Thoughts on New Cars
 

Driving about, as I do, I have finally had opportunity to see a few on-road examples of the new cars.

Ford made the new Mustang look so much like the classic that old guys can get excited. It looks like a cross between the retro and modern technology.

The Dodge Challenger is scary! It looks like time-warp from the 70's.

At first glance it catches the eye as something different but the more I stare the less I am impressed with the Camero.
Chevrolet chose to head off in an entirely different direction than retro, but it looks like something else, like it wanted to be a Dodge Charger...maybe.

The goo-goo, waa-waa's won't understand the appeal of a Hummer, because they think it right and proper that everything be homogeneous,
but I have an itch that says there is a market for something distinct.

As much as I've always been anti-Ford, I gotta admit the new Mustangs look good. And I've seen some killer drivetrains too (big blowers etc.)...

I have a feeling I'd be disappointed by the new Challenger. It's a cool-looking car, but I have this feeling that once I was inside I would find it very "plastic". haven't had a first-hand experience yet, so I'm still hopeful.

-BC

the camaro looks a lot like the new cadillacs that have come out recently. I am a big fan of the challenger but the fact that you can get one for 22k starting out means that everyone and their neighbor COULD have one. that takes a little from the allure, at least for me. the same can be said about the other two.

I saw one behind a house the other day and could easily say that the house wasn't worth much more than what they were asking for the really upgraded version of the car. I didn't realize that they made one with a V6 at the time. did some research and found out that you can get one cheap (relatively speaking)

my cars run pretty good right now so I am going to wait mine out. I would also need a vehicle with a descent back seat and my hunch is that none of these cars would accomedate a car seat (not the rear facing ones anyway) I have a hard enought time in the cavalier with that.

I think that was a reference to cry-babies.

Anyway... My ideal "retro" car, which will probably never get into production now seeing as its been a concept car for almost 9 years now is the Buick Blackhawk.

https://robson.m3rlin.org/cars/wp-con...cept-_2000.jpg

Styled after the Buicks of the 30's & 40's. I'm a sucker for Buicks, just about any model/year will make me happy, but I'm especially fond of the Buicks from the late 40's - 70's.

How the hell do you fit in Tempos? Those are the most claustrophobic car I've ever had to drive.

I really like the Challenger. It's got to be one of the few new cars I'd actually try and justify buying myself. As it is though, until they get one like this one I won't buy it.

https://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezwe...mage_large.jpg

I like all 3 new pony cars, aesthetically speaking. The Camaro was designed to be very polarizing; most people either hate it or love it.

All my life I've wanted a Camaro, and the new one looks great to me, plus it delivers pretty impressive numbers. The base V6 6MT model, around $23,000, produces the similar EPA FE numbers to my little VW Rabbit, far better acceleration, RWD, and weighs more (which I like). I haven't had the opportunity to sit in one so I have no idea if I'd be comfortable.

The Challenger is even heavier than the Camaro, does not match its EPA FE rating or its speed; and the V6 is not available with a manual transmission. That would make it a no-go for me unless we're talking about winning the lottery.

The Mustang can't match the Camaro's EPA FE rating either. I don't know much about it, but at least its V6 can be had with a manual transmission.

I guess I'm a GM guy.

The Challenger is absolutely huge. 4,000+ lbs does not a sports car make. I like the proportions, but it looks like it is built on a 5/4 scale. That's the problem with building it on a (slightly) chopped version of the 300C/Charger platform.

The Camaro has great engines, but it is portly, too. 3,800 lbs for the SS. And for such a large car (not as big as the Challenger, but still dwarfs the Mustang), there is not much space in the back or trunk.

I am NOT a Ford fan. However, the Mustang gets it. It is lighter, has less power, and can still run with the Dodge and Chevy in a straight line. Its lightness pays off in quick handling transitions and in braking. The Mustang beat a Camaro and Challenger in a recent Car and Driver comparison test.

All three of them are too big and bulky for me. Bring back the Prelude!

If they want to repop the Pony cars of yesteryear, I would want a 1970 340 Duster, which weighed about 2800 pounds, even with the old basher bumpers.

The new breed has no appeal to me whatsoever.

