Matrix & Vibe

[HarleyEarl]

Around these parts Toyota is the great satan and yet GM has this joint venture with them with the Matrix and Vibe.

I have never understood it.

Toyota is major competition and yet GM manufactures cars with them.

Has GM ever explained that?

[CSpec]

My understanding was that they have a joint plant in southern California that was started in the early 80s. Toyota needed a plant in the US, and GM was keen to learn the Toyota method for producing more reliable cars, and that plant is still making the Matrix. I think I have that right anyway.

[HarleyEarl]

Ok...that seems reasonable enough, but haven't they learned anything in the last twenty years?

Still seems strange to me, from both vantage points, Toyota and GM.

[Camino LS6]

It's a relationship that should have never happened, and is overdue for termination.

[HarleyEarl]

And how much is GM involved?

Or is the Vibe really just a rebadged Toyota?...ugh.

[regfootball]

i do find it weird that it exists still...there must be some sort of tax writeoff or something for this.

[HarleyEarl]

It makes you wonder what is really going on.

Are there things about this partnership we don't know?

It just doesn't add up.

Just what is this relationship between GM and Toyota?

Could be a movie here.

[Intrepidation]

The joint venture goes back to when GM rebadged the Corolla and sold it as the Geo Prizm. The 2nd generation was the most unique, where all of the exterior surfaces are unique, as well as most of the dash, and it had it's own seat coverings. The suspension, powertrains, and everything you couldn't see (plus some you could) were shared. The 3rd generation, badged as a Chevrolet, differed little beyond headlights, tail lights, front bumper, and badging. For whatever reason it was designed to switch the joint venture to the Matrix/Vibe, which are still based off of the Corolla platform. The exteriors of both generations share no parts as afar as I know, but the interiors are pretty much identical.

The 2nd and 3rd generation Prizms were clearly superior to the Cavalier which shared the same showroom floor. They road better, had much smoother engines, much higher quality interiors, and had were generally superior and more refined than the Cavalier. Let's not forget that the Prizm was redesigned while the Cavalier continued with little change.

I've ridden and drove both cars...the Cavalier is a rattle trap...noisy and unrefined...the interior is awful...both from a design standpoint and quality wise. I have a friend who has one and he would constantly have things brake on it (center console). That's not to say they are problem free, these Prizms. Like the Corollas, they had some cheap bits that should have been better constructed...the worst offenders being the door handles inside and out. The 1.6L are notorious for exhaust manifold cracks. Ours has also had the transmission replaced because the gear synchronizer failed, as well as the master and slave cylinders.

I have complained about it several times on the board in the tech section, but the reality is that since the cylinders were replaced, with the exception of the tires, the car has been issue free (oh and that exhaust manifold). It runs like a new car, and sounds better than some cars much newer than it. It gets 40 real world mpg on the highway, it has working A/C, it doesn't feel scary to drive at speed (it can get loud at 80 or so due to wind noise, but what car of that era doesn't?).

So what has GM learned? Good question...the Cobalt which replaced the Cavalier is superior in many areas (it's much more quiet on the highway, has more features, and feels more stable too (I've taken one up to 100 with no problem). Still, it falls short in packaging (the rear seat sucks, whereas the Prizm's is actually pretty roomy), the the interior feels much cheaper, and I was never fond of the way the Ecotec sounded...or the steering.

Dunno if that's info you were looking for or not.

[Robert Hall]

The joint venture goes back to when GM rebadged the Corolla and sold it as the Geo Prizm.

Before that, even...around 1985, they started badging a Corolla variation as the Chevy Nova... it was the first model built at NUMMI, IIRC.

[Intrepidation]

Before that, even...around 1985, they started badging a Corolla variation as the Chevy Nova... it was the first model built at NUMMI, IIRC.

Right, I forgot about that.

[HarleyEarl]

Thanks for the info, well said.

I understand the rationale, it's not like car companies haven't had joint ventures before, but this arrangement between two competitive companies vying for the top spot, seems almost unbelievable.

[Sixty8panther]

Keep your friends close & your enemies CLOSER.

[HarleyEarl]

Honestly, sometimes it makes you wonder, who at GM makes these decisions?....who comes up with the idea?

