Korean Cars

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Neither car is a Cadillac or even a midsize but he was suggesting the the Corolla was a better highway cruiser and more comfortable. I think it is just the opposite. The J-cars have a longer wheelbase and are slightly heavier and bigger. The Ecotec and 4T40 transmission is a great powertrain. To say that engine is noisy and harsh is just wacky talk. the 1.8 in the Corolla is a small buzzy engine.


I just want to add that the two I had as rentals were pre-Ecotec.

And my criticism of tiring over long rides pretty much applies to any car in that segment. J-Body, Corolla, Civic....etc. I definitely would not rank the Corolla any higher than the J-Body. The J-body at least had heavier doors, LOL. And generally more comfortable seats (IMHO).

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: grampi
You were lucky. Those things are junk....


Three pieces of what you so eloquently refer to above were used for many years here as basic transportation for TEENS! I doubt you have a clue, but it would seem that this type of driver is just a bit harder on their car than many.

All three sold for more than we paid and are still on the road today. A lot of cars would never have survived at all.

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: kb01
How did the car wear you out? No cruise control, out of alignment...?


Just uncomfortable to start with. Lots of annoyances and rattles that the older, higher mileage Prizm didn't have.

They both had no cruise control so that was a wash. It was highway driving, so the manual transmission Prizm really didn't do any worse than the automatic Cavalier from that perspective.

I realize much of what I'm saying is subjective. It's a matter of taste on many of things.
Other things were not subjective. Things such as rattles, cracked dashboards and sun visors that were falling apart. These should not have been worse on the 7 year newer and 210K mile less driven Cavalier if the Prizm still had an intact dash and working, original sun visors, etc.

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Neither car is a Cadillac or even a midsize but he was suggesting the the Corolla was a better highway cruiser and more comfortable. I think it is just the opposite. The J-cars have a longer wheelbase and are slightly heavier and bigger. The Ecotec and 4T40 transmission is a great powertrain. To say that engine is noisy and harsh is just wacky talk. the 1.8 in the Corolla is a small buzzy engine.


FWIW, my Prizm had the 1.6L, 4A-FE engine, not the more upscale, 7A-FE 1.8L engine, LOL.

I'm not sure the Corolla today would stack up as favorably. I do believe that generation of Corollas may have been the pinnacle of content. Later generations got the beam axle in back and probably less sound deadening.

So a 2001 Corolla may not have fared as favorably as the 1994 vintage.

 

[dishdude]

You guys can bash the J-body and Neon all you want, both cars got me through periods where I needed inexpensive, reliable transportation. I was young and didn't have extra funds for huge repair bills, and the Cavalier and Neons got me through HS, College and my first jobs with never letting me down.

Would I prefer to drive a Lexus LS400 or Lincoln on a road trip? Of course. But for a city driving or a commuter car, they couldn't be beat at the time.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Neither car is a Cadillac or even a midsize but he was suggesting the the Corolla was a better highway cruiser and more comfortable. I think it is just the opposite. The J-cars have a longer wheelbase and are slightly heavier and bigger. The Ecotec and 4T40 transmission is a great powertrain. To say that engine is noisy and harsh is just wacky talk. the 1.8 in the Corolla is a small buzzy engine.


The J-body was a "Cadillac" and it had a 1.8 for a year or two. A hideously underpowered 1.8 OHV engine

 

[mechanicx]

OK then the J-car must've been pretty good if it could be turned into a Cadillac. Obviously I meant a later model mid or full size Cadillac. That's part of the problem when someone says "Cavaliers are junk", ou never know if they're talking about a second experience of a 3rd owner '82 Cavalier that was abused and never repaired or maintained or what. The late model J-cars were every bit as good and more comfortable than comparable Civics and Corolla.

 

[javacontour]

Really, you never know? I didn't say my mom's car was a one-owner car, but that's what it was.

Some while sometimes you don't know, sometimes you do.

For a one-owner 30K mile 9 year old car, it was pretty pathetic.

