Auto industry complaints. Vent yours

[javacontour]

I suspect it's a packaging compromise. They can put two smaller mufflers in two smaller spaces, compared to one large one.

Yet I still go back to my 1990 Beretta GTZ, 180HP out of a 2.3L engine, and they accomplished it with a single muffler.

Now GM did have a dual tip coming out of the exhaust. It split external to the muffler, IIRC.

 

[Spazdog]

The Neon SRT-4 has dual exhaust with no mufflers.
The PT Cruiser GT has the exact same engine (different intake manifold to fit the shorter engine compartment but the block, head, turbocharger and all the parts that rotate and reciprocate are identical)

In spite of the fact that the PT-GT has a muffler, it is still quite nearly as loud as the SRT-4. It is probably pretty much a straight through perforated tube wrapped in some sort of fibrous material muffler. As much exhaust snarl but the "pops" are a little more muted.

So, I think it's for style and symmetry to = sales. I really don't think it has anything to do with packaging or flow efficiency.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: The Critic
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
My biggest gripe has to do with car mfg's not allowing customers to get the options they want without adding thousands of dollars of items they don't want.


If they did not build cars in popular option combos, production costs would skyrocket and dealers would not order cars with the appropriate option combos.



That is the reason.

Take for example, the full size GM SUV's. There are several different engine, body, chassis and other wire harnesses alone depending on option content. If every option were allowed to be a la cart, we'd have an unmanageable number of harnesses and also much more risk of mis-builds. Option packages streamline the build process and saves money in production.


While simulatneously forcing options on customers that they do not want which also increases their profits.

I am not talking about unchecked ability to order any one option you want and on any model BUT by the same token there needs to be less things forced on the consumer and more options for them to select. Car mfg's can still offer up popular equipment packages and such to help dealers streamline the ordering process and keep vehicles on the lot that will move for sutomers who don't really care and willt ake whatever is there. A customer should be able to order a vehicle though and have some say in how it is optioned. I did it on my last Silverado and I was very disappointed I couldn't get a simple thing I wanted without having to go up a trim level and get things forced on me I did not want. I have tried recently as well with a new Ram and it is a waste of time to even try these days.

Let me give some examples...

1 - Sunroof's. This is something that is fast becoming a very popular option again. It is back in style. However, the car mfg's make adding it something that requires upper level trim levels and/or tons of options that are just ridiculous to force along with a sunroof. A sunroof is not dependant on other options to work so it should be a stand alone option. Any vehicle should be able to have a sunroof. Lots of young people for instance who can't afford luxury vehicles would like a sunroof but unless they upgrade to the upper trim levels they can't get one. It is STUPID! There isn't that much wiring extra to add it. The standard interior body harness could have a plug( behind the a-pillar or up near the overhead light somewhere similar )where the SR harness could be added as needed. Then just program whatever module powers it( BCM probably ). I have done some truck and car builds from different mfg's and adding a sunroof generally means middle to upper trim levels and it adds some really crazy stuff at times like leather interior, center consoles, entertainment systems, etc... = DUMB!

2 - My 2005 Silverado LS( actually the next to lowest trim level GM offered )came with the power fold away side mirrors w/ turn signals. I loved those mirrors as it was so nice to be able to press a button and have the mirrors fold in and out when going through a drive thru or pulling up to a mailbox. I special ordered a 2007( the new body style )Silverado. I ordered a 1LT. The 1st thing I told the dealer to add were those mirrors again. Unfortunately GM decided that they were only available starting with the 2LT trim level. That added about $3K to the truck AND it meant that I would be forced to have a center console vs the 40/20/40 bench I wanted. I wasn't adding all that extra $$$ to the price and adding options I did not want just for the mirrors. Those mirrors are very popular with the GM truck crowd and tons of people add them. Frankly, IMO, it is something every truck mfg should offer on any model short of work trucks with no power accessories at all. Adding those mirrors certainly should not have required a center console.

3 - Final example. I went to price out a new Dodge Ram a couple months back. I wanetd a standard 1500 Quad Cab, SLT trim level, 5.7L HEMI, and I wanted the dual exhaust option. Now, I also wanted 17" wheels and the 3.55 axle ratio not the 20's and 3.92's. To get the dual exhaust I had to step up a trim level in the truck and get things like 20" wheels. For a dual exhaust now folks. How stupid is that. Want to add a sunroof to a new Ram? You have to add the technology group. Fine it adds the wiring for those who will argue that. However, to do so also requires the premium seat option which is $1000+.