'I was thinking, while soaking in the tub, why not make cars with Toyota?'....and everyone around the boardroom table, holler, bravo...fantastic idea!!!!

The founders and early leaders of GM must be turning in their graves.

Edited June 10, 2008 by HarleyEarl

[daves87rs]

Keep your friends close & your enemies CLOSER.

There you go...

[Robert Hall]

I never really got the market positioning of the Nova and Prizm... it seemed to overlap with the Cavalier and other GM compacts. There was also an Isuzu rebadged compact (Spectrum) that more-or-less replaced the Chevette.

Another twist is that for a few years, the 2nd gen Cavalier (around 95-97) was sold in Japan as the Toyota Cavalier.

[daves87rs]

Well, after looking at theit 80s compacts (j body) (Chevette), I could see why they gave it a try...

Hondas and Toyotas of those years (85-92) were very solid cars...and even GM knew that toward the end of the 80s....

Granted they didn't set the sales chart on fire, but I still see quite a few Prisms out there, some with plenty of miles...

And the Vibe has done pretty well....

I see two reasons here:

1. They get to see how Toyota does cars (building them)

2. They can pick off a few shoppers who otherwise may not have chose a GM car at all. Knowing that Toyota had a hand in their car might help them sleep better at night.....

[Robert Hall]

Well, after looking at theit 80s compacts (j body) (Chevette), I could see why they gave it a try...

Hondas and Toyotas of those years (85-92) were very solid cars...and even GM knew that toward the end of the 80s....

Granted they didn't set the sales chart on fire, but I still see quite a few Prisms out there, some with plenty of miles...

And the Vibe has done pretty well....

I see two reasons here:

1. They get to see how Toyota does cars (building them)

2. They can pick off a few shoppers who otherwise may not have chose a GM car at all. Knowing that Toyota had a hand in their car might help them sleep better at night.....

True enough...I know a guy with an early '90s Prizm that has over 350k miles....still looks decent inside and out. One thing you have to give Toyota credit for, I think, is that they do know a thing or two about building durable small cars and small engines....

Edited June 10, 2008 by moltar

[bobo]

This relationship has outlived those with Isuzu, Suzuki, and Subaru. Perhaps PCS can provide the rationale of the continuing relationship, though it does provide GM with a lot of things:

- Continuing knowledge of the Toyota way of building vehicles

- A very high mileage vehicle that attracts people who may not otherwise purchase another GM vehicle

- Use of a factory that Toyota may otherwise want for the Corolla or Tacoma, currently built at the NUMMI plant in Fremont, or for the Prius

[daves87rs]

True enough...I know a guy with an early '90s Prizm that has over 350k miles....still looks decent inside and out. One thing you have to give Toyota credit for, I think, is that they do a thing or two about building small cars and small engines....

True. And keeping their cars from rusting apart....

While the Js kept running (the engines lasted for quite a while), you usually had to junk them due to rust....

[CARBIZ]

True. And keeping their cars from rusting apart....

While the Js kept running (the engines lasted for quite a while), you usually had to junk them due to rust....

I still see a lot more J-cars from the '80s than I do Corollas around here, although truthfully they did sell quite a few more. There is one thing that GM (and Chrysler, for that matter) have learned to do well, and that is make solid bodies. I still see a lot of Hondas and Toyotas from the late '90s starting to dissolve to dust, proving that Japan still has some learning to do. Nobody does salt like Ontario does.

Before anyone continues beating on the Cavalier too much, please realize that the '03-'05 last generation was set apart from the rest. Under Lutz's stewardship, they received the 2.2 ecotec, a revised suspension, brake upgrades and a new fascia. The biggest problem with the last generation Cavaliers (from '95 onward) was the woefully ugly interior, particularly the potato sack seats. I will give credit where credit is due: the material weathers the test of time very well, but probably because the owners are afraid of sitting on them.

