Car Bias Question

[CKDragon]

Hi,

I'm a 19 year old male and few months ago I bought a brand new 2002 Saturn SC2 Coupe. Now, I was happy with the purchase because Saturn has a decent reliability reputation, it's economical and I personally like how it looks. I can already hear the car buffs in here scoffing but I'm honestly not sure why everyone sees Saturn as such a bad brand. I can understand that people want more powerful cars. I can appreciate that, I want a more powerful computer. Power was not an issue for me in my car choice, however.

I'm curious as to why a lot of people 'in the know' dislike the Saturn brand inparticular. Actually, this could apply to quite a few brands of cars.

This is the exact car that I bought.

The main thing for me is that I'm happy with my purchase of my car. I hope this message comes across as intended as an actual request for information. I've seen a lot of car threads degenerate into flame wars, that's not what I'm looking for.

Thanks for your time,

CK

 

[Ladies Man]

i don't think anyone really dislikes the company or the car

most people just feel for the amount of money you spend they would have rather gotten something different

 

[iamwiz82]

my buddy has a saturn. It has somewhere around 90hp. It blazes by everything....

 

[cx32m4]

imao, saturns are just too ugly

 

[CKDragon]

Well, mine has 124 hp, but as long it goes 80 mph... maybe a bit more.

CK

 

[StageLeft]

Primarily I hate the cult attitude that the commercials promote. Other than that no real complaints.

 

[Skail]

Probably because most car buffs are into BMW and Volkswagen and stuff. I loathe cars, but according to what I've heard the worst two cars ever to have are the Plymouth Neon and Geo Metro. The funny thing is that one time I was driving to the *gag* orthodontist with my mom, and I saw this car. I'm like, Oooh, that's a nice looking car. I wonder what it's called, maybe I would want it when I can drive. I look at the name, and to my horror I read Geo Metro. I thought that was pretty wierd. I don't even know what's wrong with Geo Metros, and there's probably nothing wrong with your Saturn either.

 

[GasX]

I have a 4WD Chevy Blazer. Where I live, it's a necessity. Saturns wouldn't cut it for me.

Saturns make a nice reliable economic get around car. If that is what you want and you like it's style more power to you. If I didn't need an SUV, I'd be driving an old Mustang (like before the SUV), but that' me.

 

[Thegonagle]

Because they haven't really changed much since 1991 (except for new a new plastic body). GM was on to a good thing back then, but they basically quit as soon as it was released.

Toyota just released a new Camry, and you can bet the Camry team is already working on the next generation to be released 5 years from now. You can bet Honda started working on the next new Accord in 1998 (or even late 97). The leaders don't rest. GM does. They release a new generation of their bread and butter sedans every 6-9 years. Look what's been happening to their market share ever since Toyotas and Hondas caught on here in the US.

 

[iamwiz82]

honda changes TOO often, IMHO. Every other month seems like a new design for the civic or accord is being shown.

 

[LAUST]

Just ignore them, their jealous cause they spent more money on a car that only goes from A to B, yours also does but with less gas and a cheaper sticker....

 

[vi edit]

Like Garfang said, it's the same dang thang they released 10 years ago. I've driven a couple Saturns as well. I find them underpowered, cramped, and not exactly exuding a solidly built feeling that would save me in a wreck like a solid german car does.

As others have said, I just think I can do way better for my money. I don't really care about their no hassle dealerships. No hassle just means no room to barter.

 

[Thegonagle]

Honda used to be on a 4 year cycle, but now they're on a 5 year cycle. Personally, I always thought that it was cool that they had a completely different car out under the same nameplate so often.

 

[CKDragon]

<< Because they haven't really changed much since 1991 (except for new a new plastic body). GM was on to a good thing back then, but they basically quit as soon as it was released.

Toyota just released a new Camry, and you can bet the Camry team is already working on the next generation to be released 5 years from now. You can bet Honda started working on the next new Accord in 1998 (or even late 97). The leaders don't rest. GM does. They release a new generation of their bread and butter sedans every 6-9 years. Look what's been happening to their market share ever since Toyotas and Hondas caught on here in the US. >>



That makes sense. I guess because I'm not up on the scene, I did not realize this.



<< Just ignore them, their jealous cause they spent more money on a car that only goes from A to B, yours also does but with less gas and a cheaper sticker.... >>



That's my feeling... I'm kind of proud that I'm financing my own new car at 19. I was surprised when a lot of 'friends' rained on my parade. That's why I figure I'd ask the experts in ATOT.

CK

 

[BigSmooth]

Echoing others, Saturn's coupe uses a platform that is relatively ancient, and I don't care for the looks of their cars in general. Other than that, I think they're OK cars, and I can remember recommending one to someone on this board at least once.

