Ok not really the title of this article, but my wording is pretty damn accurate. Sam, all you are allowed to do is read. No commenting or ranting or raving....unless you have something negative to say about American auto makers. Then you can speak

http://autos.yahoo...NzYW5rLWRldHJvaXQ-

The global financial crisis is suffocating the Detroit automakers, but the problems at General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler have been festering for years—even when the mighty "Big Three" were earning billions. Aging factories, inflexible unions, arrogant executives and shoddy quality have all damaged Detroit. Now, with panicky consumers fleeing showrooms, catastrophe looms: There will be plenty of business-school case studies analyzing all the automakers' wrong turns. But, as they say in the industry, it all comes down to product. So here are 10 cars that help explain the demise of Detroit: GM and Chrysler need a multibillion-dollar government bailout to survive, and both could be in bankruptcy by summer if they don't meet tough government demands. Ford hasn't asked for a bailout—yet—but it's bleeding cash and racing the clock to turn itself around. Ford Pinto. This ill-fated subcompact came to epitomize the arrogance of Big Auto. Ford hurried the Pinto to market in the early 1970s to battle cheap imports like the Volkswagen Beetle that were selling for less than $2,000. Initial sales were strong, but quality problems emerged. Then came the infamous safety problems with exploding fuel tanks, which Ford refused to acknowledge. Message: The customer comes last. "The problems for the domestics really started in the '70s when they were offering cars like the Pinto up against higher-tech, better-built Toyota Corollas and Honda Civics," says Jack Nerad of Kelley Blue Book. Chevrolet Cavalier. GM sold millions of Cavaliers in the 1980s—and decided the thrifty car was so successful the company didn't need to update it for more than a decade. To milk the model, GM even added some lipstick and high heels and tried to peddle the upgrade as the Cadillac Cimarron—a legendary flop. Honda and Toyota, meanwhile, were updating their competing models every four or five years, and grabbing market share with each quality improvement. A new Cavalier came out in the mid 1990s—then languished for another decade, while GM put most of its money into big trucks and SUVs. GM has since improved its small cars. "But they have to be miles better than the imports for Americans to forget how bad their small cars used to be," says Jamie Page Deaton of U.S. News's Rankings and Reviews car-ranking site. Even if they are better, many Americans wonder why they should give Detroit a second—or third—chance. Chevrolet Astro. While Chrysler, Toyota, and Honda were refining their minivans in the 1990s and coming up with innovations like hideaway seats and electric sliding doors, GM was offering an old, truck-based van gussied up with carpeting and cupholders. "It showed GM's repeated failure to market competitive products based on styling and packaging," says Tom Libby of J. D. Power & Associates. The Astro drove like a bread truck, and consumers noticed. It also earned the worst safety ratings in its class. Before long, GM was effectively out of the minivan segment. No biggie—those were just mainstream American families the automaker decided to ignore. Ford Taurus. Try to explain this logic: After its 1986 debut, the Taurus became a perennial bestseller. So for the next 20 years, Ford let quality decline and neglected the family sedan, while pouring love and money into trucks and SUVs. By early this decade, the Taurus had become a dowdy, rental-lot staple. So Ford simply retired the Taurus in 2006 and replaced it with the 500 sedan—which went on to set records as one of the most short-lived models ever. A year later, Ford revived the Taurus name and applied it to a bastardized 500. But by then, the damage was done. Ford Explorer. This breakout vehicle helped launch SUVs and drove record profits at Ford in the 1990s, as Americans flocked to big utilities that could take them off-road if they ever got adventurous. It also blinded Ford to the future. "Executives could not see beyond the green piling up at their feet," says David Magee, author of How Toyota Became No. 1. "The Explorer helped create an addiction that lasted 15 years." GM and Chrysler followed right behind, with SUVs like the Chevy Trailblazer and the Dodge Durango—lockstep moves that reveal how the Detroit automakers focused on each other rather than the broader marketplace. Jaguar X-Type. Ford bought the British luxury brand Jaguar in 1990, when all three Detroit automakers were seeking ways to expand their global reach. Eventually, Ford decided to build an entry-level Jaguar starting at around $30,000 for people looking to move up from, say, a Mercury Marquis. The down-market move "represented everything that Jaguar is not," says Libby of J. D. Power. The X-Type was built on an ordinary sedan platform from elsewhere in Ford's lineup, and the front-wheel-drive system underwhelmed enthusiasts used to rear-drive European makes. Jag purists were horrified, and aspiring luxury buyers shunned the X-Type in favor of BMWs, Lexuses, and Acuras. After fumbling the luxury brand for nearly two decades, Ford sold Jaguar to an Indian conglomerate in 2008. Hummer H2. It sure seemed cool back in 2003, when gas was less than $2 per gallon. And it sure seems gaudy now. This supersized SUV clearly had a heyday, but it also helped paint parent company GM as an enviro-hostile corporation that sold only gas guzzlers. Sales collapsed as gas prices rose toward $4 a gallon in mid-2008, and GM has been trying to sell the division for six months—with no takers, so far. "GM wanted to make Hummer a signature company brand," says Magee. "Instead, it showed the company was out of touch with the needs of the 21st century." Toyota Prius. While GM was spending $1 billion to build up the Hummer franchise, Toyota was spending $1 billion to develop a high-mileage hybrid—even though gas prices were still low. After the Prius debuted in the United States in 2000, GM execs seized yet another opportunity to display their intimate knowledge of American consumers, arguing that hybrids didn't make economic sense and that only environmentalists would buy them. Today, Toyota can barely keep up with demand for the Prius, and it has plans to start building them in the United States. GM, meanwhile, is scrambling to rush hybrids and other high-mileage cars into dealerships—far too late. Chrysler Sebring. Did Chrysler engineers set out to build the world's most boring car? Of course not. Yet Chrysler still produces this blandmobile to keep assembly lines running and maintain a presence, however weak, in the sedan market. In the new Darwinian auto industry, this model seems destined for extinction, since the only way to sell marginal cars is with steep discounts, which money-losing automakers can no longer afford. In fact, if Chrysler ends up being carved into pieces and sold to competitors, as many analysts expect, most of its passenger-car lineup could get the axe, since there's little to distinguish it. Besides—what's a sebring, anyway? Jeep Compass. Quick, what's the difference between the Jeep Compass, the Jeep Liberty, and the Jeep Patriot? The bosses at Chrysler, which owns Jeep, could explain, but the real answer is that Chrysler has oversaturated its strongest brand lineup in a desperate attempt to boost sales. "The Compass is not needed," says James Bell of Intellichoice.com. "Just the Liberty, please." The Compass has the same mechanical underpinnings as the Dodge Caliber, which helps illustrate one of Detroit's favorite tricks: Create multiple versions of every product under a bunch of different brand names, hoping that if buyers shun one, they'll take a more favorable view of another. Message to Detroit: Consumers aren't that stupid. Give them a bit more credit, and you might have a future.

