[77 Canamman]

Originally Posted by red1975pacer

Im still pissed at Chrysler on how they screwed AMC in order to steal Jeep. By the way the last AMC designed jeep was the Grand Cherkee {sic} of around 1987. talk about a good product, this was the one reason why Chrysler wanted Jeep.

The 1984 Cherokee (not Grand) was the last AMC designed and engineered vehicle. The design lasted with some updates through 2001 in the US. I owned a '99 for 11 years, and it was a good, dependable vehicle that never let me down, or had any issues. However, I do not miss it.

[red1975pacer]

Originally Posted by 77 Canamman

The 1984 Cherokee (not Grand) was the last AMC designed and engineered vehicle. The design lasted with some updates through 2001 in the US. I owned a '99 for 11 years, and it was a good, dependable vehicle that never let me down, or had any issues. However, I do not miss it.

The grand cherokee along with the Eagle Premere were in "pilot production' The sale of AMc took place in Dec of 87 a few months into 88 production. The last "true Amc was the AMC Eagle that actually was considered an 1988. The Grand Cherekee was an Amc designed truck, but not Amc produced for retail sale. Amc had begun to turn the corner with Jeep sales, and the last quarter of 1987 Was profitable for Amc even though it wasnt released, because of the certainly of the "merger' with Chrysler.

[Dens71TA]

red1975pacer has it correct. The 1st-gen Grand Cherokee was the last AMC designed Jeep and almost ready for production. Engineering wasn't entirely complete and Chrysler decided to work on the refresh of their minivans first which led to the Grand Cherokee not being introduced until 1992 for the '93 model year.

Had AMC not been sold the Grand Cherokee would have been released around the '89 or '90 model year and replaced the Grand Wagoneer and possibly the XJ Cherokee. AMC was trying to get away from their known use of producing old and dated platforms for way too long. The AMC Eagle was based on the Hornet which had been in production since 1969 while the FSJ Grand Wagoneers and trucks dated to 1962.

[beemergary]

Originally Posted by 77 Canamman

The 6.0 and 6.4 Navistar diesels did wonders for Ford's reputation, didn't they?

I also own a '72 Chevrolet Cheyenne 3/4 ton with a 402/TH400. That is my work truck. That is the best truck series GM ever had.

Had over 200,000 mi. on my 6.0 and never a problem. Always let it warm up and ran Amsoil in it. I'll admit there's horror stories about them. There was no thought when they designed the 6.0 overnite. My dad had the same truck as you. It was a beast with power and speed. Took it on my honeymoon with a in bed camper. The good old days

[red1975pacer]

you know its kind of funny. Chrysler wanted AMC for the JEEP line ,and Fiat wanted Chrysler for the JEEP line. Now im hearing that Fiat hopes to sell a million JEEPS worldwide. JEEP truly is a "global " line. I used to feel bad for what happened to AMC by Chrysler, but in the scheme of things I guess it all kind of worked out. Ive owned my Pacer since 1994. and loved every minute of it. Many times Ive parked my pacer next to my 68 GTO :HPP cover car June 2007} and everyone was more excited about the Pacer. Go figure!

[77 Canamman]

The Jeeps now are shadows of their former selves. Most are based upon car platforms, and will fall apart if subjected to off road abuse. The Wrangler is still true to it's roots, but they are so expensive for what you get.

[Donovan]

Nice Durango. Good looking car!

[red1975pacer]

Saw a 4 door JEEP wrangler black and gold "Dragon edition" on a new car lot. Sticker price was 40k. Alot of money for anything! Great looking Jeep, id be afraid to drive it in "the snow" or rain!

[Diego]

Originally Posted by zephyrracer

Reason not to buy from Chrysler and GM is what they and the government did to the bond holders

That sounds like ordering a dish, not being happy with it, then stiffing the waitress.

Out of curiosity, are there any other companies' bond holders you care so much about?

[71SportRagtop]

Good for you OP!

I've been burned by GM before and will never give them another penny of my money.

