Used our Lucerne to start a new Camry with a dead battery today.

[serb]

Just another example of our legislators looking out for the home land people.

stevo

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ron Green</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Reatta Man</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I have to wonder why Tokyo is so quick to want to come back and reinvest it here? </div></div>

They receive a huge tax break (thousands per vehicle) both at the federal and local level for all the vehicles they import, which could be viewed somewhat as a government subsidy. For the most part many still import 65% of their vehicles into this country. A few years ago Congress was going to close this cash cow loophole to make the playing field even for American manufactures however it appears that the lobbyist have again won this battle. </div></div>

I always said, if it wasn't for America, Toyota & Honda wouldn't be where they are today.........

[Guest Shaffer]

Thanks for that info about the Denso parts on the Buick NTX!

Interesting story about your uncles/aunts 68' Galaxie. I am not that familiar with Fords from that era (I really do not get interested in them until the 1971-78 models (full-size). As mentioned, the 71+ models of the full-size Fords seem to be better overall in quality than GMs of the same era as far as fit and finish, but I was always thinking it seemed to me that from about 1966 and back, that GM had the winning edge over Ford. I thought even more-so when I read a comparison road test from a old magazine between a 1966 Impala 2dr and a 1966 Galaxie 2dr was mentioning that the Chevy had a better fitting and quieter interior than the 66' Fords. I think it was with the 1967 redesign that Ford started its upward trend, but by the early 70s, it was superior in most areas. I am not sure what happened with GMs 1971 redesign, but it seemed to have went down a bit in fit-n-finish vs. the 1970 models, at least on some models. I personally liked the designs much better, especially on the Cadillac, Oldsmobile and Pontiac. I never thought that much of the 1967-70 Cadillacs, Oldsmobiles or Pontiacs... they were OK, but I like the 71-73 Cadillacs, Oldsmobiles and Pontiacs better. I did like the 67-70 Chevrolets and Buicks however.

There are some areas though that the 1971-76 GM cars were better on as I mentioned and thats the electrical systems. We have owned many early 70s cars over the years... GM, Ford and Chrysler. GM had far superior electrical systems. I NEVER owned a late 60s-early 70s GM car that had non-working power locks or windows. Every one I have ever owned with the option worked fine. Same could not be said for the Fords/Lincolns of the same era. Most everyone of those I/we owned had a window or door lock problem. Out of all of the early 70s GM cars that I have owned with power windows, which were: a 1972 Cadillac DeVille, 1971 Oldsmobile Toronado, 1971 Chevrolet Caprice, 1972 Buick Electra and my current 73' Pontiac Grand Ville, all have had all power windows working perfectly. We owned several 60s and 70s Lincolns and I think most had window issues, but the quality / fit finish of the instrument and door panels and interior materials, were excellent! I have also noticed too that certain GM cars of the early 70s had a high quality interior... the 71-76 Cadillacs seem to have a nice fit/finish.... the others are not that bad either and better than all Mopars of the same vintage in my opinion.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NTX5467</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I concur that full-size Fords of the later '60s and early '70s had better fit and finish than many other American makes. The Exxon service station I traded with back then had an owner/operator that was a Ford guy. He had a customer (a real estate agent) who drove '68 Country Squire wagons. He didn't mind going "out into the pasture" with it to show a property. He did have some repairs from this activity (using the car like a pickup truck), but it just kept on going. The 390 V-8s were always smooth and the Tecumseh a/c compressors kept on going as did the automatic transmission.

My aunt and uncle bought a new '68 Galaxie 500 LTD. The pin striping was exactly as it should be and the "panty cloth" interior fabric lived up to its billing of being soft and highly durable. By that time, Ford had their fit and finish game down pat, right down to the smoothness of the metal on the edges of the doors with a continuous reflection line rather than one with humps and bumps.

So, Shaffer, all it might have taken to fix your Chevy was just a good, ole fashioned valve job--getting the guide clearance back into spec would probably have fixed that whole oil use problem.

NTX5467 </div></div>

[NTX5467]

Actually, Shaffer, it was the 1965 model year when Ford really made some quantum leaps in product and design . . . not just styling. That was the start of their "Quieter than a Rolls Royce" advertising, too, with their full-size cars.

"Car Life" magazine had a huge spread on the new 1965 Mercury full-size cars (which were companions to the similar Fords, but with some particular additions and such). New body, new frame, new rear suspension (coils rather than leaf springs), etc. About the only things which carried-over were engines and transmissions (although '66 saw the first Ford C-6 Select-Shift automatic start replacing the prior Cruise-O-Matic (i.e., Borg-Warner) units.

Although the Galaxies and Montereys were similar, they had enough differentiation to call them "different". Plus the Mercury's had a 410 cid version of the FE engine series as their own.

I find the quoted car magazine comment about the Chevy being quieter and better fitting than the Ford as it was documented that the '66 Ford LTD was 1 or 2 db quieter at 60mph than the Rolls. It was agreed that the Rolls would have less noise at higher speeds, though--above the speed of comparison. Lexus was not the first to trumpet their vehicles' quietness (the Ford commercial was on a construction jobsite, heavy equipment running closeby, as the driver rolled up the window and all of the sound went away).

