16th Jun 2011, 02:23
You have misunderstood what Initial Quality Survey (IQS) is all about. That is mix between subjective and objective factors, including questions like "do you feel that your current car is good value?".
It's the VDS that's most objective and that best measures the quality of the cars. But even VDS has a lot of flaws, including that it doesn't measure the severity of the problem. A problem is a problem; a blown transmission is measured the same way as your in car CD player not working, or you having a rattle in one of the doors.
The best statistics is the one that measures the actual money spent on repairs, because that statistics takes into account the severity of the problems.
16th Jun 2011, 12:53
It's also key to note that most surveys being mentioned here are for short term ownership - as in 3 years. I would hope that any car - regardless of make - would last at least that long.
Personally I could care less about whether a car lasts 3 years. To me it's whether a car can last 10-15 years. Yes - that long. All I know is that every single Toyota we've owned we've kept for a minimum of 10 years. The eldest is my truck at 16 years old. It's a given that Toyota doesn't do the best jobs on their interiors. Some might say the design is a bit bland. Other than that the cars run forever. We always put at least 200,000-250,000 miles on our cars - if not more. None of these - and when I say none, I honestly mean none of them, have given us issues, other than a few very minor things - like wheel bearings and miniscule stuff like that. These cars are almost boring because they just do what they're supposed to do: run and run, year in, year out.
This is how Toyota got their reputation. From the many customers like me who have had the same high quality experience. I could care less about some survey taking place over 3 measly years.
16th Jun 2011, 13:44
If Toyota has more problems in "Three measly years" (as actual repair surveys clearly show they do), isn't it likely they'll also have more problems in "10 measly years"??
17th Jun 2011, 11:22
This argument is hardly an argument. Toyota and Honda both make better products than the Big 3. Plain and simple. End of story.
17th Jun 2011, 14:24
I would definitely agree that Honda does make better product than the Domestic 3. And also probably Toyota does, though I am having a bad experience with Toyota, but no carmaker is perfect. Honda is better than Toyota, though IMHO. Ford is the best of the domestics, though some GM cars are catching up in quality. I have seen European reviews of the Chevrolet Cruze on here, which are quite favourable (it has been available in Europe for a few years). If the Cruze proves to be reliable, it may be on my list of possibilities for my next car.
17th Jun 2011, 16:37
Yep. The sales numbers show it alright. In May, GM sold over twice as many cars in the U.S. as Toyota. Ford sold almost twice as many, and even Chrysler outsold them. Honda sold way fewer cars than Toyota, and Nissan was so far down the list it wasn't worth noting. Even Hyundai/Kia were only 900 cars shy of Toyota's U.S. sales. Even worldwide (where Toyota holds an edge due to more international markets), GM was only a very few units behind Toyota, and is projected to pass them in world sales this month or next.
19th Jun 2011, 21:03
... and once more, the reason Toyota, Honda, and Nissan sales are down is because their production was cut due to the Tsunami.
21st Jun 2011, 13:01
Japanese car dealers had plenty of inventory. Even Toyota dealers acknowledged that the tsunami did not cause any shortages of vehicles. Camrys have been sitting on the lot for very long periods, even before the tsunami. And to think the tsunami caused sales to fall to LESS THAN HALF of GM's in the U.S. in May is very, very far-fetched. And Honda and Nissan never come close to selling as many vehicles as Ford, GM or Chrysler in the U.S. You have to take car ads with a grain of salt. The "truth" can be misleading. Toyota DOES lead in WORLD sales (where it has a much wider market), but even there GM trails by only a few units, and is projected to surpass Toyota worldwide this month or next.
21st Jun 2011, 16:51
Let me repeat it, and then I'm not going to repeat it any further, since doing so is obviously a waste of my time.
Japanese auto sales are down because a tsunami disrupted the production of parts and assembly lines. This in turn cut their production drastically, and has affected their sales globally. The direct result of the tsunami was that over 500 Japanese parts suppliers had an interruption in deliveries. These were suppliers for all different Japanese brands, and the impact was that overall production of Japanese vehicles fell by 50%, which in layman's terms means there were 50% less total cars to sell versus before the Tsunami.
This topic has absolutely ZERO to do with consumer preference. Zero.
29th Jun 2011, 16:45
Yep. Absolutely 100% correct. If Toyota has had problems for a few years, then they MUST have more for the next ten years. After all, GM had problems and screwed up for a mere 25 years. All it took was 25 years of lost market share, poor products and customer service, poor management, bankruptcy, and a humongous monetary tax payer bailout to set things right. They are 100% perfect now, and always will be!
2nd Jul 2011, 16:46
Well, the June sales figures are out for U.S. auto sales. Again GM topped the list, Ford came in second and Chrysler third. Toyota was a very distant fourth, selling less than half the units GM sold, and barely half the units Ford sold. Ford and GM sales were up 10%, Chrysler sales were up 30%. Toyota and Honda sales were down by 20%.
The big winner was Kia, whose sales skyrocketed by 41%, putting combined Hyundai/Kia sales at twice the volume of Toyota.
Sales of both trucks and small cars were strong for Ford and GM, while Kia's aggressive, youth-oriented marketing and competitive pricing is making it a car maker to be reckoned with.
Additional recalls from Toyota didn't help. In spite of some of the highest dealer incentives in the industry, their sales continue to plummet. GM's Cruze continues to be a huge hit with buyers, especially in view of the fact that it turned in better highway mileage in USA Today's highway test (48.5 mpg) than Toyota's pricey Prius hybrid V is rated at, and at slightly over half the price.
15th Jun 2011, 19:25
"Consumer Reports bases its reliability ratings on subjective data. They have gotten into trouble in the past by "predicting" that certain cars were tops when they weren't (such as Toyota in 2007), and actually had to print retractions apologizing to their readers."
Oh- so now it's a matter of comparing publishers? Is that really what its boiled down to?
Here's the thing. I don't really care what publication says what or what other publication says that. Toyota, Honda, and Nissan all build extremely high quality cars, have for decades, and have for the most part beaten most anything the Big 3 pukes out- even now. Everyone knows it and the sales numbers show it. Hence this is such a pointless argument. We already know reality and we don't need to be "convinced" otherwise. That's it in a nutshell. Plain and simple.