 

[LAUST]

<< Toyota just released a new Camry, and you can bet the Camry team is already working on the next generation to be released 5 years from now. You can bet Honda started working on the next new Accord in 1998 (or even late 97). The leaders don't rest. GM does. They release a new generation of their bread and butter sedans every 6-9 years. Look what's been happening to their market share ever since Toyotas and Hondas caught on here in the US.

That makes sense. I guess because I'm not up on the scene, I did not realize this. >>


Don't let this bother you either tho

the longer the model runs the more fixes it goes through, every new model year brings on a new issue, if you keep a chassis as long as you can you not only perfect it but parts price goes WAY down.

I like when a model runs for 4 or 5 years if it's a good operating one.

 

[Freejack2]

I've owned Saturns since 95 and they are pretty nice cars.

I had the 98 Saturn Coupe and if the 2002 is the same I can tell you it'll maintain 120+ mph for extended periods of time. If they are still using those crappy Firehawk Gta's, get rid of them and get the SH30's instead. There is a world of difference between the two tires. The GTA's perform like crap in wet weather and aren't much better in dry weather, the SH30's though have incredible wet and dry handling.

The 124hp dohc engine on the Sx2 series is not all that bad. When I got my 2001 SL2 I tried the Honda Civic EX (yes I've posted this a zillion times ) and I found the EX wasn't as powerful, and the interior looked cheap compared to the Saturn's interior.

As for Garfang's complaint, most vehicles haven't changed much since 1991, the only real change to the the Civics (that every other carmaker hasn't alread done) since 91 has been the vtec engine. While the Vtec engine requires less maintenance it doesn't get the performance of a dohc with equal hp.
Granted the 2002 Saturns still use a DOHC engine but a number of improvements have been made on it. One right off the top of my head is in 99 (or thereabouts) they made the engine run quieter (without loss of performance too!)

Saturn isn't some cult, it's just some nicely made American cars with affordable payments.

 

[freebee]

People tend to be biased towards cars because for the most part, they are highly subjective purchases. The automotive market has evolved and improved to the point in which there are very few "bad" cars left. Most of the top cars in any segment are essentially equal...with the only difference being in their respective flavors.

The only reason I can see that most people would not choose a Saturn, is given the current assortment of choices, those factors that one might value in a Saturn, (dealership experience, reliabilty, etc.) are readily available in lower-priced, better-performing cars. That said, the same argument can be made in purchasing a Lexus LS430 over an MB S-class...so its really what makes you happy that counts.

 

[Thegonagle]

Yeah, you should be proud of paying for your own new car. Good luck with that, just make sure you stay employed at all times until it?s paid off.



<< I think they're OK cars, and I can remember recommending one to someone on this board at least once. >>



Yeah, I don't think they're that bad, don't get me wrong. I'd buy a used one if it was cheap and in good shape. I actually rather admire their relative simplicity under the hood.

 

[CKDragon]

<< If they are still using those crappy Firehawk Gta's, get rid of them and get the SH30's instead. There is a world of difference between the two tires. The GTA's perform like crap in wet weather and aren't much better in dry weather, the SH30's though have incredible wet and dry handling. >>



I've slid a few times, I will definitely look into this. I was under the impression that tires wouldn't make a big difference due to the light weight of the car.

Thanks for the info,

CK

 

[mithrandir2001]

As a twentysomething in Saturn's crosshairs, I'm put off by their "young cultist" image. Buying a Saturn would seem like succombing to their touchy-feely marketting gobbledygook, so I'm being "rebellious" but not considering Saturn at all. Saturn was created to ween young people off imports, but I'm not about to join their little fraternity when their product is still incompetitive with the real deal (a Honda or Toyota).

What about VW? Their advertising is quite "young cultist". But Volkswagen sells on the driving experience and their counter-culture/Euro image. You're hip and cool for buying a VW, but prudish and neo-puritan for buying a Saturn...philosophically anyway. And of course, Saturn is a GIRL'S car. I mean, you can argue this, but so many young women out of college buy Saturns. It's like a ritual.

I'm turned off by Saturn's inability to keep up with the market. The S-series sedans are SO TIRED! When the car line came out around 1990, they were neat little cars, much better than GM's Cavalier and Sunbird (DOHC 4-cyl engine in a domestic car...wow!!!). But they haven't really changed much over the last 12 years, while the imports have gotten much better and far more stylish.

Saturn's one-price strategy has also backfired because their cars are priced above market equilibrium price. I don't want to be forced to pay some hard-coded, fixed price. Let me wheel and deal and haggle with a saleman for the best price. I personally don't mind the experience at all!

I'm quite negative on Saturn because of their inability to make me want their cars. As a car person, to want is to praise.

 

[CKDragon]

<< And of course, Saturn is a GIRL'S car. I mean, you can argue this, but so many young women out of college buy Saturns. It's like a ritual. >>



This is a common point I've run up against.

