 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Saturn Cars / April 2008more Saturn complaints (casting flaws cause cracked heads)
Saturn (GM) STANDARD OPERATING PROCEEDURE When we at GM discover an epidemic costly flaw in our cars (like casting flaws in our cylinder heads that will cause the head to eventually CRACK); and before we become aware of the problem, tens of thousands of cars with the flaw have gone off the assembly line to dealers and customers We withold that information (sending out a service notice) for as long as we can- so as to get as many of those cars affected, OVER the warranty period. That way, we are not liable to cover the cost of the repair or replacement and we are able to cut our loses! Also: If a new car customer who has been taking his car to the dealer for regular scheduled maintainance, CHANGES ADDRESS, and the dealer fails to notify the company of the new address and because of this dealer failure- we send out a service notice to the old address and thus the notice never reaches the customer: When the service notice is returned to us as "undeliverable"; we will NOT make any attempt to reach the customer at his new address and notify him of the service notice. We are not liable for our dealer's failure nor will we take any action against our dealer for this failure in an attempt to compensate the customer,should he have been unaware of the notice and suffers a costly repair bill after his warranty has run out! Anyone who doubts the above policy can contact (among many others): Grand Rapids (Michigan) Saturn. (That is; if anyone there admits his knowledge of and has the COURAGE to verify the above policy) signed. Michael Cohrman misterf...@yahoo.com The above policy is known by many but I have never seen it posted anywhere. If you want to verify or deny the above policy from your own experience- please do! Want specific examples of GM witholding costly information on their cars? Contact: misterfact@yahoo.com Patricia of Bath ME (9/15/03): Cylinder head cracked, Saturn is aware there is a problem but their position is, if it didn't happen in 6 years or 100,000 miles (whichever came first) I'm out of luck. Of course the local dealer will fix it for $1,800. I own a 1994 Saturn SW1 with 94,502 miles. The service bullentin came out in 1999. I believe that they knew it to be a defect in the parts they used and it should be fixed no matter what the age of the car. Of couse they would like the public to think that after their timeframe the car will never have the problem or by magic it will repair itself. If the only humans worked this way after 6 years all birth defects would just disappear. What a wonderful world it would be. All I have to say is -- dream on, Saturn. I can't wait to get the car fixed and trade it in for another car. Re: GM standard operating proceedure [ To: misterfact | Post 296013896, reply to 296013865 ] (Score: 2) Cylinder head cracked, Saturn is aware there is a problem but their position is, if it didn't happen in 6 years or 100,000 miles (whichever came first) I'm out of luck. (think I'm going to buy a Toyota pickup. I've always been a Dodge man, and I'd love to have a new Cummins, but I think I'm done with American auto companies. I think I want a Toyota or a Nissan, club cab, full size. Something my dogs can ride in with me. . misterfact (nonconformist) Saturn recalls http://www.internetautoguide.com/auto-recalls/03-int/saturn/l-series/index.html misterfact (nonconformist) 01/18/08 09:54 AM Re: GM standard operating proceedure [ To: Jhoffa_ | Post 296013960, reply to 296013929 ] (Score: 1) Saturn has made over 100,000 cars with casting flaws in their cylinder heads. The flaw causes the head to crack- usually after the warranty expires. This figure was given to me by a Saturn "insider". http://www.carreview.com/mfr/saturn/midsize-compact/PRD_15473_1531crx.aspx Summary: We were very happy with our Saturn until the warranty ran out. As far as I am concerned these lemons have built in flaws.With only 56000 miles and a dedicated maintanance regime we now face a $4000.00 repair cost for replacing something on just about everything. Speed sensor, transmission valve and a computer overhaul. We thought we had made a good choice when we bought this car 6 years ago. My wife loved it. We were treated great by all the staff at Saturn and it seemed to us that we were getting a fine automobile......Then the warranty ran out and so did all the friendlyness. We now face a bill almost 1/4 the size of what we paid for it originaly. We are going to do the minimum to get it running and dump this turkey. We have started looking around for a minivan and believe me, it won't be a Saturn. They should be ashamed of themselves for foisting an inferior product on trusting people. (But I doubt they are.) Weaknesses: Constant problems with the air conditioning.I bet you've read that one before. Things start falling apart after the warranty expires. too many built in flaws in my opinion. Would you like to Comment? Join CarReview for a free account, or Login if you are already a member. misterfact (maverick) 04/12/08 09:53 AM Re: GM standard operating proceedure [ To: misterfact | Post 296172871, reply to 296013865 ] (Score: 1) Dear Mister Fact; > > Hello, > > I also am very frustrated with the integrity of the > saturn car dealership here in Holland, Michigan. I > have been on top of every check-up in the 43,000 > miles of my car's life. I own a 2003 Saturn Ion. On > January 28, I took my car in because my coolant > light was on. They couldn't find a leak doing a > pressure test - so then they topped off my coolant > and told me I was okay to drive it. 4 weeks later, > my engine is overheating and upon inspection, they > let me know that my cylinder head is cracked and my > engine needs to be replaced. 43,000 miles!! I did > everything to the "t" as far as car upkeep: oil > changes, 30,000k tune up, tire rotation, fluid > check, etc... and the Saturn of Holland, Michigan > aren't owning up to their role in this mess nor am I > getting anywhere with the customer service rep. at > Saturn Inc. > Do you have any advice/tips to pursue this further > or get someone to own up to the poor quality of > service and the horrible products they are making? > > They told me that I probably had a 'lemon' - that > one car that was made on a Friday afternoon before > the weekend ---- and the engine was probably faulty > from the start. > > Thanks in advance for getting back to me about this. > > -Christen > > -- > Complaints.com - consumers in control Mister Fact -- Mister Misinformation would be more accurate. > Saturn (GM) STANDARD OPERATING PROCEEDURE > [quoted text clipped - 173 lines] >> -- >> Complaints.com - consumers in control more Mr. Fag..... Please do not feed this troll. I work for Saturn and not a word of this unreadable garbage is true as those who own a Saturn already know. Please do not feed this troll.  Signaturemarx404 > more Mr. Fag..... > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > -- > marx404 They sure keep you busy in the repair dept don't they? > more Mr. Fag..... > > Please do not feed this troll. Good advice! > I work for Saturn and not a word of this unreadable garbage is true as those who own a Saturn already know. Are you implying that you believe that Saturn engines have not had a "cracked head" problem? If so, I would suggest you need to talk to your dealer's service department and/ or more customers. If you are implying that "MisterFact" is grossly exaggerating and possibly lying outright about GM's handling of the problem, then I'm inclined to agree with you. :) Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't been made in ...um over 6 years, so what is the point of Mr. Fag slamming Saturn on this (and everything else) ? Nevermind, he is a troll and has no life. Either Mr. Fag is a disgruntled customer or ex-employee and a retard (no insult to the retarded) My point is Mr. Fag isn't welcome to troll here. Don't feed the troll. Signaturemarx404 _________________ >> more Mr. Fag..... >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > about GM's handling of the problem, then I'm inclined to agree with you. > :) >Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L >engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't What issues do the 1.9's have ???? I just bought a 95 SL1 with 146,000 and it runs good. What can I look forward to in the future ??? Thanks Brian >>Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L >>engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Thanks > Brian The main issue, as far as I am aware, is the casting flaw that caused oil and coolant to mix either in the oil crankcase or the coolant system. If your SL has over 100,000 miles, chances are this flaw has either been caught and corrected or (more likely) your engine did not suffer from this flaw. There are other, less serious, problems such as wrong plug gapping and fuel pump but, again, your car has either had them and they've been fixed or your car never had them. I would expect that as long as you ensure your SL gets regular maintenance (especially timing chain replacement), the only problems you can expect are those endemic to all older cars. >>>Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L >>>engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >them. I would expect that as long as you ensure your SL gets regular maintenance (especially timing chain replacement), >the only problems you can expect are those endemic to all older cars. Does the timing chain break ???? I would figure a chain would last the life of the car, unlike belts....... Brian >> them. I would expect that as long as you ensure your SL gets >> regular maintenance (especially timing chain replacement), the only >> problems you can expect are those endemic to all older cars. > > Does the timing chain break ???? I would figure a chain would last > the life of the car, unlike belts....... A timing CHAIN is made up of a few 100 metal links that rub and rotate against each other. They are designed to do this and oil is continuously applied. But over time they will wear gradually and play will develop. Modern (last 20 years) engines are designed to deal with a bit of this play but at some point they need to be replaced. If they break bad things can happen. As to lasting the life of the car, when we drove cars 100K miles or less, well they usually did. (A 10 year old car with 100K miles in the 60s was usually a clunker worth little more than scrap.) I own cars with 210K, 135K, and 190K miles on them. "Life" has a new meaning than in days of old. David Ross > >> them. I would expect that as long as you ensure your SL gets > >> regular maintenance (especially timing chain replacement), the only [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > David Ross Unlike a belt, a chain very likely give you fair warning that it is about to fail. Excessive noise and engine performance will appear. My experience with chains is that a well lubricated chain will out last the car. (Especially where roads are salted.) The people who generally have problems didn't do proper oil changes. Yes the chains on S-series engines do last more than 200k miles. Its been discussed here in the past. > >>>Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L > >>>engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Does the timing chain break ???? I would figure a chain would last the life of the car, unlike > belts....... It's not a scheduled maintenance item like a belt, but it doesn't last forever. Chain breakage has been a problem for some owners due to problems with the timing chain tensioner system. Clean oil is essential for the timing chain tensioner on older Saturns to work properly. Generally you should replace the chain and the tensioner every 100,000 miles. If you have a 1995 with 146K miles then chances are the previous owner already replaced the chain once. > On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:34:53 -0400, "Steve" > <steven_dot_turetzky_at_unisys_com@deletethis.com> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Brian I do not completely disagree with the replies DLR or SMS, but feel that timing chain replacement is not necessary as preventative maintenance on an engine that receives regular changes of good quality oil. I agree that excessively extended oil change intervals can lead to tensioner seizure and loose chains that can wear on the chain case and that inadequate lubrication can accelerate chain wear. IMHO the likelihood of catastrophic failure of the chain is relatively slight on an engine that has received regular oil changes. IMHO a loose chain caused by wear or tensioner failure will be audible long before failure but does require careful listening as part of operational maintenance. I would change the chain any time the head needs to be removed. Just my .02 YMMV > I do not completely disagree with the replies DLR or SMS, but feel that > timing chain replacement is not necessary as preventative maintenance on [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > careful listening as part of operational maintenance. I would change the > chain any time the head needs to be removed. Yes, it's true that an owner that pays attention to the noise that a loose chain makes could just wait for the noise prior to changing it, rather than replace it at a periodic interval. I'm not sure what "good quality oil" is. All oil except some Amsoil products are API certified. However "regular" _is_ very important as the chain tensioner operation depends on the tensioner bore not becoming contaminated with varnish. >> I do not completely disagree with the replies DLR or SMS, but feel that >> timing chain replacement is not necessary as preventative maintenance on [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > chain makes could just wait for the noise prior to changing it, rather > than replace it at a periodic interval. IMHO, operation & driving style makes a huge differece in engine longevity. Giving an engine a short idle (and low RPM operation for the first few minutes until temperature normalizes) after startup allows oil to circulate fully