Toyota on the mend?

mcdawgg · November 2009

Agree. I think that Toyota and Honda are both in a rebuilding stage right now. Not that they are bad like some try to make them out to be, but they are capable of doing better. From what I read, Toyota will be doing better in the future, much to the dismay of many.

But, as I said before, I hope that all brands will be better as a result, and if history repeats itself, they will, and they can thank Toyota. Of course, some won't, but it'll be fun to watch the haters.

nippononly · November 2009

Well, I was just quoting one of the news articles linked above, and whether it's 43% or 51%, it's still barely half, eh? So rather than get pedantic on me, you may wish to consider the actual POINT I was making......

kdhspyder · November 2009

Yep..true that. I will accept all the abuse appropriate for posting inaccurate non-factual facts. Actually I only added up the vehicles at the bottom of that chart. I forgot entirely about the Venza, Sienna, Sequoia and Avalon which are 100% produced in the US. 61% produced in NA.

nippononly · November 2009

I'm not the one that said this:
Toyota is on the brink of capitulation to irrelevance or death

That was of course Akio Toyoda, the president of Toyota Motor Corp. He also said Toyota is grasping for salvation as it struggles to return to profit, and that it has already spiraled through the first three stages of corporate decline: Hubris born of success, undisciplined pursuit of more and denial of risk and peril.

Toyota has become too big and distant from its customers, the chief executive said.

Those remarks were made barely a month ago, and clearly there is SOME cause for concern, despite the handful of people here that have had reliable Camrys in the last 10 years (and the one person who sells them) thinking otherwise. If things are turning the corner that's great, as I want the new joint Toyota-Subaru coupe to inspire me to return to the Toyota fold, but for now it is startling how much like GM this company has become since Y2K.

gagrice · November 2009

I forgot entirely about the Venza, Sienna, Sequoia and Avalon which are 100% produced in the US.

Don't forget the Sequoia. In spite of my complaints it was a very pleasant vehicle to drive around the USA last month. I drove right by the factory where it was built in Princeton Indiana. It is put together very well by US labor without the constraints of the UAW.

kdhspyder · November 2009

I see it as his job as the top boss to kick butt and slap everybody around to bring them to the new reality that the auto industry has gone through a sea-change these last two years. Nothing will remain the same. GM might soon be a kick-azz monster with little or no debt. Ford is looking solid. Hyundai is a worldwide force. VW is a pretender ( had to throw that in :shades: ), but I really think it's true.

It will be some time before I see any maker becoming so monolithic as GM was or as Toyota seemed to be getting. Instead of 30-40% market share the biggies will fight to keep 20% market share. On top of that the big money generators the, SUV and truck segments, are shrinking like new cotton shirts in the dryer. Right now all makers have to be able to make money selling $20000 vehicles.

In addition the financial situation of the banking industry and some nations such as the US may preclude this region from being the big profit center it was over the last 40 years. IOW the easy money that used to flow from America is likely over...look elsewhere and look fast.

SMACK .... KICK .... SHOVE.... now get to it!!

sellaturcica · November 2009

Are Americans actually involved with Toyota's strategic directions? I thought it was a big deal when Jim Press got to go to Japan a while back. I think most of Toyota's direction is determined from Japan.

gagrice · November 2009

IOW the easy money that used to flow from America is likely over...look elsewhere and look fast.

I think our boom bust cycles are coming to an end. I would not look for the next bubble to bail US out. It will be getting back to hard work for smaller paychecks. That means less vehicle sales for all companies. I think VW capitalized on the China market early and has the best for the least in high mileage vehicles. They arguably have the best vehicle lineup for the next 20 years. From the smallest to the fastest to the luxury set. No one competes with them in the US with a midsize diesel car. And it is hard to argue that Porsche is not the pinnacle of the sports car class in the USA.

