I do read it when I need something for the house such as a vacuum cleaner.
That's my other gripe - you never can find the same models reviewed it seems. At least at Amazon or Newegg, people are reviewing the actual product that's for sale.
Juice, that is a peeve of mine here. We used to provide ground clearance numbers but don't any more, unless it's in a review. Maybe because the manufacturers played games with where they measured.
I drove 25 miles on a logging road in our minivan last week before the rains hit and luckily met a guy at the start with local info so I knew we could make it through (with only one mild scrape). And the gate at the 5,000 pound weight limit bridge that's usually snowmobile only was open. Ground clearance is good to know.
I always check GC when I shop cars so I may have to bug you if we ever decide to buy another rig (the Prius minivan did get my attention, but it it's like the 5" GC on the Prius sedan, I dunno).
If I wanted a midsize car I would make a safe purchase and get a 2011 Suzuki Kizashi.
And there's a good chance that Suzuki would throw in free floor mats to celebrate the sale of the 100th Kizashi in North America. Exciting!
I've heard that the upcoming ad campaign, in which Suzuki's North American sales manager (or mangler, if you will) threatens to drown a sack of kittens unless at least 10 people per month buy Kizashi sedans, will drive sales through the roof. Stay tuned!
you never can find the same models reviewed it seems
Not a problem with cars, plus I was able to find a dishwasher they recommended, and it has performed well.
The reliability ratings have been spot-on for me, predicted which parts will break first with low scores in those particular categories. It's accurate enough that you know what to look for, what to troubleshoot.
I think most people read the press release summaries and decide then and there if they like Consumer Reports. If the model they like isn't recommended - they don't like 'em.
manufacturers played games with where they measured
Bingo, you need 3rd party verfication, and often CR is the only 3rd party providing that info, measuring all cars the same way.
Prius reliability ratings dropped to "Average" with the recent complaints - another case of when something goes wrong CR data indeed does reflect the problems.
It's a competent car, just not what Americans want. At all. They broke up with GM and lost access to the V6 engine. Plus it's small and sporty. Americans like big and comfortable.
Couple that with invisible marketing, dwindling dealers, and I give 'em a year or two before they follow in Isuzu's footsteps.
I would not generalize at all about Japanese nameplates. Each is very different.
Toyota got so big they're more like the 4th nameplate in the Big Three. They're even in NASCAR for cryin' out loud, probably taking money from the quality control side to pay for it. How Tokyo is that? They're Asia's GM. At least they seem to be changing back to the old Toyota ways more recently.
Mitsubishi was the Japanese Chrysler. It's sad that even Chrysler, the most struggling US automaker, didn't want them. They sold their soul to the devil with the 0/0/0 deals.
Suzuki is a great motorcycle builder, but a punch line when it comes to cars. They were selling the stuff GM didn't want, basically, often cheap Korean-made cars. Now they are simply too small and do not have the resources to really build a good lineup, so IMHO they are doomed.
Subaru is the Japanese Porsche. I'd say Saab in terms of character, but every Subaru drivetrain sold here has a layout nearly identical to a rear-engined 911, only in reverse. Why have they succeeded? They have a clear identity. Who would have guessed they would sell more than twice as many cars by dropping FWD offerings?
Mazda is the Japanese Ford, though let's see after this divorce is final. Ford finally realized it could build small cars that don't suck (I owned an Escort, so I'm allowed to say that), so they no longer need Mazda. So the question is can Mazda now build bigger cars without Ford's help? We'll see.
Honda is tougher to peg. But very different from any other Japanese nameplate. They are their own worst enemy - recent styling effort, if you can call it that, from both Honda and Acura are missing the mark. Owners are loyal as heck, and Honda keeps 'em happy.
Nissan had a sporty edge but many models dropped the manual transmission option, and they've really focused on volume and cost controls. It's worked for them, but I wonder if they can sustain volume without relying on incentives.
No two japanese nameplates are even similar to me.
There is a difference between brutal cost cutting and trying to be more efficient and lean. Come on, no business can survive nowadays by being bloated.
The way I see it, Carlos Ghosn is just trying to be efficient. Look at the results : Nissan have very few big recalls, but compare with toyota's no. of recalls. And if Ghosn did not try to reduce bloat and other inefficiencies way back in 1999, Nissan will not exist today. He after all is the one with a track record of several turnarounds, he turnaround sick Michelin in Brazil, then he also rescued Michelin USA from a loss making company to a healthy profitable one.
I'll take this guy any day compared to people like Rick Wagoner who bleeds GM for several years. Remember, only a profitable car maker can invest in new cars and new technologies. And recently Nissan even come up with the LEAF, the first mass produced electric car in the world. If Nissan is bloated and don't cut cost PROPERLY (not blindly), this LEAF will never be created.
The numbers speak for themselves : Nissan is profitable (anyone wants to buy from a company LOSING MONEY ?), and their number of recalls is " normal " like Hyundai. So it proves that Nissan's so called cost cutting does not sacrifice quality. You think Hyundai don't cut cost ? The difference is how they do it.
toyota ? Its well known today. SUPER JUMBO number of recalls, for very serious problems. Now THAT'S cutting cost to the BONE. And believe me, they will even try to CUT THE BONE.
Look at the Nissan Juke. Within weeks after launch in Japan, it sold more than 20,000 ! And also in a very short time, more than 30,000 Jukes were sold in Europe.