all crappy companies building ugly shitty cars, hope they all get canned.

Posted by Nismo all crappy companies building ugly shitty cars, hope they all get canned.

I hope everything dies except the Corvette, Dodge Charger/Challenger, and Ford Trucks. Everything else can fuck off. Then Nissan and Toyota can come to the US, setup as a domestic company and pay taxes and all that shit, give us jobs, and make a car worth talking about.

Posted by big dave I hope everything dies except the Corvette, Dodge Charger/Challenger, and Ford Trucks.

Can we keep the CTS(& -V!) and the G8 and have Ford make a Dodge Ram body style for the F150? If yes, you've got my vote.

A little background on how these magazines come up with these lists is that they are formed by only 3 people usually at lunch so I tend to not take them that seriously.

should've titled this 'JAPANESE FANBOYS STROKING THEIR IMPORT FLAVORED COCKS & TALKING OUT THEIR ASSES"
I would've taken it far more seriously then if you had told the truth.
Hmmm... Ford Pinto. Brings back memories since I actually owned a 1980 model. Good car for the period, fit and finish was average for the 70's. Good engine and transmission, bulletproof drivetrain when equipped with the 2.3L OHC Lima 4. The Cologne V6 was not a bad choice, either, but I believe that was relegated to the wagon only. It delivered ok fuel economy, but the advantage over most of the imports of the period by having a larger displacement engine. My Pinto routinely delivered 34mpg with 86,000 miles on the odometer from 1990 until 1993 when I stopped driving it.