This is what I was talking about. Not just allowing any option on any vehicle. I do understand the mfg has to draw a line somewhere. However, they have gone too far in not allowing options that should be stand alone ones and also forcing thousands and thousands of dollars worth of unwanted options on us.



All good points. Some carmakers even bundle the sunroofs into a "sun and sound" package where you have to get an uplevel radio with the sunroof. So instead of paying the average $1000 for a sunroof you pay about $2000. I've seen some foreign makes do this. GM has the packages too, but you can still buy the sunroof by itself.

 

[Bladecutter]

When I was buying my '07 Nissan Altima back in December '06, I ran into the option bloat everyone is talking about.

The only things I cared about in my Altima were the 6 speed manual transmission, and ABS (it was an option that first year, standard every other year). $300 for the ABS, which I felt was fair. Finding a car that had it was the hard part.

Most of the manuals across the country didn't have ABS as an option. If the car had ABS, chances are it had the CVT transmission, which I wanted no part of.

I would have really liked to have gotten the Alloy Wheels, but to get them, I would have had to buy 2 option packages on top of that to get it. That was another ~$2500. Ummmn, No thank you. I can buy aftermarket wheels for less than that.

I wouldn't have minded the power seats either, but that was an additional $1500, and added lots of other [censored] I didn't want.

Another option I wanted was the traction control, but you could only get it if you bought the CVT, and one of the premium packages. If you wanted the Dynamic Stability Control on top of that, you had to buy the V6 version, and then pray you can find a car with just that option, otherwise you had to buy many thousands of additional options to get it.

Same thing with my recent purchase of the Mazda RX-8.
Sport package comes nicely equipped. Perfect for me.

The other two trim levels have lots of things I don't like, but a couple of things I would have paid extra for.

Give me the leather interior from the Grand Touring package.
Really, really nice. The traction control and stability control would be great, too. But you can keep the [censored] Bose radio, and the headroom stealing sunroof.

The R3 package has really nice rims that I would love. not to mention the sportier Bilstein suspension. It also has really, really nice interior colors that I would love to have in my Base, but you can keep the uncomfortable Recaro seats, just give my seats the red stitching, and the nice leather. And again, you can keep the [censored] Bose radio. At least there isn't that stupid sunroof, but they increased the price $5k to get rims, suspension, and red sticking in the seats over the Sport version. No thank you.

BC.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: The Critic
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
My biggest gripe has to do with car mfg's not allowing customers to get the options they want without adding thousands of dollars of items they don't want.


If they did not build cars in popular option combos, production costs would skyrocket and dealers would not order cars with the appropriate option combos.



That is the reason.

Take for example, the full size GM SUV's. There are several different engine, body, chassis and other wire harnesses alone depending on option content. If every option were allowed to be a la cart, we'd have an unmanageable number of harnesses and also much more risk of mis-builds. Option packages streamline the build process and saves money in production.


While simulatneously forcing options on customers that they do not want which also increases their profits.

I am not talking about unchecked ability to order any one option you want and on any model BUT by the same token there needs to be less things forced on the consumer and more options for them to select. Car mfg's can still offer up popular equipment packages and such to help dealers streamline the ordering process and keep vehicles on the lot that will move for sutomers who don't really care and willt ake whatever is there. A customer should be able to order a vehicle though and have some say in how it is optioned. I did it on my last Silverado and I was very disappointed I couldn't get a simple thing I wanted without having to go up a trim level and get things forced on me I did not want. I have tried recently as well with a new Ram and it is a waste of time to even try these days.

Let me give some examples...

1 - Sunroof's. This is something that is fast becoming a very popular option again. It is back in style. However, the car mfg's make adding it something that requires upper level trim levels and/or tons of options that are just ridiculous to force along with a sunroof. A sunroof is not dependant on other options to work so it should be a stand alone option. Any vehicle should be able to have a sunroof. Lots of young people for instance who can't afford luxury vehicles would like a sunroof but unless they upgrade to the upper trim levels they can't get one. It is STUPID! There isn't that much wiring extra to add it. The standard interior body harness could have a plug( behind the a-pillar or up near the overhead light somewhere similar )where the SR harness could be added as needed. Then just program whatever module powers it( BCM probably ). I have done some truck and car builds from different mfg's and adding a sunroof generally means middle to upper trim levels and it adds some really crazy stuff at times like leather interior, center consoles, entertainment systems, etc... = DUMB!

