GM to buy CHRYSLER?
02-18-2007, 02:50 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GT_2003,Feb 18 2007, 11:29 AM
any vehicle suffers from neglect. Hardly an indictment of a brand. If you let things fall apart, you have no-one to blame but yourself.
My father babied the thing for its entire life(his first new vehicle), and even with regular washes and caring for if fell apart. I forgot to mention that the paint on the roof fell off with time and, again, it wasn't from neglect.
for the Plymouth Voyager, there's no excuse for how bad it was.
02-18-2007, 06:54 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JonBoy,Feb 18 2007, 01:39 PM
Hold on while I double over in laughter.
Okay, I'm done.
Are you serious? The Chrysler has had the worst fuel mileage, the worst engine, the worst fit and finish, the worst resale value (it's truly horrible), paint problems, and transmission problems as well.
I never said the Odyssey was perfect - I said it was the best.
If "benchmark" doesn't mean anything positive, why would you use it? Most people use "benchmark" to indicate that it's the HIGH standard against which all others are measured...much like the 3-Series is the benchmark for compact sport sedans. It is rarely used to indicated a middle-class standard.
I haven't seen or read a single article that listed the Dodge/Chrysler/Plymouth minivans as the "benchmark" since the mid-90s (that's 10-12 years ago). No one takes them seriously except on their prices. You still get what you pay for, though.
Bottom line: DaimlerChrysler minivans are hasbeens. They are nowhere near competitive with the new Kia, Honda, or Toyota minivans (yes, I said Kia and yes, I'm serious).
Okay, I'm done.
Are you serious? The Chrysler has had the worst fuel mileage, the worst engine, the worst fit and finish, the worst resale value (it's truly horrible), paint problems, and transmission problems as well.
I never said the Odyssey was perfect - I said it was the best.
If "benchmark" doesn't mean anything positive, why would you use it? Most people use "benchmark" to indicate that it's the HIGH standard against which all others are measured...much like the 3-Series is the benchmark for compact sport sedans. It is rarely used to indicated a middle-class standard.
I haven't seen or read a single article that listed the Dodge/Chrysler/Plymouth minivans as the "benchmark" since the mid-90s (that's 10-12 years ago). No one takes them seriously except on their prices. You still get what you pay for, though.
Bottom line: DaimlerChrysler minivans are hasbeens. They are nowhere near competitive with the new Kia, Honda, or Toyota minivans (yes, I said Kia and yes, I'm serious).
02-18-2007, 07:08 PM
#34
Registered User
Originally Posted by GT_2003,Feb 18 2007, 10:54 PM
you give Honda a pass on "reliability" even though you parenthetically admit they have huge problems with the transmissions. Give it a rest. The only benchmark the Odyssey sets is the lengths people are willing to go to defend a clearly flawed product. Better interior? Since when is a "better interior" more important than a drivetrain that won't crap out prematurely? Since never, I respectfully submit.
Tools like you can't understand. Why you always jump in lbashing Honda about their transmissions and just for that they are not a good product? Let me make it clear for your mentally ill ass. HONDA may have some tranny issues with some cars but that alone does not make a car company bad, even Ferrari has had their few problems, does that makes them less? NO! They are what they are just like Honda for what they make overall for their respective markets. Stop looking into the little details to feel better about yourself. Go troll some place else.
02-19-2007, 05:39 AM
#37
Registered User
Originally Posted by kumainu,Feb 19 2007, 12:00 AM
What huge transmission problems? How come none of my Hondas ever had a transmission issue? How come my S2000's transmission/gearbox seems to be the best in the world? 
You're right. Chrysler products are clearly better and that's why the company is in its greatest shape. It would've died years ago if not for Daimler. Honda products are so bad that they keep garnering good reputation and awards worldwide.
Chrysler should've paid Car and Driver money to garner this spot:
http://www.caranddriver.com/besttrucks/106...trucks-van.html
http://www.caranddriver.com/besttrucks/12395/van.html
You're right. Chrysler products are clearly better and that's why the company is in its greatest shape. It would've died years ago if not for Daimler. Honda products are so bad that they keep garnering good reputation and awards worldwide.
Chrysler should've paid Car and Driver money to garner this spot:
http://www.caranddriver.com/besttrucks/106...trucks-van.html
http://www.caranddriver.com/besttrucks/12395/van.html
The funny thing is that the facts are hitting them in the face and they still talk smack. Ignorance is bliss.
02-19-2007, 05:58 AM
#38
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by GT_2003,Feb 17 2007, 08:33 PM
The Chrysler minivan has been the benchmark since day one based on price, performance, design, and reliability (no transmission issues).
I would not undersell the power of the Caravan line in the market place, they sell a zillion. But they may have been passed by in may respects by the Japanese.
I know four people at work that bought new Caravan products in the last five or six years, and they total four transmission replacements. One car worked perfectly, two had a tranny each replaced, and one went through two.
Other than that the owners generally liked them. Having gone shopping with my sis to help her pick out a minivan, she went with the Toyota. I think the Toyota and Honda make a better van, (even though the Honda is really ugly IMHO) the Chrysler was not a bad product and could be had for thousands less. And Clawhammer was right, GM does not currently have ANYTHING in the realm.
Although they don't have any cash to buy anything in the realm either.
02-19-2007, 06:36 AM
#39
Originally Posted by GT_2003,Feb 18 2007, 09:54 PM
you give Honda a pass on "reliability" even though you parenthetically admit they have huge problems with the transmissions. Give it a rest. The only benchmark the Odyssey sets is the lengths people are willing to go to defend a clearly flawed product. Better interior? Since when is a "better interior" more important than a drivetrain that won't crap out prematurely? Since never, I respectfully submit.
So how about you tell me which "benchmark" is set by Chrysler?
I'm waiting.
Seriously, tell me what Chrysler does in their minivans that is so special and above all the rest.They use smaller engines with less power and less fuel efficiency, their resale is horrible, they have had paint and transmission problems for quite some time, and their build quality is significantly below that of the three vans (Honda, Toyota, and Kia) that I previously mentioned.
Chrysler has lower prices. That's it. And that's why they sell them.
It's pretty clear you're a troll. Go back to the Mustang forum.