7th Feb 2009, 11:15

"I have never had any problems with my domestics, but have seen friends of mine countless very serious problems with their imports, ESPECIALLY TOYOTA's. In science, which is my profession, a theory (e.g., the notion of Toyota's being reliable) is tested by experiment (e.g., real world ownership experience). Experimental results always take precedence over theory. If the experimental results agree with the theory, the theory is validated. If the experimental results disagree with the theory, the theory is considered to be proven wrong."

Yes... but science requires REPRESENTATIVE samples. Your (and your friends') experiences are too narrow to be considered anything more than indicators. That is why, in science, an "experiment" takes you from hypothesis to theory which is published for peer review. Peers then conduct the same experiment using a set of controls to make sure outside factors aren't skewing the result. They then release the outcomes of their experiments. These outcomes are then used to either further the theory or question its validity. In the realm of vehicles, the organization you reject (CU) is the one who is most careful and scientific with their method. So you say you're a scientist huh?

"I do not mean this as an offense to you, but the organization (s) you consider to be "expert," I consider to be a joke."

And I don't mean this to be offensive to you, but you're rejecting the only and best "science" available out of hand.

"Those same "experts" (Consumer Reports) who had to do an about face with their tails between their legs and renege on their ratings of the Camry and Tundra, and admit that their reliabilities are actually much worse than average as opposed to their pompous assumptions that they would be better than average. Never mind the fact that all the while, none of their ratings were ever corresponding to the actual real world experience of people outside of their brain washed subscribers, who seem to think Consumer Reports is God's visible organization on Earth and adjust their evaluations to agree with (and preach) whatever Consumer Reports has trained them to believe."

CR surveys only ask for what went wrong with your vehicle, vehicle type, and mileage. They also ask if you're satisfied but that is presented separately. Obviously you've never filled out one of their surveys. Nor have you read the FAQ on their method. But you are "preaching" your opinion (in essence a conspiracy theory) that members are adjusting their evaluations en-masse... and that not born of information. I believe that there are weaknesses in the way CR data is compiled, but no discussion here would be an informed one because it would be assumed that I'm "The Brainwashed One".

Yes CR did an about face with the new (07) Camry and Tundra because they thought they would follow the same trajectory as past models. They didn't and caught CR by surprise. Consequently CR changed their method of reporting new models based on the reliability of the last one.

"Based on my real world observations, and that of countless other people on this thread, your "experts," and their theory that Toyota's are reliable, are wrong."

"Countless" indeed. You don't know how many are on this thread (I don't either). For all you know, this subject is being batted around by 6 people. This site isn't a scientific, controlled survey. It isn't designed to be. Toyotas may be fantastic. Toyotas may be crap. This site won't further either hypothesis. You don't even know for a fact that those who claim an experience with a vehicle even own one. In fact there are a couple of posts that go a long way toward proving the opposite on a few threads.

So it's fine to dislike Toyotas....that's your right. But it isn't science.