Still, the fact remains, these are crap cars.

Except my 97 F150 that is pushing over 212k miles and still going strong. Yah, I’ve replaced some parts here and there but it helps when you go do some of the maintenance yourself.

Is ford taking the money? last i heard they weren’t.

Loved it long time, wait, I really hate it.

Why are they crap cars. They are the best I’ve ever seen….a long way from when their design life was 1,800 hours. They are just overpriced via help from Congress.

My Expedition has 215k miles on it. The only failures or replacements have been to normal maintenance items.
.
Also, I had my Windstar for 5 years and 130k miles with zero failures. It was hit head-on on a highway by an oncoming SUV while my wife was taking 3 kids to their gym/karate classes. The front end of the Windstar was flattened – the motor and transmission ended up under the van. The windshield had a single crack across it and the only noticeable damage inside the passenger compartment was the deployed airbags. Nobody was hurt.
.
American cars “used to be” poorly made. That’s no longer true for most of them. I’m a big fan of several import manufacturers but they no longer have the same jump on maintenance and reliability that they had 20 years ago.

It’s easy, and inaccurate, to take a shot at quality. Stylishness, sure, innovation, perhaps, but not quality. I had a Chevy long time ago that had the rear window, undercarriage and quarter panels totally rotted-out at 85K miles and 6 years. My current 97 Explorer is as sound as the day I bought it, 110K miles and 12 years later.

I almost bought a new one 5 years ago but Ford really cheapened the materials – nonretracting antenna, padded interior panels became hard plastic and a other cutbacks. Still solid but not as luxurious, so I kept the 97.

I can’t agree with that ad. My Cherokee has 134K and is going strong. My Caddy has 155K and is going strong. My F350 has 80K and runs and rides like it did when new. My wife’s VW Bug is trying hard to put us into the poor house.
Twenty six years in the auto business taught me that America can build good cars and does.
If the damm Democrats would get out of the way, America would be fine.

Well, I had a Ford Explorer that sucked me dry from repairs, sold it after 100k for a Chevy Blazer that was even worse. Intake manifold gasket anyone? Bearings that go bad if you look at them the wrong way?
-
I made the reluctant decision to buy a Camry hybrid over a year ago and couldn’t be happier. Zero problems and built in Kentucky.

I’m surprised an attorney would put that ‘ad’ on his blog, especially since the automakers’ actual logos are used. Can you say ‘libelous’?

Old email flyer from last year. Not a Ford guy but have been driving GM’s for years. Only had one bad one an 85 Old 98. All my Roadmasters, Fleetwoods, Deville’s and Suburbans have been great. All were driven to well over 100,000 miles. Honda and Toyota have just done a good job in selling the idea that they were better. In most cases issue with American cars had more to due with the dealership then the manufacturer. I do remember a time where my Harley’s leaked as much oil as you put in but those days ended in the mid 80’s.

But the fake ad was still kinda funny.

Maybe it’s just me, but I expect my vehicles to go well over 100,000 miles. I buy a new one every 7-10 years, depending on wear and tear. Take good care of them. Never bought foreign.

The odd thing about current Detroit-think is, GM is having trouble, and what brand do they want to abandon? Saturn.

The only fresh-idea, ground-up division of GM in 50 years. It works. Their cars are consumer favorites, and well-built.

It boggles the hell out of me.

Ford did not take bail out money!!

Ford is NOT taking the money. Cuz da Feds ask too many questions.

And remember – Chrysler is now owned by bankers, not automotive people. Need I say more.

Ford FTW. I always liked Ford, but my Ranger sucked. They will be my first visit next time.

Rico,

Satire, which the ad clearly is, is protected by the First Amendment. It is evident from the content that this isn’t an actual ad from the Ford, GM, Chrysler, so no intent to mislead either.

The ad is no different thatn SNL mocking the Big Three or some other company on its show.

The ad is certainly not libelous. It’s also funny as hell. I wish whoever created it was given credit.

I’m no lawyer Paul, but I think the conditions required for a case of libel could be proved. In the first place, the ad is not ‘clearly’ satire. It is done very professionally and uses the companies’ actual logos, while portraying the ad as their actual position. Second, at such a time when the national scorn of the Auto industry has reached new heights, it wouldn’t be difficult to show malicious intent. Third, at a time of unprecedented financial crisis facing the auto industry it wouldn’t be difficult to demonstrate the invariable financial damage caused by the ad.

First Amendment satire cases heard by he Supreme Court (Hustler v Falwell) all dealt with emotional distress issues involving embarrassed celebrities. I don’t believe this case would be viewed the same. But what the hell do I know?

Sorry, Think Again. I believe I forgot a few commas.

If we don’t ever say, “No”, to anything, and spend billions and trillions to try to assure soft landings for everything and everybody, how much longer can this go on? As Matt Tulley recently quoted from an email to him about Pacer ownership, “Aren’t they supposed to be free enterprise?”

Rico,

How many people do you think would look at that ad and really, truly believe it was an actual ad put out by the big 3? Only someone who was extremely clueless. No, the person didn’t put a big label “SATIRE” on it but from the content alone anyone with half a brain would know it’s a joke.

When you’re talking about the issue of “emotional damages” you’re talking about the damage phase. You don’t even get to the damage phase, because there is no legally actionable wrong which you first have to have.. This is a lot like the Hustler case in that they both concerned satirical work.

Unlike our national media I think it is fair to say the consensus here is that the UAW does not make crappy cars nor do the managers of the various auto companies. Those of us with some age can recall rustbuckets not even getting to 50,000 miles. That said, in my view they still cost too much. The labor saving capital utilized in auto plants has no other use and a better system would have used more labor compensated fairly. The result of a bad system is overpriced cars.

Are you seriously asking how many ‘clueless’ Americans there are? Didn’t the American public just choose Barack Obama as our president?
This is nothing like the Hustler case. That case was about Falwell’s emotional distress caused by the ad in Hustler. Also, it was far more clear that the Hustler cartoon was satire.

You people need to develop a sense of humor, holy crap.

Abdul, since we are both “liars” for posting this hilarious piece of satire (as Paul correctly pointed out), than I’m proud to be in your company.