and helps to avoid scuffing and premature wear. Avoiding high RPM (and 'spirited')operation will result in lower stresses and loadings on all engine parts. IMHO, wear on all engine components is significantly higher at 4,000 RPM than at 3,000 (and much much higher at 5,000). IMHO, S series saturns make their best volumetric efficiency, and fuel ecconomy / HP produced at 2,400 RPM and will give their best and longest service if they are opperated as close to this speed as much as possible.. > I'm not sure what "good quality oil" is. All oil except some Amsoil > products are API certified. However "regular" _is_ very important as the > chain tensioner operation depends on the tensioner bore not becoming > contaminated with varnish. One would think that all API certified oils should have similar quality and performance, but IMHE they just don't. I keep careful records of oil consumption and have noted significant variation in consumption rates with different brands, and further that while price is often an predictor of consumption rate, some top price and name brand oils have relatively poorer performance. Good record keeping is necessary to determine the brands that your engine likes the best. Of course it is worth noting that the by far the worst performing oil that will cause the fastest and most expensive repair bill is the 'low level on dipstick'. No mechanical component lasts forever, but gentle operation and careful observation to sounds combined with regular maintenance and oil changes will significantly increase service life. Maintenance is always a compromise between smaller (but still very expensive) repairs before failure vs. possible larger repairs later. In general I belong to the 'drive it until it breaks' school of thought as this prevents performing a lot of unnecessary repair, however when repairs are necessary I like to repair or recondition everything at that time. Replacing a timing chain is a lot of work and by the time the replacement is necessary ISTM that the head will probably benefit from a valve regrind and new valve guides and while the head is off it is not that much more work to drop the pan and do the rings and roll in new bearings. If a new clutch is needed then this may be a good time to do all the engine work while the engine is out. Buying a used car is always a crap shoot as there is seldom any complete record of maintenance and the young seller always claims to be a careful and mature driver who never abused the car or drove it in an overly 'spirited' manner. All that a new owner can do is to immediately change all fluids (particularly coolant and transmission), perform all maintenance on a regular schedule and then monitor (and record carefully)performance (and sounds), operate gently and hope for the best. It is always easier to get long service life from a machine that is purchased new and maintained and operated carefully throughout its service life. > >>Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L > >>engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > them. I would expect that as long as you ensure your SL gets regular maintenance (especially timing chain replacement), > the only problems you can expect are those endemic to all older cars. I dont believe 95' SOHC engines were effected by casting flaws. Only 3-4 years were effected. This is something that Misterhidethefacts wont ever mention... >> >>Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L >> >>engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > years were effected. This is something that Misterhidethefacts wont ever > mention... That's what Saturn *admitted* to and played in the press. According to my (since departed) Saturn dealer service manager, the problem was believed to have been corrected in the middle of the year *following* the upper range of publicized years. My 1999 SL had the symptoms and although they didn't admit to it being caused by a casting flaw and despite my vehicle being beyond the warrantee period, Saturn Division covered the parts costs (more than 1/2 of the total on a retail price basis). > The main issue, as far as I am aware, is the casting flaw that caused oil and coolant to mix either in the oil > crankcase or the coolant system. If your SL has over 100,000 miles, chances are this flaw has either been caught and > corrected or (more likely) your engine did not suffer from this flaw. There are other, less serious, problems such as > wrong plug gapping and fuel pump but, again, your car has either had them and they've been fixed or your car never had > them. I would expect that as long as you ensure your SL gets regular maintenance (especially timing chain replacement), > the only problems you can expect are those endemic to all older cars. Timing chain replacement is often neglected because there is no fixed service interval for replacement. It's a wear item, and a lot of owners have gotten in trouble by neglecting the chain (and related tensioning components), often because the "life of the car" timing chain story was presented to them at the time of purchase and they actually believed it. Combine this with the personal anecdotes of 200K miles on a chain, and it's a recipe for disaster (a large percentage of vehicle owners could also get 200K miles from a belt, but is it worth the risk?). If you ask a dealer's service department or independent mechanic whether the chain needs replacement, the owner is likely to get an affirmative answer because a) if they say no and the chain breaks or slips soon after the owner inquires about it then the owner will claim that they're liable, b) they want the money from the repair job, or c) the chain really needs replacing. Chains versus belts is one area where I'm not a retro-grouch. The reason for going to belts is a) they're quieter, b) they're more suitable for longer runs than are the norm on newer engines, c) it's easy and inexpensive to replace them on a routine basis, d) they're more reliable, and of course e) they're less costly for the manufacturer. > Timing chain replacement is often neglected because there is no fixed > service interval for replacement. It's a wear item, and a lot of owners > have gotten in trouble by neglecting the chain (and related tensioning > components), often because the "life of the car" timing chain story was > presented to them at the time of purchase and they actually believed it. Distortion #1. Consumers seldom even know what their vehicle has. No one can cite a dealer ever telling them that. Once again Scharf pulls fantasies out of his a.s. > Combine this with the personal anecdotes of 200K miles on a chain, and > it's a recipe for disaster (a large percentage of vehicle owners could > also get 200K miles from a belt, but is it worth the risk?). More like the anecdotes of Scharfy boy. > If you ask a dealer's service department or independent mechanic whether > the chain needs replacement, the owner is likely to get an affirmative > answer because a) if they say no and the chain breaks or slips soon > after the owner inquires about it then the owner will claim that they're > liable, b) they want the money from the repair job, or c) the chain > really needs replacing. And when they do they come on here and bitch about an upsale and then you and trolls like you perpetuate this information as a "bad experience"... > Chains versus belts is one area where I'm not a retro-grouch. The reason > for going to belts is a) they're quieter, b) they're more suitable for > longer runs than are the norm on newer engines, Yes thats why I've seen belts fail with 30k-60k miles on these "newer engines". Clearly you never worked in a car shop. > c) it's easy and > inexpensive to replace them on a routine basis, Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Often cost the same if not more. You doubt me? Simply research the NSX. The cost and effort of replacing a S-series saturn timing chain is on par with the timing belt replacement of most 4 cylinder Hondas or Toyotas. I speak from 1st hand experience, do you? > d) they're more > reliable, and of course And of course you're still wrong. > e) they're less costly for the manufacturer. Yes thats what I want... Manufactures going the 'cheap' route. > Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L > engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > (no insult to the retarded) My point is Mr. Fag isn't welcome to troll here. > Don't feed the troll. I'm not sure which is worse; "Misterfact" repeatedly posting about his problem with his Saturn years after he experienced it, or a current Saturn salesperson calling a former Saturn owner a fag and a retard. At least Al Clapsaddle had some class. In article <afc88efd-16c7-48bc-b5ff- 1defc146e32d@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, scharf.steven@gmail.com says... > I'm not sure which is worse; "Misterfact" repeatedly posting about his > problem with his Saturn years after he experienced it, or a current > Saturn salesperson calling a former Saturn owner a fag and a retard. Funny how the troll trio reappears after all this time... Misterfact, a senile old man that is desperatly trying to make an impact somewhere in life after clearly accomplishing nothing thus far. Spends his time ranting like a dictator and trying to turn victim's into offenders. Satyr, an athiest that spends more time bashing religion than a preacher could ever spend talking about God. How nice of him to grace us again with his presents. Yeah those darn cults... I mean, how dare anyone worship God or Saturn when they could be worshiping him. Now shutup you peasants and drink the Satyr-Aid. Steven Scharf, an arrogant fellow that thinks his own farts don't stink. Spends his time complaining about inexpensive products not being on par with higher priced products. A clipping pulled from a webpage by Scharf, long gone now. ------------------------------------------ "About the Webmaster Steve Scharf has been researching and writing about Saturn since 1995. He is a frequent poster to the rec.autos.makers.saturn Usenet newsgroup where he is one of the most knowledgeable and well-respected contributors. His other interests include bicycling, cross-country skiing, hiking, woodworking, electronics design, coffee, and travel. His other web sites can be viewed at www.geocities.com/scharf_steven" ------------------------------------------ > "most knowledgeable and well-respected contributors" In all the time I've been here no one ever respected Scharf and his knowledge was always lifted from other peoples post and distorted in the process, including mine. . . . lol internet trolls... On Apr 18, 11:08 pm, BläBlä <killfiltered.tro...@br3tludw1g.sn0m4n.m1st3rf4ct.s!rcre4p.c0m> wrote: > In all the time I've been here no one ever respected Scharf and his > knowledge was always lifted from other peoples post and distorted in the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > . > lol internet trolls... Indeed. Just like old times. > Steve I'm sure that most here already know of the many issues the 1.9L > engine had, but it's not an epidemic, trust me. The 1.9 in question hasn't [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > - Show quoted text - The fact is: Saturn corporation has a long history of hiding EPIDEMIC defects. They withold defect information as long as they can so they can get as many customers as they can to drive their car over the warranty period. Not only that- you should not expect every Saturn dealer and repair facility to warn you of epidemic defects which they have seen from other owners who brought their car into their shop. Some will warn you. If you don't like the complaints that I receive from owners- take it up with them. If you don't like the messenger- SHOOT ME! In article <3dc82b42-6a31-44c2-82b8-535dc79c08e1 @e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, misterfact@yahoo.com says... > The fact is: Saturn corporation has a long history of hiding EPIDEMIC Shame you dont hide your EPIDEMIC stupidity. > If you don't like the complaints that I receive from owners- take it > up with them. If you don't like the messenger- SHOOT ME! Trolls like you shouldnt go around making such offers. > Heh brainiac! You forgot to mention other "trivial things" like the > muffler straps on Saturn rust out in a year! In a year? Wow caught red handed in another lie. In another post you made about 4 years ago you said it broke after 2 1/2 years. (Which sounds typical for any car in Michigan.) Oh and here is your quote: > Muffler strap is made of cheap metal- ours rusted through and broke-two and a half years after new But what else would we expect from a perpetual liar such as yourself. If you're going to make stuff up at least be consistant about it. I guess its easy to forget such things when you cant even consistently spell your last name. > The fact is: Saturn corporation has a long history of hiding EPIDEMIC > defects. They withold defect information as long as they can so they > can get as many customers as they can to drive their car over the > warranty period. > Not only that- you should not expect every Saturn dealer and repair > facility to warn you of epidemic defects which they have seen from > other owners who brought their car into their shop. Some will warn > you. Just like (and no worse than) every other manufacturer IMHE. There are unflattering words that describe people who trust car dealers. Good luck, but get over it. > Just like (and no worse than) every other manufacturer IMHE. There are > unflattering words that describe people who trust car dealers. It's not really the dealer's fault. The dealer isn't going to replace an engine head at their own expense. In fact the dealers often admit to customers that there are problems that the manufacturer knows about but won't address. There is a big difference in how manufacturer's react to manufacturing problems that affect the vehicle to an extent that it becomes unusable, or even to problems that result from lack of clear maintenance schedules. It was amazing to see someone from Toyota's corporate office posting their response to the sludge problem on Usenet! "http://tinyurl.com/6o4fkr". Toyota is very concerned about their image and getting bad press. Owner loyalty is extremely important to them because they're looking long term, and a little money spent to bolster their image is money well spent. What's so sad about the casting flaw issue is that it would have cost them very little extra to just cover everyone regardless of time or mileage. Most of those other vehicles would either not have the problem anyway, or would be scrapped for unrelated problems before the problem occurred. The few extra repairs would have engendered a lot of owner loyalty. > Good luck, but get over it. Yes, that's good advice, but I think he has the mentality of not only never getting over being wronged, but letting the whole world know about it as well. >> Just like (and no worse than) every other manufacturer IMHE. There are >> unflattering words that describe people who trust car dealers. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > customers that there are problems that the manufacturer knows about but > won't address. You are correct, I was too specific, I should have said 'who trust the car industry.' > There is a big difference in how manufacturer's react to manufacturing > problems that affect the vehicle to an extent that it becomes unusable, or [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > loyalty is extremely important to them because they're looking long term, > and a little money spent to bolster their image is money well spent. I agree that there is sometimes great variability of response to customer concerns. It often seems to depend on current corporate profitability and on product margin. > What's so sad about the casting flaw issue is that it would have cost them > very little extra to just cover everyone regardless of time or mileage. > Most of those other vehicles would either not have the problem anyway, or > would be scrapped for unrelated problems before the problem occurred. The > few extra repairs would have engendered a lot of owner loyalty. I agree, especially regarding the few additional failures occuring after expiry of the extended waranty, but the bean counters and lawyers are in charge of company policy and we know they tend to be mean and short sighted in these matters. They probably saw no immediate gain in providing warranty coverage to mainly second (or third) owners who were not good prospects to purchase new models soon. I am sure that most of these people would have been happy to receive a partial warranty in the form of highly discounted new or rebuilt exchange head assembies which they could instal themselves and would not result in Saturn paying the dealers a large amount for warranty installation. Most corporations talk customer loyalty and repeat business but few actually invest the effort to develop it. I can only assume that the GM market research has shown that 'you can't please all the people all the time' and am sure that there is a point of diminishing returns. Toyota is a growing company that is developing market share while GM is a company with both declining market share and vision. How could Saturn discontinue the excelent fuel efficient S series (particularly the SW1 model) in favor of larger SUVs and niche market sports cars instead of developing an even more fuel efficient turbo diesel? They did this at a time when 'peak oil' and rising world oil demand and prices were quite obvious. Toyota has manufactured the similar Corrola model for many many years and IIRC it continues to sell well with much customer loyalty and repeat purchasers. I would have purchased a new replacement for my SW1 several years ago but they had discontinued the SOHC engine and Saturn (or GM) no longer manufacture any mini SW model that fits my needs or interest. > > Good luck, but get over it. > > Yes, that's good advice, but I think he has the mentality of not only > never getting over being wronged, but letting the whole world know about > it as well. > I agree, especially regarding the few additional failures occuring after > expiry of the extended waranty, but the bean counters and lawyers are in [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and would not result in Saturn paying the dealers a large amount for > warranty installation. Yes, they could have at least covered the original owner for the full amount and subsequent owners for a partial amount. Back when VW had 10 year warranties on engine and power train it transferred to subsequent owners at only five years. > How could Saturn discontinue the > excelent fuel efficient S series (particularly the SW1 model) in favor of > larger SUVs and niche market sports cars instead of developing an even more > fuel efficient turbo diesel? Because the S series was never profitable, and doing new versions of it only for Saturn and no other divisions would have been hugely expensive. No mass market, low cost vehicle can sell in quantities as small as Saturn sold the S series and ever recoup the development and tooling costs. The S series had fallen way behind the competition in areas such as crash safety. They could have done a new version as a joint effort with GM and still called it the SL, SC, SW, whatever, but there were too many negative connotations to previous buyers that had experienced reliability issues. > rising world oil demand and prices were quite obvious. Toyota has > manufactured the similar Corrola model for many many years and IIRC it > continues to sell well with much customer loyalty and repeat purchasers. Well using the Corolla name anyway. The Corolla of today bears little resemblance to the original Corolla. > would have purchased a new replacement for my SW1 several years ago but they > had discontinued the SOHC engine and Saturn (or GM) no longer manufacture > any mini SW model that fits my needs or interest. Well Toyota doesn't sell the Corolla wagon anymore either. They want people to buy SUVs. But I guess the Scion XB qualifies as a wagon, as does the Matrix sort of. >> Private wrote: >> How could Saturn discontinue the excelent fuel efficient S series >> (particularly the SW1 model) in favor of larger SUVs and niche market [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > people to buy SUVs. But I guess the Scion XB qualifies as a wagon, as does > the Matrix sort of. We can debate why the S series was not more profitable, but I suspect that it had more to do with management and marketing than engineering, or cost effectiveness. I have been very satisfied with the usability, utility, economy and reliability of the SW1, I will not be replacing it with any SUV. The VW Golf and Jetta look very good but the rising Euro will make them pricey. I will buy what I want to buy and not just what a seller has or wishes to sell me. Oil hit close to $120/barrel today and I suspect we will not see <$100 again, I am glad I do not need to sell (or buy fuel for) a Hummer or pickup truck. I am reminded of the difference between marketing and selling, marketing is having what the customer wants and selling is attempting to do business with what you have. Saturn (and GM) no longer has what I want to buy, which is an