Inbound From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Sep 2001, 838 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1033 times:
I have to agree with JAL and TWA.....I like the front of it.
could someone post a pic of the rear and side view?
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6 Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1015 times:
Renault has no clue (Le Car, Alliance, ruination of AMC).
Trickijedi From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3266 posts, RR: 5 Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1003 times:
I notice that a lot of the new cars that come out nowadays have that curvy looking headlight glass containing tubes which house the projector beam. I'm not sure if it's suppose to look sexy because it's curvier. And the actual glass seems to get bigger every year. Personally, I think car manufacturers should refrain from have design. Makes the car look uglier. The Maxima is a perfect example.
Its better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than be in the air wishing you were on the ground. Fly safe!
Sophiemaltese From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2064 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 992 times:
I feel like a lot of the new cars that just came out have ugly rears. What is up with that? The new Accord...ick. That 7-series Beemer is gagalicious. What is it? The year of the ugly rear????
Twaneedsnohelp From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 977 times:
yeah 747-451, Skystar is right.
Just a few short years ago, Nissan was on the brink of extinction. The French came up with an emergency cash infusion and sent a team of their top executives led by Carlos Ghosn to Tokyo. He has really, almost single-handedly completely turned around the company. Possibly our decade's top car executive.
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6 Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 933 times:
Big Deal, so Renault is rich. In the US they ruined American Motors and gave us garbage like the Le Car, Allaince (R12) and kept their "best" in Europe. Added to the horrendous reliability of Renaults products was the lack of dealers here and those that were here treated the customers like dirt.
Secondly, Nissan went bad financially due to the Asian financial crisis not because of poor cars. They made and continue to make well made, relaible, sensibile though poorly styled cars and are quite successful in the US, unlike the horrible Renault. Nissan products in the US are well respected for offering a complete line of award winning products at a variety of price range. Renaults cars sold in the US were horrible. Let's see how much the "French" will do to move Nissan forward or will it be another disaster like Vivendi it appears that Renault still doesn't have a clue to "stylng" and are foisting their horrible influence on Nissan's as well.
Sccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5091 posts, RR: 28 Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 904 times:
The Renault of the Alliance and "le Car" is a distant memory, especially if you compare their current products and brilliant design ethic with their prior mediocrity. Although we no longer have any Renaults in market to compare, I am told by my European friends that the quality is there too.
In any event, but for Renault's capital infusion, Nissan would be either dead, or fully-absorbed by some other company. And Renault's management are largely responsible for the renaissance of Nissan's design department.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6 Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 894 times:
Scutter;
1989 is not all that long ago (when the average age of a car is about 7 years old) when Renault items were sold here. Among them the Alliance, Encore, Medalion and (Eagle) Premier. Except for the MEdallion and Premier, their product line was awful (though the products marketed here in the 70's were compelling, the 12, 14, 9 and Giordini Sport Coupe). The R5 was at best an answer to the oil crisis. It rode well and had alot of room, but the rust and poor engines were its down fall here and it soldiered on til 1980 again, not all that long ago considering there are quite a few Corolla's, Civic's and 210s floating around here from that era. The Alliance and Encore were alo roomy and comfortable in the French vein, but again with horrible reliability. Added for these models were the puny 1.1 and 1.2 litre engines they were equipped with which made for stupendous as mileage, but horrible driveability.
The Medallion and Premier were the products that would have made Renault in this country. Both were sized and priced competitively and in the case of the Premier, it was the only "Renault" that survived Chrysler's buy out of Renault's interest in AMC Jeep which Renault horribly managed. Their styling, equipment, power and roadability were more suited to US driving habits and environments. As amatter of fact, the chassis of the Premier served as the paltform for Chrylser's forst LH series of cars. The Medallion was a let down only in that it was abandoned here. The Premier was also marketed as the "Dodge Monaco" entry up until 1993. Of the Medallion and Premier, the Medallion still suffered from the indifference in quality that typifies Renault products here. The Premier was an excellent automobile.
Reanult thought they could effectively penetrate the US market by gaining an controlling interest in AMC, who at the time was dead on its feet except for Jeep whose good sales they hoped would give them the influx of cash to fund a Renault effort here until it would be self sustaining. However, Renault mis calculated in two ways. instead of bringing in some of their better designs to the US, they brought the lowest level models hoping to compete in the US economy car market-one dominated by the Japanese and by cars such as the Omni/Sundance/Horizon/K family Chrysler family and GM's X and J cars. Their products fared poorly even with effective pricing due to their poor performance and (later) reliability. Secondly, they let the Jeep line languish by not adding new or upgrading models which at the time of their control were already 20 year old designs. Renault bombed here because they did not have the business accumen to understand and manage the American market and had brought poor products here. I cannot comment on some their models not exported here because I am not familiar with them; however, reviews of thier US imports both in consumer and enthusiast publications are self explanitory. The business issues were well evident when Renault "gave up" by selling Jeep/AMC to Chrysler who had legendary success with Jeep and utilized an excellent(!) French desigined chassis as a basis for their award winning LH series of cars. What Renault should have done, was bring in a variety models from compact to midsize and freshen up some of Jeep's designs at the time.
As far as styling, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. But "this" beholder finds Renault's cars to be very, very ugly and disproportinate. One thing Renault always had going for them was design--and the most tasteful were the Guigario designs including the Giordini(??) and Premier, with all being fresh, contemporary and clean, without the "garishness" of today. Chopped angular roofs, "projector beam" (like those on current the current Altima and UNLIKE those on BMW 3 series for instance) lamps, huge wheels look too extreme for conservative US tastes. It may be fine for Jay Z but not for Joe Schmoe who is looking for a reliable sedan with a bit of style and reliability (such as the Camry, Passat or Impala).
As far as where Nissan would be? who knows. They certainly would not have gone out of business--despite typical French Euorcentric arrogance. Nissan (and Subaru) are successful products in their own right. The Japanese Government and MITI's protectionism reflex wouldn't have allowed it and secondly because of Nissan's size it would be to large for a complete "takeover". If Ford can have an interest in Mazda and GM have a stake in Isuzu (if dwindling now) any other number of auto companies US or European would have taken an interest in them. Renault's "success" in the US was "legendary". And as far as "French business accumen" they may or may not have "saved" Nissan; Vivendi comes to mind here in the US.
Sponsor Message: 
From France, joined Jun 2005, 0 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7695 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2000, 1363 posts, 
From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 5057 posts, 
From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Sep 2001, 838 posts, 
it appears that Renault still doesn't have a clue to "stylng" and are foisting their horrible influence on Nissan's as well.
Printer friendly format 
