Why is that the Americans still can't build a reliable car without so many minor nuisances and problems.

American technology is so good with other machines, such as military equipment, commercial aircraft and commercial trucks. US fighter jets are some of the most reliable and advanced in the world. Navy warships such as the aircraft carrier are extremely tough, and now with the construction of the next-generation of aircaft carrier, the CVN-78 (USS Gerald Ford).

American companies are improving, but some of these cars are still disappointing. The new Jeep Grand Cherokee is amazing, but still has so many problems and not sure if I would put a lot of these cars as reliable.

I would really like to see America come out on top of well-made vehicles, as they have had with other machines.

 

Ok.

 

Moved to Car Talk...

 

I think you'll find that most of the people here who own an American car have had little to no problems with it.

I can also say that based on surveys as well as first and second hand experience... American cars have come a long way and many manufacturers can now easily compete with the foreign brands in terms of reliability...

If your post was from the 90's, I'd agree... but they've made great strides over the last decade or so...

 

All car companies have some disappointing cars, and some great ones. American car companies are no different. I'd say since about 2007, the American car game has definetely changed, and they're coming out with a lot of new cars that are better than the competition.

 

I can't agree more, especially when it comes to talking about Ford. If there is one auto company from the US that I want to see succeed, it is Ford.

 

My guess would be cost effectiveness. In the 70's Ford knew there was an issue with the placement of the Pinto gas tank at the rear of the car. In the case of a rear-end collision, explosion was a likely consequence. However, it would cost less to settle liability suits than change a production line. They didn't change the design until the next production run and settled out of court numerous times.

When choosing a part to use, if one part that fails 1% of the time costs 50% more than another that fails 10% of the time, it is likely that replacing those 10% under warranty will cost less than using the better part across the entire fleet.

When it comes to car business, cutting corners (cost reduction) usually reigns supreme. Even if reliability is less than the competitor, the consumer typically will only look at the price tag. How much does it cost to get from A to B? If it is cheaper from America, then the manufacturer made the right business decision. The fastest way to someone's vote is through their wallet.

But that is just my guess.

However, like ^^^they mentioned, the bar is being raised. Lincoln is stepping up their game, and let's not forget where a lot of Hyundais are made.

 

Agree.

Also to add, i have had LESS rattles, or fixes with my 2 expeditions (a 1998 and 99 which i still currently own) combined (both have/had over 200k on them) than any of my 5 hondas/acuras by themselves

 

I think there may be some truth to what the OP says, although some of it can also be argued that much of the quality issues suffered by the domestics aren't as common as they once were. It was the Japanese that prompted the domestics to start building better vehicles, as the consumer was able to witness a Japanese product with far better quality and engineering than they had ever experienced before.

Of the big three, it's now widely recognized that Ford has exemplary quality and I hope it continues. Ford actually realized a number of years ago that the products it would build today had to be of a quality to rival it's Japanese counterparts. Ford also decided then that much of the components used to build their vehicles should be designed and manufactured in house instead of an outside supplier, resulting that today it uses more of it's own parts than GM or Chrysler. That being said, both Chrysler and GM have also increased their quality levels as well. Many of the mid and upper GM products have much better quality than just a few short years ago. Unfortunately, lower GM products often still suffer from poor materials and construction. Quite odd, as in the future it will be a smaller product that will become the strongest sellers.

Today I wouldn't have much of a concern buying something from either Ford, GM, or Chrysler. To be honest, I still thing the Japanese built products would be a little better in quality, but I would also question if the price premium being asked for them is as easy to justify as it was ten years ago.

Anyway, just my

 

I'm not sure if I should go into this, but a few things:

- The quality of the "Big Three" US automakers has improved greatly over the last couple of decades.
- A Jeep Grand Cherokee has never been the best example of manufacturing capabilities.
- A lot of "American" vehicles are actually made in other countries, while a lot of "Japanese" and "European" vehicles are built in the US. All of them use parts from around the globe.
- I'm trying to avoid having this veer off into political territory, but simply stated, after Germany and Japan lost WWII, military development in both nations was very small, especially compared to that in the US and former Soviet Union. As a result, many of their engineers, designers, manufacturers and resources were focused on things like building automobiles. If, say, Ford and GM had access to the people and resources that went into American military development, we'd likely have much different vehicles.

