We are talking about 40K+ cars anyway. Not the point of this thread. The premium brands are usually very good anyway. I way prefer domestic vehicles for the value and durability but I would love to own a 5 series BMW. Not for status but because I am partial to a VERY good handling RWD sedan that can seat a larger than average American man in comfort. No one else makes such a car. If one of the big three made a similar vehicle I would be a player on one of them. None of the Asian makes have such a car either.
bias against American cars
- Thread starter Stab
- Start date
- Status
Stab sounds like you need to stick with 5 year old chevy's. If that's what turns your crank, great. Enjoy.
Stab you might checkout a used Infinite Q45. I have a buddy that has a 91-93?? Q45 with the active suspension, we drove it from KCMO to Denver. What a great car and you can get them cheap!!! Big V8, rear wheel drive, it is considered the BMW of the Japanese cars. He bought it when it was 5 years old with 40K miles on it for $18K, I am sure you can find some late model Q45's for a great price. Confort wise my buddy is 6'4" and weighs 230 lbs+ and I'm 5' 11" and weigh 225 lbs, both of us are big into lifting (so we are both kinda broad) and the seats were real comfortable. The wifes aren't that big but they had plenty of room in the back, no complaints.
The dependability of my last Chevy truck convinced me to buy my first Toyota. The Chevy is actually very dependable. Every five thousand miles something new breaks.
Stab check out a Holden Monaro oops Pontiac GTO. OK except for the dopey nose change Pontiac insisted on. Handles/rides/brakes well and plenty of power and room. Australian though but at least it's a GM product.
Reference the Infiniti:
I currently have a 99 Infiniti G20. It is my wife's car. She bought it before we met because it is a Infiniti. Not very impressive. OTOH, I had a 96 Infiniti I30 (6cyl FWD) as a demo for about 4 months and liked it pretty good. I also had a 93 J30 as a demo that had some issues. I do like the some of the bigger high end jap cars. The older Infiniti cars are wwwwaaaayyyyyy cheaper than the older Lexus cars at the auctions I attend.
I am lucky that I get to drive almost anything I want (as long as it is acceptable for the type of sales we do) because I own the car dealership. I tend to drive my demo's for about 4 months and then I sell them. I deal in a little older cars because of nature of my business (buy here pay here) and get to see a lot of cars with high miles. In the buy here pay here type of business I am familiar with the car for a year after the sale. I feel my impressions are pretty darn accurate because of how many units I "touch" over the course of the day. I get to see how my sold units hold over the next year as well.
This may shock some of you but the least problematic car we sell are early to mid 90's 4 cyl. GM products. Go figure. The interior is usually shot but the cars are almost bullet proof.
I currently have a 99 Infiniti G20. It is my wife's car. She bought it before we met because it is a Infiniti. Not very impressive. OTOH, I had a 96 Infiniti I30 (6cyl FWD) as a demo for about 4 months and liked it pretty good. I also had a 93 J30 as a demo that had some issues. I do like the some of the bigger high end jap cars. The older Infiniti cars are wwwwaaaayyyyyy cheaper than the older Lexus cars at the auctions I attend.
I am lucky that I get to drive almost anything I want (as long as it is acceptable for the type of sales we do) because I own the car dealership. I tend to drive my demo's for about 4 months and then I sell them. I deal in a little older cars because of nature of my business (buy here pay here) and get to see a lot of cars with high miles. In the buy here pay here type of business I am familiar with the car for a year after the sale. I feel my impressions are pretty darn accurate because of how many units I "touch" over the course of the day. I get to see how my sold units hold over the next year as well.
This may shock some of you but the least problematic car we sell are early to mid 90's 4 cyl. GM products. Go figure. The interior is usually shot but the cars are almost bullet proof.
Yup. My new 3 is on a Focus platform. But this is definitely a Mazda and contains a lot of Mazda engineering. It's even made in Japan. From what I hear the Focus is a good car and, if I liked the looks better, I might even have considered buying one. I think Chrysler and Ford are moving in the right direction but I just don't quite have full confidence in them yet. Once I know someone that's owned one for a while that's nice to drive and trouble free I'll give them more credit.
