Why do Europeans hate American cars?

Discussion in 'Automotive' started by adamj932, Jan 15, 2014.

  1. Smiling Wolf

    Smiling Wolf
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    9
    These cars need to be registered as a minibus in Scandinavia in order to legally drive on the road, which is in conflict with most of the Suburban’s that do make it into Norway are registered as small trucks and can’t have that many seats. And a ford transit or a VW Caravelle is 3 times cheaper to buy and drive.

    I know.
    We had a 98 suburban with 5 seats but it was too expensive to own, too expensive to drive, it broke down all the time and the parts were just too hard and expensive to get. Norway is also the most expensive country in the world to fill gas so that didn’t help either.
     
  2. nandee

    nandee
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2013
    Messages:
    109
    And what about VW transporters? Aren't those available in the states?
    In the EU you can drive them with "normal, car" licence.
    Or the Honda Oddyssey? Sure, it doesn't have a V8, but isn't that a big car?
     
  3. Mitki4a

    Mitki4a
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    256
    Simply because they are extremely impractical for Europe. Their fuel consumption is higher than a jet fighter and this isn't very good for a country were the gas costs around 1.5 euros. And most of them (because of the odd automatic transmissions and huge weights) are dreadfully slow compared to their euro equivalents with much smaller engines and better fuel economy. I admit that I really like the design of some ones but in any other way they are worse than the euro cars.
     
  4. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    I'm UK not states. Transporter is what, a van with seats, as is the transit. Same car pretty much.
    Never seen an oddysey on UK roads.
     
  5. Dr.Bullshit

    Dr.Bullshit
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Messages:
    105
    Woops, I meant Dacia Sandero, don't know why I said Skoda Fabia. I actually think it's one of the nicest wagons.

    Anyway, it's the point that I compare cars fom completly different classes... That's my entire point... Some cars are high class and some are badly engineerd pieces of shit.

    Again, no idea why I said Skoda. Skodas making decent ars right now.

    And to be fair with Dacia, their cars suck, but atleast theyre realistic and put a really low prices on their products.
     
  6. antil33t

    antil33t
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2013
    Messages:
    8

    A shogun isn't a V8 Either, probably being in the UK i'd bet it being a diesel variant.

    same as the Pajero/Montero sold elsewhere, nice cars
     
  7. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    Its a big hungry diesel alright, with mums driving my stepdad has calculated it only doing 10mpg aswell which is doubly annoying considering diesel costs more than petrol here.
     
  8. logoster

    logoster
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    2,082

    Diesel costs more than gasoline here as well (also, technically gasoline makes more sense then petrol, as there's petroleum in both diesel and gasoline)
     
  9. vidkidd1392

    vidkidd1392
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2014
    Messages:
    15
    Its funny because that's where most of us Americans originated.....
     
  10. aljowen

    aljowen
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,670
    Traitors :p
     
  11. kruleworld

    kruleworld
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    181
    ironically, it costs less to produce than petrol. so it's the petrol companies that win. the problem with 'gasoline' is it's not a GAS.
     
  12. thevidmaster

    thevidmaster
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2013
    Messages:
    202
    because our cars (eg. Challenger, Camaro, Mustang) take up 1.5 parking spaces over there
     
  13. robfather

    robfather
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2013
    Messages:
    6
    Simple: european cars are just more practical. But that has been said 1,000 times before.
    I live in the U.S. and don't like some american cars myself. My dad just bought a Ford Fusion (mondeo in europe) and its pretty nice. They sold it in europe with everything almost identical except for the right-hand/left-hand drive and the name badge on the back so it's pretty european. But its still not as nice as some similar sized european cars like the BMW 5 series or Audi 7 series. And yes i know there is a major price difference but with the Audi and BMW you get more for your money. Example; the ford has a 4 cylinder while its competitors have an optional V6 or V8
     
  14. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    Most of europe is also left hand drive. Britain are pretty much the only eurozone country with right hand drive cars.
    The american grill is changed, but thats just a piece of plastic and I dont think the inline 3 engine is available as an option in the US but that isnt an option you want :p
     
  15. logoster

    logoster
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    2,082

    ok? i said gasoline, i never said anything about GAS being correct (yes, ik it has the word gas in it, but that doesn't mean it's called gas (even though people do anyway, it's actually not supposed to) and technically, gasoline does BECOME a gas)
     
  16. shockwaffleman

    shockwaffleman
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    153
    I haet avry us car, dey sux!!1!1one1!

    Muscle cars are essentially my favorite type of cars, and the sound when revving DAT ENGINE can't really be beaten by any other car.

