Am I wrong about GM?

File: 00T0T_dsu1HcfgW4L_600x450.jpg (30KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 600x337px

OK, here's something to consider.

Am I being biased whenever somebody says they have some GM car and Pic related comes to mind...and then I'm not disappointed? I mean, if there's one thing I can almost always count on, it's that it will look as shitty as that.

Here's a question for any GM fans (bless your heart), but did they actually manufacture vehicles in that filthy matte primer gray, or is everybody that buys a GM a chronic procrastinator that never gets past the primer stage?

I can't count the number of 88 Cutlass' I see that are straight up flat primer gray/rust two-tone, and it makes me wonder if they're all lazy or if GM actually had a correctional-facility color palette thing going on.

File: 1425855235283.jpg (1MB, 2048x1901px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1901px

>>15102075

>>15102075
Damn dude, how does all that tell everyone that fwd is better than rwd? Or that automatic is super master race?

File: Screen Shot 2016-05-20 at 6.55.15 PM.png (879KB, 1191x440px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 1191x440px

I actually went to CL to find the lowest of the lows and compare.

I typed in 1988 ford, then 1988 chevy. I was scrolling through and saw one single piece of shit and thought "ahah! There's a shitty ford!" but then I looked closer...somehow chevy won the shit-show again.

I kept scrolling and found a wonderful Ford econovan in great condition inside and out! Something I can't seem to find when I search for Chevy vans...

Both of pic-related are '88's

Science.

>>15102075
>Lincoln
Why?
>Mercury
lol they aren't even around anymore

>>15102075
Bruh, this isn't your blog.
No one wants to read a few paragraphs about your opinions on one brand.

>>15102164
As far a those are concerned GM did have a paint problem at that time so just about every surviving G-body either needs paint or was repainted years ago.

File: 687474703a2f2f7777772e6375726273696465636c61737369632e636f6d2f77702d636f6e74656e742f75706c6f6164732f323031332f30322f657874656e73696f6e2d6661696c7572652d65313335383534383735363335362e6a7067.jpg (56KB, 575x419px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 575x419px

Oh, and another point while it's on my mind, why do niggers and mexcuns LOVE GM?

I mean, if there's one thing GM can do that NO other manufacturer can do (Chrysler a close second, though they're complete sell-outs and bootleggers) it's appeal to the unga-bungas.

They fucking love Chevy Avalanche's and "dat 'llac". Niggers will live in section 8 housing and STILL try to find a cadillac to put on rims. Doesn't matter that the headliner is disintegrating, that the tint is flaking, that the lower fascias have fallen off, and that the ABS filler panels are missing, "yo at least I got dat 'llac!"

I see niggers drive Lincolns and Crown Vics too, but that's because they happen to be the most popular american vehicles in existence today and can be had for $2,000. They'll pay triple that price to have an older and more beat-up (nigger-ified) Cadillac.

>>15102214
So how the owner treats the car controls brand quality. Neat.

>>15102075
>He thinks that picture is a problem on a fleet truck
>He doesn't know how to take 15 minutes of prep with the 120 and 220.
>He doesn't know how to paint retard proof single stage

Why should be value your opinions on anything? You keep posting straight cars with bad paint and claim they're shit. You're obviously a normie.

>>15102075
Cars will break over time and people will abuse them. It's all personal preference.

>>15102237
At that time? From what years? 1988-2005? Because that's about the range that I see paint FALLING OFF of these things... That's a long time to realize "hey dude, you got a fucking problem" unless the issue is "did we save $0.02?"

>>15102216
Lincoln is just a Ford, which means (and this is GENERAL, because there are some platforms, engines, years that are shit) that I can count on them to have thought things out, have a good record as far as engineering and ruggedness, and the Lincolns are by-far the most well-suited luxury vehicles I've ever driven. I despise BMW, VW, Mercedes-Benz, Porche and Cadillac, I've driven them all and they seemed to be pumped out without any thought about what might happen five-minutes after it left the lot. I think these brands are for people that are impulse buyers and can be swooned into buying something that makes their jimmies jingle.

Watch this. This is one of those "wow" features to get somebody to buy the shit, never thinking about how it might BLOCK buttons and be an issue in the future, just as long as somebody feels their butthole pucker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4W5CaqhdnY

>>15102262
The factory should deliver a tested product...

It's a clear oversight and is a symptom of a larger issue.

>>15102263
Then why do I find it hard to find other brands that are as shit as GM cars? I mean really, if I need to find a car to enter for the Crap Fest, the first thing I'm doing is hitting up CL and typing "1988 chevy/buick/gmc/olds/cadillac/pontiac"

Full-disclosure, I believe that all Lincolns from 1980-1989 are shit. 1990 Town Car got it back on track, but everything else followed the 90's trends (and ALL their flaws). They didn't get another good car until the 2003-2011 Town Car, and any Lincoln made after 2014 is fine as far as quality and longevity, but christ nobody can design a functional interior today.

"HEY LOOK, I can durpty durp a hurpaderp just by using my voice command!"
"SYNC, please say a command"
"DURP!"
"Sorry, I didn't understand, please try again"
"DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUR-PUH!"
"Sorry, I didn't understand, please try again"
"DEEEEEEEEE-YUUUUUUUUUR-PUH!"
"Sorry, I didn't understand, please try again"

vs.

*press durp button
*car durps

Also, you need a robot to park your car? How did you get a license?

>>15102385
Maybe if you stop yelling durp at the poor thing it would work

File: 2015-Lincoln-MKX-interior.jpg (58KB, 638x426px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 638x426px

>>15102410
You're a fucking liar. Look at the layout of this shit and tell me ANYTHING should be expected to work.

what about DODGE?

File: lincoln-town-car-black-interior-wallpaper-4.jpg (81KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1024x768px

>>15102414
This is the layout of my Town Car. I have yet to find any fault in its function, and believe me, I'm one PICKY asshole.

