GM VS Ford

  • Thread starter Thread starter Poverty
  • 141 comments
  • 3,579 views

Which car company do you prefer?

  • Ford

    Votes: 23 50.0%

  • GM

    Votes: 23 50.0%
  • Total voters
    46
BlazinXtreme
[…] the Cadillac STS is by far much more superior then the Town Car will ever be and the Navigators doesn't stand a snow ball's chance in hell of even comparing to the Escalade.
Click to expand...
Strangely, the very moment I read that, this was playing on my computer:

snowball3rd.gif


Anyway, I tend to like Ford products better, if only because I’m a big Mazda and Volvo fan.
 
Wait, just re-read my post(s) again. I said what sells in your LOCAL area isn't what the ENTIRE COUNTRY does. And my points about Lincoln and Cadillac are from MY local area to prove my point.
Click to expand...

When more people say they see GM vehicles in their part of the country I'm going to say that they probably sell better. But you don't even need to go by that, GM vehicles do sell better, look at figures.

Actually it does not have Altezza lights. If you stand next to one in real life you'll notice that it's not "white out clear" lights but it's actually a chrome strip inside the plastic surrounding the taillight structure. Taillights and chrome grille aside (the CTS has an ugly grille and taillights too BTW) the CTS just looks odd in non V trim. The V trim add more substance and style and it isn't as noticable that the car is too tall. If you SVT, Roush, or Shelby the Fusion it will definately out look the CTS-V. Probably won't be faster (almost certain it won't be unless they V8+RWD it) but would look much better (it already does IMO).
Click to expand...

These....
ford_fusion_rear_corner.JPG


Looks a lot like these...
lexus-is300-rear.jpg


Altezzas, euro lights, ricer lights, whatever you want to call them, if I want something other then red lights on a car I'll buy them myself.

The V-trim isn't much different then the non V. The only thing I notice is a slightly different bumper and grill inserts (which you can get as an option).

Cadillac without the V series is absolutely rubbish when put in the same catagory as Lexus, Infinity, BMW, Audi, Jaguar, and Mercedes.
Click to expand...

That's a toss up, a lot of people like Cadilliac better then the then following, and I'd much rather drive a Caddy over a Jag, at least the Caddy won't be in the shop every week with a ton of problems.
 
Neither will the Jag.
 
Jags are terriable in the reliablity department, my buddys mom had one and that thing was always falling apart. Hell Jags have a reputation for not being well made cars...at least in America.
 
If they are then explain why the 2005 JD power survey saw the Jaguar XJ in 12th, the Jaguar S-Type in 20th and the Jaguar X-Type in 41st, and the XK in 43rd, all very good positions. And also they all averaged 4/5 for reliability and build quality (In other words, they're as relaible as one of out VW Golf's, ie very relaible and a lot more realible than most Mercedes). Your buddy's mum must have had some really big bad look. Now none of that would mean anytinhg if your Jag's were built in different factories and to a different level of quality to ours, but correct me if I'm wrong, the Jag's you get are built in the same factories and to the same spec as the Jag's we get, unlike the Ford's and VW's etc.
 
I'm not sure where they are built, but in America Jags have a bad reputation for being unreliable and her car was older, like a 99.
 
I can't remember them that far back, not in terms of what they were good at/ bad at anyway (except looks ofcourse) but I can tell you that current models are being held in higher regard than many if not most, BMW's, Mercedes' and Audi's.

On a JD Power survey note, the lowest placed Jag (the XK8) was still ranked better than the highest placed Merc and Audi, and no BMW's were as high as the S-Type.
 
The current ones might be different, I haven't been in a new Jag yet and frankly I really don't want to be. I really don't like Jag at all, if I was going luxery the last place I would look is Ford and especially Ford of England, the first place I would go to is Lexus or Infinti. England might have some decent cars (and the more I research TVR's the cooler they become) but as for Jags and Astons I can't say I care for them at all.
 
Personally I think Aston Martin is the finest car maker in the world, I'd take some Jags over some Audi's, BMW's or Merc's. Nothing from Nissan comes close to Jag, but Lexu's is very good, they are the number one in their class, Jaguar have been rated number 2, Infinit isn't over here, we have them all Nissan badged, they arn't close. Onto Aston, Aston and Jag arn't in the same market, Aston Martin dominate the luxury GT maket and rightly so, the DB9 is a better car in every way than the Bentley GT, and I don't know of any other car's worth comparing to thoes two. Ford don't really have anything to do with Aston Martin production right now, they funded Aston Martin, and they own Aston Martin but they don't step in and dictate what Aston Martin does, their designs or the production of the car's. They did with the DB7, but they don't with the DB9, it's all Aston Martin. The Jaguar S-Type is perhaps the weak link in the Jaguar line up, whereas the X-Type and the XJ are both very good compared to their competitors, the S-Type is nothing special, it's good, but nothing special. The old XK was starting to get old when it ended production last year yet it was still relaible and held it's own, but now we have the new XK which has stepped things up a gear across thoe board. Do you mind me asking why you wouldn't consider an Aston though? If I had £100k for a GT I woudn't consider anything but, and there's nothing out there that's ever been called as as good o imo looks as good.
 