As far as Toyota. I don't hate them. I would not have laid out the cash for a new Sequoia if I hated them. I am deeply disappointed in Toyota. They have failed to bring their best selling PU Worldwide to the USA. The HiLux diesel IS the best in its class. We get the dregs with the Tacoma and Tundra gas hogs. The Land Cruiser sold in the UK only comes equipped with diesel engines. No gas hogs even offered in that market. Toyota has treated the USA like a step child for too many years. We don't get the highest mileage vehicles they offer to the rest of the World. That makes Toyota part of the problem with our fossil fuel consumption. And the hybrids were injected to protect them from CAFE fines. So why should I jump on your Rah Rah bandwagon. Toyota has not given US any good reason to be fans over the last several years.

210delray · November 2009

Part of the problem with bringing the pickups built overseas to the US is the infamous "chicken tax," which ought to be dumped, IMO. Also, I fail to see Americans lining up in large numbers for diesels. I know I don't want one.

As far as boom and bust goes, remember the famous last words, "This time it's different." I don't believe that for a second; we'll continue with booms and busts as always, but there's no question China's star is rising.

gagrice · November 2009

The Chicken tax is a good excuse. They managed to build the HiLux and Tacoma in the USA to avoid that tax. Toyota even got around most of the problems by just putting the bed on here, if memory serves me. They offered the diesel PU trucks back in the early 1980s. They push gas vehicles on US when they know they use more fossil fuel. WHY IS THAT? The hybrids are a poor substitute for diesel if you need any kind of towing capacity. Our addiction to fossil fuel is a direct result of the FACT that the automakers do not offer any alternative to low mileage gas vehicles. Toyota being the biggest now in the USA is Number one on the problem list. There is NO way you can know if Americans would buy small diesel PU trucks unless they are offered. If you needed a PU and automaker XYZ says we have this model that gets 16 MPG or this model that gets 35 MPG. Both able to haul the same load. Which would be your choice?

doggrandma · November 2009

I hope there will be a return to quality in all manufactured goods. For too long, we have chased the lowest possible price (not that lower prices are bad!) with the result that there has been a race to the bottom to see how many corners companies could cut without people noticing. You can't really blame manufacturers. They had to do this to remain competitive on price.

In some ways, todays vehicles are the best they have ever been, but when you see things on a $30,000 vehicle like visors that look like they were made out of cardboard covered in peach fuzz, it is a little disturbing. There are also more serious shortcuts such as a post I saw about a defective bolt that could have been resulted in an accident (not a Toyota or Honda).

People are finally getting tired of shoddy products (think cheap stuff from China). Even with bad economic times, we may see consumers actively seeking better quality goods, even if they have to pay more.

210delray · November 2009

I understand that Toyota has the second highest fleet avg, mpg of any volume manufacturer selling cars in the US (Honda is first). I'm not convinced people would go for diesels in droves here, though I know you like them. The newly mandated complex emissions controls will drive prices up and mpg down (not that I disagree with the mandate -- fine particulates from diesels are carcinogenic).

If you needed a PU and automaker XYZ says we have this model that gets 16 MPG or this model that gets 35 MPG. Both able to haul the same load. Which would be your choice?

Neither, I'll keep my '98 Frontier 4-cylinder gas engine, with a 5-speed manual. Its overall mpg has been 26.

doggrandma · November 2009

Thank you for the info! I learn something new here every day.

I thought it was just something they made up.

lemko · November 2009

I'd rather have one well-made more expensive product that holds up over the long run versus several cheap ones that fall apart in the same time period. This goes for anything be it a toaster, a washing machine, or an automobile.

gagrice · November 2009

Neither, I'll keep my '98 Frontier 4-cylinder gas engine, with a 5-speed manual. Its overall mpg has been 26.

That is hard to beat. I would not even think about a different PU if my gutless Ranger got close to 26 MPG. It is rare for a tank to be over 15 MPG. Though I only put about 2000 miles per year on the truck. I imagine I lose about 10% to evaporation of the ethanol in our Crap CA gas.

corvette · November 2009

I imagine I lose about 10% to evaporation of the ethanol in our Crap CA gas.