2 - My 2005 Silverado LS( actually the next to lowest trim level GM offered )came with the power fold away side mirrors w/ turn signals. I loved those mirrors as it was so nice to be able to press a button and have the mirrors fold in and out when going through a drive thru or pulling up to a mailbox. I special ordered a 2007( the new body style )Silverado. I ordered a 1LT. The 1st thing I told the dealer to add were those mirrors again. Unfortunately GM decided that they were only available starting with the 2LT trim level. That added about $3K to the truck AND it meant that I would be forced to have a center console vs the 40/20/40 bench I wanted. I wasn't adding all that extra $$$ to the price and adding options I did not want just for the mirrors. Those mirrors are very popular with the GM truck crowd and tons of people add them. Frankly, IMO, it is something every truck mfg should offer on any model short of work trucks with no power accessories at all. Adding those mirrors certainly should not have required a center console.

3 - Final example. I went to price out a new Dodge Ram a couple months back. I wanetd a standard 1500 Quad Cab, SLT trim level, 5.7L HEMI, and I wanted the dual exhaust option. Now, I also wanted 17" wheels and the 3.55 axle ratio not the 20's and 3.92's. To get the dual exhaust I had to step up a trim level in the truck and get things like 20" wheels. For a dual exhaust now folks. How stupid is that. Want to add a sunroof to a new Ram? You have to add the technology group. Fine it adds the wiring for those who will argue that. However, to do so also requires the premium seat option which is $1000+.

This is what I was talking about. Not just allowing any option on any vehicle. I do understand the mfg has to draw a line somewhere. However, they have gone too far in not allowing options that should be stand alone ones and also forcing thousands and thousands of dollars worth of unwanted options on us.

I think its the same trick with channel bundling for cable and satellite TV, they identify the popular channels then divide them into many bundles so you'll buy the full deal... With cars though its more of a risk for the car manufacturers, as people can cross shop by the features they want.
When we got our Tracker we would've liked AC, but you needed to go up a trim level to make it an option, so it was almost $3k more. GM could've made $500 or whatever they make on AC alone, but they wanted more money and bet people would pay alot more for AC. Didn't happen in our case.

 

[NHHEMI]

I want to add another gripe. GM adding OnStar to all it's vehicles now.

GM owns OnStar. Even though OnStar is now listed as "standard equipment" we the consumer still pay for all of the equipment in the price of the vehicle. To actually use that OnStar equipment you paid for however you have to pay for the service( 1 year free service usually comes with purchase of the vehicle ).

I resent the heck out of this. Not only do I feel OnStar is a HUGE rip off $$$ wise but I hate how integrated into the vehicle it is with no way to remove/disable it. Hate it hate it hate it.

OnStar originally was an option and should go back to being that way vs forced on every customer buying a GM vehicle. My 2005 Silverado did not have it thankfully. My 2007 Silverado and 2008 Equinox did though and I hated it being there. Drove me nuts that I had no say in the vehicle coming with it or not. IF they do not want OnStar to be it's own option and want it to be SE then at the very least they need to offer an OnStar delete option for those who do not want that [censored] in their vehicle and don't want to pay for it.

GM is forcing the consumer to buy equipment with their vehicle that is not required for the vehicle to run and be driven but rather to use with a 3rd party service. That is just flat out wrong IMO. The fact they, GM, also own the 3rd party service( OnStar )that the equipment is for really irks me. That is like buying a home built by the cable company and them installing a TV in every room but to view it you have to buy cable from them( and only them ).

I am not a GM basher at all when it comes to the vehicles. However, this issue is a big one for me. GM needs to go back to OnStar just being an option. I can honestly say that OnStar being standard equipment now, with no way for me to decline it or remove/disable it, and GM actually owning OnStar would be a big issue if I ever decided to go back to GM. It just might make me walk away.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
I want to add another gripe. GM adding OnStar to all it's vehicles now.

GM owns OnStar. Even though OnStar is now listed as "standard equipment" we the consumer still pay for all of the equipment in the price of the vehicle. To actually use that OnStar equipment you paid for however you have to pay for the service( 1 year free service usually comes with purchase of the vehicle ).

