Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The car had a beautiful digital dash, and the stereo sounded great, but it was breaking down frequently. Our mechanic used to joke about how my brother-in-law is paying for his(mechanic) kid's college bills with his Buick's repairs.
That was twenty years ago.
Back in, say, '71, if someone would have said they wouldn't buy a new Impala because their '47 Chevy was having problems in 1950, we'd have all laughed and considered the person a neanderthal. But now that most of us are older, we find ourselves making similar statements.
That was then. This is now. Toyota's worse now than in '86; GM's better now than in '86.
Bill P.
No it is common sense not to entrust your life to a device you know isn't essential, that you can operate yourself. For instance would you go sky-diving if the only way for the chute to deploy is if you have an altimeter, and this computer-control system that deploys the chute? That's the only way you can deploy the chute, no backup chute either. Or would it make more sense to have the altimeter system, AND a backup manual-pull-cord? And maybe a 2nd chute? Even if the computerized system fails about the same as you're chances of hitting Powerball, it is still foolish not to have a manual backup system.
Oh and I thought of you while watching the news today - guess what the high-tech military "missed the chimney" by about 1,000 feet in Afghanistan. Not very reliable if you ask me, or the Army who shut it down for review of what went wrong. The Afghan civilians are certainly fearful. :P
IMO, Toyota will be forced into great incentives just to scare up showroom traffic. As it stands now Toyota does not make the most exciting cars on the market, the only thing that keeps them going is the usually great build quality and higher than average resale value - well that's past tense for now.
If I were in the market for a new car today (which I am not) I would only purchase a 2010 Toyota model if it came with an unbelievable deal. It is no secret that overall quality has slipped in the past 10 years or so, but that is the trade off when you put trying to be #1 in sales in front of quality.
I have owned several Toyota's in the past 15 years or so, and for the most part have been satisfied with the autos I have purchased. Would I buy one again? Maybe, but it depends on the competition and what they are offering at the time and price comparison.
Toyota needs to refocus on quality and building the most trouble free cars on the market and they will be just fine; otherwise there are many other cars on the market that offer more driving pleasure and reasonable reliability.
Get your heads out of your a**es Toyota!!!
What is clear, with Toyota's continued slipping quality, their safety woes, and falling resale values, the competition is eating away at their market share pretty dramatically. Toyota's in a situation where the dealers have over a 100 days of stock on hand. That's a big problem for them, too. I'm not even certain larger rebates will clear that amount of stock out. For one example, Toyota could quit making Camrys for a month....just shut down production for 30 days, and they'd still be overstocked (provided that people actually will buy those same Camrys as it's a tenuous bet that they will).
I check many UK and European sites and they are saying just this.
I'm thinking that if electronics are truly the UA culprit, then it will be inevitable that UA starts appearing more on other makes as well. I guess time will tell, but people need to look at the stats and the fact that experiencing UA is still a pretty low probability of occurence.
Your best bet of quality these days is to buy Hyundai, KIA, or a Daewoo built GM car such as the upcoming cruze. Checked out the new Sonata at the autoshow and no other carmaker had anything that came even close in style, content, quality, and value. Another few cars that looked promising were the Buick Regal based on the German Opel, and the Ford Fiesta and the 2012 Focus all coming from Europe. Nothing the Japanese automakers had looked close to interesting.
BTW, my wife just had to replace the entire front end on her 2007 Acura TSX because of rack and pinion complete failure. Apparently transport Canada already has enough complaints about these that Honda has extended the warranty on it. It affects most of their modes including the CRV, civic, etc...
Honda did not issue a recall yet on these, but just give it time. I think they are banking on the fact that the failure is gradual and you will notice the steering squeek long before it becomes a safety issue, still at some point it will cause some disaster for someone who drives with the music and on and do not notice small things (I noticed the problem, my wife did not).
At that point it will be another massive recall for Honda.
In their favor though is they did not give us any hassle fixing everything under warranty even though the car had passed its bumper to bumper warranty mileage.
It was about a $4000 fix including as well the water pump (yes failure after 2 years) unheard of. Japanese car quality.
Logically, yes. However LOTS of people will swear off a brand if they get crappy quality. That is reality. And that is the long term cost of crappy quality. It doesn't really matter if it makes sense, it's still the truth. Any manufacturer needs to consider that if/when they cheap out on their products.
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.f1b06e0/14
check out the link to my post below and you'll see that I had trouble with GM for almost 30 years going all the way up to 2005, which the last time I checked wasn't 20 years ago!!! :P
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.f1b06e0/14
How, who, would ever know...??
If it were my car, I'd want to know. But, as best I can tell, toyota isn't giving up that information.
