>Don't know about 2007 model cars, but do believe that American brand car makers in past used cheaper less reliable parts and components to cut costs than did manufacturers such as Honda and Toyota.
That makes a nice urban myth. Doubt there's any gravitas to the story.
Check out April issue of Consumer Reports regarding reliability, especially one chart/graph that shows reliability of American brands and foreign brands from 1 to 10 years. Japanese brands are more reliable. Probably due to better design and engineering as well as better components/parts. What might be better reason for superior results?
The link I provided was for replacement parts for ten year old cars, something you can go get one. Was it OEM? It doesn't see aftermarket there (although they are listed on the same page, for both cars).
The Chinese are far from pushovers when it comes to business. I will be curious to see how Chrysler makes out with them. GM has done pretty well playing the game by their rules. I think the Buick built in China is very popular.
Read somewhere that China and India each is graduating far more engineers than the U.S. Of course, don't know about the quality of their educations. Proof of pudding will be in cost/quality/reliability of products we might buy from them in future that are 100 percent Chinese/Indian design.
Months ago, read that leading Chinese telecom maker was close to making inroads in selling their equipment in other areas of world, but had not yet got into the U.S. market, but wants to.
How long before Chinese start selling Buicks in U.S. or Cherys.
You went from light bulbs not being made well for American cars to the whole cars being better. :P
Now it's read Consumer Misreports. I don't give them the credibililty that many others do.
>Japanese brands are more reliable.
Does that include all and every and every vehicle? I can lead you to some posts on Edmunds that point in the opposite direction. The regression to the mean has started for some models; in others only publicity about the flaws needs to be done.
Perhaps instead of talking about 10 years and more ago you should compare with current offerings. Are you sure that past statistics indicate future experience?
>"better design and engineering as well as better components/parts"
The parts come from essentially the same suppliers for those cars build partly within the US that are foreign brands. Are you saying the bulb companies give the "best" bulbs to Toyota Georgetown and Honda Marysville for the plants they do have here?
JDPowers has problem rates very close for many cars.
Would there be a good reason that one is more likely to spot an early 90s Civic on the road than a late 90s Contour or Mystique?
We actually have the opposite where they use salt on the roads. I guess it depends on location. When I first got my Contour I was on the west coast, and I was still more likely to see a 90s Honda than a Contour. In the midwest, most of the 90s Honda's have that signature corrosion over the rear wheel.
Perhaps instead of talking about 10 years and more ago you should compare with current offerings. Are you sure that past statistics indicate future experience?
Past statistics can indicate future experience if inputs and variables are monitored and controlled. This is practice of statistics method of control charts invented by US company AT&T (Western Electric) back in 1930's (I think) and adopted by Japanese after WWII. US car companies largely ignored these methods while Japanese adopted and used, along with numerous other statistical and other management methods to beat the US car companies.
Have to wait and see with time and mileage of vehicles to look at relative reliability. Unless one has specific knowledge about designs, specifications, tolerances of all of the parts that go into each brand and model, hard to predict the reliability of a 2007 model in year 2007. Understand that Consumer Reports does predict reliability of current models, but it is based on a manufacturer's history and "ongoing" performance. When Consumer's Report publishes test results, they clearly give their opinion of "Predicted Reliability" unless the model is brand new.
With time and trustable data from unbiased source such as Consumer Reports, we will know in perhaps 4-5 years whether or not American brands have caught up to Japanese brands in terms of reliability.
The parts come from essentially the same suppliers for those cars build partly within the US that are foreign brands.
Yes, supplier companies provide their parts to various brand vehicle makers. No doubt there are commodity type parts that suppliers make to same specs/tolerances that are sold to all car companies. But, are there non-commodity parts/components that are made exactly to a car company's (GM, Honda, Toyota, etc) particular designs and specifications? If so, had Japanese designs been better? Have American designs caught up to, or perhaps exceeded, the Japanese designs in model year 2007?
When I first got my Contour I was on the west coast, and I was still more likely to see a 90s Honda than a Contour. In the midwest, most of the 90s Honda's have that signature corrosion over the rear wheel.
1998 Contour is on list of used car "Vehicles to Avoid" by Consumer Reports. Except for Honda Passport models, which were built by Isuzu for Honda, there is no other Honda on the list.
Are you saying the bulb companies give the "best" bulbs to Toyota Georgetown and Honda Marysville for the plants they do have here?
Moisture on bulb will reduce its lifespan. Perhaps some automakers have better ways to seal areas around taillight bulbs to eliminate moisture from getting in and thus increasing bulb lifespan.