Chevrolet Cavalier, the ubiquitous J-body. It wasn't really revolutionary at the time it was introduced in 1982, relying heavily on data already gathered from the X/A cars. It did, however, have that weird ruggedness to it. The early models were very prone to failure and the Generation 1 2.0L was pretty awful, having a tendency to eat crankshafts. However, by 1988, the Gen II V6 and 2.0L were definitely leaps and bounds ahead of their predecessors. Quality issues remained, as did with most cars from that period. In fact, in 1988, Japanese manufactured cars were little more than boxes with headlights. They had yet to catch on to Ford's aero-styled cars or the Generals more angular, sort of futuristically odd shaped cars.
In the 23 years of the J-body, there were over 8 million cars sold. You can't go a couple of miles and not see either a Cavalier, Sunfire or Sunbird. It was either a car you got, or you didn't. Personally, i found them to be rugged, easy to drive, easy to service, fun to drive, and generally indestructible. The last two model years of Cavalier and Sunfire were a disservice to a line that had soldiered on for so long, but room had to be made for the excellent replacement, the Cobalt and G5-Pursuit.

The Chevrolet Astro was a good intermediate van that, frankly, the Japanese automakers couldn't ape if they wanted to. The Astro was based on the S-10 light truck chassis and could outhaul any Japanese minivan offering with ease. The 4.3L V6 may not have been as advanced as other vans, but it far more appealing to look at, drive and to live with day after day than the competition from Ford, namely the rather odd-looking Aerostar. The Astro and it's GMC counterpart really hit their stride in the contractor sales department. I personally had a 98 Astro van when I worked as a cable guy for a 3rd party telecom contractor. It was perfect for the work and comfortable for the long drives and the time spent in it that the job called for.

The story of the Taurus is common with a middle of the road family sedan. People that buy cars like this don't really change. Look at the competition from Toyota in the Camry line. It was a different body, but the same staid, conservative drivetrain... just in a fancier wrapper. I have driven a Camry from that vintage and a dishwasher felt like it might be more interesting drive. I'm not saying that any vintage Taurus had my pants blazing to drive it, but that was the class of car. I do agree in that Ford did do the model a disservice by its neglect or mismarketing and the '500' debacle was proof positive that consumers do get attached to brand names.

With the Ford Explorer, it really did get the SUV ball rolling, but this article glossed over was that it wasn't just GM, Ford and Chrysler building embarassingly thirsty SUV's. Toyota and Nissan had both rolled out SUV's based on their new full size truck lines... it was the golden goose. SUV's and fullsize pickups offer manufacturers huge profits in comparison to smaller cars. It's just basic math here kids. The Japanese makes, however, were faster to abandon these models due to their core products.

Jaguar was a huge mismarketed fumble. The executives in charge should be executed.

The Hummer H2... what can we say about the H2 and H3? That executive that approved these vehicles should've been taken out back of the office building and executed with the same guys that designed and approved the Pontiac Aztek/Buick Rendezvous.

The Toyota Prius is snake oil. All of these hybrids are snake oil. I remember when "Sport Compact Car" did a road test of both the Prius and the hybrid Camry. They found that unless you were out in the boonies without serious traffic, the hybrid was actually worse than a normal gas engine car. And what is going to happen to this hybrids when they start to break down after they get some miles put to them? Is the average consumer going to suck it up and pay huge money for parts or for dealer only service? No. These cars are going to be scourge of the used car lot.

Chrysler is a lost cause in the past few years... even me, Mr Domestic, can't say anything good about them.

Posted by Samurai should've titled this 'JAPANESE FANBOYS STROKING THEIR IMPORT FLAVORED COCKS & TALKING OUT THEIR ASSES" I would've taken it far more seriously then if you had told the truth.

