And the Honda transmissions.
So let's see: Toyota screws up once. Honda screws up once.
GM, Ford, and Chrysler have developed screwing up to an institutional
art. Virtually everything they have done for 30 years has been a major
screw-up, from the top down.
Yeah. Toyota screwed up once. OK.
Please. This is total crap. Toyota screws up all the time. Back in
2007 Toyota led the industry in recalls. The new Turdra is one huge
screw up - broken camshafts, defective transmissions, pick-up boxes so
weak you cannot leave the tailgate open. Or my SO's RAV4 - the worst
crusie control I have ever used. It is unusable at certain speeds. How
about all the ball joint failures on trucks from a coupkle of years
back - these fauilures killed people. How about the rotten egg
smelling catalytic converters? How about the Corollas with failing
rear suspensions. The list goes on. For some unknown reason, Toyota
seems to get a free ride when they build crap. And there is the whole
Toyota culture when it comes to problems - deny, lie, deny...repeat as
At what speeds? Cruise is NOT to be used in urban areas at 30 mph.
I replaced an average of better than one per year over the 6 years I
owned that heap.
How about the rotten egg
High sulphur gasoline is not a conveerter problem. A rich mixture can
contribute to it, but the main problem is BAD GAS. ANd the problem OST
DEFINITELY was not limited to Toyota.
I think you mean the tercels in 1981?
EVERYBODY had rust problems back then. ANd as soon as they realized
there was a problem (which was only a problem in the "rust belt" with
high road salt use) they recalled the affected vehicles for testing
and remediation - or replacement if rust was evident.
I did several hundred of them.
GM putting 6 cyl tranny parts in 8 cyl trannys.
The GM 3.8 V6 intake problems.
The GM 2.8/3.1 intake problems.
The GM 307 camshaft problems.
The GM 3.4 liter "time bomb"
These are just a few LONG TERM problems GM got away with.
When Toyota screws up they fix it in relatively short order.
OK so some Pontiacs are just as bad as some Toyotas - sort of my
point. Toyota's have problems, just like vehicles from other
But Toyotas seemed especially prone to this problem and Toyota seemed
the least willing to address it with changes. The definitely followed
the standard Toyota line - "It's not Toyota's fault, you are doing
I did't say GM vehicles don't sometimes have problesm. I was merely
pointing out that Toyotya does also. And don't forget, for many years
we never saw "first generation" Toyota models. The bugs were often
worked out in other market. Since Toyota has been selling more US
specific models, we are seeign a lot more problems.
Yeah right. It took NHTSA 3+ years to force Toyota to "voluntarily"
recall the trucks with the bad ball joints. Toyota "voluntarily"
initiated a recall after NHTSA sent them a letter saying they were
about to issue a mandatory recall (something NHTSA almost never does -
usually manufacturers roll over as soon as an inviestigation indicates
there is a problem). And to this day, Toyota (and Toyota fanatics) try
to blame all the sludge problems on Customers (while never exaplinaing
why only certain Toyota models have the problem).
OK, clearly, I didn't quite get the Toyota mantra right. Instead of
"deny, lie, deny...repeat as necessary" I should have said "deny, lie,
deny, lie, say everyone else is worse, deny some more, try to hide the
problem, claim it wasn't Toyota's fault, say GM is a lot worse, claim
it was the Customer's fault, deny again, repeat as necessary." Oh what
a feeling, moving formward, this changes everything, etc, etc, etc.
In my memory no auto company has been as successful as Toyotra in
scamming the public. If I was running GM, the first thing I would do
is hire Toyota's propoganda minister.
Just to be clear - I don't think Toyota vehicles are particaulrly bad,
I don't think they are particualrly good either. Some or good, some
are bad, most are mediocre. I'd be driving a Tacoma today, if they
weren't priced thousands more than a Nissan Frontier.
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 08:38:49 -0500, "C. E. White"
Or my SO's RAV4 - the
Then something was wrong, and it was fixable. It is NOT a common
In the '80s and early '90s in particular, Chevy and Chrysler had REAL
problems with the rotton egg smell - and it was significantly worse in
some geographic areas than others - depending on what refinery the
fuel came from. We had several that would stink like crazy on Esso
(EXXON) and Texaco, and not at all on shell, for instance.
Was I right? Are you talking about a 1981 product?????
Sometimes? Cripes, it's been one thing after another, with GM sweeping
it under the rug for DECADES of production.
OK - as for the ball joints - Why was GM not forced to recall the
TransSport/Lumina/et al? The balljoints on those peices of scrap
failed like clockwork. I see a lot of cars on the side of the road in
pothole season with the lower ball joints separated - and come to
think of it, I can't remember a Toyota!!.
A quick GOOGLE shows ball joint recalls on Jeep, Avenger, RX8,Dakota,
Durango,Prowler, Kenworth trucks (that's scary) with TRW parts,
Mitsubishi Eclipse, Prowler, Volvo, replacement MOOG joints for
Honda/Accura, - ant that's just RECENT RECALLS.
Even the venerable K Car had ball-joint recalls.
As for the sludging? It is a PROVEN FACT that vehicles serviced on the
"severe service" schedule did not have the problem in any numbers, if
at all. Same was true on Chrysler 3.7 engines.
The AMERICAN GOVERNMENT pretty well mandated the extended drain
intervals which werer a large part of the problem. (and users of
synthetic oil, following the extended drain intervals also did not
have the problem)
I see a very VERY strong bias.
I spent 25 years actively involved in the automotive service industry.
I've spent most of the rest of my life closely involved.
I can tell you, without GM cars on the road, a large number of
mechanics would be out of a job. For many years Ford and Chrysler were
right up there with them in the "screw-up" Department.
BOTH have improved significantly faster than GM.
I'd buy a Chrysler today. I'm currently driving a 2003 PT.
I'd buy a Ford today - wife currently drives a 1996 Mystique
I'd buy a Honda today - daughter just bought a 2008 Civic. - not
convinced it was the best value for the dollar, but nobody else maid a
small 2dr coupe (not hatch) that was worth looking at - certainly not
I'd even buy a Toyota. I've owned 2 in the past and they were perhaps
the most dependable vehicles I've owned - and I've owned 25 or more at
last count and driven countless other "company cars"
Scamming? GM's done a good job of that since the sixties.
Talk about Nissans and ball joints - saw TWO on the side of the road
in the last week - 10 days. Both kneeling in prayer to the tow-truck
I wouldn't buy a late model Nissan but if it came down to a Nissan or
a Mitsu, the nissan would still win.
That said, that's the only REAL reason I'm not driving Toyotas the lat
10 years or so. I do NOT buy new vehicles, and Toyotas hold their
value too well. The only reason I bought that darn pontiac was because
I could buy them for such a good price. Six years old they were pretty
well giving them away, while I was paying $6000 for a 6 year old
Chrysler or Ford, and $9000 or more for a Toyota.
I'm back with $6000 Chryslers and Fords.
drains that did it.
If the oil was changed every 5000Km (3000 miles) there would be NO
sludge. Same as with the Chryco engines.
Unlike the Chryco trannies where they had electrical/electronic
Even then, if the fluid was changed regularly and with the RIGHT
fluid, and the gremlins did not show up, the trannies asted a LOT
longer than those that were not serviced.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.