I think it more falls in to the category of cost vs effectiveness.
Why spend $100 on a part when you can get a $30 that's nearly just as reliable but doesn't last quiet as long. If you do that it gives you an extra $80 to buy a better more important part. I think GM's have good drive trains. But iv never owned a remotely newer GM.
I think the main thing GM is guilty of is a lack of serouis field testing and prioriting parts.
Honda makes good cars but I believe Honda's best years where in the 90's back when Honda was really trying to prove themselves and their cars. They made virtually nothing on there budget cars since they knew for most buyers it would be there first car (teenager/college student) they wanted to make a car for this market to develop a life/brand loyalty.
They knew in the future they could get theses people to buy their higher end cars. I think after 2k their gpquality went down and has been going down ever since.
Why spend $100 on a part when you can get a $30 that's nearly just as reliable but doesn't last quiet as long. If you do that it gives you an extra $80 to buy a better more important part. I think GM's have good drive trains. But iv never owned a remotely newer GM.
I think the main thing GM is guilty of is a lack of serouis field testing and prioriting parts.
Honda makes good cars but I believe Honda's best years where in the 90's back when Honda was really trying to prove themselves and their cars. They made virtually nothing on there budget cars since they knew for most buyers it would be there first car (teenager/college student) they wanted to make a car for this market to develop a life/brand loyalty.
They knew in the future they could get theses people to buy their higher end cars. I think after 2k their gpquality went down and has been going down ever since.