It is one thing to compare cars today, but for those of us who remember the junk they sold us in the not-so-distant past, it is the REPUTATION for poor quality that the Big 3 need to overcome...
The Big 3 seem to lose market share almost each and every year...no one is holding a gun to the heads of those buying the "import" brands, but they do seem to believe that the cars are made better, or else they would not buy them, increasing the market share of Toyota, Honda and Nissan...
So, even in today's world, with the Big 3 losing market share as we speak, SOMEBODY is not placing their faith in the quality of GM/Ford/Chrysler...sure they sell cars, but their share of the market has been sliding since the 1980s, when they did make junk unworthy of being a boat anchor...those chickens are still coming home to roost, IMO, as folks in their 50s and 60s, who DO remember the trash they sold us, probably tell their kids when they start shopping for a new car, to look at the reliability of the "imports"...if they were screwed by the Big 3 in the past, it takes a lot of "mea culpas" to place your faith back in the ones who shafted you, especially if they had a great experience (like I did, with 4 perfect Hondas) with the "imports"...
Regardless of what your opinion may be, the Big 3 have lost the underlying faith that many of us used to have for them...while the imports do seem to be growing, despite the few problems they have (like Toyota engine sludge)...
Aren't most 10 year old commuter cars best avoided anyway? At least by anybody who can afford something newer.
I don't see why. My ten year/178K mile old Accord is my commuter car while 2006 Acura TL is primarily an evening/weekend car for me (except when chauffeuring my dog).
In fact, the Accord happens to be my car for "commutes" between Dallas and Houston/Austin/San Antonio. It is still that good.
Certaintly, burned out light bulbs are at best an annoyance, defintely would not equate to a death trap or lemon.
As I've posted many times I've had all sorts of problems with my Suburban. It's a 2000 with the 5.3 with currenly about 85k miles on it.
It's never left me stranded on the side of the road, but I have put several thousand dollars in major repairs to it. Transmission, fuel pump, A/C compressor (only the fuel pump was under $1k and that still was over $500), some suspenion components and a few electrical issues, and numerous squeaks and rattles and a whining differential that I hope won't fail anytime soon, along with a power steering pump that gets real weak when cold out. Most of these items went south between 45k-70k miles
I'm hoping to get another 40-50k miles out of it, but I don't know if I can put up with the issues for that long.
I still like the vehicle in the sense it is very comforable and fits my needs. But I don't think anyone can question my hesitation to buy another.
imidazol97: The parts come from essentially the same suppliers for those cars build partly within the US that are foreign brands. Are you saying the bulb companies give the "best" bulbs to Toyota Georgetown and Honda Marysville for the plants they do have here?
That's not the way it works.
Supplier X doesn't make 1 million identical widgets and sell 400,000 to GM, 300,000 to Ford, 200,000 to Toyota and 100,000 to Honda.
When a supplier agrees to make parts for a particular car, it works closely with the manufacturer to design, engineer and test the part. It uses the company's specifications and parameters. (This is why many parts on new cars are not interchangable among various manufacturers.)
People who work for suppliers have stated - on other message boards - that the domestics are most concerned about cost; are more likely to take a supplier's technology and "shop" it to other suppliers to get a lower price (which makes the suppliers reluctant to share new or improved technology with the domestics); and more likely to switch suppliers based on price alone, while the Japanese attempt to build long-term relationships with suppliers.
Survey after survey shows that even American-based suppliers prefer to work with Honda and Toyota over any of the Big Three.
It's entirely possible that the same supplier could be supplying higher quality, longer lasting parts to Toyota than to GM. It's all about what the company buying the parts is willing to pay for when making a purchase. The bottom line is that any supplier will tell you that for Toyota and Honda, the main drivers are quality and cost.
For GM, Ford and Chrysler, it's low cost first and foremost.
When a supplier agrees to make parts for a particular car, it works closely with the manufacturer to design, engineer and test the part. It uses the company's specifications and parameters. (This is why many parts on new cars are not interchangable among various manufacturers.)
For advanced modules this is often the case, and OEMs will give contracts to suppliers to help with development efforts. For low level commodity items where there are accepted or defacto standards in place, like bulbs, wiper blades or tires, pretty much everyone is about price.
Now for an integrated in-vehicle infotainment system, that might be a different effort or something, but a bulb or a fuse, if it meets the spec, its in.
And cheaper too. That is far more of an indicator why companies are seeking engineers abroad in countries like India. Not that America doesn't have any left.
And Ford thinks, India has better accountants too. Americans must suck at that.
