Personally I hate the corolla. You pay more for the sport edition and all you get are some minor looks and no performance. I like the Scion tc. I wish I could afford one.

yeah thats based on sales, but if your looking at power american  owns. sure people wanna save money at the pumps nowadays so they buy economy cars.

Only thing  Daimler/Chrysler ever got right was Jeep. And even still Jeep aren't known for reliability. 

And whoever said that imports got no power, I would be more than willing to match my fathers Lexus to your American vehicle.

Toyota needa to bring back the Supra/some other sports car.

According to cars.com JD Power blows its load all over Toyota cars if you look at the quality ratings that they dish out (especially the corolla). 

Ford owns Mazda? wow k forget all comments made by me, im sure it wont be to hard

choopie911 wrote: little devil wrote: yeah thats based on sales, but if your looking at power american  owns. sure people wanna save money at the pumps nowadays so they buy economy cars. Uhhh.... no. American cars get stunningly LOW horsepower for the size of their cars. euro cars tool them. Watch some top gear.

A broad statement if you ask me.

I know from experience that a car is what you put into it. And bear in mind that the European cars that are usually compared to American cars aren't anywhere near their price range.

Take the Mustang GT for instance. There are very few European sports cars in the sub-$30 grand range, and if you compare it to a BMW or Mercedes, than of course it's not going to have the features that a 50 or 60 thousand dollar car has.

For about ten grand, I can have your GT running with if not smoking most European cars in the sub-$100 grand range, and for about $40G.

The problem is that the cars that get compared are generall made affordable for the general public, therefore emphasis is put on size and safety before speed. But lose some weight, swap out tires, add a supercharger, change your gears out, add a chip and a shift kit (all of which isn't as costly as it sounds), and you've got a car that will compete.

And America has plenty of high end sports cars that will run right with European design-Ford's GT, Chevy has the various race-engineered 'Vettes, and of course lots of other designs in the works for the next couple of years from both companies. I'd include Chrysler's group of beasts, but since they base most of their engineering off of European design...

Like I said, it's unfair to compare the average 20 or 30 thousand dollar American car to the 60 grand and up BMW's, Mercedes, what have you.

choopie911 wrote: stratoaxe wrote: America has plenty of high end sports cars that will run right with European design-Ford's GT, Chevy has the various race-engineered 'Vettes, and of course lots of other designs in the works for the next couple of years from both companies. If you want to drive in a straight line, sure.

Not sure what you mean-modern 'Vette's handle corners like dreams, and yes I've driven a couple.

Never driven a GT, but they're race engineered to compete in the same road courses as Ferrarri's and top end Euro cars.

Unfortunately too many modern cars are defined by their performance in video games, and low rate action flicks like TF&TF. I assure you that an American car will do anything you have the skill to do.

Roll Tide wrote: stratoaxe wrote: choopie911 wrote: stratoaxe wrote: America has plenty of high end sports cars that will run right with European design-Ford's GT, Chevy has the various race-engineered 'Vettes, and of course lots of other designs in the works for the next couple of years from both companies. If you want to drive in a straight line, sure. Not sure what you mean-modern 'Vette's handle corners like dreams, and yes I've driven a couple. Never driven a GT, but they're race engineered to compete in the same road courses as Ferrarri's and top end Euro cars. Unfortunately too many modern cars are defined by their performance in video games, and low rate action flicks like TF&TF. I assure you that an American car will do anything you have the skill to do. Maybe so, but you wouldn't find a sane person on this planet who would pick a Ford GT over a Lamborghini Gallardo or a Porsche 911 or an Audi R8.

That's a statement of taste rather than quality. I'm a huge fan of Porsche, so it would be a close call for myself. I have no interest in Lambos or Ferrarri's personally, and Audi does nothing for me.

And again, apples and oranges. The GT is a statement of retro, raw power, while the other three are high end luxury/performance cars.

