Why are American cars built so badly?

Why are American cars built so badly?

Author
Discussion

GolfSupplierAU

Original Poster:

603 posts

195 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
I have always wondered how a nation which can engineer themselves out of our atmosphere, to the moon and beyond struggle to build cars well. Anyone got any ideas/opinions?


sawman

4,920 posts

231 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
not sure what you mean - I have had a number of american cars over the years and not one of them has ever broken down or left me stranded. (none of the cars have been new)

You could say that the plastics are not as soft feel as the ponsier european cars, but they do what they say on the tin for the most part, for many hundreds of thousands of miles

tbc

3,017 posts

176 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
all about big engines and small price

American cars have yet to grasp the concept of refinement

the reason why Corvettes and Mustangs can more than match a BMW M5 or Audi RS for speed

are sold for a lot less and rattle like a snake at anything over 60 mph

dapearson

4,368 posts

225 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
America didn't engineer itself out of the atmosphere.

Panayiotis

503 posts

210 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
Because they are built to a price and in the most part cars are seen as consumables in the states.

Matt Harper

6,622 posts

202 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
Clever - you saw Jeremy Clarkson do that, didn't you...

Pints

18,444 posts

195 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
tbc said:
Americans have yet to grasp the concept of refinement
EFA

bob1179

14,107 posts

210 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
I don't think modern American cars are that badly built at all. They all seem to be capable of astronomical mileages too.

I'd say my old truck has a build quality on par with anything ARG were chucking out at the same time ('89).

I like the fact American built stuff (much like classic cars) seem to have plenty of character, are a bit different and are fun to drive. Modern BMWs, Audis and Mercs etc. seem completely soulless and hugely over complicated.

smile

skyrover

12,682 posts

205 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
they are better built than 90% of European cars in my experience, especially their trucks/4x4's.

The Japs beat everyone though.

matthias73

2,883 posts

151 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
The f250 I drove seems pretty nicely put together, after 300k its still doing well.

Having said that I don't really like 90 percent of american cars. I do love the remaining 10 percent though

98elise

26,698 posts

162 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
That bit of the car is as flexible as any european car bumper.

I've been to the states many times, and always hire an american car. There is nothing wrong with the build quality. Look at what sort of car you could get here for the same money. The problem is people will compare them to similar spec and sized cars, when thay should compare on price.

smifffymoto

4,578 posts

206 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
That's it though,you can't compare on price because in America cars are so damn cheap.

redtwin

7,518 posts

183 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
Those soft flexible bumpers are there to satisfy Insurance Industry crash testing. Don't recall the exact specifics, but it is judged on how much damage results from a 5 mph crash into a solid object. If the bumpers were more rigid they would sustain more damage and receive a lower rating which results in higher insurance category for that car.


minipower

898 posts

220 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
I think it is partly perceived. The picture shown is just to do with crash regulations.
I can't really think of many european cars with over 430hp that are as reliable or as cheap to run as the vette (that goes for the 500hp and 640hp models as well). They are built to last rather than just look like they can.

I'm not sure about other yank cars though. I remember renting a Cadillac Deville whilst out in the states and the interior was very flimsy. Probably underneath it was quite sturdy though.

irocfan

40,602 posts

191 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
oh dear Lord this st again... yes the plastics used in Yank cars isn't the latest soft touch stuff made from chinchilla gonads, yes they *appear* to use low tech materials and... actually you know what? fk it you buy your overpriced soul-less German luxo barge and I'll enjoy my 'cheaply made hunk of yank tank crap' with not many (if any) assorted squeaks and rattles safe in the knowledge that when they do occur I'll be a lot less pissed of than you having paid a huge amount less for something that looks better, sounds waaaay better (in most cases) and for the performance returns very acceptable economy

PanzerCommander

5,026 posts

219 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
redtwin said:
Those soft flexible bumpers are there to satisfy Insurance Industry crash testing. Don't recall the exact specifics, but it is judged on how much damage results from a 5 mph crash into a solid object. If the bumpers were more rigid they would sustain more damage and receive a lower rating which results in higher insurance category for that car.
This.

They are also better for pedestrians that might be dumb enough to stray into the path of a slow moving car.

The bumpers on my 2006 Mustang are similarly flexible, but behind that and the foam that holds them in shape is more or less an RSJ at the back/front of the monocoque. As far as build quality goes the car is pretty solid, the plastics might not be those europonce soft feel types but then I don’t have a fetish for fondling car interiors like most motoring journalists seem to have so I care not about that and as for it rattling etc. at speed, sorry OP but I have no idea where you got that from (probably Top Gear) but at 60, 70, 80+ I can honestly say nothing vibrates or rattles and the car in general feels rock solid, there are a few rattles and squeaks going over severe bumps and really bad roads, but then I have replaced most of the suspension with stiffer poly bushed bits so that makes NVH worse.

V88Dicky

7,305 posts

184 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
Dunno about anyone else, but everytime I've been to North America I'm amazed how many older cars are still in daily use. Cars and trucks from the 60s/70s/80s or older seem to be everywhere and generally in decent nick.

When was the last time you saw a 1970 Vauxhall Ventora, a 1980 Audi 100, or even a 1990 Ford Escort?

Me neither.

kambites

67,620 posts

222 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
I get the feeling the OP doesn't actually understand what "built well" means.

HD Adam

5,154 posts

185 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
Never had any problems with the build quality of the cars & trucks I've owned bar a couple of self-inflicted ones.

Of all the stuff I've owned, the most unreliable was a Toyota.

V88Dicky

7,305 posts

184 months

Thursday 7th March 2013
quotequote all
Maybe it's a criptic question and the OP's on about the Mercedes ML? hehe

BMW X5?

Z3?