In fact, I get so annoyed by seat-belt chimes (they beep whenever you turn the key to ON and start it, but I don't fasten until after I start it so I can fasten my belt empty-handed) that I just rigged the seat-belt sensor to show that I'm ALWAYS buckled. The peace is sweet...

If there is a fault in a car, I find it, and I shit on it. GM gives me a lot to shit on, they're not alone, but they are the shittiest.

>>15102423
They're odd. I don't get their design, but I also don't get the "is this knob about to fall off in my hand" feeling when I drive one. I also don't see the PLAGUED gauge issues that GM seemed to have from the 80's to mid 00's... I mean really, PLAGUED. They used horrible printed circuits that were guaranteed to fail.

So now we get to Ford.

Am I wrong to say that Ford's FIRST priority is volume production? How many different marquis do they have? That's like having ten-wives and pumping out as many babies as you can, allah be praised.

I keep banging my head against Ford's faults because my father in law is a die-hard fan, no matter how many times I point out that NONE of his four Fords have a working fuel gauge... That the headliner on some is falling, that the clear-coat was lost to the wind years ago or the paint seems to be evaporating slowly, that half of the knobs on the dash are held on with glue, that everything you touch creaks and groans as if it's ready to give, that all of the interior panels rattle and clack over the most minute road faults, that the expanded-foam steering wheel in one of his cars is DISINTEGRATING, and that there are so many god damned frustrating over-sights in the design of practically every aspect of the vehicle!

Well?

So now we get to Toyota.

Am I wrong to say that Toyota's FIRST priority is volume production? How many different marquis do they have? That's like having ten-wives and pumping out as many babies as you can, allah be praised.

I keep banging my head against Toyota's faults because my father in law is a die-hard fan, no matter how many times I point out that NONE of his four Toyota's have a working fuel gauge... That the headliner on some is falling, that the clear-coat was lost to the wind years ago or the paint seems to be evaporating slowly, that half of the knobs on the dash are held on with glue, that everything you touch creaks and groans as if it's ready to give, that all of the interior panels rattle and clack over the most minute road faults, that the expanded-foam steering wheel in one of his cars is DISINTEGRATING, and that there are so many god damned frustrating over-sights in the design of practically every aspect of the vehicle!

Well?

>>15102322
>pontiac
I dunno dude, I'm with you up to there, but there's hella grand prix's and grand am's still on the road. they're not terribly fuel efficient but they just don't seem to die

>>15102423
there's the Neon in the sticky, so they did at least one thing kinda almost sorta right

So now we get to VW.

Am I wrong to say that VW's FIRST priority is volume production? How many different marquis do they have? That's like having ten-wives and pumping out as many babies as you can, allah be praised.

I keep banging my head against VW's faults because my father in law is a die-hard fan, no matter how many times I point out that NONE of his four VW's have a working fuel gauge... That the headliner on some is falling, that the clear-coat was lost to the wind years ago or the paint seems to be evaporating slowly, that half of the knobs on the dash are held on with glue, that everything you touch creaks and groans as if it's ready to give, that all of the interior panels rattle and clack over the most minute road faults, that the expanded-foam steering wheel in one of his cars is DISINTEGRATING, and that there are so many god damned frustrating over-sights in the design of practically every aspect of the vehicle!

Well?

>>15102482

yeah my grand am is my daily driver, bought it as used

>>15102442

so by your opinion is GM the worst? because all the "internet ratings" and "consumer reports" have chrysler, jeep and dodge at the bottom.

btw not starting a fight with you, I'm actually agreeing that GM sucks ass

File: pontiac-grand-prix-interior.jpg (782KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

782KB, 1600x1200px

>>15102482
I like Pontiac. In fact, if not for the poor crash score in one of the tests, I would have gotten one for my wife. I'm talking about the sedan, fuck the coupe.

The 3400 is a solid fucking engine with economy you can't really complain about for what it does.

It is still, however, assembled from GM parts-bins. Yes Pontiac does it better, but they still creak and rattle just as much as other GM's.

The dash face is one big piece of easily shattered plastic. One crack and kiss it goodbye. The knobs are those NASTY rubber-coated plastic ribbed-for-your-pleasure designs that GM started in the 90's. Everything in these cars offends my senses.

File: 21E8282E-CE8B-417E-8D0A-8FF3631DE23B_1.jpg (23KB, 480x320px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 480x320px

>>15102533
>so by your opinion is GM the worst?

No, I just like to pretend Hyundai and Kia don't exist.

Chrysler is worse, though. Not only do they have a QC department that went to lunch before the paint on the office door dried, they are WHORES. By that I mean they have no shame in knocking off everybody else and making what I call "bootleg" cars.

Ever seen those $2 airsoft guns at the flea market that are supposed to model a Glock but have a hammer? That's the same sort of idea behind most of what Chrysler does.

Prowler, PT Cruiser, New Yorker, anything it takes to get Leisure Suit Larry to swoon and empty his pockets.

ATHF fans just need to think of Carl. "That is AUTHENTIC, RED PLEATHER!"

The Prowler and PT Cruiser look like the kind of thing a kid would design. Immature gimmicks!

The New Yorker and 300....

OK, is there anybody that will deny that the 300 is supposed to look like a Bently? I mean REALLY look like one?

And the New Yorker is the car I cite any time I need to illustrate what shameless and unoriginal copiers they are.

"People are really buying those Buicks and Cadillacs. Oh and the new Lincoln Continentals are doing even better... WHY NOT ALL OF THEM! TRIPLE THE SALES!"

So they go completely Lego mode and take a piece from this and a piece from that and when somebody says "THAT'S A MEGABLOCK, IT DOESN'T FIT" they stuff them in a closet and beat them with an orange in a sock and say "god dammit, they won't know the difference!"

Then pic related is born.

