um yeah a neon r/t is faster than a v6 stang.. :P
Newer V8 stangs... sure a neon is faster... if the stang driver is a moron. |
|
|
| Fish_e_o |
quote:
Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
He drives a stock Neon... he's gotta race something he can win against... ;)
i think you read wrong it says once stock... it was 3 days after i got my neon too and of course it was at the track:thumbup:
and it was a 4.6 gt and we both had two people.. it was really close but i had him till 100 and by then the "track" had ended so i slowed down...
and some imperssive times too
1964 Ford Mustang (289ci V8 w/4spd) 7.5 15.7
1966 Ford Mustang (289ci V8 Auto) 10.9 17.9
1967 Ford Mustang (390ci V8 w/4spd) 7.4 15.6
1973 Ford Mustang 351ci 8.9 16.3
1974 Ford Mustang II 4sp 14.2 18.8
1974 Ford Mustang II Auto 15.6 19.4
1975 Ford Mustang II (302ci V8 w/3spd) 9.6 17.5
1977 Ford Mustang II 302ci 11.3 17.7
1980 Ford Mustang (255ci) 11.8 18.5
1980 Ford Mustang Cobra (225ci) 11.3 18.4 <--- i thought cobras were the fast ones?!?!?!?
1981 Ford Mustang M81 McLaren (2.3L Turbo) 9.7 17.3
1984 Ford Mustang SVO 7.9 15.8
1982 Ford Mustang GT 8.0 N/A <--- what it didn't make it or what?
1991 Ford Mustang GT 7.3 15.6
1993 Ford Mustang GT (auto) 8.0 16.1
1994 Ford Mustang GT 6.7 15.1
1995 Ford Mustang 3.8 9.9 17.3
1999 Ford Mustang Convertible V6 8.6 16.5
alll of those cars can be beaten by a neon r/t with mild weight reduction... there was a guy once if i remember correctly gutted his car, which was stock, and ran a 14.8
basically ford has it all wrong... they keep making their cars heavier by putting in bigger motors and all that crap... they need to make a low, light, wide, high reving sports car for me to give them some performance respect...
:dunno: |
|
|
| tegGSR |
| no disrespect but do you give neons performance respect? |
|
|
| Fish_e_o |
quote:
Originally posted by tegGSR
no disrespect but do you give neons performance respect?
well a stock motor can rev to 7800 safely, they weigh 2200 lbs, came stock with koni adjustable struts, front and rear sway bars, and handle like a dream...
they only reason they were built like that was so that mopar could take them to the track as a stock car and slaughter everyone...
i would say they definetly deserve respect.. it's a lighter, faster, better handling, better designed eclipse and they get *some* respect right???
but really ford is the topic we got sort of off track here... |
|
|
| SilverNeonRacer |
quote:
Originally posted by Fish_e_o
well a stock motor can rev to 7800 safely, they weigh 2200 lbs, came stock with koni adjustable struts, front and rear sway bars, and handle like a dream...
they only reason they were built like that was so that mopar could take them to the track as a stock car and slaughter everyone...
i would say they definetly deserve respect.. it's a lighter, faster, better handling, better designed eclipse and they get *some* respect right???
but really ford is the topic we got sort of off track here...
Thats an ACR, the new mustangs on that list, I didn't post most of them cause they're faster than a neon, most newer stangs are 5-6 second for 0-60 |
|
|
| Fish_e_o |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverNeonRacer
Thats an ACR, the new mustangs on that list, I didn't post most of them cause they're faster than a neon, most newer stangs are 5-6 second for 0-60
meh.. acr for dodge= GT for ford
oh ya i know some mustangs are faster, in a strait line, but in no way a sports car... i'd still drive a mustang just not hard and not because it's a sports car, just because i LOVE the looks of the 95 Gt's but thats it..
and then for all the ricers out there i'd slap a wing on the back and take it to the street races WAHOO!!!... just kidding guys..:dunno: |
|
|
| BlackSRT4 |
quote:
Originally posted by Fish_e_o
You should worry about punctuation first and car mods second.
