arbilab
Well-known member
'no safety of altitude...'
By the same token, you can't just park a malfunctioning aircraft and call AAA.
By the same token, you can't just park a malfunctioning aircraft and call AAA.
What The Hell Is Going On Here?
- Thread starter dirtybuck
- Start date
Help Support :
Rick,
My point was only that a disaster can happen in seconds in a car, there are lots of nearby objects that can be struck in milliseconds. A pilot may have a lot more time (excepting landing and take off) to react to a problem, hence the safety of altitude. I will agree I would much rather have the engine stall in my car then when I'm in flight
It would be very helpful if every driver had time in the simulator to cover various failure scenarios though. Pretty unrealistic though, we have to deal with some pretty low lowest common denominators here.
My point was only that a disaster can happen in seconds in a car, there are lots of nearby objects that can be struck in milliseconds. A pilot may have a lot more time (excepting landing and take off) to react to a problem, hence the safety of altitude. I will agree I would much rather have the engine stall in my car then when I'm in flight
It would be very helpful if every driver had time in the simulator to cover various failure scenarios though. Pretty unrealistic though, we have to deal with some pretty low lowest common denominators here.
whirlcool
Well-known member
The ignition switch isn't locking the column... Now THAT would be recall-worthy!
That has been reported in a few of the cases. The key switched all the way off locking the steering column.
Chrysler just issued a recall on some of their models for ignition switch problems. I wonder if they are using the same supplier GM did?
Now that we know there are problems with ignition switches in cars it should be common sense for people to check to ensure the switch is on if their car dies while in motion. It takes about 1 second to do. They ought to make a public service announcement about this.
That has been reported in a few of the cases. The key switched all the way off locking the steering column.
Chrysler just issued a recall on some of their models for ignition switch problems. I wonder if they are using the same supplier GM did?
Now that we know there are problems with ignition switches in cars it should be common sense for people to check to ensure the switch is on if their car dies while in motion. It takes about 1 second to do. They ought to make a public service announcement about this.
arbilab
Well-known member
Turning Chi-a-nese I really think so
Are all our engineers turning Chi-a-nese? I mean, if you can't make a 4-position switch what CAN you do? Well, you can bullshxt about it and make it a corporate basketball for a decade until Congress calls you one day asking 'what the hell is wrong with you people?'. Pretty much what happened. GM has recalled numerically more cars in this half year than they MAKE in a WHOLE year. Can't blame 13 (actually more than 50 but media uses GM's statistic of 13 so they won't get sued) dead shxtty drivers for that.
I'm not giving aircraft a walk. Asiana flew a perfectly-operational aircraft into a pre-runway obstruction almost exactly a year ago for no other reason than the pilots were using their brains for seatcushions. Nice way of saying heads inexcusably up their asses.
Which is the same thing the whole GM engineering chain did with this switch thing. Except instead of minutes in the Asiana case, GM did it for the better part of a decade.
Are all our engineers turning Chi-a-nese? I mean, if you can't make a 4-position switch what CAN you do? Well, you can bullshxt about it and make it a corporate basketball for a decade until Congress calls you one day asking 'what the hell is wrong with you people?'. Pretty much what happened. GM has recalled numerically more cars in this half year than they MAKE in a WHOLE year. Can't blame 13 (actually more than 50 but media uses GM's statistic of 13 so they won't get sued) dead shxtty drivers for that.
I'm not giving aircraft a walk. Asiana flew a perfectly-operational aircraft into a pre-runway obstruction almost exactly a year ago for no other reason than the pilots were using their brains for seatcushions. Nice way of saying heads inexcusably up their asses.
Which is the same thing the whole GM engineering chain did with this switch thing. Except instead of minutes in the Asiana case, GM did it for the better part of a decade.
If I were to buy a new car today the Kia Soul would be one of those at the top of the list.
Although the new Jeep Renegade looks interesting.
