Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Recommended Posts

And yet Ford recall's 74,000 hybred SUV's from 2005 -08 or so because the cooling pump may fail causeing the engine to shut off. IT's not Only GM fella's

Just because "everybody does it" doesn't make it OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you really believe that? What's the cause for their other recalls along the way ? That's typical of corporate thinking in today's world- pass the blame to someone else. The customer, of all people. I wonder what was the difference in cost to GM.

http://www.autocarepro.com/gm-recalls-death-tsb-know/

Here's the actual article about it. It's from Brake and Front End, which is an auto repair industry publication.

Just for the record, I am not defending GM. In any case, be it design defect or cheap part to save costs, GM is still at fault for using an inferior design.

Edited by Longbox55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever been to a party, and there's a guy there who's really drunk and making a total ass of himself? You think it's amusing at first, but the more it goes on, the more it seems pathetic and you start feeling bad for the guy because the situation is so sad?

That's kind of the way I see GM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever been to a party, and there's a guy there who's really drunk and making a total ass of himself? You think it's amusing at first, but the more it goes on, the more it seems pathetic and you start feeling bad for the guy because the situation is so sad?

I've been that guy, and I was lucky enough to be told the day(s) after that I'd been a complete idiot. My behavior changed.

Maybe that's one of the reasons I have so little sympathy for the ol' General's problems. EVERYBODY at the party must be too drunk to notice anything going on, and if they DO notice, too chicken to say anything about it.

Edited by Ace-Garageguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet Ford recall's 74,000 hybred SUV's from 2005 -08 or so because the cooling pump may fail causeing the engine to shut off. IT's not Only GM fella's

And yet we still have people who think that brand loyalty comes into play here. I don't see why. If it were Chrysler, I would be writing the same post and I like my Mopars.

NOBODY SAYS THAT IT'S ONLY GM. Unfortunately for GM, that corporation has had a helluva lotta recalls lately, after having been bailed out by the federal government- meaning, us, the US taxpayers. That just plain looks bad... it seems that we, the people, didn't get our money's worth. Well, maybe the shareholders did...

I'll bet there are a lot of execs at the other companies scrambling to cover up a lot of idiotic penny-pinching right now.

Edited by johnbuzzed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The air bag issue was found on 1 pre-production vehicle, all other vehicle inspected, production and pre-production, have been good so far.

It was the result of an unauthorized supplier change to the part.

The majority of all the recalls are for similar instances - 1 or 2 vehicles found with an issue. GM is acting on any possible problems even when a single problem vehicle is involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is how Toyota does it. Better product for it in the long term. I'm not a GM fan by any stretch but I do believe they can grow from this. If they can't, well that solidifies why I won't buy anything else from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 19 acknowledged deaths based on the GM ignition failure (not Corvette) and 125 more wrongful death claims. Whatever you think, this stuff is serious.

Edited by sjordan2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree it's very serious. I have been chasing a starting issue on my buddies alero. Told him it was the key but I confirmed it saturday when it all shorted out while I was wiggling the key around aggressively when it wouldn't start. Told him to take it to dealer and he could have it replaced free but he is kind of lazy that way lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a 1995 Chrysler Cirrus. The pin that holds the gears to the axles in the transmission, fell out, destroying the transmission, and halting me from a 60 mph freeway trip to a complete stop. The car had exactly 36,030 miles, just 30 miles outside of warranty. They wanted to charge me about $2600 for the repairs. I made several calls and complaints and they paid for the parts, and I was responsible for the labor. There was no recall. Chrysler covered it up, and would only "take care of it" if someone complained. After 5 years has lapsed, and so did my ownership of said vehicle, I received a check refunding my costs. There is now a recall issued for this problem affecting the Cirrus, Stratus and Bravo. Sometimes these things get swept under a rug, until it happens to a majority. Unfortunately this is "common practice" for manufacturers of anything. Not just cars, but can also happen to household appliances. Don't get me started on my refridgerator problem...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm reading all these recall threads with interest..

Part of why we see so much today is that our government has tightened the manufacturer's reporting requirements and remedy.

My question... can you imagine what the reporting history would have been like on US 1950s and 1960s cars? Different world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom, you may be right, but today's world is totally different than the '50's and '60's. I think the government of that era, had the same requirements been in effect, would have been a lot more severe when dealing with the offending corporations. Since then, our government has become comparatively toothless and our society has become a litigious one- anybody can and sue anybody else for the least offense, as long as an attorney will handle the case. The corporations aren't afraid of the government- they're afraid of being sued and the negative publicity that would ensue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom, you may be right, but today's world is totally different than the '50's and '60's. I think the government of that era, had the same requirements been in effect, would have been a lot more severe when dealing with the offending corporations. Since then, our government has become comparatively toothless and our society has become a litigious one- anybody can and sue anybody else for the least offense, as long as an attorney will handle the case. The corporations aren't afraid of the government- they're afraid of being sued and the negative publicity that would ensue.

??? I agree with Tom too. But apparently not in the same way you do. Back in the 1950's especially, the automobile companies were getting away with murder. Cars were dangerous in the way they were designed and built back then. Warranties? Some cases one month or a 1,000 miles, which ever came first. Cover ups? Buick's famous brake problem of 1953. No recall to the public. The dealers were barely warned of it. Until a mechanic in a Buick dealership as crushed by a Roadmaster. And still there was no public recall. No teeth today? Read your history. And be glad we live in a time where the government is watching out for us on this one. By the way, despite Buick's brake problems, they had a record setting year in sales. When they started grinding out axles in '56, is when the public started turning away from Buick. It took Buick years to rebuild its reputation from that debacle.