I've never bought a part from a dealer (except a PS Fluid cooler for my old '87 Grand Am that couldn't be found anywhere else), so import vs. domestic prices are usually very similar for me. I phone them once in awhile but the prices are usually 2-3 times that of the jobber parts.
I just realized another reason I don't give the domestics as much respect: they have few cars that really catch my attention. They offer very little in the way of sporty cars with decent power and a manual tranny. I just feel like they don't really represent me. Having cars in the more upper end of the lineup that I wish I could own goes a long way towards my opinion of the company.
I am not bashing the import brands guys. I just think they are over priced. Don't take it too personal. If ya want to spend more for a similar car be my guest BUT it will take a lot more than consumer reports to tell me they are any better than the domestic counterparts.
My expierence and expertise purchasing used cars (about 20-40 a month) does not validate the "higher quality" claims.
I will buy every single Honda or Toyota I can get my hands on cheap because people will pay way more for them than they are worth. The profit line loves the propaganda. Just say "hey it's a Toyota" and all the sudden common sense runs away and the check book open up. I love paying 800 bucks for a car and selling in for $3495 and the hype over these brands allows it to happen.
My expierence and expertise purchasing used cars (about 20-40 a month) does not validate the "higher quality" claims.
I will buy every single Honda or Toyota I can get my hands on cheap because people will pay way more for them than they are worth. The profit line loves the propaganda. Just say "hey it's a Toyota" and all the sudden common sense runs away and the check book open up. I love paying 800 bucks for a car and selling in for $3495 and the hype over these brands allows it to happen.
I can see this thinking somewhat. The difference in my way of thinking is that I see nothing from toyota under 50K bucks that has any appeal at all. Sorry but that is the way I see it. My friends wife has a Camry LE. It is the most cookie cutter boring car I have ever driven. No power, no handing, poor braking, and the stick on wood trim looks awfull. The only thing it has going for it is when they sell it the sheep will line up to buy it because of what they read.
I agree. If I was buying used I'd probably go domestic. I could buy a used Z24 and change the engine in it a few times for the same price as what people want for Civics! I glanced through the paper and laughed at what people wanted for used imports before heading to the dealer to get a new one instead. If you're going to use up the best years of a cars life you can't expect to sell it to me for almost what you paid for it.
Other than the IS300 I agree. Maybe if they started making them wider than they are tall and put some real wheels on them. To me, they just violate my sense of proper automotive proportions. I still respect them as a quality manufacturer though.
"I agree. If I was buying used I'd probably go domestic. I could buy a used Z24 and change the engine in it a few times for the same price as what people want for Civics!"
So true. Imagine if you didn't have to replace the engine? If if drove and it checks out it is more than likely good to go. Now look at my value to dollar argument.
My sister sold her 94 Accord coupe with 166K miles to the first person that came to look at it for 5700 bucks a few years ago. Amazing. She did say the people called back a few days later and said the ac quit working. I bet they felt stupid paying $2500 over book for a used car and then having to get the air fixed.
So true. Imagine if you didn't have to replace the engine? If if drove and it checks out it is more than likely good to go. Now look at my value to dollar argument.
My sister sold her 94 Accord coupe with 166K miles to the first person that came to look at it for 5700 bucks a few years ago. Amazing. She did say the people called back a few days later and said the ac quit working. I bet they felt stupid paying $2500 over book for a used car and then having to get the air fixed.
Why are you fighting the notion that Accords hold their value well? Like real estate, stocks and NFL salaries, car value is an inexact science where perception plays a huge role in what the buyer will pay. Your arguments are shooting down your premise that Hondas and Toyotas are overpriced. Your examples with the Accord, both new and used, show that it sells profitably, quickly and easily, and maintains its value over time. Meanwhile, the domestic examples you cite are good values mainly because they have a $4K incentive on it when new or is a bargain used but has a burned out interior. How the interior holds up part of the reliability/quality perception. A buyer isn't going to have confidence buying a mid-90's car if the interior is shot, so down goes its value, down goes its reliabilty perception...