Anybody have info about how popular, or un-popular is the Juke, recently launched in the US ?
Once again, I feel that Nissan and Hyundai are today's 2 best automakers who strike a good balance between cost cutting, profitability and quality. I don't care a damn what jd power and CR says. Yea, if toyota can and HAVE tried to pay off the people at government level, what makes YOU think they won't and don't do the same to the media guys ?
I look at the cold hard evidence, not points published by magazines whose accuracy is not even proven.
If, if, CR is so thorough in their highly random, unfailingly accurate statistical data collection, they would have known about the sludging engine problems and immediately reported that people should not buy that piece of junk.
Same for the Odyssey and Honda's unfailing transmission and now VCM problems.
Notice they have Odyssey recommended, still.
I went through my stacks of CRs in the garage and copied this from April 2010.
Even funnier is that "powertrain" is a strong point for purchasing an Odyssey. Perhaps in CR's way of valuing.
The original tenet of this thread was that CR's having rated toyota as very reliable is an unquestionably correct assessment. CR makes no mistakes was the thinking of the OP.
Actually let's look at CR's vacuum cleaner ratings. The #1 pick is a Chinese-owned Hoover. In owner reports on Amazon and Sears and elsewhere people are complaining about the thing failing. CR didn't even bother to check but the company claims it's a 12 amp unit--however that's the 5.5 amp upright (others are 12 amp) added to the portable unit which is 7 amp. The Hoover company added the two ratings to get a seemingly powerful motor draw rating which implies great cleaning suction.
This is the CR which rates cars perfectly? I don't think so. So their ratings and publicity statements as to which cars are "best" or in reality slightly "bester" than another since the differences are so slight really need a big grain of salt. Read Edmunds owner threads and you'll learn about cars quicker than relying on CR.
Maybe I'll trust CR about which dog food to buy. Grin.
Didn't we just finish arguing about the validity of CR's ratings on another forum (Stories from the Sales Frontlines) that most of us here frequent?
Why, then, go through it all over again just a couple of weeks later? Do you think that we'll come to a different conclusion the 2nd time around?
Let's agree to wait until next year before we restart this old argument. I'm calling it "old" because in my 12 years here, I've seen it easily a dozen times.
If we keep it up, the host will step in & stop it because it's off topic.
He has been saying that for the longest time and there is not point in trying to change their opinions, they are more than entitled to it.
I just love the "CR is bias against the domestic automakers" line yet the entire Ford line-up has been on the recommended list with better than avg or much better than avg scores for the last 2 years
Even Hyundai stumbled recently, though I think that has more to do with very rapid growth due to enormous demand for the segment-busting Sonata.
FWIW, I do not equate recalls with quality, it's completely wrong to do so because of real-world examples like this:
* Toyota recalls spare tire cables that might rust, that makes them look bad * Ford does not recall rusting/breaking axles for owners outside the snow belt, they look good?
So I don't buy the argument that # of recalls is a measure of quality, not by a long shot.
Having said that, yes, Toyota has cut costs, materials in some vehicles have dropped in quality, and they perform fewer inspections (though they changed that recently).
Even funnier is that "powertrain" is a strong point for purchasing an Odyssey
First, the problem rate had not been high since 2003, so why shouldn't they recommend a 2010 model? :confuse:
2nd, they were rating the powertrain's performance for 2010, not the reliability from 7 years prior. Dodge didn't come out with a truly modern engine until - well, until now - the Pentastar V6, and finally.
You seem to be confusing reliability scores with their product scores, which are totally separate.
They have very highly rated models with horrible reliability scores:
* Nissan Versa 1.8S (#1 subcompact sedan in 2010 buyer's guide, yet it gets a black dot for reliability so it's not recommended) * M-B GL (near the top, but unreliable)
.. and very reliable cars with low ratings:
* Smart ForTwo (dead last in class, but Red Dot reliability)
Before anyone screams of bias let's keep in mind Smart is owned by Mercedes, and Nissan is an import brand.
So looks like Honda is better than average (especially when you consider it's been the best selling minivan lately), Toyota is MUCH better than average.
Conclusion: get a Toyota van if you have concerns.
Conclusion #2: real-world thread activity in Edmunds matches Consumer Reports' reliability for those vans exactly, Toyota #1, Honda #2, Chrysler #3.
Thanks, I feel much better about my Sienna and Consumer Reports magazine after using your source.
>Let's agree to wait until next year before we restart this old argument. I'm calling it "old" because in my 12 years here, I've seen it easily a dozen times.
You should just scroll over posts you don't care to read instead of filling bandwidth kvetching.
>Didn't we just finish arguing about the validity of CR's ratings on another forum
The topic was topic was brought up presenting CR's recent PR statement about some brands being higher in reliability as the last word on the subject. I challenge that based on the statistical methods (not) used by CR in their convenience survey technique.
> it because it's off topic.
If anything's off topic, it's your your trying to control the discussion rather than add to the discussion thereof just because you disagree with someone else's evaluation of CR. Rather than letting the discussion ebb, you fanned the flames.
Well according to the article about the recall and the model's listed, very few people here in the states will be affected by it, luckily.
The article says "The recalls are mostly in Japan, with 835,000 units, and the United States and Canada with a combined 762,000 units." That's quite a few. :shades:
The most recent Toyota one was "global" too, fwiw.