 

The only issues I've even heard a grumbling about with the new Jeeps is potential suspension glitches with the adjustable set up on the Overland model. Apart from that, nothing.

I actually find the OPs statement to be very untrue from a personal experience...and a more true statement to be that most automakers are on a fairly level playing field at this point. Much in part to the Domestics getting this act to gather and improving their product, and the japanese resting on their laurels and cheapening their products (except lexus)...Then you have the germans, where I feel the song remains the same about them for the last 20 years. And the Koreans...who have shot out of nowhere to be what the japanese were 30 years ago.

 

This - I fully believe that Kia/Hyundai is the Honda/Acura of the 80's and 90's. Their new stuff has come a long way in the past 10 years.

 

I still feel as if American car companies are building mediocre/garbage cars. I've been in rentals all week; 2 American, 1 Korean and the experience has only reinforced the sentiment. Campared to the level of power/luxury I'm accustomed to there is no comparison (msrp is significantly higher though) but even when compared to a very modest, base Elantra the aesthetics (inside) and interior build quality of both the Fusion SEL & Chrysler 200 w/ leather fell short although both American cars had under 10k miles.

 

On the exact opposite, go compare a Titan to a F150 or Chevy. The Americans blow them out of the water.

 

Its not a bad question. To be honest, I think under 75000 miles you wont have many problems with any car. Its after warranties expire and components get older that I'd worry about my cars country of origin.

 

The OP is misinformed.

Domestics are very good in terms of quality.

In terms of industry I see Japanese makes as falling in terms of quality, while the domestics and Koreans are gaining.

 

What do you mean by quality? I'm not a mechanical engineer so I can't debate with you which is less likely to break down or has a better tranny, but as an enthusiast and someone who's driven drozens of cars when someone mentions quality a few things come to find: how well is the interior put together, the materials used in said interior, the types of materials used on exterior and fit/finish of said materials.


I can't contribute to discussion in regards to trucks, pickups, or subcompact cars but have a lot of experience with compact/mid size and full size sedans. Nothing comes to mind where domestic counterpart is > important (Japanese, German, Swed, Korean, etc).

 

Go drive a brand new civic and tell
Me how the interior compares to say a 200.

I'd bet about the same. Possibly even worse.

 

Quality as in durability, I'd say the Civic is better. Materials and their perceived quality (see and feel) I'd probably give many cars an edge.

Honda dropped the ball there.

Ever sat in a CR-Z particularly an EX? The upper level Civics should get some of that..

 

Not trying to bring in higher level models right now.

But Honda has really been cheaping out on their interiors. Current accord, civic. I feel like the durability is NOT there. Hell, I wouldn't give the vote to my prius as far as long term durability. The fabric on the seats is first rate crap.

 

Ps. For reference I'm using my challenger, Prius, ANNNNND my wife's 2000 civic (that I am driving everyday) And my in laws current gen accord. My sis in laws last gen
Civic (that I like)

That 2000 is like a tank. Everything inside has held up very well.

Even my 97 jeep Laredo is still very nice inside.

It's the prius and in laws accord I feel are the weak link.

 

Why? Because the labor rate is so fucking high that all their money goes towards it ands its not easy keeping quality high. They're forced to cut corners

 

Im my experience, some Japanese manufactures have work to do in terms of paint/metal quality/durability. My dad had 2 Datsun Zs in the 70s and they rusted out within a couple of years...30 years later my old Protege 5 rusted through in places by year 5. Conversely dad drove his '89 Taurus SHO for 13 years, and barely had any surface rust at all when he traded it in for his first TL.

When the Mazda started rusting, the dealers failed to fix anything under their 4 year warranty as they said it only covered holes, and not surface rust. By the time I had rust "holes" the car was 5 years old, thus no longer under warranty...NEVER BUYING ANOTHER MAZDA PRODUCT EVER AGAIN, made in Hiroshima or otherwise...

 

Yep, they sure do skimp out on the paint. Basically every Honda/Acura from the 90s that wasn't a pure garage queen or taken care of meticulously will have clearcoat peeling away up top.

