st-bum wrote:
Yep, just like the Republican lobbyists who forced the state
legislatures into promising benefits 30 friggen years ago that I have
to pay now.

Its not about pensions. Its about greed. Its about some fat ass CEO
sitting there pulling down 4.3 million dollars while he slashes 30,000
jobs from the dole.

Delphi should thank the UAW for letting them back down on their
deadline. The UAW could kill Delphi dead

"Learning Richard" <learningrichard (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

There are a couple of reasons for this:

Toyota only sold 316 Land Cruisers in 1961. I don't have the sales figures
for 1963 but the volume certainly was not the same as the Impala at the
time.

At the time, Toyotas were a low-cost alternative to main stream U.S. brands
and were not considered collectibles by many auto enthusiasts so not many
have been restored or even maintained.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

GM makes junk. That's why they hold so little of their purchase price
after a few years. The market speaks. It's worth more than random
statements by you.

The UAW "won't back down". Good. I hope they don't. I hope they
drive GM into the graveyard and then we'll see what happens to all the
fat union contracts and all the fat union contributions to democrat
politicians.

In article <gmQif.6970$wf.2134 (AT) newsread3 (DOT) news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote:

There were certainly reliability problems with certain GM parts.
One part I remember was their water pumps. They would usually fail by
leaking by about 20,000 miles, yet the rebuilt auto shop replacements
never failed me for the next 70,000 miles.
Imagine that, the rebuilt parts were much better than the original
equipment parts.
GM's problem is just taking too low a bidder on parts or making them too
cheap themselves.
I've not had a water pump fail with any other car.

Ray O wrote:
sure, but... did you get my main point?

<lane.walker (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

Which point was yours? I didn't notice a previous post from lane walker in
this thread.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

Ray O wrote:
oops that was me.

My point was that uh... oh yeah, that the USA has been at it a helluva
lot longer than anywhere else first of all... and secondly, we birthed
the auto market as it is today. Yeah. That was it. And hopefully the
same brotherhood that turned out those 63 Impalas are going to get
their voices back so we can arrive at a solution that doesn't favor the
crooks in the executive suites.

"Learning Richard" <learningrichard (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

Some background on me... Although I worked for a Japanese car manufacturer,
I grew up with American iron and have a fondness for 1960s models. The fact
that may 1960's era cars are still on the road does not necessarily mean
that they are great cars or durable. Although some of those cars still have
their original engine, transmission, and body parts, my guess is that the
majority of those vehicles have had those pieces replaced or rebuilt unless
it was one of those cars that lived much of its life parked in a garage or
barn. I loved my 1968 Mustang because of the way it could smoke the tires
and kick you in the rear when you popped the clutch, but realistically, a
modern Hyundai probably handles better, brakes better, burns cleaner, and
will need less maintenance and repair than that car.

A 1963 Impala probably was more reliable and durable than a 1963 Corona. A
comparison of 43 year old vehicles is not a valid reason to make statements
about the quality, reliability, or durability of current products from those
auto makers unless neither of those companies made any changes in vehicle
design, materials, and production methods since that time.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

"Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote


No, more like an exception. In a typical week I drive 500 miles. I see a lot
of cars. And I never see a generation 1 or generation 2 Camry. That doesn't
mean they don't exist, but it does imply there are not many left in my area.
The roads around my area are clogged with 0 to 6 year old Camry, and older
ones were plentiful when new. They just seem to disappear after they hit 7
years old. My neighbor's Camry is one of the older ones I see and it is a
pathetic looking vehicle for one that is less than 10 years old. My 14 year
old F150 is in better shape. The Cressida we owned literally started falling
apart when it was 6 years old. The paint looked like crap, the "black" trim
turned silver, the interior plastic started warping and fading. At the time
I thought it was an outstandingly bad car, but from what I see these days,
it was a typical Toyota product - dull, over priced, well assembled, third
rate design that doesn't hold up. Of the big three Japanese brands (Nissan,
Honda, Toyota), I'd rate Toyotas best at initial build quality and worst at
long term quality.

Ed

"Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote


Hey I actually saw two generation 2 Camrys today - at the same time. One was
dead on the side of the road in the process of being towed. The other was
moving under it's own power with only a minor smoke screen behind it. Both
looked like crap - dull and peeling paint and faded plastic trim. The
plastic bumper finishing stuff on the mobile one was in the process of
falling off. Oh what a feeling, but at least one was Moving Forward (but not
for long from the looks of it).

Ed