Going Mini Van with a supercharger of course

[NapaBavarian]

Originally posted by petesvx2
How long does it take you guys to type these long posts?

Time is not of importance

[Motorsport-SVX]

Originally posted by Subafreak
I had no idea a Previa could look so cool I don't think a Turbo Caravan could ever look that cool


Do they really call it an Emina in Ireland?

Yeah, got some big plans for this one the more I research
it online.
Its sold in Russia, Japan, just about every country like
the Svx was.
They still offer then in Japan and most places, new body style too.
Quit bringing it over here though same yr as the Svx in 97.

I dont even read post over 2 paragraphs, too many other
things to do,. not to mention its irrelevant to the actual subject, right? me

[petesvx2]

That thing is definitely sweet.

[Landshark]

Originally posted by Chicane
WHY ARE YOU NOT UNDERSTANDING ANYTHING?!?! I'm not complaining about my SVX. I think it's great. I'm just saying that calling a chrysler unreliable while driving a car that BLOWS up transmissions, warps brake rotors, and eats wheel bearings is being a ****ing hypocrite! I think the SVX is great! I'm just pointing out what a double standard some of you have.

- Rob

no, i got you - Chysler has always made excellent, well-engineered products. solid. who calls them unreliable? Toyota? ha! get a Chrysler minivan Dayle - are you crazy?

[Chicane]

Yeah, ignore all the points I made. Whatever.

- Rob

[Landshark]

Originally posted by Chicane
Yeah, ignore all the points I made. Whatever.

- Rob

i did because its always the same point over and over and over again.

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by Chicane
Yeah, ignore all the points I made. Whatever.

- Rob

Rob, here's the problem I have with your points - you made them all up.

I'm not kidding, and I'm not making fun of you. You're simply not presenting any evidence to support your argument that has the same weight as the evidence I'm presenting.

You argue that the only reason Toyotas and Hondas last longer than GMs and Chryslers is the difference in how they're cared for, and not in design and manufacture. You have zero evidence to back this up - only anecdotes. It's an arbitrary assertion with no evidence to support it. Anecdotes and your limited (in the face of the number of cars produced and sold) experience have little to no value compared to studies which show the opposite. That's why I'm not buying it.

You argue that CR's studies are flawed and biased. Then show me something which suggests the opposite of their findings. Look, Rob, I haven't seen a single study rating any American manufacturer above Toyota and Honda in terms of quality and reliability. Not a single one. If Ford, Chrysler and GM really do build cars as good as those two, don't you think they'd be funding their own surveys to prove it? Then why don't they? Because they already know what I do - that their cars don't compare. So they focus their marketing on other things.

You keep bringing up the Neon and how CR continues to rate that car low in reliability, despite the fact that Chrysler fixed a problem with it early on. Maybe the car suffers other problems, I don't know because I haven't seen the raw data. And neither do you - you just assume that CR is incorrectly rating the car low based on that one problem the model had early on. At any rate, this is one car - one car - and does not answer for the dozen other Chrysler cars in the CR 'reliability risks' list.

I think you need to seriously examine your arguments, the opposing conclusion, and take a good hard look at how much evidence is against your conclusion.

Or you can keep telling me that I'm wrong and if I don't see your point of view, that I'm just an idiot - despite the body of evidence against you.

[GreenMarine]

Originally posted by Motorsport-SVX
I was getting a Previa ..........

Hey Dayle, did ya know that the Toyota Previa's in Australia are turbo'ed and AWD?? I have a Truck and Wagon trader from Adelaide, SA that I picked up last july and I found a few for sale in there.. .Thought ya might be interested in that...

[NapaBavarian]

5 star cars are typically poorly assembeled with a laundry list of problems, while the SVX is a quasi exotic car that has a couple issues...

[Motorsport-SVX]

Originally posted by GreenMarineSVX



Hey Dayle, did ya know that the Toyota Previa's in Australia are turbo'ed and AWD?? I have a Truck and Wagon trader from Adelaide, SA that I picked up last july and I found a few for sale in there.. .Thought ya might be interested in that...