 

That I can concur also. Driver side door on my wife's car is getting bad with the clear coat peeling up. Silver car.

The paint on the prius is thin. I'm betting it's paint like the Honda Fit where there is clear coat mixed in the actual paint. But no real clear coat layer.

I will say the paint on my challenger is thin. That's where I feel they cheaper out on that car.

 

my brand new equinox is suffering from tranny problems, and engine rattle issues and GM refuses to acknowledge that it's not right. Many owners are complaining. Some things still are yet to change.

 

LoL I never knew that.

 

I need to drive high luxury American cars such as Cadillacs and Lincoln's to get a better feel for their build quality, fit and finish because I'm only familiar with the lower end of the spectrum.

 

As for the Civics mentioned here, there are large differences between a DX trim and an EX-L trim. Everything about the drivetrain is the same, so mechanical reliability is the same too. The biggest difference is one costs $16k and the other costs $22k. All other differences are based off that $6k interior price difference. The DX will not impress many people. The EX-L will, and people will go, "This is a Civic? I thought those were supposed to be cheap." The same will go for an Accord. You are going to get what you pay for.

I don't think it is fair to judge interior quality on a company's lowest trim. At that point you are only looking for a motor that turns wheels for a long time with little issue.

 

Disagree/agree

Civic and accords...higher trims get you leather. The cheap hard plastic, and in some places very thin walled plastic, theyve resorted to using in the dash/center console remains the same throughout.

This isn't like a bimmer where you from pleather and plastic to soft touch materials, alcantara and napa leather.

 

Forgot to mention I test drove an 08 civic ex-l and the interior was surprisingly nice; like the dash, sheering wheel, buttons.

 

Thats last gen...and they are nice. My sister in law has 08 EX. I happen to like the interior design of that gen.

Its the current all new civic that took a big plunge.

 

This is an interesting thought. I know we have great engineers and resources to design different mechanical things, but things such as the military and NASA have the top ones.

 

So what, are you basing your comments on you rented a low end gm/ford and are trying to compare it to the "luxury" of your 40k TL? Apples and Oranges.

 

I think the thread about the top trim level Impala many of us have rented would fit nicely here. A top trim Camry is much more impressive as far as fit and feel for $2k less. Shit, my wife's Civic EX-L is smoother and more comfortable than the Impala XLT I rented. I bet it will hold up just as well or better down the road too. I was very unimpressed by that $30k car.

 

Guess it's safe to assume you didn't read my entire post.

 

My mom's 1997 Dodge Intrepid is a tank compared to my TL. Hasn't had one major mechanical problem since it's purchase in late 1996. As for my TL I've had a cracking dash, interior rattles, and the transmission is starting to fail.

 

Wow, what a thread.

In the 90's, the OP's assertion was absolutely true and of my three prior American car purchases, I was sorry I purchased with two of them. The two POSs were both Mopars. I will likely never again buy a Chrysler product because of my experience with those two cars.

Contrast that to my experience with my CTS-V. I thought I'd own it for a year or two and get out of it as little problems crept up. I'm at over 2 1/2 years in the V, modded, and almost 31k miles and the only problems I've had are that the door handles, which are part of the keyless entry system, had to be replaced. My modded V is more reliable than my 2G RL was. I'm still shocked. I'm still waiting for something to go wrong, for an unexpected creak to happen, but this car is built like a fracking tank. There are a couple of known issues with the V, but they are minor annoyances at worst and easily taken care of.

At least in the case of the V, there have been some advancements in quality. The more plebian CTS, though, with the old 3.6 DI engine, has had issues with stretching of the timing chain.....corrected by more frequent oil changes (the associated TSB was to change the MID oil reminder to reflect the new mileage requirement).

So American cars are not perfect....but they've come a long way.

 

I agree. As good as the Japanese are, I don't think they've quite figured out just yet what appeals to the domestic pickup driver. Another one is snorting V8. The Japanese V8s are a marvel of smoothness and drivability, but stomping one's foot down on a rumbling, torquey domestic V8 is a wonderful thing, and so far it hasn't been duplicated by anyone.

 

Oh, hell yeah. I speak from daily experience.