Think of it this way: At least the ethanol that evaporates isn't going through the truck's fuel injection system.

corvette · November 2009

I'd rather have one well-made more expensive product that holds up over the long run versus several cheap ones that fall apart in the same time period.

It depends upon how you're going to use the product. For an infrequently used product, even a cheap piece of poorly-made junk may last a long time.

doggrandma · November 2009

Was your Caravan the short version? Those were pretty reliable. We had the misfortune of owning the longer wheelbase version and it went through 2 transmissions before it finally died, leaving my husband stranded on a city freeway in rush hour traffic. He was not happy, to say the least. After our experience, we would not even consider a Chrysler product. My dad owned one of those horrible GM diesels when they first came out. After that, he would never buy another GM product. I own a 2004 Mazda 3 right now, and I love it. The only reason I am looking for a new vehicle is because I now also own 2 large dogs that don't fit very well in the back seat.

If a person has a bad experience with a vehicle, it can sour them on the brand for life.

doggrandma · November 2009

I am a baby boomer, but I won't even look at GM vehicles because we taxpayers were forced to bail them out. No Government Motors for us. Besides, with the government having a say in the company, how long before all GM vehicles have the same quality and appeal of a Yugo?

lemko · November 2009

I am not a babyboomer and I could care less about the bailout of GM, the UAW, or any other political issues. I really, really love GM vehicles - especially those of Buick and Cadillac. I would buy another Cadillac or Buick in a New York second. I see great things coming from GM these days and in the future.

stickguy · November 2009

I think you are going a bit over the top with this. It was a money transaction. THe government isn't running GM (making product decisions, etc.) ongoing. And supposedly GM is paying back the loan early (same thing that Chrysler did).

THere are many reasons I wouldn't buy most GM cars, but the fact they had to borrow money from their rich uncle in order to restructure sin't one of them.

british_rover · November 2009

I agree I have heard this from several people while selling cars and it just makes no sense to me.

Usually these were people who bought GM or Chrysler products before and liked them. They had good experiences with them too but now refuse to buy them because they had to get a bailout to keep the whole mid-west from falling into another great depression. That of course would have made most of the suppliers go out of business and probably Ford to. Maybe even some of the transplant automakers would have collapsed if they couldn't source parts from US suppliers anymore.

Sorry that is stupid.

Buy what you like and what makes you happy. As long as the company isn't using slave or child labor or grossly polluting the environment don't worry about the rest.

kdhspyder · November 2009

As far as Toyota. I don't hate them. I would not have laid out the cash for a new Sequoia if I hated them. I am deeply disappointed in Toyota. They have failed to bring their best selling PU Worldwide to the USA. The HiLux diesel IS the best in its class. We get the dregs with the Tacoma and Tundra gas hogs. The Land Cruiser sold in the UK only comes equipped with diesel engines. No gas hogs even offered in that market. Toyota has treated the USA like a step child for too many years. We don't get the highest mileage vehicles they offer to the rest of the World. That makes Toyota part of the problem with our fossil fuel consumption. And the hybrids were injected to protect them from CAFE fines. So why should I jump on your Rah Rah bandwagon. Toyota has not given US any good reason to be fans over the last several years.

Two words... 25% Chicken Tax...

Actually I think that Toyota followed the lead of the Detroit 3 when it decided to get bigger into the truck market. You're right there's no reason why a diesel 4Runner or Tacoma couldn't be built here exactly in the same way it's being built today in Thailand.

houdini1 · November 2009

I'm with you grandma. A baby boomer that has been burned by GM too many times over the years. As a consequence I haven't owned one in years and have no plans to buy another one.

The bailout was just another nail in the coffin for me. They got themselves into the problem with years of trying to rip people off by selling them pos autos and caving in to the unions. They should have gracefully committed hari kari. I would not miss them.

iluvmysephia1 · November 2009

please tell us how you really feel about GM.

This new AE86 Coupe Toyota and Subaru are working on together looks downright hot to me. I'll come back later and post a concept picture of the Toyota version of the collaboration.

gagrice · November 2009

Two words... 25% Chicken Tax..

