posted
Bob, my husband used to be an independent contractor for FedEx, who recommended that he buy a GM van for his route. After less than 2 years the extended warranty he paid extra for was up and we had spent and unGodly amount of money on "covered" dealer repairs just like the one you mentioned (buying a part to go with the replacement part) and many things we had to fix over and over and over. It is ridiculous. He finally had to find another job because we could no longer afford to own the truck. We lost over $10K trying to sell it too. We will NEVER own another GM product. We are a Dodge family now.
I didn't realize Saturn was GM. Guess I won't get me one of their flashy new sports cars.
I once knew a Tiberon owner who bought hers used from a dealer and just loved it! They are cute and fun to drive! Posts: 1319 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have you checked the Subaru Legacy: seems to be in nearly the same price and performance class; is in the ConsumerReportsGoodBets category inregards to reliability; and earned the gold highest safety category in Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash tests. The last being what brough my attention to the Legacy.
The Saab 9-3 also made the highest safety category, but is ~20% more expensive. Plus Saab is now owned by GM. And considering that GM vehicles make up 45% of the BadBets in ConsumerReports' reliability survey...
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
cheiros do ender, I haven't committed yet, but I'm still thinking that's what I will do. I'm giving my mind a chance to change for 4 or 5 more days first.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well...things may have changed somewhat since my last GM product. I know that back in the 60's and early 70's GM (especially Chevy) was a make that people gravitated to precisely because parts were readily available, cheap, and standardized.
I have to ask, though, have you ever owned a GM vehicle with pop-headlights? Did you own one with plastic separate horn buttons on the sides of the steering wheel (a la early 90's Buicks). Were you unlucky enough to own one of their first models with the Generation 1 antilock braking system? Or the first years when they started using halogen bulbs?
I think if I had avoided purchasing one of their "oh, let's try this out" vehicles, I probably would be a lot happier with them. Everyone I know who has owned a pop-up headlight equipped model has run into the same thing -- needing to buy an entire motor assembly just because a plastic gear was stripped. The gear is a 5-cent part. The motor -- on some vehicles is $150. And, while I suspect a mechanic could probably figure some work-around. A person who needs to have their car fixed by someone else is at the mercy of Mr. Goodwrench for that stupid repair.
The horn button thing was ridiculous. A plast part that POPS into place. It probably would cost $1.00 if you could just buy the horn button. But NO! The entire "horn button assembly" must be purchased. And...of course, it comes as a "paintable unit" meaning that the dealer has an up-charge for an hour's labor painting a 1" x 2" horn button.
On my car, they broke at a rate of about 1 per year.
I finally found a way to insert a metal rod into the weak-point of the plastic so I could just fix the stupid button instead of paying $90 for someone to install a whole new "assembly."
The Gen-1 antilock brake system was a disaster. When it failed, the brake pedal would lock in the "up" position. You couldn't push that thing if you were the Incredible Hulk. It wasn't like the old power-assist brakes in every other car on the road -- where you'd be assured of some braking force. This was nothing. You just had no brakes.
It was a well-documented problem on 1990 Buicks. Only Buick and GM didn't agree that it existed. And...because it tended to crop up after the cars were out of warranty, they didn't care. NHTSA also didn't care. There were too few of these cars on the road and they hadn't caused any fatalities...yet.
Ultimately, that was the "repair" that sent that car to the junk yard -- or whereever. I didn't care. The dealer diagnosed the problem and told me it would take $3000 to fix it to the point where they could tell if the "computer" was also shot.
I sent a tow truck for the car and traded it on a new vehicle. Guess how much I got for my car that I had to have towed to the dealer?
GM deserves to go bankrupt as far as I'm concerned. The way they treated me when I documented the problems I was having with that vehicle was appalling.
I now own a car that has a 100,000 mile power train warranty. And 50,000 on the rest of it. If that Buick had had a warranty like that, I imagine that they would've had to buy me a new car versus just tell me "tough luck."