I suspect it is comfortable for some. But you have to realize comfort is subjective.

A non-car example. My wife and I have a sleep number bed. Why? Because what is comfortable to her is painful to me, and vice versa. I have the firmness on my side cranked up to say 70-75 on a scale from 0-100. She is somewhere sub-50. It is literally a "down-hill run" from my side of the bed to hers.

Each of us would describe our sides as more comfortable than the other side.

So you cannot say that the J-car is more comfortable for all. It may be TOO SOFT for some, making it uncomfortable for them.

Personally, I think a Cadillac or similar would be very painful and/or numbing to drive for short or long distances.

I certainly don't feel comfortable with a car that only has 30K miles and is full of squeaks and rattles. I realize it's perception, but it's also the subjective nature of things.

In my case, the one-owner J-car did not stack up to the 2nd owner Prizm that was 7 or 8 years older and had 210K more miles.

Why the hate for the Prizm/Corolla. It was built by the UAW in Fremont, CA in the NUMMI plant. It doesn't get much more American made than that.

It's a shame GM pulled out of NUMMI, it was one of their highest quality production lines. But they stopped offering the Prizm and the Vibe and left the joint venture few years back when they created the "new GM"

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
OK then the J-car must've been pretty good if it could be turned into a Cadillac. Obviously I meant a later model mid or full size Cadillac. That's part of the problem when someone says "Cavaliers are junk", ou never know if they're talking about a second experience of a 3rd owner '82 Cavalier that was abused and never repaired or maintained or what. The late model J-cars were every bit as good and more comfortable than comparable Civics and Corolla.

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
OK then the J-car must've been pretty good if it could be turned into a Cadillac. Obviously I meant a later model mid or full size Cadillac. That's part of the problem when someone says "Cavaliers are junk", ou never know if they're talking about a second experience of a 3rd owner '82 Cavalier that was abused and never repaired or maintained or what. The late model J-cars were every bit as good and more comfortable than comparable Civics and Corolla.


One more thing. You are making a serious logical fallacy. Just because they put a Caddy badge on it doesn't mean it was good.

I think this thing was universally panned by auto reviewers. I don't think it sold well either.

Perhaps it was a really BAD Cadillac. Your argument would carry water if the car was nearly universally praised and blew out the sales.

Instead, I think it was largely a flop. So I wouldn't try to hang my argument on how good the J-Car platform is on GM sticking a Caddy badge on it, some more chrome, alloy wheels and offering some better upholstery.

Hey, don't get my wrong. My mom loves hers too. I'm glad it works for her. I'm glad it works for you. No need to defend your choices. I drove almost exclusively GM until I got the Prizm back in 2003. I even bought a Neon, because it was a FUN car to drive. Good power, handled well, and available with a stick AND 4 doors.

It was really like a little 4 door go-kart during it's heyday!

I wouldn't mind finding one to play with Auto-X'ing and keeping around as a winter beater. But not with a automatic. I had too many of those as rentals and the three speed automatic in the first generation Neon took a lot of the fun out of the drive.

 

[Vikas]

Huh, what does this have to with "Korean Cars"????

 

[jcwit]

Been wondering the same thing.

 

[javacontour]

Isn't that how most topics go around here, chasing rabbits down holes...

 

[mechanicx]

Javacontour call it subjective call it biased or whatever but I don't know how anyone could call a Corolla more comfortable than a J-car. I was just driving an '12 Corolla, the engine had no torque and was buzzy and jerky, hard cheap plastic every where with uncomfortable arm rest positioning, springy brake pedal hard to modulate that is typical of Japanese cars, no steering feedback whatsoever, stiffer spring rate than necesary that threw you around, hard seats with more bolstering than needed. It was not comfortable or smooth at all and less comfortable than most any GM car I've driven made in the last 30 years.

What does American and Japanese cars have to do with Korean cars? Well they are all competitors and the Korean cars aren't as good as the Japanese cars IMO.