I hate the way Astons look, if I was going to get some sort of Luxery GT (assuming I know what it is) it would have to be a SL65 because Mercedes knows how to design a car.
 
One minute he hates mercs, then the next he loves them. Currently he hates audi's yet I have a qoute from him a couple months back where he said audi were the only company of the big three germans that makes nice cars. Whats it gonna be?

If you call lexus and infinit luxurious the cars they sell in america must be truly dreadful. :lol:

Theyre nice cars but not exactly luxurious. I wouldnt call a BMW luxurious, far from it.
 
Overall I don't like them but with the given choices I like one over the other. I've always like Infiniti and Lexus.
 
BlazinXtreme
I hate the way Astons look, if I was going to get some sort of Luxery GT (assuming I know what it is) it would have to be a SL65 because Mercedes knows how to design a car.
Click to expand...

You are on crack right? Astons have the best looking GT designs ever--as in ever in history I might add. NOTHING looks better than a DB9 in the GT class--NOTHING! And for a luxury GT the SL65 is a good fast car but the Aston has style and frankly the DB9 and Vanquish have a better exhaust note in my opinion. And Jaguars are absolutely reliable. The stigma you display about them are from the late 70's and early to mid 80's when they did have electrical problems and such--they are a different animal now. I'd take an S-Type over most mid sized luxury saloons excluding Audi--I'll take an A6 thanks. But let's discuss this, does GM even HAVE a GT car? No.

And to be on topic that's:
GM GT cars = None. The Corvette is not a GT car it is a sports car. The ZEE OH SIKS is not a GT car it is a borderline supercar.
Ford GT cars = Ford GT, Aston Martin Vanquish, Aston Martin DB9, and Aston Martin V8 Vantage.

Ford again for teh win!
 
No Astons don't look good, I've never liked the way they've looked, ever. I would much rather have the SL65 AMG because it would simpley be awesome to own something that powerful and looks better then the Aston. Plus I wouldn't have to drive around a British car (I'm sorry I just wouldn't drive a British car...maybe a TVR but that's a maybe).

I still hate Jags and I wouldn't ever buy one, you can get a perfectly good Benz or BMW which is better in everyway.

And GM doesn't make a GT eh?

cadillac-xlr-v-280.jpg


If you consider a 2 seat roadster a GT car then this would be a GM designed and built GT car I would think.

But what's funny is you classify the Ford GT a GT car while it's not a convertable roadster, but a mid engined sorta race car and a Z06 is a supercar? I think they both are low end supercars.

And the Astons are all the exact same car with different engines. Seriously if you lined them all up I couldn't tell you which one was which.
 
BlazinXtreme
No Astons don't look good, I've never liked the way they've looked, ever. I would much rather have the SL65 AMG because it would simpley be awesome to own something that powerful and looks better then the Aston. Plus I wouldn't have to drive around a British car (I'm sorry I just wouldn't drive a British car...maybe a TVR but that's a maybe).

I still hate Jags and I wouldn't ever buy one, you can get a perfectly good Benz or BMW which is better in everyway.

And GM doesn't make a GT eh?

cadillac-xlr-v-280.jpg


If you consider a 2 seat roadster a GT car then this would be a GM designed and built GT car I would think.

But what's funny is you classify the Ford GT a GT car while it's not a convertable roadster, but a mid engined sorta race car and a Z06 is a supercar? I think they both are low end supercars.

And the Astons are all the exact same car with different engines. Seriously if you lined them all up I couldn't tell you which one was which.
Click to expand...

The XLR is not a GT car. And ok I'll conceed the Ford GT isn't a GT car--but that's still Ford 4 GM 0--I forgot about the Jaguar XK. The ZO6 is borderline supercar--which that topic was beaten to death and then eaten and then regurgitated again and then stepped on and then thrown in a sespool. And it's not hard to tell Astons apart, you just have to know what you are looking for. That's the same as me saying "all GM SUVs look the damned same"--they even use the same drivetrains. And I think if you ask any knowledgable person between Jaguar and Merc which has the best build quality most of them would say without hesitation...Jaguar.
 
Wait, wait, wait...the SL65 is a GT car but a XLR isn't? Explain. I want to know what the differences are.

And no it's not easy to tell Aston's apart, if you lined them all up I couldn't tell you which is which. But with the all GM SUV's look the same, it's was slightly true with the GMT800's, but with the 900's everything has a completely different face, very easy to tell them apart. However Astons all have pretty much the same look and I can't tell them apart.

And who do you consider knowledgeable? Mercedes, BMW, and I hate to say it but Auid are all better the a Jag, hands down.
 
BlazinXtreme
Wait, wait, wait...the SL65 is a GT car but a XLR isn't? Explain. I want to know what the differences are.
Click to expand...
I don't know anything about the XLR, so I couldn't tell you, doesn't look too good though.