Now see, Rob almost had me buying a chrysturd but now
its clinched, Im getting the Previa !!!

Didnt know it was turboed over there, thats pretty cool
They have awd SC versions here though pretty cool.
I just believe consumers in Jp and Au need to get their kids
to school safer and faster hehe

[Chicane]

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets


Rob, here's the problem I have with your points - you made them all up.

How is anything I've said fictional??? I go by personal experience. If I went by CR ratings, and general knowledge, I'd believe the SVX is an underpowered land yacht that can't handle and was a complete failure. But I don't. In my personal experience, I've seen well taken care of domestics last longer than poorly taken care of imports. I've also noticed that most imports are better cared for than most domestics.

I'm not kidding, and I'm not making fun of you. You're simply not presenting any evidence to support your argument that has the same weight as the evidence I'm presenting.

I've presented a ****load of evidence. Eyewitness accounts of chevy's fords, and chryslers turning over 300k. Pointing out Noir's hypocrisies. Pointing out WHY you cannot go 'just' by CR ratings. Pointing out where JDPower gets their ratings, and why they can be flawed.

You argue that the only reason Toyotas and Hondas last longer than GMs and Chryslers is the difference in how they're cared for, and not in design and manufacture. You have zero evidence to back this up - only anecdotes. It's an arbitrary assertion with no evidence to support it. Anecdotes and your limited (in the face of the number of cars produced and sold) experience have little to no value compared to studies which show the opposite. That's why I'm not buying it.

Look, a car will last as long as you spend money fixing whatever breaks. I could have a 2 million mile SVX if I had a deep enough pocketbook. The point is, some cars break more often than others... why? Some of it has to do with design.... tolerances...etc.... some of it is the materials.... but a LOT of it is how the car is treated. You can take a brand new ANYTHING, and if you beat the piss out of it, eventually it'll break. Even a slant six. Those break EVENTUALLY. Tell you what... let's reverse this... give me some reasons WHY a toyota will last longer than any other brand. What do they do so differently than other marques? Do they have 'magic' engine parts? Or do they assemble them like everyone else?

You argue that CR's studies are flawed and biased. Then show me something which suggests the opposite of their findings.

People like Noir. He doesn't call his repairs 'repairs', instead he calls them 'preventative maintenance'.... whatever. Point is, if HE was intereviewed by CR, he wouldn't report any problems. This is what I'm talking about. I know a guy who purchase a new 4 runner this year. It's been back to the dealership, I **** you not, over 10 times. The sunroof was leaking, rattling, and all sorts of other things happened to it. Yet he still boasts about toyota's build quality and reliability. Why? Who cares. The point is I've seen this more than once: People who own imports tend to dismiss problems and repairs as 'necessary to owning such a pedigree/machine', and people who own domestics tend to call 'repairs' 'repairs'.

Look, Rob, I haven't seen a single study rating any American manufacturer above Toyota and Honda in terms of quality and reliability. Not a single one. If Ford, Chrysler and GM really do build cars as good as those two, don't you think they'd be funding their own surveys to prove it? Then why don't they? Because they already know what I do - that their cars don't compare. So they focus their marketing on other things.

Quality, I won't argue. Toyota has far better quality interiors and panel gap/fit and finish than most domestics (though I'd say caddy could beat some of toyota's lower end models). Reliability wise... I'm just not sure. Like I said, yeah, according to CR reports, a 400+ THOUSAND MILE GM or FORD product simply cannot happen. CR is known for being EXTREMELY biased in comparisons betwixt domestics and imports.... as an example (like I previously stated) a BASE MODEL Jeep Wrangler vs some import SUV (top of the line). Guess which one had better features? Better interior? Better everything? DUH. They do this all the time. CR also reports STUPID things... ex: They reviewed the new mazda 6. They did the regular version, and the sport version. They complained that the sport version had a firmer ride. WELL NO CRAP! IT'S SUPPOSED TO!!!! Argh.