Guess I am not that nostalgic.

If it was a Chevy, I would want a 67 Nova.

The original Mustang weighed 2395 pounds and cost $2395.

Thats 105 less than an 06 Corolla.

Even better would be a 240Z with a modern 4 valve, twin cam, aluminum engine putting out about 300 HP in a 2500 pound car.

regards
gary

The new Mustang reminds me of Marvin the paranoid android, you can imagine it saying "An engine the size of a planet and you make me fetch groceries *sigh*"

I'm only 5'10" so most cars fit me well. I absolutely love the way it feels to be behind the wheel of an RX-8 but who wants to own a 1.3L that barely gets into the 20s and has no torque!

The secret to Mazda rotaries (I've had 3 of them) is to wind them out to redline...they pick up power as they pick up revs.

Of course, they were the most fun when gas was 27 cents a gallon...

Is "20s" there referring to drag racing time, or MPG?

Didn't do the 70s or 80s over this side of the pond so never been in those. I guess my angles are all different, I'm close to 6'1". Had to use a 4dr Tempo for a while doing a longish commute loop morning and evening, couldn't tilt the seat far enough back because the kids needed somewhere to put their legs. So I was blinded in the rear quarter by the B pillar, my shins were only a hair off the dash, was using the pedals with the sides of my feet, and was always bruising knees and elbows trying to steer. My legs would be going numb after half an hour and after a couple of months being in the beast 2 hours a day I got cellulitis in my right leg. The rear view mirror was in the middle of the road from my POV, and I whacked my head off the door frame and roof a few times going through construction or on rough roads... On top of that, I was holding the ATX together with lucas and willpower and couldn't get more than 30mpg out of the thing, more often it was around 25-27, and it handled like a plate of jello. Damn thing made my Escort feel airy and cavernous and like driving a sports car.

OK so I went somewhere and I'm thinking about this topic. I get out the tape measure and:

1) Legs to dash: 4"
2) Legs to steering wheel: 2"
3) Top of pointy head to roof: 2 3/4"

Hmmm.... OK, so how does that compare to a full-size extra-cab F150?

1) Legs to dash: 4 1/2"
2) Legs to steering wheel: 2 3/4"
3) Top of pointy head to roof: 2 1/2"

So even though sitting more upright in the truck, clearances from carcass to interior stuff are roughly the same, with plenty of room to move around in either vehicle.

Oh- I'm 3" taller than you.

The only conclusion to reach is that you are screwed together funny.

Ummm... wait. Yes, you are right. Tempos are awful. Anyone that has one, PM me, I'll help you dispose of it.

Too late, it went to the crusher when it was worth $300 in scrap (And the ATX finally let go, "coincidentally" after a "professional" touched it.)

This was a '94 LX, maybe they added extra crap??? It was unpossible for me to get in it unless the seat was slid all the way back.

Maybe it's in the legs and arms, I have to buy 34 inseam, and I can't buy shirts with arms long enough unless there's room for 2 of me in the body (Then the shoulders come halfway to my elbows, but the cuffs are on my actual wrists)

Edit: Also wear size 12s, had to have my heel well back or I was hooking up my toe on the pedal linkages and underdash wiring.

People come in all shapes and sizes. I'm difficult to fit into a car and I'm not all that large. If I don't fit right, after more than a few minutes of driving I'll be achy; my elbows and knees will be in pain from pushing against the car, and my joints will ache from it too.

It could be a huge spacious vehicle, but if the layout isn't right, I won't fit and that's the end of that for me.

Tempo Owner 4/1999-11/2000. This one was mine: https://www.carsurvey.org/reviews/ford/tempo/r16104/

People either love or hate their Tempos. I hated mine. I have heard that there were two assembly plants, and that Tempos built in one location were bulletproof, while cars built in the other were junk. I guess I know where mine was built.

We knew the previous owner of the Tempo. The owner was the mother of someone my dad worked with. The car had 47K miles on it and had been garage its entire life. It had NEVER been wrecked.

I spent all the money I had (I was 16) trying to figure out why it stalled every time the car came to a stop or the brakes were applied suddenly. It turns out it was the throttle position sensor. I did not figure that out until after I had replaced everything else. As for the other stuff, it was not uncommon.

