Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Are Toyota's recent quality problems just a glitch?

1246726

Comments

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    kd,

    The last tundra, I looked at was 60% and that was a few years ago.

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    Kd,

    GM management in the past are the ones to blame for not fully funding GM, pension funds and blowing billions on fiat, Saab, Fuji, Isuzu, Suzuki, Subaru, all which have been major blunders and money that could of fully funded pensions and health insurance to make them non-issues.

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    from wikipedia..

    1st Gen tundra

    Snippet:
    Built in a new Toyota plant in Princeton, Indiana, with 80 percent domestic content, the Tundra showed that Toyota was serious about closing the gap on the Big Three.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    http://www.levelfieldinstitute.org/docs/lfi-domestic-content.pdf

    It shows here the toyota Tundra is 60% so Wikipedia or this site is wrong. I with my own eyes back around 2003-2004 remember seeing a Tundra with 60% ???? I don't know why we are getting different numbers.....

    However some of these facts below might help you look at the bigger picture. ;)

    http://levelfieldinstitute.org/domestic.htm

    http://www.levelfieldinstitute.org/fact-sheet-yen.htm

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    kdhspyder . . . I agree with you. Why does every thread and forum that rockylee contributes to gravitate to becoming a drum beating advertisement for the UAW?

    W9cw,

    If you actually pay attention and follow the posts you would notice I wasn't the one who brought up the UAW. ;)

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    No in this case the 'levelfieldinstitue' is
    a) wrong because they did no research of their own;
    b) intentionally misleading the readers;
    c) presently old evidence..

    It is what it is at 80%. Your refusal to accept any other word than the possibly slanted viewpoint UAW just confirms your 'ears of stone' nickname.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    You are yet to show me a domestic content label off of a Toyota Tundra. Wikipedia, can be wrong and who knows where they got their information from. They perhaps like you got the domestic content percentage from Consumer Reports ? I'm not blind and know just a few years ago the Tundra, I saw said 60% domestic content. Geeez why would I lie. I honestly could really care less because the big 3 trucks are the only "american" trucks and the Tundra is a Japanese owned truck.

    Rocky
  • OMG I am going down to the Toyota dealer across the way from and looking at the sticker myself.

    You said yourself it was a few years ago so they could have increased the domestic content now.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    You said yourself it was a few years ago so they could have increased the domestic content now.

    That is true british, they could have but Wikipedia said the content was 80% from 2000-2006 and I think their could be a mistake on their part ?

    Oh well it's not that big of a deal and is kinda childish to really argue over. ;)

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Unless you are calling me a liar...

    I gave you three domestic content stickers
    2 Chevy's and a Tundra.

    You only contest the Tundra one because you don't want to take the time to verify my info and it doesn't suit your purpose.

    Most importantly though you just like to argue without listening especially where facts don't suit your biased viewpoint... ergo 'ears or stone'
  • w9cww9cw Posts: 888
    rockylee wrote: "If you actually pay attention and follow the posts you would notice I wasn't the one who brought up the UAW."

    I do follow the posts, at least given the small amount of time I have to peruse Edmunds.com. No disrespect intended, it just seems like in all the myriad of threads you are involved here, the discussion always seems to evolve to the UAW. Is it possible to discuss the pros and cons of the thread's title without a union vs. non-union debate?
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    kd,

    I'm not calling you a liar. I'm just saying I saw different back a few years ago is all. Perhaps things have changed ?

    I honestly don't care....you can win this arguement ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    Is it possible to discuss the pros and cons of the thread's title without a union vs. non-union debate?

    Would love to do that w9cw. It seems that the majority of people know where I stand on the union issue and to get my goat they bring it up. I guess I should be more mature and ignore it. ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    gmfan1,

    Fintails, Mercedes Benz's aren't winter beaters.... ;)

    Rocky
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,175
    http://www.leftlanenews.com/2007/01/08/2007-toyota-tundra-crewmax-announced/

    Domestic truck fans have nothing to diss about this new rig. It's handsome, well equipped, powerful and certainly as capable as the big three. Best of all, it is built in the good ol US of A which should change the minds of the anti-import crowd as they have absolutely nothing to knock this new rig for anymore. They'll sell every single one.

    I predict many conquest sales from this. Good job Toyota on building a real competitor. :shades:
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    It's a very nice truck "anything" but I don't see where it's better than GM's new ones which won't matter because like you said everyone will sell as they should because it's a nice piece. ;)

    Rocky
  • drjamesdrjames Posts: 274
    anythingbutgm, though I whole heartedly agree that this truck is american as one gets, and that it probably is a rock solid truck, I've learned that it doesn't matter what you post, or what you say. Unfortunately many who may claim to be "open mined", have a pervasive and ingrained mind-set that simply will never be changed. Laughable is the notion that a Dogde truck or anything built by Chysler is still built by an "American company."
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,876
    For a hint about the subject of conversation. Off-topic posts have been removed, and will continue to be removed without notice.