Excerpts... “Honda is a demanding customer, but it is loyal to us. [American] automakers have us work on drawings, ask other suppliers to bid on them, and give the job to the lowest bidder. Honda never does that.” —CEO, industrial fasteners supplier to Ford, GM, Chrysler, and Honda, April 2002
“Toyota helped us dramatically improve our production system. We started by making one component, and as we improved, [Toyota] rewarded us with orders for more components. Toyota is our best customer.” —Senior executive, supplier to Ford, GM, Chrysler, and Toyota, July 2001
That is very similar to the explanations I got from three businessmen from Michigan, who I met while vacationing in Wyoming last year. They decided to sell their businesses and now do nothing but spend 100% of their time vacationing in their mega RVs.
Also from the article... "During the past decade, $160 billion Toyota and $75 billion Honda have struck remarkable partnerships with some of the same suppliers that are at loggerheads with the Big Three and have created latter-day keiretsu across Canada, the United States, and Mexico. The two Japanese companies work closely with their suppliers in those areas. Of the 2.1 million Toyota/Lexus vehicles and the 1.6 million Honda/Acura vehicles sold in North America in 2003, Toyota manufactured 60% and Honda produced 80% in North America. Moreover, the two companies source about 70% to 80% of the costs of making each automobile from North American suppliers."
Yeah, that sounds very much inline with what I was saying. Specialized components, like those used in interior systems, advanced electronics modules, mechanical systems, etc, things that differentiate products, are developed with closer relationships than commodity items.
That isn't necessarily talking about non-specialized components, but about relationship with vendors in general, and the cultural differences between these two very successful companies from Japan versus the big 3. It is called discipline. The very first quote about Honda reminded me of stories I have read about Soichiro Honda and his demands. It seems, the spirit is still alive and well.
I see no reason why a company's attitude towards vendors will depend on what part they supply. Remember the Ford cruise control debacle from the 90s and early part of this decade (addressed via a recall in 2005)?
I recently achieved a status that pleases me greatly: That being that all five cars owned and operated by my immediate/nuclear family carry American names. There's one Chrysler, one Ford, one Mercury, and two Jeeps. I take a certain degree of pleasure in NOT owning any four-wheeled vehicles that carry foreign manufacturer names. I won't discuss my Triumph motorcycle... :shades:
I see no reason why a company's attitude towards vendors will depend on what part they supply.
Well, lets look at batteries for example.. Many imported cars (like they came here on a boat) don't come with service batteries. My Accord had an AC/Delco battery and my Civic had an International battery, while the Contour had a Motorcraft battery (which makes sense). The Accord had some Stanley bulbs and some Sylvania bulbs. It also hsd some Denso sockets and some Sumitomo sockets.
Sometimes, the integrator or tier one specs the sub-level component or assembly, the OEM lists it as a commodity, which basically means if it meets the spec they don't care were it comes from.
One of the other things that suprised me was how much of a "domestic" car was sourced from "ferrin" suppliers, and how much Delphi or Visteon contribute to "ferrin" cars. For those foriegn suppliers, a lot of the engineering and development is done here...everyone has engineers in residence at the OEMs.
Is your Triumph a new 'merican one or an old Brit one? Well I won't discuss my BMW motorpickle either. I was glad to see Harley D come out last year with a motorpickle that has more than a 30 degree cornering ability. Apparently it is not real popular. Back to the ranch.
The new Tundra looked nice at the last car show I attended. Certainly worth considering if and when my F150 gives up the ghost. I feel no qualms about considering it based on some sort of cost benefit ratio.
After I bought home my Mazda6, I was glad to see the UAW sticker on it. I don't know why I felt that way, being in our global economy where "Name Brand" means so little. The good folks at Flat Rock, MI have my thanks for a fun ride than I can afford and also survive a 4 hour drive in.
For some reason the salesman thought the Mazda3 built in Japan would be more appealing and felt that that fact alone would be a major selling point.
About that in Alaska. My friend jkinzel sent pictures of the ship when it capsized. I think they sold the cars as used last I read. Many got dunked in salt water. I am glad they are building many of them in the USA. Even better that they are UAW made. I may buy another. I just sold our 1990 626. Only had 90k miles since new. Still ran very well.
it would be nice if US dealers would scrap their cars that get flooded, know a couple people now that have bought what they thought where new cars and found out later that car had been in a flood and had water damage to the electrical systems and a couple actually had mold growing in them.
is so common and bad that they had a TV special about it where car is sent back to the factory and gets new VIN plates/numbers.
My brother even got a pontiac grand am that had been flooded and had front end damage repaired, carfax came up clean listed as new car first owner.