But then again, im not a Japanese Fanboy. I have a Ford truck, a Plymouth Voyager, Lincoln Continental, a 300zx, and a VW Golf. Yet, i still get called a Fanboy sharing an opinion thats closer than the truth than your opinion. Jesus christ Sam. I like a well built car, which the Americans have failed to produce since the 70's.

Shove that up your fanboy hating behind.

EDIT: I told you not to reply unless you are going to agree.

God, you guys basically bar Samurai from replying to this, but then proceed to just bash the shit out of companies with silly ad hominem attacks. Hypocrites!

While I agree with most of the above article, all it does is focus on the negative. Unions are more to blame for the current problem than the cars, even though some did suck. All companies, around the world, can build gems as well as shitboxes.

This is my 93 Blazer:



I took that pic last week. That fucking truck has over 222,000 miles on it now. It's not mint, but that's the original engine and mostly original paint. Burns no oil. The previous owners abused the hell out of it too. The thing doesn't die. It broke down once since I've owned it, when the ignition module went. I diagnosed it, walked to a place, bought one, and installed it on the side of the road with a screwdriver then drove away.
I try to maintain it so that says something for it's condition, but still, it goes to show that most GM trucks are world class. I can't say the same for the small S-10s because I never owned one ad have heard stories of them being shit.
Regardless, without sounding like a dick I can almost say my truck is superior to any of it's foreign counterparts of the same era. Sure, the dash in my truck looks like it's made of Legos. But, it was designed in 1985 most likely since these style trucks were introduced in 1987 as 88 models. And a retard can work on it. A retard could work on my whole truck. The frame doesn't rot. I don't have a shit 3.0 V6 that gets the same MPG as my V8, but has no power and blows headgaskets like spark plug wires.

If you guys are going to judge a vehicle, try driving them first.

Ford trucks aren't all that great. The modular engines burn oil, blow spark plugs out the sides of the heads, they rot, etc. The Super Duty is okay, and I'd drive one, but the transmission is a weak spot. There are springs in them that have been known to blow holes through the transmission case, they have rust issues, random things break, and they have that crap 5.4 engine. I'm probably being a little harsh but I've seen some stuff go down.
I do want a Bronco. We had one for a family car, and while it kept breaking, I loved it. My dad hates them now though. The damn thing rotted to death, needed an engine at 100K, the usual. The c-6 trans and 9" rear end lasted until 225K when the truck was junked though.

At the same time, even the new Tundra is a pile. The frame is weak, the tailgates delaminate, the bed has exposed mounting bolts in the floor, the doors rattle, I know, we rented one for over a month. It wasn't bad, but the new GMC I rode in was better looking, better assembled, and was way better on fuel. The Tundra is just something to appeal to people who are brand loyalists already.

I DO take offense to the Astro van being in that article. Those things run FOREVER. Cheap to own. They handle fine. The seating position gives a good view. And you know what? Those vans are huge over in Japan, they are imported as gray market vehicles. The Scion xB was essentially styled in a boxy shape to exaggerate the lines of the Astro.
As for the crash safety issue, what about the Toyota Previa? That thing was the most dangerous van ever produced!

Lastly, I love how all you guys have become so brainwashed that you think excessive globalization is good for the planet, and the big three should collapse. I think we should be able to buy foreign cars. Sometimes they are superior, and this is a free market we have here. But, if we cannot produce our OWN vehicles, 100% AUTONOMOUSLY, the country will not survive this way.
Same goes for most other industries. The excuse that the country is fine in spite of little to no footwear, electronics, etc. being produced here no longer applies. Look at what's happened to the country. No one is working. It's all service based now, catering to fat, lazy sacks of dumb shit who choose to throw common sense out the window as long as they don't have to think about it, and someone else will do the thinking for them.

Sheep.

I did not agree with the bailout, I think they should go bankrupt so they can tell their creditors and unions to piss up a rope, restructure, and get people running these companies that understand what the country needs. However, this needs to be done in a non-Orwellian, non-Socialist way. Some of the stuff happening right now is frightening me.

American trucks and import cars. Thats how we do it in my house.