Although the final 3 years of the Cavalier lacked the quiet tuning of the Cobalt, the engine and suspension improvements changed the entire nature of the beast. For $h!s and giggles, I remember taking a '03 Cavalier and a '03 Corolla (borrowed from our sister store at the time) for a, ahem, shall we say 'spirited' test drive. No competition. The Corolla actually experienced 'cowl shake' on the horrible roads of eastern Toronto. (The dealer I used to work at was the envy of the nation because it was adjacent to Pharmacy Ave., which still ranks as one of the f'ing roughest roads on earth, thanks to the truck traffic and total lack of attention this city gives to anything to do with cars or roads.)

Back on topic, the auto industry has always been very incestuous. Parts companies make parts for many competing makes. Ford and GM have cooperated on many projects (notably the current 6 spd auto), BMW has 'borrowed' GM trannies (as has Jaguar and others over the years), OnStar has made its way into other companies. With the way that higher up executives flit from company to company, there always has been a lot of DNA transfer.

But I, too, have wondered why GM continues the relationship in this factory. Surely anything to be learned has been learned (or not) by now.

[Intrepidation]

I still see a lot more J-cars from the '80s than I do Corollas around here, although truthfully they did sell quite a few more. There is one thing that GM (and Chrysler, for that matter) have learned to do well, and that is make solid bodies. I still see a lot of Hondas and Toyotas from the late '90s starting to dissolve to dust, proving that Japan still has some learning to do. Nobody does salt like Ontario does.

Before anyone continues beating on the Cavalier too much, please realize that the '03-'05 last generation was set apart from the rest. Under Lutz's stewardship, they received the 2.2 ecotec, a revised suspension, brake upgrades and a new fascia. The biggest problem with the last generation Cavaliers (from '95 onward) was the woefully ugly interior, particularly the potato sack seats. I will give credit where credit is due: the material weathers the test of time very well, but probably because the owners are afraid of sitting on them.

Although the final 3 years of the Cavalier lacked the quiet tuning of the Cobalt, the engine and suspension improvements changed the entire nature of the beast. For $h!s and giggles, I remember taking a '03 Cavalier and a '03 Corolla (borrowed from our sister store at the time) for a, ahem, shall we say 'spirited' test drive. No competition. The Corolla actually experienced 'cowl shake' on the horrible roads of eastern Toronto. (The dealer I used to work at was the envy of the nation because it was adjacent to Pharmacy Ave., which still ranks as one of the f'ing roughest roads on earth, thanks to the truck traffic and total lack of attention this city gives to anything to do with cars or roads.)

Back on topic, the auto industry has always been very incestuous. Parts companies make parts for many competing makes. Ford and GM have cooperated on many projects (notably the current 6 spd auto), BMW has 'borrowed' GM trannies (as has Jaguar and others over the years), OnStar has made its way into other companies. With the way that higher up executives flit from company to company, there always has been a lot of DNA transfer.

But I, too, have wondered why GM continues the relationship in this factory. Surely anything to be learned has been learned (or not) by now.

As much as we'd all like to believe rust is somehow afraid of American cars, that's not the case. There's equal number of rusting vehicles from every manufacturer. I'd be happy to snag some photos if you require proof.

I see just as many of not more Corollas than Cavaliers around here...but I can tell you which one I see more of in the junkyards.

Finally, the `03 "refresh" was far too little too late. the Cobalt should have debuted in `03, and havebeen redesigned by now.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Dodgefan

[grandmarquis]

Before that, even...around 1985, they started badging a Corolla variation as the Chevy Nova... it was the first model built at NUMMI, IIRC.

Had an 86 Nova many years ago... an obnoxious litte turd of a car.

[CARBIZ]

As much as we'd all like to believe rust is somehow afraid of American cars, that's not the case. There's equal number of rusting vehicles from every manufacturer. I'd be happy to snag some photos if you require proof.

I see just as many of not more Corollas than Cavaliers around here...but I can tell you which one I see more of in the junkyards.

Finally, the `03 "refresh" was far too little too late. the Cobalt should have debuted in `03, and havebeen redesigned by now.

Considering the J-cars outsold the Corollas 2-1 right up until their last year, I would hope you would see more of those in the 'junkyard,' as you put it.

