Which car company do you think has the best cars?

[RoLiNdAdIcE64]

Which car company do you think has the best cars?

Alfa Romeo
Audi
BMW
Cadillac
Chevrolet
Chrysler
Citroen
Corvette
Daewoo
Daihatsu
Ferrari
Fiat
Ford
Honda
Hyundai
Jaguar
Lamborghini
Lancia
Lexus
Lotus
Mazda
Mercedes
Mini
Mitsubishi
Morgan
Nissan
Opel
PeugeotPorsche
Renault
Rolls Royce
Rover
Saab
Seat
Skoda
Smart
Subaru
Suzuki
Toyota
Volkswagen
Volvo

Give an explanation for your reason...

[nova 8]

I like mitsubishi, I own a 97 Magna (Diamante) I also like Ford (Falcon BF GT-P is my Fav.), Ferrari (360 Modena Fav.) and Holden (VX Clubsports, Monaro CV8-Z (AKA Pontiac GTO)

[Cheech]

Lada...

cause they're cute, n funny looking...


;)

[RoLiNdAdIcE64]

Lada...

cause they're cute, n funny looking...


;)
Laugh out loud. http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i319/rolindadice64/Laughing_hard.gif

[125gJoe]

Lada...

cause they're cute, n funny looking...


;)Huh?

http://judey.dasmirnov.net/picture_page.htm

----------

My Toyota Corolla reminds me of an oversized go-cart that's great on the mpg.
And, I'm sure there will be very little if any problems with the thing...


_____________

[khombre]

ferrari :devil:

[budrecki]

Vw

[knotty47]

For practicality its got to be ford, but for the most desireable cars its got to be Aston martin (not on the list????) and for something completely different, they don't come more crazy than TVR.

Knotty

[dougall]

I can't believe Reliant didn't make the list..

http://www.3wheelers.com/robin.html

Reliant Robin ftw.

[DaisyTattoo]

Toyota- They are built to last.

[dorkfish]

Definetly rolls royce, there suposed to be completely hand built.

[DeputyChiefJR]

I'm a massive Subaru fan just due to the AWD and the driving comfort...also DeLorean didn't make the list

[Slappy*McFish]

Honda

[Native American]

Honda.

I can't name anything they don't do well with motors of all types.

v/r, N-A

[RoLiNdAdIcE64]

I can't believe Reliant didn't make the list..

http://www.3wheelers.com/robin.html

Reliant Robin ftw.
Oh my gosh. I hate those cars.

[RoLiNdAdIcE64]

Toyota- They are built to last.
Soooo true! :)

[RoLiNdAdIcE64]

Honda.

I can't name anything they don't do well with motors of all types.

v/r, N-A

Their motors suck!!! My aunt has had sooo many problems with their Honda Accord. Today, the engine blew up!!!! Nice huh...? JEEEEZZZZ

[aardvark1]

Best for what?

Economy?
Speed?
Luxury?
Pose factor?
Comfort?

[RoLiNdAdIcE64]

Best for what?

Economy?
Speed?
Luxury?
Pose factor?
Comfort?

Yes give your reasoning.

[Native American]

Their motors suck!!! My aunt has had sooo many problems with their Honda Accord. Today, the engine blew up!!!! Nice huh...? JEEEEZZZZCan't speak for her or how she maintained her vehicle. We got 175,000 miles on our CRX, all cylinders measured w/in 5psi of each other and only 15psi below max allowable for a compression check when I sold it. Pretty amazing. The lady who bought it is up to nearly a quarter of a million miles. Did not want to part with it, but between my wife and I had 4 cars. Had to trim down a little before moving.

So, for reasons: durability and realiability (it lasted a long time w/ no trouble). Economy was a plus. Got 47mpg city (it was an HF model) and 51mpg highway.

Just sold an Accord with 136,000 miles, 155psi compression, evenly balanced on all four cylinders, centered w/in the max/min values out of the service manual. The engine pushed that value on all 4 cyls w/ no deviation. 34mpg on the last trip (combined city and highway) before we sold it.

We'd keep it if we didn't need bigger vehicles. It too was durable, reliable and light on fuel consumption.

Had to tell a guy w/ a brand new Chevy Trailblazer that the heavy blue smoke on mild acceleration was NOT simply due to the engine still breaking in or the fuel injection running richly...it was more symptomatic of a failed intake valve seal (no noise to indicate a failed oil control ring; he still had the dealer tag...no hard plates yet on this new vehicle).

It tees me off that I can't buy a new Chevy any more and expect, after following engine break-in procedures, to have it yield the same diagnostic results as a well-used Honda...or even last and perform like older Chevys our family has had. Frankly, I like the way Chevys fit me, where things are positioned in the cabin, etc. I should've bought my aunt's 1968 327/325hp Nova when she offered it up, and should have kept my 1969 350 Stingray convertible...those old cars were almost as good as the Hondas we're driving today.

