You Need This: Single-owner Chevy Cavalier Type 10

Fun Fact:

The car was actually named for the attitude of General Motors, regarding their approach to quality control.

At a young age, this car taught me that a company needs to build quality into every product, even their entry level stuff. This car was so bad that I've never bought another GM product since.  I'm sure that they are much, much better now, but I still haven't recovered. 

It went to the junkyard, and I used the money to put a down payment on a Honda.
 

Turbine said:

No clue if it would actually fit, but I bet this would be a bunch of fun with a 3500 or 3900 swap.

Based on the turbocharged Pontiac version of these I'm going to say that more power doesn't make them better in any way.

A 401 CJ said:

Brings back memories.  The single most attractive girl at my high school had that exact same car in a different shade of blue.  She always parked in the same place and almost every male would check the parking lot to gauge whether or not she was at school that day.

It brings back memories for me as well but, none of them are pleasant.  I worked on those when they were new and boy were they crap.

In reply to Woody (Forum Supportum) :

I rented a ~2001 Cavalier in Hawaii once. That car was horrible. ~115hp and a *three*speed*automatic* (in 2001?!). It had like 10k miles and already felt ragged. It buzzed and wound itself out before slamming into the next gear and dropping revs massively. Still buzzed and whined on the low freeway speeds in Hawaii. Just all around an awful car. It made the Neon we rented on another island feel like a luxury car, crank rear windows and all.

ShawnG said:

Fun Fact:

The car was actually named for the attitude of General Motors, regarding their approach to quality control.

Does GM even have a QA/QC department? 

In reply to DirtyBird222 :

GM in a nutshell:

DirtyBird222 said:

ShawnG said:

Fun Fact:

The car was actually named for the attitude of General Motors, regarding their approach to quality control.

Does GM even have a QA/QC department? 

I worked in automotive parts manufacturing for 25 years. We made parts for everybody, and the GM specs for material and tolerances were generally the tightest.

Friends owned a mid-2000s impala (think). Interior quality felt terrible. Car seemed ok from an appliance point of view.

I think they'd have been better served with a Camry or some product like that from Japan or Korea.

Cavaliers are virtually unkillable. To render one inert takes levels of abuse that is beyond your comprehension.

In reply to Appleseed :

Early '80s Cavaliers were pretty much extinct before the end of the '80s where I live. The Opel powered J cars seemed to die a lot quicker than the wheezy 1.8/2.0 though. '80s were head gasket hell.

I do have to say the early 90s s-10 economy trucks with the Tech4 engine are virtually indestructible. 

Those things will run badly longer than some stuff will run at all.

In reply to ShawnG :

I think that applies to most post war Chevys.

In reply to ShawnG :

I guess... They don't run at all when you lose a tooth on your plastic timing gear.

Peabody said:

DirtyBird222 said:

ShawnG said:

Fun Fact:

The car was actually named for the attitude of General Motors, regarding their approach to quality control.

Does GM even have a QA/QC department? 

I worked in automotive parts manufacturing for 25 years. We made parts for everybody, and the GM specs for material and tolerances were generally the tightest.

Do tolerances equate to quality fit and finish of interiors that fall apart after a few years of use? Horrible driving mechanics? Plastic timing chain guides that fail at 60k miles? 

Peabody said:

DirtyBird222 said:

ShawnG said:

Fun Fact:

The car was actually named for the attitude of General Motors, regarding their approach to quality control.

Does GM even have a QA/QC department? 

I worked in automotive parts manufacturing for 25 years. We made parts for everybody, and the GM specs for material and tolerances were generally the tightest.

That doesn't equate to good product, that just means the engineers are too lazy to design a door handle that will work if the parts are a little off.  You can't compensate for poor design with tight tolerances.  You can have the best plastic timing chain guide possible, but if the guide should have been made out of steel, or if the product could have been designed to not need the guide in the first place, you're going to have trouble.

volvoclearinghouse said:

That doesn't equate to good product, that just means the engineers are too lazy to design a door handle that will work if the parts are a little off.  You can't compensate for poor design with tight tolerances.  You can have the best plastic timing chain guide possible, but if the guide should have been made out of steel, or if the product could have been designed to not need the guide in the first place, you're going to have trouble.

My point was that they take quality more seriously than you think. That was the discussion, not design, but feel free to hate GM, I don't really care.

In automotive there is a lot of collaboration these days with several manufacturers using the same design. Transmissions are a good example. There were a number of instances where we manufactured the same parts for multiple companies and the GM parts were always the better, higher quality part.

I was as surprised as anybody.

On a lighter note, mid 2000's, my coworker had a later version of that car with the 2.8 or 3.1. It needed a water pump and despite my protest, he took it to Canadian tire. He got a call the next day, it's protocol to replace the timing belt when doing a water pump, we're already in here,  it just makes good sense.

I told you so.

In reply to Peabody :

They can top off the blinker fluid while they're at it.

In reply to Peabody :

Don't bother.  Rule number one here is, it doesn't matter what the subject of the thread is, if it's about a GM product, you must hate with all your heart on GM.

In reply to Peabody :

I'm not hating on GM. I've had plenty of GM products, most of which were good. When it came time to get a new vehicle for Mrs. VCH, we picked up a brand new Traverse, and so far (17,000 miles in) it's been a great family vehicle, needing nothing but a replacement tire and oil changes. 

But, GM has had what seems to be at least their fair share of issues.  And since they still account for something like 1/4 of all new vehicles sold in this country, I guess those issues get amplified a certain extent.  

Also, quality is not something you inspect into a product. It has to be there from the design phase.  I've worked for GM, and other manufacturing companies, and that's been drilled into my skull ever since I was a junior engineer checking window seals on S-10 Blazers. 

racerfink said:

In reply to Peabody :

Don't bother.  Rule number one here is, it doesn't matter what the subject of the thread is, if it's about a GM product, you must hate with all your heart on GM.

I was a GM fanboy for a long time. My teenage dream car was a 1980 Camaro. Black with orange and red stipe package please.

I made a tidy side business out of 2nd gen F-body parts. I owned a 1973 Formula 400, a 1980 Turbo T/A, a 1981 Indy Pace Car and a 1984 Fiero Indy Pace Car. I still own a 1999 Suburban K2500 and a 2019 Silverado High Country.

GM deserved to go out of business but they didn't. They cranked out garbage as fast as they could because it always sold. They treated customers like idiots with their badge engineering plans.

They've gotten themselves more or less sorted out now. I like my new GM product. In fact, we chose it over three other Fords and a GMC truck that we test drove.

Unfortunately, the service department out here is still firmly rooted in 1978. The "You need a whole new transmission" sort of upsell treatment. I went there for service and was lied to, ripped off and upsold.

That's why my Suburban is at the Chrysler dealer for a provincial safety inspection.

So no, f--- the General Motors of the 70s, 80s and 90s. They deserve the hate.

In reply to racerfink :

I own an 82 Z28 Camaro that I bought new, a 67 Camaro with an LS, and a Silverado with a 4.8. 

4 cylinder Chevrolets universally suck, but an early Cavalier with a 1.8, an carb and a 3 speed automatic is the height of suck, in most every way possible.

Except the seats, which are the same ones in my Camaro, and I find adequate...And this form a guy who drived Volvos.

In reply to Streetwiseguy :

The Lear-Siegler seats in my Indy Fiero were a close second to the seats in my Volvo 850.

In reply to ShawnG :

Can I jump on the GM seat love?  We just completed a family road trip in the afore-mentioned Traverse, 2600 miles over 10 days, and never once did my back bother me. And this is a base model, too, cloth, non-power chairs.