They will probably crush them and make Toyotas with the scrap metal Maybe that was what happened with the bad Tundra camshafts. Made from melted down Mazda parts.
"...what could possibly be hurting General Motors' sales? ... " conclusion: There is nothing more obvious than the reason for the opposite directions of GM and Toyota. While Tyota is successfully marketing a car (the Prius) that gets up to 60 mpg, Gm still touts the Hummer that gets as low as 6 mpg. Duh!"
This is from a letter to the editor in the local rag. The PR has worked well. The guy thinks all Toyotas get 60 mpg (the Prius doesn't even do that) and that all Toyotas get 35 while GM's cars only get 6.
He obviously hasn't been watching local tv with ads for the GM cars getting 30 mpg and all kinds of reasonable mileage cars they have. Or maybe he just hates GM. I wonder where he works...
imidazol97: The guy thinks all Toyotas get 60 mpg (the Prius doesn't even do that) and that all Toyotas get 35 while GM's cars only get 6.
Unless he said that in part of the letter that you didn't reproduce, he said nothing of the sort.
He merely said that it is possible to buy a Toyota that gets up to 60 mpg. Meanwhile it is possible to buy a Hummer that gets as little as 6 mpg. Both of which are true statements.
Just as it's true that GM offers nothing that gets as good as gas mileage as the Prius, while it's true that Toyota offers nothing that gets 6 mpg. Which does reflect their priorities to some extent.
But no one logically believes that all GM vehicles only achieve 6 mpg, or that every Toyota gets 60 mpg. And several green groups have begun targeting Toyota for building and promoting the Tundra, which is hardly a gas sipper.
I take a certain degree of pleasure in NOT owning any four-wheeled vehicles that carry foreign manufacturer names.
What about "foreign made" U.S. brands and models of vehicles being made in Mexico and Canada. Is it ok to buy a U.S. brand vehicle made in Mexico at low worker wage rates? Is it better to buy a Mexican worker assembled U.S. brand vs a foreign brand assembled in Ohio, Tennessee, Alabama, etc.?
Other than vehicles, suppose it is good to buy American branded tvs such as Sylvania and Magnavox rather than foreign brands such as Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic, etc.
So says Toyota. We will probably never know the truth on how many and who was to blame. How about the failed 6 speed Tundra transmissions? You don't think in their anxiety to stick a knife in the the domestics last bastion of dominance, they left out a little R&D along with QC?
You really need to lighten up. Your loyalty to Toyota is getting cult like. At least drfill is on the payroll at Toyota. That I understand.
The land Cruiser is as likely to get 6 MPG as the H2. They are both gas guzzlers. The new Tundra gets worse mileage in each comparison to a GM truck. And it is rare for anyone to get 60 MPG in a Prius. That is why they are now rated at 46 MPG combined. It sounds like the writer liked to exaggerate to make one look good and the other bad.
If the percentage of failed transmissions or camshafts was substantial or otherwise out of the norm, the Toyota Tundra board would be lit up with problems.
A quick check shows it's not any more lit up than the rest of the forum.
The "norm" is shrinking by the way and putting mechanics across the board out of work:
If Toyota blamed the supplier, and it was NOT the supplier, that supplier would have been screaming it from the highest mountain, "Hey, it was NOT US !!!"
And I'm sorry you see my Toyota defending as "cultish" because it's really far from it. I'm just basing it on years of Toyota ownership and the fact that Toyota makes good cars and that I respect how they go about their manufacturing process.
Do they have recalls? Sure, but so does every carmaker. Do they have quality issues? Sure, but so does every carmaker. Do they make mistakes in R&D and QC? Sure, but so does every carmaker.
Toyota, like all other carmakers, is imperfect. They do things wrong. They make marketing blunders.
But my point is that they do a great job overall by producing more quality cars than just about anyone else.
And they revolutionized the industry in a positive way with their hybrids.
Choice of going with serviceable versus non-serviceable battery has nothing to do with how vendors are treated. Are you saying that Ford likes Motorcraft (supplies batteries) better than, and gives preferential treatment to it compared to, other vendors supplying other parts?
Do their quality standards change? Or, do they expect the best from every supplier?
Other US car companies have a problem or recall, it's awful. Don't buy forever. Toyota has a problem or recall (more than any other company IIRC) and it's "So does every carmaker."