Practice what you preach. |
|
|
| Fish_e_o |
quote:
Originally posted by BlackSRT4
Practice what you preach.
i try thats why it's there... it's a constant reminder:lol: :lol: :lol:
that one wasn't that bad. it's when i do paragraphs without any puctuation at all; spellcheck has killed proof-reading for me. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by Fish_e_o
basically ford has it all wrong... they keep making their cars heavier by putting in bigger motors and all that crap... they need to make a low, light, wide, high reving sports car for me to give them some performance respect...
:dunno:
I think they know what they're doing.... but I can't afford to find out at the moment. :p
 |
|
|
| driftr420 |
yea fords r so great to work on.
quoted time to install headers on to a 99 f150 6hr's.
i've worked on pleanty of vehicles in genral and it's way to hard to singal any manufacturer's vehicles out and say their cars/trucks are hard to work on.
but either way they still blow ass :mad: |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
I think they know what they're doing.... but I can't afford to find out at the moment. :p
You would think so for the price, but considering the recalls they have had for that car I would say its kinda unlikley. |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
quote:
Originally posted by Fish_e_o
i think you read wrong it says once stock... it was 3 days after i got my neon too and of course it was at the track:thumbup:
and it was a 4.6 gt and we both had two people.. it was really close but i had him till 100 and by then the "track" had ended so i slowed down...
and some imperssive times too
1964 Ford Mustang (289ci V8 w/4spd) 7.5 15.7
1966 Ford Mustang (289ci V8 Auto) 10.9 17.9
1967 Ford Mustang (390ci V8 w/4spd) 7.4 15.6
1973 Ford Mustang 351ci 8.9 16.3
1974 Ford Mustang II 4sp 14.2 18.8
1974 Ford Mustang II Auto 15.6 19.4
1975 Ford Mustang II (302ci V8 w/3spd) 9.6 17.5
1977 Ford Mustang II 302ci 11.3 17.7
1980 Ford Mustang (255ci) 11.8 18.5
1980 Ford Mustang Cobra (225ci) 11.3 18.4 <--- i thought cobras were the fast ones?!?!?!?
1981 Ford Mustang M81 McLaren (2.3L Turbo) 9.7 17.3
1984 Ford Mustang SVO 7.9 15.8
1982 Ford Mustang GT 8.0 N/A <--- what it didn't make it or what?
1991 Ford Mustang GT 7.3 15.6
1993 Ford Mustang GT (auto) 8.0 16.1
1994 Ford Mustang GT 6.7 15.1
1995 Ford Mustang 3.8 9.9 17.3
1999 Ford Mustang Convertible V6 8.6 16.5
alll of those cars can be beaten by a neon r/t with mild weight reduction... there was a guy once if i remember correctly gutted his car, which was stock, and ran a 14.8
basically ford has it all wrong... they keep making their cars heavier by putting in bigger motors and all that crap... they need to make a low, light, wide, high reving sports car for me to give them some performance respect...
:dunno:
1998 Dodge Neon R/T 7.5 15.9
2000 Dodge Neon R/T 7.7 16.4
Not bad at all either one but why is the newer one slower?
Heres Mustangs with the heavy engines.