If anything's off topic, it's your your[sic] trying to control the discussion rather than add to the discussion thereof just because you disagree with someone else's evaluation of CR. Rather than letting the discussion ebb, you fanned the flames.
Sorry. It was my intention to help - not offend - you by pointing out that we had just finished hashing this over & that it was unlikely that we'd turn up anything new on this topic so soon after the last CR discussion ended.
Chrysler is making the Pentastar V6 the standard engine in the 2011 Grand Caravan, a HUGE improvement.
The old base engine was a 3.3l pushrod that put out a meager 175hp (less than the 4 banger in the Sienna). Even the upgrade 3.8l pushrod only made 198hp, and both only got 16mpg city. The big 4.0l only went in the pricier models.
Now Chrysler has fixed that - a much better engine, even in the base models. Now they might add Powertrain as a strong point for Dodge, especially since a 6 speed auto comes standard (with Honda you have to get a $40k plus Touring model).
My only comment is, what took so long? Chrysler invented the minivan, they should be leading the class, not following.
My only comment is, what took so long? Chrysler invented the minivan, they should be leading the class, not following.
In reality Chrysler is doing quite well considering Daimler and Cerberus gutted them over the last decade or more. I am surprised they had enough left in them even with our bailout to survive.
Here's their used car ratings for the Odyssey. How's that statistical analysis for CR working? Check the Odyssey transmission discussion along with others.
"Either I'm lost or we are really off base on this topic"
Maybe because Toyota may have a chance to pass up the new Ody in sales in the next year or two with its redesigned Sierra? There has been some press recently that the industry is expecting minivan sales to track back up some in the near future.
yeah, but most of the recalls I believe are on their pick-ups and large SUVs which are not their big sellers so in the grand scheme of the total of what they sell its not that big of a recall, plus the 762k is split between Canada and US so its even less than that number here!
Not sure why a Nissan recall article was brought up in a Toyota thread to begin with?
you conviently left out pre 2004 data, which someone posted earlier, which is when the major transmission issues with Honda models were, since 2004, transmissions have not been a Honda issue like they were pre 2004.
For someone who complains when GM or Ford are brought up in here, why did you bring up Honda, last time I checked this was a Toyota thread :confuse:
Toyota's transaction prices on 2011 models sold Sept. 1-Oct. 8 are the lowest, relative to sticker prices, of all mainstream brands, according to TrueCar
Brand % discount on 2011 models Toyota 8.30% Mercedes-Benz 8.1 Lincoln 7.9 BMW 7.7 Acura 7.6
I owned an 04 and shortly into its production run Honda did an update to its tranny (3rd gear I think?) so I believe the tranny actually was improved on most of that year's production. The last CR I looked at didn't show a tranny problem on the 04 Ody.
Not sure why a Nissan recall article was brought up in a Toyota thread to begin with?
Oh, we were talking about Toyota recalls and how it was the end of the world. And Nissan was held up as a brand that didn't have many. Until the day after the thread. :shades:
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Toyota secretly bought back from U.S. consumers vehicles it found with speed-control defects as part of a strategy to hide unintended-acceleration problems from safety regulators and the public, a revised lawsuit claims.
The repurchase transactions included strict confidentiality agreements barring consumers from disclosing the problem to anyone and from suing the automaker, according to the amended class-action complaint.
The new complaint also cites internal company records documenting instances in which Toyota Motor Corp technicians or service managers replicated speed-control problems like those reported by customers.
But in a series of field reports from 2006 to 2010 involving Toyota Camrys, technicians from Hong Kong confirmed unintended acceleration in cars they tested while ruling out faulty floor mats or gas pedals, the lawsuit said.
Moreover, the acceleration glitches were duplicated without the vehicle's diagnostic equipment detecting a malfunction.
I said: It's CR's responsibility as to what Toyota sells?!!!
You cut it short and took my question out of context. I reproduced the text of your original statement. How convenient that you omitted that.
Notice they have Odyssey recommended, still.
Another poster showed how CR had black dots for the affected years. Your post was from 2010. Perhaps it's recommended because those problem areas were fixed long ago?
The original tenet of this thread was that CR's having rated toyota as very reliable is an unquestionably correct assessment. CR makes no mistakes was the thinking of the OP.
It's obviously silly to think that Toyota is perfect, or that CR never makes mistakes. I do think that CR's original premise - that when a make has shown consistent high reliability, even in newly introduced models -- and has a 20 or so year track record to that effect, then it is not unreasonable to recommend a newly introduced model, based upon the historical ability of that company to do a good job on new models. In this case, Toyota screwed up. And also in this case, CR changed their recommendation. What I don't know is whether CR will still now recommend new models from a manufacturer that hasn't had these problems.
This is the CR which rates cars perfectly? I don't think so.
I don't think so either.
So their ratings and publicity statements as to which cars are "best" or in reality slightly "bester" than another since the differences are so slight really need a big grain of salt.
When the differences are slight, I would agree. But when you see 100% of make's models (Honda) being more reliable than average, and you see another make (GM) where barely half of their new models are more reliable than average, that's not a small difference, and is significant.
Toyota has had a lot of problems. I personally don't really like Toyotas because I don't want to float along with isolation from the road and my steering. But even with the Toyota problems (and interior cheapness) of late, they are still very reliable. The new GM's may have nicer interiors, but GM needs to work on reliability. You buy a Toyota if you want reliability, isolation, solitude, and you don't care about handling or interior quality.