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,175
    Yeah, I'll drink to that. So true.

    But even with the "coordinated forum blitz" of pro-GM posts that we have been seeing over the past month or so, I believe the Real Market will fully accept the new Tundra as a strong offering and worthy of a look.

    Pro-domestic fans are going to be grasping for straws to come up with negative things to say about this new rig. :blush:
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,175
    Toyota is getting serious with their new supercar. The Corvette could be in for some serious competition.

    http://www.leftlanenews.com/2007/01/08/2009-lexus-lf-a-concept/

    Stylistic knockout IMO. :shades:
  • drjamesdrjames Posts: 274
    anythingbut, agreed with the styling. Thing this thing is just gorgeous, but doubt Lexus is aiming at the Vette as its primary competition. It's a "Lexus", and has been caught being tested in Germany along with a 911 Turbo.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,713
    Freaky, especially the weird lump on the A-pillar and the ridiculous scoop beside the B-pillar. Toyota and styling...they still haven't got it down, but at least they are trying.
  • maple2maple2 Posts: 177
    Unfortunately many who may claim to be "open mined", have a pervasive and ingrained mind-set that simply will never be changed. Laughable is the notion that a Dogde truck or anything built by Chysler is still built by an "American company."

    whats even more laughable is your having this converstion with a guy who goes by anythngbutgm :) :P
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    Sounds like Toyota did the right thing to increase the engine warranty but neglected to tell customers OR dealers about the extended warranty.

    What is the oil change schedule on a Toyota? 7500 miles? Do they have an oil life monitor like GM vehicles?

    LOS ANGELES -- Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc. has quietly settled a class-action lawsuit that covers about 3.5 million Toyota and Lexus vehicles that may have been damaged by engine oil sludge.

    Details of the settlement, which allows for third-party mediation of sludge claims rejected by Toyota, have been mailed to 7.5 million current and previous owners.

    Critics contend Toyota has told customers and dealers too little about sludge issues. They say some customers took vehicles with dead engines to dealers who had little or no knowledge of the problem and often assumed it was the owners' fault.

    Unhappy customers had no remedy other than hiring a lawyer to go after Toyota.

    Under the agreement, owners whose claims have been denied by Toyota may submit them to a third-party mediator at no cost for binding arbitration.

    "This settlement breathes life into claims that have been dead for years," said Gary Gambel, a lawyer for plaintiffs who sued Toyota. "This is not a settlement that gives a few dollars to everyone. The relief is exactly tied to the problems and damages that someone might have."

    Toyotas at risk
    About 3.3 million Toyota vehicles are susceptible to oil sludge, which can cause thousands of dollars in damage and require replacement of the engine. Here are the vehicles included in the settlement.
    VEHICLE MODEL YEARS
    Camry 4 cyl. 1997-2001
    Camry 6 cyl. 1997-2002
    Camry Solara 4 cyl. 1999-2001
    Camry Solara 6 cyl. 1999-2002
    Sienna 6 cyl. 1998-2002
    Avalon 6 cyl. 1997-2002
    Celica 4 cyl. 1997-1999
    Highlander 6 cyl. 2001-2002
    Lexus ES 300 1997-2002
    Lexus RX 300 1999-2002

    The issue highlights a possible chink in the company's armor. Executives fear Toyota is growing too fast for its engineering resources. That could lead to quality snags and a tarnished reputation.

    When a customer takes a sludge-caked engine to a dealership, there is usually a "clean-out" procedure. The head is pulled and a service technician tries try to steam out the sludge. If that doesn't work, the engine must be replaced.

    Sludge can result from poor engine design; overly tight tolerances between moving parts; improper cooling; and poor maintenance by consumers.

    Toyota insists the problem arises mainly when owners fail to change their oil frequently enough.

    The agreement does not find Toyota at fault.

    "The settlement doesn't mean that Toyota or Lexus vehicles are predisposed to develop oil gel," according to the notice.
    After Toyota had received 3,400 sludge complaints by 2002 it extended its vehicle warranty to eight years and unlimited miles. The program was offered to owners of 1997-2002 Toyota and Lexus vehicles equipped with 3.0-liter V-6 or 2.2-liter four-cylinder engines. The company declined to give an updated number of complaints.

    The terms

    Under terms of the settlement:

    Owners of damaged vehicles have eight years plus 120 days from the original purchase date to file a complaint.

    If Toyota denies the claim, owners can appeal to a judge-appointed third-party administrator: J. Robert Ates, a New Orleans lawyer.

    Customers who have already made repairs may be able to recover the costs.

