American-brand cars prove poipular with millennial

[mechanicx]

Basically agree but on one point it depends on what year Cavalier and Escort and civic your are talking about and what the definition of drivability is. I wouldn't say iirc an 1800 lb '82 Civic with 1.5 carbed engine and 2-speed automatic was a great driver. Now an '87 or so Civic probaby was a lot sportier driving car in comparison.

Those domestic models were stagnating on their first platforms, but even then they had their sport models with sport suspnsion options, Cavalier Z24 and the Escort GT. We are kind of splitting hairs at this point since I don't considered Japanese cars the pennacle of ride and drive or FWD or subcompact and compacts either for that matter.

 

[rjundi]

Fighting about the best penalty box is funny. The small cars still are penalty boxes just nicer ones. I owned two penalty box cars Wrx & civic and never will buy small again. The superior ride and slight fuel mpg penalty of new midsize car make it a no brainer.

 

[LineArrayNut]

penalty box lol! I had a 2012 elantra touring thingy for 2 days as a loaner, could not WAIT to get back to my midsize; and it got no better gas mileage because you had to floor it to get anywhere!

 

[ram_man]

Ive owned several cars and I like my civic. Haven't had it long but it reasonable in every manor. Sure its not a Cadillac but its a decent all around car and its super simple.

 

[hattaresguy]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
Fighting about the best penalty box is funny. The small cars still are penalty boxes just nicer ones. I owned two penalty box cars Wrx & civic and never will buy small again. The superior ride and slight fuel mpg penalty of new midsize car make it a no brainer.


Yeah that's pretty much how I look at it. Like when I bought my sister her 06 Corolla, its just meh its cheap.

My idea of a good small car is a BMW 135I, or a Honda S2000, or that new Toyota/Subaru RWD coupe.


I won't buy a car with the engine mounted the wrong way.

 

[Cubey]

I was talking to a friend recently. She said she was thinking about getting a small'ish car with the best MPG possible since all her kids are soon to be out of the house and she doesn't need a minivan anymore and her job has her driving many hundreds of miles a week.

I told her Corolla since they are priced less than Hondas, or perhaps one of the newer Fords they are 4cyl. She exclaimed "oh, i don't want a 4 cylinder.. they're not very good are they?"

Seriously? Are people are expecting 40mpg out of a v6 automatic? A 4cyl in a Corolla is plenty powerful enough for everyday driving. I had a 91 model and it had:

4A-FE — 1.6 L (1587 cc) I4, 16-valve DOHC, FI, narrow valve angle, 102 hp (76 kW)

I had it at 75mph easily several times without the car feeling like it way straining.

My grandmother bought that car new in 91 for my mom because my mom's brother had a Corona back in the 70's or early 80's and it apparently was a good car.

I got it from her in 2008 and it still drove good despite some lack of proper maintenace, the power steering blowing a hose(?) and the A/C compressor seizing up (thank goodness for separate accessory belts!). It was nearly totaled in 94 when a 70's American boat of a car smashed into the side of it.

In 2009, a 2000 taurus hit it at low speed almost in the same spot and crushed in the A pilar at the passenger side front door. I kept on driving it for over a year after that.

I traded it in at 168k miles and it still ran awesome without any major engine or transmission problems (besides the usual stuff... water pump, etc). If not for the side being smashed in and the Ford dealer being generous on the trade in value toward a pickup I was getting, I would have kept it. It still got 30mpg. It had a slightly rough idle but it got me to DC and back in 2009 (prior to the accident, and prior to the power steering going out) from Arkansas.

I would buy another Corolla in a heartbeat. They may not be the fanciest cars out there. The one I had, had no fancy options on it but it got great mpg after almost 20 years of somewhat good maintenance at the hands of my mom from 91-08.

I think the thing about Japanese cars is they'll last longer with subpar maintenance. American cars have a history of kicking the bucket over much of nothing.

In the past 10-15 years that might be less so since so much has become computerized.. which I really dislike. I love my simplistic 78 Dodge van I have now. I do wish it had fuel injection but aside from that, there's really nothing I'd want added to it features wise.

That's one thing that draws me to classic Beetles besides the styling. They are the most simplistic, well received and hugely mass produced car made after 1950.. and get great MPG for the era in which they were produced.

VW was really the leader in small, fuel efficient cars until the Japanese market hit the US with differently styled cars that VW tried to compete with in the 70s and 80s with their water cooled models.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Basically agree but on one point it depends on what year Cavalier and Escort and civic your are talking about and what the definition of drivability is. I wouldn't say iirc an 1800 lb '82 Civic with 1.5 carbed engine and 2-speed automatic was a great driver. Now an '87 or so Civic probaby was a lot sportier driving car in comparison.