I'd wager if took a test pool of average car shoppers and had them test drive American, Korean and Japanese cars without them know which was which a majority of them would prefer how the American car feels and is styled. Hyundai might sell based on styling. The media is selling these cars.

And unlike you with the Corolla I don't personally own a J-car. I just know a lot of people that did and spent a lot of time driving them. I undertand why GM choose the spring rate and shock valving, set contour etc that they do. You seem to be putting words in my mouth about the Cadillac Cimarron and suggesting I'm defending the Cavalier because I own one.

 

[kelpie]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Originally Posted By: grampi
The Cavalier and Corolla are at opposite ends of the spectrum; the Corolla is a well built car...the Cavalier was built for the sole purpose of allowing Chevy to meet their overall fleet EPA MPG requirement and nothing more...and it's obvious....


Pure nonsense.


Grampi, if that were the case, GM could just sell the Prizm and not sell the Cavalier to up their mileage figures. Looks to me like you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
OK then the J-car must've been pretty good if it could be turned into a Cadillac.


No. It wasn't a good car that could be turned into a Cadillac. And virtually the entire Cadillac lineup at that time was utter garbage. V8-6-4? Junk. HT-4100? Junk. Olds 350 disease-el? Junk. And then they tried to pawn off a Cavalier as a bonifide Cadillac. It was a terrible car. Universally regarded as one of the worst GMs ever.

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
The late model J-cars were every bit as good and more comfortable than comparable Civics and Corolla.

Even the latest Cavaliers suffered in seat comfort and ride quality vs the Civic and Corolla. I think the only Cavalier I ever sat in that had anything near lumbar support was the old 60° V6 Z24 seats, and they weren't that good. '96+ Cavalier seat backs seemed to have been designed with backpackers or Ninja Turtles in mind.

I recall my old Hyundai Scoupe having more comfortable and supportive seats than any J-body. Nicer upholstery too. For being saddled with a mediocre Mitsubishi 4G15 clone, it wasn't that bad of a car.

I think one of the very few reasons the Cavalier was so long lived was that the first cars out of GM/Korea (Daewoo) were so ugly.
If they had made a better looking car than the Pontiac LeMons, who knows...

. The LeMons had the Sunbird's OHC engine. I believe that if Daewoo had made an attractive coupe and sedan, with the OHC 2.0, and a value leader 1.6 variant there would have never been a Sunfire. And the bean-counters would have undoubtedly carried that over to the Cavalier line. Simplify it and glue on a bow-tie badge.

But who knows what Daewoo was thinking when they got the hideous Opel Kadett-E and were told to make a Pontiac. Perhaps if they had gotten a better Opel...early Vectra maybe.

GM/Korea has recently proven that they can design stylish cars.
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Isn't that how most topics go around here, chasing rabbits down holes...

It's the natural course of conversation amongst gearheads.

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
OK then the J-car must've been pretty good if it could be turned into a Cadillac.


No. It wasn't a good car that could be turned into a Cadillac. And virtually the entire Cadillac lineup at that time was utter garbage. V8-6-4? Junk. HT-4100? Junk. Olds 350 disease-el? Junk. And then they tried to pawn off a Cavalier as a bonifide Cadillac. It was a terrible car. Universally regarded as one of the worst GMs ever.


Utter garbage and junk is pretty extreme and simplistic. They weren't bad cars for their time period.

Quote:
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
The late model J-cars were every bit as good and more comfortable than comparable Civics and Corolla.

Even the latest Cavaliers suffered in seat comfort and ride quality vs the Civic and Corolla. I think the only Cavalier I ever sat in that had anything near lumbar support was the old 60° V6 Z24 seats, and they weren't that good. '96+ Cavalier seat backs seemed to have been designed with backpackers or Ninja Turtles in mind.

I recall my old Hyundai Scoupe having more comfortable and supportive seats than any J-body. Nicer upholstery too. For being saddled with a mediocre Mitsubishi 4G15 clone, it wasn't that bad of a car.