And no it's not easy to tell Aston's apart, if you lined them all up I couldn't tell you which is which. But with the all GM SUV's look the same, it's was slightly true with the GMT800's, but with the 900's everything has a completely different face, very easy to tell them apart. However Astons all have pretty much the same look and I can't tell them apart.
Click to expand...
If you have trouble telling a DB9 from a Vanquish your not looking.

And who do you consider knowledgeable? Mercedes, BMW, and I hate to say it but Auid are all better the a Jag, hands down.
Click to expand...
Then why is the lowest placed Jag in the 2005 JD power survey rated higher than the highest placed Merc or Audi? Why are Jaguars repeatedly being given 4 or 5 start build quality rating where Merc struggles for 3?

No offence, but your sounding as biased against British car's as thoes people you hate that are biased against American one's.
 
The XLR is based off the Corvette, it's a hard top convertable, and starts in the 90k range I do believe so. I like it, but I think I would rather go with the SL55 or SL65 because you get more car for the money.

aston-martin-db9.jpg


lgpp0443.jpg


AstonMartinV8Vantage-front.jpg


They all look very similar to me and if I didn't just type them into Google I wouldn't have been able to tell you the difference.

And Jag's still suck compared the the German rivals. They could be rated higher but from everyone on these boards tell me, that doesn't mean a thing.
 
Yes it does, they are simply better built car's th JD Power survey is owners and members of the public saying what they think, the fact it's rated higher means the public rate them higher, that means a hell of a lot. They are more reliable than a Merc, cheaper to run and offer just as much, if not more luxury to any of their Merc counterparts.

Also I can identify each of thoes Astons at a glance, The DB9 looks different to the Vanquish and the V8 Vantage looks different to them both. Sure the share a style, but the details are all different.
 
The details aren't different by much, it's like looking at the GM mini van things, I could say they are all different because they look slightly different but they aren't.

And you'll never convince me that Jags are nearly as good as the German riverlies. I would much rather have a BMW parked in front of my house then a Jag, hell I take an Audi over a Jag.
 
How many does the XLR seat? I belive the SL seats four. I could be wrong though. Id say the SL is bordering on GT/Sportscars. Same could be said for the XLR but the SL just looks more GT.
 
The XLR has 2 seats and I think the SL does too, but even though I like GM's I can't neglect the fact the the SL is the better car. GM needs to step up the XLR so it's competitive.
 
Okay, a GT is not defined by the number of seats it has, a GT can have 2 seats or 4 seats, and I guess it could have 3 seats, but were just yet to see one. Look at a GT like a sportscar that's bee taken, given luxury features and made more comfey and refined. From looking up some info on the XLR I can't see any reason why it's not a GT. I still think it looks ugly as sin though. And Blazin, it's a pitty you won't stand to reason on Jaguar, don't ask everyone else to when it comes to Camaro's and Corvette's.
 
The XLR would be a GT.

But with Jag's I just don't think they are good, like I've said several times the German cars are better in everyway when it comes to luxury sedans. I'm not the only one who thinks this, pick up Car and Driver, Road & Track, etc. they all think the Jags are subpar to the Germans.

With the Vette I don't care if you don't like it, that's you choice. And Camaro's are ok.
 
Yet Mercedes owners are constantly complaining about the car's poorer build quality and so on, and Jaguar owners all seem to be chuffed. Go figure. And I can tell you of numerous magazines where the Jag's are praised no end. They are more reliable car's than Merc's.
 
Maybe in the UK, but here in America they aren't held with high standards. Once again I think this is a clash of culture.
 
But why not, the build quality doesn't dissapear on import to the US, it's not like VW where the US one's are built in Mexico, the Jaguar's in the US are still better built than Merc's. Sure, hate the deign, the style or the feel of the drive etc, but to say they're not well built is just untrue. Besides that here's what the American public think of Jaguar
http://www.jaguarusa.com/us/en/comp...ence_Overview_overview@__link__GraphicPromo_1

And here I quote...
Nov. 16, 2005—Jaguar has maintained its number one position in the 2005 J.D. Power and Associates SSI (Sales Satisfaction Index) Study for the second consecutive year.* Last year Jaguar tied for first place, but in the latest study it now owns the first position alone. The Jaguar brand performed particularly well in the areas of 'salesperson experience' and 'paperwork/finance process.

For example, in the 2005 Initial Quality Study Jaguar moved up to second place and maintained its position as the highest-ranked European car manufacturer for vehicle quality and dependability.
 
I'm just saying that Americans don't hold the Jag to high standards because we were tainted with the days when they sucked. It's no different then people saying GM sucks because of past products. But I don't think I've ever been in a Jag that I liked. They didn't feel like a big expensive car when I was in it, however every Mercedes I've even been in feels like an expensive car should.
 
Well obviousely plenty of people in the US do hold Jag in pretty high regard, otherwise it wouldn't have got the numder one spot in the JD Power for the US last year, that survey included Mercedes, BMW, Audi and Cadillac and Ford and Pontiac and Cheverolet etc.
 
Oh yeah that reminds me I saw a camaro today when I was driving about. Its ugly.
 
Back