Those domestic models were stagnating on their first platforms, but even then they had their sport models with sport suspnsion options, Cavalier Z24 and the Escort GT. We are kind of splitting hairs at this point since I don't considered Japanese cars the pennacle of ride and drive or FWD or subcompact and compacts either for that matter.


That's what I don't get. The 1979 Honda Accord Sedan sold for $7,950 nicely equipped for the time. It had something like 75 horsepower (the CVCC actually had a fair amount of torque....something like 90 ft-lbs at 3000 rpm) and a two speed automatic. I'm certain that you could negotiate a nice A-body or Fox body Fairmont for 8 grand. That's nearly two base 2.3 Mustangs. And yet people waited for months to buy the Accord.

I said I liked the 2.8/3.1 V6 Cavalier...

 

[sciphi]

Chevy at least did a smart thing to attract millenial males by re-introducing manual transmissions into the Cruze's volume selling LT trim. They decided that the Eco owners needed to share the turbo engine/manual transmission love. A lot of Cruze forum participants have Cruze LT manuals ranging from bare-bones to LTZ without the badge, more than have Eco manuals. Those of us who grew up in the back seat of a Caravan or Explorer now have the hankering to row our own gears, while getting a practical grown-up car (that isn't associated with a video-game character) without a giant price tag. Brilliant!

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: genynnc
Originally Posted By: bigt61
The quality gap the Japanese once had has disappeared. GM, Ford and Chrysler have all raised their games - and are making products people want to buy. Compared to a new Cruze, Focus or Dart, a Corolla looks and feels dated and cheap. Maybe the Corolla will last 200,000 miles, but pity the poor soul who has to drive it that long.



You keep telling yourself that...lol.

Let me break it down straight to the point.

Two vehicles I maintain- '03 Corolla & '03 Dodge Ram 1500

Mileage- '03 Corolla 275K '03 Dodge Ram 75K

Repairs/ Maintenance: '03 Corolla- 5 sets of plugs, 3 ATF pan drops and re-fills w/ new filters, 4 sets of tires, 1 PCV valve, numerous oil & filter changes, 02 sensors replaced, air filters, 1 set of brake pads, 1 set of rotors, 1 brake fluid flush, 1 cooling system flush.

EDIT: struts on all four corners replaced

I am amazed the stock tranny is still going strong.

Repairs/ Maintenance: '03 Dodge Ram- 02s replaced, catalytic converter replaced, complete front brake system replaced (rotors, pads, calipers- covered under factory warranty @ 11K) replaced alternator, replaced sliding rear window (inside latch broke... whole sliding glass had to be replaced!) 2 sets of plugs, plug wires replaced, gas cap replaced, NVLR pump hose replaced (evaporative system), power steering pump hose (one of them) replaced, 2 ATF pan drops w/ filters, numerous oil and filters, air filters, 1 differential fluid change.

I'm lucky, I did all the repairs except for the cat replacement and the front brakes under warranty. If I was paying someone to do the work... the Dodge would be GONE. I am amazed by one thing in the Dodge... it's still on the factory battery!




I'm not convinced that domestic 'quality' has kept pace with their design teams. The newer cars look 'better' but looking good and running good are two different things.


On the original topic, I'm glad Detroit is getting some of the young crowds attention. They need it.






You're comparing Chrysler - BY FAR the worst quality of the domestic brands to Toyota. That's not really a fair comparison. Compare Ford or GM.


Also a truck to a car. The car makes no power, it is hard to break it. What is the Truck used for VS the car.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: ram_man
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: ram_man
Considering tons of regular people buy a honda and then continue to buy more hondas in the future tells me customer satisfaction is substantially higher. There is a loyalty there.
They flat out most of the time build better cars as well as Toyota and the proof is in the pudding.


Tons of regular people buy all kinds of vehicles repeatedly. My family has been buying Ford cars since the Model A. One guy I work with has had like 6 BMW's. A client of mine has had at least 5 BMW's. Another client has a veritable VW emporium with a few micro busses and the like. His wife, his kids...etc, they ALL drive VW's because that's what their dad is a fan of and what they grew up around. Given VW's reliability history, do you think this is because "they flat-out most of the time built better cars"?

Buying criteria isn't always all about what is the most reliable. I'm the first to admit that in many cases, that has not been BMW's strong suite. If you want a car that's never going to need much in the way of maintenance and repairs, don't look here. But if you want a car that's put together incredibly well with beautiful fit and finish, handles wonderfully and is designed around the driver, IMHO, you can't beat them. The driving experience sells the German cars for the most part. The appliance experience is what sells a Toyota. Honda is a bit of a mix of both. But "Civic Nation" certainly wasn't founded on bullet-proof reliability, it is enthusiast oriented where guys are sprinkling their blocks all over the drag strip pushing boost through them. The "Fast and the Furious" crowd. Honda strikes me as the brand for people who want a Japanese car that is generally reliable, but more fun to drive than a Toyota. Same seems to go for Nissan.