I traded my wife's Gran Prix in on a Honda and had over 100K of trouble free miles and our Honda still had really good value when we got rid of it. My wife now drives a Subaru WRX and she LOVES it. I have to admit the car is a blast to drive.

I had lots of issues with my Chevy Tahoe and finally got rid of it before I emptied my bank account on maintenance. I tried several different rides and brands before choosing a Toyota 4 Runner. My 4 Runner is a FANTASTIC ride. It's powerful, comfortable, great in the snow, and the 3.4 engine is well documented to easily hit 300K trouble free miles. After driving my 4 Runner and my wife's WRX, it will be a cold day in Hell before I ever walk into a GM dealership.

[77 Canamman]

Greg, you seem to fail to bring up your Suburban? Doesn't really matter, it's the same old "kiss the Japanese manufacturer's asses" message in all of your posts.

[Ben M.]

Originally Posted by 77 Canamman

Doesn't really matter, it's the same old "kiss the Japanese manufacturer's asses" message in all of your posts.

More like "praise the manufacturers who deliver a quality product" than anything else. Voting with our dollars, nothing more American than that!

[77 Canamman]

Originally Posted by Ben M.

More like "praise the manufacturers who deliver a quality product" than anything else. Voting with our dollars, nothing more American than that!

I haven't regretted buying two brand new GM vehicles in 7 years. Too bad, so sad to those who have had problems with them.

Sh!t happens. I could write several paragraphs profiling of all of the lackluster Japanese vehicles owned by friends, customers, and acquaintances.

[zephyrracer]

Originally Posted by Diego

That sounds like ordering a dish, not being happy with it, then stiffing the waitress.

Out of curiosity, are there any other companies' bond holders you care so much about?

Yes Diego my friend there is some and I will expound some for you but first a question to you, people lost their personal investment retirement income with no recourse, some were ok, some had to go back to work, some had to live a life differently than what they planned for, the bond holders by law were the first to re-coupe their investment, GM, Chrysler and the government stole their lively hood from them so question to you is isn't that reason enough, if you don,t understand the principal I will be most happy and respectful in an explanation, is there any part you don,t understand ?

Gregg

[beemergary]

Jeeps and Harley aren't going away. Still have my (resored 1973 cj5 with the AMC 304). Wife gets made when I don't wave back to other Jeep drivers when driving her Jeep wrangler. There's a saying "Its A Jeep Thing You wouldn't Understand" Are 1995 Grand Cherokee with 290,000 miles with a 318 cu in will get 22-24 mpg. Brother has 340,000 on his 2001 grand cherokee

[70gp]

In my experience, I`ve spent more $$$ to fix our purchased new 2008 Toyota Sienna with 75,000 miles (the latest problem, the steering rack just needed to be replaced-$1000 bill) than my purchased new 2000 Chev Silverado with 188,000 miles. My Chev`s been VERY good to me. Not impressed with our Toyota, actually somewhat PO`d that a steering rack goes out at that mileage. All makes have their good and their bad and I don`t think the quality difference is as great between the Japanese and American cars as the Consumer Reports crowd would have you believe. I have no qualms about buying a new GM vehicle based on quality and am thinking about buying a new 2014 Impala. If it`s the bailout that`s bothering some here, that`s another story. But I think a USA with a thriving GM is better for the country than a USA without GM.

[Diego]

Originally Posted by zephyrracer

Yes Diego my friend there is some and I will expound some for you but first a question to you, people lost their personal investment retirement income with no recourse, some were ok, some had to go back to work, some had to live a life differently than what they planned for, the bond holders by law were the first to re-coupe their investment, GM, Chrysler and the government stole their lively hood from them so question to you is isn't that reason enough, if you don,t understand the principal I will be most happy and respectful in an explanation, is there any part you don,t understand ?

So you choose to ignore the real point? You're penalizing GM for the government's handling of the bailout.

That's hardly exercising "principle."

[zephyrracer]

Originally Posted by Diego

So you choose to ignore the real point? You're penalizing GM for the government's handling of the bailout.

That's hardly exercising "principle."