Roll Tide wrote: stratoaxe wrote: Roll Tide wrote: stratoaxe wrote: choopie911 wrote: stratoaxe wrote: America has plenty of high end sports cars that will run right with European design-Ford's GT, Chevy has the various race-engineered 'Vettes, and of course lots of other designs in the works for the next couple of years from both companies. If you want to drive in a straight line, sure. Not sure what you mean-modern 'Vette's handle corners like dreams, and yes I've driven a couple. Never driven a GT, but they're race engineered to compete in the same road courses as Ferrarri's and top end Euro cars. Unfortunately too many modern cars are defined by their performance in video games, and low rate action flicks like TF&TF. I assure you that an American car will do anything you have the skill to do. Maybe so, but you wouldn't find a sane person on this planet who would pick a Ford GT over a Lamborghini Gallardo or a Porsche 911 or an Audi R8. That's a statement of taste rather than quality. I'm a huge fan of Porsche, so it would be a close call for myself. I have no interest in Lambos or Ferrarri's personally, and Audi does nothing for me. And again, apples and oranges. The GT is a statement of retro, raw power, while the other three are high end luxury/performance cars. Quality? Quality?! Are you trying to tell me that Lamborghini, Audi, and Porsche all have lower quality standards than the almighty Ford Motor Company? If that's the case, then I'm still right, because I said SANE person.

You're reading alot extra into my post-who said anything about lower quality? I think you've read someone else's post, in fact I didn't make any statements pertaining to the quality of the manufacturer. I'm sure that Porsche holds higher production values over Ford, since Ford is a lower end manufacturer that mass markets to middle income families, and Porsche is an exotic sports car company that markets to executives and investment bankers.

If you count features as quality, than yes the Porsche is probably far superior to the GT in quality. I never said either was superior to the other, since I myself have never owned any of them.

My point was that saying you'd have to be insane to turn down a Porsche 911 (and i'm assuming you mean the 140 thousand dollar Turbo) for a GT is a little broad. I'd probably take the GT-it's more my style of car.

That's my point man-you're missing the purpose of a stripped down shell on top of a supercharged V8-you feel that V8. It's an experience thats it's own kind of exotic.

That doesn't mean that the Porsche or Gallorda hasn't got more than enough power, but the point is that people pay for an experience in the GT, but features in the Porsche. Luxury does nothing for me-I like the raw feel of race engineering.

Not saying I wouldn't own a Euro luxury-sports car. I'd love to have a Porsche or BMW-but there's a serperate thrill to be had with raw power, and nothing in between you and the torque afforded a car like the GT.

Uncle Rudder wrote: According to cars.com JD Power blows its load all over Toyota cars if you look at the quality ratings that they dish out (especially the corolla).

The Truth About Cars wrote: Consumer Reports has released the 2007 edition of its “Annual Auto Issue.” For the second year in a row, all CR’s “Top Picks” come from Japanese makes. For some industry observers, that’s a problem. They believe the magazine’s results indicate a hidden bias, especially against vehicles produced by domestic manufacturers. Which both is and isn’t true. Consumer Reports’ road test engineers subjected every test vehicle to a thorough evaluation, using a pre-established set of criteria and weights. For example, emergency handling might get ten points, front seat comfort might receive eight and “feels like a Honda” might be worth 37 (just kidding— I hope). Whatever the formula, when the magazine totaled-up the points, they ended up with a list composed entirely of Japanese cars. This process leads to an obvious question: what criteria and weights– what formula– does Consumer Reports use to rate any given vehicle? The press and Consumer Reports have a policy in this regard: don’t ask, won’t tell.  At the last Detroit auto show, I asked a Consumer Reports road test engineer why the magazine doesn’t publish its formulas. After all, nearly every enthusiast-oriented magazine does when conducting a comparison test. “It’s policy,” he replied. He went on to suggest that he didn’t make the policy, he didn’t necessarily support it, but as a Consumer Reports employee, he had no choice but to follow it.