And as Steve said, the problems don't seem to be prominent on the Edmunds boards much to the disappointment of some folks. 20 supposed camshafts and a couple of "supposed"? transmission failures hardly define the norm. Heck, a buddy of mine is a service manager for a GMC dealer in NH, went through not 1, but 2! Sierra :lemon: 's and now drives a 2007 Tundra. I've also found postings in Edmunds and other forums for flaws with the GM pickups and SUV's. But I don't see forums flooded with Toyota fans claiming the new GMT900's as junk. Because they're not and most folks know that.
I can live with that. That's much more realistic. I am sure you know there are posts I can go back to that show the rabid, unreasonable dislike for anything GM currently offered. Things change. That's why each time I've shopped for a car since 1997 I've looked at the Camry and Accord offerings along with others.
It isn't in recall. In fact, I would rather deal with recalls (widely known problem, fixed by automaker even outside of warranty) than have nagging issues. For me, the problem is more about engineering and quality of product. I prefer a situation where a piece fails to meet specs than have lower grade specs to start with. Nobody is perfect, so former can happen for a variety of reasons. OTOH, latter describes deliberate imperfection well.
Honda was far from perfect with my US built Accord from 2003, but it was still a very well built and designed vehicle. It was mechanically very very reliable, and left me stranded a total of zero times.
The transmission bug did hit me in my Accord since I had the V6, but Honda paid for a full brand new assembly shipped overnight and installed in two days, all the while paying for the rental car, and they did this out of warranty, as I already was past the 42K mile mark. The Civics we have owned have never exhibited any problems with transmissions, nor anything else for that matter.
I think the next time I'm shopping for a car, I'll be broad minded enough to stop by a GM dealership and take a look and a test drive or two, but the short bumper to bumper warranty and length of the powertrain warranty (in years) has me on edge.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
He obviously hasn't been watching local tv with ads for the GM cars getting 30 mpg and all kinds of reasonable mileage cars they have. Or maybe he just hates GM. I wonder where he works...
GM can claim to have more cars that get over 30 mph because of all the different brands they sell. When you have one car rebadged four times and it gets 30 mpg it sure is easy to make the, "we have more cars that get over 30 mpg then any other automaker," claim.
Just off the top of my head.
You have the G5 and the Cobalt.
The G6, Aura, 9-3 and Malibu.
There are probably some others but that is all I can remember.
It probably was actually 20,000 Tundra trucks, but when something goes wrong with Toyota, the press dramatically deflates the number. If it was 20 Silverado trucks, the press would say it was 200,000.
Comments
That makes a nice urban myth. Doubt there's any gravitas to the story.
Check out April issue of Consumer Reports regarding reliability, especially one chart/graph that shows reliability of American brands and foreign brands from 1 to 10 years. Japanese brands are more reliable. Probably due to better design and engineering as well as better components/parts. What might be better reason for superior results?
Do you have a better link to prove your point?
Read somewhere that China and India each is graduating far more engineers than the U.S. Of course, don't know about the quality of their educations. Proof of pudding will be in cost/quality/reliability of products we might buy from them in future that are 100 percent Chinese/Indian design.
Months ago, read that leading Chinese telecom maker was close to making inroads in selling their equipment in other areas of world, but had not yet got into the U.S. market, but wants to.
How long before Chinese start selling Buicks in U.S. or Cherys.
Now it's read Consumer Misreports. I don't give them the credibililty that many others do.
>Japanese brands are more reliable.
Does that include all and every and every vehicle? I can lead you to some posts on Edmunds that point in the opposite direction. The regression to the mean has started for some models; in others only publicity about the flaws needs to be done.
Perhaps instead of talking about 10 years and more ago you should compare with current offerings. Are you sure that past statistics indicate future experience?
>"better design and engineering as well as better components/parts"
The parts come from essentially the same suppliers for those cars build partly within the US that are foreign brands. Are you saying the bulb companies give the "best" bulbs to Toyota Georgetown and Honda Marysville for the plants they do have here?
JDPowers has problem rates very close for many cars.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
We actually have the opposite where they use salt on the roads. I guess it depends on location. When I first got my Contour I was on the west coast, and I was still more likely to see a 90s Honda than a Contour. In the midwest, most of the 90s Honda's have that signature corrosion over the rear wheel.
Past statistics can indicate future experience if inputs and variables are monitored and controlled. This is practice of statistics method of control charts invented by US company AT&T (Western Electric) back in 1930's (I think) and adopted by Japanese after WWII. US car companies largely ignored these methods while Japanese adopted and used, along with numerous other statistical and other management methods to beat the US car companies.