Well I just disagree but go ahead and keep stating your opinion if you want. I wouldn't say the Cavalier had great seats but they weren't that uncomfortable. The Sunfire's seats were just fine.


Quote:
I think one of the very few reasons the Cavalier was so long lived was that the first cars out of GM/Korea (Daewoo) were so ugly. If they had made a better looking car than the Pontiac LeMons, who knows...

. The LeMons had the Sunbird's OHC engine. I believe that if Daewoo had made an attractive coupe and sedan, with the OHC 2.0, and a value leader 1.6 variant there would have never been a Sunfire. And the bean-counters would have undoubtedly carried that over to the Cavalier line. Simplify it and glue on a bow-tie badge.

But who knows what Daewoo was thinking when they got the hideous Opel Kadett-E and were told to make a Pontiac. Perhaps if they had gotten a better Opel...early Vectra maybe.

GM/Korea has recently proven that they can design stylish cars.


I don't know why you always bring up Daewoo and Opel and other relatively rare and obscure models from GM's foreign operations as if anyone cared about them. The J-car was originally a domestic designed in the early 80's and Pontiac had the Sunbird which became the Sunfire. Pontiacs generally were better. It's amazing what a different a tire and possible spring, damper, and other difference can do to the same platform.

 

[Spazdog]

Really? What was good about the HT-4100? Or the V8-6-4? Or the Olds diesel? None were reliable. Really troubling for the V8-6-4 because it started out as a reliable engine before the poor attempt at multiple displacement rendered it unreliable.
Were any of the Cadillac engines listed more reliable than the CFI 302 or BMW diesel that Lincoln was using?
It was an abyssmal time for Cadillac. Horrible reliability in the "real" Cadillacs and a Cavalier posing as a Cadillac. If you were lucky you got a Buick 4.1 V6 or an Olds 307 V8 in your Cadillac Fleetwood. It's a lot of car to lug around with such low output engines and they were "corporate", not real Cadillac engines but they were robust.


I'll agree that nobody cared about the Daewoo Pontiac LeMons. But I wouldn't call it "rare". I brought it up in the spirit of the original post. It was a Korean car, based on the Opel Kadett-E. (which itself was a very ugly car). I was just wondering if GM Korea/Daewoo had done a better job of styling,(which they have certainly proven themselves capable of recently) if it would have rendered the Sunbird obsolete.

 

[jcwit]

I owned a Cavelier for a few years a decade or more ago, never realized it was a bad car. Oh well.

 

[buster]

Is there any data out there on the quality of Korean cars? I'm sure there is.

I think they've come along way. Not only is the quality significantly better than years past, the designs are very nice. My sister chose a Tuscon over a CR-V. The CR-V is probably a higher quality vehicle, but there was more overall value in the Hyundai. It's pretty nice too. Their warranties are good and most people buy new cars ever few years.....well used too. lol

Corlla's and Civics have always been light years ahead of Caveliers in overall quality. You're talking about Sony vs Radioshack. I can't believe the U.S. automakers neglected the compact car segment and let Toyota and Honda dominate.

 

[The_Jeff]

Originally Posted By: buster


Corlla's and Civics have always been light years ahead of Caveliers in overall quality. You're talking about Sony vs Radioshack. I can't believe the U.S. automakers neglected the compact car segment and let Toyota and Honda dominate.


It's my theory that the Cavalier existed to shame buyers into something midsized from GM and profitable. Instead people bought corollas. The basic cavalier powertrain design was solid and it could keep ticking like the rest of the fleet but the lousy paint, cheap plastic, and 4/5 Camaro interior meant you had to really like GM, or a bargain.

(This arrogance is here again with Ford thinking former Ranger owners will buy F150s and not Colorados or Japanese trucks.)

(Yes, I really said Camaro interior. I had a 97 Cavalier coupe and it seemed gussied up to pretend to be a camaro. I thought it was kinda cool, but so would Joe Dirt.

)