That's why I have a problem with Consumer Reports / JD Power.

choopie911 wrote: little devil wrote: yeah thats based on sales, but if your looking at power american  owns. sure people wanna save money at the pumps nowadays so they buy economy cars. Uhhh.... no. American cars get stunningly LOW horsepower for the size of their cars. euro cars tool them. Watch some top gear.

Clark Kent wrote: Not just low horsepower per size, but it also seems to me that American cars overestimate their stated horsepower - as in given two similar cars with similar rated HP, I find that the American car is more sluggish.

The Detroit News wrote: New testing standards are forcing automakers to downgrade horsepower on several of their models. Does a change in horsepower ratings cause you to rethink your next vehicle choice? It turns out Toyota Motor Corp. isn't as strong as it appears in at least one area -- under the hood. Testing under stricter new horsepower standards reveals that most of the models in Toyota's lineup have less oomph than the company has advertised. Even though the engines are unchanged, the automaker had to lower the horsepower ratings on all but few 2006 Toyota, Lexus and Scion models. The reductions range from 4 to 20 horsepower compared with 2005 models. Honda Motor Co., the No. 2 Japanese automaker, also has downgraded the horsepower ratings on several models, including most of its Acura luxury brand. But while the Japanese automakers overstated their power, an analysis of data compiled by Edmunds.com shows domestic vehicles have generally been testing at or slightly above previously stated horsepower. The testing suggests Detroit's automakers may have suffered unfairly in the battle of perceptions. While drivers may not notice the difference, said George Peterson, president of consulting firm AutoPacific Inc, "it does matter to the manufacturers because each one is engaged in what I would call a brochure war where they're competing for the best specifications. And the average American likes a bigger horsepower number than a smaller one." Most notably for Toyota, the rating for its top-selling Camry, when equipped with a 3.3-liter V-6 engine, had to be reduced to 190 horsepower from 210. The V-6 version of Toyota's Highlander sport utility vehicle dropped from 230 to 215, and the Lexus LS and SC 430 decreased by 12. The revised ratings comply with standards adopted by the Society of Automotive Engineers. The standards specify which components and accessories should be on during testing and what kind of oil and fuel to use. To claim an SAE-certified rating, an automaker also must conduct tests in the presence of an independent witness. "The intent of the revision was to tighten up the specifications," said Gary Pollak, an SAE program manager. "There were a lot of areas that were loose and subject to interpretation."

Snipa69 wrote: They never list WHP (wheel horse power) but instead they list CHP (crank horse power). There is a big difference from what is put to the wheels vs. what is put to the crank. Not to mention the grounds on American cars aren't that great which will cause loss of horsepower and poor acceleration.

Roll Tide wrote: Maybe so, but you wouldn't find a sane person on this planet who would pick a Ford GT over a Lamborghini Gallardo or a Porsche 911 or an Audi R8.

Shub wrote: I think it may be a good thing for American car companies to get a little serious competition from Toyota.

I'm sorry - this made me laugh.

"GET" a little competition?  Toyota (and Honda, and everybody else) have absolutely been destroying "American" car companies for at least 15 years, and probably more.

IMO, the only reason GM/Ford/Chrystler are still in business at all is because there are millions of idiots in this country that insist on buying an inferior car because it is "'Merican".

Clark Kent wrote: Shub wrote: I think it may be a good thing for American car companies to get a little serious competition from Toyota. I'm sorry - this made me laugh. "GET" a little competition?  Toyota (and Honda, and everybody else) have absolutely been destroying "American" car companies for at least 15 years, and probably more. IMO, the only reason GM/Ford/Chrystler are still in business at all is because there are millions of idiots in this country that insist on buying an inferior car because it is "'Merican".

I wouldn't say those people are idoits. I would love to have a new F-150 4x4 or a Mustang GT. Granted those are less quality vehicles.

Toyota > Ford
And I used to be a diehard Ford man.