Diego point is and the reality is they accepted the money, they could have and should have filed bankruptcy and reorganized that would have been legal and proper way for a kick start, in case you didn't know there are many different kinds of bankruptcy, one to liquidate one to reorganize and continue, the bond holders by law, by law were first in line for money. Diego I hope this explains that GM and Chrysler stole from poor defenseless citizens if so we can move into the next part or your question but don't feel rushed I will stay on this part as long as need be.

Gregg

[71SportRagtop]

Originally Posted by 77 Canamman

Greg, you seem to fail to bring up your Suburban? Doesn't really matter, it's the same old "kiss the Japanese manufacturer's asses" message in all of your posts.

I've said before that I had a 99 Suburban and I loved it. But I bought it as a 12-13 year old used truck with 124K for $3000.00. As much as I dislike GM I can't blame them for the way a 12-13 year old truck with over 100K runs and drives. The Suburban served it's purpose but I knew that with 124K that it was on borrowed time. When I took it in for PA State inspection, my mechanic told me that it needed upper and lower ball joints on both sides plus he recommended new front tires and an alignment. The repair bill was going to be around $1200-$1500.00 I sold it.

The 99 Suburban I bought is basically the same truck as the 97 Tahoe that I bought brand new. I loved the Tahoe too when I drove it off the dealer's lot. Then that same Tahoe lost a trans at 50K miles. And that same Tahoe needed intake gaskets at 45,000 miles. Call me foolish if you want but it burns my butt to have to pay $3000.00 to replace a transmission on a 50,000 mile truck that I'm still making payments on. At the same time I was making payments on my Tahoe, we were also making payments on my wife's 98 Gran Prix. Before that car hit 50K miles I replaced a water pump, an alternator, a hub bearing, a wiper transmission, and also had the same leaking intake gasket problem.

I was paying over $800.00 a month to GM for these 2 vehicles and having multiple issues. I understand brakes, oil changes, and tires but I was having issues that cost serious money. The trans was a hair over $3K to replace, the intake gasket job was in the $600.00 range. Add to that all the things that had to be replaced on my wife's Gran Prix and I had to sink about $7,000 into my GM vehicles before they hit 50K miles and while I was still making payments.

As my patience level ran thin, I wrote a very nice professional letter to GM stating my displeasure with their product and explaining that my family had been GM loyal since my grandfather bought his first ever new car in 1956. Since 1956 my family had been GM loyal through and through. What I got back was basically a form letter from GM. If you read through all the mumbo jumbo it basically said tough crap.

So that's my experience with GM. Now let me tell you my experience with Honda. In 2004 we got sick and tired of the Gran Prix nickel and diming us to death so we traded it in on a 2004 Honda CR-V for my wife. We paid $23,000 for the CR-V. My wife drove the CR-V for 9 years and just over 100K miles and had ZERO issues. Other than oil changes, tires, a battery, and brakes, we replaced NOTHING. After almost 10 years of ownership my wife finally decided she wanted something different so I listed the CR-V on eBay as a one owner, garage kept, well maintained car. It sold for $8,800.00! So 10 years of trouble free ownership of a Honda cost me $15,000.00. I spent half of that $15K just to repair items on the GM cars I was STILL PAYING FOR!

You can get mad at me all you want. You can tell me I'm kissing the Jap manufacturers asses all you want but the bottom line is this: MY PERSONAL experience with the 2 different manufacturers has been piss poor with GM and fantastic with Honda. Sorry if that pisses you off but it's been my experience. I can only base my opinions on what I have personally experienced.

[Scarebird]

Originally Posted by zephyrracer

Diego point is and the reality is they accepted the money, they could have and should have filed bankruptcy and reorganized that would have been legal and proper way for a kick start, in case you didn't know there are many different kinds of bankruptcy, one to liquidate one to reorganize and continue, the bond holders by law, by law were first in line for money...

You seem to miss the fact this is GM, not Jenny's House of Parakeets and nobody could have handled the bankruptcy other than the US govt. Both Honda and Toyota lobbied strongly for the support as their supply chains would have suffered immense damage here. The needs of the shareholders were weighed against those of the rest of the country and the decision was made.