GM should consider that strategy too.

"In fact, Hyundai topped Toyota in J.D. Power's 2009 initial quality survey, moving up the ranks from 13th to 4th in that ranking. "
Hyundai Bucks The Trend

Sherwood

So then, low expectations are working to Hyundai's advantage? ...or does this say Hyundai is better quality than Toyota?

do i hear "onstar"?
what was the great technical innovation that the ml had? oh wait, none....where was that made? of course! ALABAMA...
the straight 6 in the new GM's is a heck of a motor...as are the v8's with active cylinder control.
Have a bad experience with domestic? or are you just a nose in the air kind of person?

In theory yes, for initial quality. But these surveys just count issues reported per 100 vehicles and base the rankings on that. They make no distinction between a door rattle and a blown engine.

They also do not take into account that a new Hyundai owner might ignore a door rattle while a new MB owner might have it in the dealership 3 times for a door rattle.

They've been building crap for the last 40 years. Was that supposed to be a rhetorical question? I've given them a chance several times in the last 5 years and came away very disappointed both times. Their new stuff is the best ever, but so is their competition. Once bitten, twice shy......

In regards to Hyundai, my dad's newer Sonata is very nice. Boring to drive, but the interior materials and overall build quality are on a par with the Japanese (i.e. better than domestics).

I've worked with several engineers who spent time at GM (or are still there)...

There was a few smart, smart people. Unfortunately for GM they either A) left or B) worked on the smaller, cool projects (There's a reason why the Vette can be so great and the rest of the cars are trash...)


There was also some very, very stupid people. Seems like those were the people who were most happy to work at GM. They also were the people working on the 'everyday' cars...


I have a deep, deep hatred for two people I saw go straight to GM after getting their bachelors. After knowing them and seeing who they work for- and then hearing from someone at GM how great they were..... I realize I'd rather not own most GM vehicles.


Except the Sky/Solstice. I know someone who was involved with that car, and it was done pretty damn correctivo. But, y'know... GM canned that one already.

Our neighbor recently purchased a new Traverse.
(She retired from Delphi a few years ago at age 47. Single, no kids.)

I helped her out with a detail on how something works on it and ,I have to say, it really is a nice vehicle.

Having owned a newer BMW I can also say that it's no BMW but still nice.



My biggest gripe with GM is the rust appearing on cars less than 5-6 years old.

That's BS, IMO.

I have seen many cars out there rusting bad at the rocker panels. Now, I understand that not everone is a fanatic about keeping a car clean but this is justwayyyy too many suffering.

I don't understand the rust thing either.

944's are galvanized and were since the they started with 924 in 78 or so. I have never seen rust on one unless it was in a spot where t had been in an accident that went unrepaired (scraping the paint and coating off). My track car's tub sat in what was effectively marsh of wet leaves and grass under a molding tree for 5 years before I bought it. After stripping the car I found no rust. This was 1987.


Maybe they are afraid of using certain types of galvanizing because they don't want to end up like Chrysler's slew of cars from the 90's that had the paint chip off due to not sticking with the galvanizing. Maybe the galvanization process requires the use of more expensive paint (that Porsche can afford to use but they don't want to splurge on).... who knows.


It's pretty ridiculous though, I agree.

But does the Equinox have soft Corinthian Leather?

You just hit a very sore spot. The GM Atlas inline piston engine is a massive piece of $hit!!! I own one. It runs like crap, throws P0300 codes all the time due to valve seat wear cause by resonating valve stems and they won't replace the cylinder head with their new one until you get some massive leak down in a test that you have to pay for each time.

They call customer service extending the warranty until 100,000 miles for this issue but they won't fix it til it is running on three cylinders.

p.s. I don't know anyone that pays for Onstar.

sorry you got a bad one...I know more than a few people who have well over 150k with no problems.

Ive had to take several double takes at a Hyundai Sonata, thinking it was a Jaguar S Type.

Yeah, G.M. has gone down hill. I have a friend that owns a salvage yard, and he pays the bills with G.M.'s 60 degree V6 engines, and transmissions. If he had 50 Of GM's 2.4 "Quad" engines he could sell them today. The only GM engines that sit around are the Ecotecs, and Northstars. I still don't believe they were designed here in the U.S.

It is more than just one.

Now lets talk about the GM blue chip stock those blithering idiots made worthless.

And still I've never heard of a GM drive-by-wire system failing and accelerating the car up to 120 mph just before a fiery death...

Don't worry. GM will have that technology copied in 5 years or so.

Which maker was responsible for that one?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/509085-bad-advice.html

Selected GM truck owners didn't have to go that fast to die. Instead they could have met a fiery death at zero MPH.

"On April 9, 1993, the NHTSA called on GM to voluntarily recall all of its over 6 million 1973-87 full-size C/K pickups with side saddle fuel tanks. (Attachment B.) In its official response to NHTSA's recall request, GM refused to comply."

Powered by Google Docs

The attempted cover-ups were especially enlightening.

Sherwood

That's the story where NBC put the explosives in the gas tanks, no?