I kind of wish a Toyota service dept technician at one of the dealerships would wander over here with the answers, as opposed to trying to squeeze that information from toyota corporate (who still doesn't seem to be forthcoming).
Someone at NipponDenso, Denso US, would undoubtedly know but having the information get to Toyota/etc would be questionable.
The emergency stop function must operate as either a category 0 or category 1 stop, as determined by a risk assessment. It must be initiated by a single human action. When executed, it must override all other functions and machine operating modes. The objective is to remove power as quickly as possible without creating additional hazards.
http://www.ab.com/en/epub/catalogs/3377539/5866177/3378076/7131359/tab10.html
Toyota is teetering on the precipice and in danger of squandering a lot of their 40 years of repuation. However I would not agree that they've failed miserably...YET. When you look at the track records of Toyota vs. GM or C they are not so miserable. But they need to get it together quickly or they will be.
Because until "now" no one saw, foresaw, the need.
The clutch went away.
The mechanical coupling to the automatic transmssions went away.
The mechanical coupling to the throttle went away.
And no one noticed that there was no longer a way to uncouple a run-a-way engine.
But, Toyota is entering into an area of firsts, none of them good. Not sure of this, but 8.5M vehicle recalls, at least in such a short period of time, across such a broad range of products, for such a variety of maladies, have to be a first.
the general consensus is that the long term impact to Toyota is minimal.
it depends on what you and the society consider essential. At the basic level, clothing, shelter, cars, tvs, computers, and pretty much 99% of what we use on a daily basis isn't "essential" in that you can certainly sustain your life without any of them.
does that mean you should be walking around naked?
there is an engineering report by a west coast engineering firm (Exponent?) today on Toyota vehicles electronics systems. They bought 6 toyota / lexus vehicles last december and started to induce electronic problems in the vehicles to say if they couldn't induce run-away cars / unintended acceleration.
In spite of their herculean efforts, they could only get lower engine output - apparently the computers will detect sensory malfunction and will default into a fail-safe (lump-home) mode.
the report IS funded by Toyota.
from WSJ:
"Exponent has so far been unable to induce, through electrical disturbances to the system, either unintended acceleration or behavior that might be a precursor to such an event, despite concerted efforts toward this goal,"
"In December, Toyota retained Exponent "to understand customer reports and claims of unintended acceleration in vehicles" which use its electronic throttle-control system. Exponent says Toyota didn't limit the scope or budget of its investigation. A person familiar with the study says testing and analysis by Exponent will continue for several months."
"The evaluation was conducted by engineers and technicians specializing in mechanical, electrical, and automotive engineering. It included a series of tests such as driving tests with anomalies imposed on the electronics and characterizing the sensitivity of the system to aberrations and noise imposed on individual components.
The tests looked at how the electronic sensors in the gas pedal and in the throttle body perform in different vehicles in normal and stressed situations. When failures were induced in these sensors, Exponent says the electronic control module detected the problem.
"Imposing these perturbations resulted in a significant drop in power rather than an increase," Exponent says in the study. "In all cases, when a fault was imposed, the vehicle entered a fail-safe mode."
In the event of any electronic failure, Toyota says its system is designed to default to fail-safe, or limp-home, mode where the engine power is significantly reduced."
I wish them luck in any case.
the general consensus is that the long term impact to Toyota is minimal.
Well DUHH!! What did you think they would say? You think they are going to say hmmm i guess we are screwed now. :lemon: :confuse:
And if the computer itself has the malfunction...DEADLY EMBRACE within the code execution maybe...??
When the battery in my '01 911/996 was marginal I would not have even taken notice except shortly after starting to drive away the instrument panel would light up like a Christmas tree. I could switch the ignition off and restart and everything would be fine until the next time, RARE next time.
I finally decided to pay attention to the fact that when starting the engine was turning over a bit slowly. Once I replaced the battery the engine would then start INSTANTLY and all those symptoms disappeared.
My guess, "uneducated" guess, was that with the low voltage during engine cranking some of the ancillary ECUs, ABS, PSM, etc, were dropping out of operation, code crawling into a hole....
I like the sudden increase in Toyota UA claims though, probably a combo of media hysteria and televised legal firms soliciting a buck. Reminds me of how whenever there is a city transit accident, if there were 6 people on the bus, at least 18 show up claiming injury after the accident. America - home of the lawyer on commision!
Amazing!! Who would have imagined that Exponent could support the exact result that Toyota wanted, and which Toyota is paying for. Next thing you know my Congressmen will be adding little addendums to bills, to help the lobbyists who just took them and their families on a fact-finding mission thru the Caribbean. Anyway, my friends and I will do a second study to verify the first. Where's Toyota's phone #?
I would guess Toyota will pay pretty well, as I'd certainly pay a lot to have some independent-proof (hahaha!) when the lawsuits start. Maybe Toyota can see if they can arrange some of the OJ jurors to be involved?
