"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.


A few did catch fire... in extreme situations, after being rear-ended while
sitting still on the side of the highway by a vehicle doing 80mph. The vast
majority of police, fire, public safety, etc. still buy Crown Vics because
there's nothing else out there that has the safety record, reliability,
capacity, and capability if the Crown Vic. Certainly nothing Toyota offers.

The SC Highway Patrol has a few BMW cruisers that BMW gave them. Painted
and marked, but with no light bar. They can sneak up on you, or you on
them, very easily. It's just not right. :-)

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.

"Harry Krause" wrote:


In the car lines, I think it is tough to beat Toyota, and it doesn't
matter where they are assembled. But I think the full-size Ford and
Chevy trucks are aces. And for $50,000, there is nothing around to equal
the Corvette.

The Corvette just barely edges out the SVT Cobra Mustang, and the Mustang
does it for 15k less money. Put that extra 15k into the Mustang and you've
got a Corvette killer. The Mustang doesn't have the presence or following
of the vette, however.

Last vette I drove was a 2001, and while it was impressive in the go fast
and handling departments, the interior sucked. I put my arm on the arm
rest, and it was hot! It was the incandescent light bulbs used to
back-light the power window and door lock switches. The dash controls and
switches and plastic were cheap as well. They are definitely putting the
money in the engine and suspension and using what's leftover in the
interior.

Toyota's are mind-numbing boring... but reliable.

"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

Every once in a great while, the courts get one right.

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
om...

"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.


A few did catch fire... in extreme situations, after being rear-ended
while
sitting still on the side of the highway by a vehicle doing 80mph. The
vast
majority of police, fire, public safety, etc. still buy Crown Vics because
there's nothing else out there that has the safety record, reliability,
capacity, and capability if the Crown Vic. Certainly nothing Toyota
offers.

The SC Highway Patrol has a few BMW cruisers that BMW gave them. Painted
and marked, but with no light bar. They can sneak up on you, or you on
them, very easily. It's just not right. :-)



Extreme situations....maybe. We allow blind or dead people to drive in this
country. That accounts for about 50% of what's on the road, and I'm being
charitable.

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.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Extreme situations....maybe. We allow blind or dead people to drive in
this
country. That accounts for about 50% of what's on the road, and I'm being
charitable.


So you should quit driving... knock that percentage down a bit.

"Harry Krause" wrote ...

Ford has a new sedan, the 500 something, that looks kind of interesting.

I was interested until I read edmunds review, they were quite disappointed in
the motor.
-rick-

sheesh

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.

I know they can't be perfect. But, in this case, there was apparently a bolt
installed which, in a collision, would puncture the tank. Hopefully, things
like that would be obvious to more engineers.


"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast dot net wrote in message
...
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.