You keep bringing up the Neon and how CR continues to rate that car low in reliability,

Actually it's listed as reliable now. They changed it last year, 5 years after Chrysler fixed the problem.

despite the fact that Chrysler fixed a problem with it early on. Maybe the car suffers other problems, I don't know because I haven't seen the raw data. And neither do you - you just assume that CR is incorrectly rating the car low based on that one problem the model had early on. At any rate, this is one car - one car - and does not answer for the dozen other Chrysler cars in the CR 'reliability risks' list.

I know a LOT about neons... and you know what? They didn't change much AT ALL inside generational production. Sure, the 95 had a funky intake, and a slightly different steering wheel, but honestly, everything from a 95-99 neon is the same. The only MAJOR difference is the headgasket. One is paper, and has some thin areas, the other is multi-layered steel and is much thicker in the same areas. It cured the headgasket problem. Yet the 1998 neon was listed as unreliable. So was the 1999. And the 2nd gen neon (2000 on up)??? Even though they've NEVER used a paper gasket, and I've NEVER heard reliability issues about them, CR still listed them as unreliable for THREE YEARS. They NEVER used the paper gasket. Ever. And I've never really seen a common complaint about them, and I know a LOT of neon owners. Now these owners tend to beat the snot out of their cars.... don't you think a problem would have shown up???? I do. But nothing did. And when I asked CR why they continued to list it as unreliable, they wouldn't answer. Why????

I think you need to seriously examine your arguments, the opposing conclusion, and take a good hard look at how much evidence is against your conclusion.

I think I've provided more evidence than you have. CR and JD power can report about 'consumer reported problems', but when import owners consider problems merely 'maintenence', I don't think you have a fair game going on. Like I said, I've made none of this stuff up, everything I've said is from PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. IF YOU have driven a chrysler for an extended period of time, and it gave you a ton of problems, then I think you have some truth to what you're saying. But until then....

- Rob

[Motorsport-SVX]

Chicane, you can try to convince me (or anyone else here) till the cows come home, but just to save you the time of typing etc.
I barely skim over your post, just to get a gist of what you are trying to convey, then thats about it.

Nothing you could say would change my mind or whatever
so type away, its obvious you have an opinion for everything anyone post here, you have almost 1000 more post then I do and you registered almost 2 yrs AFTER I did.

Either way nothing you could say could ever change my mind, I have my facts and opinion, you have yours.

[Chicane]

Originally posted by Motorsport-SVX
Chicane, you can try to convince me (or anyone else here) till the cows come home, but just to save you the time of typing etc.

I'm not trying to convince you anything. I'm mainly refuting Noir, and pointing out what a double standard some people have.

I barely skim over your post, just to get a gist of what you are trying to convey, then
thats about it.

No offense, but it's quite apparent. I mean, you post things like that toyota truck video, like it's proof of how bulletproof toyotas are....when in fact any truck could have done that. It's obvious you want to believe that Toyotas are the best built most reliable things on the planet, and even if I was able to prove you wrong with your own words, your mind wouldn't change.

Nothing you could say would change my mind or whatever

Like I said.

so type away, its obvious you have an opinion for everything anyone post here, you have almost 1000 more post then I do and you registered almost 2 yrs AFTER I did.

What's your point? I had a job that required to sit in front of a computer for 8 hours a day. It was lame.

Either way nothing you could say could ever change my mind, I have my facts and opinion, you have yours.

Yes, but my mind is still open, because I'm going by personal experience. Yours is obviously shut.

- Rob

[Phil Hill]

Guys, guys................

There is obviously an unresolvable issue here, time to leave it and more on surely ??

Take a deep breath........... pause.......... and move on (Please !!)

Phil.

[upnygimp]

Rob, I have a question for you. If you're so in love with Neons and theyre so superior, why don't you sell your SVX and buy a Neon? I mean, you could probably get three or four of them for whatever you sell your SVX for.