So, we're a Honda family now...I'm looking at one of their 200-hp 4-stroke outboards to replace the older 200-hp Merc V6 2-stroke on our boat. Bought and installed (took only 3 self-tapping bolts, one crosshead screw for throttle cable, and a blade swap) a 5.5hp Honda OHV motor to replace the problematic Briggs & Stratton motor on an otherwise pricey Snapper mower...it seems I can mow several times now without refilling the tank, and it's really, really quiet.

I used to do all my own motor work (from tuning to teardown and rebuild back in the day). The most I ever have to do w/ Honda motors is change oil and follow the maintenance schedule. My tools and shop hoist are gathering dust.

Those Hondas just keep running, insurance is quite reasonable, fuel economy is superb, and the dealer support is better than fair.

v/r, N-A

[125gJoe]

...

Those Hondas just keep running, insurance is quite reasonable, fuel economy is superb, ...

v/r, N-AWhen we got the Toyota "4-banger" Corolla we test drove the Honda. Seat comfort was the drawback that kept us away from Honda. It felt slightly better than lightly padded plywood. We had an older Saturn years ago that had a "vee" shape to the bucket seat -- what a 'back killer' that thing was.. But - some may appreciate a really firm seat. (?)

I'm not sure if Toyo will outlast Honda, but comfort was part of the deal ...

Now, on 4 stoke outboards, I wonder if Yamaha would have better lifespan than Honda?...


________________

[Native American]

You're sure right about seats...Honda didn't put adjustable lumbar in their Odyssey EX until 2002. Toyota was taking care of this stuff way back in the 1980's. You could get a Toyota Celica GT (with their incredibly durable and smooth 5-spd) fitted with an air adjustable lower back seat pad for the driver, 20 years before most other car companies even thought about the idea. Yeah, I looked for the neat stuff, even if I was barely old enough for a driver's license.

There's the guy with a Toyota truck who runs a paper route in the western rural areas of the U.S. 700,000 miles plus and still running, last I heard a couple years ago. I wonder when his Toyota will hit the million-mile mark?

Yamaha makes awesome outboards. Comparing the two is tough, because 2-stroke Yamahas are very, very light (the Honda 4-stroke is a bit heavier). For power vs. weight, the Yamaha wins, hands down. I've never heard of a Yamaha quitting at a tournament, even the ones that were heavily speed-mod'd by their owners; they are real leaders in 2-stroke tech. If I was a little younger and more "speed minded", I'd be shopping for the Yamaha 200 w/ TRP instead of the Honda. At my age I'm just attracted to only having to fill a gas tank instead of gas and a 2-stroke oil reservoir.

On the 4-stroke road side of the coin, I'll be the first to admit that my brother's Yamaha V65 Magna is way too much motorcycle for me, but it's a great, well-executed ride...one of the best out there.

Lot of well-engineered stuff out there...just have to wade through a lot of choices to find it.

v/r, N-A

[125gJoe]

... ...
On the 4-stroke road side of the coin, I'll be the first to admit that my brother's Yamaha V65 Magna is way too much motorcycle for me, but it's a great, well-executed ride...one of the best out there. ...

v/r, N-AYou mean one or the other...
Honda V-65 or Yamaha Vmax?

It seems the Honda had heating problems with the head.

I've got the 2004 Vmax 1200cc and its not too much bike unless your are not ready for the V-boost after 6,000rpm. The Vmax is a v-4 cyclinder, and now they are making metric v-twins that are much heavier; so much so, I would feel like it was "too much bike" for me.

Just my opinion, but I never felt like the mid-sized 600cc - 750cc were very distance worthy. I had a 1979 Yamaha 650 for years and it just didn't "work well" on the interstates..

(oops, guess I should start a motorcycle thread!)

Here's a link on the 2 bikes...

http://www.angelfire.com/ia/z/V65magna.htm


___________

[Native American]

I'm a doofus. It was a Vmax. I remember the gas cap with the Yamaha logo! Don't know why I was thinking Magna.

You're right again X2...the big ones are much better for distance. When I say "too much", it just means I'm intimidated by all the mass one has to master with a big bike, even though they are pretty darn safe for two-wheelers. I'm actually more at ease taxiing a big jet...it's just hard getting used to moving such a big bike and having it be so nimble. Not what I expected at all! I was expecting ocean liner handling out of the Yamaha, not the instant, measured responses I received from each steering input. Those Yamaha engineers really did their homework! It handles like a much smaller motorcycle. I spent most of my time worrying about dropping it instead of enjoying the ride.