Motor mounts were a common failure on Tempos. I was told that by two different garages when I had them replaced (the first time for one motor mount and the transmission mount, and the second time at a different shop to have another motor mount replaced). The exhaust was replaced by a factory exhaust. The exhaust was not loud... just the sound of the motor revving up to 3,500 RPM on the highway (3-speed auto) sounded like a vacuum cleaner.

The battery cables rotted out. The coil and module had to be replaced. I also replaced the whole distributer. The rear speakers quit. The dome light caught on fire. The radio caught on fire. The rear shocks both went bad (the car would hit the bump stops over moderate dips). The right front tie rod went out. The left front lower ball joint was replaced. The vents leaked rainwater. The headliner sagged. The interior trim broke off. The right side power door locks went up and down on their own and killed the battery until I pulled the fuse. I went through several power window motors, gears, and switches. The trunk latch broke (which I did properly fix once I had the chance). The inside hood latch broke. The headlights had loose connections, so that they would only come on when I got out of the car and hit them. The wipers would not work on high, only low and intermittant. The horn started blasting one day and would not shut off (it was not winter, either). The alternator locked up, causing it to throw the belt. The power steering pump went out. The master cylinder sprung a leak (I've never even HEARD of this happening to any other car). The driver's seat came apart.

How much of the above can be explained by poor maintenance? Lack of maintenance was not the issue. I don't remember having the same problem twice. Once I fixed something, it stayed fixed. I did a tuneup twice in 13,000 miles and changed the oil every 2,000 miles. This was my first car, and I took care of it. I did not drive it hard. I did not drive aggressively until I bought my Accord. No tickets in my Tempo.

I did not mention problems that were caused by service issues. When the car started running on 3 (and finally 2) cylinders, it was discovered that the distributer was not tightened after it was replaced, and it screwed up the timing. This was not the car's fault, and I did not mention it. The windshield had been replaced before I got it, but it was not the car's fault (I mentioned it in my article because I was young and angry when I wrote it). The rear view mirror broke off two or three times, but it was likely due to the fact that I kept regluing it when it was too cold. Not the car's fault.

To theclencher;140317, I am disappointed. I kept my post honest and fact-based. I said that people tend to be Love it-or-Hate it with Tempos. The other posts on the website back that up. You responded with an attack without knowing all, or any, of the facts. The car was not a beat-up POS as you attest, but a garage-kept car with all service records and no accidents. The "shoddy painting of a backyard hack?" It had factory paint, right down to the orange peel. "If it shakes bad at idle, something's broken and you failed to fix it." Or, it could be that it was a big 2.3L 4-cylinder with no balance shafts and an automatic, causing the engine to strain while in drive with the brake on. That's why Tempo automatics were so hard on motor mounts. Manuals did not have the same problem. 1.9L motors did not have the problem to the same extent.

Regarding the acceleration and mileage, I did my best. The car could not chirp the tires from a start, and the best mileage I got was 24 mpg on a tank (all highway at 65 mph using cruise and no A/C). I tried two different kinds of wires and plugs. I cleaned out the throttle body. I had the timing checked. Nothing had any effect.

"If the exhaust system fell off and you didn't put a decent one on, how can you then complain about the noise?" I replaced the exhaust with a factory system.

"You sound like someone that doesn't know jack about cars." I was 16 when I bought the thing and only owned it for a year and a half. Of course I didn't know a whole lot when I bought it. I learned as I went. If the job was too big for me to handle with a Haynes manual, then I took it to a garage. "Couldn't open the hood?" The hood latch broke. If you actually read the article, you would see that the dealership could not figure out how to open the hood. In order to open the hood, I had to crawl under the front bupmer and stick a screwdriver into a blind hole and push it against the undeside of the hood latch. It took me a few hours of fiddlign around before I figured it out. Not everyone has that much spare time. "Couldn't properly fix a trunk latch?" I fixed it. I just had to figure out how to adjust it. "Change oil every 2000 miles? WTF?" Why is this a bad thing?