I guess the writer of Toyota's code is god-like! I thought that was only the emporor in Japan? So the emperor must be moon-lighting?
But, Toyota is entering into an area of firsts, none of them good. Not sure of this, but 8.5M vehicle recalls, at least in such a short period of time, across such a broad range of products, for such a variety of maladies, have to be a first.
Again, disagree. The jury is out. Nobody looks objectively at numbers. You may be a bit too wishful. It could come true if Toyota screws up, but IMHO if they are honest from here on out and no more problems occur, their damage will not be long lasting.
GM had 40 years of trash and that takes a lot of years to climb out of the hole. Toyota had 40 years of almost sterling reputation and even a few years of incidents that are admittedly rare (at least the UA problems) don't destroy that reputation.
Ford's lawyers said let the Pinto buyers burn because it was too expensive to design a decent gas tank. That is worse than Toyota.
Again, if Toyota does well from here on, they will only suffer a year or two. If they screw up or more problems discovered, it may get to what you say. But it is not there yet. I would personally still trust a Toyota more than a C or most GMs.
How do you know that Toyota has not hid their findings on the flaky DBW system? There is evidence to that end.
GM had 40 years of trash
That is so much baloney. I owned 5 GM trucks from 1988- 2005. The only one that gave me problems was the 2005. Sounds like GM and Toyota headed down hill together. Just talking to my plumber. His 2002 GM 1 ton van has 255k miles with only a bad water pump. GM cars may have been junk. I have never owned one. Did the frames rust and fall apart like recent Toyotas? I think the downfall of Toyota since the late 1990s is actually understated.
you guessed wrong.
you apparently aren't aware of watchdog timer, something they usually mention during the first lecture on Embedded Programming 101, and they usually start to teach students about it in the 3rd or 4th lecture on the same class.
"When the battery in my '01 911/996 was marginal I would not have even taken notice except shortly after starting to drive away the instrument panel would light up like a Christmas tree. I could switch the ignition off and restart and everything would be fine until the next time, RARE next time."
mostly modern mcus run off 1.8v - 2.2v, and some older stuff run off 3.3v - 5v. Your battery (lead-acid) is considered fully depleted with an output voltage of 9.4v, and most systems light up a warning if it falls below 10.8v.
so to think that your lead-acid batteries can fall to the extent that it would no long power a mcu is foolish and ignorant of the basic knowledge about electronics.
"My guess, "uneducated" guess, was that with the low voltage during engine cranking some of the ancillary ECUs, ABS, PSM, etc, were dropping out of operation, code crawling into a hole.... "
never heard of brown-outs, BOR resets, etc.?
apparently so.
you are basically accusing Exponent of having no integrity, without any factual basis to support your allegation.
" and which Toyota is paying for. "
who else do you think should be paying for this? GM? you? the plaintiff's bar association?
That is so much baloney. I owned 5 GM trucks from 1988- 2005. The only one that gave me problems was the 2005.
Perhaps if you want a truck. I like sedans and GM had nothing decent unless you wanted a boat that rode on cream of wheat shocks.
GM trucks and SUVs are much more reliable then their cars have been!! there is the reason why the majority of Americans, for the past 20 years, typically have a Japanese car in their driveway and a GM or Ford pick-up truck as the other vehicle
for instance my one neighbor has a Accord and F-150 and my other neighbor has a Maxima and Silverado!!! :shades:
maybe just because the Japanese came to the truck game late?
the pick-up truck is a very unique US thing. many of the countries outside of the US don't have them, or have much smaller versions of them. so naturally the US makers have been long at this game and have an advantage over the Japanese (or the europeans for that matter).
the same could be said about cars 40 - 50 years ago as well.
it takes time to catch up with someone, even if that someone has years more experience.
that was the problem, GM's primary focus has always been pick-ups and SUVs because as GM stupidly said, "that is what Americans want" despite the fact no one was buying them when gas prices were over $4 dollars a gallon - GM finally reduced production, too late I might add, of their pick-ups and suvs but then as soon as gas prices lowered production of those large gas-guzzling vehicles increased again - "HELLO, DIDN'T YOU JUST SEE WHAT GAS PRICES WERE AT AND NO ONE WAS BUYING THEM???" and there is a really good chance they'll be back at those high prices within the near future??? and then GM will be whinning again when they have these huge inventories of gas guzzling vehicles that they can't sell
these are the local dealerships I have within 10 minutes from me, GM, VW/Audi, Nissan, Ford, Hyundai, Toyota, BMW, Infiniti, Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep, Subaru, and MB! of all these dealerships, the GM dealership has the biggest on lot inventory of pick-ups and SUVs which takes up almost HALF their lot
now that gas prices have been hovering just under $3 a gallon, instead of $2, I've started noticing a reduction in pick-up and SUV purchasing and I've seen the same pick-ups and SUVs at my local dealership sitting there for the past several months!
what really shows GMs stupidity is, that when gas was over $4 a gallon, all Japanese, Korean, German, and Ford had the smarts to severely reduce their large gas guzzling pick-up and/or suvs production when the gas prices started really going up! of course though, GM didn't and I remember my local dealership having to buy out two separate empty parking lots outside the dealership to hold all their inventory because the suvs and pick-ups were just sitting there while they continued to get their normal supply of coupes, sedans and pick-ups/suvs!