So, steering back to best cars...back in the day (that means I'm old) Yamaha supplied the engine for an awesome three-wheeler car called the Badsey Bullet. It looked like a scaled down version of Speed Racer's car. If I ever find one, I'm going to buy it.

v/r, N-A

v/r, N-A

[RoLiNdAdIcE64]

Can't speak for her or how she maintained her vehicle. We got 175,000 miles on our CRX, all cylinders measured w/in 5psi of each other and only 15psi below max allowable for a compression check when I sold it. Pretty amazing. The lady who bought it is up to nearly a quarter of a million miles. Did not want to part with it, but between my wife and I had 4 cars. Had to trim down a little before moving.

So, for reasons: durability and realiability (it lasted a long time w/ no trouble). Economy was a plus. Got 47mpg city (it was an HF model) and 51mpg highway.

Just sold an Accord with 136,000 miles, 155psi compression, evenly balanced on all four cylinders, centered w/in the max/min values out of the service manual. The engine pushed that value on all 4 cyls w/ no deviation. 34mpg on the last trip (combined city and highway) before we sold it.

We'd keep it if we didn't need bigger vehicles. It too was durable, reliable and light on fuel consumption.

Had to tell a guy w/ a brand new Chevy Trailblazer that the heavy blue smoke on mild acceleration was NOT simply due to the engine still breaking in or the fuel injection running richly...it was more symptomatic of a failed intake valve seal (no noise to indicate a failed oil control ring; he still had the dealer tag...no hard plates yet on this new vehicle).

It tees me off that I can't buy a new Chevy any more and expect, after following engine break-in procedures, to have it yield the same diagnostic results as a well-used Honda...or even last and perform like older Chevys our family has had. Frankly, I like the way Chevys fit me, where things are positioned in the cabin, etc. I should've bought my aunt's 1968 327/325hp Nova when she offered it up, and should have kept my 1969 350 Stingray convertible...those old cars were almost as good as the Hondas we're driving today.

So, we're a Honda family now...I'm looking at one of their 200-hp 4-stroke outboards to replace the older 200-hp Merc V6 2-stroke on our boat. Bought and installed (took only 3 self-tapping bolts, one crosshead screw for throttle cable, and a blade swap) a 5.5hp Honda OHV motor to replace the problematic Briggs & Stratton motor on an otherwise pricey Snapper mower...it seems I can mow several times now without refilling the tank, and it's really, really quiet.

I used to do all my own motor work (from tuning to teardown and rebuild back in the day). The most I ever have to do w/ Honda motors is change oil and follow the maintenance schedule. My tools and shop hoist are gathering dust.

Those Hondas just keep running, insurance is quite reasonable, fuel economy is superb, and the dealer support is better than fair.

v/r, N-A

Well, it really depends on how you drive and treat your car. I know that they are PERFECTIONISTS so they have everything look and feel and everything perfect and brand new. The car looks and drove like it was brand new. Just that the motor always had problems. Or maybe its the car you choose. Let's say that you have two of the same cars. You buy one of them, that could be a good car with a good engine and in the future not many problems. On the other hand, the other car may have more problems becuase the way it was built or something.

[Puffernewbee]

For the best, I have to say Honda. My wife and I are on our 6th and 7th Hondas. Drove all of the others to well over 100,000 miles each and never had a moments problem with any of them.

For the nicest looking,I must say Lamborghini. Do not have the finances to be able to buy one and find out about the quality and reliability. The fact that a family of three cannot live in one comfortably we opted for a house instead.

[Native American]

Here it is, in the attached JPEG, powered by the Yamaha 1200cc V4. Topped out at 150mph, 0-100km/h in the high 4's.

Definitely for fair weather only. Found out they only made eight of these! Looks like I'll never get ahold of one.

P.S. 125gJoe, my brother is having a little fun at my expense...the emblem on his Vmax "tank" is not the fuel fill port as I thought, and he's holding me in suspense. I will never figure it out, as I never had to fill it up myself, so that begs the question...where does Yamaha put the gas tank and fill on the Vmax?

v/r, N-A

[Native American]

On the other hand, the other car may have more problems becuase the way it was built or something.She's definitely in the minority, a small minority at that...when Honda brought out their first N. American offering in the sedan market, the AN600 in 1969, GM executives openly laughed at it. They are not laughing, now.

v/r, N-A

[mostlycichlids]

I live in the United States so I only buy American made cars Gm or Ford, Only buy the best.

[Must4ng s4lly]

Ford Mustang of course ;) ('80 & '98) Oh and Expeditions rule too! They can pull a huge heavy boat with ease and comfort.

[mostlycichlids]

Honda sucks!! American Muscle screw gas milage pll !!!!

1962 Chevrolet Nova Convertible
400 small block bored out 50 over 500 hp
Thats a car

[125gJoe]

Interesting thought.