I recall that GM had a NVH initiative in the middle '60s, but had (by observation) increase it significantly to counter Ford's sudden gains. Same for fit/finish, too, but the acrylic enamel on Fords and Chryslers had a better (harder) shine than any factory acrylic lacquer paint did.

To me, the neat thing is that EVERY car manufacturer's vehicles had many distinctive sounds and feels to them . . . unlike today's "generic" feel so that new customers will feel at home rather than in "something different". More than just where (and how much) sound deadener or undercoating was applied (or what if it had a gear-reduction starter or not).

If you can find a copy of the DeLorean book "On A Clear Day, You Can See General Motors" (circa 1982, used copies can still be found via the Barnes&Noble website and others), it'll explain much of the "differences" you noticed on the early '70s GM cars . . . and why they happened.

Whether or not you might like particular years or models of GM vehicles in that era ('65-'75) is "personal taste" as we might agree to disagree in some areas. I term them as "honest design" vehicles. Meaning . . . the designs were simple, yet sophisticated, with similar engineering orientations.

There were reasons to purchase a particular brand of GM vehicle, as personal priorities and preferences kicked-in. Models and lines DID overlap, just as there were FEW dual-franchise GM stores (other than traditional evolved duals of Pontiac and GMC) in metro areas. If you bought a BUICK, you got a BUICK ownership experience (same with other GM brands, too), for example. In MANY respects, GM was a better GM when each GM division seemed to be more concerned with competing with their siblings rathen than anybody else.

Back then, certain GM divisions were the "lead division" on certain vehicle systems. Olds was usually "A step ahead" in the engineering department, with new things first before they went to other GM divisions. Buick and others had their own "lead" areas, too. Things were DEFINITELY more fun back then, especially keeping up with who was doing what!

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[Dosmo]

Listening to folks gripe about Toyota & Honda owners reminds me of talking to a couple of my in-laws. Both are die-hard Ford fans - they absolutely despise Chevrolets and people who love them. This used to put me on the opposite side from them, because I was pretty much a GM person until about 6 years ago when I bought a Toyota Tundra pickup for my wife. I took over the 89 GMC Suburban and drove it for 2 years before it died at 213,000 miles. Then, I bought a 2004 Impala with 30,000 miles on it. I thought it was an OK car, a little boring. After putting 22,000 miles on it, there was a roar in the front suspension. Had RF wheel bearings replaced twice, didn't fix it - in fact, the car started making a popping noise while being driven. Took it to a certified alignment/suspension shop - they could hear the noise, but couldn't find it. I promptly took that car and traded it on a 2003 Toyota Avalon with 96000 miles. You wouldn't believe the bath I took on the Impala.

I'd do it again in a heartbeat. I know that I upgraded when I went to the Avalon, which is in a different price range. However, I love this car more than any I've ever had. Totally silent operation - tight as a drum. Great fit & finish. I read these stories of people whose every experience with a Honda or Toyota has been negative and I am absolutely incredulous. It's exactly like listening to my in-laws talk about anything that is not a Ford. Why do people get so upset when others, for whatever reason, make choices that are different from their own?

I absolutely love Buicks, Chevies, Pontiacs and Olds up through 1965, and a few beyond that. Ford products for me were great through 1957, but that was it. Mopars through mid sixties. My first several cars were all American-made, but I abused them so bad as to make comparisons meaningless. The first new car I bought was a 1982 Dodge Omni Charger - what a worthless, rattling, loud uncomfortable shambles of a car. My second new vehicle was a 1986 Mazda B200 Pickup. Great ride. NO PROBLEMS. Traded it on the Suburban - loved the truck, but it did have its share of problems.

I'm 54 years old, and I've been around the block a few times. I recognize some of this import-bashing for what it is, and all I can say is that I feel sorry for folks whose lives must be so empty that all they can do is spin these stories about each & every time they've had contact with someone who owned an import car, the people with the import are either weird or have been misled in some way that they ended up buying a non-American car. Give me a break!

Pound on me all you want. I call this like I see it.

[Guest Shaffer]

That sounds identical to the company car I had for a couple of months in early 2007... it was a 2005 Impala that had 54K miles. There was a horrible roaring sound, but I discounted it to being the type/brand of tires on the car. Then there was also a popping and thumping coming from the steering wheel on certain turns/bumps. When I was through using the car for the errands they had me doing, the car was ready to be traded in for a new supervisor. The car I was using had been a supervisors car that had been on sick-leave. I turned it in to the company and that week, it was traded in on a new 2007 Impala LS sedan, which the new supervisor tells me already has 29K miles! I was offered the job BTW, but declined it when I found out it was a 60-65 hour per week job.

Oh yes, the Avalons are great cars. The only really quality issue I ever heard on the Avalons was that the earlier 95-97s were not up to Toyotas usual high standards in the "squeak and rattle" department. I read/heard that some had issues in this area and was "un-Toyota" like, but was improved with the 98+ models and especially with the 2000 redesign. I could have bought a 2002 Avalon XLS for $8600, which I regret not doing now.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 54nuyorkrwagon</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> 2004 Impala with 30,000 miles on it. I thought it was an OK car, a little boring. After putting 22,000 miles on it, there was a roar in the front suspension. Had RF wheel bearings replaced twice, didn't fix it - in fact, the car started making a popping noise while being driven.

</div></div>

[Guest Shaffer]

Yeah, I now remember them boasting in 1965 how quiet the car was and was boasting that this car now had all-coil suspension (which Chevy had since 1958 and even before Oldsmobile). I guess I have a hard time believing it was really as early as 1965, because I have seen some oddly/unpleasant fitting dash panels on the 1965-66 Fords and some unpleasant exposed wiring (under the dash near the steering column) on ALL of the 65-66 FS Fords and Mercurys, which I find cheap looking and unattractive. This was something that some of the 64' Mercury's had as well (strange, but I do not think did). My uncle is a big fan of 60s Fords and I have noticed on the mid 60s Mercurys he has, all have unattractive exposed wiring at the base of the steering column, which appears to be factory. Also, Ford did not do as good of a job as GM in the mid 60s in "hiding" the lower parts of the steering columns where it meets the lower instrument panel, but I am nit-picking. I have seen inside of several 1965-66 Chevrolets (and other GM cars) and the quality seems to be much more better than the 65-66 Fords. The panels align better it seems to me. the 64-older Fords seem to have nice fitting interiors on the flip side. I think its where Ford tried that "two-piece" dash panel on the 65-68 models. Thanks for the tips on that book! I will look for it!

I know what you mean in your closing statements... I think. LOL. One thing that comes to mind to me was the finger-tip wiper control on the early 70s Buicks, the rear seat clock on the early 70s Ninety-Eights, and the adjustable pedals on the early-mid 70s Pontiacs.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NTX5467</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, Shaffer, it was the 1965 model year when Ford really made some quantum leaps in product and design . . . not just styling. That was the start of their "Quieter than a Rolls Royce" advertising, too, with their full-size cars.

"Car Life" magazine had a huge spread on the new 1965 Mercury full-size cars (which were companions to the similar Fords, but with some particular additions and such). New body, new frame, new rear suspension (coils rather than leaf springs), etc. About the only things which carried-over were engines and transmissions (although '66 saw the first Ford C-6 Select-Shift automatic start replacing the prior Cruise-O-Matic (i.e., Borg-Warner) units.

Enjoy!

NTX5467 </div></div>

[Reatta Man]

The thumping noises you guys have heard on your Impalas is called the intermediate shaft. It is about a $200-250 repair, parts and labor, and makes the car steer like new.

By the way, my 2003 Impala has been in the shop ONCE since I bought it new. It was for the intermediate shaft. It averaged 27-28 MPG on my trip here to Florida from San Antonio. Otherwise, in nearly 80K miles, it has been totally trouble free. And, as for the noise some of you talked about, nearly 80-90% of it went away when I got rid of the OEM Goodyears and replaced them with Michelins.

As for the discussion about 60's Fords and Chevies, the best thing about those cars is the fact that they cost about $3500 brand new! If you didn't like it, next year, you just bought another brand new $3500 car. Nowdays, you spend $30K, take a $10-20K beating if you turn it in before 2-4 years, so if it is a dog, you either live with it or take a beating.

Personally, I'm also a to-the-bone GM guy, but every time I see a 1964 Ford Galaxy 500XL 2-door coupe or convertible, I almost throw my neck out of joint turning around to get a look at it! That was a one-year-only body that really rocked.

I enjoy the walks down memory lane about the great 1960s iron...keep it coming!

[Guest Shaffer]

Thanks for that tip! I will keep it in mind incase I ever buy a 00-05 Impala! Overall, I loved the car... it had a soft and pleasing ride, handled well and had alot of pickup and a super smooth transmission.

Speaking of 64' Fords, my uncle has a <span style="font-weight: bold">1964 Ford Galaxie 500 XL 2dr</span>, LOADED TO THE MAX! It has rare options that I have not seen on many of these. It has factory <span style="font-weight: bold">A/C, FM radio</span> (must have been about the first year) and even <span style="font-weight: bold">power windows</span>, power steering, power brakes.... It is red, with red leather interior (ALL ORIGINAL), bucket seats, console, etc. Its an awesome car.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Reatta Man</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The thumping noises you guys have heard on your Impalas is called the intermediate shaft. It is about a $200-250 repair, parts and labor, and makes the car steer like new.

Personally, I'm also a to-the-bone GM guy, but every time I see a 1964 Ford Galaxy 500XL 2-door coupe or convertible, I almost throw my neck out of joint turning around to get a look at it! That was a one-year-only body that really rocked.

I enjoy the walks down memory lane about the great 1960s iron...keep it coming! </div></div>