GM Announces 6 more recalls

[bugo]

If you want a high quality car and you must buy Asian, take a look at a Mazda.  I had a 1991 323 hatchback which was a great car.  Light, quick, fun to drive despite only having 82 horses.  5 speed manual with a blissfully buttery shifter, passive 4 wheel steering, no power steering for better roadfeel, very few options.  It got up to 43 MPG on the highway.  I wish they still made them just like that.  It got totalled at something like 230K and was running strong.

Another good car is the Honda.  I drove a CR-V from North Dakota to Arkansas and from Oklahoma to North Dakota and back (3 trips total) and it was a great highway car.  It sucked in town and on curvy roads and guzzled gas but oh how comfortable it was.  I don't usually like crossovers but if I had a lot of highway miles to drive I would consider one.

And now look!  The Koreans are on our tail!  Seriously, Hyundai (and Kia) has come a long way in the last 25 years.  From building garbage like the Excel, forgettable cars like the Scoupe, and early Accents to the current Sonata and Genesis Coupe.  I hear even the ugly Veloster is a good car, despite looking ridiculous.  They have caught up with the Japanese 99% of the way and within 5 years will pass them if the Japanese don't do something.  They are starting to become design leaders instead of just copying other companies (Remember that Kia that looked like a cross between a Jag, a Benzo, and a blowtorch?)  If you want a new car and value is important to you, then you should look at the Koreans.

[SP Cook]

Do you really think the Chrysler Sebring is a better car than the Chevy Malibu?

It is like deciding between liver cancer and bladder cancer.  They are both products of companies and workers that do not care about quality, which is to say, about me, the customer.  If I were looking for a car in that segment, there are so many better choices, starting with America's most American made car, its best seller, Kentucky's Camry.  The Accord is also a great choice.  The Kia and Hyundai offerings are great.  Mazda, Nissan, even VW.  All will work properly, the first time.  The Chevy and Mopar probably won't. 

[DaBigE]

Tell that to my Cavalier, which has 202,xxx on it and the engine runs as well as it did when it came off the showroom floor.  It's had a few wear and tear items replaced (alternator, etc) but that is to be expected on a 16 year old car with 200K on it.  You're just using typical conservative hyperbole. 

Since when did an alternator become "wear and tear"? I've always assumed/been told wear and tear items were tires, brakes, struts, wiper blades, and light bulbs. Apparently we must have been lucky...neither myself nor my immediate family has ever had to replace an alternator in any of their cars.

[Laura]

Tell that to my Cavalier, which has 202,xxx on it and the engine runs as well as it did when it came off the showroom floor.  It's had a few wear and tear items replaced (alternator, etc) but that is to be expected on a 16 year old car with 200K on it.  You're just using typical conservative hyperbole. 

Since when did an alternator become "wear and tear"? I've always assumed/been told wear and tear items were tires, brakes, struts, wiper blades, and light bulbs. Apparently we must have been lucky...neither myself nor my immediate family has ever had to replace an alternator in any of their cars.

I've owned two cavaliers. The first one ('02) ended up in a flash flood in 2011 at 149,500 miles, so I donated it because my mechanic said that he would not recommend putting a single dollar more into a previously flooded car. Prior to the flood, it ran  perfectly. I bought her as a frankencar (salvage) at 26,000 miles in 2004 from a friend of a friend, who bought the car for parts, fixed her, and resold her to me. Even my mechanic thought it was incredibly depressing because I never had a single issue with the car beyond replacing tires, belts, and changing the oil. That car would have made it to 200K easy peasy.

After the flood, I purchased my second cavalier (this time an '03) at 89K miles. I'm currently at 147K miles. She did have an engine problem at 116K miles. Fortunately, knowing my financial situation, my mechanic worked with me and took extra time to hunt for less expensive parts to keep the costs down. In my mind, I like to think that she's only had "minor wear and tear", because the cost of that one repair is still less than trying to pay for an equivalent car in value. Most cars will have something extra happen every so often. If the car is having problems like this monthly, then it's a issue (and probably time to look for another car).

[roadman]

Tell that to my Cavalier, which has 202,xxx on it and the engine runs as well as it did when it came off the showroom floor.  It's had a few wear and tear items replaced (alternator, etc) but that is to be expected on a 16 year old car with 200K on it.  You're just using typical conservative hyperbole. 

Since when did an alternator become "wear and tear"? I've always assumed/been told wear and tear items were tires, brakes, struts, wiper blades, and light bulbs. Apparently we must have been lucky...neither myself nor my immediate family has ever had to replace an alternator in any of their cars.

If a car has over 200K on it, then IMHO it is perfectly reasonable to consider installing a new alternator as a "wear and tear" item.

[SteveG1988]

Tell that to my Cavalier, which has 202,xxx on it and the engine runs as well as it did when it came off the showroom floor.  It's had a few wear and tear items replaced (alternator, etc) but that is to be expected on a 16 year old car with 200K on it.  You're just using typical conservative hyperbole. 

Since when did an alternator become "wear and tear"? I've always assumed/been told wear and tear items were tires, brakes, struts, wiper blades, and light bulbs. Apparently we must have been lucky...neither myself nor my immediate family has ever had to replace an alternator in any of their cars.

If a car has over 200K on it, then IMHO it is perectly reasonable to consider a new alternator as a "wear and tear" item.

Alternators are finnicky devices. I had a 2003 sable with a PepBoys alternator from the prior owner, unsure of how many miles before i bought it (169k) that it was put on, some days it was fine, then once in a while, particularly during storms, the electrical system would crap out and it would buck and stall on me due to knocking out the computer. The Speedometer, Tach, Fuel, Temperature gauges would fluxuate for a few moments while the car was trying to reset itself. Found out it had a diode or two going bad, a ripple is what they called it, a minor one that was occuring just the right way to cause issues. 150 bucks and 4 bolts later i swapped it for a brand new advance alternator.

Wear items to me are any moving parts external to the engine. Alternator, Water Pump, Power Steering Pump, CV Joints, etc.

[formulanone]

Since when did an alternator become "wear and tear"? I've always assumed/been told wear and tear items were tires, brakes, struts, wiper blades, and light bulbs.

"Wear and tear" is basically anything your warranty wouldn't cover after the first 30/60/90/365 days (your manufacturer varies, but many items have vaguely the same ideas); visual appearance of items in which humans repeatedly come in contact with, adjustments not due to improper installation, and maintenance items (i.e., if it's in the scheduled maintenance book, or if it's expendable brake components, wipers, and tires - your manufacturer might even add a few items like key fob batteries to this list).

An alternator replacement would be a common repair; just about every car would need one after about within 8-15 years, or between 100,000-200,000 miles. It's just not a "preventive maintenance" item, like say...taking care of the water pump along with the valve cover gaskets and a timing belt replacement.