Wish I had a fully restored muscle car of my choice, but it wouldn't be the daily vehicle! That's for sure!

Too bad the '60's are over and done with, at least when it comes to some cars.
But, for me, I'd rather spend my hard earned money on other things than (gas) "big oil companies" and middle eastern, weapons, mosques, mansions, and other excesses...

But, that's just me, not sure about others'...

:D


_________________

[Puffernewbee]

I live in the United States so I only buy American made cars Gm or Ford, Only buy the best.

Both of my Hondas are American made.

[Puffernewbee]

Honda sucks!! American Muscle screw gas milage pll !!!!

1962 Chevrolet Nova Convertible
400 small block bored out 50 over 500 hp
Thats a car

5 Hondas. Zero repairs and basic maintenance (brakes and oill changes) and traded all in with over 100,00 miles.
5 Chevy's - 3 made after 1980 didn't see over 40K before they had problems. Major problem after 80K. The other 2 (My '69 Chevelle and '71 El Camino) I will say were great cars. They survived my teenage years without problems. But those where mechanically simpler times.

[hle_81]

honda, toyota, acura, lexus

[nova 8]

You guys sure know your stuff

[nursie]

Mitsubishi...my husband works at the plant!!!
Made in Normal IL:
Galant, Endeavor, Eclipse, Eclipse Spyder.....100% American made.

[nova 8]

Also 100% Australian made over here.

[DaveinSF]

That's easy... for me, it's BMW. I've also had a Honda Civic, a Porsche 944s, and two Audi A6 2.7Ts, but the two best cars I've ever owned were BMW 3-series. The first was a '97 328i and it was a great handling, reliable, and fast car. Nothing ever broke or went wrong with it for the three years I owned it. The 2000 Audi A6 2.7T was a good car, but it wasn't as responsive or as sporty as either of the BMWs. The 2003 A6 2.7T had a number of little electrical problems that never went away.

That Honda civic was an awesome car. I should have kept it, but I didn't need to have two cars at the time. I did my own oil changes and it ran like a top, plus got 30+mpg. It wasn't fast, but it was peppy because it was so small and light. I really liked that car a lot.

The Porsche was a '97 and it had a number of electrical problems. It was also very expensive to fix. It was a beautiful looking car, though, and it was reasonably fast and handled pretty well.

So far, my 2006 BMW 330i is probably the best car I've ever had. It's faster than both Audis and the Porsche. Both this and the '97 BMW have amazing handling. Much better than even the Porsche. So far the new BMW is averaging 23.5 mpg, which isn't bad for a 3.0 liter straight-six engine. It's a six speed and it'll easily hit 70 in third.

BMWs are the perfect car. If your budget is more limited, from my experience you can't go wrong with a Honda Civic. Those new Civic SIs look pretty cool and are a great value for the money.

If you want the ultimate in practicality and reliability, several friends and family members swear by Toyota Camrys. I think they're boring, but everybody likes them.

[Red Tailed Wonder]

audi

they R so reliable and cool

[blitzen25bm]

bmw. they arent as cool as before and im more of a classic bmw guy so im into the ones made in the 90s and some of the earlier ones. but they make awesome cars. i want an m5 wagon. roomy, safe, can hold the kids and cargo while keeping up with corvettes.

plus they arent owned by any of the bigger companies so theres no parts bin stuff. i swear some of the pieces in my moms mercedes is the same as the ones that goes into the neons.

ive always liked bmw and mclaren did go to them when they wanted the engine for the worlds fastest car. also you guys should check out alpina, they take things a step further.

[fishman1979]

gotta be VW, didnt they have the THING??

[DansMarineTank]

I think there is no real science to american cars, just throw a big engine at a car and it will go fast! where as things the the lotus elise have 1.8l engines and would destroy most muscule cars. Maybee if you guys learned to tune engines you would be able to make cars that go fast and can turn faster than the Bismark

[CajunCC]

General Motors!

Pontiac Trans Am (http://www.myrtlemadness.net/~cajuncc/ws6/clean/overhead.jpg)
Pontiac GTO (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/natural_selection/desert.jpg)
Saturn Sky (http://www.carenthusiast.com/saturn/saturn_sky2005_14.jpg)
Cadillac XLR-V (http://www.getchevatgan.com/images/fun/cadillac/2006-Cadillac-XLR-V-FA-Red-TD-800.jpg)
Concept Camaro (http://clabedan.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/chevy_camaro_concept.jpg)
Corvette Z06 (http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/specs/c6/2006/images/z06.jpg)

Any questions?