I resent the heck out of this. Not only do I feel OnStar is a HUGE rip off $$$ wise but I hate how integrated into the vehicle it is with no way to remove/disable it. Hate it hate it hate it.

OnStar originally was an option and should go back to being that way vs forced on every customer buying a GM vehicle. My 2005 Silverado did not have it thankfully. My 2007 Silverado and 2008 Equinox did though and I hated it being there. Drove me nuts that I had no say in the vehicle coming with it or not. IF they do not want OnStar to be it's own option and want it to be SE then at the very least they need to offer an OnStar delete option for those who do not want that [censored] in their vehicle and don't want to pay for it.

GM is forcing the consumer to buy equipment with their vehicle that is not required for the vehicle to run and be driven but rather to use with a 3rd party service. That is just flat out wrong IMO. The fact they, GM, also own the 3rd party service( OnStar )that the equipment is for really irks me. That is like buying a home built by the cable company and them installing a TV in every room but to view it you have to buy cable from them( and only them ).

I am not a GM basher at all when it comes to the vehicles. However, this issue is a big one for me. GM needs to go back to OnStar just being an option. I can honestly say that OnStar being standard equipment now, with no way for me to decline it or remove/disable it, and GM actually owning OnStar would be a big issue if I ever decided to go back to GM. It just might make me walk away.



I hear you and feel you. Let me just say that, in my opinion, the only reason Onstar is being pushed so hard is due to consumer demand for bells and whistles - namely telematics. You've got Ford even putting internet in the cars. Onstar allows GM to offer handsfree calling (you can buy their minutes or use your onstar phone added to your verizon acct and share your minutes for $10/mo), internet, navigation, all sorts of stuff. Techno nerds love this and actually Onstar has saved many lives and recovered many stolen cars as well as unlock locked doors. It does have some pros...and cons.

I can also tell you that the cost of the parts is VERY small to the car price. I can also tell you it CAN be disabled.

Me?? I only keep it for the first year and drop it. I did renew it once on my truck and once on the CTS but have since let it go. I liked the monthly email reports....but decided against continuing because I like my privacy.

I agree, it should be an option on most cars.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: GMBoy


I hear you and feel you. Let me just say that, in my opinion, the only reason Onstar is being pushed so hard is due to consumer demand for bells and whistles - namely telematics. You've got Ford even putting internet in the cars. Onstar allows GM to offer handsfree calling (you can buy their minutes or use your onstar phone added to your verizon acct and share your minutes for $10/mo), internet, navigation, all sorts of stuff. Techno nerds love this and actually Onstar has saved many lives and recovered many stolen cars as well as unlock locked doors. It does have some pros...and cons.

I can also tell you that the cost of the parts is VERY small to the car price. I can also tell you it CAN be disabled.

Me?? I only keep it for the first year and drop it. I did renew it once on my truck and once on the CTS but have since let it go. I liked the monthly email reports....but decided against continuing because I like my privacy.

I agree, it should be an option on most cars.


I would love to know how OnStar can be disabled? If you visit the many, many, I hate OnStar web sites one of the bigegst gripes is it can't be disabled. Not easily anyway as in pulling a fuse or relay. The equipment is hidden and it is so intergrated into the vehicle it is impossible to get rid of it.

While I hear you on it saving lives( i.e. crashes )that is the ONLY part of it that IMO is anything special. There isn't anything else it does that can't be duplicated with a cell phone, AAA membership, spare key in your wallet, and a GPS. Ok, the e-mails about your vehicle but is that really anything we need? I guess if you know nothing about cars and negelect things it is good but I don't need OnStar telling me I need an OC. Add in GM's excellent OLM system, TPMS systems, and such and it is a redundant service IMO.

I had this type of discussion with a pro OnStar guy( his description - I am not saying you are one too )on another site a year or so ago and I broke it all down and showed him how much more expensive OnStar is than other options. He had the premium service with navigation and was paying $299 a year AND he was buying( and actually using up every month )their air time minutes( 300 )on top of it like a fool.

OnStar air time minutes are ridiculously expensive...

100 = $ 49.99
300 = $ 145.99
500 = $ 224.99
1,000 = $ 389.99

Not even close to what even the most expensive cell plans offer. I pay $39.95 and get 400 anytime anywhere minutes so why would I pay $50 for just 100 minutes. Their air time minute fees are borderline criminal. So let's look at it...