File: 4690101998-lincoln-continental-4-dr-std-sedan-pic-36771.jpg (725KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

725KB, 1600x1200px

1988 Buick Century vs 1988 Chrysler New Yorker, nah, nothing going on here, just coincidence.

>>15102075
I've got experience with more vehicles than I can possibly keep track of and would like to provide you with some insight. However it should be kept in mind that nearly all of this is dealing with 90s-00s light trucks, SUVs, and vans.

When comparing Ford to GM 1/2 ton (F150-K1500, Expedition-Tahoe/Yukon) I can not possibly have it in me to give Ford the edge in any example other than general look and feel of a bottom of the barrel base model work truck. But even that is just a maybe and does not speak for the actual build quality or longevity of said interior. Take a step up from the zero options base model and I'd rather be in the GM every time. The interior "feels" higher end even when it's not, and this seems especially true when comparing the luxury models like Escalade vs Navigator. They seems to have much more attention paid to ergonomics while in the design stage. Nearly every aspect of the design is extremely intuitive. Everything is where it feels like it should be for ease of use and that concept carries over when you're working on the vehicle. Replacing a cluster can be done in about two minutes on a GMT400. The same job is a nightmare on a 9th gen F150.

That said, these GM trucks do have their issues. For some reason the clear coat just does not want to stick to the white paint GM used. The other colors seem to be fine though. GM's always had problems with starters and fuel pumps. No idea why, but yeah they tend to go out at a higher than average rate. Not to say it's a major issue, as they generally last 100-200k and aren't expensive or difficult to replace. When it comes down to it, I trust GM more than I do Ford.

The differences in how well thought out the design is shrink considerably when you move up to the newer HD platforms. The 99+ Super Duty and 01+ GM HD platforms are both great.

As far as headliner falling, I've seen that happen to pretty much every make. Whenever headliner gets wet, the adhesive fails.

>>15102899
I have to try to block out anything that happened in the 90's because....it was the 90's. Do we really want to talk about it?

So now we get to Nissan.

Am I wrong to say that Nissan's FIRST priority is volume production? How many different marquis do they have? That's like having ten-wives and pumping out as many babies as you can, allah be praised.

I keep banging my head against Nissan's faults because my father in law is a die-hard fan, no matter how many times I point out that NONE of his four Nissan's have a working fuel gauge... That the headliner on some is falling, that the clear-coat was lost to the wind years ago or the paint seems to be evaporating slowly, that half of the knobs on the dash are held on with glue, that everything you touch creaks and groans as if it's ready to give, that all of the interior panels rattle and clack over the most minute road faults, that the expanded-foam steering wheel in one of his cars is DISINTEGRATING, and that there are so many god damned frustrating over-sights in the design of practically every aspect of the vehicle!

Well?

File: mark7.jpg (34KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 400x300px

>>15102284
>From what years?
Not an excuse but it should be noted that some of the paint issues were the result of regulations that required formula changes and did affect all of the Big 3 in varying degrees through that period.

>>15102385
>I believe that all Lincolns from 1980-1989 are shit
Huh. Do tell. Pic related

>>15102976
As affordable, comfortable, and capable as 90s trucks and SUVs can be, yes. We have to talk about it.

>>15103043
What needs to be said?

The 80's cars were 70's cars that were quickly neutered and choked to meet emissions standards, and in the process had new-fangled and hardly-tested or thought-out technology SHOE HORNED into them. Yes, I love guessing which of the 60 dash buttons in a row I'm pressing while going through menus to find my trip meter.
Please add MORE glowing puke-green lights to my peripheral so I can be sure not to drive at night, thx.

The 90's were just a continuation of 70's/80's technology that jumped onboard with the "ergonomic/economic" craze without any forethought. Need more economy? Shrink it down, or round out the body, don't ask whether or not it will look good. Need more ergonomics? Fuck it! Expanded foam and rubber-dome switch-mechanisms everywhere!

File: 00H0H_bfHx2TTZSIj_600x450.jpg (30KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 600x337px

>>15103091
I just love how that door handle flexes every time I get out and it feels as though it's ready to fall out of its mounting. And hey, if we're going to have switches, we're going to make them as square and stiff and puke-tastic as we can!

>>15103109
>Please add MORE glowing puke-green lights to my peripheral so I can be sure not to drive at night, thx.
Green is the best color to use to maintain night vision...

>>15103148
>door handle flexes
It's called rotating. That's how it actuates. That's how it knows you want to open the door. Would you prefer it be a button?

>we're going to make them as square and stiff
Would you prefer round switches that are soft? I'd wager you complain about that too.

File: s-l1000.jpg (41KB, 1000x341px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 1000x341px

>>15103156
Right, but it doesn't have to be such a pukish green that looked more like a print-error than a design decision.

>>15103180
>It's called rotating. That's how it actuates.
No, when you pull this handle the top-end (furthest from the levering portion) flexes and creaks.

>>15103180
>Would you prefer round switches that are soft? I'd wager you complain about that too.

Pic Related. These have an excellent fulcrum, whereas the GM switches are ALWAYS too fucking tall which means downward force doesn't transfer easily to a rotational force. Also, they press very easily, it's like hitting a key on the keyboard, but still solid and mechanical, not spongey. The best door switches I've ever tried, even better than 2008-current ford switches. Want to know what happened to the ford switches in 2008?

File: new_ford_lincoln_sw6953_pdl236_sw6504_passenger_door_lock_switch_10_clinton_mo_6310069437770758127.jpg (12KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 480x360px

>>15103283
>Want to know what happened to the ford switches in 2008?

They made them TOO FUCKING TALL AND SQUARE!

File: large.jpg (21KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x500px

And to add the diarrhea icing to the shit cake, here comes chrysler to violate your anus

Post more of your Lincoln.

GM started to go to shit in the '60s, becoming garbage by the end of the '70s.

Inversely, Lincoln started to shine and would become the best until they went to crap in 1980.

Chrysler became the equivalent of Lada in that they hit their stride in the '60s and literally built the same car until 1980; despite trying to hide it under different increasingly hideous bodies.