GM is a sucky company.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's entirely possible that my experience with GM products is not typical. Because my dad worked in GM parts for over 25 years, he knows which models are reliable and which ones are not—he saw the unreliable ones were in the shop more often and had to order parts for them.
For instance, he told me to avoid two-door W-bodies (Luminas, Grand Prix, Cutlass Supremes, and Regals) because the door handles, which were mounted sideways on the B pillars, were prone to breaking, and they were 80 bucks to fix. So I've been very lucky because I've been able to take him car shopping with me, and he's been able to tell me which models to avoid and also to identify potential problems.
I'm not saying that GM makes consistently reliable cars and that everyone should rush out and buy one. I'm just saying that people should become educated about different cars as they're shopping around and that they shouldn't avoid an entire brand just because of an old reputation or because of past experience with one car. Anecdotes and rumors make for ill-informed purchases.
After all, Bob, you were apparently able to get past Hyundai's horrible reputation. If you had owned a problematic old Hyundai, you might have sworn them off and missed out on your current car.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I swore off American cars altogether. I don't like the Japanese cars made in America, even. I prefer Japanese cars made in Asia. Talk about prejudice!
The Hyundai is a Korean car made in Korea, isn't it? This will be a new departure for me.
posted
Actually, I have always gone to Consumer Report and looked carefully at their reliability diagrams. That's why I've had Toyotas and Hondas for a long time.
When I was very young, I bought a Volkswagon because they were cheap, and mechanically relatively simple, and because we knew how to work on them. I learned a lot about working on cars from that one. (It was about 16 years old and so major systems went out at a rate of about one every two weeks.) Now I have a Honda Accord that's almost 20 years old, and it still almost never has anything go wrong with it.
The exception is brakes. I knew in 1983 that Honda Accords had inadequate brakes. Year after year in Consumer Report, Honda gets "poor" or "less than good" for its rating for the brakes. Why haven't they figured that out and fixed it in 23 years? That boggles me! I had to have all new rotors usually every 3 or 4 years. Sometimes they would machine them flat, but they don't really last long that way, because the problem is that they're too small to dissipate the heat they generate without warping, and so taking part of the material off just makes that problem worse.
When it got about 15, all the rubber and plastic parts of course started disintigrating, but that was a no-brainer. Rubber and plastic usually last about 10 years in an automotive environment (which is one of the harshest uses that machinery can be put to... dirt, vibration, heat, weather). In my Honda they lasted 50% longer than I would expect. So then I made an effort to get every piece of hose or whatever replaced, and then it just kept running for more years. I actually love that car and I don't want to sell it to a stranger and have it leave the family!
Last year, the radiator rusted through. This is most likely my fault because I didn't get my radiator blown out and the coolant replaced every year like I should have done. So over time it corroded. The bad thing is that it happened without me realizing (though I totally should have, in retrospect) and it happened on the highway and my engine overheated. Since then it's needed a new engine, but I don't think I should spend $2500 to get a new engine. It still runs just fine, only with about 3/4 the power it used to have, and it burns a quart of oil every 1000 miles.
If you keep the oil level high and don't push the engine to do what it can't do anymore, then I expect that car will last another 10 years and 100k miles. It's a great car! If I liked the new Accords as much as I did the old ones, I would totally get another one of those. My mother did in 2004, but then neither of us like her new car.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I swore off American cars altogether. I don't like the Japanese cars made in America, even. I prefer Japanese cars made in Asia. Talk about prejudice!
The Hyundai is a Korean car made in Korea, isn't it? This will be a new departure for me.
Why in the world would it matter which country the plant is in? I've never heard anything about Japanese cars built in the US being any different from Japanese cars built in Japan.
posted
I think the quality of the cars starting going down when they began making them in the U.S. It's anecdotal and it may be pure prejudice but I think the industrial culture in the U.S. was just not one that produced as high a quality of machinery as that in Japan, for whatever reason.