In an Edmunds Bob Lutz interview, the GM exec touches on the importance of image on the consumer's perception of value and reliability.
"So the reality is we've closed the quality gap but the lag in customer perception is still huge. The average person still believes that the Japanese cars' quality and reliability is head-and-shoulders above General Motors, and it simply is no longer the case.
It's going to take a while for that to get through. I would say the onus is on us to produce vehicles, which we're now doing and the Chevrolet Malibu is the first concrete example, vehicles with a much higher level of visual quality. Better panel fits, closer gaps, better door-closing sounds, better-tailored seat covers and more precise knobs and switches. Soft, low-gloss plastic parts instead of hard, shiny ones. All of those things are part of what the customer registers as a quality perception, which is why we call it "perceived quality." And your real quality can be outstanding, but if your perceived quality is off, the customer says, "Gee, I don't know, this is a pretty lousy-looking interior. I can't believe this is a good car." And you turn them off. That part we still have to fix across our whole product line and do interiors and exterior fits and finishes that tell the customer, "Wow, this thing was put together with great attention to detail and love of craftsmanship."
What is the number-one challenge facing GM right now? It sounds like it's changing the company's perception.
Yes, that's exactly right, you've got it. We've got to. And it's through advertising. It's through unpaid communication, through speeches, through owner experiences, through word of mouth. We have got to get the truth out about where we are on quality and reliability versus the Japanese. And as I say, part of the communication is how the car is put together. Because, again, you can have a totally reliable car with crooked body gaps, a door that closes with a bad sound, cheap interior plastic parts, carpets that don't quite fit. None of those things are a reliability problem or something that you go to a dealer about, but they're not nice. And it's up to us, as we've done in the Malibu, and as we will do in all of the cars we launch, that all of the sights and sounds, materials, controls and everything will contribute to sending the message of quality, as opposed to detracting from it. But you're right, it's our biggest problem — the lingering reputation that American companies, General Motors in particular, cannot produce consistent quality the way the Japanese can."
"So the reality is we've closed the quality gap but the lag in customer perception is still huge. The average person still believes that the Japanese cars' quality and reliability is head-and-shoulders above General Motors, and it simply is no longer the case.
It's going to take a while for that to get through. I would say the onus is on us to produce vehicles, which we're now doing and the Chevrolet Malibu is the first concrete example, vehicles with a much higher level of visual quality. Better panel fits, closer gaps, better door-closing sounds, better-tailored seat covers and more precise knobs and switches. Soft, low-gloss plastic parts instead of hard, shiny ones. All of those things are part of what the customer registers as a quality perception, which is why we call it "perceived quality." And your real quality can be outstanding, but if your perceived quality is off, the customer says, "Gee, I don't know, this is a pretty lousy-looking interior. I can't believe this is a good car." And you turn them off. That part we still have to fix across our whole product line and do interiors and exterior fits and finishes that tell the customer, "Wow, this thing was put together with great attention to detail and love of craftsmanship."
What is the number-one challenge facing GM right now? It sounds like it's changing the company's perception.
Yes, that's exactly right, you've got it. We've got to. And it's through advertising. It's through unpaid communication, through speeches, through owner experiences, through word of mouth. We have got to get the truth out about where we are on quality and reliability versus the Japanese. And as I say, part of the communication is how the car is put together. Because, again, you can have a totally reliable car with crooked body gaps, a door that closes with a bad sound, cheap interior plastic parts, carpets that don't quite fit. None of those things are a reliability problem or something that you go to a dealer about, but they're not nice. And it's up to us, as we've done in the Malibu, and as we will do in all of the cars we launch, that all of the sights and sounds, materials, controls and everything will contribute to sending the message of quality, as opposed to detracting from it. But you're right, it's our biggest problem — the lingering reputation that American companies, General Motors in particular, cannot produce consistent quality the way the Japanese can."