What I find Ironic is the fact that the Democrats pushed that tax to protect the US automakers from VW. Now Ford is pulling a big switch to circumvent the law that was a protectionist tariff for their benefit. Why is that stupid law still in place?

To Outfox the Chicken Tax, Ford Strips Its Own Vans
Logic Takes a Back Seat -- and Windows, as Auto Maker Plays Tariff Games

BALTIMORE -- Several times a month, Transit Connect vans from a Ford Motor Co. factory in Turkey roll off a ship here shiny and new, rear side windows gleaming, back seats firmly bolted to the floor.

Their first stop in America is a low-slung, brick warehouse where those same windows, never squeegeed at a gas station, and seats, never touched by human backsides, are promptly ripped out.

The fabric is shredded, the steel parts are broken down, and everything is sent off along with the glass to be recycled.

Why all the fuss and feathers? Blame the "chicken tax."

The seats and windows are but dressing to help Ford navigate the wreckage of a 46-year-old trade spat. In the early 1960s, Europe put high tariffs on imported chicken, taking aim at rising U.S. sales to West Germany. President Johnson retaliated in 1963, in part by targeting German-made Volkswagens with a tax on imports of foreign-made trucks and commercial vans.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125357990638429655.html

fintail · November 2009

Who do you bank with? Who manages your investments? Did you abandon those setups after those industries and virtually everyone involved with them raided the taxpayers wallets not long ago?

I can see many reasons not to choose GM - and I myself am not really wooed by any present-day GM offerings...but simply because it was bailed out is kind of silly. I'm not a boomer, and I think the products can have a lack of appeal all their own without a penny of federal aid :shades:

It's also amusing how people would write off GM for receiving aid, but still support parasitic middle eastern "allies" who have been nursing at the federal teet for generations with zero benefit produced...and the same people also have no problem buying household items simply because they are cheap, no matter that they are made in arguably the greatest social and environmental criminal nation in the world and no matter the future problems it poses for the western world, one the "me generation" would gladly aid and abet to save $50 on an appliance.

xlu · November 2009

I think that's the wrong reason to hate GM. Japanese government bailed their car makers even more than the US! It's your lost for not checking all the possibilities in the car selections.

I had never owned GM before but I purchased 3 new GM cars in the recent 5 years. They are changing for better and they have some very good new models.

bumpy · November 2009

I'll keep my '98 Frontier 4-cylinder gas engine, with a 5-speed manual. Its overall mpg has been 26.

The diesel version would have net you 36 mpg.

What gagrice really needs to do is find a nice manual Nissan '90s pickup, buy a Navara or Terrano diesel front clip from jarco or somebody, then locate a good import shop to swap in the TD engine and associated parts.

gagrice · November 2009

buy a Navara or Terrano diesel

I have had offers to install a Cummins 4BT with GM auntomatic in my 99 Ford Ranger. I really like that size PU and it is in perfect condition. The V6 engine with auto transmission is very weak. I can barely pull my utility trailer with a yard of topsoil.

It would be so much easier if one of the automakers would get off the dime and offer US a decent midsized PU with a 4 banger diesel. We have plenty of fire breathing diesels for the racer set. I just want a decent work vehicle that gets better than 20 MPG.

iluvmysephia1 · November 2009

this is not the same pic of the new Toyota Coupe under development with Subaru. But here's what I found a coupla minutes ago for ya ta gander upon. Listed as Toyota AE86. Similar red as my '08 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS' Rally Red for iluvmysephia1 starters.

obyone · November 2009

Any chance that Subaru is doing the gas pedal?

explorerx4 · November 2009

rejected civic coupe design?

iluvmysephia1 · November 2009

Corolla in that design. Maybe the 1980 series Corolla. I see it.