    FUN FACT ABOUT MR. WAFFLE: Back when I was a baby and I was crying or was just really sad, if I saw a muscle car or heard a V8, I would almost instantly stop crying and smile or laugh.
     
  17. Masterjoc

    Masterjoc
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages:
    296
    to be fair with fuel consumption: US Manufactors give you a more real info than european manufactors due the different tests.
    If a Ford Mustang needs 12liter per 100km, you can be sure you can reach 12l on a normal way too.
    If european Car with V8, 500 PS Info says 8l per 100km, you will never reach the 8l^^
    Most V8 (500ps) european cars need actually the same amount of fuel, around 11-12l like us cars


    But not many europeans know that :(
     
  18. BBQ

    BBQ
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    551
    That's because when they do these tests, they use very high octane fuel, maybe 98-100. That's why the consumtion is more with "normal" octane fuel.
     
  19. KiloHotel

    KiloHotel
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    Messages:
    388
    Actually only the vapors burn, which is kinda like a gas. Better than using "petrol" because that's just the shortened version of "petroleum" which is a form of crude oil. Gas is a shortened version of "gasoline" which is a refined product.
     
  20. spavatch

    spavatch
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
    Messages:
    56
    Well, I don't hate them, I find them interesting in their own peculiar way. As a matter of fact I'd love to own a Crown Vic based 2011 Ford Police Interceptor in single tone black or dark grey livery and with a searchlight on the front left fender - a definitive American full size sedan. They are, however, or were - to be more precise - poorly engineered, at least until mid 2000s. Why, you ask?
    Okay, here comes the boring part. Since the Americans were fond of using cart springs for suspension (until the end of frame based sedans era), something Europeans have dropped back in the late 60s, and always mistaken size for luxury (I'm sorry, but that's true, there's nothing bad in making them big but the principle stands) let's focus on the engines. Let's take the Viper RT/10 as an example of an early 90s American supercar, America's motor industry's crown achievement, and compare it to a then-contemporary competitor Ferrari 512TR (not the top of the range though, there still was the F40) and... how about some early 80s European city runabout, just a bit like Covet or even smaller. In Viper you find a naturally aspirated OHV 8 liter V10 with 2 valves per cylinder made from two truck engines, generally already outdated at it's launch, pushing out merely 400 bhp (or less in some states), which is somewhere around 50 bhp per liter. On the other hand in 512TR there's a 4,9 liter flat-12 (technically a 180 deg. V12) with DOHC layout per bank and four valves per cylinder, producing 428 bhp, which is 86 bhp per liter. Let's stick to the Italians, shall we? Even the cheapest econoboxes like Fiat Panda had modern OHC engines with specific output similar to the Viper's and their sportier cousins reached 100 bhp per liter by using a turbocharger bolted on top of a 1.4 liter unit sporting an intercooler, oil cooler, sodium filled valves etc etc. Some would probably say 'hey, you can always blow them with dual turbos and get a result like Vector got in their W8' but that's still far from 163 bhp/l the F40 did. I wouldn't mind if that low specific output would translate to outstanding durability but no, it didn't. To sum things up - Viper's powerplant is more like a result of barn-engineering done by people in hard hats rather than of science experiments by people in white coats and protective goggles. And that was the range topper, the elite. Popular full size people carriers produced like 160-190 bhp from 5-6 liter V8s, figures achieved by European 2-litre four banger compact hatchbacks with half the fuel consumption. Different driving conditions have nothing to do with that. If I had all those interstates to wander around I'd do my best to do 50 MPG, not 10, and still have fun doing it. Here ends the boring part.
    Americans have always been supportive of their own produce and I highly respect that. Still, 80s or 90s Cadillac or Oldsmobile sedans were nowhere near 5-series BMWs, E-class MBs or V8 Audis in terms of technical sophistication. Things are going better recently, the engines are more and more efficient and environmentally friendly, probably because of the end of 'f*** fuel economy' approach, so popular in the previous years. But to be honest, I'm not sure if it's all American technical thought or is it imported. Chrysler's been bought out by Fiat, Ford has it's R&D centers in UK and Germany, GM... may be the last fortress of engineering. You can't make up for 30 years of sloppiness in design in just 10 years either so the stereotype stands strong. Plus, US models still differ greatly even within the same vehicle class. That's why we don't see many American cars on European roads. The only ones that have a chance of achieving a rather moderate commercial success are those that stand out, like Jeeps (synonymous for good all terrain performance, made in Austria modified a bit to suit European needs) or top of the range Chevys and Fords (Corvette and Mustang - performance cars for a hot compact money). I guess that would be all.
     
    #220 spavatch, Jun 7, 2014
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2014
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice