On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 05
49 GMT, Steve B. <none@none.com>
wrote:Steve B. <none@none.com>, Steve B.
>On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 02:04:40 GMT, "C. E. White"
><cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>>So, I guess you are right, On average Chrysler reliability is pretty much
>>mediocre. As I was looking through the CR information I was surprised to see
>>that in almost ever category, the Chrysler products were from the middle to
>>near the bottom of the vehicle ratings. Apparently CR is not a big Chrysler
>>fan.
>>
>>Ed
>>
>
>And this is the reason I quit subscribing to their magazine. It seems
>that an American company (well they were one back then) can do no
>right and Honda or Toyota can do no wrong. I don't have a problem
>calling a bad car a bad car but they just seem so hell bent on making
>the foreign cars look perfect.
>
>Steve B.
Once again as the original poster I thank all for their replies and
links posted.
While Consumer reports listed the 04 Sebring as "fair" was it, and the
Honda's in general are seen as great, I would NEVER EVER buy a honda
again, the 81 accord I had lasted the shortest amount of time ( I buy
all my cars new and keep em until they are only suited for the junk
yard ) Hondas in 81 were held in high esteem by many including
Consumer reports I'll bet. My 89 Olds has 197k now, the 86 aries
I junked last year had 170k now that F**$#$ 81 HONDA lasted till
89 when I bought the Olds. I know how to maintain a car , fix many
problems, and turn to professionals (real professionals) when
necessary.
Thanks again