The trouble with counting junkers is that the stats are meaningless without original registrations to compare against. Desrosiers Marketing (Canada's JD Powers) did just that in 2000, and were confounded to explain why far more pre-1987 GM's and Fords were still on the road as compared to the imports from the same years, as adjusted by the numbers sold basis. Those were real, hard numbers: far fewer 'imports' were still on the road 13-5 years after being sold than were the 'domestics.' Of course, those were Canadian numbers, but since our winter's are generally harsher and we use proportionately more salt, I would say that our weather would tend to mercilessly weed out the junkers.

[Intrepidation]

Considering the J-cars outsold the Corollas 2-1 right up until their last year, I would hope you would see more of those in the 'junkyard,' as you put it.

The trouble with counting junkers is that the stats are meaningless without original registrations to compare against. Desrosiers Marketing (Canada's JD Powers) did just that in 2000, and were confounded to explain why far more pre-1987 GM's and Fords were still on the road as compared to the imports from the same years, as adjusted by the numbers sold basis. Those were real, hard numbers: far fewer 'imports' were still on the road 13-5 years after being sold than were the 'domestics.' Of course, those were Canadian numbers, but since our winter's are generally harsher and we use proportionately more salt, I would say that our weather would tend to mercilessly weed out the junkers.

Once again, no car is immune to it, foreign or domestic. Ventures for example: I've seen more than few with severely rotted rockers. That's the point I'm making.

[Sixty8panther]

Japanese cars, with their THINNER sheet-metal are MUCH

more prone to rot-through, & as such I hate to disagree

but I def. see WAY more Japanese cars with fist-sized rust

holes in the rockers/rear 1/4s and doors.

Again, all things being equal. model year and such esp.

Unfortunately your poor high-miliage Shadow is not a good

example of a solid domestic.

[HarleyEarl]

I contend that Japanese cars in the past often were more refined and well bolted together....but its the integrity of the materials used, that is in question.

Thinner gauge sheet metal and plastics for instance. I recall helping push a Datsun 510 out of the snow bank and as we pushed on the front end the two front fenders buckled above the wheel well.

And of course rust just ate up these cars.

I find American cars can last forever sometimes. They are more robust.

[CSpec]

As much as we'd all like to believe rust is somehow afraid of American cars, that's not the case. There's equal number of rusting vehicles from every manufacturer. I'd be happy to snag some photos if you require proof.

I see just as many of not more Corollas than Cavaliers around here...but I can tell you which one I see more of in the junkyards.

Finally, the `03 "refresh" was far too little too late. the Cobalt should have debuted in `03, and havebeen redesigned by now.

Well the Cobalt was supposed to come out for 2003, but apparently it was such a piece of garbage that Lutz ordered an emergency redesign, and the Cavalier refresh of that year was just to hold it over.

[daves87rs]

I still see a lot more J-cars from the '80s than I do Corollas around here, although truthfully they did sell quite a few more. There is one thing that GM (and Chrysler, for that matter) have learned to do well, and that is make solid bodies. I still see a lot of Hondas and Toyotas from the late '90s starting to dissolve to dust, proving that Japan still has some learning to do. Nobody does salt like Ontario does.

Before anyone continues beating on the Cavalier too much, please realize that the '03-'05 last generation was set apart from the rest. Under Lutz's stewardship, they received the 2.2 ecotec, a revised suspension, brake upgrades and a new fascia. The biggest problem with the last generation Cavaliers (from '95 onward) was the woefully ugly interior, particularly the potato sack seats. I will give credit where credit is due: the material weathers the test of time very well, but probably because the owners are afraid of sitting on them.

Although the final 3 years of the Cavalier lacked the quiet tuning of the Cobalt, the engine and suspension improvements changed the entire nature of the beast. For $h!s and giggles, I remember taking a '03 Cavalier and a '03 Corolla (borrowed from our sister store at the time) for a, ahem, shall we say 'spirited' test drive. No competition. The Corolla actually experienced 'cowl shake' on the horrible roads of eastern Toronto. (The dealer I used to work at was the envy of the nation because it was adjacent to Pharmacy Ave., which still ranks as one of the f'ing roughest roads on earth, thanks to the truck traffic and total lack of attention this city gives to anything to do with cars or roads.)

