11th Nov 2007, 11:20

5:43's is the most objective and balanced comment that I have read here in a long time.

Anybody that says "Brand X is perfect" and "Brand Y is always junk" is only making themselves look foolish. All major brands are pretty good, and pretty equal if you take care of them. Somebody once pointed out that I've owned a dozen cars on Consumer Report's list of used cars to avoid. Funny, but I thought they were great. For me, they were dependable, nice to drive, easy to maintain, and never needed major repair. Whoever put them on that list did me a great favor by scaring people off and letting me get great deals on good cars.

Not only do some brands have a (not necessarily justified) reputation for reliability, but in general buying a brand new car is supposed to equate to reliability. Perhaps, but it's nothing more than being sold peace of mind. The most I ever paid for a car was $3,750, and have been driving it for a year with no problems and no repairs; how could I have possibly been better off paying $25,000 for a new car of ANY brand? Even if it dies at the end of the year, I'd still be $2,500/year ahead just on what I saved on car payments. By the end of the 5-year car loan, that would be a savings of $12,500 even if I had to buy a new $3,750 car every year. That's what I have done, and those savings over the years have gone to pay off my house 20 years early, and poured into my retirement funds and savings.

I've quietly gone about building a fortune with the help of driving old cars like '70's, '80's, and more recently '90's Dodges, Chevies, Pontiacs, Plymouths, Fords, Mercuries, Cadillacs--cars that were 5-15 years old that I picked up for anywhere from $350 to $3,750 and drove for 5-10 years. Unlike some of these other braggarts, I have never made "6 figures" but I am a millionaire nonetheless (and that is not in "assets"), and it's because of responsible spending, aggressive savings, and not being a slave to brands or trying to keep up with the Joneses.

Nobody would be impressed to see my beat up old Dodge truck coming down the street, but I really don't care. Maybe that's the difference. Some of you seem to feel as though you have to convince everybody else that you're doing the right thing by driving a Toyota, Ford, or whatever. You aren't satisfied to mind your own business, but believe anybody else who drives something different is an enemy for attacking your values.

If I see a cheap Toyota for the right price, I'll pick it up, I don't care. But if they have the reputation for "holding their value" so I can't get a good deal, then I'll buy the same year Chevy for 1/3rd the price and drive it past 200,000 miles and then be on the lookout for the next beater.

Needless to say, I am not affected by the sub-prime housing market, the credit crunch (what a laugh!), or the plummeting Dow. When these real-estate speculators lose their houses and have their Cadillacs repossessed, I'll be there to scoop them up for 4 or 5 Grand.

11th Nov 2007, 16:06

05:43 Thank You! Somebody else with a functioning brain. That's nice; uncommon however, lately. I've told these ridiculous Ford and Chevy owners most of that stuff at one point or another, but they can't separate fact from opinion. Here are some more you may have missed if you need a laugh: I was told that my Tacoma doesn't fall apart off road like a Ford would because it doesn't weigh as much as the Ford...OK.??? Maybe this is the same comment, but one guy told me he can put 1000 pounds on the TAILGATE of his F-150, and that it only squats 2 or 3 inches. Uh huh. Here's a REALLY good one: somebody said that people are going to start buying more domestics because the quality of imports isn't good. Is that not the definition of IRONY as well as a complete disregard for reality? I love reading here.

11th Nov 2007, 20:17

21:20 What absolute guarantee do you have if fuel consumption decreases prices will follow? You can survey individuals that may not use a truck in their profession and yet still have a spouse that does. Manufacturers realize market niches and produce vehicles based on demand. Since the number one vehicle sold in America is a full size truck for decades are you able to accurately assume your premise is correct? Why not eliminate personal aircraft, all watercraft such as boats, jetskis, snowmobiles, recreational vehicles, travel trailers to name a few during your survey. There are large manufacturing facilities providing jobs and tax revenue that would be lost however. Seems like you are a prime candidate to not own any motor vehicle and walk 100% to work, shopping and any or all available free time. I use my full size truck and find it more practical and useful than strictly owning a car.

11th Nov 2007, 22:32

05:43,

Just because some things might defy simple logic, doesn't mean it can't happen.

Take the loading up the ranger for example. Yeah, I've done something very similar to that, and gotten away with it. Doesn't seem very plausible, but I still did it.

And for the over-heating part. I have had a car (an explorer) that used to over heat like that. As odd as it may seem, I did turn it off and let it cool down then keep on driving.

In response to the statement that weight doesn't equal strength. It, in fact, does. We're not talking about lead here, but about steal and aluminum. More of each equals a stronger base. If what you're saying is true, then it would be so that a fully boxed frame that is 1/2" thick is stronger than a frame that is 3/4" thick. See my point? Just as long as we're dealing with CONSISTENT materials, i. e steal and aluminum, NOT lead or something that has nothing to do with anything, the latter is true. More=stronger.

Encase you didn't notice, this thread was started to be a discussion board, so everyone has the right to post here. However, if you wish to use the "what right do you have to be posting here" argument, I would advise you check out the domestic reviews where some of the first comments are "Toyota this, Toyota that. Should have...Toyota...not...domestic..."

Are WE really supposed to believe your comments about how wonderful Toyotas are and how horrible domestics are? That definitely isn't a one-sided argument, but indeed goes for BOTH sides of the spectrum.

12th Nov 2007, 17:40

22:32 You know what? I'm about ready to throw in the towel. More material does NOT mean more strength; SOMETIMES it does; sometimes it does NOT. It is NOT a fact, like you think it is. Ask an engineer, ask a person that designs or builds bridges.

Toyota's, by DESIGN, do not flex as much nor are as sloppy as a Ford or Chevy; this is obvious to anyone who has owned a Toyota as well as a domestic. Take an S-10 for example. They rattle when they are brand new. My Tacoma still doesn't have a single squeak or rattle after 10 years. After 10 years, if the cheap generic motor in your S-10 hasn't blown up yet, which isn't likely, and you're still driving it, it will rattle like a bag of tin cans. A Toyota will not.