In a separate 2009 case, service manager described in a company memo as "trustworthy and reliable" experienced an unexplained burst of acceleration while test-driving a Toyota Tacoma. The vehicle raced from 70 miles per hour to 95 miles per hour in seconds with "no pedal contact" from the driver. Floor mats were properly secured, according to the lawsuit.
That sounds very similar to the report by Wozniak on his Prius. I think the Cruise Control was the culprit. I know that Woz tried contacting Toyota several times before taking his complaint to the news media.
I think I've seen some of your campaign ads on TV lately.
Perchance you can point out where I mentioned either Toyota or Chrysler in my post relating to your posting of 2006 CR surveys about 2003 and older Odyssey trans issues. Believe me, they're still happening.
I work with a guy with an '05. Needed new trans at 70K. He is the only Odyssey owner I know, but gee, that's a 100% problem area in my "sample"!
I see where CR rated the Equinox above average but the Terrain below average. There's a 'duh' if I've ever seen one. It's sample error, of course.
I also read that CR will use a 100-car sample as the minimum for their results. Sheesh, when I think of how many of a given model are sold and how people trust CR like the Bible, I have to chuckle when I think they might have used a 100-car sample to rate reliability and guide someone to buy or not to buy.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I work with a guy with an '05. Needed new trans at 70K. He is the only Odyssey owner I know, but gee, that's a 100% problem area in my "sample"!
My wife's grandson spent $3500 on the transmission in his Odyssey. It had 107k miles at the time. They are not car people and were unaware that it was a common failure. Honda was happy to take their money on a poorly designed transmission. He is the only person I know with an Odyssey as well.
I think the Sienna will pass up the Odyssey this year. The new Honda mini van is ugly. The Sienna has better ground clearance and offers AWD. Though I would not count the Town and Country out.
My brother was just up visiting in his '03/'04 Odyssey (or maybe it's an '05 - they all look alike). It's humming along nicely at 110k and the power doors and stuff all work. Original transmission. :P Plusher ride than my '99 van.
Meanwhile, Edmunds projects that Toyota will stay in 3rd place after October sales numbers are totaled.
Perchance you can point out where I mentioned either Toyota or Chrysler in my post relating to your posting
Perhaps people here do not understand what Consumer Reports reliability ratings mean.
They rate cars the compared to the AVERAGE car, so "Better than Average" does not mean a car is perfect, it simply means it has fewer problems than the average car.
Ody has 1600 complaints/posts, Caravan has 1900 complaints/posts, Sienna has an inactive thread with 4 posts, IIRC. If the Caravan is average, the Honda is a little better than average, the Sienna is much, much better than average (transmission rating).
When we look at the Average for a segment, you look at the volume models, so it's 100% relevant to look at Ody, Caravan, and Sienna, the 3 best sellers.
So you're saying CR just sort of looks at the number of problems in a forum on Edmunds, 1600, 1900, and 4, and CR surmises how many that represents out of the real world. Then they decide which ones are sort of better than others and that's how they get the ones that are reliable, while the others are less than reliable. But then that's only relative to their earlier guesstimate of how reliable a Honda, or Toyota, or Chrysler should be?
Furthermore, the reliability doesn't mean they're reliable, it just means CR thinks they are more reliable than some other baseline that CR has.
CR therefore operates much like CarFax. We want you to use our data but we're not responsible if we overlook a couple of crash repairs on the CarFax data because we sort of told you in the fine print that our opinion wasn't really reliable?
That was my original premise: CR uses a cursory form of survey that I lable "convenience survey" because the subscriber returns it if they notice the questionnaire and if it's convenient for them; the survey is _not_ random. Then CR uses the data as they wish.
"In addition, attorneys representing thousands of Toyota owners charged that the automaker's technicians were able to replicate the sudden acceleration and failed to notify the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the problem."
"LOS ANGELES — Toyota Motor Corp. bought back cars from drivers who reported sudden acceleration defects, but the company didn't tell federal regulators about the problem, according to court documents filed in the sprawling litigation against the automaker.
Plaintiffs' lawyers contend the Japanese company compelled the owners to sign confidentiality agreements that prevented them from speaking publicly about the issues they encountered.
In some cases dating back to 2006, Toyota's own technicians experienced the vehicles speeding up without pressing the gas pedal, according to the documents filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court.
"The deeper we dig into the facts that surround Toyota, the more damning the evidence that Toyota was aware of the issue and failed to act responsibly," plaintiffs' attorney Steve Berman said. "The revelation that they bought up the cars in question and prevented the owners from talking about their experience is curious at best, nefarious at worst."
So you're saying CR just sort of looks at the number of problems in a forum on Edmunds
I never said anything like that.
You're just upset that I proved you wrong about the CR ratings of 2004- Odysseys.
I never said CR "looks" at Edmunds' forums. They're independent, that was the whole point - naming a 2nd source. Both point to the Ody being better than the only domestic minivan.
"In addition, attorneys representing thousands of Toyota owners charged that the automaker's technicians were able to replicate the sudden acceleration and failed to notify the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the problem."
Good luck proving that.
Feel free to jump to conclusions, though.
In related news, water is wet, dogs are loyal, and attorneys want to make money.
What'll get that lawsuit thrown out is a very simple premise - UA is a one in a million occurance.
To have one car fail in a lab when they want it to is like winning the lottery.
By buying only one ticket.
Your entire lifetime.
They're not that lucky, for it to happen when they want it to so they can observe it. No way, no how.
As for the suit, noone bothered to include Toyota's response:
those who sold back their vehicles were simply asked to sign a waiver of liability – consumers weren't required to sign and the waiver didn't say anything about confidentiality
Comments
That's my other gripe - you never can find the same models reviewed it seems. At least at Amazon or Newegg, people are reviewing the actual product that's for sale.
Juice, that is a peeve of mine here. We used to provide ground clearance numbers but don't any more, unless it's in a review. Maybe because the manufacturers played games with where they measured.
I drove 25 miles on a logging road in our minivan last week before the rains hit and luckily met a guy at the start with local info so I knew we could make it through (with only one mild scrape). And the gate at the 5,000 pound weight limit bridge that's usually snowmobile only was open.
I always check GC when I shop cars so I may have to bug you if we ever decide to buy another rig (the Prius minivan did get my attention, but it it's like the 5" GC on the Prius sedan, I dunno).
And there's a good chance that Suzuki would throw in free floor mats to celebrate the sale of the 100th Kizashi in North America. Exciting!
I've heard that the upcoming ad campaign, in which Suzuki's North American sales manager (or mangler, if you will) threatens to drown a sack of kittens unless at least 10 people per month buy Kizashi sedans, will drive sales through the roof. Stay tuned!
Not a problem with cars, plus I was able to find a dishwasher they recommended, and it has performed well.
The reliability ratings have been spot-on for me, predicted which parts will break first with low scores in those particular categories. It's accurate enough that you know what to look for, what to troubleshoot.
I think most people read the press release summaries and decide then and there if they like Consumer Reports. If the model they like isn't recommended - they don't like 'em.
manufacturers played games with where they measured
Bingo, you need 3rd party verfication, and often CR is the only 3rd party providing that info, measuring all cars the same way.
Prius reliability ratings dropped to "Average" with the recent complaints - another case of when something goes wrong CR data indeed does reflect the problems.
Couple that with invisible marketing, dwindling dealers, and I give 'em a year or two before they follow in Isuzu's footsteps.
I would not generalize at all about Japanese nameplates. Each is very different.
Toyota got so big they're more like the 4th nameplate in the Big Three. They're even in NASCAR for cryin' out loud, probably taking money from the quality control side to pay for it. How Tokyo is that? They're Asia's GM. At least they seem to be changing back to the old Toyota ways more recently.
Mitsubishi was the Japanese Chrysler. It's sad that even Chrysler, the most struggling US automaker, didn't want them. They sold their soul to the devil with the 0/0/0 deals.
Suzuki is a great motorcycle builder, but a punch line when it comes to cars. They were selling the stuff GM didn't want, basically, often cheap Korean-made cars. Now they are simply too small and do not have the resources to really build a good lineup, so IMHO they are doomed.
Subaru is the Japanese Porsche. I'd say Saab in terms of character, but every Subaru drivetrain sold here has a layout nearly identical to a rear-engined 911, only in reverse. Why have they succeeded? They have a clear identity. Who would have guessed they would sell more than twice as many cars by dropping FWD offerings?
Mazda is the Japanese Ford, though let's see after this divorce is final. Ford finally realized it could build small cars that don't suck (I owned an Escort, so I'm allowed to say that), so they no longer need Mazda. So the question is can Mazda now build bigger cars without Ford's help? We'll see.
Honda is tougher to peg. But very different from any other Japanese nameplate. They are their own worst enemy - recent styling effort, if you can call it that, from both Honda and Acura are missing the mark. Owners are loyal as heck, and Honda keeps 'em happy.
Nissan had a sporty edge but many models dropped the manual transmission option, and they've really focused on volume and cost controls. It's worked for them, but I wonder if they can sustain volume without relying on incentives.
No two japanese nameplates are even similar to me.
It's CR's responsibility as to what Toyota sells?!!!
The way I see it, Carlos Ghosn is just trying to be efficient. Look at the results : Nissan have very few big recalls, but compare with toyota's no. of recalls. And if Ghosn did not try to reduce bloat and other inefficiencies way back in 1999, Nissan will not exist today. He after all is the one with a track record of several turnarounds, he turnaround sick Michelin in Brazil, then he also rescued Michelin USA from a loss making company to a healthy profitable one.
I'll take this guy any day compared to people like Rick Wagoner who bleeds GM for several years. Remember, only a profitable car maker can invest in new cars and new technologies. And recently Nissan even come up with the LEAF, the first mass produced electric car in the world. If Nissan is bloated and don't cut cost PROPERLY (not blindly), this LEAF will never be created.
The numbers speak for themselves : Nissan is profitable (anyone wants to buy from a company LOSING MONEY ?), and their number of recalls is " normal " like Hyundai. So it proves that Nissan's so called cost cutting does not sacrifice quality. You think Hyundai don't cut cost ? The difference is how they do it.
toyota ? Its well known today. SUPER JUMBO number of recalls, for very serious problems. Now THAT'S cutting cost to the BONE. And believe me, they will even try to CUT THE BONE.
Look at the Nissan Juke. Within weeks after launch in Japan, it sold more than 20,000 ! And also in a very short time, more than 30,000 Jukes were sold in Europe.