Back on topic, the auto industry has always been very incestuous. Parts companies make parts for many competing makes. Ford and GM have cooperated on many projects (notably the current 6 spd auto), BMW has 'borrowed' GM trannies (as has Jaguar and others over the years), OnStar has made its way into other companies. With the way that higher up executives flit from company to company, there always has been a lot of DNA transfer.

But I, too, have wondered why GM continues the relationship in this factory. Surely anything to be learned has been learned (or not) by now.

I am not knocking on them (at least not that much)...I have owned 4 of them already....

My ol' 93 is a good example of what I am saying...

The 3.1 has held together quite well, the drivetrain is holding up well, but after 15 years of michigan winters, the car is starting to rust pretty well. I think the will lose a door before it stops running.....

My wife's 2003 Cavaler has been a good car, sans the dreaded "dash rattle". That at times can drive me nuts. If the roads are bumpy, My dash will know. :AH-HA_wink:

Besides that, it is holding up quite well. The Eco is still smooth, and it has given me 42k trouble free miles so far...

[Robert Hall]

True. And keeping their cars from rusting apart....

While the Js kept running (the engines lasted for quite a while), you usually had to junk them due to rust....

Rust isn't a problem in Colorado or Arizona... but I still don't see very many '80s GMs FWDers like the J-cars around. They seem to have all gone to the crusher by now...

[CARBIZ]

I contend that Japanese cars in the past often were more refined and well bolted together....but its the integrity of the materials used, that is in question.

Thinner gauge sheet metal and plastics for instance. I recall helping push a Datsun 510 out of the snow bank and as we pushed on the front end the two front fenders buckled above the wheel well.

And of course rust just ate up these cars.

I find American cars can last forever sometimes. They are more robust.

That was a common problem with early '80s Japanese vehicles. At one point Datsun was actually using a kind of corrugated steel for their suspension mounts. I witnessed a 240Z lifted onto a hoist at a garage and the wheels stayed on the ground.

My ex BF had a '81 Tercel in '91 when we met. He parked it one winter and when I went to have it 'certified' the next Spring, the mechanic pointed out the rear wheel mounts were about to bust right through the trunk.

As Iaccoca attests in his first book, Japanese cars had a horrid rust problem in the '80s, but all anyone talks about is the rust problems Ford use to have.

[Intrepidation]

That was a common problem with early '80s Japanese vehicles. At one point Datsun was actually using a kind of corrugated steel for their suspension mounts. I witnessed a 240Z lifted onto a hoist at a garage and the wheels stayed on the ground.

My ex BF had a '81 Tercel in '91 when we met. He parked it one winter and when I went to have it 'certified' the next Spring, the mechanic pointed out the rear wheel mounts were about to bust right through the trunk.

As Iaccoca attests in his first book, Japanese cars had a horrid rust problem in the '80s, but all anyone talks about is the rust problems Ford use to have.

It is true though, rust does effect 80's Japanese cars more than others...and Tacomas STILL (ZING!).

[Robert Hall]

That was a common problem with early '80s Japanese vehicles. At one point Datsun was actually using a kind of corrugated steel for their suspension mounts. I witnessed a 240Z lifted onto a hoist at a garage and the wheels stayed on the ground.

My ex BF had a '81 Tercel in '91 when we met. He parked it one winter and when I went to have it 'certified' the next Spring, the mechanic pointed out the rear wheel mounts were about to bust right through the trunk.

As Iaccoca attests in his first book, Japanese cars had a horrid rust problem in the '80s, but all anyone talks about is the rust problems Ford use to have.

'70s Japanese cars were severe rusters as well....I remember as a kid in Ohio, our neighbor's college-age daughter got a new '76 Accord coupe as her first new car...the last I saw of the car was around '83 or so, and it was horribly rusted out--doors, quarters, front fenders, hood, hatch...still running w/ 250k+ miles, but the body was shot.

Then again, in the '70s in the Rust Belt, EVERYTHING rusted out...some very quickly.

Edited June 12, 2008 by moltar

[HarleyEarl]

Really it's genius the way the Japanese created the quality image that is perceived.

The cars appeared very high quality, at least for the life of a car loan.

[buyacargetacheck]

I used to own a 240Z so I am curious about your comment. What year was it that you witnessed this 240Z on a lift? And in what part of the country?