"Japanese Reliability" has become an buzz-phrase in North America. "Japanese" and "Reliable" became synonyms. It is now an expected trait, because it has been so heavily ingrained in society with respect to the media and the reputation of these brands during the 80's and 90's where they built basic cars that were pretty bloody reliable and dominated the compact segment when Ford was building the Escort, GM was building the J-body and Dodge was building the Omni.

My sister's husband was hard-core into the "Toyota thing". My one sister (who has a Jetta) will never buy anything that isn't German. These people can't make cases as to WHY they think these particular brands are better than another. My sister with the Jetta scoffs at my parents still driving an old Ford (2000 Expedition) but that truck has racked up more miles than all the vehicles she's owned combined and needed very little in the way of repairs and maintenance in comparison.

Perception is a key player here. Usually it isn't as simple as we try to make it out to be.


I agree but I think a lot of average american families who buy Honda per say will buy Honda again and again, where as a family who buys a Chevy may not buy one again. Honda owners are generally loyal. Like with German cars. Where as if you aren't a car guy you probably aren't very loyal to one specific American brand. This all changes if your like us and are gear head.

A lot of it is perception, but based on our latest ford experience the quality to us is not as good as it was.
The truck the 2010 replaced was a 82 f150 300 i6 4speed manual. Paint didn't fall of it until it was 15 years old. The old 89 tbirds paint never failed car never squeaked either. It had close to 300, 000 when it was wrecked. I doubt the focus will go 300, 000 and if it does the last 150, 000 will be miserable for sure.

I realize the comparison isn't a direct comparison. However an average consumer doesn't care. There mind set is if they owned an 2000 camry and then bought a 2010 cruze the cruze should be a nicer longer lasting better made care. It cost more its newer and its more advanced.

So far i know one person who owns a 2012 cruze and 38, 000 miles it popped a head gasket and screwed a few things up and the dealer is fighting to not have to fix it because its out of its 36, 000 bumper 2 bumper warranty and she must have done something to the car to cause the issue......

Problems like that are what make people leave the big 3.
Sad thing is she traded a hyundai sonata with 86, 000 for the cruze the sonata was an 08 or 09. Never had one single issue, not even the battery went bad.

Well I had a 96 Accord, lets just say, well look at my signature.

 

[MCompact]

Midsize? My wife's 3er is as big a car as we ever want to own. In fact, we take the '02 whenever we don't have to have A/C.

 

[MBS500]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
Fighting about the best penalty box is funny. The small cars still are penalty boxes just nicer ones. I owned two penalty box cars Wrx & civic and never will buy small again. The superior ride and slight fuel mpg penalty of new midsize car make it a no brainer.
Trololo guys, penalty box? you are true yankees that love everything Texas size.And often bigger is not better, like US dept

I went fron Altima 3,5L (the biggest body, auto)to accord(5 sp), then to Camry(5sp), then w140 S 500 and BMW 550i (both auto) and finally I bought a small "penalty box" fun car as I always wanned (signature)and drive it with a smile every day.
Can it be compared to MB s500 or BMW 550i? No, w140 is a b-52 bomber, 550i is A-10 or Attacking fighter, Fiat-- is light jet fighter.

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Say what you will about the Cavalier and Escort's reliability, but they did not drive well compared to a Civic or Corolla. The Neon would at least drive well before it chewed up it's own head gasket.


Cavalier was rigged to drive like a bigger car. IOW soft floaty suspension. If you needed a ride to work and it was pothole city from your door to your parking lot it was a reasonable choice. It was a deliberate tune for a different market segment. They're quieter inside, or at least lower in frequency with lower revving engine, quieter tires. They did make a sports handling package that wasn't opted for all that much.

 

[Silverado12]

I like my mid-fullsize Challenger. It rides smooth and quiet, gets 28 mpg on a trip (25combined)with midgrade gas. I get better than EPA if I use 89 octane. I drove a new Cruze, and was impressed by it, but still nowhere near the smooth, quiet ride of the Challenger. For my mileage I drive and current gas prices, I pay 7 bucks a week difference to ride in a nicer car.

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: Silverado12
I like my mid-fullsize Challenger. It rides smooth and quiet, gets 28 mpg on a trip (25combined)with midgrade gas. I get better than EPA if I use 89 octane. I drove a new Cruze, and was impressed by it, but still nowhere near the smooth, quiet ride of the Challenger. For my mileage I drive and current gas prices, I pay 7 bucks a week difference to ride in a nicer car.