$299.99 a year for premium OnStar Turn By Turn Navigation package
300 air time minutes p/month @ $145.99 = 1751.88 p/yr
Total for year = $2051.87

Now, I showed him what I paid to basically achieve the same service( minus the crash notice and diagnostic e-mails )...

$39.95 p/month cell service w/ 400 anytime/anywhere minutes = $479.40 p/yr
$45 p/yr for AAA roadside assistance
$25 one time fee for spare key for wallet
$299 one time fee for decent auto GPS system
Total 1st year = $848.40
Total following years = $524.40

So to me OnStar makes absolutely NO sense at all. Nothing they offer that to me is so special it warrants the outrageous fees and most of what it offers can be duplicated for far less.

Oh, and FYI - As far as the Verizon/OnStar plan it was far more than $10 extra a month. The plan started at $69.99 a month w /600 or 700 minutes as I recall. If you were already paying near that figure and needed that many minutes I guess it made sense but for me it was nuts. My VZW plan is only $39.95 a month as previously stated and I seldom use 300 minutes let alone the 400 I get. It was not worth it to me to use it with OnStar hands free for $30 more per month/$360 per year. And don't forget that you can not use just the hands free part. You MUST have at least the basic OnStar package to use the hands free service( with or without Verizon )so add in that minimum $199 a year to it as well.

Also, they stopped accepting new customers into the plan in 2009 and starting Jan 1, 2012 it will no longer work for anyone. Just another FYI.

Disclamer - this is just a friendly discussion of the OnStar topic and nothing is intended to sound like I am going at you.

 

[Throckmorton]

Ford Mustang Rear Axle:

This car is based on the old Lincoln LS/Jaguar S-Type platform. Both of those cars had an independent rear supension.

When Ford designed the Mustang they didn't need need to design a cheap solid axle rear suspension. They had the existing machine tools and existing IRS design from LS/S-Type available. They literally designed a new rear axle and created new tools to stamp out the axle to save on the marginal cost of the new cheaper rear supension.

How much were they honestly going to save?

That said, the Mustang's six cylinder engine is quite impressive.

 

[artificialist]

Interesting point, Throckmorotn. It makes me think of another thing. How much money do automakers save when they don't put an independent rear suspension on a FWD car? There isn't much stuff back there to re-route.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: GMBoy


I hear you and feel you. Let me just say that, in my opinion, the only reason Onstar is being pushed so hard is due to consumer demand for bells and whistles - namely telematics. You've got Ford even putting internet in the cars. Onstar allows GM to offer handsfree calling (you can buy their minutes or use your onstar phone added to your verizon acct and share your minutes for $10/mo), internet, navigation, all sorts of stuff. Techno nerds love this and actually Onstar has saved many lives and recovered many stolen cars as well as unlock locked doors. It does have some pros...and cons.

I can also tell you that the cost of the parts is VERY small to the car price. I can also tell you it CAN be disabled.

Me?? I only keep it for the first year and drop it. I did renew it once on my truck and once on the CTS but have since let it go. I liked the monthly email reports....but decided against continuing because I like my privacy.

I agree, it should be an option on most cars.


I would love to know how OnStar can be disabled? If you visit the many, many, I hate OnStar web sites one of the bigegst gripes is it can't be disabled. Not easily anyway as in pulling a fuse or relay. The equipment is hidden and it is so intergrated into the vehicle it is impossible to get rid of it.

While I hear you on it saving lives( i.e. crashes )that is the ONLY part of it that IMO is anything special. There isn't anything else it does that can't be duplicated with a cell phone, AAA membership, spare key in your wallet, and a GPS. Ok, the e-mails about your vehicle but is that really anything we need? I guess if you know nothing about cars and negelect things it is good but I don't need OnStar telling me I need an OC. Add in GM's excellent OLM system, TPMS systems, and such and it is a redundant service IMO.

I had this type of discussion with a pro OnStar guy( his description - I am not saying you are one too )on another site a year or so ago and I broke it all down and showed him how much more expensive OnStar is than other options. He had the premium service with navigation and was paying $299 a year AND he was buying( and actually using up every month )their air time minutes( 300 )on top of it like a fool.

OnStar air time minutes are ridiculously expensive...

