I saw that list. When I saw the Taurus, I was like "wha? That was a nice car." Then I read on to realize that was the point: it WAS a nice car.
I owned a 2002 Ford Taurus SES several years ago. A common comment was, "Why are you driving a rental car?" Other than windshield wind noise, a persistent engine valve cover gasket oil leak, and two transaxle failures (covered under warranty), this was an OK car...
Though I never owned a Taurus, my uncle had one of the performance ones, the SHO. It was pretty well appointed..........pretty quick too. My son just bought a demo 2008 Sebring convertible for his wife. Car is gorgeous! Watching the top go down is a beautiful thing though. I felt the car is pretty well thought out for a Chrysler. And he and I are MOPAR people, I like the vintage ones and an Indy Ram pickup. He works in a dealership in the parts department. Resale value on a Sebring though is horrible! He says very few warranty claims. But, none are as good as the Prius.
Wow...that was a tough list LOL. All very true though... It underlines the issue that US Automakers just are always a day late and a dollar short to what the consumer wants, its purely bad leadership...
The last model year the Vega was produced was 1977, and that's too far back to blame that car for GM's current problems. Also it sold 1.9 million units over seven years, which is not a bad record - that exceeds Prius US sales over a similar period... [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Vega]Chevrolet Vega - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
Sorry. When a so called auto journalist makes the following statement, he loses ALL credibility in my book. The article may have some credence but this clown should leave the auto articles to somebody with at least a little knowledge of this arena.
From looking at the GM marketing strategy over the years, you would think they were in the oil business. 4-5 years back, Jeep marketed a Liberty with a 4 cylinder engine and manual 5 speed transmission. The EPA mileage ratings were 20/24. I bought the only one available within a 50 mile radius--at a local dealer. Averaged 20-22 mpg for three years before selling it. No complaints. Peppy SUV. The 4 cylinder engine was only available with manual transmission, because the Liberty was too heavy for a 4 cyl. automatic, and most women driving SUVs wanted automatics. So 98% of the Libertys were 6 cylinder automatics that got terrible gas mileage. And that's why Jeep is in trouble today.
At least the Prius is mentioned in a positive way - it was derided as 'not economical'... but then gas prices soared and Toyota had a viable high mileage vehicle that people snapped up! I remember hearing about long waits for them last year. Detroit had nothing that could compare. Now they are a day late and a dollar short. There are some good candidates, tho. The Fusion Hybrid is pretty nice and may have broad appeal, especially if gas prices climb. The Volt will be very great if they can get the price below $30k. Eventually, I think that will happen, but it will probably be a few more years away.
The new Taurus actually looks QUITE nice. Ford is doing well, I think. Their domestic designs seem to be pulling ques from their European designs, which look great, IMHO. They should also do well with the EcoBoost engines. Turbocharging a smaller engine is a great way to get the power of a large engine and the efficiency of a smaller engine. I'm also glad Ford took no TARP or other bailout funds. That's a huge plus in my books.
How about that front-drive transaxle and the big sliding door that allowed the minivan to work? Don't you think that was Detroit finding out what Americans wanted? Oh! That was 26 years ago?! And it was first introduced in Europe? Oh . ...
Different dealers for the same manufacturer. GM started the whole arrangement when Durant bought up a whole slew of new automobile companies around 1909, each with there own plants and designs. A century later, the brand names remain, but the individuality is gone. Ford has to service Lincoln/Mercury and Ford. GM has Buick, Chevy, Cadillac, etc. Basic economics leads them to put out the same base vehicle with style variations for the different dealers.
That's because the SHO had a Yamaha-tuned V6 originally meant for a MR sports car (at least the first generation). I was pleasantly surprised to find a rumor I had heard about the engine up on Wikipedia: [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taurus_SHO]Ford Taurus SHO - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame] "the SHO V6 was actually capable of revving up to about 8,500 RPMs, but Ford's accessory systems couldn't handle it, so the redline was dialed back to 7,200 so the engine didn't destroy the rest of the car"
I suspect he knows perfectly well what Sebring is, but his point is that the average sedan buyer has no idea, therefore the name has no selling value, therefore Detroit is out of touch with the buyer. Again.
I honestly have no idea what a Sebring is. I have heard the name but no idea (without searching) what it is. NCIS is on TV and they are talking about a sea-bring, is that the same thing?
Pat, "Sebring International Raceway is a road course auto racing facility located in Sebring Florida. The raceway occupies a portion of Hendricks Field, a former military training base and currently an active airport for private and commercial traffic. "Sebring Raceway is one of the oldest continuously-operating race tracks in the United States, its first race being run in 1950. Many consider Sebring to be one of the classic race tracks in North American sports car racing and the 12 Hours of Sebring, 24 Hours of Daytona, and 24 Hours of LeMans to be the trifecta of sports car racing." [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebring_International_Raceway"]Sebring International Raceway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame] Perhaps it is just an American -- read the Detroit-3 -- conciet to name cars after race courses such as the Chrysler Sebring, Dodge Daytona, and Pontiac LeMans.
Sebring International Raceway is a race track in Florida that hosts endurance events. The Chrysler Sebring is this: It was consistently the best selling convertible in US for more than a decade. There is also a sedan and coupe version. The Sebring was a mediocre car in 1996 when it was introduced but got by because it was one of the least expensive convertibles available. It has been redesigned twice since 1996, the latest in 2007 but has fallen farther and farther behind the competition. It is the definition of Chrysler's inability to make a quality car. I had a 1991 Chevy Cavalier Wagon as my second car: I inherited it from my grandfather when I went to college in 1996. It was a great car for me but I absolutely hated it at the time. I wanted a sports car and a station wagon was about as uncool as you could get for a 18 year old car enthusiast. It got mpg in the high 30's on the highway and carried all my crap back and forth from school every 3 months. I drove it for 100k miles in 4 years before a oil change place only but 2 quarts of oil in it and the engine started to seize on my last trip back from college. My father rebuilt the engine and a family friend is still driving it today. That car took me everywhere, ski trips to Canada, summer road trips to Virginia Beach, my brother took it to New Orleans for Mardi Gra...... The author's point is valid though. GM redesigned the Cavalier in 1996 and then did nothing with it for 10 years. By that time it was so out of date that they decided to change the name on the replacement to the Cobalt.