Looks like the Sonata and Santa Fe are the two models made here. I'm staying away from those. Mercedes has a plant here in Alabama building their SUVs and they've had lots of reliability issues with them too. Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Santa Fe is a great little SUV wannabe, and the best seling new model, I think.
I know three people who have bought one, and all three of them LOVE it.
Also, Hyundai has had a great reputation since the began their 100,000 mile warrenty, abuot 10 years ago. before that they were horrible, but even CR likes them a lot these days. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: It's anecdotal and it may be pure prejudice but I think the industrial culture in the U.S. was just not one that produced as high a quality of machinery as that in Japan, for whatever reason.
Yes, that is pure prejudice. You're saying that it's the fault of the workers, not the companies, that certain cars suck? I don't buy that for a second. I'd certainly like to see some facts, not anecdotes, to back that up.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aren't companies responsible for their culture? I think such things come from the very top. I don't think it's the fault of the workers, but more of the system, or something like that. There's no hard evidence as to why, of course. The whys are just guesses. But what is indisputable is the "whether". American cars overall have demonstrated poor reliability compared to Japanese for the last 20 or 30 years. Consumer Report has published the data that shows that to be true.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You didn't answer my question at all. I'm not disputing that Japanese companies have produced, on average, more reliable cars than American companies. Also, this doesn't demonstrate that Chevys built outside the US are better than those built in the US, or that Hondas built in the US are worse than those built in Japan.
What I'm disputing is that the factory workers are the cause for the difference. They're just putting the cars together, not designing and engineering them. If a part wears out and breaks because it was made out of plastic instead of aluminum, that's not the fault of the people who built the cars.
First you said it was national culture. Now you're saying it's company culture. If it's company culture, then it shouldn't matter where in the world the factory is.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I said "industrial culture" by which I meant the culture of the individual companies in the industry, and of the auto industry in the U.S. as a whole, to the extent to which it is a shared thing. I do think the culture comes from the very highest levels of companies. I never said it was the workers' fault. I think it's the fault of the system the way it's set up here.
I've spent about 20 years working in different factories, though not auto factories, and have seen how the culture of a given plant can tremendously impact the quality of work they do there. That's why my guess is that.
Since you agree that U.S. cars aren't as reliable, what is your theory as to why?
posted
Because it just hasn't been a priority to US carmakers. They still haven't entirely gotten over the idea of planned obsolescence, I think. It still hasn't quite hit them that people want a car to last for longer than three years, and since they're so large and so old, it's taking them a long time to turn around.
quote: I do think the culture comes from the very highest levels of companies. I never said it was the workers' fault. I think it's the fault of the system the way it's set up here.
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't seem to make much sense. Hyundai isn't outsourcing their production to American companies. They're building the plant themselves, and I presume that they will be training the employees themselves, too. How would this be different from a Hyundai factory in Korea? Just because the plant is in the US doesn't mean it's going to be just like a Ford or GM plant.
Besides, you still haven't shown any evidence that Japanese or Korean cars built in the US are any different from those built in Japan or Korea. For instance, the Honda Accord and Civic are built in the US, and those two are always at the top of the reliability ratings.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, I think good quality not being a priority counts as part of what I would call culture, do you? If good quality is still not a priority here in the U.S., 30 years after Japan started out-competing U.S. automakers, then do they sort of deserve to fail? Why is it so hard for them to get the message?
I'm thinking the culture I mean here in the U.S. may stem from various interests which are pretty powerful but who don't want to change and think they don't have to change, as well as just coming some from the inertia of history, and the cross-fertilization of ideas and techniques between the various U.S. plants.
I'm not sure why you are calling for proof. I told you it was speculative, and not something that can be proven one way or another. It's certainly something powerful that I feel, and many other people feel. It's anecdotal, yet I feel sure that it's also rooted in fact. Several of us who have owned the old Hondas built in Japan, and later the new ones built in the U.S., all agree that the Japanese built ones were better.