That was a common problem with early '80s Japanese vehicles. At one point Datsun was actually using a kind of corrugated steel for their suspension mounts. I witnessed a 240Z lifted onto a hoist at a garage and the wheels stayed on the ground.

My ex BF had a '81 Tercel in '91 when we met. He parked it one winter and when I went to have it 'certified' the next Spring, the mechanic pointed out the rear wheel mounts were about to bust right through the trunk.

As Iaccoca attests in his first book, Japanese cars had a horrid rust problem in the '80s, but all anyone talks about is the rust problems Ford use to have.

[buyacargetacheck]

You, apparently, were born yesterday. Toyota and Honda, in particular, honestly earned their reputations over a period of 30 years and counting. Try to kill any 1980s Toyota Cressida. Even rusted out they still run.

Really it's genius the way the Japanese created the quality image that is perceived.

The cars appeared very high quality, at least for the life of a car loan.

[Camino LS6]

Japanese cars have always been the worst with rust. It was truly pathetic in the 70s and little better in the 80s. The Tacoma debacle is the most glaring example though.

It still amazes me that my two 31 year-old Chevys barely have any rust.

[daves87rs]

You, apparently, were born yesterday. Toyota and Honda, in particular, honestly earned their reputations over a period of 30 years and counting. Try to kill any 1980s Toyota Cressida. Even rusted out they still run.

Well, that is nice, but so do the 80s J bodies....

Even with the all the rust, the 2.0 motor my my neighbors 86 Sunbird is going at 312k miles.....

Edited June 12, 2008 by daves87rs

[regfootball]

The joint venture goes back to when GM rebadged the Corolla and sold it as the Geo Prizm. The 2nd generation was the most unique, where all of the exterior surfaces are unique, as well as most of the dash, and it had it's own seat coverings. The suspension, powertrains, and everything you couldn't see (plus some you could) were shared. The 3rd generation, badged as a Chevrolet, differed little beyond headlights, tail lights, front bumper, and badging. For whatever reason it was designed to switch the joint venture to the Matrix/Vibe, which are still based off of the Corolla platform. The exteriors of both generations share no parts as afar as I know, but the interiors are pretty much identical.

The 2nd and 3rd generation Prizms were clearly superior to the Cavalier which shared the same showroom floor. They road better, had much smoother engines, much higher quality interiors, and had were generally superior and more refined than the Cavalier. Let's not forget that the Prizm was redesigned while the Cavalier continued with little change.

I've ridden and drove both cars...the Cavalier is a rattle trap...noisy and unrefined...the interior is awful...both from a design standpoint and quality wise. I have a friend who has one and he would constantly have things brake on it (center console). That's not to say they are problem free, these Prizms. Like the Corollas, they had some cheap bits that should have been better constructed...the worst offenders being the door handles inside and out. The 1.6L are notorious for exhaust manifold cracks. Ours has also had the transmission replaced because the gear synchronizer failed, as well as the master and slave cylinders.

I have complained about it several times on the board in the tech section, but the reality is that since the cylinders were replaced, with the exception of the tires, the car has been issue free (oh and that exhaust manifold). It runs like a new car, and sounds better than some cars much newer than it. It gets 40 real world mpg on the highway, it has working A/C, it doesn't feel scary to drive at speed (it can get loud at 80 or so due to wind noise, but what car of that era doesn't?).

So what has GM learned? Good question...the Cobalt which replaced the Cavalier is superior in many areas (it's much more quiet on the highway, has more features, and feels more stable too (I've taken one up to 100 with no problem). Still, it falls short in packaging (the rear seat sucks, whereas the Prizm's is actually pretty roomy), the the interior feels much cheaper, and I was never fond of the way the Ecotec sounded...or the steering.

Dunno if that's info you were looking for or not.

back in 99 i had big GM bucks and needed a new car. my two choices were cavalier and prizm. i got the prizm, it was more refined. it felt light and tinny though. in my instance, i chose the prizm, had the ecotec been out, i maybe would have got the cav.

[Intrepidation]

back in 99 i had big GM bucks and needed a new car. my two choices were cavalier and prizm. i got the prizm, it was more refined. it felt light and tinny though. in my instance, i chose the prizm, had the ecotec been out, i maybe would have got the cav.