"Suspecting" is not "accusing". I "suspect" since I have seen various examples where $$$ influences the judgment of firms. If you were an investor in Enron, with Bernie Madoff, or various companies that were rated by Moody's or other rating-agencies; and you did not suspect bias, then you were out a lot of $$$. It's not wise many times to wait for the proof.
I also suspect that most of the scientists and universities behind collecting data on man-made global warming are biased because of the $$$ and power they receive for coming to certain conclusions.
Everyone can be corrupted, it's usually just a matter of how hungry they are. What is uncovered on these issues can mean the difference of hundreds of millions or billions of $'s, so yes internal and paid-for analyses are suspect.
so they were facing two difficult choices:
1) keep the factories working. that built up the inventory and hope a future reduction in gas prices will move the inventory. they are largely correct on the 2nd point - they thought $4 gas wasn't sustainable. But that depleted their cash fast which drove them to their demise.
2) shut down the factory. well, they would have to pay the union members and not much else was saved. Remember that GM was a negative working capital company and they benefit from higher levels of working capital so a ramp-down of production would have been a huge cash drain and that would have killed them faster.
your larger point is right, through: GM put all of its eggs in the truck/suv basket and when that stop'd moving, ...
but I think their notion that americans want bigger trucks / suvs continue to be correct, except that at $4 gas, that was a lot less correct,
does the following like suspecting or accusing: " Who would have imagined that Exponent could support the exact result that Toyota wanted,"
"If you were an investor in Enron, with Bernie Madoff, or various companies that were rated by Moody's or other rating-agencies; "
for your information, the rating agencies didn't cover Madoff. and unlikely to ever cover him or his type of busiensses, if you understand what rating agencies do.
"Everyone can be corrupted,"
that doesn't mean everyone IS corrupted.
Off-topic messages, such as those addressing hosting of this discussion and the quality of GM vehicles, are a violation of the membership agreement.
Please do not engage in either activity - they are equally offensive.
The appropriate way to deal with hosting issues is via email. Posting within the discussion only ADDS to the problem. These discussions are not now, and never have been, monitored in real-time. The best policy is to ignore rude/offensive posts until a human host removes them - hosts each cover many discussions, so this may not always be first on the list.
Thank you, and please return to discussing the issue pertinent to the topic of this discussion.
kirstie_h
wandering host
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
It's subjective; depending on the bias of the reader.
for your information, the rating agencies didn't cover Madoff.
They were 3 separate subjects: 1) Enron, 2) Madoff and 3) Moody's. They each were either paying someone to audit them - Enron and Madoff; or 3) they were getting paid to rate companies (many they continued to rate AAA until days before their stocks collapsed.
that doesn't mean everyone IS corrupted
And I'll doubt an unknown's honesty, until they prove otherwise. And then I'll still have a camera on them, if they're involved in my affairs.
Toyota has a serious problem right now, in that there have been so many dishonest individuals and corporations in the news. The worst thing they could have done is not to have had 1 "confession" of all problems. The way they have handled this with various statements and various recalls on different days, certainly makes it look like they are reluctantly giving information. It can all be legitimate, but it certainly looks like confusion, correction, and added recalls, coming out over months, is not the best way to present this.
Another day, another major story on Toyota's recent recall woes. As you may have already heard, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration – and particularly U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood – is less than pleased with the way Toyota has handled its various vehicle callbacks.
Now, NHTSA has made its public displeasure official with a press release indicating that it will "[use] its statutory authority to obtain documents from Toyota to determine if the automaker conducted three of its recent recalls in a timely manner." To what end? To determine "when and how it learned of the defects affecting approximately 6 million vehicles in the U.S. alone" and to be sure that there aren't any additional problems Toyota has yet to announce.
If the NHTSA finds that Toyota failed to deal with known safety issues in a timely manner, it could find the Japanese automaker liable for a maximum of $16.4 million in civil penalties. Granted, that's a pretty small dollar amount for such a large company, but it could spearhead the already rising tide of negative press and keep the issue fresh in the public's mind for some time to come. Click past the break for the official press release.