21st Jan 2009, 07:33
21:13.
Still waiting for a Toyota fan (you?) to explain why if Toyota's are so reliable as, you claim, they are having constant engine failures:
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/toyota_engine.html
Maybe you could also consider why all of these problems are not cited by the automotive publications you rely on so much. These problems are obviously going on; they are being reported to Consumer Affairs and indicated on reviews on this site in numerous reviews. Could it be that many automotive publications, much like many media outlets in general, are biased?
But, even while Consumer Reports had been writing accolades about Toyota for so long and perpetually placing them on their recommended list (EVEN WHILE ALL THESE TOYOTA ENGINE PROBLEMS WERE GOING ON), why is it now that they suddenly "rated" the Camry and Tundra as much worse than average in reliability and no longer recommend them. Is it possible that Consumer Reports could not cover for Toyota's horrible quality anymore, had to reluctantly give them a bad rating to try and save there already much precarious credibility, and then pretend that the problems only began recently?
You say all the testimonies of domestic owners who have had excellent experiences with their vehicles are irrelevant. So what is the point in arguing with you? You clearly do not want to listen to what anybody has to say. You would obviously rather listen to a handful of biased automotive publications that conveniently buy into the same myths you do, than the real world experiences of thousands of people.
Are you the same person who a while back stated that nobody posting comments on this thread was "qualified" to do so, and we should only listen to the biased automotive press? Whether or not you are that person, you sound a lot like them.
We have all heard the myth of Toyota's supposed divinity repeated over and over again. But as usual, no one has explained how/why Toyota has been having a their massive amounts engine failures.
Once again, please explain:
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/toyota_engine.html
21st Jan 2009, 11:08
I noticed yesterday, while waiting in a dealership for my mom to buy a new Ford vehicle, that the 2009 F-150 was (wisely) chosen 2009 "Truck of the Year" by Motor Trend. I guess someone felt that Toyota had not addressed the Tundra's myriad problems.
Although full-size truck sales are all dropping (and Tundra's are basically dead in the water), Ford continues to be the full-size truck leader. That is as it should be. The trend in lots of more patriotic areas now is to avoid vehicles made by foreign-owned companies. My mom traded an import (which had been a BIG disappointment) for her Ford vehicle. I expect more and more people will follow this trend in years ahead. We need to support our own economy.
21st Jan 2009, 15:22
To all the Big 3 fans: guess what? Repeatedly listing websites about problems Toyota has had does not address the facts I posted about their reliability from major sources.
Of course they have problems. All machines do when you build hundreds of thousands or millions of them. But the FACT still remains that Toyota's and Honda's have far LESS problems than Ford, Chevy, or Dodge.
I will not allow you, nor does it make any sense, to try and refute that by listing a website that involves a mechanical issue that Toyota has had. I can do the same (very easily) with Ford, GM, and Dodge.
I still will not allow you to skirt around all the proof offered by claiming that YOU had problems with an import. Maybe you did, but the FACT still remains that people have less problems with Toyota because Toyota vehicles HAVE fewer issues, and all the proof I offered will support that. Still waiting for one of you domestic fans to address that.
21st Jan 2009, 18:07
The true facts are us driving full size new pickups, meaning 2007, 2008, 2009, and what we are really seeing as actual owners and our actual recent repair expenditures. I drive close to 30,000 a year a lot of that weekends and towing. I maintain the best indicator is your own personal expenditures on new ones.
I really like my new GM's and they have been very reliable and fun to own and drive. In the end it doesn't matter to anyone other than myself, but I would like others to know that I am very satisfied.
If you like small pickups, it seems that a Toyota commenter has praise for it. I am commenting as an actual owner as well on a new full sizes. I drive a lot and it's not causing repair headaches. At least test drive everything in your class and don't get lulled in without a comparison. There's old comments on old trucks on here... how about indicating what year you are commenting on? If it's 1989 or 1995, let us know so that we know what decade you are in.
21st Jan 2009, 19:39
For quite a few years, the Consumer Reports Buyers Guides usually had a line that said certain new models were being recommended even before any reliability data was in, because certain manufacturers had a long history of reliability and just generally were better companies. I can't remember exactly how they used to phrase it. One of those models was the 2006 Camry. When the data came in, they had to admit they had made a mistake and they now have a new policy that they only recommend models after they have gotten reliability data in.
22nd Jan 2009, 09:18
"But, even while Consumer Reports had been writing accolades about Toyota for so long and perpetually placing them on their recommended list (EVEN WHILE ALL THESE TOYOTA ENGINE PROBLEMS WERE GOING ON), why is it now that they suddenly "rated" the Camry and Tundra as much worse than average in reliability and no longer recommend them. Is it possible that Consumer Reports could not cover for Toyota's horrible quality anymore, had to reluctantly give them a bad rating to try and save there already much precarious credibility, and then pretend that the problems only began recently"?
First question: (why is it now that they suddenly "rated" the Camry and Tundra as much worse than average in reliability and no longer recommend them.)
Answer: because they were new models with new problems that were widespread enough to change their ratings to below average.
Second question: (Is it possible that Consumer Reports could not cover for Toyota's horrible quality anymore, had to reluctantly give them a bad rating to try and save their already much precarious credibility, and then pretend that the problems only began recently?)
Answer: Unlikely; because Consumer Reports compiles owner data rather than simply doing a road test or by-the-feel-of-the-car quality test like many publications. The reason Toyotas received an across-the-board recommendation up until recently was because they had significantly fewer problems across the spectrum of problems and vehicles.
I'm sure someone will respond that Toyota was having engine troubles before this (sludging was a major issue if people were using non-synthetic oils and following some over-optimistic oil-change-interval recommendations). Yes, while this is true, the problems were still on few enough vehicles that they didn't skew the data when 10s of thousands of owners were factored in.
Nevertheless, domestic manufacturers are starting to really pick up their quality and are becoming viable alternatives to Asian imports. They were already more interesting. The imports tend to be kinda "white bread" appliances. If the Americans can revamp their reputations, they have a built-in advantage over the imports in the forms of; more interesting product lines, more devoted fan base, and a patriotic advantage (as is obvious on these forums).
"Are you the same person who a while back stated that nobody posting comments on this thread was "qualified" to do so, and we should only listen to the biased automotive press? Whether or not you are that person, you sound a lot like them".
Well I'm not and would imagine that this thread (including my post) itself serves as conclusive proof that NO qualification is necessary to post here. :)
So no I don't believe in most publications, but I do believe that "Consumer Reports" data is accurate. I read it but try to draw my own conclusions from the data. For example, I think that heavier duty vehicles (that are more likely to be used roughly) will naturally need more repairs than lighter duty vehicles. I also think that the road test portion of Consumer Reports is very subjective so just because they don't like how a car looks or feels doesn't mean that I'll feel the same. I love my Jeep Wrangler -- they hate it. So I think that the data -- if not the conclusions -- are valuable as long as you read it with an engaged mind and a willingness to do your own shopping. It is still the best source for large scale data covering most aspects of vehicular performance.
Cheers!
20th Jan 2009, 20:06
Talk about irony. "most reliable"??? Even the highly biased car magazines that drool over ANYTHING foreign call the recent Toyotas an "uncharacteristic drop in quality". BEST?? By WHOSE STANDARDS.
Also, we ARE STILL WAITING for genuine, verifiable frequency of repair records from DEALERS, not some disgruntled owner who is upset that his cigarette lighter stopped working at 300,000 miles in his domestic, such as the commenter whose 200,000 mile Ford finally had a minor issue and he has now become a worshipper of anything foreign.