2nd Sep 2009, 10:03

Is an old Camry worth putting through a ground up or rotisserie restoration? An old 67 Nova 6 cylinder 4 door even sold for 7000 in my neighborhood with zero done to it. I wonder what 4 door Toyota sedan will sell for over twice what it sold for new at the time, unrestored, untagged and just a starting point? And just a plain 4 door no less! New the car was at most 3000 then.

2nd Sep 2009, 16:57

With the exception of advertising, Japan has always "gone cheap". An article in a 1980's science magazine discussed how even the frame components on Japanese cars were built to last roughly 1/5 of the miles a domestic was built to last. I learned this from personal experience. My 1980's Mazda was taken to an alignment shop because it was pulling to the left. I was told that I was a victim of the "Japanese Flimsies", a condition in which the frame sags just from the weight of the car. I was told I'd need the frame reinforced. The car had 86,000 miles on it. I traded it for a Ford with 139,000 miles on it that performed flawlessly.

More people are waking up to the deception of ad hype and car magazines reviewing Japanese cars and raving about them. There is simply no way a magazine reviewer can drive a specially prepped car for a few hours and give the slightest indication of its reliability. The long-term surveys of J.D. Powers rate a Ford product and a GM product higher in long-term reliability than even Lexus. The highest reliability rating for the Ford Fusion in Consumer Reports tops both Camry and Accord.

We see silly and unfounded claims that "Fusion won't last! They'll start falling apart". One wonders just when this miraculous transformation from world-class quality to junk is supposed to magically occur. This is the Fusion's 5th year and it's better than ever. My 2006 Fusion is as good as it was the day it was built. After that length of time both my Japanese imports had cost me more than they were worth in costly repairs.

3rd Sep 2009, 18:04

"The 2006 Camry reviews on this site give it a ZERO satisfaction rating."

I do realize the 2006 Camry got a zero approval rating on this site, however, domestic lovers overuse this. That's all they can seem to find that makes Toyota look bad. Just one model year? That doesn't seem good enough for me, and it wouldn't turn me away from buying a Camry.

4th Sep 2009, 05:37

16:57 Your Fusion isn't world class. It's junk, like all other Fords, because Ford designed and built it - which means corners cut and shoddy assembly of a poor design to begin with. It's a joke next to ANY Toyota or Honda car.

4th Sep 2009, 15:40

This does not seem to be an objective, factual comment and I shall dismiss it out of hand. It sounds like a "my dad's is better" mentality.

4th Sep 2009, 21:10

I picked up my newspaper today and read that Toyota is having to recall 100,000 cars due to defective brakes (AGAIN??) and that Toyota is also being sued by hundreds of owners in roll-over cases and is accused of destroying or hiding evidence. Now what was that about FORD being so bad??

7th Sep 2009, 20:28

21:10, Glad to answer your question about why Ford is so bad... on their best days, they also have brake/safety and engine/transmission recalls. On your average day, they have electrical fires, spark plugs blowing out of the heads, and explosions/fires... they don't call them Ford Exploders for nothing. Look it up. The last 1000 comments here are a joke. Toyota quality is matched or surpassed by Honda only. Ford doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence.

7th Sep 2009, 20:31

We all enjoy a little comic relief now and then, but give us a BREAK!! "shoddy assembly"?? Sorry, but it was TOYOTA that just recalled 100,000 cars due too bad brakes (AGAIN), not Ford. Also, the news just carried an item about Toyota (not Ford) being sued by HUNDREDS of owners in roll-over cases (not a couple of dozen, as the case with the Explorer). Toyota tried to destroy evidence and hush this up, according to a former lawyer for Toyota. Hardly the mark of an honest company.

And if the Fusion is so far BENEATH Honda and Toyota, please explain why every automotive source of repute (Toyota ad brochures don't count) rate it ABOVE both Honda and Toyota in reliability. It's OK to be loyal to your first car, I think we all understand youngsters having that sort of loyalty, but just throwing out unfounded statements doesn't help credibility. True, it gives us all a good laugh and probably helps sell a few more Fords, but no one takes such ranting seriously. As people mature and have experience with several different brands of cars, they have a better basis for making objective statements. I whole heartedly agree with comment 15:40.

9th Sep 2009, 20:22

We should be understanding of young people who are proud of their first car and want to defend it. I think we were all that way as youngsters. Of course it isn't an objective opinion, but as people get older and own different cars they come to realize that that first old used Toyota was basically just another car, not a magic carpet. Give the kids break. We were all teenagers once!!

9th Sep 2009, 21:26

20:31 OK.. let's keep bragging about that stroke of luck that Ford has gotten with someone actually saying they make a decent car... funny. Want to look at ratings? Want to brag? We Toyota and Honda owners have WAY, WAY more room to brag than you. Look at their quality and long-term reliability ratings over the last decade or two. You lose, and BADLY.

10th Sep 2009, 17:12

I could brag that I had cell phone coverage and my wife did not when we had to have our nearly new Honda towed. Another trans, not a recommendation out of us for the previous comment.

10th Sep 2009, 20:08

Let's turn the tables.. you Ford guys are doing a great job of selling Toyota's here. Thank you.

First off, every time Ford comes out with their latest piece of junk car, Ford owners like to pretend that it's worth something. The Taurus.. we had to hear about that. No one cared. So they changed it to the 500. Still, no one cared.

I remember the Contour. That was junk. I remember my friend's Contour; and the engine that was scrap at 80,000 miles.

I remember the first generation Taurus, and how bad it was. Another unfortunate friend owned one; two transmissions and a lot of major work to get it to 120,000 miles. That's pathetic.

And the new Fusion; you can't drive a review. It's still a Ford, which means low quality, lots of repairs, and dissatisfaction. You're talking to a 3 time Toyota owner, and I now have a Honda Civic, all 4 of which were and are so far above ANY Ford in quality that Ford should close it's doors out of shame. Comparing any Ford vehicle to the standard of quality that a Civic or any Toyota has set over the past few decades is ridiculous. Ford cannot compete.