Idiot.

as for the rx-8, I think the 20s refers to mileage. I have heard they are horribly inefficient. I would also think that it would do better than that on a qtr as most compact cars are in the 18s or better. also remember that this is mazdas sports car, it wouldn't be that slow.

for that small of a package, it get unbelievable horsepower (at 8k or so)

*edit*

mazda RX-8
6 speed manual
1.3 liter RENESIS 2-rotor rotary
232 @ 8,500 (hp)
159 @ 5,500 (tq)
9000 (redline)
10.0 : 1 (compression ratio)
16 / 22 (mileage city/highway)

I found a web site that said 1/4 mile time of 15.010 for a 2007 but take that for what it's worth here is the site https://www.dragtimes.com/Mazda-RX-8-Timeslip-12238.html

Your comment on MPG is the problem Mazda has always had with the Rotary.
The 1.3 c.c. engine generates more power than engines 3 and 4 times as large but that is ignored. The comparison should not be by cubic inches but by Horse Power.
That they use the Rotary in small cars has added to the perception; people equate small car with good gas mileage.

I've heard that fuel consumption with the Wankel worsens with life as uneven seal wear takes its toll.

By the way, I was at the Buick GS Nationals when that car was debuted. 2001 I think. A VERY impressive car all the way around - complete with a Fuel Injected 455 right after my own heart...

-Bob C.

I don't think I'd need a fuel injected 455, I'd be happy with a small block 350. I would love to have a Blackhawk, and I wouldn't care if it got 5 MPG in my daily drive either...

Blah blah blah.

Your pile would have to have been related to freekin Christine. What a story!

I have five (5) of them. I've known one of them since it was new in 1984. What are the odds that I've not experienced anything like you have in 25 years, 5x the vehicles, and about 500,000 miles???

I will say yes the early headliners separated and the cloth fell down after several years. Later ones are fine- I don't know the year they changed that. Had that happen to a Dodge too- many cars of that era used the same faulty set-up. 3M spray adhesive FTW.

ATX Tempos = smooth, and good for low 30s mpg on a good day, high 20's with lots of city. More than chirps the tires.

Changing oil every 2000 miles. There's a sure sign of an idiot. :rolleyes:

When I was young & stupid I used to change the oil in the Buick when it turned black. That was at about every 1,500 miles before the new engine. When I got the new engine, the oil was changed at 500 miles, 1,500 miles, 3,000 miles, then I settled into every 5,000 miles after that. I've been changing it yearly or 5,000 miles, whichever comes first for probably close to 15 years now. Always with Mobil1 synthetic, and my oil is never black by the time I change it.

As a matter of fact, since I've been using synthetic oil, I have never seen the oil in any of my vehicles turn black.

Get it right.
 

Although I wasn't a hypermiler, I was not an aggressive driver either. I could not get any better than 24 mpg highway using cruise control (3-speed auto). I also could NOT chirp the tires once I had them replaced with Futuras. The stock ones could chirp, but they were 12 years old when I bought the car, and had quite a bit of dry rot.

As far as the other issues... my mom's '89 Crown Victoria had the SAME problems with the windows, door locks, headliner, radio, trunk latch, exhaust, and leaking vents. Her transmission also went out at 110,000 miles. The Vic leaked a quart and a half of oil per 3,000 miles (my Tempo never leaked). Her car also went through 2 alternators and 3 starters between 50,000 and 150,000 miles. We replaced her coil and module before the car had 100,000 miles on it. I remember my dad replacing the U-Joints, too.

As far as changing the oil, I did it at 2,000 miles for two reasons: (1) I thought it was good for the car. (2) I changed the oil on my mom's car and dad's truck, and they accumulated 3,000 - 3,500 miles on their vehicles in the same amount of time that I drove 2,000. I changed the oil on all 3 cars at the same time.

I will state (AGAIN!!) that some people had good luck with their Tempos. Some people hated theirs. I am the latter. I'm not going to say that Some Tempos were not built well. As strange as it is, most positive reviews I've seen are of GLs. Mine was an LX. Perhaps the extra crap on it was more prone to breaking. I don't know how to find out which Tempos were built in which location (2-door verus 4-door, powertrain differences, model designations?). I do know this. Mine was pampered for the time I had it, and it fell apart.

