Yes it is. The latest generation is indeed getting better but they're not as reliable as they should be yet. I just bought a low mileage 2014 Silverado (72k) and I'm going to hope for the best with the 4L80E six speed it has. I'll be servicing it very soon just for peace of mind.
Should be fine the trans went out in my work van at 159 k
Camaro went fast in a straight line, handling, suspension, and brakes were primitive on a good day. Camaro is a muscle car. Going fast in a straight line, is where Camaros are happiest doing.
The Mustang II was designed to compete against the Toyota Celica. And Ford's sporty reaction against the fuel crisis, and increased fuel prices. And more sporty compact, and fuel efficient. Do consider the era in which the Mustang II was new in. The succeeding Mustang III in 1979 was where horsepower and performance got gradually added back in as the platform moved along.Right! Having a high school friend that got a 69 fastback in the early 70s with the semi high performance motor (225 hp I think) to replace his MG-A, we grew up with real Mustangs. But Ford has always played games with the mustang branding ... that sad little 4 cyl Mustang II (pinto based - 1973-78) was a shameful example. The ones with the 2.8l V6 were reasonable, while the 302 V8 versions were fun but excessiveBut they sold a ton of the Mustang IIs, America liked them.
Starting in 2005, Ford finally gave the Mustang a chassis that had some serious handling potential. I own a 2007 Mustang GT Steeda Q335. Steeda set it up to be mainly a road course car but it runs the 1/4 mile in the low 13s with ~105 mph trap speed. Mine was sold new by a Ford dealer with the modifications installed. It handles incredibly well and I'll drive it until I can not longer work a clutch. I would love to put a twin screw blower on it but can't bring myself to modify a somewhat rare car that came that way when sold new.
New Camaros handle very well !
New Camaros were extremely improved in the braking and handling department. And even the V6 had 300 HP. And the retroesque styling is nice.
IMO, up until the mid to late 1970s, the US automakers overall made vehicles with terrific body styles.
The 77-79 coup Deviles were fantastic vehicles ! 425 were bullet proof that was a very successful first downsizing caddy’s and of all the full size GM vehicles ! Then came the 80s yikes but most had recovered by the 90s and early 2000s
List of countries by motor vehicle production - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Direct injection seems to cause a lot of carbon build up on the valve stems. Most companies that use DI have problems with the engines after 50K or so and many have to have the cylinder heads pulled and cleaned out. Port injection puts the fuel into the intake port and keeps the port and valves clean, DI puts the fuel right into the combustion chamber, while the exhaust gas re-circulatory system (EGR) pumps crankcase vapors into the port clogging them up. Ford has solved this issue by using both DI and Port injection at the same time... more power from the DI and clean valves from PI
CAFE effected all manufacturers. It was the lack of competition that was GMs problem.The simple answer in two nice tidy sentences;
#1, fuel economy directives ("CAFE")
#2, greed
Engine if serviced regularly last about 4 times as long as they did in the 50s. Not uncommon to have a 500000km engine still in a car. At 80000 kms 50s engines needed rings, valves and all new sealing surfaces. Maybe had a lot to do with modern oils but the old engines didn't last very long. Yes you can tell me about the 1000000 mile engine bit that is so rare it isn't worth repeating.