Actually I don't find teh gneration of Prizm we have to be tinny. It's much more solid than the Corolla of the same generation. My friend's Corolla feels very tinny and "pings" when you tap the metal or close the door. The Prizm "thunks".

I couldn't choose a j-body simply because the interior was so awful. However since my mom and brother are looking for Economical cars, anything is open to look at.

[CARBIZ]

Actually, Dodgefan, the Z24 interiors weren't so bad: they didn't have the potato sack material. It was truly the seats that were ghastly, more than anything.

Buyacargetacheck, I worked for an auto parts dealership from June '80 to June '81 (the reason I remember that is because I graduated highschool in June '80 and it was my first full time job), so the incident would have been somewhere in that time period. I remember it was a warm day. I'm from Toronto, so Salt Capital of the Known Universe.

I am not beating up on Datsun or Honda's bodies. Everyone had a rust problem in the late '70s, early '80s. It's just that the Japanese seemed to have recovered from their reputations, but Ford is still living theirs down. Iaccoca refers to Honda as the Teflon Car Company because bad news doesn't stick.

I've been in and out of the car business most of my adult life, and HarleyEarl has a point: everybody built crap in the '80s, but only Detroit's is remembered. I have a number of theories as to why that is true, but there is no point arguing with an 80 year old, who drives a '00 Accord and will never drive a domestic again, based on his experiences with an '83 Ford of a model whose name he cannot even remember. When you are up against that kind of stubborness, there is no point in arguing: a '00 Elantra would be 'better' than a '83 Lincoln, in most respects - that's called progress.

[buyacargetacheck]

That is simply not true. Toyota, Honda and Subaru did not make crap during the 80s. Yes, there were rust problems after about 6 or 7 years in northern areas (I lived in New England then), but the cars ran like Swiss watches otherwise. Most American cars of the time either had horrendous recall and quality problems (X-car, Imperial fuel-injection, every new GM front drive design of the decade and on and on) or were just crude compared to its Japanese counterparts (Iron Dukes vs modern overhead cam, in some cases DOHC).

American cars also had terrible fit and finish (huge door gaps and nameplates glued on unevenly -- things like that as a rule). I can remember a friend's brand new '84 S-10 Blazer. On one blustery cold day leaving work he tried to leave but couldn't get his door shut. The damn driver's side wouldn't latch! Frustrated, he went around to the other side to see if he could decern a difference. Comically, he couldn't get that one shut either! That was typical of American cars of the period. Read any car magazine "long-term test drive" for more morsels.

There's a reason why the American car companies were on the run even when the Japanese fought with one hand tied behind their backs (Voluntary Import Quotas in the US). It had nothing to do with consumers being brainwashed by the media.

Detroit's reputation is justly deserved because it hasn't been until the last few years where their entire lineups were generally pretty good. Before then, Detroit would cherry-pick and brag that the Buick so and so won one award one year. Toyota has shown broad excellence year after year despite the recent recall problems.

HarleyEarl has a point: everybody built crap in the '80s, but only Detroit's is remembered.

[Duncan]

Rust isn't a problem in Colorado or Arizona... but I still don't see very many '80s GMs FWDers like the J-cars around. They seem to have all gone to the crusher by now...

Really? I still see tons of older A-bodies, usually of the Ciera/Century variety. And as I was paying fifty bucks (!) for a tank of gas the other day, a very clean mid-1980s Cavalier was pulling out. (I actually slightly envied the mileage he must be getting...)

[Robert Hall]

Really? I still see tons of older A-bodies, usually of the Ciera/Century variety. And as I was paying fifty bucks (!) for a tank of gas the other day, a very clean mid-1980s Cavalier was pulling out. (I actually slightly envied the mileage he must be getting...)

I see the '90s ones, but pretty much anything from the '80s is a pretty rare sight. At least in my area, it was rare to see cars older than 10-15 years with any frequency.

[prinzSD]

I see the '90s ones, but pretty much anything from the '80s is a pretty rare sight. At least in my area, it was rare to see cars older than 10-15 years with any frequency.