The defensiveness of many U.S. automakers to being told they aren't succeeding acts as a real barrier to their improvement. First they have to admit that something could possibly be better than what they're doing, neh?
That's true in all industries. I recently witnessed someone stalk out of a room because of being told their former company didn't do everything right leading up to a major near-miss that could have resulted in a loss-of-coolant accident in a power plant (a very big deal). Why? She thought they did everything exactly right and had nothing to learn from the experience?
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It took me a moment to process that post. I don't speak marginally-insane-undyingly-cheerful-stream-of-consciousness.
I think what you're trying to say is that, before Honda opened it's plants in the US, the cars they manufactured in Japan were of higher quality than the ones manufacturered now, in the US.
You're right. There is no way to prove this. Especially since automobiles manufactured now are significantly more complex than they were at that time. The more complex any system is, the easier it is to break down. Also, I'm sure you've noticed how people always seem to think that things were better in the old days. I believe the phrase is "they don't make them like they used to." So, your comments are anecdotal at best, and are, probably, untrue.
Posts: 4753 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I'm not sure why you are calling for proof. I told you it was speculative, and not something that can be proven one way or another. It's certainly something powerful that I feel, and many other people feel. It's anecdotal, yet I feel sure that it's also rooted in fact. Several of us who have owned the old Hondas built in Japan, and later the new ones built in the U.S., all agree that the Japanese built ones were better.
I haven't seen anyone agree with that. And as people often say around here, the plural of anecdote is not data. You made a fairly preposterous claim, I believe. All I'm asking for is something a little more concrete than "something powerful that I feel."
quote:The defensiveness of many U.S. automakers to being told they aren't succeeding acts as a real barrier to their improvement. First they have to admit that something could possibly be better than what they're doing, neh?
Personally, I think the biggest barrier is people like you. The Big Three know they've got problems, but it doesn't matter how much they change if people like you have already decided that they suck. People are obviously more willing to overlook Hyundai's past than GM's, Ford's, or Chrysler's.
posted
I have to wonder about the reliability surveys. I would think there would be so many variables that would be difficult to take into account. Location, weather, driving habits, length of commute, type of driving, maintenance, severity of problem, dealership service, etc.
Just take mainenance for example. How many people check their oil level every time they fill up for example? Do they change the air filter when required (or even know what the interval is)? Do they adjust their air filter or oil change schedule if the environment hot, dusty, or if they do a lot of city driving? What about the fuel filter? Coolant flushes? Spark plug inspections to make sure the engine is running right? I know some of the nicer European and Asian car companies offer free dealer mainenance for the first 1-3 years. If people on domestics did this, would the reliability be better (simply because they are actually doing the recommended maintenance as opposed to waiting until they have 'extra' funds, or surprise! something breaks)?
It seems to me the big difference is recalls. The media hasn't exactly been fair to US companies. Around 2000, there were massive problems with GM and DEX-COOL coolant getting in the oil (very bad). This got a lot of press. Also, there were problems of a similar magnitude with the transmissions on Accords. Guess which one got more bad press?
A lot of the problem is perceptions, and so many factors shape those.
An anecdote, just because no car-related post would be complete without. I'm the owner of a Pontiac Grand Am, terrible reliability ratings. On a forum I frequent, many people report extensive problems with the LIM gasket, rotors, fuel injectors by 30K miles. That's terrible. But my car has over 60K on it and is 4 years old. I've beat the crud out of it. It's been raced, taken on offroad jeep trails, camping, used for moving 3 times, gone through several blizzards, Utah's salty roads, sat for a month, driven on thousands of mile road trips through the desert, etc. However, I've just taken good care of it mechanically. I bought it brand new and put synthetic oil in on the first change, right now it has Amsoil, which I change every six months. I've always done the recommended maintenance early. The only thing I had to take it in for was the turn signal, which I broke myself in an overenthusiastic motion. I thought I had a tranny problem, but a fluid flush was all it needed.