1964 Ford Mustang (289ci V8 w/4spd) 7.5 15.7
1967 Ford Mustang (390ci V8 w/4spd) 7.4 15.6
1971 Ford Mustang (351ci V8 w/4spd) 5.8 13.8
1985 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 14.9 (C&D, Jan. 85)
1987 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 14.4 (Automobile, April 87)
1988 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 15.0 (MT Jan '88)
1989 Ford Mustang GT 5.0l Manual 6.2 14.8 (MT Jan '89)
1990 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 6.4 14.9
1991 Ford Mustang GT 7.3 15.6
1992 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 6.2 14.8
1993 Ford Mustang Cobra 5.9 14.5
1993 Ford Mustang GT (auto) 8.0 16.1
1994 Ford Mustang Cobra 5.4 14.0
1994 Ford Mustang GT 6.1 14.9 (C&D Dec '93)
1995 Ford Mustang Cobra R 5.2 13.8
1996 Ford Mustang Cobra 5.4 14.0
1998 Ford Mustang Cobra SVT 5.4 14.0
1999 Ford Mustang Cobra SVT 5.4 13.9
1999 Ford Mustang GT 5.5 14.1
2001 Ford Mustang Cobra SVT 4.8 13.5
2003 Ford Mustang Cobra SVT 4.5 12.9
2004 Ford Mustang Cobra SVT 4.5 12.9
2005 Ford Mustang GT 4.6L V8 5.1 13.5 (MT Jan 05)
2005 Ford Mustang GT Convertible 5.2 13.8 (MT Apr 05)
2001 Ford Mustang Roush Stage 3 4.3 12.9
1969 Ford Mustang Mach 1 5.7 13.9
2003 Ford Mustang Mach 1 (5 Speed) 4.7 13.2 (MT Feb 05)
2003 Ford Mustang Mach 1 (Auto) 5.6 13.88 (MT Apr 04)
Not bad times for heavy cars IMO. Look the 05 convertable does 0-60 in 5.2 seconds 13.8 not bad at all :)
Big pimpin rides with extreme potential to do more.
haha I filled a page
:lol: |
|
|
| SilverNeonRacer |
The newer neon is slower cause it's 300lbs heavier.
I raced a first gen neon R/T in my 02 neon R/T... I kicked it's ass... but then again, mine was brand spanky new and his was atleast 3+ yrs old. |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
I seen some pretty impressive runs by neons. Low 12's wow thats awesome!:thumbup:
But then again I seen some pretty nasty stangs in the single digit area with full interiors :dunno:
Comparing the 2 is like comparing a Sperm Whale to a Tuna......... |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by Markgase2000
Comparing the 2 is like comparing a Sperm Whale to a Tuna.........
why were you vague in describing the tuna and somewhat more detailed in describing the whale?:lol:
i wonder how a stock SRT-4 would go againest a stock Cobra... |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
Ooops sorry. For diversity sake , it was a Yellow fin tuna :D
Haha thanks for helping me there :thumbup:
I wonder the same thing about the srt-4 versus Cobra.
Would be nice to see a low end to top end race for true comparison. 0-top speed side by side. On a longer streatch than the 1/4mile. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by newaccorddriver
i wonder how a stock SRT-4 would go againest a stock Cobra...
Stock? Cobra.
Modded and from a dig..... depends on the drivers, but usually cobra, rwd>fwd.
Modded and from a roll, depends on mods and how fast you go to.
Skittles can be made to go fast, no denying that. :) |
|
|
| Markgase2000 |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
Stock? Cobra.
Modded and from a dig..... depends on the drivers, but usually cobra, rwd>fwd.
Modded and from a roll, depends on mods and how fast you go to.
Skittles can be made to go fast, no denying that. :)
:lol: :lol: :bowdown: |
|
|
| Fergizzo |
I dont understand "initial quality":dunno:
Does it not simply mean quality at first like not taking into account reliability, over time and such? |
|
|
| Talontsi96 |
quote:
Originally posted by Fish_e_o
i would say they definetly deserve respect.. it's a lighter, faster, better handling, better designed eclipse and they get *some* respect right???
Thats got to be the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Neon being an improved eclipse....lol...right buddy...a Neon is a neutered eclipse with no turbo, no AWD and no life..better designed...? Thats Hillarious...
Remember non turbo eclipses are not real eclipses. They are glorified neons..not the other way around...
By the way I've owned a neon back in 95 when they just came out and it was a quck for an econobox car... operative words being for an ECONOBOX CAR.... |
|
|
| ACX |
latest lemon list.