Have to wait and see with time and mileage of vehicles to look at relative reliability. Unless one has specific knowledge about designs, specifications, tolerances of all of the parts that go into each brand and model, hard to predict the reliability of a 2007 model in year 2007. Understand that Consumer Reports does predict reliability of current models, but it is based on a manufacturer's history and "ongoing" performance. When Consumer's Report publishes test results, they clearly give their opinion of "Predicted Reliability" unless the model is brand new.
With time and trustable data from unbiased source such as Consumer Reports, we will know in perhaps 4-5 years whether or not American brands have caught up to Japanese brands in terms of reliability.
The parts come from essentially the same suppliers for those cars build partly within the US that are foreign brands.
Yes, supplier companies provide their parts to various brand vehicle makers. No doubt there are commodity type parts that suppliers make to same specs/tolerances that are sold to all car companies. But, are there non-commodity parts/components that are made exactly to a car company's (GM, Honda, Toyota, etc) particular designs and specifications? If so, had Japanese designs been better? Have American designs caught up to, or perhaps exceeded, the Japanese designs in model year 2007?
1998 Contour is on list of used car "Vehicles to Avoid" by Consumer Reports. Except for Honda Passport models, which were built by Isuzu for Honda, there is no other Honda on the list.
Moisture on bulb will reduce its lifespan. Perhaps some automakers have better ways to seal areas around taillight bulbs to eliminate moisture from getting in and thus increasing bulb lifespan.
The Big 3 seem to lose market share almost each and every year...no one is holding a gun to the heads of those buying the "import" brands, but they do seem to believe that the cars are made better, or else they would not buy them, increasing the market share of Toyota, Honda and Nissan...
So, even in today's world, with the Big 3 losing market share as we speak, SOMEBODY is not placing their faith in the quality of GM/Ford/Chrysler...sure they sell cars, but their share of the market has been sliding since the 1980s, when they did make junk unworthy of being a boat anchor...those chickens are still coming home to roost, IMO, as folks in their 50s and 60s, who DO remember the trash they sold us, probably tell their kids when they start shopping for a new car, to look at the reliability of the "imports"...if they were screwed by the Big 3 in the past, it takes a lot of "mea culpas" to place your faith back in the ones who shafted you, especially if they had a great experience (like I did, with 4 perfect Hondas) with the "imports"...
Regardless of what your opinion may be, the Big 3 have lost the underlying faith that many of us used to have for them...while the imports do seem to be growing, despite the few problems they have (like Toyota engine sludge)...
I love the logical leaps made on forums. Burnt out bulbs lead, inevitably, to being equated to deathtrap.
I don't see X (10+ year old) car in my area so they have all rusted into dust. Not one remains in the world.
My car runs fine so all other cars like mine run fine. A buddy of mine has a X car that had a lot of problems, so all X cars have lots of problems.
A lot of people are so blindly loyal it is silly.
I don't see why. My ten year/178K mile old Accord is my commuter car while 2006 Acura TL is primarily an evening/weekend car for me (except when chauffeuring my dog).
In fact, the Accord happens to be my car for "commutes" between Dallas and Houston/Austin/San Antonio. It is still that good.
As I've posted many times I've had all sorts of problems with my Suburban. It's a 2000 with the 5.3 with currenly about 85k miles on it.
It's never left me stranded on the side of the road, but I have put several thousand dollars in major repairs to it.
Transmission, fuel pump, A/C compressor (only the fuel pump was under $1k and that still was over $500), some suspenion components and a few electrical issues, and numerous squeaks and rattles and a whining differential that I hope won't fail anytime soon, along with a power steering pump that gets real weak when cold out. Most of these items went south between 45k-70k miles
I'm hoping to get another 40-50k miles out of it, but I don't know if I can put up with the issues for that long.
I still like the vehicle in the sense it is very comforable and fits my needs. But I don't think anyone can question my hesitation to buy another.
That's not the way it works.
Supplier X doesn't make 1 million identical widgets and sell 400,000 to GM, 300,000 to Ford, 200,000 to Toyota and 100,000 to Honda.
When a supplier agrees to make parts for a particular car, it works closely with the manufacturer to design, engineer and test the part. It uses the company's specifications and parameters. (This is why many parts on new cars are not interchangable among various manufacturers.)
People who work for suppliers have stated - on other message boards - that the domestics are most concerned about cost; are more likely to take a supplier's technology and "shop" it to other suppliers to get a lower price (which makes the suppliers reluctant to share new or improved technology with the domestics); and more likely to switch suppliers based on price alone, while the Japanese attempt to build long-term relationships with suppliers.
Survey after survey shows that even American-based suppliers prefer to work with Honda and Toyota over any of the Big Three.