[CajunCC]

I think there is no real science to american cars, just throw a big engine at a car and it will go fast! where as things the the lotus elise have 1.8l engines and would destroy most muscule cars. Maybee if you guys learned to tune engines you would be able to make cars that go fast and can turn faster than the Bismark

The lotus weighs about 10 pounds, of course it's gonna be fast. Besides, it uses a toyota motor lifted from the Celica. Lotus didn't do the engineering on that one. Besides, they run mid-13 second 1/4 miles. Just a tad slower than a stock LS1 Camaro/Firebird.

Regardless, there are any number of ways to make a car go fast. Revs, turbos, big motors, rotary, etc etc etc. No one method is better than any other. They're just different and different people like different cars.

Just try not to spout off too much bad stuff about American cars, because it's been my experience that people who do eventually get shut down by someone who knows their stuff. Not all american cars are huge, heavy, poor-handling brutes. I'd put my stock WS6 Trans Am up against almost any import commonly seen on the streets in just about any form of racing. It's got big power, big tires, and a good suspension. Did I mention it gets 30 mpg on the highway? ;)

[you made me ink]

im with akapaul26 i only like American cars they just are better in my opinion sure gas mileage is cruddy (compared to japaneese ((sp?)) cars) but i can deal with that althought i do really like aston martins ((sp?)) too bad they are so expensive

[you made me ink]

The lotus weighs about 10 pounds, of course it's gonna be fast. Besides, it uses a toyota motor lifted from the Celica. Lotus didn't do the engineering on that one. Besides, they run mid-13 second 1/4 miles. Just a tad slower than a stock LS1 Camaro/Firebird.

Regardless, there are any number of ways to make a car go fast. Revs, turbos, big motors, rotary, etc etc etc. No one method is better than any other. They're just different and different people like different cars.

Just try not to spout off too much bad stuff about American cars, because it's been my experience that people who do eventually get shut down by someone who knows their stuff. Not all american cars are huge, heavy, poor-handling brutes. I'd put my stock WS6 Trans Am up against almost any import commonly seen on the streets in just about any form of racing. It's got big power, big tires, and a good suspension. Did I mention it gets 30 mpg on the highway? ;)


... i agree look at the Ford GT it can squash a ferrari on much more than a straight track and its heavier and longer too dont rag on american muscle cause the truth is we do know how to tune engines look as nascar, we just dont need to for factory cars and dont be mad that the engines sound better too -lol- jp ... but really they do sound better

[Native American]

... i agree look at the Ford GT it can squash a ferrari on much more than a straight track and its heavier and longer too dont rag on american muscle cause the truth is we do know how to tune engines look as nascar, we just dont need to for factory cars and dont be mad that the engines sound better too -lol- jp ... but really they do sound betterThe Ford GT doesn't crush a Ferrari, it's a very close contest (are we talking 355M?). It also depends on the track (Willow Springs? Sebring? Watkins Glen?).

Why look at NASCAR? They use old technology that I'm not allowed to use on the street (carbs, headers, no smog control devices...well, I can use the MSD6A ignition since it has a CARB EO). Anybody can get that kind of horsepower out of a big V-8 and not be allowed to drive it on the street. The real contest w/ NASCAR is the guy who sets up his car just right for the track conditions to gain a small edge over everybody else, along w/ Crew Chief track and pitting strategy. Even then, it's not a sure thing because on any given race day with a white flag signalling one last charge, you can find over half of the field still fighting it out on the lead lap...now THAT is the cool thing about NASCAR...you don't know the winner for sure most times until the checkered flag has fallen.

I don't like it much when people point at the lesser engineering that goes into American cars across the board, but they have a point. Ford has had to sign a technology-sharing agreement w/ Honda to keep from falling behind the rest of the planet, but at least they're smart enough to know that when gas hits $5/gallon, at least they'll be able to sell a technologically competitive car. I don't know why everybody is pointing at the Ford GT, Chevy Corvette and Dodge Viper as being the representatives of American technology...these few cars will not carry their companies into a sound financial future. The cars that will do it must be reliable, efficient and inexpensive and sold by the millions. In this engineering regard the American auto executives need to get a clue and support their engineering efforts in the same way the Euros and Japanese do.

The big letdown for me this year was that not one single Ford engine made it into the Indy 500 this year. GM pulled out of Indy racing entirely last year (this was a complete shock to me...years ago the Buick stock block was one of my favorites...a cinch to make a 225 mph lap w/ Scott Brayton at the wheel). How GM could completely abdicate contention for winning the 500 is beyond comprehension.

And GM executives wonder why they have a smaller hold of market share than at any other time in their corporate history. It keeps shrinking, too.

The big tragedy is that the one year (2006) that the American car makers decide to not show up at Indy is the first and only year ever that all racers posted perfect reliability from their engines...not one single DNF due to engine malfunction. Yes, a few guys DNF'd due to wrecking their cars, but the motors (all Honda) were screaming along just fine until these few drivers made a misstep, like smacking the wall.

v/r, N-A

[CajunCC]

So it's not impressive to you at all that the C6 Z06 posts downright incredible track times simply because it uses a pushrod architecture and 7 liters of displacement?

Top Gear's review put it at 4 seconds faster around their track than a Ferrari 575. It was 1.5 seconds faster than a Pagani Zonda. And it was half a second faster than a Ferrari 430. I'd say America is capable of playing with the big dogs.

And you wanna talk about technology? Fine. What about the Pontiac G6? Oh, sorry, that's a pushrod motor. But with variable valve timing? Yeah. Engineer that one for me. Then there's the Northstar V8 that was using a DOHC architecture back in 1992, when it was still fairly new stuff. Displacement-on-Demand? That's cool stuff there.

Did you know that my friend's 1995 Cadillac STS has an oil-life monitor? Oh, that's nothing special. The car counts down how many miles you've driven and when you hit x miles, it puts the "change oil" light on right? No. That's most cars. This particular system actually analyzes the oil in the crank case to look for signs of chemical breakdown. It also accounts for how far and how hard the car has been driven.

See, just because a company chooses to use tried-and-true methods in their run-of-the-mill cars doesn't mean they're incapable of technology and innovation.

I don't know where the whole idea that japanese cars are better than american cars came from, but it's dead wrong. In the end, a car is a car. Every manufacturer has problems. In fact, the least reliable brands have been proven to be european. BMW, Mercedes, Audi, and particularly VW.

[you made me ink]

So it's not impressive to you at all that the C6 Z06 posts downright incredible track times simply because it uses a pushrod architecture and 7 liters of displacement?

Top Gear's review put it at 4 seconds faster around their track than a Ferrari 575. It was 1.5 seconds faster than a Pagani Zonda. And it was half a second faster than a Ferrari 430. I'd say America is capable of playing with the big dogs.

And you wanna talk about technology? Fine. What about the Pontiac G6? Oh, sorry, that's a pushrod motor. But with variable valve timing? Yeah. Engineer that one for me. Then there's the Northstar V8 that was using a DOHC architecture back in 1992, when it was still fairly new stuff. Displacement-on-Demand? That's cool stuff there.

Did you know that my friend's 1995 Cadillac STS has an oil-life monitor? Oh, that's nothing special. The car counts down how many miles you've driven and when you hit x miles, it puts the "change oil" light on right? No. That's most cars. This particular system actually analyzes the oil in the crank case to look for signs of chemical breakdown. It also accounts for how far and how hard the car has been driven.

See, just because a company chooses to use tried-and-true methods in their run-of-the-mill cars doesn't mean they're incapable of technology and innovation.

I don't know where the whole idea that japanese cars are better than american cars came from, but it's dead wrong. In the end, a car is a car. Every manufacturer has problems. In fact, the least reliable brands have been proven to be european. BMW, Mercedes, Audi, and particularly VW.


that also wasnt the first time the Ford GT beat the ferrari either if you look back in time it beat it then too and if im not mistaken and dont quote me on it i believe the nickname given to the Ford GT was "The Ferrari Killer"

that was without mentioning that the new z06 makes the 505 HP while still getting 21 mpg on the highway saying that americans dont use technology in their cars is rediculous and if you cant look at nascar why look at indy cars i dont belive they are anymore street legal than nascar ive never seen an indy car driving the streets

...sry make that 28 on the highway ...http://www.chevrolet.com/corvette/specifications/ (http://)


Americans also made some of the most durable planes in WWII they could take tons of damage and still make it home not to mention the P51 Mustang was one of the most powerful fighters and who made the planes ??? i belive alot of car companies made them and who one the war ... i dont think japan did go figure

[you made me ink]

BuMp...Argue with me pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaase -lol- i like to argue im 17 and very opinionated, stubborn, and set in my ways!!!!!! -lol-

[CajunCC]

BuMp...Argue with me pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaase -lol- i like to argue im 17 and very opinionated, stubborn, and set in my ways!!!!!! -lol-

Mazda RX-8: 232 / 1.3 = 178.5 hp/liter
Corvette Z06: 505 / 7.0 = 72.1 hp/liter

Chew on that a little for me. I know i just jumped sides in the argument, but you wanted an opponent and i appreciate all cars enough to be able to fight for the other side a little. ;)

[DansMarineTank]

The lotus weighs about 10 pounds, of course it's gonna be fast. Besides, it uses a toyota motor lifted from the Celica. Lotus didn't do the engineering on that one. Besides, they run mid-13 second 1/4 miles. Just a tad slower than a stock LS1 Camaro/Firebird.

Regardless, there are any number of ways to make a car go fast. Revs, turbos, big motors, rotary, etc etc etc. No one method is better than any other. They're just different and different people like different cars.