And the red on this new AE86 Coupe looks more cinnamon-ish than my Lancer GTS' does. I have truly come to love the Rally Red on my Lancer GTS. A true metallic red that looks...racy. :shades:

bumpy · November 2009

Biggest problem is the 4BT weighs about 800 pounds, which is too much iron to stick in the front end of a Ranger without a ton of work.

gagrice · November 2009

Weight is one of the big negatives. I will probably get my neighbor to drop in a small V8 which are plentiful. Or just keep driving it until the next C4C program and hope something comes along I like. The truck qualifies just not for another small truck with enough power.

explorerx4 · November 2009

from msn

imidazol97 · November 2009

To quote from the MSN link...

"The IIHS announced its winners Wednesday and noted that Toyota didn't have a single model in the list: "Toyota and its Lexus and Scion subsidiaries had a strong showing in 2009 with 11 winners but were shut out for 2010," the institute said.

Firing back, Toyota issued a statement the same day, reacting to IIHS' news release and its comments on Toyota that the institute put under the subheading "Missing the mark."

"IIHS' statement that Toyota was shut out for 2010 is extreme and misleading, considering there are 38 Toyota, Lexus and Scion models, and only three were tested for roof strength by IIHS: Camry, RAV4 and Yaris," the automaker said.

No Toyotas offered
IIHS Senior Vice President Anne Fleming said Thursday that she wasn't surprised by the response. "This is the way automakers often react," she said, and called Toyota's statement disingenuous.

"We told every automaker, including Toyota, there would be this new criterion for roof strength and to flag the vehicles that they would like us to test," Fleming said. "Toyota did not come forth with any requests. Usually the reason automakers don't flag vehicles is they know the vehicles wouldn't pass."b>

houdini1 · November 2009

Usually the reason automakers don't flag vehicles is they know the vehicles wouldn't pass.

But she "couldn't say" which other mfgs. did not flag vehicles.

Others not making the list included BMW, Mazda, Mitsubishi, and Saab.

210delray · November 2009

Let's not make too big a fuss over this -- the Institute's tests are not pass/fail, but rather Good, Acceptable, Marginal, and Poor (more like A, B, D, and F).

GM had only 2 vehicles that were rated Good in the roof crush testing, and Ford had only 2 if you exclude Volvo. The Chevy Aveo was Marginal, same as the Ford Escape without the hybrid engine.

Toyota did have the Camry, which rated Good in the new roof test, but fell short on head restraints; the other 2 Toyotas tested (RAV4 and Yaris) scored an Acceptable on the roof test. In fact, the Camry had the strongest roof in numerical terms among the 18 midsize moderately priced sedans tested thus far.

Moreover, the only vehicles to score a Poor thus far on the new test were the Kia Sportage (and twin Hyundai Tucson) as well as the Ford Escape Hybrid and its clones.

Toyota will be back with more models to test, as will GM and Ford. This isn't over by a long shot.

I will agree that it was not in good judgment for the Toyota spokesman to trot out the tired old line that "our cars meet or exceed all federal safety standards." Of course, otherwise your cars wouldn't be allowed to be sold in the US!

corvette · November 2009

I will probably get my neighbor to drop in a small V8 which are plentiful.

Sometimes it's nice to live in an area with no emission testing/vehicle inspection... I've sometimes thought about retrofitting a used Jetta or Passat with one of the high-powered diesels that's not offered here, but I think the different fuel standards might cause a problem, plus if it ever breaks, you have a one-of-a-kind vehicle to figure out how to fix.

mcdawgg · November 2009

"Let's not make too big a fuss over this" True, but there are some that love to do that to the brand they really hate!! Just ignore or post negative stuff about other brands - it is easy to find. :P

210delray · November 2009

In that vein, should I point out that the Hyundai Sonata and Kia Optima had the worst roof crush scores of any of the 18 midsize sedans -- Marginal? All the others scored Acceptable or Good, with the Camry at the top.

gagrice · November 2009

My understanding is CA is not to rough on engine changes. At least not if you are putting a diesel into an existing vehicle. The one of a kind and getting totally involved keeping it running does not appeal to me as it did 50 years ago. I loved swapping engines and changing transmissions in the 40s and 50s vehicles. By about 1963 I was ready to let someone else get greasy. I maintain by Kubota tractor and that is enough.

kdhspyder · November 2009

This little flareup IMO is mainly about the Corolla and the Prius.

