Doug,
I only know what I've read in the papers. I think at this point they
have added shielding to the police cars. I imagine the bladder idea would
help, but still how safe can any car be built? If you want to drive a tank I
guess that'd be a lot safer but then the gas mileage would suck. I car like
anything else is a compromise (just like a boat). The world just isn't
perfectly safe.
Paul

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Last I read, they were experimenting with putting rubber liners in the gas
tanks, like some race cars have. Any idea if that worked?

"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast dot net wrote in message
...
Doug,
The funny thing is that the some of the Police Department suing Ford
over the rear end collisions (some at 90 mph) now want to buy more Ford
vehicles. When Ford refused to sell them more police cars they sued, Ford
won that lawsuit. Go figure.
Paul


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
I almost did buy one two years ago - a Crown Victoria, since I wanted a
rear wheel drive car for towing. I would've preferred that car to my
pickup truck because the gas mileage was about 25% better. But then, I
read about the feature that wasn't in the brochu The thing about the
exploding gas tank and rear-end collisions. I realize other cars may have
this problem, but that fact had no bearing on my decision. I may look
again in the future, but only after finding out if the issue has been
dealt with. Police departments are happy to dispense this information.



"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast dot net wrote in message
...
Doug,
I can understand how you feel. I work as an electrician, for Ford at
the Romeo Engine Plant. I hired in the in 1989. Since we were building
the engine plant we went to a lot of classes. We learned that Ford
changed its way of doing business because of the Japanese. What you say
is completely true and very embarrassing. They're whole focus was on
numbers, we've since learnt different. Today quality is the first
priority. Anyone can stop the line if something is wrong. No we're not
perfect but we sure as hell are trying. The union has a quality rep
that you can call if you feel quality is being ignored. A lot of the
members of upper management in the plant come and go as they move up
the ladder. But we as members of an engine building team will either
prosper or fail with this plant are here for the long term. The product
that we deliver to you determines our future. I assure you that the
majority of us are very concerned with quality. Doug, I appo;igize
about the past and hope you check us out in the future.
Paul

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

snipped

How can you not understand? Millions of people got ****ed up the ass
by the American car makers. Those memories don't fade for many, many
years. Toyota offers cars that are damned close to perfect. Unless you
require a "niche car" like the one you bought, why gamble with an
American car?

My brother in law used to bitch at me about how I was costing
Americans jobs by buying Japanese. My response was simple: My second
Ford was in the shop 5 times in the first year (1975). My boss read me
the riot act: Find a way to get to work, or work somewhere else. In
other words, the Ford was about to cost me MY job. When it finally
died, I bought a Toyota. My logic: If American engineers can't build a
car correctly, they deserve to lose their jobs.

It's an interesting phenomenon in America: Pick 10 products, one of
them being a cars. For each product, ask 10,000 people what should
happen to the manufacturers of those products if they're poorly built
for years on end. For 9 of the products, people will say what they
should: The manufacturers should go out of business. For cars, they'll
cut the manufacturers a ridiculous amount of slack. It's as if cars
have some sort of religious status. I makes no sense at all.