Tacoma double cab 4x4 = win imo

Da Hui wrote: I wouldn't say those people are idoits. I would love to have a new F-150 4x4 or a Mustang GT. Granted those are less quality vehicles.

I didn't mean to imply that everybody that buys a Ford is an idiot - I will certainly acknowledge the F-150 as a very respectable vehicle, for instance.

My point was that there aren't enough of those vehicles to sustain these companies.  For every F-150 or Corvette, there are a dozen Tauruses, and while some people might legitimately prefer a Taurus over a Camry, there just isn't enough of that to keep the company alive.

Some/many people buy Ford/GM/Chrystler for rational reasons.  But without the millions of idiots supporting these companies for irrational reasons they would all have gone down long ago.

Sammy wrote: It seems Clark doesn't recall the Japanese cars overestimating their horsepower..

I had never heard of that, nor do I particularly care.  I was making a personal observation, not a scientific claim.  And I will stand by it.  Whenever I sit in an American car, it feels sluggish to me.  American cars are good at making a big ROAR when you hit the gas, but with little apparent effect on velocity.

(And, BTW, I wouldn't know anything about 2006 Toyotas.  My 1999 Camry only has 220,000 miles on it, so I don't expect to be buying another one for several more years.)

Clark Kent wrote: Sammy wrote: It seems Clark doesn't recall the Japanese cars overestimating their horsepower.. I had never heard of that, nor do I particularly care.  I was making a personal observation, not a scientific claim.  And I will stand by it.  Whenever I sit in an American car, it feels sluggish to me.  American cars are good at making a big ROAR when you hit the gas, but with little apparent effect on velocity. (And, BTW, I wouldn't know anything about 2006 Toyotas.  My 1999 Camry only has 220,000 miles on it, so I don't expect to be buying another one for several more years.)

Lots of cars are geared differently, which affects overall takeoff. Most small engines like 4cyl's are geared higher to better utilize their small amounts of torque and horsepower. The same goes for most foreign-made six cylinders as well.

American cars, however, are generally geared lower to utilize their power for top end, especially in the larger engined cars. My dad's Chevy truck for instance-while it may not scream from a dead stop, it doesn't stop pulling even in higher speeds.

Honestly, if you'll spend a little time with cars and really test them out (though at 220,000 you might want to use someone else's car ) you'll find that cars with extreme response times generally run out of juice alot faster than cars that build their speed through the gears.

Of course, now I'll get the usual bombardment of "But my friend's RX-8...", or "My STi doesn't do that!". You have to bear in mind that we're discussing average sedans, not performance engineered cars. Cars specifically built for performance are designed in a way to evenly distribute power through all gears so you have even spread, and you don't lose too much power on low or top end.

Unless you're driving a wannabe speed demon like SRT-4's, where once again you're given lots of juice through the quarter so high schoolers can brag to their friends.

On a luxury-per-dollar basis, I will fully agree that Cadillac is the way to go.  Some of the last Oldsmobile models also had potential.

But I did take a look at a Cadillac SRX recently, and I was not impressed.  It didn't come anywhere close to its German (or even Swedish) competition in terms of specific luxury features, space, feel, or driveability.  Out of all the vehicles I looked at, the SRX came in a distant last.  Granted that most of the others were more expensive, but still - it wasn't even close.  Bummer, since I like the new Cadillac exteriors.  I really wanted to like it.  Maybe other models are better.

Sorry, going back to Ford here, but Lincoln is branching out into some really nice designs as well. They're coming a long way towards ditching the old lady stigma.

But for me, BMW is the ultimate luxury car. Combine excellent power with aggressive styling, and top of the line luxury features. Just an awesome high end car. Of course then there's Jaguar, another masterpiece in design.

I got a thing for Toyota products.

Northstar engine FTW.

I'd get a Caddy if I could afford the insurance. But I cant so its either a 4runner or Wrangler for Me.