100 = $ 49.99
300 = $ 145.99
500 = $ 224.99
1,000 = $ 389.99

Not even close to what even the most expensive cell plans offer. I pay $39.95 and get 400 anytime anywhere minutes so why would I pay $50 for just 100 minutes. Their air time minute fees are borderline criminal. So let's look at it...

$299.99 a year for premium OnStar Turn By Turn Navigation package
300 air time minutes p/month @ $145.99 = 1751.88 p/yr
Total for year = $2051.87

Now, I showed him what I paid to basically achieve the same service( minus the crash notice and diagnostic e-mails )...

$39.95 p/month cell service w/ 400 anytime/anywhere minutes = $479.40 p/yr
$45 p/yr for AAA roadside assistance
$25 one time fee for spare key for wallet
$299 one time fee for decent auto GPS system
Total 1st year = $848.40
Total following years = $524.40

So to me OnStar makes absolutely NO sense at all. Nothing they offer that to me is so special it warrants the outrageous fees and most of what it offers can be duplicated for far less.

Oh, and FYI - As far as the Verizon/OnStar plan it was far more than $10 extra a month. The plan started at $69.99 a month w /600 or 700 minutes as I recall. If you were already paying near that figure and needed that many minutes I guess it made sense but for me it was nuts. My VZW plan is only $39.95 a month as previously stated and I seldom use 300 minutes let alone the 400 I get. It was not worth it to me to use it with OnStar hands free for $30 more per month/$360 per year. And don't forget that you can not use just the hands free part. You MUST have at least the basic OnStar package to use the hands free service( with or without Verizon )so add in that minimum $199 a year to it as well.

Also, they stopped accepting new customers into the plan in 2009 and starting Jan 1, 2012 it will no longer work for anyone. Just another FYI.

Disclamer - this is just a friendly discussion of the OnStar topic and nothing is intended to sound like I am going at you.


I still hear you. And I agree, this is friendly discussion. I am not a pro Onstar person, but feel more like you. I was basing my pros list on how it is presented to the public.

Working deep inside GM, I do know how to disable it. The system has it's own module and it's not as deeply imbedded as people may lead you to believe. Not saying it isn't an integral part of the car because it is. You cannot just unhook the antenna, that's for sure and fuse pulling is nowhere related to it, like you said. I work daily on Onstar issues on our trucks and I've learned how it works in it's entirety.

I with you and you really broke down the cost well! Not aure about the Verizon deal, but I do know last year I got information either from Onstar or Verizon (can't remember) offering to add my Onstar vehicle to my Verizon acct just like it was another phone for $9.99/month to share minutes like they do for cell phones. Maybe it changed. Onstar does use Verizon...but you have to keep Onstar to keep the phone capibilty. That sucks.


***EDIT - I just checked...Verizon and Onstar did cancel the shared minutes deal. That is just wrong.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: GMBoy

I still hear you. And I agree, this is friendly discussion. I am not a pro Onstar person, but feel more like you. I was basing my pros list on how it is presented to the public.

Working deep inside GM, I do know how to disable it. The system has it's own module and it's not as deeply imbedded as people may lead you to believe. Not saying it isn't an integral part of the car because it is. You cannot just unhook the antenna, that's for sure and fuse pulling is nowhere related to it, like you said. I work daily on Onstar issues on our trucks and I've learned how it works in it's entirety.

I with you and you really broke down the cost well! Not aure about the Verizon deal, but I do know last year I got information either from Onstar or Verizon (can't remember) offering to add my Onstar vehicle to my Verizon acct just like it was another phone for $9.99/month to share minutes like they do for cell phones. Maybe it changed. Onstar does use Verizon...but you have to keep Onstar to keep the phone capibilty. That sucks.


***EDIT - I just checked...Verizon and Onstar did cancel the shared minutes deal. That is just wrong.


Well, seeing as you are an insider you would know. The OnStar wiring and parts is a closely guarded secret so the average person has no clue where to even look. You could make a fortune if you told people how to remove it.

I never heard of that $9.99 thing. It is surprising to me seeing as it was summer 2009 when they announced no new customers could enter the plan. You can still transfer your current account to a new vehicle through Aug 2011 though. It is being cancelled completely however. Last day it will work is Dec 31, 2011. OnStar apparantly didn't like so many people doing it through VZW as it was so much cheaper. Maybe they will finally take their heads out of their butts and lower the cost. I doubt it though.

