Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Buying American Cars What Does It Mean?
7263 messages, Last post on May 27, 2009 at 4:31 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
With parts coming from everywhere, does "Buying American" have much meaning anymore? Is quality and price the bottom line?
|
Replying to: fezo (Oct 22, 2008 8:27 am) Well for the most part, Lemko and I have tended to buy bigger, simpler American cars, and that's what the domestics tend to be good at. And as for something like a '79 Chrysler Newport, even though they were horribly rated, the chassis could essentially be traced back to 1962, the transmission to 1957, and the engine way back to 1955, so it's not like we were dealing with rocket science here. It would break and things would fall off of it, but for the most part you could nurse it along indefinitely! I'm sure if Lemko and I had a preference for smaller vehicles, I'm sure our memories of how reliable those old cars were wouldn't be quite so happy. If i try next time out to buy a domestic it would really have to be a domestic. I'm not interested in the concept of saving American car companies if they are going to build in Mexico or Korea. This isn't to say that those two countries can't build cars - they just don't employ Americans. I'll take an American built Japanese make over that every time. I'm with you there! That's one thing I don't like about the Fusion...it's built in Mexico. I'd rather have an Altima or Accord that's domestic-built, and is made up of primarily domestic content, than something that got slipped across the border with a minimum of US content, and had an American brand badge slapped on it.
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Oct 22, 2008 8:36 am) |
|
|
However, the lack of air bags, ABS, stability control, frequent tune-ups and 10 mpg on a good day with a tailwind (just kidding) might be slight detractors, especially for routine use. How about a modern classic: simple four door, RWD, state of the art 3 to 4 liter six cylinder (preferably in-line with plenty of space either side for easy servicing), choice of auto or stick shift, stability control and air bags, and that's it. Double DIN dash opening and standard speaker size openings, no compulsory gadgets, you get the idea.......
|
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Oct 22, 2008 8:27 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: vcheng (Oct 22, 2008 9:09 am) You'd probably have to go back to the 70's to find something that bad. By the early 80's most cars got decent fuel economy as fuel injection and an overdrive gear became more common. My grandpa bought a '83 Old 88 Brougham with a 307 w/ 4speed and it would get mid to high 20's on the hwy at 60mph back then. Certainly would be a crude drive by today's standards though. OTOH, my 6000lb Expedition with 300hp gets better fuel economy than the 150hp (or so) '75 Buick Regal that my grandpa gave me as my first car. While it was a big car, it probably didn't weight much more than 4,000lbs, and 16mpg at 60mph was about as good as it would get.
|
|
|
Replying to: 1stpik (Oct 22, 2008 4:33 am) Like another poster said: It's the auto workers who are suffering the most.' It seems it's too late for the big 3 to turn it around. They have sold their souls. |
|
|
Replying to: dieselone (Oct 22, 2008 9:24 am) I was actually looking at a similar car a few weeks ago, although it was an '82 Delta 88, and just a base model. 307, but just a 3-speed auto. Seller wanted $1500 for it. I had an '85 LeSabre with the 307/4-speed, and around town I'd usually get around 14-15, lower 20's on the highway. My grandparents, who had the car before me, could easily get mid/upper 20's out of it though on the highway. OTOH, my 6000lb Expedition with 300hp gets better fuel economy than the 150hp (or so) '75 Buick Regal that my grandpa gave me as my first car. While it was a big car, it probably didn't weight much more than 4,000lbs, and 16mpg at 60mph was about as good as it would get. Yeah, 4000 lb sounds about right. I have a '76 Grand LeMans coupe, and I think its base weight is around 3830 lb. By the time you add air conditioning, a few power accessories, etc, I'm sure it's up to around 4000 lb. It has a 350-4bbl, a whopping 165-170 hp. Best I ever got on the highway was 17.5, running maybe 65-70 on average. Around town, more like 10-11, and I've managed to sink it into single digits!  My Mom & stepdad have a 1997 or 1998 Expedition, and I think they've gotten it down to as low as 12-13 mpg around town, maybe 18 on the highway. But when you factor in the bulk of it, and the power, by 1970's standards that kind of fuel economy would have been phenomenal!
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Oct 22, 2008 10:17 am) |
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Oct 22, 2008 10:22 am) Well, you never know, depending on the circumstances. Out on level ground, no a/c running, staying at a lazy 60-65 mph without sudden acceleration or braking, it just might. Making the run up to PA for one of our car shows (I think it was the Ford show back in June), I took it easy with the Intrepid, keeping it around 55-60 for the most part, and managed to get about 32.5 mpg. When I came up for Fall Carlisle, I kept it more like 60-65 for the most part, and economy dropped to about 31.5. This last time, going up for the Hershey show, I didn't have the patience to drive that slow, was doing more like 65-70 on average, and when I filled up came in right at 30 mpg. I didn't use the a/c any of those times...although it was so hot the day of that Ford show I had it cranking on the way home! |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Buying American Cars What Does It Mean?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