File: GreenLED-Dash.jpg (490KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 1632x1224px

>>15103283
>Right, but it doesn't have to be such a pukish green that looked more like a print-error than a design decision.
This color green? Doesn't look too pukish to me.

>>15103283
>No, when you pull this handle the top-end (furthest from the levering portion) flexes and creaks.
I don't know why you pull at the weakest point furthest from the levering portion (perhaps you're hoping it breaks and going out of your way to stress it) but I've got four of those handles and have yet to notice any of these issues.

>Pic Related.
Those are more square than the switches you're complaining about being too square. Do you really not have the strength to actuate the GM switches? Do you have the strength to turn a steering wheel?

>>15103356
In your pic, look at the difference between the number 3 and 4 on the tach, and the difference between the 8 and the bottom of the 0 at the "80" mph indication on the speedo. Do you see the poor lighting consistency? They just couldn't get this right? And the color...it's not really a color, it's just close enough to what they were going for that they said "good enough" and moved on. Nobody could actually like that color, EKH! Reminds me of my first suburban. Oh and those needles, hahahahaha, "I can only see half of the needle" "Fuck it, they can guess"

>Do you really not have the strength to actuate the GM switches?

I don't mean the shape, I mean the boxy FEEL, and just more about comfort. It's like the difference between a tight-knit Haynes cotton tee and a wool sweater. The sweater isn't going to kill me, but why would anybody opt to constantly assault the senses? Can't I have a button-pressing experience that's so right that it's forgotten, rather than one that lingers when it just isn't right?

File: tmp_7859-01-2017-ford-super-duty-front-three-quarter-view645700453.jpg (29KB, 660x495px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 660x495px

Towncar owner here. OP I like lincoln too. I also work for Ford. But you're off your roller rocker. The towncar is junk. The only think that doesnt break is what the crown vic fleet has in them standard.
The digital dash without an rpm guage. The faux glovebox on the passenger side. The leaky gasket before the blower fan. Let's not even mention how seriously the 4.6L's intake was before they made the thermostat housing metal.

Ford is fine. But dont let the gm w-bodies and lower trim previous models put you off. They had a good lineup that ld take over many new cars offered today. For the same price

File: 79963087.jpg (86KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1024x768px

>>15103349
I only have shots of the old Lincoln that I'm selling.

Lincoln had it's ups and downs. Revived in '68, died in 1980, revived in 2017 by the new Continental... Not saying that my town car is bad, it's one of the best cars I've ever driven.

Here's my gauge for comparison to the one above.

File: images.jpg (7KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 259x194px

>>15103462
>The digital dash without an rpm guage.
see pic above

>The faux glovebox on the passenger side
...what? I have a glovebox...

> Let's not even mention how seriously the 4.6L's intake was before they made the thermostat housing metal.

This doesn't effect the 2003-20011 models, that was the last redesign before it died.

I'm a mechanic and a picky asshole, this car has yet to turn me off.

It's dark out, but here is the shot of the car from the dealer. Black lace-material top, black exterior, black interior.

>>15103463
The '77 Lincoln is the one I want to see. I want to buy another one.

File: Hey+faggots+my+name+is+john+and+i+_3f9b414c38ed501655435703dbffb6a1.jpg (7KB, 193x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 193x200px

So now we get to NASA's Apollo program.

Am I wrong to say that NASA's FIRST priority is volume production? How many different lunar modules do they have? That's like having ten-wives and pumping out as many babies as you can, allah be praised.

I keep banging my head against NASA's faults because my father in law is a die-hard fan, no matter how many times I point out that NONE of his four Lunar Rover's have a working fuel gauge... That the headliner on some is falling, that the clear-coat was lost to the solar radiation years ago or the paint seems to be evaporating slowly, that half of the knobs on the dash are held on with glue, that if sound could travel in a vacuum everything you touch would surely creak and groan as if it's ready to give, that all of the interior panels rattle and clack over the most minute crater faults, that the expanded-foam steering wheel in one of his rovers is DISINTEGRATING, and that there are so many god damned frustrating over-sights in the design of practically every aspect of the rover!

Well?

File: 1440937385919.png (108KB, 1680x1044px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1680x1044px

This might be the most autistic and baseless brand whoring I've ever seen on /o/.

File: A.jpg (547KB, 2032x1525px) Image search: [Google]

547KB, 2032x1525px

>>15103540
incoming

File: FullSizeRender 23.jpg (1MB, 2863x2147px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2863x2147px

I'll include the 8-tracks. There's two and a cassette adapter

File: tmp_7859-20160429_015727-2091754100.jpg (2MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3840x2160px

>>15103497

Yes. You do have the better model. But that doesnt save the previous model problems. The 2016 impala is miles ahead of the early 2000 models.
The same for the towncar. The 2010 blows out the 2001.
Car companies are generally making better shit these days. But if youre willing to dig up dirt on GM over anyone else. I can do the same on what you like. It literally boils down to preference and principles.

File: sweg.jpg (29KB, 400x333px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 400x333px

So now we get to Beat's.

Am I wrong to say that Beat's FIRST priority is volume production? How many different headphones do they have? That's like having ten-wives and pumping out as many babies as you can, allah be praised.

I keep banging my head against Beat's faults because my father in law is a die-hard fan, no matter how many times I point out that NONE of his four headphones have a working auxiliary jack lead... That the headstrap on some is falling, that the clear-coat was lost to the wind years ago or the paint seems to be evaporating slowly, that half of the buttons on the microphone control are held on with glue, that everything you touch creaks and groans as if it's ready to give, that all of the plastic panels rattle and clack over the most minute bass drops, that the expanded-foam noise cancelling ear pads in one of his headphones is DISINTEGRATING, and that there are so many god damned frustrating over-sights in the design of practically every aspect of the product!

Well?

File: FullSizeRender 22.jpg (2MB, 2674x2005px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2674x2005px

>>15103590
And the 1980 Lincoln Mark VI shits itself when the 1977 Mark V strolls by. It can always go both ways.