I love cars from the 50's and 60's. It's my favorite era in automotive history. But, I'm realistic about those cars too. I still get a kick when I hear people at car shows say, "They sure don't build them like that anymore." And I think to myself, "Thank god." The amount of work required back in the day in simple maintenance compared to today. The lack of safety and convenience features we have now. There's no way do I want to go back to "the good old days". The cars from back when are fun now as weekend play things. But, I'll stick this a modern car for daily driving. Recalls and all.

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you walked into any place that you purchased something with a problem and they had the authority to handle it , we would be in a much better place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And be glad we live in a time where the government is watching out for us on this one.

While that sounds all warm and fuzzy to outsiders looking in to the automobile industry, or any other over-regulated business these days, the simple truth of the matter is that, in most cases, the government agencies entrusted with "watching out for us" don't have the technical grasp of the "problems" they're "solving" to devise rational and well thought-out solutions. In many cases, the designers and engineers of the vehicles themselves lack the hands-on experience to make valid technical decisions (as should be pretty obvious by now), so how do you suppose government office paper shufflers know BETTER?? The knee-jerk pass-a-law-to-make-cars-safer mindset is slowly removing the idea of taking PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for the safe operation of motor vehicles...vehicles that are BY NATURE DANGEROUS, especially in the hands of the inattentive or poorly trained driver.

Take the mandated rear-view cameras that will be required in all new vehicles under 10,000 pounds in 2018. Yes. people continue to not pay attention and back over children, but requiring EVERYONE who drives a vehicle to PAY FOR THE INATTENTIVENESS OF A FEW is ludicrous. And the NHTSA's cited figures don't even agree with each other. In one sentence, NHTSA cites an average of 210 annual fatalities as a result of someone backing over someone else, and in another sentence the same agency says the cameras "will save 58 to 69 lives each year once the entire on-road vehicle fleet is equipped with systems that meet the specifications outlined."

Anybody see the disconnect in that? When NHTSA's own figures contradict each other, how are we to take seriously the validity of anything else their infinite wisdom puts forth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Dangerous"? Define the term. Cars were no more dangerous then than they are now. Today's cars might be safer due to the increased safety equipment, they might be cleaner running due to better engine management, they probably do handle better- but no less "dangerous" than cars of the '50's and '60's. I'm not saying that there were no recalls nor problems with them. Sure, we all know that they tended to rust due to lack of rustproofing. And, yes, our current government has more strict regulations for manufacturers. They don't seem to work when the bottom line on the spread sheet and shareholder revenue is what counts. With all of the regulations, quality philosophies, manufacturing techniques, etc, available to today's automakers,THERE SHOULD BE NO PROBLEMS WITH IGNITION SWITCHES OR AIRBAGS. But, there are. Unfortunately, money talks and politicians, government officials and corporate executives love money, no matter the source.

By the way- my family was involved in a three-car collision in a '56 Buick. We were in the middle car. I was about 4 years old. I saw pictures of that car and appreciate the heavy gauge sheet metal that was used in it's construction. If the same thing occured with our 2008 Sonata, things would have been... very ugly, to say the least :( .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Dangerous"? Define the term.

In my post #42, my implied definition of "dangerous" comes from the idea that ANY 3500 pound vehicle made mostly of steel, with many hot, spinning and jagged parts in its makeup, containing at least 15 or so gallons of highly flammable gasoline fuel, and traveling at 35 miles per hour on non-divided highways (where the impact with an oncoming vehicle traveling at 35 MPH is the same as driving into a solid concrete wall at 70...depending on how you actually define the solidity of the wall), being operated by almost totally-untrained drivers who are easily distracted by text and phone communications or screaming children...well, that should seem to pretty well fit any thinking persons idea of "dangerous".

Knee-jerk safety legislation DOES NOTHING TO ALLEVIATE THE INHERENT DANGER AS DEFINED ABOVE.

Lives could be saved and injuries minimized if more time was spent on hammering home the inherent danger of operating a vehicle, ANY vehicle, and reinforcing the idea that attentiveness and actively taking personal-responsibility for safe conduct is absolutely necessary at all times.

But THAT wouldn't make everybody feel good about being taken care of.

Edited by Ace-Garageguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government may not do as good job of regulating the automotive industry overall. Or at all. The bureaucrats do not know as much about cars as they should. This is all true. I can not argue with you guys on these points at all. But (Don't you just love the butts? For here it comes! A difference of opinion you know you will not agree with.), in the days before government intervention/regulation the industry did a very poor job of regulating itself. Nobody wants the government to stick its nose into anybodies business. Especially since the government doesn't do a very good job of it. But, industry would not do the job, so somebody had to. The government agencies that do this stuff didn't just come about out of thin air. There are reasons for their existence. Right or wrong. Again go back and read history. Contrary to belief, the "good old days" were not very good.

By the way, the government is over zealous in a lot of cases and takes things too far. And humans having differences in opinions and experiences give us all a different perspective on life. What can we do if we don't like something the government does? We can lobby our Senators and our Represenitives. And if that doesn't work, we can vote for one who shares our same values and beliefs. The only trouble with that is, in many cases the majority (right or wrong) may not agree with with us. And they may vote for people or ideas we don't agree with. Also, here again right or wrong, are indivual lobbiest with more power and money than I. I don't always like it. But, that's life.

As I tell the kids I work with, "Life isn't fair. But, sometime that is not always a bad thing. And for the most part things seem to work out for the best in the long run."

Now to wait. And see the disagreements that come up over this one.

Scott

Edited by unclescott58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was gonna rant, but, nah. GM made it's bed, now, the execs and shareholders can sleep in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was gonna rant, but, nah. GM made it's bed, now, the execs and shareholders can sleep in it.

Oh come on. Go for the rant. It's much more fun.

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...