I'm not saying everybody that's had a problem has horrible neglected their car, but I've noticed with the cars that I've owned there seem to be a LOT less problems with proper mainenance.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jon Boy, the fact that they're focused on people's perceptions instead of the very real quality problems they have, that everyone agrees they have, seems to me to be a big issue.
They are blaming their customers for thinking their cars suck. That's not how you compete successfully. It's much more effective to think "We're screwing up, let's figure out how to fix it."
If they just dismiss all the dissatisfied serial owners' input as "anecdotal and therefore meaningless" then they will lose market share (as they've done) and eventually shut down. Customers with complaints are a company's best friends, for they are taking the trouble to explain what they feel needs to be corrected, rather than simply defecting for the competition, which is much easier and also more effective at correcting the problems that the customer experiences. Capitalism and competition almost always seem to work by shutting down companies with poor culture, rather than by reforming them, however, the latter is certainly possible if the company leadership will truly listen and try to improve.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bao, maintenance can certainly have a huge effect on the problems you experience with machinery, however, there's no reason to believe that the Consumer Report respondants who rate their Hondas systematically do a better job of maintenance than those who rate GM cars, is there? I expect there will be a wide range of levels of maintenance on all brands, so that things would average out, and the differences between brands are what I would look at.
The Honda Accord consistently does poorly on brakes, for instance. Well, my Accords have been no exception. The brakes are underdesigned for the car. They don't dissipate enough heat when you are in stop and go traffic around town, and the rotors subsequently warp. This is not a maintenance issue, though it can be exacerbated by the way a person drives, if they are battling rush hour traffic a good deal and doing lots of accelerating and slowing down, for instance.
The brakes in the Hyundai are disk brakes on both front and back wheels, (rather than drum brakes on back as in the Honda). I expect because they're better designed that I won't have any brake problems other than needing to change the shoes as they wear out.
That's just one example of how different cars can have very real differences in reliability, regardless of the level of maintenance done. Unless you can show that people who buy American cars are especially bad about doing maintenance, for some reason, then I don't see the reliability problems as being due to that factor.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bok, the Civic Hybrid was something I considered. It really is fuel efficient if you just look at the gasoline. I'm thinking of the battery, though, and how often those will wear out, and how expensive they are, and how toxic big batteries are to the environment. I'm also looking at the price/performance ratio, and it's still way too high for me. Maybe in 10 years, when we have several breakthroughs in battery technology, and when fossil fuels are much more expensive than they are now, it will be worthwhile. One of the things I know from engineering is that it doesn't really pay to be an early adopter of the newest technology of machinery. You end up helping the manufacturers find and work out all the design problems. I would never buy a new car model on the first year it existed, for the same reason.
Hybrids are for rich people who don't really need a car to be a workhorse for them, and who have other cars available to drive when they need better performance. And for the time being, I'm not at all convinced hybrids are better for the environment, either.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I understand what you are saying Tatiana. And I do agree that in general, Hondas and Toyotas are more reliable. I just don't think the difference is quite as black and white as some people think-a Ford will fall apart at 50K miles and a honda will run for 300K miles.
For example, the maintenance issue. I see your point about different habits averaging out over different brands. However, if there were just a couple of small unaccounted for factors, couldn't it skew the results enough to invalidate the data? Hondas cost more than their American equivalents. This would suggest to me that someone would need to be a bit more affluent to purchase one. That person could afford the regular service and tuneups for the vehicle whereas someone who purchased a cheaper car might not. Therefore Hondas would appear to have a much better reliability rating, when in fact it can simply be traced to a difference in maintenance.
An example pointing the other way would possibly rest with Toyota's reputation for quality. People who purchase a Toyota are shelling out extra money for a quality vehicle. Might that make them more likely to report relatively minor problems (that a domestic owner might not even notice or care about) thus artifically decreasing Toyota's quality score relative to domestics?