Just try not to spout off too much bad stuff about American cars, because it's been my experience that people who do eventually get shut down by someone who knows their stuff. Not all american cars are huge, heavy, poor-handling brutes. I'd put my stock WS6 Trans Am up against almost any import commonly seen on the streets in just about any form of racing. It's got big power, big tires, and a good suspension. Did I mention it gets 30 mpg on the highway? ;)

Its not all about straight line sppeds put the two on any race track (proper race track not a big circle) and we all know whose gonna win

[Native American]

Again, people seem to be only talking about the low-volume "flagship" models for each American maker. If that's where they (U.S. car companies) put the bulk of their engineering efforts, then they will not survive in the long run.

Forget the GT (it's a prestige model that does not generate enough income to keep its own plant running)...Ford built its best ever version of the Explorer SUV this model year, in my opinion. This car can hold its head up in the comapny of any similar SUV. The problem is that Ford didn't keep up with the rest of the market in previous years, and this resulted in about a dozen plant closings and laying off tens of thousands of hourly and salaried wage workers just last year...it was NOT a case of too little, too late, but a case of just enough of the right stuff, but slightly tardy. In short, a good number of American buyers abandoned this now-fine car even though Ford "almost" kept up with the rest of the foreign market.

Prior to their current revival from the ashes (I hope they can pull it off), in the last decade GM actually had to often put the Firebird and Camaro on part-time production, as they couldn't sell enough to maintain full-time production plants...I drove some of those cars built during that timeframe, and they were great cars. However, many Americans had given up on them due to very poor first-year reliability every time GM made a major design change.

Fair or not fair? It's not either, it's just a result. Good news only travels at the speed of sound. Bad news travels at the speed of light. Think about it.

The Euros and Japanese figured out the way to make great cars for everyday Joes and maintain financial solvency...take care of your designers and engineers and set high standards for style, utility and reliability. If an auto company does that, the fiscal bottom line takes care of itself and they get to build more plants in our own country...while our own American Big 3 are busy closing down N. American plants and losing a highly qualified, motivated and well-trained workforce to their competitors (that is the type of loss I cannot stand to see!!!).

Look at GM's latest reorganization efforts...you see everything in the WSJ about "We must change our GM upper management, we need to close GM plants and lay off thousands of GM workers and sell off fixed capital, we need to hire more top executives just like us to make GM better." Do these high-paid dimwits ever say the following? "Gee, let's assist the continuing education of our styling, engineering and design staff and give them 100% support and hire the best people regularly to keep the fresh blood coming in."

American auto CEO's and their staff have an incredibly small grasp on reality, and it is showing in the choices they give us for cars. I don't need a Ford GT, a Dodge Viper or a Chevy Corvette...I need something by these automakers that will do it as well as the overseas offerings do, and comfortably last 250,000 miles (like my last CRX did), and it has to be available to us every year, not when they feel like it. These senior executives are doing a huge disservice to their companies, to the guys who punch a clock every day to work hard to build them, and to the American car-buyer. Oldsmobile and Plymouth are already GONE...which one is next? (And please don't tell me that these two fine marques went away because they weren't active in racing or didn't have flagship models of their own).

If I can't find a reason to buy shares of their stock, I'm going to find it difficult to buy any of their vehicles. There's an almost direct correlation here, folks.

v/r, N-A

P.S. In the stock market (comparing only U.S. marques, here), make mine Ford for the past 1, 5 and 10 years. Chrysler is so up-and-down (not to mention lawsuit-ridden) that it's a little scary in spite of some great years.

[Native American]

Americans also made some of the most durable planes in WWII they could take tons of damage and still make it home not to mention the P51 Mustang was one of the most powerful fighters and who made the planes ??? i belive alot of car companies made them and who one the war ... i dont think japan did go figureOkay, let's look at this example carefully (aside from the spelling). Yes, it's topic drift, but here goes.

First, the Mitsubishi A6M Zero-Sen was an unqualified success in the early stages of the Pacific war, the basic design concept having been formulated by none other than Howard Hughes. However, with an unusual grasp on unreality, the Japanese high staff continued to stress maneuverability at all costs and failed to order (under changing external and internal pressures) the design of excellent fighters such as the Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate or Mitsubishi J2M Raiden to regain ground lost in later air battles. These excellent warplanes, with the qualities of longer range, heavier armament, armor and self-sealing fuel tanks did not make it into the war until it was too late to make a difference.

Right now, today, U.S. car companies are doing the same thing. They are not responding to shifting external and internal pressures (the market, internal organization, unions, etc.) to make cars that can sell in the volume required to regain ground lost in terms of market share...and boy, they've lost loads of it. This should alarm most Americans. I've lived in an area that endured the chaos of a GM plant closing. It is one of the uglier things I've seen.