Suzuki Verona 10,462 Jap
Nissan Quest 4,980 Jap
Volkswagen Touareg 3,240 Euro
Nissan Armada 2,383 Jap
Chevrolet Malibu 2,304 USA
Mazda RX 8 1,982 Jap
Chrysler Pacifica 1,689 USA
Nissan Maxima 1,460 Jap
Nissan 350z 1,402 Jap
Toyota Sienna 1,374 Jap
Honda Element 1,161 Jap
Subaru Impreza 1,157 Jap
Hyundai Tiburon 1,140 Kor
Chrysler Crossfire 1,114 Euro
Acura TSX 1,060 Jap
Pontiac Grand Prix 1,046 USA
Suzuki Grand Vitara 869 JAP
Cadillac CTS 818 USA
Pontiac Aztek 807 USA
Mitsubishi Endeavor 762 JAP
---------------------------------------------------------------
We have Ford crew trucks and like any crew trucks they get beat on and hold up like pretty much anything else does.
Those basing Ford on the Aerostar and the Fairmont might want to get out of the acid wash jeans and get into this millenium.
I've heard horror stories with most makes and models, and as far as I am concerned the quality gap is closing. The biggest thing Ford and GM have to work on is offering car models people WANT. They have relied on trucks / SUVs and the sales are clearly in the shit tank.
My personal experiences:
1979 Ford Fairmont - no major problems.
1970 Chevelle - no major problems.
1987 Plymouth Turismo - carb :lol: :lol:
2000 Mustang GT - part of the wiring harness - warranty
2003 Acura TL - Electrical issues, transmission replaced, hard starting in the cold. Worst car for reliability I ever drove.
2004 Neon SRT4 - No issues besides the neon spectre
2005 Subaru Forester - No issues besides the lesbian spectre.
I'm getting a 2006 F250 soon. I expect it will be fine as well.
The germans are coming off reeling from some quality issues, the yankees have played catch up as well. To me the factual playing field for new cars is pretty even. Maybe not 100% even, but more even. Perception and preference being a large part of what drives consumers. |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
| The main issue with the origional SRT4s was eather a fully plastic intake manifold or one part of it was.. in the cold it tended to shatter then get forced into the engine. The stuff on the TL should have been fixed under warrenty unless you did something to cause it.. Considering you seem to get a new car every year by your list, you eather have to much money.. or you wreck new cars for fun. |
|
|
| ACX |
quote:
Originally posted by Nightstalker
The main issue with the origional SRT4s was eather a fully plastic intake manifold or one part of it was.. in the cold it tended to shatter then get forced into the engine. The stuff on the TL should have been fixed under warrenty unless you did something to cause it..
I've never heard of those issues on any SRT4s - interesting.
The acura was warranty, but that didn't absolve i from being a total pain in the ass and dangerous. I got left high and dry thanks to that car a few times. To me, not acceptable for a 40k machine, or any machine I guess for that matter. Nothing like a car downshifting into the lowest gear on its own while going 120. Glad I'm quick on the draw. I can accept that I got a bad example however.
Anyways, car companies are like banks, everyone has a horror story. Pick the one you like and give-er.
:thumbup: |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
| I figure your getting what you deserve for buying a automatic :p |
|
|
| ACX |
quote:
Originally posted by Nightstalker
I figure your getting what you deserve for buying a automatic :p
I'm paying for having a standard now too. I need to teach my G/F how to drive my Turbo forester.
I've been wearing a neckbrace for a week now.
:blink: :mad: |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
Ha ha ha.. Remember the 3 Os of bad Driving
Old
Ovarys
Oriental |
|
|
| tegGSR |
quote:
Originally posted by Nightstalker
Ha ha ha.. Remember the 3 Os of bad Driving
Old
Ovarys
Oriental
hahaha my day has been made:thumbup: |
|
|
| newaccorddriver |
quote:
Originally posted by Nightstalker
Ha ha ha.. Remember the 3 Os of bad Driving
Old
Ovarys
Oriental
im oriental and im not too bad at driving. alot better then all the other ones which think you can go 70 down calgary trail where the speed limit is 110. or all those that drive 40 in a 60 zone(that one seriously pisses me off). |
|
|
| Nightstalker |
| Ha ha ha. Don't take it personally man. Some of the better race drivers I know personally are oriental.. They are far better drivers then me. |
|
|
|