    Only those who elect not to participate in the settlement can sue Toyota individually. The deadline for that choice was Dec. 31, 2006.

    The settlement is transferable to future vehicle owners.

    The car only needs to show evidence of oil sludge. It is not necessary for the owner to have made repairs during the claim period.

    Damages that can be recovered include loss in value of the vehicle and incidental costs, such as rental cars. Past lawyers' fees, mental anguish and bodily injuries are not covered.

    "The terms of the program remain unchanged. There always was a way for customers to appeal our decision."

    Plaintiff lawyers disagree. They say Toyota failed to communicate the extent of the problem to its dealers and customers. Toyota's appeal process also meant hiring a lawyer, which many consumers could not afford. It costs nothing to file an appeal with Ates.
  • 210delray210delray Posts: 4,722
    This part of the story isn't quite accurate: Critics contend Toyota has told customers and dealers too little about sludge issues. They say some customers took vehicles with dead engines to dealers who had little or no knowledge of the problem and often assumed it was the owners' fault.

    I had one of the affected cars -- a '97 Camry 4-cylinder. In 2002, after Toyota had received numerous complaints, including a spirited debate here on Edmunds in which a Toyota rep participated, Toyota agreed to an 8-year, unlimited mileage warranty on all vehicles potentially affected by the problem. The article you quote says as much: After Toyota had received 3,400 sludge complaints by 2002 it extended its vehicle warranty to eight years and unlimited miles. The program was offered to owners of 1997-2002 Toyota and Lexus vehicles equipped with 3.0-liter V-6 or 2.2-liter four-cylinder engines.

    I received a letter explaining this warranty extension. The letter was similar to a recall letter, so it was obvious that it wasn't junk mail. If there was a problem, the owner had to show evidence of reasonable maintenance, meaning at least one oil change per year.

    My car did NOT have sludge. I changed the oil myself at 5000K mile intervals or less (3+ times a year) using conventional oil. I had the car for 7 years and 111K miles and sold it only to upgrade to a side-airbag equipped 2004 Camry. It is still not clear to this day if the sludging issue was due to faulty engineering or inadequate maintenance.

    I have seen some articles that discussed changes that were subsequently made to the V6 engine, but I have yet to read about ANY changes that were made to the 4-cylinder.

    At the time (1997), Toyota had 6-month/7500 mile intervals for normal service oil changes and 4-month/5000 mile intervals for severe service.

    In 2004, Toyota shortened the service interval to 6 months/5000 miles for all users AND began installing a dashboard amber warning light "maintenance required" that would start flashing at 4500 miles since the last reset and would stay on steadily at 5000 miles.

    To my knowledge, no Toyota product uses engine oil life monitors, but as you know, these are indirect indicators of oil quality and are not infallible. And as I recall from reading GM owner's manuals, you still must change the oil once a year even if the monitor indicates the oil is still "good."

    And just in case I get called on for making things up ;), here is the link to the relevant Edmunds thread from five years ago. Yep, five years ago -- this really is old news.
  • chevy598chevy598 Posts: 162
    I've got 2 GM cars with the oil life monitors, and I wouldn't trust them for a minute. I use conventional oil, and change it every 5000 miles regardless of what the monitor says. I didn't reset the oil life monitor after an oil change (5000 miles), and it didn't go off for another 4000 miles. That's 9000 miles on one oil change. I don't think that is very healthy on a motor.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,691
    2 different people with affected 4-cylinder Camrys, one a '97, and the other a '99. I know they were both notified by mail when that warranty got extended, because they both asked me what the letter meant.

    The '97 got sold to be replaced by an '04 Accord, with 120K miles when sold and never a single repair. The '99 is still in my other friend's possession, getting to about 120K itself now, and no problems with the engine. An aftermarket alarm and an attempted theft have caused no end of problems, but that's another story...

    GM made a smart move going to the 100K warranty. Regardless of how "meaningful" it is (currently being debated in a different thread, because it is 100K miles but only 5 years), it is a great demonstration by the manufacturer of faith in the long-term durability of its product. And if Toyota had such a standard warranty, they probably wouldn't have taken so much flak over the sludge thing.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    Oil life monitor works well. Nothing wrong with 9000 miles with the right customer usage. Just not what you are used to. In my old vette the service schedule is unbelievable. If any manufacturer put it out they would have no customers. Vehicles have improved immensely
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,162
    My Seville STS has the oil life monitor. I change it around 21% oil life which corresponds to 3K miles. I make sure I reset. Heck, I'm used to checking the odometer anyway to determine when to change my oil.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,162
    Why don't they just bring back the Supra and be done with it? That car looks pretty weird - front end kind of reminds me of a Mazda. The Acura NSX still looks good nearly 20 years later.
This discussion has been closed.