It's entirely possible that the same supplier could be supplying higher quality, longer lasting parts to Toyota than to GM. It's all about what the company buying the parts is willing to pay for when making a purchase. The bottom line is that any supplier will tell you that for Toyota and Honda, the main drivers are quality and cost.
For GM, Ford and Chrysler, it's low cost first and foremost.
For advanced modules this is often the case, and OEMs will give contracts to suppliers to help with development efforts. For low level commodity items where there are accepted or defacto standards in place, like bulbs, wiper blades or tires, pretty much everyone is about price.
Now for an integrated in-vehicle infotainment system, that might be a different effort or something, but a bulb or a fuse, if it meets the spec, its in.
And Ford thinks, India has better accountants too. Americans must suck at that.
Excerpts...
“Honda is a demanding customer, but it is loyal to us. [American] automakers have us work on drawings, ask other suppliers to bid on them, and give the job to the lowest bidder. Honda never does that.” —CEO, industrial fasteners supplier to Ford, GM, Chrysler, and Honda, April 2002
“Toyota helped us dramatically improve our production system. We started by making one component, and as we improved, [Toyota] rewarded us with orders for more components. Toyota is our best customer.” —Senior executive, supplier to Ford, GM, Chrysler, and Toyota, July 2001
That is very similar to the explanations I got from three businessmen from Michigan, who I met while vacationing in Wyoming last year. They decided to sell their businesses and now do nothing but spend 100% of their time vacationing in their mega RVs.
Also from the article...
"During the past decade, $160 billion Toyota and $75 billion Honda have struck remarkable partnerships with some of the same suppliers that are at loggerheads with the Big Three and have created latter-day keiretsu across Canada, the United States, and Mexico. The two Japanese companies work closely with their suppliers in those areas. Of the 2.1 million Toyota/Lexus vehicles and the 1.6 million Honda/Acura vehicles sold in North America in 2003, Toyota manufactured 60% and Honda produced 80% in North America. Moreover, the two companies source about 70% to 80% of the costs of making each automobile from North American suppliers."
I see no reason why a company's attitude towards vendors will depend on what part they supply. Remember the Ford cruise control debacle from the 90s and early part of this decade (addressed via a recall in 2005)?
Well, lets look at batteries for example..
Many imported cars (like they came here on a boat) don't come with service batteries. My Accord had an AC/Delco battery and my Civic had an International battery, while the Contour had a Motorcraft battery (which makes sense).
The Accord had some Stanley bulbs and some Sylvania bulbs. It also hsd some Denso sockets and some Sumitomo sockets.
Sometimes, the integrator or tier one specs the sub-level component or assembly, the OEM lists it as a commodity, which basically means if it meets the spec they don't care were it comes from.
One of the other things that suprised me was how much of a "domestic" car was sourced from "ferrin" suppliers, and how much Delphi or Visteon contribute to "ferrin" cars. For those foriegn suppliers, a lot of the engineering and development is done here...everyone has engineers in residence at the OEMs.
The new Tundra looked nice at the last car show I attended. Certainly worth considering if and when my F150 gives up the ghost. I feel no qualms about considering it based on some sort of cost benefit ratio.
After I bought home my Mazda6, I was glad to see the UAW sticker on it. I don't know why I felt that way, being in our global economy where "Name Brand" means so little. The good folks at Flat Rock, MI have my thanks for a fun ride than I can afford and also survive a 4 hour drive in.
For some reason the salesman thought the Mazda3 built in Japan would be more appealing and felt that that fact alone would be a major selling point.
What ever.
http://blogs.edmunds.com/Straightline/1291
Yeah that was a year ago wasn't it?
is so common and bad that they had a TV special about it where car is sent back to the factory and gets new VIN plates/numbers.
My brother even got a pontiac grand am that had been flooded and had front end damage repaired, carfax came up clean listed as new car first owner.
Something like this has happened to every carmaker - parts in one of their vehicles which were made by another company have failed.
Nothing new, and it will happen again in the future.
...
" conclusion: There is nothing more obvious than the reason for the opposite directions of GM and Toyota. While Tyota is successfully marketing a car (the Prius) that gets up to 60 mpg, Gm still touts the Hummer that gets as low as 6 mpg. Duh!"
This is from a letter to the editor in the local rag. The PR has worked well. The guy thinks all Toyotas get 60 mpg (the Prius doesn't even do that) and that all Toyotas get 35 while GM's cars only get 6.
He obviously hasn't been watching local tv with ads for the GM cars getting 30 mpg and all kinds of reasonable mileage cars they have. Or maybe he just hates GM. I wonder where he works...