economical, small, light and fuel efficient mini-wagon. Just my .02, YMand needsMV \ > We can debate why the S series was not more profitable, but I suspect that > it had more to do with management and marketing than engineering, or cost > effectiveness. At one point Saturn claimed an "operating profit" which means that if they ignored the several hundred million dollars in development and start-up costs they were making a profit. Clearly they couldn't keep doing this over and over again, since GM wouldn't pay for such nonsense. It was always amusing to see people complaining that GM wasn't allowing Saturn to do its own designs anymore, as if GM was supposed to pour cash into the division forever with no hope of ever seeing a monetary return on the investment. One reason Toyota is so profitable is that they build massive numbers of each design in multiple factories all over the world so they amortize the development costs. These days if you can't sell a few million of each design then you don't do the design. That's why GM decided that Saturn would no longer do designs solely for Saturn. > > more Mr. Fag..... > > > > Please do not feed this troll. > > Good advice! If anyone wants to know how twisted MisterAct is just research his post archived in Google Groups. He gets his a.s handed to him regularly but he keeps posting the same discredited crap so repeatedly that it has become "epidemic". The replies are pretty funny and must humiliate Misteract to no end. I think my next car will be a Saturn. If I can find what I like made in the States that is. >> more Mr. Fag..... >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > grossly exaggerating and possibly lying outright about GM's handling of the problem, then I'm inclined to agree with > you. :) He got 100,000 miles out of a GM product. If he wanted a longer lasting vehicle he could have bought one. No one was holding a gun to his head and forcing him to buy a Saturn. Many people buy a vehicle with the full intention of keeping it for more than six years or 100K miles, but most of these people are smart enough to do a little research prior to making a purchase. Even before the casting flaw was discovered, Saturn's engine reliability problems were legendary and well-documented. "Misterfact" apparently did no pre-purchase research, and when this backfired on him he went non-linear. Marx404 is trying to sell Saturns, you can't blame him for wanting to gloss over what happened in the past, and get upset when anyone brings it up. The fact is that those early owners that couldn't get their vehicles fixed under the recall (or whatever GM called it) are unlikely to ever buy a Saturn or GM car again, and a few of them are upset enough about their loss to complain about it forever. OTOH, those that were covered and got their vehicles fixed are probably big fans of Saturn and GM for "doing the right thing." The current Saturn models bear no relation to the ones with the casting flaws. However it's still instructive to look at the Alldata TSB lists for competing models of vehicles of recent vintage as part of evaluating which vehicles to buy (see "http://www.alldata.com/"). Also look at the JD Power Long Term Dependability studies. While a good rating for three year dependability doesn't necessarily imply a good ten year rating, a poor three year dependability rating probably does imply a poor ten year rating. It's interesting that 2004 (for 2001 models) is the last year that Saturn was ranked above the industry average in dependability. "http://www.autoblog.com/photos/j-d-power-2007-vehicle-dependability-study/346679/" "http://www.autoblog.com/2006/08/09/j-d-power-dependability-results-are-out/" "http://www.curbzone.com/pit/2543-j-d-power-releases-long-term-vehicle-dependabil ity-study.html" "http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/jdpower/12513/" Saturn has some nice vehicles now, but those looking for a vehicle to keep for a long period of time would be advised to be wary. > >> more Mr. Fag..... > >> > >> Please do not feed this troll. > He got 100,000 miles out of Oh boy its Steven M. Scharf! Everyone bow down to his trollness! Steven M. Scharf's knowledge on cars is just one step above Misteracts... IOW it also holds no value. > However it's still instructive to look at the Alldata TSB lists > for competing models of vehicles of recent vintage as part of evaluating > which vehicles to buy Wont do you a damn bit of good. Toyota hides or wont allow most of its TSB's to be shown on Alldata. Most of GM's TSB's tell techs how to reinstall molding or trim and other trivial things. From my research on you its clear you're far from qualified to tell people anything about cars. It seems you simply regurgitate things you hear with bias. > If he wanted a longer lasting vehicle dur hur hur hur > In article <4807392d$0$84224$742ec...@news.sonic.net>, > scharf.ste...@geemail.com says... [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Most of GM's TSB's tell techs how to > reinstall molding or trim and other trivial things. Heh brainiac! You forgot to mention other "trivial things" like the muffler straps on Saturn rust out in a year! (Saturn can't afford a small piece of stainless steel) Look under ANY Saturn car an see a muffler ready to fall off. Aluminum heat shields over the exhaust system are held onto the frame with STEEL bolts. The bolt heads rust through the shields in a year and the shield fall off. Stabilizer links (those cars that have them) sieze up in a year. Dirt easily gets into the cheap, degrading rubber ball joint cups that are supposed to protect those ball joints. If you want to know more about "trivial" car problems- be sure to ask MisterfactLIES! On Apr 17, 10:15 am, misterfactLIES <misterfactL...@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <4807392d$0$84224$742ec...@news.sonic.net>, > scharf.ste...@geemail.com says... [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Most of GM's TSB's tell techs how to > reinstall molding or trim and other trivial things. Heh brainiac! You forgot to mention other "trivial things" like the muffler straps on Saturn rust out in a year! (Saturn can't afford a small piece of stainless steel) Look under ANY Saturn car an see a muffler ready to fall off. <snip> Except mine. > Heh brainiac! You forgot to mention other "trivial things" like the > muffler straps on Saturn rust out in a year! (Saturn can't afford a > small piece of stainless steel) Look under ANY Saturn car an see a > muffler ready to fall off. IMHE this is correct. > Aluminum heat shields over the exhaust system are held onto the frame > with STEEL bolts. The bolt heads rust through the shields in a year > and the shield fall off. I have not noticed this problem, but have not checked this location for corrosion. I have yet to have any vehicle that did not have some problem. I have a 1996 SOHC that was from the series with several head casting flaw problems but have not as yet experienced any problem and can only think that I got lucky. I learned of the possible problem just as the regular warranty was ending and had an oil and coolant lab analysis done to check for coolant/oil mixing both as the regular warranty and the extended head replacement period were ending but found no problem. I now have almost 200k miles on the engine with no serious problems. I do not expect any manufacturer to do a 100% replacement on a component that has lasted for a substantial portion of its expected service life. Saturn did offer a generous extended warranty to cover this head casting flaw. At this point I would not expect any help from Saturn if I have a head problem nor would I take it to a Saturn dealer if a repair was required. Good luck, but get over it. >Heh brainiac! You forgot to mention other "trivial things" like the >muffler straps on Saturn rust out in a year! (Saturn can't afford a >small piece of stainless steel) Look under ANY Saturn car an see a >muffler ready to fall off. I own *two* Saturns, and the muffler isn't "ready to fall off" of either one. >Aluminum heat shields over the exhaust system are held onto the frame >with STEEL bolts. The bolt heads rust through the shields in a year >and the shield fall off. Dissimilar-metals corrosion between aluminum and steel corrodes the *steel*, not the aluminum. If you're going to make up stories, at least try to make them a tiny bit convincing. When your tall tales contradict scientific fact, you expose yourself as a liar and a fool. >Stabilizer links (those cars that have them) sieze up in a year. Dirt >easily gets into the cheap, degrading rubber ball joint cups that are >supposed to protect those ball joints. Not a problem on *my* Saturns. Wonder why you have so much trouble with yours? > In article > <9fbecbfb-408c-4f42-978b-eab86abc40c3@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > fact, > you expose yourself as a liar and a fool. I have seen severe corrosion of aluminum caused by steel bolts touching aluminum combined with lots of road salt. You may be correct regarding the scientific theory of steel corroding electrically but IMHE the aluminum is usually consumed totally long before the steel. Good practice uses a thin plastic washer or sheet under a steel washer under the bolt head and nut. Just my .02 >I have seen severe corrosion of aluminum caused by steel bolts touching >aluminum combined with lots of road salt. You may be correct regarding the >scientific theory of steel corroding electrically but IMHE the aluminum is >usually consumed totally long before the steel. Good practice uses a thin >plastic washer or sheet under a steel washer under the bolt head and nut. It's not the steel causing the corrosion of the aluminum, it's the salt. Specifically the chlorine in the salt. >>I have seen severe corrosion of aluminum caused by steel bolts touching >>aluminum combined with lots of road salt. You may be correct regarding [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > It's not the steel causing the corrosion of the aluminum, it's the salt. > Specifically the chlorine in the salt. I readily admit that I am not a corrosion engineer, but to my uneducated experience this seems to be a classic case of galvanic corrosion, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_corrosion occurring between two dissimilar metals (steel and aluminum) in the presence of an electrolyte (road salt + water). Since aluminum is lower than steel in the galvanic series, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_series the aluminum will act as the anode and cause aluminum ions to migrate to the steel which is acting as the cathode. This galvanic corrosion is in addition to the normal corrosion that would be experienced by the aluminum caused by exposure to the road salt + water solution, (which may also have a galvanic component depending on any other elements present in the solution). I note that zinc (and cadmium) is lower than aluminum (and steel) in the galvanic series so zinc plated galvanized bolts would seem to cause the anode/cathode relationship to reverse, at least until the galvanic corrosion of the zinc anode exposes the steel and reverses the anode/cathode to again favor corrosion to occur in the aluminum, I suspect that this process gets quite confused and contributes to accelerated corrosion of all the metals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanising Just MHU, if I am misunderstanding this process, please enlighten me. >>>I have seen severe corrosion of aluminum caused by steel bolts touching >>>aluminum combined with lots of road salt. You may be correct regarding [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > >Just MHU, if I am misunderstanding this process, please enlighten me. When aluminum and carbon steel are fastened together and gotten wet *without* salt, it's the steel that corrodes, not the aluminum. Salt will cause damn near anything to corrode. > >>I have seen severe corrosion of aluminum caused by steel bolts touching > >>aluminum combined with lots of road salt. You may be correct regarding [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Just MHU, if I am misunderstanding this process, please enlighten me. You understand the process; what you're missing is that the steel bolts aren't actually in contact with aluminum at all. Aluminum oxidizes so rapidly when exposed to air that virtually all aluminum objects are covered with a very thin layer of aluminum oxide. *That* is what the steel bolts are in contact with. And aluminum oxide is a very stable compound, not readily reactive at all. That's why under normal circumstances, it will be the steel that corrodes and not the aluminum. Adding salt changes everything: chlorine is even more corrosive than oxygen, and free chloride ions will attack even aluminum oxide. > In article <9fbecbfb-408c-4f42-978b-eab86abc4...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, "misterf...@yahoo.com" <misterf...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Mr fabricator: WRONG! The steel heads on the bolts on my car remained intact. The hole in the aluminum shields rusted out to the point where they became bigger than the bolt. >> In article <9fbecbfb-408c-4f42-978b-eab86abc4...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.= >com>, "misterf...@yahoo.com" <misterf...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >hole in the aluminum shields rusted out to the point where they became >bigger than the bolt. Post a photo. >>> more Mr. Fag..... >>> [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] >Saturn has some nice vehicles now, but those looking for a vehicle to >keep for a long period of time would be advised to be wary. Consumer Reports shows that Saturns generally range from a little worse than average (Ion, Vue) to a lot worse than average (Relay, Sky). GM managed to start a cult with Saturn, but no one is drinking the Cool-Ade anymore. > >Saturn has some nice vehicles now, but those looking for a vehicle to > >keep for a long period of time would be advised to be wary. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Sky). GM managed to start a cult with Saturn, but no one is drinking > the Cool-Ade anymore. Judging from this thread, at least a couple of people still are drinking it. BTW, it's Kool-Aid. Still, I think that Misterfact should direct his energy to more worthwhile projects. Trying to convince people to not buy Saturns based on what happened with the casting flaw so many years ago, is not going to be a very productive use of his time. I haven't seen any new Saturns around my area. The dealership near me closed up shop several years ago, and I think people are reluctant to buy vehicles when there is no dealer close by. The current Saturns are probably no worse than other GM vehicles, but other than trucks, who's buying anything from GM? The local GM (Chevy) dealer in my town closed up unexpectedly one day, and eventually they sold the building and a huge Whole Foods went in. In March 2008, Toyota sold 40,487 Camrys, and Saturn sold 6,241 Auras, and that was a 12.9% increase for Saturn. quote...Marx404 is trying to sell Saturns...yada yada yada.. SMS, if that is all that you derive out of my being here you are sadly mistaken. Yes, I do work for Saturn and am proud of that fact. After being a member of SaturnFans and my family being Saturn owners for years, I decided to go to work for them. Does that make me biased? I do not hide what I feel and have frequently spoken candidly about issues that I have personally had with my own cars and good and bad services at Saturn dealerships. I am an owner first and foremost. What I post is out of personal experience and especially as a Saturn owner so please don't make assumptive comments. Nobody is glossing over anything. I am here to learn and to contribute what I can, not add to the troll posts. Want my insight to all this trollness and my view on Saturns? I am a car guy, I love cars. There are some great cars out there and some not so great cars. In comparison, with the few known issues such as the SOHC head flaw and early 1st gen ecotec timing chain issues (issues that were few and far in between and resolved by most reputable dealerships) this is a cheap but not cheaply made car which is safe and reliable and had a an extensive fan base of repeat owners. You can find good and bad if you look at any car and trolls love to dwell on the negative, others post both positive and negative but are looking to share and receive positive solutions. If you and Mr. Fag still don't get the difference, here's an example. If I post about a leaky sunroof for example, I am looking for others who have found a solution to a similar problem. I don't go online and troll trying to convince others it is a bad product. I am glad that you are able to differentiate previous Tenn. made Saturns from the new Opel based ones, yet it is disconcerting that past issues are still surfacing and being outspoken and misrepresented today. By the way, we have 3 SOHC S-series, one which has overheated twice (teen boys) and have never had cracked heads. Have I seen cracked heads? you betcha, it has happened. OTOH, I have seen 10 times as many very high mileage s-series with little or no problems still on the road. - fin. Signaturemarx404 _________________ >>> more Mr. Fag..... >>> [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > Saturn has some nice vehicles now, but those looking for a vehicle to keep > for a long period of time would be advised to be wary. > quote...Marx404 is trying to sell Saturns...yada yada yada.. > > SMS, if that is all that you derive out of my being here you are sadly > mistaken. While I don't like what "Misterfact" does either, you're statement of "I work for Saturn and not a word of this unreadable garbage is true" is just as bad, simply because you are clearly lying, as other posters have already pointed out. In fact, the casting flaw that caused the cracked heads is well known, and admitted by Saturn. Many owners were not compensated by GM because the recall program (or whatever they called it) had unreasonable time and mileage limits. Since the cracked head was caused by a manufacturing flaw and not anything that the owners did to their vehicle, their should not have been any limitation in terms of time or miles. If the flaw was rare then it wouldn't have cost GM much to fix all vehicles affected. It's always annoying when a manufacturer knows of a flaw in a product that remain latent for beyond the warranty terms, so that only those owners "lucky" enough to have the problem manifest itself during the warranty are able to get it repaired at no cost. ok, I admit that I am "clearly lying" about everything except that you are a troll and not a very nice person. Another fine example of why never to feed a troll. Ciao! Signaturemarx404 _________________ >> quote...Marx404 is trying to sell Saturns...yada yada yada.. >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > "lucky" enough to have the problem manifest itself during the warranty are > able to get it repaired at no cost. On Apr 12, 12:09 pm, "misterf...@yahoo.com" <misterf...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Saturn (GM) STANDARD OPERATING PROCEEDURE > [quoted text clipped - 175 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Yep. I work for Saturn. I hate to see people lie about a great company! Saturn makes great cars.I'de love to beat some sense into misterfact (Mike Korman), but since I'm too stupid and lazy to refute anything he says with facts; and I'm too cowardly to go over to his house and re-arrange his brain-I decided to go to a lot of expence and waste my precious time to find out who he is, where he lives and his phone number-then plaster it all over the internet.. That way someone else might go over to his house and do the job for me, or else call him up in the middle of the night. I guess I could sue him for defaming the company, but that means I'de have to face him in court and document all his lies, which again, I don't know how to do or am to lazy to do. Then too, he'd get MY name and address! misterfactLIES On Apr 12, 12:09 pm, "misterf...@yahoo.com" <misterf...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Saturn (GM) STANDARD OPERATING PROCEEDURE > [quoted text clipped - 175 lines] > > - Show quoted text - misterfactLIES... .I work for Saturn. I hate to see people lie about a great company! Saturn makes great cars.I'de love to beat some sense into misterfact (Mike Korman), but since I'm too stupid and lazy to refute anything he says with facts; and I'm too cowardly to go over to his house and re- arrange his brain-I decided to go to a lot of expense and waste my precious time to find out who he is, where he lives and his phone number-then plaster it all over the internet.. That way someone else might go over to his house and do the job for me, or else call him up in the middle of the night. I guess I could sue him for defaming the company, but that means I'de have to face him in court and document all his lies, which again, I don't know how to do or am to lazy to do. Then too, he'd get my name and address! Yep. Ug, I just wore out my scroll button. adding another one to my block list, bye! Signaturemarx404 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.