If anything, you gave a tragic example of what not to do at the senior corporate leadership level without realizing that this is the very thing that is causing most of the problems with our American car makers (and by extension, the cars they choose to sell us, a major part of this discussion thread).

BTW, the Merlin engine (a tremendous example of Euro engineering still used in air racing today) fitted to the N. American P-51 was license-built in WWII by Packard, an American car company which ceased to exist in the car-making business.

v/r, N-A

[DansMarineTank]

Americans also made some of the most durable planes in WWII they could take tons of damage and still make it home not to mention the P51 Mustang was one of the most powerful fighters and who made the planes ??? i belive alot of car companies made them and who one the war ... i dont think japan did go figure

I dont believe the P51 gained a deal great of success untill it was equiped with a rolls royce merlin engine. Certainly not built by the US

[DansMarineTank]

and a link to prove it

http://www.acepilots.com/planes/p51_mustang.html

[you made me ink]

i knew it wasnt the engine wasnt built in america i watched some show explaining it but yet its not really the cars that come from the U.K. and Britan ((SP?)) that i despise its just mostly cars from japan and even thought the engine wasnt made in america the plane was and our bombers could carry obviously huge loads (in the case of the atomic bomb) and if japan produced somthing better than the mustang but it was too late because america beat them to it and it made a difference ...

...cajuncc thanks for that, id have to say you got me but the RX-8 dosnt even have a cylinder its a rotary to me its just not the same but none the less it is pretty impressive but you never see (stock) an RX-8 beat a corvette (also stock) unless the vette rams into a wall or a 2 yr old is driving a standard ...

...i realize that japaneese cars are pretty good i just DONT like them im from america and i simply love the cars my country produces (except for the HHR its ugly as sin) esp. older muscle cars to me it no better than that it just depends on what you like, on straight 1/4 mile track american cars just simply have the raw horsepower and on ciurcit ((SP?)) type tracks foriegn cars tend to have the tuning and technology it just depends and despite that fact that the GT is pretty expensive (151K) and wont keep the company's head above water it is a really neat fast car as far as the Corvette goes i just love corvettes they are my favorite cars ive loved them since i was little and i always will let me choose between a Vette and ANY foreign car ill take the vette ... i grew up and my family has always bought American cars and always will weve NEVER had one break down either truth is ANY car can be a good car it just depends on how well YOU take care of your car

[Native American]

Topic drift again...Merlin was originally designed and manufactured by Rolls Royce, but license-built in the U.S. by Packard (like the American Lockheed F-104G was license-built in the countries of Denmark, Norway, Canada, Germany and Italy...get the mfg license, build it that foreign product in your own country).

DansMarineTank is absoutely correct regarding the success of the P-51 once it was equipped with the Merlin engine. In its prior guise as the A-36, the Mustang was a fine attack aircraft. Fitting that fantastic 2-stage supercharged Anglo V-12 to the American airframe gave the allies a superb day escort fighter.

Back to CARS. I'll give the best nod of approval to another Anglo-American product, the Gurney-Weslake Eagle.

Go, Dan, Go! (http://www.allamericanracers.com/gurney_grand-prix/eagle_f1-photo.html)

Fantastic looking car, they took an F1 win on only their fourth outing, eventually taking a win in the regular F1 season at Spa (Belgian GP). For you guys who only like big V8 sounds, you still might like this American car...it has a snarl and shriek like ripping silk, and it had the guts inside and out to win races at the international level (along with a gutsy Yank driver to make it happen). That British V12 was something else...400bhp+ out of 183cid, and it was reliable and strong throughout the expected powerband.

v/r, N-A

[you made me ink]

all engines aside ...im still off topic -lol- the americans made a heck of a bomber with the B-17 i mean it would come back with over half of the rear horizontal stabalizer missing and could still fly on only two engines thats one tough plane

[Native American]

The B-17 was arguably a very tough airframe design, but perhaps two shades tougher out of all of the various WWII designs was the Vickers Wellington. Aero designer Barnes Wallis used a geodetic construction to make a twin-engine heavy bomber that could take unbelieveable punishment.

Back on cars...I give a link to one of Dan Gurney's finer achievements in design, engineering and actual employment on the race track...and no comments from my fellow U.S. motorheads.

Here we have a thread with a minor war of words regarding "torque rules" (big U.S. V-8's, a favorite of 1960's muscle cars) against "HP is where it's at" (high-revving smaller-displacement Euro and Asian motors)...

...I give a great example of an American driver whose team built its own car from the ground up, and who gave a great showing on Europe's own home turf, the F1 circuit of the late 1960's. No laudatory comments saying that we Americans can do it as well on a level playing field?

Any information you can glean about this car and Dan's achievements, whether or not you favor big V-8's or performance tuned Euro and Asian cars, is literature worth reading.

v/r, N-A