I replaced the Tempo with an '88 Accord with 230,000 miles on it. I beat the crap out of that car for the rest of my senior year and for two years of college. I treated it worse than I ever did the Tempo, and it never broke down. (I towed the Tempo four times). The Accord's thermostat went out ($2.95) and the choke stuck once. The car still ran fine when I sold it with almost 280,000 miles on it.

You could compare production plants by VIN.
https://www.vehicleidentificationnumb...in_detail.html

In the late 1980s, by my observations, The Big 3 were still lagging behind the Japanese manufacturers in quality/reliability/durability/longevity. The 1980s were when the Japanese manufacturers earned their reputation as doing so much better in those areas. It's certainly possible for someone to have all those problems with a 1989 Ford without any abuse or negligence, and it's not unreasonable for someone to dislike them as a result.

In the 20+ years since, the domestic manufacturers have definitely stepped up their game, while the Japanese companies seem to have outgrown themselves a bit. The playing field is very even, and has been for 10 years IMO. Now the difference seems to be mainly attitude and treatment by owners who believe in those stale reputations...people who buy Japanese cars tend to be more interested in longevity, while people who buy American cars tend to be more interested in a disposable car; and they treat their cars as such.

Wow... You're a real a**hole.

You always seem to escalate things into personal attacks, don't you?

Yeesh.

I'm not going back to see who made the first personal attack, but Biffmeistro has made the last one in this thread. Capiche?

HC is basically correct.

Detroit in the 80s was Union versus Manufacturer, sabotage was common, I witnessed it personally and in ways that was catastrophic.

The Japanese manufacturers peaked when the children of WW2 were in their prime, now they are retiring and a new generation of Japanese are not as dedicated to the quality that was obvious in Japanese cars made in Japan itself.

The best cars I have ever owned were made in Japan. Our 99 Maxima was about the peak of Japanese quality. Only problem we ever had with it was the tires, that were the only part not made in Japan.

When Nissan started building cars here in the USA there was a noticeable decrease in quality. At the same time the US manufacturers were improving their quality. Maybe the Unions and management finally saw that they had better hang together or they would be hung separately, which is what has happened except for Ford.

I believe the significant factor was computerization of the assembly process, which reduced the human error factor and the possibility of sabotage by disgruntled union workers.

My father bought an 83 Thunderbird that was one of the best cars he ever owned, with very few problems. The only critical problem he had was a broken valve spring. He babied it to the dealer and they were amazed the valve did not get bent. The broken spring was the outer (stronger) spring and if he had revved it beyond about 2k rpm the valve would have hit the piston.

The number of adult males lost in WW2 by the Japanese meant they did not have the legacy costs and retirement expenses of the American manufacturers. Not sure what the percentages were of workers to retirees in the 70s and 80s, but I would bet it was much higher for Americans versus Japanese.

Today the Japanese car manufacturers have shifted to a much more GM like corporate philosophy, while the Koreans are coming into the picture in a strong showing. The Chinese will not be far behind.

Japan used to be the underdog, now they are the target.

regards
gary

I cannot remember where the plants were. I believe one was in Canada and the other was in the States. I think mine was a Canadian build, but I cannot remember. I don't have a record of the VIN. I do remember finding a slip of paper inside the dome light when I pulled it apart to replace the fried wiring. It showed a date, something from May 1986. I forget the date, but it showed that the car was built on a Wednesday.

I used to hear "Buy a car made on a Wednesday" a lot. The logic was that Monday & Tuesday the workers were still getting over their hangovers from the weekend, and Thursday & Friday they were already getting ready for the weekend, and Wednesday was the only day they actually did their jobs right.

-Jay

One of my professors in college followed a similar reasoning process when scheduling TA sessions.

I don't know, first time you use a semi, blend or fully synth in a car it usually comes out black at 2 or 3000, second fill goes black at 5,000, then after that you're changing it at 10 or 15 and wondering why you didn't leave it in, because it's coming out looking the same as when it went in.

OTOH, Wednesday can feel the most tedious...like being out in the desert, Wednesday can be the doldrums. Other days can be when people are energized from/for their weekend.

This is surely the most scientific thing I've ever said. :p