OH where to begin....
Aurora40 said:
Yet when you are confronted with the reality that an Impala is bigger than your Accord, you have to make up some new "metric" about how efficient the space usage in your car is.
They already know they will like the import better, and they feel a need to justify it by disguising their opinion as fact. It would be quite reasonable of you to say that the Impala interior is bigger, but that you don't need that much space or just find other aspects of the car more appealing. What is absurd is to make up some new metric of "interior efficiency" and then claim Honda is the champ.
And you didn't let the fact that you have no idea how well Buicks sell from preventing you from stating that they must sell abysmally. The fact that the Rendezvous is the only Buick you see on the road regularly doesn't change the fact that for almost 10 years the LeSabre has been the best selling full-size car in America, or the fact that the Rendezvous has been outselling the RX300, or the fact that, while not setting any sales records, Centurys and Regals leave dealer lots to the tune of over 200,000 per year.
I've read a review in Car and Driver where they pitted the new SC430 against a CLK430 and concluded the CLK430 the more "serious" and "sporty" car. This, in spite of the fact that the Lexus bested the MB in just about every performance category, and that at the race track they went to the Lexus continuously set better lap times than the Benz. Hell, they didn't even let the fact that the MB had a wheel burst into flames (no lie!) at the track, from the brakes not being up to the task, get in the way of their findings! Why should that prevent them from proclaiming the German car to be more serious about performance than the Japanese one. Maybe the Benz just felt so connected and in control whilst being engulfed in its own flames that it just had to win... I'm not saying they should say American cars are better than imports. But I do feel that they are biased in their reporting and they need to change that bias even if it doesn't change their conclusions.
I feel this type of reporting is in no small part responsible for shaping American's impressions of cars. It might surprise you to find that VW has one of the highest ratings of perceived quality, but one of the lowest ratings of actual quality, which of course won't prevent magazines from referring to the exacting German standards of the VW's they test.
And it might surprise you to know that GM is working on replacing the engines in 13,000 mass-transit buses with hybrid ones, and that it will save more fuel than 500,000 Toyota Prius's would, or that GM is the fuel-economy leader in 38 of the 82 segments (46%) of the US market, but again, this won't stop the magazines from portraying Toyota or Honda as caring, efficient companies and portraying GM as some bean-counting company that won't care about our planet until the government makes them.
I'll attempt to address the silliness line by line..
1. Your point regarding interior room. These numbers are straight from Consumer Guide.
2003 Honda Accord
Front Head Room, in. 39.8 40.4
Max. Front Leg Room, in. 43.1 42.6
Rear Head Room, in. 36.1 38.5
Min. Rear Leg Room, in. 31.9 36.8
2003 Chevrolet Impala
Front Head Room, in. 39.2
Max. Front Leg Room, in. 42.2
Rear Head Room, in. 36.8
Min. Rear Leg Room, in. 38.4
So what does that mean? Just like I said, room in the front is fine. Accord has more headroom and legroom in front. Just like I SAID, the back seat is more cramped. So far I fail to see your point.
2. Why do you think it IS that magazines and consumers have come to expect a higher level of quality from certain companies? And furthermore, why is that a BAD thing.
If you went to McDonalds for 15 years and everytime you went the service was good, and the food was always hot. Even though it costs more than Burger King, you never got heartburn from the McDonalds-- you never regretted your purchase. So you come to expect that from McDonalds. Should anybody be surprised when one day you announce, "lunch should be good, it usually is."
It only seems asinine to me to receive lower quality every year and not form opinions about the Big 3. You still can't answer to the fact of Consumer Guide's Best and Worst Lists. This year the Honda Accord, Civic, Prelude, CR-V, and Odyssey were there. The Toyota Camry, Corolla, Cellica, Sequoia, and Avalon were there. Nissan Maxima, Altima, and Sentra get there. BMW's are common, so are Suburus. Why do you think there's NOT A SINGLE CHEVY, FORD, or CHRYSLER? It's called reality. Fact is, those cars just don't hold up.
So why do you think the magazines expect Japanese cars to be green, Euros to be precise and Americans to be wasteful and unreliable? It's called experience. Just like the McDonalds story. Deductive reasoning is an incredible thing.
3. I've never made any comment as to Buick's being terrible, or the reason for the lack of sales. My comment regarding the Rendezvous was simply a confirmation that they are a popular Buick model. I have no problem in particular with the Rendezvous. Your point regarding the LeSabre being the best selling Full Size was just silly. Being the best selling Full Size is like being the most attractive woman in prison. I can't think of a segment of the market shrinking faster than Full Size Sedans. And furthermore, LeSabre's share of that market has dwindled every year since it's last redesign.
4. I can't speak at all to your point regarding the Benz vs. Lexus. I have not seen the article. I will say that if the article was an essay over determining which was a sportier or more raceworthy car, I'm sure looks do play a part. With that said, I've not read the article.
5. The point about VW is well taken. If you read carefully, you'll find that many sources Consumer Guides (who I feel are pretty reliable) and Edmunds both report that new VWs have some issues. Particularily with suspension. I think sometimes the past gets caught up with the present in regards to VW. The older bugs were pretty dependable. We had one that ran non-stop in -20 degree Ohio weather for many years.
6. I'm glad GM's replacing those engines. That's great. It's a good step. It doesn't change the lack of quality in their products. I would agree that stereotypes can be very dangerous, but in this business--they are forged for a reason. Reporters didn't just wake up one day and think, "you know, I'll be those Japanese make a great econobox, and the Germans must be really good at math." Those perceptions come from years and years of experience. Remember that there used to be a stereotype about American cars too. People spoke about their Chevelle's and Fairlanes with pride. But those days are gone and slowly but surely years of poor product have eroded that image. 20 years ago, someone's dad might have said, "My '57 was built like a tank. They don't make em like that anymore." Who says that about Chevy now? Not many people.
Sentences you won't hear soon:
"My Chevy Cavalier was built like a tank."
"My Oldsmobile Alero sure held up well."
"One day this Pontiac Grand Am will be a Classic!"
It won't happen until some major lessons are learned.
I appreciate your point, I know you feel the media writes to support it's preconceived ideas. Maybe you have a point. But I'll bet you that those preconceived ideas came from somewhere. The world had years of Chevrolet Citations, Oldsmobile Omegas, Pontiac Sunbirds, Geo Metros, Ford Pintos, and Chrysler LeBarons upon which to figure out that the Big 3 had lost their grip.
However, I do see lots a Buicks on the road!