I have been driving my 85 TA for the last month while my 93 TA was getting a second opinion from my dealership. Just learned the 93 needs a new radiator and thermostat and apperently has not blown a head gasket. So if you lived in my area you would see a nice clean pretty Blaze Red Trans Am tooling around. The car gets plenty of notice and thumbs up from people. Not to bad for a 3rd gen car that had no respect in it's days. My problem is everyone one with a fast car wants to race me but my problem is that the 85 TA only puts out 155-160 HP and as you know there are plenty of 4 bangers out there that now produce way more hp and therefore faster.

[prinzSD]

That is simply not true. Toyota, Honda and Subaru did not make crap during the 80s. Yes, there were rust problems after about 6 or 7 years in northern areas (I lived in New England then), but the cars ran like Swiss watches otherwise. Most American cars of the time either had horrendous recall and quality problems (X-car, Imperial fuel-injection, every new GM front drive design of the decade and on and on) or were just crude compared to its Japanese counterparts (Iron Dukes vs modern overhead cam, in some cases DOHC).

American cars also had terrible fit and finish (huge door gaps and nameplates glued on unevenly -- things like that as a rule). I can remember a friend's brand new '84 S-10 Blazer. On one blustery cold day leaving work he tried to leave but couldn't get his door shut. The damn driver's side wouldn't latch! Frustrated, he went around to the other side to see if he could decern a difference. Comically, he couldn't get that one shut either! That was typical of American cars of the period. Read any car magazine "long-term test drive" for more morsels.

There's a reason why the American car companies were on the run even when the Japanese fought with one hand tied behind their backs (Voluntary Import Quotas in the US). It had nothing to do with consumers being brainwashed by the media.

Detroit's reputation is justly deserved because it hasn't been until the last few years where their entire lineups were generally pretty good. Before then, Detroit would cherry-pick and brag that the Buick so and so won one award one year. Toyota has shown broad excellence year after year despite the recent recall problems.

The experience of my then girlfriend, wife now, with her 80s AWD Subaru was the exact opposite of my domestics. That car was a piece of sh*t. We gave the car to my wife's sister who said the car was a piece of crap herself, thought my sister in law did eventually buy a late 90s AWD Legacy Wagon. Her brother also bought a 2005 Subaru AWD wagon as well. So my sister in laws experience did not sour her enough not to buy a second Subaru which proved to be more reliable. It is a shame that people with bad experience with domestic cars do not give them an equal second chance. The domestics are mired in a bad reputation of producing crappy cars in the 80s to mid 90s in which americans will not let them forget.

[siegen]

This thread has the potential to go on forever.

And it will accomplish nothing.

What we see on the road means nothing, because we only see a minutely small percentage of the vehicle market. And more importantly, people tend to notice certain cars based on their unique experiences. Vehicles they own or have owned tend to get noticed more, as well as vehicles that they either like or strongly dislike. If you are a typical Toyota basher, which I am guilty of as well, you will notice every single Toyota stalled on the side of the road, every bit of rust on a Toyota, and pretty much anything you can find to complain about a Toyota. When a car you are fond of rolls by, you are naturally inclined to gloss over any problems, or attempt to chalk them up to the vehicle owner or simply not notice them. It is a natural reaction for everyone and nobody is truly unbiased.

[LosAngeles]

I take it the west coast is the only place where you can find plenty of cars older than 1989 still on the road.

Japan's rust issues likely came from them using milder, thinner steel and not the greatest paint, plus exporting to markets they weren't aware ate cars for breakfast (the JDM isn't that cold or salty). Learned in later years when they got serious about tailoring cars for these other markets beyond federalizing.

As far as the Fremont plant (in the Bay, northern CA), it was an old A-body factory that entered into a joint venture with Toyota making their Corolla Sprinter sedans our Nova and first two Prizms, the third Prizm from a rebadged Corolla, then the mighty Vibe/Voltz...so basically something Corolla-based for GM and some Tacomas (plus now the Corolla itself). GM ceded NUMMI to Toyota in 1996.

[daves87rs]

I"ve seen quite a few 80s Hondas lately...

[SuperSport623]

i just finished reading CALL ME ROGER about Roger Smith, it details alot about how the NUMMI partnership started, and its ideals... a very good read