2003 town car, shitty steering wheel, 2005 gets a better wheel, 2008 gives you shitty door switches... it's a cycle of shit, wipe, shit, wipe

File: FullSizeRender 38.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

dumping

>>15103622
How much and where?

>>15103711
Also, 460?

File: FullSizeRender 37.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>15103731
Fuck yes.

I might be a huge cuck but I feel good with my s10. I'm not saying it's great. I'm saying It's never failed in an any unexpected ways. Everything was expected or known problems that I was prepared for ahead of time. If a part or assembly isn't on the list of common failures, it lasts the life of the vehicle. If it is, the aftermarket improved it or the ac delco version lasted 200k miles anyway so fuck it.

I can't say as much for other vehicles I've owned. Especially my f150. Everything on that heap would brake with no warning.

>>15103721
$5,500 in Dallas

>>15103759
I'm interested; I'm in Houston.

File: FullSizeRender 26.jpg (2MB, 3199x2399px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3199x2399px

>>15103753
I've never brought the integrity of the powertrains of any of these vehicles into question. I'm talking about the small nuances.

So you still have your paint? The gauges all work?

How does this guy go on a rant about paint quality and no one brings up any white crown vic ever?

>>15102868
>Being this retarded

Your "88 Buick Century" is a 97 ish Skylark,
Your "Ford" is a 02 ish Continental
The Chrysler is older than both a '94 which started the whole cab forward trend. I never liked it, but you can't say it's the same at all and came first besides dumbass.

File: FullSizeRender 11.jpg (2MB, 3111x2333px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3111x2333px

>>15103782
cool. got kik?

>>15103822
hey, retard, they are two posts, not referencing one-another...

my dad has a Savannah 2500 like pic on OP, it's pretty reliable, engine wise, although he supercharged his cuz shit power stock, but the build choices? terrible, shitty plastic all on the interior, terrible paint job, overall trash interior

>>15103827
No, is it on Craigslist? If so, I'll text you about it tomorrow.

File: FullSizeRender 17.jpg (2MB, 2890x2168px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2890x2168px

>>15103841
in Dallas. go ahead

>>15103856
Great. Found it. My area code is 262.

>>15103834
So what is the point of the pic then?

Also, why compare the NY and Buick then? The Chrysler is more like the downsized Cadillacs of the 80's than a A body Buick?

>>15103879
The pic is ONE example of Chrysler blatantly combining popular cars to make a bastard that ends up with NONE of the charm of either.

Yes, it's closer to the Cadillac, true. Chrysler has almost always wanted to be a Cadillac.

>>15102385
I'm ashamed to say that I drive a Geo Metro and I can't parallel park to save my goddamned life. I'm absolute shit at it. I might as well vertical park like a smart car.

>>15102758
I'm looking at getting a Pontiac Vibe, simply because it's not actually a GM. It's a toyota matrix (corolla hatchback) that GM slapped some exterior parts on.

Sure, the exterior that GM *did* make, will probably go to shit, but I'll be able to replace most parts with straight up corolla parts when they go bad for super cheap.

>>15103791
my gauges still work. even the famous gas gauge where the fingers wear out on the resistor board. someone, can't remember who, sells a kit that stops them from wearing out.

door handles replaced by what seems to be a sturdier part.

paint is good for 14 years old.

Dashboard is cracked, though. can't deny that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_60°_V6_engine

This is one of the only redeeming things about Pontiac/GM

>>15103463
More consistent "smoother" lighting does nothing for me if everything else about it is less visually pleasing. Like look at that fucking font. Look at the D in OD. What the fuck is that?

File: 00707_azeeZ5fE53b_600x450.jpg (49KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x450px

>>15103569
owned one in blue. Front end was all fucked up, paint peeling and faded, interior another fucking story.

It used to randomly shut off at a stop(red lights) and strand me at the intersection for a good 20 minutes. I replaced fucking everything related to spark and fuel and the cunt still did it. Don't get me started on the retarded ass bolt placement for the fuel pump, which wouldn't be an issue if they allowed you to get a FUCKING SOCKET ON THE THING.

Good highway cruiser, though.

File: interior.jpg (43KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 600x450px

>>15104227
I was 19 when I bought it, Little did I know I bought the niggest of niggermobiles possible. I'm mainly talking about it's condition.

>>15103557
I agree.

File: 00R0R_3hzOvFmVmKE_600x450.jpg (32KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x450px

>>15104247
Gas gauge was spotty at best, but the fancy ass little "miles left to a tank" electronic piece worked well enough to tell me when the tank was low.

File: 00K0K_kW1PNf2PyW7_600x450.jpg (48KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 600x450px

>>15104253

>>15104247
>niggermobiles

I'm glad I'm not the only one to have used this word.

I think the reason it was stranding you was the carb. They were shit and would do exactly this. If not, then the fuel pump was done.

I'm not saying cars like yours aren't out there, I can find them all day long, it's that this is quite the norm if you search for 1989 Olds or Buick...

>>15103931
But it doesn't make sense if the Chrysler came before those cars now does it?

Sounds like you spout a bunch of uninformed opinions as fact.

>>15102241
>those fucking filler panels in the first place
What the fuck WERE they thinking?

>>15102798
CORINTHIAN LEATHER

>has nothing to do with Corinth
>half the seat is vinyl

>>15102075
One thing you don't understand about fleet vehicles is that they get the absolute hell beaten out of them their entire life. A lot of problems boil down to negligence by the owner.

I've seen GM vans with 250k+ miles and still be used everyday at jobsites. There's a reason GM is the only manufacturer that still makes traditional vans, compared to about every other car maker has switched to the European style.

>>15102470
>>15102478
>>15102491
>>15103021
>>15103542
>>15103608
Go back to /b and post your bananas on ylyl threads faggot!