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Unless he said that in part of the letter that you didn't reproduce, he said nothing of the sort.
He merely said that it is possible to buy a Toyota that gets up to 60 mpg. Meanwhile it is possible to buy a Hummer that gets as little as 6 mpg. Both of which are true statements.
Just as it's true that GM offers nothing that gets as good as gas mileage as the Prius, while it's true that Toyota offers nothing that gets 6 mpg. Which does reflect their priorities to some extent.
But no one logically believes that all GM vehicles only achieve 6 mpg, or that every Toyota gets 60 mpg. And several green groups have begun targeting Toyota for building and promoting the Tundra, which is hardly a gas sipper.
What about "foreign made" U.S. brands and models of vehicles being made in Mexico and Canada. Is it ok to buy a U.S. brand vehicle made in Mexico at low worker wage rates? Is it better to buy a Mexican worker assembled U.S. brand vs a foreign brand assembled in Ohio, Tennessee, Alabama, etc.?
Other than vehicles, suppose it is good to buy American branded tvs such as Sylvania and Magnavox rather than foreign brands such as Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic, etc.
So says Toyota. We will probably never know the truth on how many and who was to blame. How about the failed 6 speed Tundra transmissions? You don't think in their anxiety to stick a knife in the the domestics last bastion of dominance, they left out a little R&D along with QC?
You really need to lighten up. Your loyalty to Toyota is getting cult like. At least drfill is on the payroll at Toyota. That I understand.
A quick check shows it's not any more lit up than the rest of the forum.
The "norm" is shrinking by the way and putting mechanics across the board out of work:
Better car quality squeezes mechanics
Gary, it's self-explanatory. Stay with me here:
If Toyota blamed the supplier, and it was NOT the supplier, that supplier would have been screaming it from the highest mountain, "Hey, it was NOT US !!!"
And I'm sorry you see my Toyota defending as "cultish" because it's really far from it. I'm just basing it on years of Toyota ownership and the fact that Toyota makes good cars and that I respect how they go about their manufacturing process.
Do they have recalls? Sure, but so does every carmaker.
Do they have quality issues? Sure, but so does every carmaker.
Do they make mistakes in R&D and QC? Sure, but so does every carmaker.
Toyota, like all other carmakers, is imperfect. They do things wrong. They make marketing blunders.
But my point is that they do a great job overall by producing more quality cars than just about anyone else.
And they revolutionized the industry in a positive way with their hybrids.
Do their quality standards change? Or, do they expect the best from every supplier?
Toyota has a problem or recall (more than any other company IIRC) and it's "So does every carmaker."
Perhaps sensitivity training is called for here.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
You're not hearing that from me.
My take is that you find the car which meets your needs and your budget regardless of the manufacturer, and you buy that car.
The research you do should include the quality reputation of the carmaker but do not use that as the sole deciding factor.
And don't use some baseless geography or patriotism to guide your purchase.
And as Steve said, the problems don't seem to be prominent on the Edmunds boards much to the disappointment of some folks. 20 supposed camshafts and a couple of "supposed"? transmission failures hardly define the norm. Heck, a buddy of mine is a service manager for a GMC dealer in NH, went through not 1, but 2! Sierra :lemon: 's and now drives a 2007 Tundra. I've also found postings in Edmunds and other forums for flaws with the GM pickups and SUV's. But I don't see forums flooded with Toyota fans claiming the new GMT900's as junk. Because they're not and most folks know that.
I can live with that. That's much more realistic. I am sure you know there are posts I can go back to that show the rabid, unreasonable dislike for anything GM currently offered. Things change. That's why each time I've shopped for a car since 1997 I've looked at the Camry and Accord offerings along with others.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The transmission bug did hit me in my Accord since I had the V6, but Honda paid for a full brand new assembly shipped overnight and installed in two days, all the while paying for the rental car, and they did this out of warranty, as I already was past the 42K mile mark. The Civics we have owned have never exhibited any problems with transmissions, nor anything else for that matter.
I think the next time I'm shopping for a car, I'll be broad minded enough to stop by a GM dealership and take a look and a test drive or two, but the short bumper to bumper warranty and length of the powertrain warranty (in years) has me on edge.
GM can claim to have more cars that get over 30 mph because of all the different brands they sell. When you have one car rebadged four times and it gets 30 mpg it sure is easy to make the, "we have more cars that get over 30 mpg then any other automaker," claim.
Just off the top of my head.
You have the G5 and the Cobalt.
The G6, Aura, 9-3 and Malibu.
There are probably some others but that is all I can remember.
You mean like the Camry/Avalon/ES?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,