DAMN IT!! Chrysler Survives

That isn't a down-grade. Even if you traded a 2009 Chrysler 300C in on a 83 Tercel with a dent in the door it would be an upgrade.

 

So if I'm following you correctly you had:

• One American made car (more than 20 years ago) that was a lemon
• One Honda that you liked
• One Toyota that you liked

Now you believe that all American-made cars are crap because you had a bad experience with 1 (of 3) companies decades ago? Sorry but that is not at all logical.

It is no different than a friend of mine that won't buy a Honda because the one he bought in the late 70's was crap or my Uncle that won't buy a Ford because the one he owned in the 50's was a lemon.

 

That would be Lada, which was actually a carbon copy of an older Fiat design. In the early 1980's they were briefly sold here in Canada when the former Soviet Union could not afford to pay for Canadian grain, so offered their cute little Lada's

For awhile, you could find quite a few of the Lada 2106's here in Canada, based on the Fiat 124. Mechanically, they were very simple, and easy to work on. They had a soft suspension - softer than on many full size cars of the period - so didn't fall apart on washboardy rural roads

However, Canada apparently uses a lot more road salt than Mother Russia does. After 2-3 years, it was fairly common to spot heavily rusted Lada's, door skins flapping in the breeze.

A small suv, the Lada Niva, was also briefly sold in Canada. They were primative but easy to work on

I haven't spotted a Lada in perhaps 10 years. I suspect they rusted out a long time ago

I agree with your comments about Chrysler.

 

Correct.

That, and all the black circles Consumers Union gives to American-branded cars and all the red circles Hondas and Toyotas get.

 

Chrysler makes one hell of a nice minivan. Here's to hoping they'll be able to bring an extended-range electric version to the market.

 

Shouldn't Fiat be rather cautious about aligning with a "Black Widow" such as Chrysler?

Let's see who else has been allied with Chrysler --
There are enough of them to fill a VH-1 "Where Are They Now" episode --

Rootes (Simca)
AMC / Jeep
Renault (linked to AMC)
Daimler

feel free to add to this list, as I'm sure it's incomplete.

 

You seem to be ignoring the black circles that Toyota has been getting recently and the red circles that Ford and Chevy have been receiving.

Consumer Reports recommends a number of American branded vehicles and JD Power shows that in the last 4-5 years their is minimal if any difference in the quality of Ford, GM, Toyota, and Honda vehicles.

Chrysler is the exception. They have consistently been in the lower third, right down there with Toyota's Scion brand.

Times change.

 

If JD Powers did a survey of owner satisfaction for vehicles over 100,000 miles it would be an eye opener.
Toyota would have many owners (if not most)with zero major repair costs.
Most American vehicles would be not functional or with major repairs.

 

JD Powers doesn't just do initial quality surveys (90 days) they also do dependability surveys (3 years). Your bias is not reflected in the data. The data shows that there is minimal difference from best to worst cars and only tiny differences between the top half. (Industry average is 1.7 problems while the very best (BUICK / Jaguar) only 1.22 problems)

Lexus and Toyota do very well, placing 3rd and 4th respectively but Scion's performance is dismal (32rd out of 37 brands / 2.2 problems)

 

Thats because the data doesnt encompass the time frame I stated.
Im hypothesizing that if you surveyed a period after 10 years, most American vehicles would be in the junkyard.
While most Toyota Lexus would still be dependable.

 

Your original hypothesis was based on 100,000 miles, I see now it has been updated to 10 years. Do you have any data to support your new hypothesis that cars from American brands suddenly fail between the 3 year and 10 year mark? It seems odd to me that cars have very similar reliability at 3 years but then would suddenly diverge.

This is an interesting statement on the topic from someone at Consumer Reports:

"Days past, 100,000 miles was usually the average life of a car," says John Ibbotson, a workshop supervisor who's in charge of vehicles that are tested for Consumer Reports' Auto Test Center in Connecticut, referring to vehicles from the 1950s to 1970s.

This is an interesting statement from someone @ Consumer Reports on vehicle life:
"At 100,000 miles, we were into major engine and transmission rebuilding," Ibbotson says. "Cars in the '90s, it was 140,000, 150,000 miles."

The U.S. Department of Transportation reports the average life span of a vehicle is 12 years, or about 128,500 miles. But that could be low simply because people don't maintain them, Ibbotson says. "If you bought a car today, there shouldn't be any problem with that car going 200,000 miles," he says.

Cars that last a million miles - MSN Money

 

Am I the only one that has wondered if Chrysler could have been named Hummer, Inc?

Even the cars look like little Hummers - what's this obsession with the kick a$$ look? It's not necessary to get me from Point A to B. Worse yet, you engineer the car opposite of a Prius and waste gas for that tough look.

I have no sympathy for those that led Chrysler in that direction in the 90's but feel for those under that must suffer.