Toyota May Surpass GM in 2007 With Record Car Sales

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Dec 28 2006, 07:06 PM) [snapback]367872[/snapback]</div>

Wrong. I went to the Saturn dealership first. I wanted a 2005 Saturn SC2 coupe. I wanted a new version of the car I that had served me well for 10 years.

I test drove a Saturn four months before I bought my Prius. I don't remember which one but it was about the same size, maybe bigger. It was wider. It was a four door. Had a trunk instead of a hatchback. But it felt cheap. I didn't like the way it drove. I didn't like the way the door shut or the trunk closed. It just felt cheap.

No, not the way the interior of the 2005 Prius looks, I.E. some of the plastic. It felt of low quality workmanship. It didn't even feel up to my old SC2 coupe. That's why I walked away. I returned to the Saturn Dealership expecting the same quality as my 1996 Saturn in a new car. It wasn't there.

The test of a car isn't when it's new.

Compare a Toyota and a GM when both have 100,000 miles on them. 200,000 miles on them. 300,000 miles on them.

I liked my Saturn. But the Saturn now isn't the Saturn that was. Too bad really. That's why I bought a Prius. The Saturn I wanted didn't exist anymore and I wasn't interested in anything they offered me.

 

At 100,000 miles my cars are just getting broken in. When considering the Prius I concluded that I could change my habits and sell or trade the car at 100,000 miles before the battery fails. Based on the experience of the Canadian taxi fleet I may be able to keep this car as long as I've kept the others. My 1989 Delta 88 ran for 11 years before I started dropping serious money on repairs.

In 2000 I was disappointed that the Intrigue got worse mileage with the 3.5 liter engine than the Delta 88 got with the 3.8 liter. I do like the Intrigue's drop down rear seats. Although I don't use them much they became a "must have" feature. If GM, Ford, and Chrysler had had real leadership we wouldn't have had to go overseas to find what we wanted and Chrysler would still be an American company.

Is there a site that tracks the number of cars in service as a percentage of the number sold? This would seem to answer the question of who makes the most reliable cars.

 

Don't the Big 3 offer smaller, more fuel efficient cars to the European market?

Is there some reason they don't offer them here?

Seems to me if the market has shifted and Americans want more fuel efficiency, it would be easy to do some redesigning and get something on the market pretty fast. After all, repackaging what they already have is like a sacrament to them.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(VaPrius @ Dec 22 2006, 05:45 AM) [snapback]365595[/snapback]</div>

No surprise there. Every night i see huge SUV's, huge pickup trucks, and other gas guzzlers heavily discounted in TV ads by GM, Ford, & Chrysler. If all they are doing is discounting their inventory to turn $$$ then they surely have lost. I would have thought by now they would be retooling up for senseable high milege vehicles. But, with Bush & the stubborn resistance by US auto makers to "get with the program"they are SOL. Only the US & Austraila haven't signed the global warming treaty. Bush & the auto makers claim our economy would be wrecked if we start making efficient autos and energy plants. Old technology = a receipt failure. I do wonder why Toyota still makes huge gas guzzlers and also advertises big discounts for them on TV ads. I would drop every gas guzzler and build sensible vehicles.

Recently I watched Al Gore's documentary about global warming and I realized what a big mistake it is to continue to do "business as usual" in the US. We will all be doomed if we don't change our energy ways soon.

 

US car makers (esp GM) have been producing some real crap.
I will NEVER buy another GM or Ford product, and doubtfully a Chrysler.
GM needs to fire their designers (Aztec? LMAO plastic 2' moulding?) and get agressive with the unnecessary unions that are killing the US auto industry