Well, that's just it. The utter garbage that GM produced from the mid 70s thru the late 90s is going to be a really tough hurdle to overcome. Maybe they're producing fine cars right now - I don't know - but for about 30 years they've been producing junk, and I don't want to be a guinea pig for their current fleet.
I'll stick with my Japanese cars (whether they're built in Japan or over here), thank you very much.
It's also a regional thing too. I was in Chicago a couple of weeks ago and I could've gotten a '92 Honda Civic for $750, drove it back to DC (assuming that it didn't break down on the way) and sold it to some rube here for $2000. **** there'd be people lining up around the block to buy it for that price.
"I don't have an attitiude problem, you have a perception problem."
When I read GM's statements, that above saying comes to mind.
I used to be a serious Chevy guy ... owned a '68 Camaro convertible and totally bought into the bow-tie scene.
My brother owned a 1990 Chevy truck. I loved the look of it but the thing simply wasn't well made. Interior was cheap, maechanical trouble (cracked head, etc ..) plagued it and he got rid of it right at the 100,000 mile mark.
Years later, he bought a new '03 Trailblazer for his wife. He's already brought it back numerous times for a fan or similar noise and after the 3rd visit, they told him they couldn't fix but would give him a brand new one for $5,000 and the '03.
$5,000 depreciation in 14 months?
Thanks, but I'll stick with my "overpriced" Nissan Sentra SE-R SpecV. Cost me $16,500 and I have a 6-speed car which turns 15.5 second 1/4 mile times and (now) gets 30+ mpg.
They still own that Trailblazer. Not sure what's happened with the noise ... or what they'll get next.
Point is, I'd really like to buy American cars like the Camaro, new GTO, 'Vette, etc ... but I just have no confidence in them to be well made and hold together. I've got other automotive tales of woe with GM, Fords and Chrysler ... er, Daimler. Just don't have enough time to write them all down.
I do think some people are a little nuts when the over-value used Hondas, etc ... but if I saw one of those car overpriced, I simply wouldn't buy it.
--- Bror Jace
[ May 25, 2004, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: Bror Jace ]
When I read GM's statements, that above saying comes to mind.
I used to be a serious Chevy guy ... owned a '68 Camaro convertible and totally bought into the bow-tie scene.
My brother owned a 1990 Chevy truck. I loved the look of it but the thing simply wasn't well made. Interior was cheap, maechanical trouble (cracked head, etc ..) plagued it and he got rid of it right at the 100,000 mile mark.
Years later, he bought a new '03 Trailblazer for his wife. He's already brought it back numerous times for a fan or similar noise and after the 3rd visit, they told him they couldn't fix but would give him a brand new one for $5,000 and the '03.
$5,000 depreciation in 14 months?
They still own that Trailblazer. Not sure what's happened with the noise ... or what they'll get next.
Point is, I'd really like to buy American cars like the Camaro, new GTO, 'Vette, etc ... but I just have no confidence in them to be well made and hold together. I've got other automotive tales of woe with GM, Fords and Chrysler ... er, Daimler. Just don't have enough time to write them all down.
I do think some people are a little nuts when the over-value used Hondas, etc ... but if I saw one of those car overpriced, I simply wouldn't buy it.
--- Bror Jace
[ May 25, 2004, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: Bror Jace ]
GM made the "perception" problem worse for them with the way they rolled out their "Road to Redemption" ad campaign last year, IMO. They called it "... a unique effort to reach those consumers whose perceptions of GM are out of step with today's reality...". In reality, by admitting that for the past 20 - 30 years their cars weren't up to their competition, they in effect burned the customers who faithfully bought GM over that period trying to woo new customers.
This analysis does a much better job pointing out the irony and damage.
Edit - making image matters worse, GM has more recalls in the first quarter AFTER the ad (7.5 million) than in all of 2003.
[ May 25, 2004, 12:58 PM: Message edited by: darryld13 ]
Perhaps they also want more intelligent customers than they had in the past to go along with their better quality cars.
The best way to correct a "perception" of poor quality and lackluster products is to fix the underlying problems and let the "perception" take care of itself.
- Status
Similar threads