File: 1463790554450.jpg (55KB, 638x426px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 638x426px

>>15102414
hurp de durp

>>15106083
>There's a reason GM is the only manufacturer that still makes traditional vans
Yeah, because they don't have a European van model they can steal for their home market and they're too fucking cheap to engineer a new one. Ford and Chrysler made the switch because European vans are simply superior at being vans with the configuration modularity and space offering. If you want a thirsty crapbarge with shit cargo space to beat on for 300k miles, buy a Murrikan truck and slap a bed shell on it.

>>15102798
Hey friend, I agree with you, but you want to talk about copying, look at Ford blatantly ripping off Rover and Aston in the last few years.

>>15106124
Actually, gm also makes a euro spec van. Im on my phone otherwise I'd attach a pic, look up the Chevy city express.

I assume you haven't driven a proper full size van to realize how useful they really are

File: Nissan-NV200-2010-hd.jpg (161KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1600x1200px

>>15106189
>Actually, gm also makes a euro spec van
Rebadging a Nissan does not equal making a euro spec van.

File: gmlol.jpg (233KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 1920x1080px

>Chevy city express
lol

>>15106189
American full size vans are exactly as useful as Euro full size vans, except that they don't have any high roof options at all and are therefore completely useless as vans.

>>15103021
You just crossed a line there lad

>>15106121
You're the reason I wake up in the morning.

>>15106068
those filler panels were necessary whenever it became uneconomical to produce so many stamped and welded parts with any sort of consistency and finish. So your options are, stop making cadillacs that look like cadillacs, or put vinyl in the place of craftmanship. It may have also reduced repair costs but....really? sure...

>>15106165
Yup. But they didn't take both and glue some parts together and say "why not both?" Chrysler is shameless, tasteless and unoriginal.
Ford owned Aston Martin from about the 90's to 2007 btw...

>>15106225
>they don't have any high roof options at all and are therefore completely useless as vans.

Heh, yup. I never understood the purpose of a box vehicle you can't stand up in...

>>15106068
Bumper laws that were in effect at the time:

>Cars for the US market were equipped with bulky, massive, heavy, protruding bumpers to comply with the 5-mile-per-hour bumper standard in effect from 1973 to 1982. US bumper height requirements effectively made some models, such as the Citroën SM, ineligible for importation to the United States.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumper_(automobile)

>>15107060
supposedly they had to survive a 5mph hit against a wall without incurring a certain repair cost.

>>15107080
Yeah I think it was something like that but I can't find a source.

File: Lol.png (396KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 1366x768px

GM Ford, Mazda, Nissan, VW, are all complete shit overall, especially their economy lineup.
Truth is, only Toyota and Honda make good cars.
However, GM is by far best value for performance, no one else really comes close.

>>15107107
On April 9, 1971, the agency issued its first passenger car bumper standard -- Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 215, "Exterior Protection," which became effective on September 1, 1972. This standard called for passenger cars, beginning with model year (MY) 1973, to withstand 5 mph front and 2 � mph rear impacts against a perpendicular barrier without damage to certain safety-related components such as headlamps and fuel systems.
In October 1972, Congress enacted the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Saving Act (MVICS Act) which mandated that the agency issue a bumper standard that yields the maximum feasible reduction of costs to the public, taking into account the cost and benefits of implementation, the standard's effect on insurance costs and legal fees, savings in consumer time and inconvenience, and health and safety considerations.

>>15107140
I'm not going to question that GM goes fast. That seems to be the only thing fanboys can wave around. "Oh look, it says RIGHT HERE it has 31 bolt mains with a super high suplex rear cross dynamic axleshaft lock diffusion travel bar!" "what does that mean?" "I dunno but it sounds FAST!"

>>15107060
Yeah but couldn't they have designed different bumpers?

File: 6254-Rear.jpg (229KB, 1200x761px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1200x761px

>>15107178
You mean like this sliver of vinyl above the bumper? Nah, that's too easy.

>>15106203
Dont know if you're the guy who said gm doesnt have a European van model. Either way you're grasping at straws here, gm gas traditional and modern vans for sale

fastest
reliablest
cheapest
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKik4VNeGCk

>>15106225
Yeah ill give you that, it sucks trying to load a van when you're really hunched over. But that doesn't mean they arent useful

>>15107240
and yet they still haven't found a way to un-fuck the last 1/8 of the body style.

40 years almost...40 fucking years

>>15102798

The 300 is modeled after its original namesake. If you honestly think the new 300 is a knock off Bentley, you need to learn yourself about classic American sedans.

At any rate, I can't disagree more with your assessment. Chrysler, for all of their faults, are extremely innovative. Even if the PT Cruiser and Prowler were shit, they began the retro movement YEAR before anyone else even thought about it. Their design philosphy with their trucks and vans are phenomenal, even of they're contrived for mass production. They pioneer both vehicle classes.

The 5.7 Hemi and it's derivitives are still incredible from an engineering standpoint after being in production for over a decade. In fact, their entire engine line up is amazing, if only because they can squeeze life out of an engine far, far more efficiently than any other brand.

The Pentastar, for all of its faults early in its production cycle, remains one of the most reliable six cylinders on the market.

Chrysler is a weird company. Fucking TVR levels of weird at competitive price points. Not everything works and some shit is just bad on their cars, but they are ballsy as hell when it comes to R&D.

>>15107295
I've never met a chrysler that didn't look like it was designed by adolescents that saw the world as whimsical more than as practical.

>>15107338

I don't see that as a negative. In my opinion, Chrysler is the only American company producing cars with any sort of personality to them these days. The Hellcats and Viper, for instance, emanate this aura of masculinity and strength that had been lost on automotive manufactures since the early seventies.

I know the whole 'angry car' thing is over saturated these days, but Chrysler puts a fun twist on it. Just my opinion, but it seems to work for them. Their cars are unique compared to their competition.

File: hqdefault.jpg (31KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 480x360px

No personality here.

>>15110921

"I'm a spoiled American teenager who just watched Doctor Who for the first time and now puts on a shit posh accent to try to sound cultured."