I'm just saying that I don't see a really controlled scientific experiment going on, just a simplified analysis of the situation. I think many contributing, underlying factors may be unaccounted for.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, btw, have you looked at the Acura RSX Type S? It's a sweet car to drive, I like the looks of it, and I think it gets better mpg than the hyundai you're looking at (but too lazy to go check). You might want to check it out.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had a whole long post here, but it's really repetitive of me. Needless to say, your reliability concerns have yet to materialize (and we're at 5-6 years of having hybrids out on the road... Longer in Japan), for either the battery, or the cars in general. The emmissions of the cars themselves are the best out there (The older ones are ULEV. the newer ones SULEV rated). Every drop of gas I don't use now, can (theoretically) be used later. The cars are not luxury cars. Mine was bought for a little under $20k. Even at MSRP, the newest Civic hybrid is $21.5k, and that's before the new for 2006 $2k tax CREDIT is factored in.
The car isn't a beast, but it's a functional, reliable, clean and efficiently operating sedan.
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: Jon Boy, the fact that they're focused on people's perceptions instead of the very real quality problems they have, that everyone agrees they have, seems to me to be a big issue.
They are blaming their customers for thinking their cars suck. That's not how you compete successfully. It's much more effective to think "We're screwing up, let's figure out how to fix it."
If they just dismiss all the dissatisfied serial owners' input as "anecdotal and therefore meaningless" then they will lose market share (as they've done) and eventually shut down. Customers with complaints are a company's best friends, for they are taking the trouble to explain what they feel needs to be corrected, rather than simply defecting for the competition, which is much easier and also more effective at correcting the problems that the customer experiences. Capitalism and competition almost always seem to work by shutting down companies with poor culture, rather than by reforming them, however, the latter is certainly possible if the company leadership will truly listen and try to improve.
I'm sorry, but I honestly have no idea what this post is in reference to. Where did I say that American automakers are focused on perceptions rather than real quality, or that they're ignoring anecdotal evidence, or that they're blaming their customers?
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Personally, I think the biggest barrier is people like you.
i.e. potential customers who think they suck.
quote: The Big Three know they've got problems, but it doesn't matter how much they change if people like you have already decided that they suck.
i.e. the problem is more with our perception than with the automakers.
Or that's how I read you. If that's not what you meant, then I misunderstood. I'm not really intending to argue any point here. I'm interested in hearing what people think the U.S. automakers need to do differently. I'm sorry if I read incorrectly between the lines of what you said, and inferred a meaning you didn't intend. Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bok, I'm happy to hear that the hybrids are further along than I had imagined. I still don't think I'd want to risk it yet for myself, but I'm glad to hear that owners are happy with them.
How long have you had yours? Have you had to replace the batteries yet? Does the heater work well? How about power to go up steep hills and accelerate quickly? I forget what part of the country you live in. It is cold/hilly where you live? Has the car performed up to your expectations? How much do you figure you save on gas over a comparable sedan with the ordinary engine?
I definitely will consider getting one someday, just not this time around, I don't think. I'm glad they sound like they've come further than I expected at this point. Since I usually keep my cars until they're at least 10 years old, I may well be ready to buy one the next time I'm looking at a new car.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry, but it seems like you're making different and contradictory points with every post. I think it's time for me to stop.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've got a Mazda6, and I'm really happy with it. I had one small factory recall on a part that didn't meet CA emmission standards, but otherwise haven't had any problems in almost 3 years.
It's nice and sporty, which is fun, but has lots of room in the back room and trunk, so it's fairly practical too. If you like the look of the Miata, you should give it a try.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just bought a red 2006 Toyota camry. It's my first four door car. I think I'm pretty happy with it.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: Bok, I'm happy to hear that the hybrids are further along than I had imagined. I still don't think I'd want to risk it yet for myself, but I'm glad to hear that owners are happy with them.
