Och

iTrader: (3)

Well, no Ford doesn't offer anything like CTS-V or Z06, but these are niche vehicles anyways. Their regular cars on the other hand, such as the new Fusion and Taurus are excellent, and the Lincoln MKS is amazing.

Och

iTrader: (3)

Not only CTS-V expensive, but also I hear dealers mark it up 10-15k. I would never pay a penny over MSRP no matter how good the car is.

tex2670

Wow--my head is spinning from all those choices.

As it stands today, the only way I'd get a Chrysler product is by winning one on The Price is Right. I would "consider" a GM, but ultimately, I don't think I could pull the trigger.

And this has nothing to do with bailouts or clunkers. If I'm spending $30-40K for a new car, I want a top quality car, that is reliable and has current or cutting edge technology. I just do not see many GM, or any Chrysler, products that fit this description. 60-day return policies don't do it for me.

Example: sure, the Malibu is a nice car, and gets good reviews. But a 4 speed auto tranny on the 4-cyl model? Are they joking? Even a 5-speed is suspect these days--that's just not the way you compete, especially in a crowded market like family sedans.

allklr

iTrader: (1)

I got 7K off mine, Even when they were first out people were paying sticker or less. One of my largest customers is a tier 1 supplier to GM/Chrysler/Ford, They actually gave me a supplier code to get the discount and trade in my Lexus. It was good timing since I wanted one anyways. I got the car because its what I wanted and was not really concerned about the bailout.

tmf2004

iTrader: (15)

Anyone look at the new Ford Fusion Sport.Seems much better than the previous model. Although the Sport comes with a hefty price tag. For the money, you could probably pic up something better. I've had Fords before and all i can say is that the 5.0 engine in the older GT's were solid. The rest of the car fell apart. I hope ford has improved the quality and craftsmanship of there newer vehicles..

Of course i would also consider a used CTS-V.. The 04/05 are in the low to mid 20's from ebay's pricing.

Och

iTrader: (3)

Well, I personally would never consider a car like CTS-V or Z06. I don't drive aggressively, and if I was to spend this type of money on a car, I'd rather spend it on something like LS460 or A8. But as far as GM's non performance cars, sure they do offer a few nice products these days - such as these new Buicks, the new Malibu, etc. But so does Ford - the new Taurus, Fusion and MKS. And if I wanted one of these cars, I would simply go to the Ford dealership without hesitating for a fraction of a second.

mmarshall

Ford, today, in a number of its vehicles (not all) has quality that is at or just short of Japanese standards. The Fusion/Milan/MKZ triplets, especially, are impressive in the quality area.

Consider an extended warranty on an older CTS-V.....the first-generation model was known for a weak RWD differential that couldn't take the torque under hard use and often had premature failure. GM, in those days, also did not have the 5/60 or 5/100 drivetrain warranty....it was only a 3/36.

GS3Tek

iTrader: (8)

I don't mind a flex or the lincoln mkz

-J-P-L-

Bailout or not, some of GM's vehicles are getting to good to ignore. For me, if the product is the best out there, then I can put the past behind me.

I finally got to drive the new CTS recently and was blown away that the car is built by GM. The interior looks 50 years newer than the previous CTS. If I was in the $40K market, this could be my choice. That said, I'd still prefer to wait 10 years to see how today's GM and Ford products really hold up beyond the "initial quality" phase which is good so far. The real test of quality is what the car is doing at 250,000+ miles / 10-15 years old.

The Chevy Volt really appeals to me and if they could bring the price down, I'd be on board with that too.

At the end of the day though, I'm a loyal Toyota guy for good reason. It will take a lot to pull me away.

Also, one other note - Ford would have also needed a "bailout" if not for securing private loans before the financial meltdown occurred. They were nearly in the same financial pit as GM and Chrysler. They just got lucky.

CDNROCKIES

The CTS is a huge improvement over the last generation. Definitely a step forward.

Who cares what a car is going to do after that kind of mileage and timeframe?

Most people aren't purchasing luxury vehicles for this length of time. If things are good and reliable for 3-5....maybe stretching it to 7 years for some, then that is all that matters. People buy Toyotas and Hondas to last for 10 years...not BMW's, MB's, Audi's or even Lexus'.


That could also be called prudent financial planning.

Though I do agree that there was a certain amount of luck involved.

Och

iTrader: (3)

Thats not quite true. People who purchase expensive luxury vehicles still care about long term dependability because it often affects resale value.

nthach

I think both GM and Chrysler suck - but GM has a few shining stars IMO, not just the Corvette, or the Cadillac V-Series. Obamopar can't get their act together when Mercedes held their hand, and I doubt Fiat and Obama can fix Mopar - Lee Iacocca and Mitsubishi were really the ones that revived Chrysler in the 80s.

I still think Ford is the better American car company - even though Jacques Nasser and his predecessors have done quite a bit of damage to them in the 70s-early part of this decade. Bill Ford and Alan Mulally have done a spectacular job so far...

nthach

The old Mercedes - those were built like TANKS but had mediocre electronics and the timing chain+rails had to changed every 60-100K or the rails break free and jam the chain.

CDNROCKIES

The majority of buyers of higher end BMW, MB or Audi's and to a slightly lesser extent Lexus know that their cars are going to depreciate a ridiculous amount in a very short amount of time.

Have a look around and see what a 3 year old S class, 750, A8 or LS is going for these days. These buyers have no intention of keeping their car for the long term. These aren't investments....people know that these aren't necessarily the best financial decision but keep buying them anyways.

It's even worse on the high performance lines (ie. AMG, M, RS) where once again, nobody buys them for a 10+ year ownership lifespan. I'd even suggest that most people are buying these cars for only 3 to 5 years max.

Long term dependability is viewed very differently for top end luxury (ie. Tier 1) vehicles than it is for generic cars by their owners.

Och

iTrader: (3)

Which is pretty much why most of these vehicles are leased.