Is Cadillac this bad???

[Duffman77]

My dad had a 84 ponitac 6000 with the 2.5. It eventually went 300,000+km in my sisters hands until it got hit in an accident. Thing was hard to start in the winter and always sounded like a diesel when running. When I need to cite a POS from the big 3, I always come back with Ford Tempo, Pontiac 6000, Chrysler K car. All equally cheap, equally bad cars that were a result of the dark ages of late 70s early 80s bad engineering and production.

 

[ikeepmychevytoo]

Actually Pontiac 6000 would cost close to a BMW 5-25 or Audi 5000 when loaded with matching options. Engineering wise I wish all the cars in the price range would get similar attention. I accept they lack in the detail department or may present somewhat higher "lemon" frequency but in the design stage they used to put first things first back then. Nowadays, they seem to have flying colors on showroom engineering and skimp on the suspension, steering, brakes and such for what the technology could offer.

 

[Duffman77]

Same as a BMW? I didnt think we were talking about the same car so I did some research:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac_6000
You are right I guess. Anyways the one we had was a wagon. 2.5 w/3speed auto. Options: A/T/C and cassette, hardly BMW material. I guess I confused citation with celebrity. I think the citation was actually a better car of the two, but I am sure there is a ton of common components between the two.

 

[ikeepmychevytoo]

The marketing models have cahanged since the 80's. Back then I don't recall too much "price-range", it was seemingly all about mid-size, full-size and compacts. This was, I guess, skewing the comparisons between the continents. You could buy a stripped down cheap full-size US car but never a European.

I think they were satisfactory on the handling+ride basis. I haven't seen a car offering better handling without sacrificing the ride or that almost foolproof steering, thats why I think they haven't left grounds uncovered in the design stage. They were intended just for this I guess, never been sporty, handling icon or "drifters" ideal car, but an award for the lazy drivers, or long distance riders such as me.

They like Citation more today... I guess that's because they are faster with the same v6, less refined IMO. BTW, early iron-on-iron vee sixes don't have those head-gasket problems, they were fairly robust.

 

[gedcruise]

Actually, in the early 'eighties, the Mercedes W123, 5 series BMW and Jaguar XJ-6 all offered a better ride/handling experience than anything else you could buy. There were also a handful of grey market Citroens, which were remarkable cars.
Now, GM did remarkable development on some sow's ear platforms. For example, the rudimentary Chevy II platform was morphed into the really good mid 'seventies Trans Am and the original Seville. Really pleasant cars, built on a really basic platform.
I drove a number of both (I was repossesing them). The T/A was a far more plesant car then the concurrent Corvette, had equal cornering limits, and was virtually as fast. The Seville was no Mercedes, but was quiet, and rode well. Most of it's buyers, like most MB W115 or W123 buyers, would never explore it's limits.
The '77 GM B-bodies were also very good. A Chev Caprice equipped with F-41 suspension was a worthy adversary for any sedan then available from anywhere. My family had a couple of them.

 

[Auto-Union]

Cutlass Sierra