Yup, bottoms of my doors are on my pile now too. Only 28K, garaged 24x7, never has seen a salted street, rarely even saw rain, but the rust is peering through on both.
Yup, bottoms of my doors are on my pile now too. Only 28K, garaged 24x7, never has seen a salted street, rarely even saw rain, but the rust is peering through on both.
GM did squat for rust protection, pretty obvious when a 28K car that has never seen Winter is showing rot.
True and compared to the 70's GM trucks and imports, it was the ultimate in rust proofing. Carry on and give it the Donovan rust proofing.I would agree with that..... to a point.
Could they have done better?
Absolutely.
What everyone seems to conveniently forget however, is that we have become spoiled with the march of progress and the quality of products nowadays, and without even really realizing it.
The quality of products 30-40 years ago is/was nowhere near what we’ve come to take for granted today. GM was still painting cars with lacquer for crying out loud, and fuel injection hadn’t even become refined or mainstream yet. Yes absolutely, a new Kia has better fit and finish than our old cars ever did. But our cars weren’t computer designed on CAD/CAM software and assembled by robots down to the thousandths of an inch either.
The other thing to take into account too is, where do you stop? What I mean by this is, you can continue to make improvements in almost every aspect (paint, fit and finish, sound deadening, engine efficiency etc), but who’s gonna pay for it? There’s a reason a new Chevy doesn’t cost the same as a new Mercedes. If it did, everyone would be bitching about how expensive they’ve become.
GM knew that they weren’t trying to compete with Mercedes or any other high end brand, and drew the line where they knew they could turn a profit without excessive expenditures and still make a half decent respectable car.
No sense in bemoaning “what could have been”, what they “should have done” and criticizing the past.
Hindsight is ALWAYS 20/20.
I would agree with that..... to a point.
Could they have done better?
Absolutely.
What everyone seems to conveniently forget however, is that we have become spoiled with the march of progress and the quality of products nowadays, and without even really realizing it.
The quality of products 30-40 years ago is/was nowhere near what we’ve come to take for granted today. GM was still painting cars with lacquer for crying out loud, and fuel injection hadn’t even become refined or mainstream yet. Yes absolutely, a new Kia has better fit and finish than our old cars ever did. But our cars weren’t computer designed on CAD/CAM software and assembled by robots down to the thousandths of an inch either.
The other thing to take into account too is, where do you stop? What I mean by this is, you can continue to make improvements in almost every aspect (paint, fit and finish, sound deadening, engine efficiency etc), but who’s gonna pay for it? There’s a reason a new Chevy doesn’t cost the same as a new Mercedes. If it did, everyone would be bitching about how expensive they’ve become.
GM knew that they weren’t trying to compete with Mercedes or any other high end brand, and drew the line where they knew they could turn a profit without excessive expenditures and still make a half decent respectable car.
No sense in bemoaning “what could have been”, what they “should have done” and criticizing the past.
Hindsight is ALWAYS 20/20.
GBodyForum is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. Amazon, the Amazon logo, AmazonSupply, and the AmazonSupply logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.