Quote:
Verizon Wireless And OnStar® Discontinuing The Nationwide Plan With OnStar® Effective December 31
2011

Verizon Wireless and OnStar® are discontinuing the Nationwide Plan with OnStar® effective December 31, 2011. There is no need for you to doanything at this time. You will continue to be able to use your Verizon Wireless minutes from your OnStar®-equipped vehicle until December 31, 2011. Beginning January 1, 2012, you will no longer be able to use the minutes from your Verizon Wireless Nationwide Plan in your OnStar®-equipped vehicle. In order to make hands-free calls in your vehicle you may take advantage of the OnStar® Hands-Free Calling program, which allows you to make hands-free calls using pre-paid minutes.

Starting August 1, 2011 you will no longer be able to transfer your Nationwide Plan with OnStar® from your current vehicle to a new OnStar®-equipped vehicle, or to a new OnStar® device. We regret any inconvenience the discontinuation of the Nationwide Plan with OnStar® may cause you. OnStar® is currently working to develop a new Hands-Free Calling program specifically with you in mind. This new program will feature many of the benefits that you currently enjoy with the Nationwide Plan with OnStar®. OnStar® will send you details about this exciting new program next year.

 

[Sierra048]

How is it that the Chrysler/Dodge 3.8l has been around forever, they make it standard in new Jeeps, and the gas mileage is still atrocious. I believe a C-17 gets better gas mileage than a Jeep with the 3.8l.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Biggest turnoff to me is all the cheapy plastic everywhere.

 

[L_Sludger]

Cars are heavier than before, with flimsier and cheaper interiors than ever before as well. They're engineered to be a PAIN to work on and have more of a throw-away feel to them than they used to.
Right now I wouldn't consider any of the current model Toyota or Lexus vehicles on the market due to what I see as poor quality parts brought on by cost pressures.

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
Cars are heavier than before, with flimsier and cheaper interiors than ever before as well. They're engineered to be a PAIN to work on and have more of a throw-away feel to them than they used to.
Right now I wouldn't consider any of the current model Toyota or Lexus vehicles on the market due to what I see as poor quality parts brought on by cost pressures.


While this may be true on some models, the Prius I have been working on does not have any low quality parts or poor engineering. All of the components are well-designed, serviceability is incredibly easy, and the car has been incredibly reliable considering its complexity. The Prius is just an extremely well-designed car, and is the one and only Toyota that I would consider purchasing.

 

[morris]

i may have said this here before, so fore give me if i have. i realy have a hard time loveing my chrysler cars/trucks. however they cant make a a/c hose that doesnt leek. i cant spend $300-500 every 3-4 years, so i dont have a/c and may never have it. thats just one thing, i have more. and yes i have tryed other brands and the ford ranger i bought my son isnt 1/10 the truck of my dakota. both the same year and mileage

 

[Spyder7]

Originally Posted By: morris
i may have said this here before, so fore give me if i have. i realy have a hard time loveing my chrysler cars/trucks. however they cant make a a/c hose that doesnt leek. i cant spend $300-500 every 3-4 years, so i dont have a/c and may never have it. thats just one thing, i have more. and yes i have tryed other brands and the ford ranger i bought my son isnt 1/10 the truck of my dakota. both the same year and mileage


That's where duct tape is useful. Unless a hose is completely shot, I just use decent HVAC duct tape to seal any cracks that appear. None on this car, but if one were to turn up it'd get the same duct tape treatment past used cars have had for that type issue.

FTR, that practice started as a band-aid until I could get around to ordering and replacing the hose. However the prices on hoses being what they are, and having been well served by the band-aid in the past, it became a permanent remedy. The upshot is that its invisible to anyone not looking under the hood (i.e.: doesn't turn the car into an eyesore).

-Spyder

 

[artificialist]

There are hose fabrication companies that can build a custom replacement refrigerant hose, but I don't know how durable they are.

 

[JoeWGauss]

Marketing and consulting genuises that insist that consumers do NOT want smaller more economical cars, diesel passenger cars, manual transmissions or other manual controls, and cloth seats.

The ONLY reason WHY this is is because if they force the auto box, bigger cars, ect, the companies make more profit, that is ALL.

Give me a small efficient, diesel subcompact with a stick, at a reasonable price from a major player and I'd bet that would would have a winner on your hands although it wouldn't give the highest profit margin like an SUV would.