I've have very good luck with my '99 Chrysler 300M which I got new. Biggest repair so far has been when the transmission speed sensor went out and it kept on stalling on right hand turns. Luckily I limped it home, took about an hour to diagnose it on the internet, about another hour to locate and pick up a new sensor at the dealer, and 30 minutes to install it myself.
GM's reliability record for the past decade appears to be troublesome. They say some companies are too big to fail. I wonder if GM is too big to succeed.
Although the new Jeep Renegade looks interesting.
I've have very good luck with my '99 Chrysler 300M which I got new. Biggest repair so far has been when the transmission speed sensor went out and it kept on stalling on right hand turns. Luckily I limped it home, took about an hour to diagnose it on the internet, about another hour to locate and pick up a new sensor at the dealer, and 30 minutes to install it myself.
GM's reliability record for the past decade appears to be troublesome. They say some companies are too big to fail. I wonder if GM is too big to succeed.
xraytech
Well-known member
I may be in the minority here, but as a long term GM owner I wouldn't think twice about buying GM. I've decided my next car purchase will be yet another Buick, which I've decided will be an Enclave.
dustin92
Well-known member
If I was to buy a *new* car, it would likely be the Kia Soul as well. I've liked them since they came out a few years back. In Green of course.
I've had extraordinary service from my 1994 Geo Prizm (a rebadged Toyota Corolla). At 20 years young, and with 262,000 miles on it, I've put very little money into repairs. I'm still on the original clutch!
No major parts have ever been replaced. It runs like a top and doesn't use oil. Had I known I'd keep the thing this long, I'd have taken care of rust spots, etc.
I miss the Geo nameplate, because it was a way I could purchase a Toyota at a GM dealership. I'd gladly buy one again. GM closed our little burg's dealership in the economic downturn of 2009. We have only a Ford dealership. I try to buy 'local' whenever possible, but I'm not a Ford person by nature.
I drove a 2013 Ford Fusion (rental) over 600 miles last fall and was impressed with it. Handled well; interior was quiet; seat was comfortable. However...(there's that word, again) I really want another compact car (easy to park; plenty of walk-around room in my garage). A friend bought a 2013 Focus and really liked it for a few months. Then the problems with electronics and transmission started. It's been in the shop several times (still covered by warranty) but that doesn't bode well for the long-term. If Ford can get those problems under control, I'll buy a Focus in a heartbeat.
Otherwise, I'll take my business to Mankato, MN and get a Corolla.
GM history: My first car was a 1969 Olds Delta 88 (purchased from my stepfather when I turned sixteen in 1975)---great car. Followed that with a 1982 Cavalier which was an absolute nightmare; one problem after another. Then came my beloved '86 Camaro Z28. What a gorgeous car it was, but dad recurring problems with AC, brakes, and exhaust system. That led to the Mighty Geo, which has been almost miraculously reliable. Still drive it 75 mph down the interstate, although I accelerate gently and go easy on the brakes these days.
No major parts have ever been replaced. It runs like a top and doesn't use oil. Had I known I'd keep the thing this long, I'd have taken care of rust spots, etc.
I miss the Geo nameplate, because it was a way I could purchase a Toyota at a GM dealership. I'd gladly buy one again. GM closed our little burg's dealership in the economic downturn of 2009. We have only a Ford dealership. I try to buy 'local' whenever possible, but I'm not a Ford person by nature.
I drove a 2013 Ford Fusion (rental) over 600 miles last fall and was impressed with it. Handled well; interior was quiet; seat was comfortable. However...(there's that word, again) I really want another compact car (easy to park; plenty of walk-around room in my garage). A friend bought a 2013 Focus and really liked it for a few months. Then the problems with electronics and transmission started. It's been in the shop several times (still covered by warranty) but that doesn't bode well for the long-term. If Ford can get those problems under control, I'll buy a Focus in a heartbeat.
Otherwise, I'll take my business to Mankato, MN and get a Corolla.