28 mpg is what I get in my Cruze when I'm flogging the daylights out of it. Most of the time it's getting 40+ mpg, even running around suburbia. For my needs, a 42 mpg car that often meets/beats its 42 mpg label makes far more sense than a larger 28 mpg car.

For me, a Challenger would not be a nicer car simply because of the fuel economy. My commute's a long one, so I got the quietest and most fun to drive 40+ mpg car I could.

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: MBS500
Trololo guys, penalty box? you are true yankees that love everything Texas size.And often bigger is not better, like US dept

I went fron Altima 3,5L (the biggest body, auto)to accord(5 sp), then to Camry(5sp), then w140 S 500 and BMW 550i (both auto) and finally I bought a small "penalty box" fun car as I always wanned (signature)and drive it with a smile every day.
Can it be compared to MB s500 or BMW 550i? No, w140 is a b-52 bomber, 550i is A-10 or Attacking fighter, Fiat-- is light jet fighter.


New England roads are in poor condition in the winter due to frost heaves and pavement breaking. Small car rides really suffer especially in the winter. They also cheapen the car up by not having as much insulation for road noise and sometimes thinner glass.

The MPG penalty it not substantial at this point. Also IMHO midsize cars hold up better long term in the 150k-300k range with less rattles/body squeak etc. My guess is the price of building a midsize vehicle vs small car is neglible. They have to strip down on things underneath to make their price points. That is what the big3 could never figure out in the 80's and 90's. They get it now with their European imported designs.

I had a chance to drive a new Mazda6 and it is vastly superior car to the Mazda3 IMHO.

 

[Silverado12]

Originally Posted By: sciphi
Originally Posted By: Silverado12
I like my mid-fullsize Challenger. It rides smooth and quiet, gets 28 mpg on a trip (25combined)with midgrade gas. I get better than EPA if I use 89 octane. I drove a new Cruze, and was impressed by it, but still nowhere near the smooth, quiet ride of the Challenger. For my mileage I drive and current gas prices, I pay 7 bucks a week difference to ride in a nicer car.


28 mpg is what I get in my Cruze when I'm flogging the daylights out of it. Most of the time it's getting 40+ mpg, even running around suburbia. For my needs, a 42 mpg car that often meets/beats its 42 mpg label makes far more sense than a larger 28 mpg car.

For me, a Challenger would not be a nicer car simply because of the fuel economy. My commute's a long one, so I got the quietest and most fun to drive 40+ mpg car I could.


Not trying to knock the Cruze. I really like it but I don't drive that much so I didn't need the substantial mileage difference. The Cruze has a lot of legroom in it, nice seats and decent power.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog


That's what I don't get. The 1979 Honda Accord Sedan sold for $7,950 nicely equipped for the time. It had something like 75 horsepower (the CVCC actually had a fair amount of torque....something like 90 ft-lbs at 3000 rpm) and a two speed automatic. I'm certain that you could negotiate a nice A-body or Fox body Fairmont for 8 grand. That's nearly two base 2.3 Mustangs. And yet people waited for months to buy the Accord.



It's been a long time, but I only recall paying about $6400 ( a lot of money back then ) or so for the '79 Prelude, which was the top of the line (LOL) model. Now mine didn't have a/c, or aluminum wheels, or even a passenger mirror. I had to save for a couple more years to add those to the car. But it did have an automatic choke, and 13" wheels, both big advances for Honda.

Torque is not a word I would use in combination with the car. If it had any at all, it was in about a 50 rpm range around the peak, and that was while it had compression, which wasn't that long. The CVCC was just a terrible wheezer of an engine. There is good reason everybody else went in a different direction to meet emission requirements. I never saw a Honda of that era with the 2 speed wheezermatic they claim they offered. I can't imagine how miserable it must have been to drive one of those, if they actually existed.

And I didn't have to wait to buy it. It was on the lot, and I bought it. I'm an impulse car buyer, I don't waste a lot of time looking around or reading magazines, and it really bit me with that car. If I had to wait, I probably would have changed my mind about buying it. Wish I had. Should have bought a Toyota, they were very good little cars back then.

 

[mechanicx]

Yeah so the car was bare bones and stripped down and Honda still couldn't make it reliable lol. I remember back then people were already claiming how super reliable anything Japanese is before any of them had any miles or years on them. They bought into the marketing and even exaggerated on it.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: TFB1
This is one "boomer" that's never owned a foreign model(except to resell) and never will...


Same here, and not even to resell.