>>15111009
1. Doctor Who is so gay I don't even have words to describe it. The people that watch it must be the kind that do things more for the attention and impression of others than for actual enjoyment.
>drives around with windows down
>stereo full blast
>listening to 1920's oboe-laiden swing music
>because people will grimace
>you get the chance to scoff and say "UNCULTURED SWINE!"

2. Dude, it's a fine ass car that performs and is as well-designed as it looks on the outside. That is the kind of refinement that keeps my attention. I would argue that this either meets or exceeds the levels of Toyota/Lexus quality and refinement.

"ur but it looks like"
So? Are we 10-years-old? You wanna drive the Batmobile because it'd be "totally like way cool?" The ecoboost technology and all-alloy engine does nothing for you? noob.

>>15111009
Unlike most, I buy my cars, clothes, devices, furniture and music for ME. The world could go to hell and I'd still like and enjoy what "I" like and enjoy.

I don't understand how this pic triggered you. It's a refined car with subtlety and nuance, and the color very much suits my personality. I'm stoic, calm but sharp. I understand nuance. The general population is defined by either twitchy skittishness or sedate dopishness, and just as they swing on both gross ends of the scale, they are more focused on the gross rather than the nuanced.

>>15111101

You should ease off of the mountain dew, My Supreme Gentleman. It seems to be effecting your normally stoic personality.

No one buys a Mustang for refinement. In fact, no one buys a Ford for refinement in general. A Mustang is supposed to be an affordable car with plenty of power. It's supposed to be brutish and reflect the homoerotic obsession with masculinity that is so profound in American culture.

You are correct that the new model is much more elegant than previous iterations, but that does not fit its name. It would make a good Thunderbird or Cougar, but it is not a Mustang.

Ford has been failing all throughout these last few years in their design department. They made a Mustang and GT with no respect for the lineage. The new F-150 is more bloated than ever and hideous when viewed at all from the front.

The problem is not that they perform well. There's nothing inherently wrong with the Ecoboost, Aluminum panels, or any other innovations Ford is producing. The problem is that they're forgetting their roots.

The name is what sells their products. People buy Ford because it's what their parents and grandparents did. That goodwill will fade as they move further and further away from what made them famous. That's why GM is slowly creeping on them.

It's also the polar opposite of what Chrysler has done. They dug deep and returned to what made them famous. Brutish power, mean aesthetics, and an all out embrace of the villainous motif. Call it childish all you want, but it's a concept that works well.

You made this thread to question design decisions and I countered your thoughts with my own. I don't have to agree with you and you don't have to agree with me. It's possible to accept other opinions and try to understand them, even if you don't allow yourself to be swayed.

>>15111245
I WILL RAGE UNTIL EVERYBODY SUBMITS AND STOPS LIKING THINGS I DON'T LIKE!

But really, I think the new Ford exists for the same reason Mercury doesn't: the gap is closed.

I would truly love to see what they could do with the Cougar lineage to revive it from what happened in the 70's and uh...the 90's. But the Mustang is what happens when you take a Mustang and work it into a Cougar's personality.

Ford stepped it up so that the bottom-rung spartan Crown Vic was no longer fitting to them. The bottom rung Fusion, Taurus, or Focus are so much more plush and functional than any prehistoric barge (like my Lincolns).

Sure they don't focus *entirely* on aesthetics, but they are very very functional vehicles that make the buyer feel like they made a great buying decision. The powertrains that started to take over around 2010 stopped me in my Lexus-loving tracks and the first words that I ever thought whenever I saw it in person (caught me off guard) was "they're back".

I'm willing to let go of Mercury knowing that every Ford today is more than a Mercury was supposed to be.

They're competing with companies like Hyundai putting half-baked barely-passable features into their cars that look great on paper but often disappoint, but only after the dealer has taken the money and the warranty has run out. Ford takes these on-paper features and delivers them in ways that give me confidence.

I don't like SYNC, I fucking DESPISE the touch screens in ANY car, but FUCK, they are nice! Massaging seats that can also actively move to relieve soreness from sitting too long, adaptive cruise control, blind spot warnings (hey, that ONE time that you slip up, you'll appreciate it), and airbags galore! Think Demolition Man.

There's a lot wrong with modern cars, but damn it's good to be bad.

I won't be trading in my Town Car in the foreseeable future, though. I like to roast tires and play the tune of dual Magnaflows.

>>15111327

It remains to be seen whether their new direction will pay off for them. I firmly believe Ford's attempts to make their sports cars more European and their economy cars more competitive with Hyundai and Kia will fall flat. GM has too strong of a lock on both categories.

Regardless, I'm glad you like what you've seen in the new Fords. I'm always glad to see people investing more into American cars. However, I'd one hundred percent recommend you look at what Dodge has to offer in their cars. It's pretty much a fact that they've got the best 'infotainment' bullshit on the market. Optioned V6 Chargers manage ludicrous MPGs, hold high as fuck safety ratings, and have more cabin and trunk capacity than any other competing sedan. They are remarkably comfortable for long drives and are generally more capable than any naturally aspirated competitors bar eight cylinders.

The quality of Mopars are on the upswing. Even if they're not to your taste, I advocate that the general idea of Chrysler products being cheap and shitty is incorrect. I've owned a Challenger R/T for four years now, driven hard and we'll for more than 50k miles. No issues, big or small. They've come a long way since the early 2000s.

File: IMG_3674.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>15111402
I drove an '09 Dodge Ram 3500 before it got totalled and bought an F350. The shit was STOUT. It was the Cummins and yes, that fucker would cook.

However, the design inside looked like it wasn't fully thought-out and the experience not as refined. It's like how Apple moved the lock button to the side when they enlarged the screen. I believe if I had to reach to the top to lock the screen, it would be one of those extremely subtle groans that trigger in my mind over such oversight.