Posted by big dave But then again, im not a Japanese Fanboy. I have a Ford truck, a Plymouth Voyager, Lincoln Continental, a 300zx, and a VW Golf. Yet, i still get called a Fanboy sharing an opinion thats closer than the truth than your opinion. Jesus christ Sam. I like a well built car, which the Americans have failed to produce since the 70's. Shove that up your fanboy hating behind. EDIT: I told you not to reply unless you are going to agree.

i'm never going to agree because you are just as biased as i am only at the different end of the spectrum. NOTHING built in the 1970's was good. Jesus christ, it was a decade when cars literally rotted ROTTED on the showroom floor. It really was the decade that put the last series of nails in the American auto industry. You had management making bad decisions based on corporate perk packages. You had the government sticking their noses, hands, feet, dick, whatever they could into the auto industry trying to make everything safe and environmentally cool (which wasn't a bad thing, but no one was on the same page) And then you had the perpetually paranoid UAW at the height of its power and depths of it's common sense striking here and there. We wax nostalgic over the 70's like it was a lost decade of awesome cars. It wasn't. It was an age when the country was confused and so were its cars.

...and the Japanese as much as you don't want to hear this, exploited the shit out of the situation with merciless zeal and mercenary purpose... they dumped every shitbox they could on America taking advantage of the tariff situation. And suckers, idiots that buy in to bullshit, bought their cars and snooted their nose and Detroit. Not that Detroit didn't have it coming. They needed something to wake their asses up.

Unfortunately, too many old corporate drones haunt the halls of the once proud big three and change did not come fast enough. I hate to say this, but maybe bankruptcy and controlled restructuring are just what GM needs.

The Cav was one of those car designs that could survive generations of drivers without any major changes; I think who ever wrote this seem to not understand that.

The Astro actually despite its truck roots is a pretty good van. It succeeded where the Ford Aerostar did not; that is cut into the sales of my beloved Caravan.

Posted by Agent Skelly The Cav was one of those car designs that could survive generations of drivers without any major changes; I think who ever wrote this seem to not understand that. The Astro actually despite its truck roots is a pretty good van. It succeeded where the Ford Aerostar did not; that is cut into the sales of my beloved Caravan.

the Astro was never marketed as a 'mini' van like the Aerostar tried to. It was an intermediate sized van with some heavy capabilities, almost the same stigma that the Dodge Dakota had. It was not a compact truck, nor was it full size.

Posted by Samurai the Astro was never marketed as a 'mini' van like the Aerostar tried to. It was an intermediate sized van with some heavy capabilities, almost the same stigma that the Dodge Dakota had. It was not a compact truck, nor was it full size.

Yup, that too. The Astro could pull the heavier travel trailers over the Caravan because of the better towing package. One thing that the 1st generation Caravans did not have.

and bringing this all back to the thread concept... whoever wrote this article that Big Dave found was an idiot, an inept idiot more intent on starting trouble than actually looking at or researching his subject matter.

meh america = fail at most of their cars. My taurus = fail, my cousins alero = fail his gf's cav = fail. the cobalt steerign wheel in my gf's dads corvette = fail.

The Taurus ate automatic transmissions for lunch. The engines were good though my sister drove one for years and could not manage to kill it. The car was on it's 3rd tranny at the end though.

Sam is gonna go post in the pissed off forum now.

Posted by Nismo meh america = fail at most of their cars. My taurus = fail, my cousins alero = fail his gf's cav = fail. the cobalt steerign wheel in my gf's dads corvette = fail.

ever consider that maybe its your family?

The simple fact about this article and everything everyone has said so far is that the Big 3 had such a pissing contest that they were competing only with each other and did not have the foresight or humility to make the decisions that the Japanese did. If they knew that Japan was going to a) be such a big influence and b) actually get it right. It's a matter of pride, and now American Auto is paying the price. It's unfortunate, but true.

Posted by Samurai ever consider that maybe its your family?

nope because the toyota we have, my jetta, the other jetta, my old GTI, my aunts last 3 jettas, and the accord never failed us. GM Ford and Chrysler are just old dogs that need to be put down