The Camry as you noted is fine. It gets a GOOD rating on the new test and Toyota was never going to add the AHRs before the Gen 7 comes out anyway. Net effect nothing. With regards to this new test the Camry remains in higher standing than it's main rivals the Accord and Altima as well the recently redone Fusion. Nothing to see here move on.

But the Corolla and the Prius were not submitted while the Civic was, getting GOOD marks. If one looks at the segment rankings all they imply is incomplete testing. Note: [ not tested ]. This appears to put the onus on the IIHS but says nothing about the vehicles.

IIHS small car segment

The IIHS is somewhat left in a lurch in recommending some vehicles but admitting that the others are fine but they just haven't tested them. Their backhand at Toyota was IMO a jab to get more vehicles to be tested. Without vehicles to be tested the IIHS's results are interesting but very incomplete.

nippononly · November 2009

Toyota takes blame for part from Dana

November 23, 2009 - 12:01 am ET

Toyota Motor Corp. is taking the blame for rust problems on 2000 and 2001 Toyota Tundra pickups. But in a highly unusual move, the automaker identified Dana Holding Corp. as the supplier of the trucks' frames.

Dana also built the frames for 750,000 1995-2004 Tacoma pickups that faced similar rust problems and were the subject of voluntary recalls and buybacks last year.

Toyota was to submit information to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration last week in response to complaints about rusted frames on the pickups.

Dana spokesman Chuck Hartlage said, "We are assisting Toyota with this investigation" on the Tundras.

...."It is too early to speculate what we will do for Tundra," Lyons said. "They're only looking at one specific portion of the frame -- the cross member that supports the spare tire -- not the entire frame."

NHTSA is investigating 20 reports that relate to spare tire separation and brake system failures as a result of frame corrosion on the vehicles.

NHTSA has received 238 complaints about the 2000 models and 48 about the 2001 models. The complaints range from brake-line corrosion to corrosion of the entire frame. More than 70 complaints had been posted since NHTSA launched its preliminary evaluation of the problem on Oct. 6.

http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091123/OEM/311239951/1128

So are they blaming Dana or are they not? Why point a finger at Dana if they "don't blame them"? And are they going to go on having rust problems with the frames of all their trucks?

Maybe automakers depend too heavily on their outside suppliers these days....

autobuynsell · November 2009

Toyota in that design. Maybe the 1981 series Toyota

andre1969 · November 2009

I'd say that new Toyota coupe looks like a Honda styling exercise, something caught in between an Acura RSX and the current-gen Civic coupe. Not a bad looking car, but doesn't really do anything for me.

I guess if you squint your eyes a bit, it might pass off as that generation of Celica that ran from around 1978-81...it has a similar, slicked-back look. The Corolla back then, at least from 1979-83, had more of a forward thrust to the front-end. I always thought those little hardtops they offered were neat. They offered one that was a notchback coupe, and the other was a 2-door, sort of splitting the difference between wagon and hatchback.

lemko · November 2009

I agree. The fact that they had to borrow from the govt. doesn't change my opinion about GM one bit. I still love Buick and Cadillac cars and look forward to many more in the future. I would love to get a new LaCrosse for my wife someday.

lemko · November 2009

I would mourn the loss of GM more than my own impending death. I would follow GM to hell, even if it meant leaving heaven to do so. Did you "babyboomers" ever think where your kids or your grandchildren are going to work? A young girl who works with me is going for her law degree. She was looking at jobs in the classifieds and the best one was for a warehouse worker. You've got people at Best Buy with masters degrees! What a tragic waste of intellect and talent. You didn't hear of such stories when GM was on top and there were plenty of manufacturing jobs for anybody who wanted to work. Keep sending those jobs out of the country, boomers! Just remember, it'll be Gen-X and Y who you so royally screwed who will be looking after you in your dotage!

Toyota on the mend?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles