13th Jan 2009, 15:41
10:28;
Now take all of that and apply it to pro-foreign commenters, and you'll have about covered it all.
13th Jan 2009, 16:18
10:28 First of all you were off regarding the profession. Whatever labeling you are making an effort to prove, is not indicative of full size truck ownership. If I talk about Chevrolets and I have owned some pretty nice ones including Corvettes. I would have no problem going to Bowling Green, Ky. to pick up my new order.
I firmly believe anyone buying a new 2009, not languishing in an old vehicle that makes them the absolute authority... should test drive every single comparable model in their category and buy in a set price range. Walking into any showroom and saying "give me another, only bigger" may be fine is you own a small Toyota now. If that works for you, fine.
Ignoring or side-stepping serious mechanical concerns on late models both on here and consumeraffairs.com is foolhardy.
Love what you own and that's great.
I test them all and have a list of criteria on full size trucks. I would like to know what others are buying their full size trucks on here at the moment. If you are walking into a showroom, what's the agenda?
Applying small car, small truck analogies on a full size truck review has zero applications. My truck and 2 cars are garage kept, not parked out by the outhouse as you insinuate domestic owners might.
I dwell on features and benefits and testing all before you buy... not hoping to persuade anyone to buy by insult or any other desperate measures. People are not forced and are usually taking more time to test, compare and become more and more educated on new models, not on something old that someone has kept and has no new basis of comparison to reflect upon.
13th Jan 2009, 20:51
10:28 You didn't miss many. And thanks for the laugh. So true. They'll go on and ON about the camshaft in the Tundra, which was only a very small number and remedied a long time ago, but they choose to ignore the mountain of recalls that the Big 3 have always had, which are of course much more frequent, almost always handled improperly, and usually far more serious and negligent. Ha. But... as long as they can find ONE issue that Toyota has had... they must be bad. Too funny. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
You have to love that backwoods logic too... Ford trucks must be better because they can haul more. Wow. Dump trucks must be the most reliable vehicles on the road because they can haul a LOT! It makes sense right? Ford and Chevy make cheaper cars, have tons of recalls on them, and are consistently rated worse than Japanese cars, yet are SOMEhow better. Cheaper and better. Right. Duh. If they REALLY were less expensive AND better then Toyota and Honda would never have gotten off the ground in the U.S.
The fact is, people pay a little more for a far better automobile when they buy Toyota, Honda, or Nissan. If you don't want to pay the price; you get a piece of crap Ford or Chevy. But, according the Big 3 fans on this site, they all get 600,000 miles and you don't even have to change the oil. Right.
You want a junk car? Buy a Chevy. Want a good one? Buy a Toyota.
14th Jan 2009, 10:09
First off, statistics don't lie. Our personal experience (not some mythical "friend's") is as follows:
1) 30+ domestics owned in over 30 years. None ever had a single engine or transmission replaced, or any major repairs of any kind. We own 3 to 4 cars at a time and some of these vehicles were kept for nearly 20 years. Several made over 200,000 miles, and one (a Ford) made over 300,000 miles. We also owned 3 imports during the 80's and 90's (when they were SUPPOSED to be "good"). Only 1 made 100,000 miles, and all of them were far less reliable than ANY of our domestics. Do the statistical probability of getting 30 GOOD vehicles from a supposedly BAD manufacturer, and 3 BAD vehicles from supposedly GOOD manufacturers.
2) I don't "hate" foreign cars. I just have far better things to do with my money than spend it on cars with high degrees of problems and very short warranties. I also don't care for sitting around a dealership all day waiting for repairs when I can spend my time more productively.
3) ALL of our 80's and 90's imports were less than stellar in reliability and VERY EXPENSIVE in repairs. I don't think they were any better in the "good old days".
4) It's hilarious how the number of defective Toyota engines has "magically" dwindled from THOUSANDS to TWENTY!!
That Toyota "engine fairy" must be at it again!!!
5) The Tundra ISN'T a real truck. How many heavy construction jobs do you see using the puny and unreliable Tundra?? We own two companies. There is not a Tundra in either fleet. Longer warranties and better service are essential to any company's bottom line. We can't have vehicles constantly out for repairs. That's why ours are all Ford, Chevy or Dodge.
6) Japanese auto executives fly in private jets too. I have yet to read of one of them driving to a meeting in a Corolla. And buying from American companies DOES help the American economy. Study your basic economics 101.
7) Domestic vehicles ARE rated higher than many imports. Fusion DOES outrank Camry and Accord, just as most domestics outrank most Mercedes. And considering that two of our current vehicles are rated "much worse than average" and NEITHER has given us a single problem other than a burned out light bulb in 65,000 miles and 75,000 miles respectively I'm not overly concerned about Japanese-biased ratings at this point. When a DOMESTIC gets a decent rating in biased media, it HAS to be REALLY GOOD.
13th Jan 2009, 11:51
Since you are responding to my comment, I'll fill you in a little bit about the perspective from which I come. My last truck was a 2000 Toyota Tundra, which was rated above average by Consumer Reports when I bought it used in 2002. It was a very good vehicle. Not stiff enough for towing heavy loads, but a very fine off-roader. I took it 4WDing a number of times; Once by Ouray, CO. It was very good off-road for a truck because of its high clearance and comparatively short length. The only negative was that it suffered from axle hop in mud or snow. At that time, though, Consumer Reports also rated the F150 above average which provided me with a viable alternative in a slightly heavier-duty truck. I chose the Tundra partly because of Toyota's reputation for reliability and wasn't disappointed. It was a very close cousin to perfect until I sold it in 08.
I'm just becoming more encouraged by signs of improvement from Detroit. The mere fact that I think that the average reliability of past Toyota products (average of all products) has been better than their American counterparts' doesn't make me hope for the demise of an industry that underpins American manufacturing. So when I see signs of improvement at Ford and elsewhere, I'm perfectly willing to cheer them on and even plunk my money down when the time comes.
One point: I think the data suggests that Ford has risen to better than merely the worst of a bad lot. The last Consumer Reports said that Ford now has an "average" corporate rating when all their models are included in the sample. That's not bad and I hope to see continued improvement for the sake of all the folks who rely upon them for a job or a vehicle. Cheers.