Beauty is obviously subjective. Well, my girlfriend likes how it looks. As long as she likes it I suppose that we're the only people who's opinions truly matter. Seems my power-hungry friends wouldn't have been happy with anything I got. I keep getting Nissan Maximas and Suburu WRX's thrown into my face. Yea, they would've been great, but most likely for considerably (Considerably = $3000+) more. Not to mention it's not like they're actually driving these cars.

CK

[EDIT]Added my definition of considerably so I'm not misunderstood[/EDIT]

 

[Thegonagle]

OK,here are the changes on the Civic, starting with a completely new design, outside, inside, and underneath, in 1988.

[*]'88 - New model with great handling. The car is so refined that it makes Car and Driver's 10 Best list. They had new 16 valve SOHC engines in most models. The 1.5 L had throtle body fuel injection and 92 HP. The 1.6 L had multipoint fuel injection and 108 HP.
[*]'90 - New bumper covers and tail lights, and unfortunately, motorized seatbelts on the 4 doors.
[*]'92 - Completely new body and interior, and they reworked the existing suspension. They increased the travel, softened the ride and slighly dulled the handling. The 1.5 L engine gets multipoint fuel injection and 102 HP. The 1.6 L SOHC gets VTEC and 125 HP. The effect of VTEC is like swapping from an economy cam to a performance cam instantly and automatically at 4000 RPM. Cool, huh?
A 92 HP VTEC-E engine is also introduced on the VX hatchback. The effect of this VTEC engine is like switching from an 8 valve engine to a 16 valve engine at 3000 or so RPM, resulting in excellent fuel economy if you keep the revs low and adaquate performance when you need it just by revving the engine. Even cooler!
[*]?93 ? 2 door version introduced, making rice boys drool.
[*]'96 - Again, an all new, larger body and interior. The platform is basically the same, but they made some improvements in the details. The 1.5 L SOHC engine grew to 1.6 L and 106-108 HP. The 1.5 L VTEC-E engine also grows to 1.6 L and power is vastly improved, bumped up to 115 HP. They also introduced their CVT, optional with the VTEC-E engine in the HX.
[*]?98 ? New bumper covers, tail lights, etc.
[*]2001 ? Completely redesigned body, interior, suspension, platform, engines, etc.
[*]2002 ? Minor tweaks to the suspension.

So, the previous Civic platform was with us for 13 years, with major changes after 4 and 8 years. The current Civic is an all-new design.

 

[Freejack2]

<< Saturn's one-price strategy has also backfired because their cars are priced above market equilibrium price. I don't want to be forced to pay some hard-coded, fixed price. Let me wheel and deal and haggle with a saleman for the best price. I personally don't mind the experience at all! >>



Oh yes I just love spending 4 hours arguing with a dealer to get TMV (True Market Value)
Here are some prices from Edmunds (MSRP is retail, TMV is what a person should pay)

Saturn SL2 - MSRP & TMV $14525
Honda Civic LX - MSRP $15,910 TMV $14913
Nissan Sentra GXE - MSRP $15089 TMV $14653
Dodge Neon ES - MSRP $15935 TMV $15148

Looks to me like the Saturn TMV is the same as the competition's TMV. I'd scarcely call it above market equilibrium.

 

[The Stigenator]

My dad drives an 1999 Saturn SW2 station wagon. I do drive that when they are out of station (like they are going to be next week). Anyway my only dislikes for the car (the SW2) happens to be ergonomics. The 1999 model (and even teh 1997 SL2 - my friends) has the same problem the front seats are not comfy. The lumbar support (manual support) isnt too easy to get used to. But once you sit in that car for a while it does grow on you. My major complaint about the saturn is the "turn indicator stalk".. its too bulky and round and short. You literally have to fight with it to hit the turn indicator. It bugs me that saturn hasnt fixed that yet even though I have complained to them about it. The interior dash does have a feel of cheap plastic, but its solid nevertheless. The driving position once you have got into the low cockpit feels very good on the long run.

My other complaint is specific to the SW2/SW1. The rear seats are too low and they dont have a head rest. A relatively tall guy like me (at 5'10") cant sit comfortably because there is no head rest.. in an accident the neck injuries will be certain. On top the bottom part of the seat that the "butt" rests on is rather small, and coupled with teh low backrest.. its a horrid position. The bottom being small is also part of the other saturns.

As for handling, I love hte handling on the saturn SW2, it can canyon carve with teh best. Its handling is tight and there is hardly any body roll. The suspension and the tyres do their job well.. though in wet weather I beg to differ. The car's manual gearing is pretty horrid, the first of two gears are very tall and you have to get down to the lower gears to take the turns. On top the gear lever is rather uncomforatble to use. Its too tall by height and the movement has no feel to it. The brakes are good for this car, and can stop it in emergency situations very well.

All in all the car is light and agile and despite its obvious flaws I would still buy it cause its cheap to run and cheap insure.