My opinion is that if the vehcile costs over , oh, say, $10,000, that at
least the paint should be perfect.
My 92's is pretty damn nice, save for the peeling problem that I had a
couple years back (repainted roof free of charge by dealer after my
incessant griping!)
The point is, we ALREADY pay a premium for these vehicles. ANd a paint job
may be difficult to "perfect" for you are I without a LOT of time spent, but
assembly line painting can be remarkably nice. Orange peel and scratches
on a brand new vehicle should NOT be seen as acceptable.
Would you accept things like an ALMOST scratch free windshield or ALMOST rip
free interior?? I doubt it.....Why reduce our standards for paint just
because it seems like a time consuming process for most of us??
As far as the Dakota not being a Chrysler's Premium product (as compared to
the Genreal's Vette).....SO WHAT??
Compare the price of a New Dak or Ram to a base Vette. NOT a whole lotta
difference, I believe......
The price of a vehicle or even its genereally intended use should NOT allow
the manufacturer to get away with sloppy workmanship....
Just my 2 cents...
>I've seen some pretty shoddy paint jobs on GM trucks. The Corvette is
>the General's prestige product. I would expect a fine finish on a 'Vette,
>a Cadillac, a Lincoln or a Chrysler LHS. We own TRUCKS. TRUCKS go to work,
>play in the mud, parked outside while the wife's car sits cozy in the
>garage. I know it'd be nice to get an A-#1 paint job, but it takes time
>to do that, and time is money. How much more would you pay for a perfect
>paint job? Now ask the whole Dakota customer base [this is a list full of
>enthusiasts].
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:04 EDT