Anybody have info about how popular, or un-popular is the Juke, recently launched in the US ?
Once again, I feel that Nissan and Hyundai are today's 2 best automakers who strike a good balance between cost cutting, profitability and quality. I don't care a damn what jd power and CR says. Yea, if toyota can and HAVE tried to pay off the people at government level, what makes YOU think they won't and don't do the same to the media guys ?
I look at the cold hard evidence, not points published by magazines whose accuracy is not even proven.
If, if, CR is so thorough in their highly random, unfailingly accurate statistical data collection, they would have known about the sludging engine problems and immediately reported that people should not buy that piece of junk.
Same for the Odyssey and Honda's unfailing transmission and now VCM problems.
Notice they have Odyssey recommended, still.
I went through my stacks of CRs in the garage and copied this from April 2010.
Even funnier is that "powertrain" is a strong point for purchasing an Odyssey. Perhaps in CR's way of valuing.
The original tenet of this thread was that CR's having rated toyota as very reliable is an unquestionably correct assessment. CR makes no mistakes was the thinking of the OP.
Actually let's look at CR's vacuum cleaner ratings. The #1 pick is a Chinese-owned Hoover. In owner reports on Amazon and Sears and elsewhere people are complaining about the thing failing. CR didn't even bother to check but the company claims it's a 12 amp unit--however that's the 5.5 amp upright (others are 12 amp) added to the portable unit which is 7 amp. The Hoover company added the two ratings to get a seemingly powerful motor draw rating which implies great cleaning suction.
This is the CR which rates cars perfectly? I don't think so. So their ratings and publicity statements as to which cars are "best" or in reality slightly "bester" than another since the differences are so slight really need a big grain of salt. Read Edmunds owner threads and you'll learn about cars quicker than relying on CR.
Maybe I'll trust CR about which dog food to buy. Grin.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Nissan recalls 2 million cars worldwide (MSNBC)
That tops Toyota's 1.53 million car recall of last week.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Why, then, go through it all over again just a couple of weeks later? Do you think that we'll come to a different conclusion the 2nd time around?
Let's agree to wait until next year before we restart this old argument. I'm calling it "old" because in my 12 years here, I've seen it easily a dozen times.
If we keep it up, the host will step in & stop it because it's off topic.
I just love the "CR is bias against the domestic automakers" line yet the entire Ford line-up has been on the recommended list with better than avg or much better than avg scores for the last 2 years
Agreed on that, but....
So it proves that Nissan's so called cost cutting does not sacrifice quality
Bad timing on that:
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/10/28/nissan-to-repair-2-14-million-vehicles-in-its- - -3rd-biggest-recall/
"engine to stall or fail to restart"
Even Hyundai stumbled recently, though I think that has more to do with very rapid growth due to enormous demand for the segment-busting Sonata.
FWIW, I do not equate recalls with quality, it's completely wrong to do so because of real-world examples like this:
* Toyota recalls spare tire cables that might rust, that makes them look bad
* Ford does not recall rusting/breaking axles for owners outside the snow belt, they look good?
So I don't buy the argument that # of recalls is a measure of quality, not by a long shot.
Having said that, yes, Toyota has cut costs, materials in some vehicles have dropped in quality, and they perform fewer inspections (though they changed that recently).
Even funnier is that "powertrain" is a strong point for purchasing an Odyssey
First, the problem rate had not been high since 2003, so why shouldn't they recommend a 2010 model? :confuse:
2nd, they were rating the powertrain's performance for 2010, not the reliability from 7 years prior. Dodge didn't come out with a truly modern engine until - well, until now - the Pentastar V6, and finally.
You seem to be confusing reliability scores with their product scores, which are totally separate.
They have very highly rated models with horrible reliability scores:
* Nissan Versa 1.8S (#1 subcompact sedan in 2010 buyer's guide, yet it gets a black dot for reliability so it's not recommended)
* M-B GL (near the top, but unreliable)
.. and very reliable cars with low ratings:
* Smart ForTwo (dead last in class, but Red Dot reliability)
Before anyone screams of bias let's keep in mind Smart is owned by Mercedes, and Nissan is an import brand.
OK, let's look. Excellent point! You guys keep saying real-world posts mean more than CR, so shall we?
Using YOUR yardstick:
Ody Transmission Problems: 1678 posts
Chrysler Transmission Problems: 1941 posts
Toyota Sienna: No active thread!
Ody thread link:
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f0fa11e/1677#MSG1677
Dodge thread link:
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.ee93e7a/1940#MSG1940
So looks like Honda is better than average (especially when you consider it's been the best selling minivan lately), Toyota is MUCH better than average.
Conclusion: get a Toyota van if you have concerns.
Conclusion #2: real-world thread activity in Edmunds matches Consumer Reports' reliability for those vans exactly, Toyota #1, Honda #2, Chrysler #3.
Thanks, I feel much better about my Sienna and Consumer Reports magazine after using your source.
You should just scroll over posts you don't care to read instead of filling bandwidth kvetching.
>Didn't we just finish arguing about the validity of CR's ratings on another forum
The topic was topic was brought up presenting CR's recent PR statement about some brands being higher in reliability as the last word on the subject. I challenge that based on the statistical methods (not) used by CR in their convenience survey technique.
> it because it's off topic.
If anything's off topic, it's your your trying to control the discussion rather than add to the discussion thereof just because you disagree with someone else's evaluation of CR. Rather than letting the discussion ebb, you fanned the flames.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The article says "The recalls are mostly in Japan, with 835,000 units, and the United States and Canada with a combined 762,000 units." That's quite a few. :shades:
The most recent Toyota one was "global" too, fwiw.
They were ranked by the brand average, folks.
Each brand has good and bad models, they looked at the average for each brand, but that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of variance between models.
For instance Toyota and Honda beat Ford on average, but the Fusion beat the Camry and the Accord.
People are still misinterpreting the information.
Sorry. It was my intention to help - not offend - you by pointing out that we had just finished hashing this over & that it was unlikely that we'd turn up anything new on this topic so soon after the last CR discussion ended.
Again, my apologies. I enjoy reading your posts.
Sorry to quote you twice, but this will show that CR was on track...
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/10/28/2011-dodge-grand-caravan-revealed/
Chrysler is making the Pentastar V6 the standard engine in the 2011 Grand Caravan, a HUGE improvement.
The old base engine was a 3.3l pushrod that put out a meager 175hp (less than the 4 banger in the Sienna). Even the upgrade 3.8l pushrod only made 198hp, and both only got 16mpg city. The big 4.0l only went in the pricier models.
Now Chrysler has fixed that - a much better engine, even in the base models. Now they might add Powertrain as a strong point for Dodge, especially since a 6 speed auto comes standard (with Honda you have to get a $40k plus Touring model).
My only comment is, what took so long? Chrysler invented the minivan, they should be leading the class, not following.
In reality Chrysler is doing quite well considering Daimler and Cerberus gutted them over the last decade or more. I am surprised they had enough left in them even with our bailout to survive.
I'm utterly amazed that Chrysler is still standing. If they can hang on another year they may be in the clear.
Here's their used car ratings for the Odyssey. How's that statistical analysis for CR working? Check the Odyssey transmission discussion along with others.
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f0fa11e/1636#MSG1636
The transmission ratings are red circles?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
They had the most room for improvment, but recent efforts show they're definitely on the right track. The Jeep Grand Cherokee being a good example.
These improvements to their minivans are also huge. Now they need good entry-level cars. I'm not convinced the 200 goes far enough.
CR shows a big black dot for 2001 Odyssey transmissions.
Once again, looks accurate - they really nailed it.
Are you folks trying to prove CR is not biased, or what?
The link takes you to a discussion.
You're supposed to read through the many reports of varied years. That means more than one.
You didn't know that?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Last time I checked this topic was called Toyota on the mend for 2010?
Either I'm lost or we are really off base on this topic.
Plus talking trash about Toyota is more fun. :P
Maybe because Toyota may have a chance to pass up the new Ody in sales in the next year or two with its redesigned Sierra? There has been some press recently that the industry is expecting minivan sales to track back up some in the near future.
Not sure why a Nissan recall article was brought up in a Toyota thread to begin with?
For someone who complains when GM or Ford are brought up in here, why did you bring up Honda, last time I checked this was a Toyota thread :confuse:
Brand % discount on 2011 models
Toyota 8.30%
Mercedes-Benz 8.1
Lincoln 7.9
BMW 7.7
Acura 7.6
Auto News
Oh, we were talking about Toyota recalls and how it was the end of the world. And Nissan was held up as a brand that didn't have many. Until the day after the thread. :shades:
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The repurchase transactions included strict confidentiality agreements barring consumers from disclosing the problem to anyone and from suing the automaker, according to the amended class-action complaint.
The new complaint also cites internal company records documenting instances in which Toyota Motor Corp technicians or service managers replicated speed-control problems like those reported by customers.
But in a series of field reports from 2006 to 2010 involving Toyota Camrys, technicians from Hong Kong confirmed unintended acceleration in cars they tested while ruling out faulty floor mats or gas pedals, the lawsuit said.
Moreover, the acceleration glitches were duplicated without the vehicle's diagnostic equipment detecting a malfunction.
Toyota coverups
It's CR's responsibility as to what Toyota sells?!!!
You cut it short and took my question out of context. I reproduced the text of your original statement. How convenient that you omitted that.
Notice they have Odyssey recommended, still.
Another poster showed how CR had black dots for the affected years. Your post was from 2010. Perhaps it's recommended because those problem areas were fixed long ago?
The original tenet of this thread was that CR's having rated toyota as very reliable is an unquestionably correct assessment. CR makes no mistakes was the thinking of the OP.
It's obviously silly to think that Toyota is perfect, or that CR never makes mistakes. I do think that CR's original premise - that when a make has shown consistent high reliability, even in newly introduced models -- and has a 20 or so year track record to that effect, then it is not unreasonable to recommend a newly introduced model, based upon the historical ability of that company to do a good job on new models. In this case, Toyota screwed up. And also in this case, CR changed their recommendation. What I don't know is whether CR will still now recommend new models from a manufacturer that hasn't had these problems.
This is the CR which rates cars perfectly? I don't think so.
I don't think so either.
So their ratings and publicity statements as to which cars are "best" or in reality slightly "bester" than another since the differences are so slight really need a big grain of salt.
When the differences are slight, I would agree. But when you see 100% of make's models (Honda) being more reliable than average, and you see another make (GM) where barely half of their new models are more reliable than average, that's not a small difference, and is significant.
Toyota has had a lot of problems. I personally don't really like Toyotas because I don't want to float along with isolation from the road and my steering. But even with the Toyota problems (and interior cheapness) of late, they are still very reliable. The new GM's may have nicer interiors, but GM needs to work on reliability. You buy a Toyota if you want reliability, isolation, solitude, and you don't care about handling or interior quality.
That sounds very similar to the report by Wozniak on his Prius. I think the Cruise Control was the culprit. I know that Woz tried contacting Toyota several times before taking his complaint to the news media.
Perchance you can point out where I mentioned either Toyota or Chrysler in my post relating to your posting of 2006 CR surveys about 2003 and older Odyssey trans issues. Believe me, they're still happening.
I work with a guy with an '05. Needed new trans at 70K. He is the only Odyssey owner I know, but gee, that's a 100% problem area in my "sample"!
I see where CR rated the Equinox above average but the Terrain below average. There's a 'duh' if I've ever seen one. It's sample error, of course.
I also read that CR will use a 100-car sample as the minimum for their results. Sheesh, when I think of how many of a given model are sold and how people trust CR like the Bible, I have to chuckle when I think they might have used a 100-car sample to rate reliability and guide someone to buy or not to buy.
My wife's grandson spent $3500 on the transmission in his Odyssey. It had 107k miles at the time. They are not car people and were unaware that it was a common failure. Honda was happy to take their money on a poorly designed transmission. He is the only person I know with an Odyssey as well.
I think the Sienna will pass up the Odyssey this year. The new Honda mini van is ugly. The Sienna has better ground clearance and offers AWD. Though I would not count the Town and Country out.
Meanwhile, Edmunds projects that Toyota will stay in 3rd place after October sales numbers are totaled.
October Car Sales: Not Scary But Not Thrilling Either (AutoObserver)
Also read berri's, tlong's and smarty666's posts.
Perhaps people here do not understand what Consumer Reports reliability ratings mean.
They rate cars the compared to the AVERAGE car, so "Better than Average" does not mean a car is perfect, it simply means it has fewer problems than the average car.
Ody has 1600 complaints/posts, Caravan has 1900 complaints/posts, Sienna has an inactive thread with 4 posts, IIRC. If the Caravan is average, the Honda is a little better than average, the Sienna is much, much better than average (transmission rating).
When we look at the Average for a segment, you look at the volume models, so it's 100% relevant to look at Ody, Caravan, and Sienna, the 3 best sellers.
That's how Consumer Reports rates reliability.
Hope that's clear.
So you're saying CR just sort of looks at the number of problems in a forum on Edmunds, 1600, 1900, and 4, and CR surmises how many that represents out of the real world. Then they decide which ones are sort of better than others and that's how they get the ones that are reliable, while the others are less than reliable. But then that's only relative to their earlier guesstimate of how reliable a Honda, or Toyota, or Chrysler should be?
Furthermore, the reliability doesn't mean they're reliable, it just means CR thinks they are more reliable than some other baseline that CR has.
CR therefore operates much like CarFax. We want you to use our data but we're not responsible if we overlook a couple of crash repairs on the CarFax data because we sort of told you in the fine print that our opinion wasn't really reliable?
That was my original premise: CR uses a cursory form of survey that I lable "convenience survey" because the subscriber returns it if they notice the questionnaire and if it's convenient for them; the survey is _not_ random. Then CR uses the data as they wish.
My point is made.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Read more: Class action: Toyota hid defect | freep.com | Detroit Free Press http://www.freep.com/article/20101029/BUSINESS01/10290362/1315/Business01/Class-- action-Toyota-hid-defect#ixzz13mQzn7ft
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Plaintiffs' lawyers contend the Japanese company compelled the owners to sign confidentiality agreements that prevented them from speaking publicly about the issues they encountered.
In some cases dating back to 2006, Toyota's own technicians experienced the vehicles speeding up without pressing the gas pedal, according to the documents filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court.
"The deeper we dig into the facts that surround Toyota, the more damning the evidence that Toyota was aware of the issue and failed to act responsibly," plaintiffs' attorney Steve Berman said. "The revelation that they bought up the cars in question and prevented the owners from talking about their experience is curious at best, nefarious at worst."
http://www.statesman.com/business/court-documents-toyota-quietly-bought-back-sur- ging-vehicles-1004025.html
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I never said anything like that.
You're just upset that I proved you wrong about the CR ratings of 2004- Odysseys.
I never said CR "looks" at Edmunds' forums. They're independent, that was the whole point - naming a 2nd source. Both point to the Ody being better than the only domestic minivan.
Good luck proving that.
Feel free to jump to conclusions, though.
In related news, water is wet, dogs are loyal, and attorneys want to make money.
To have one car fail in a lab when they want it to is like winning the lottery.
By buying only one ticket.
Your entire lifetime.
They're not that lucky, for it to happen when they want it to so they can observe it. No way, no how.
As for the suit, noone bothered to include Toyota's response:
those who sold back their vehicles were simply asked to sign a waiver of liability – consumers weren't required to sign and the waiver didn't say anything about confidentiality
From here:
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/10/29/report-suit-alleges-toyota-pushed-owners-to-s- tay-quiet-about-un/
Not that you care to hear both sides, it's much more fun to jump to conclusions!
Also, I love how Ford buying back rusted-out minivan axles is an act of good will, yet Toyota doing the same thing is suddenly clandestine.
Double standard, much?