How long have you had yours? Have you had to replace the batteries yet? Does the heater work well? How about power to go up steep hills and accelerate quickly? I forget what part of the country you live in. It is cold/hilly where you live? Has the car performed up to your expectations? How much do you figure you save on gas over a comparable sedan with the ordinary engine?
I definitely will consider getting one someday, just not this time around, I don't think. I'm glad they sound like they've come further than I expected at this point. Since I usually keep my cars until they're at least 10 years old, I may well be ready to buy one the next time I'm looking at a new car.
I've had mine since late-October 2004. I have ~21,000 miles on it. The batteries are working as good as they did on day one. From everything I can find, the batteries have been simulated up to 125,000-150,000 miles, and have had around 3-5% in performance degradation, which is essentially nil. This is due to the car's computer regulating the batteries to stay between 30-70% charge (the batteries optimal performance band) as much as possible. My transmission did conk out at 8,000 miles, but that was a non-hybrid issue, and hasn't been reported with any regularity by other drivers. Some folks already have their hybrids over 100,000 miles, and I haven't heard of any issues.
The heater and air conditioner work fine. In fact, the car is smart enough that if it is too hot/cold out, it won't "autostop", therefore keeping the engine running, and the passengers comfortable (there are some "hacks" to force more frequent autostops, to save more gas, but that isn't the default). I go up as steep a hill as any in the Boston area (New England being a notoriously hilly, though not mountainous, place), the hill on which the Boston Mormon Temple is on. I hate that hill, it kills mileage I keep it at 55 to maximize what little efficiency I can, but if I wanted to, I could push above that. The car can be peppy, but isn't going to win and performance contests Most professional reviews (and I agree with them) say the car has perfectly unremarkable yet acceptable performance. I never feel like I'm in danger because of the hybrid. It gets better torque at the low-end (initial acceleration) than most regular cars; I can beat almost anyone off the line to about 25 MPH After that, well, the small engine catches up (at peak power, the car has around 95-100HP, I believe... The newer model has 105HP). The electric motor by it's very nature gets full power immediately, after all.
Lifetime, I've gotten 39MPG, combined highway/city. Not near EPA, but then the EPA test doesn't do a 10 mile (each way) commute through Boston traffic, up a mile long hill that taxes even conventional cars. A conventional Civic would get around 30MPG, maybe a little more, if they drove the same commute, at the same speeds, I figure. On the highway, I get over 45MPG, easy. The car has a 12.9 gallon tank (ULEV), and I've driven from just outside of Philly (Haverford College) to Boston, and then commuted to work for three days, on a single tank. This was while travelling between 65 and 75 on the highway. You don't speed as much in hybrids, mostly because they provide a different sort of feedback; you start playing the "efficiency game", where you see how far you can push the car's gas mileage
posted
Okay, Monday is the day I'm planning to go plunk down the cash and buy it.
I cleaned out my old car Sparky today. I'm going to miss him. I left for his new owner the warranties on tires and battery, every ticket from every oil change and all maintenance he's had ever since he was new, which wasn't much. And as a personal gift to him, I hid the words to "Airplane" by the Red Hot Chili Peppers in his ashtray where hopefully nobody will every look. (Should I hide it better?) Somehow it seems appropriate.
I really love that car. It's been such a great car for me. I kissed it goodbye on the headrest and shed a tear. Maybe this should go in the "do you have feelings for inanimate things" thread, but I find that I'm very sad to lose him, and I hope that his new owners will treat him well and love and appreciate him. I sure hope he finds a good home. Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Guess I won't get me one of their flashy new sports cars.![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
I'm going to miss him. I left for his new owner the warranties on tires and battery, every ticket from every oil change and all maintenance he's had ever since he was new, which wasn't much. And as a personal gift to him, I hid the words to "Airplane" by the Red Hot Chili Peppers in his ashtray where hopefully nobody will every look. (Should I hide it better?) Somehow it seems appropriate.