I believe the only thing that Ford has that I haven't seen in other affordable entry-level cars is the COMPLETELY revamped powertrains. WOW, everything about the new motors is what I loved about Toyota and beyond.

I don't groan, however, at how my "barge" achieves 25.5mpg on the highway and 16 in town. The honeymoon still aint over.

>>15102075
>This thread has been brought to you by Ford Motors®

>>15102214

>church van

You have no idea how poorly those vehicles are treated.

File: sexy.jpg (2MB, 3161x1157px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3161x1157px

did someone say Lincoln?

>>15111667
Do you happen to be black by chance?

File: IMG_0105.jpg (2MB, 3362x1934px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3362x1934px

>>15111669
Does it look like I have peeling paint or 20" rims on them

File: P1010038.jpg (633KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

633KB, 2048x1536px

>>15111682
I also agree with OP, except Ford trucks are garbage when it comes to a 1/2 ton truck you can't beat a Vortec.

File: jocks-lincoln-2.png (522KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 640x480px

>>15111669
you're not a millennial by chance, are you?

You think these cars were designed to be sold to inner-city wellfare queens thirty years ago? Of course you do, you couldn't actually be bothered to THINK.

File: P1010039.jpg (655KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 2048x1536px

>>15111695
Last good pic I have of my Lincoln

File: Elvis-Museum.jpg (103KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 800x480px

>>15111669
"the last car Elvis purchased before his death"

>>15102227
Hate to admit it, but I completely agree

File: IMG_3670.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>15111709
SEXY.

I'm not the biggest fan of the IV's. I believe that the BEST car Lincoln ever made (contemporarily of course) was the V. Yes I enjoy my town car more, but if it was 1977 and I bought a Mark V, and 2003 and I bought the Town Car, I would have felt FAR more plush and pampered in the Mark V.

File: DSC00270.jpg (164KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 640x480px

>>15111728
I like the IV, because the more powerful engine and the interior is still as nice, but the steering is much better in the V

File: IMG_8427.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>15111669
disc brakes all-around, ABS, auto-tensioning seat-belts, DUAL 6-way adjustable seats, power locks, power windows, cruise control, power antennae, premium stereo, actual leather interior, auto-unlatching seats (unlatches front seatbacks when you open the doors), wipe/wash and interval wipers, light-sensing lighted-entry (pull the exterior door handle and all of the lights inside the car illuminate, as well as a ring of light around the lock cylinder), power steering and brakes, A/C and heat with auto temperature control, rear window and side-mirror defrost, windshield defog, low-fuel light and for 1978 a Miles to Empty digital readout... ALL STANDARD. FUCKING STANDARD! in 1977! Most entry-level cars didn't have any of these features until thirty-years later, dammit!

Optional: auto-headlights and auto-dimming high-beams to oncoming traffic.

File: 20151031_081412.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>15111682

Hey, black/black mark iv buddy!

File: IMG_9760.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>15111745
The interior is better in the IV? I've always found them to be a 60's carry-over. Not quite as refined and thought out as far as material, design and layout.

More powerful engine...well fuck, I can't argue that, but the Mark III was even more powerful! Ugly, but moar.

File: fd9f0a25afb73913c1c83f4b8f8989a4.jpg (41KB, 632x356px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 632x356px

niggers gunna nig

>>15102075
GM is good if you understand what the car is. they are cheap. parts are cheap. working on them is easy. just dont expect them to never need maintenance. the only way you could call a car bad is if it throws rods without redlining on a regular basis or has some other serious fault.

>>15103156
Besides red

>>15111844
Red is slightly better per lumen for maintaining night vision but your eyes pick up green light a lot better than red light, meaning you don't need nearly as much light output with green.

>>15102414
Fuck those horrible touch sensitive "buttons" why did that become a thing

File: 71J23750wwL._UY500_.jpg (25KB, 268x500px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 268x500px

>>15113611
"look! new shit!"
"TAKE ALL THE MONEY!"

That's all it comes down to.

I'm a very backward-moving person. The more technology moves forward, the more I abandon it and go back.

My phone has shitty and annoying ringtones and so does everybody around me. If I'm sitting next to you at the post office and your phone makes the sound of a flushing toilet, a fly buzzing around, or screaming "ring ring, ring ring, RIIIIIING RIIIING" then I've mentally categorized you among the same crowd of white-trash that lives in half of a trailer home, collects collectible KFC buckets, yet drives a truck that has more Autozone "bling" glued to it than actual surface area.

I use monophonic tones I stole from Nokias and the Motorola Startac. They're CONCISE and hard to miss in a crowd or the next room.

My watch is a plain Seiko. They are such high-quality, such classy design, and last for what you pay into them. A $100 watch will last 5-years at least. Every time my friend sees me check my watch, he asks if I want his old Samsung smart watch. I have to say, with more and more vehemence, "NO, I like being able to check time without being distracted by texts, apps, and checking battery percentage. Oh and I don't have to press anything to see the time either, it's just there, it's all it does!"

My other friend, who's a real fucking snob that always over-dresses, tries to talk me into watches with more complications, fatter bodies, and metal-link bands. I tell him how disgusted I am by it all because it's grossly unnecessary and metal bands are for masochists. Yeah, I'd love to have a weighted chain jingling and banging around every time I move or put my arms on a table.

Faggots, I tell ya. I keep it simple.

>>15115196
>that whole complaint about phones

Just put it on vibrate like everyone else.

Take your hipster shit and get out. I'll bet you don't even like being able to lock your car with a remote.

>>15115299
Bullshit, I love it. I feel like my Town Car spoils me. Keypad entry, remote start, remote trunk open and close. The sex is real.

Vibrate...yeah because that isn't annoying too.

This ringtone is perfection. It doesn't use harsh square waves like similar tones, isn't a harsh pitch, and has the perfect duration and pattern. I haven't been annoyed by it yet, nor have I missed a call in a loud environment.

http://ringtones.specialtyansweringservice.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/motorola-dynatac-8000-ringtone.mp3