GM history: My first car was a 1969 Olds Delta 88 (purchased from my stepfather when I turned sixteen in 1975)---great car. Followed that with a 1982 Cavalier which was an absolute nightmare; one problem after another. Then came my beloved '86 Camaro Z28. What a gorgeous car it was, but dad recurring problems with AC, brakes, and exhaust system. That led to the Mighty Geo, which has been almost miraculously reliable. Still drive it 75 mph down the interstate, although I accelerate gently and go easy on the brakes these days.
Reliability.
I've had my 1987 Volvo since 1999 and just drove it on a 1,600 mile road trip with minimal issues. Volvos of today, however, bear NOTHING in common with Volvos of my era, so I cannot attest to the reliability of current production models. My Volvo had required a fair bit of maintenance and repair, but at 27 years old and over 152,000 miles, I expect that and accept it.
I had a 2002 Saab 9-3. I drove it for 7 years and found it to be comfortable, fun to drive, versatile, and it delivered supurb fuel economy. It was also terribly unreliable, requiring 4-5,000 dollars at the shop every year, paid for by the warranty company. I sold it when the warranty expired. Most of the problems were with the electronics, for which I blame GM. Reliability aside, the Saab was fantastic.
Now, I also have a 2008 Honda Element. It's not as comfortable as the Saab, but it will hold major appliances with ease. Thus far, it has required only routine maintenance and not a single unscheduled repair! I've experienced Honda and I can say it is everything it is cracked up to be! I'd gladly buy another, but I see no reason why replacing my Element would be necessary.
Dave
I've had my 1987 Volvo since 1999 and just drove it on a 1,600 mile road trip with minimal issues. Volvos of today, however, bear NOTHING in common with Volvos of my era, so I cannot attest to the reliability of current production models. My Volvo had required a fair bit of maintenance and repair, but at 27 years old and over 152,000 miles, I expect that and accept it.
I had a 2002 Saab 9-3. I drove it for 7 years and found it to be comfortable, fun to drive, versatile, and it delivered supurb fuel economy. It was also terribly unreliable, requiring 4-5,000 dollars at the shop every year, paid for by the warranty company. I sold it when the warranty expired. Most of the problems were with the electronics, for which I blame GM. Reliability aside, the Saab was fantastic.
Now, I also have a 2008 Honda Element. It's not as comfortable as the Saab, but it will hold major appliances with ease. Thus far, it has required only routine maintenance and not a single unscheduled repair! I've experienced Honda and I can say it is everything it is cracked up to be! I'd gladly buy another, but I see no reason why replacing my Element would be necessary.
Dave
One cost benefit the Japanese manufacturers had over the Big 3 is that they outsourced much of their manufacturing of parts, whereas the Big 3 built most everything in-house.
When the Big 3 figured this out, they began divesting themselves of their parts divisions and began outsourcing parts. The problem is how they did it. The Japanese built relationships with their suppliers, treating them like extended family. Whereas the Big 3 played a game called "screw the supplier." All of the Big 3 did this, and they developed the worst reputation among suppliers.
It is really no surprise they got crappy parts as a result. Bloomberg did a decent article about GM's ignition debacle, at the link.
When the Big 3 figured this out, they began divesting themselves of their parts divisions and began outsourcing parts. The problem is how they did it. The Japanese built relationships with their suppliers, treating them like extended family. Whereas the Big 3 played a game called "screw the supplier." All of the Big 3 did this, and they developed the worst reputation among suppliers.
It is really no surprise they got crappy parts as a result. Bloomberg did a decent article about GM's ignition debacle, at the link.
whirlcool
Well-known member
This GM ignition switch problem reminds me of the Ford Pinto gas tank problem. Ford knew that in a rear end collision that the Pinto gas tanks may explode, but they didn't want to spend the extra $3.25 per car for a bracket to prevent that from happening. Instead they went with the "acceptable losses" method. They figured 13 people would die each year in Pinto crashes, and it would be cheaper to pay off those families than pay for the bracket for each car. I wonder if GM Risk Management did the same thing with the ignition lock?
