If that were true they would have a '1,' like a Honda Accord which is
actually made in the US, as the first number of the VIN, not a '4' as in the
case of the Camry or a '5' as is the case with the Tundra indicating only
assembled in the US of most imported parts
I also read the VIN which indicates where a vehicle, and it component parts
are build, not merely assembled. Read the fine print in Toyota ads that say
made in America of world source parts.
Not if one considers that the Japanese manufactures do not pay US federal
corporate income taxes on the millions in profits they earn, and take out of
the country, on the vehicles they sell in the US. In addition domestic
manufactures employ hundreds of thousands more American and pay them higher
wages and offer better benefits, medical care and pensions.
It makes one wonder why Toyotas cost so much more than their domestic
competitors comparable cars. Seems like they should be four of five
thousands less, not more. Like the Korean cars, ay? Especially when one
considered the Hyundai brand scored higher than the Toyota band, in the
recent JD Powers survey of initial quality of 2006 vehicles ;)
I can think of many reasons one car should cost more than another. I don't
know if they apply to Toyota or any other make. There are a lot of unseen
parts in suspension, internal parts, pumps, compressors, etc. Thickness of
sheet metal, tolerances on engine and transmission components. Oh, and
Does anyone have factual data that would support one car as being better
than another brand for those reasons?
As for the initial quality, it is, IMO, less of a factor in my decision
making to buy a particular brand than overall durability.
Toyotas aren't high priced, at least the Corolla isn't, I haven't looked as
the luxo models.
A Toyota Corolla 2005 compared with a 2005 Chevy Cobalt are the SAME PRICE,
the cars in the below link (as you can verify) are nearly identical in every
single feature and option except the Toyota gets significantly better gas
mileage while the cobalt has a good deal more horsepower:
Close match Pretty much comes down to who offers the color you want.
Without driving them, hard to say if the power/mileage trade off is a big
What these comparisons don't tell you is construction, design, engineering,
durability. Does one engine have better bearings and will last 50,000 miles
longer? Will one brand have the gas tank rust out in five years? Cost of
repairs at 50,000 miles assuming both are driven the same?
I totally agree, initial quality is only part of the story. It's the
long term that counts most and that takes a while, ref. the recent GM
disaster with their V6 gaskets failing just after the engine guarantee.
Hyundai has been struggling with quality for years.
About 10 yrs back the CDN CBC advertised that they had given Hyundai an
award for best new car quality. No mention was made of who conducted
Eventually it came out that Hyundai bought that award with a big
advertising contract. <:)
Interesting, but CR does have accuracy for me and my friends. CR also
included service responsiveness in their reporting here.
Only one Mac of a few dozen, I had 6 myself, had a problem in over 20
yrs. That was a few yrs ago due to an industry wide problem with faulty
electrolytic capacitors. Apple responded quickly with a new power
Still basically the same though, wither double wishbone, or A arm, or
trailing arm, they all have about the same number or parts, maybe a few
more but nothing to make a big difference in the initial build price of the
WTF are you talking about? As I recall, in 2002 my Corolla was at least
three thousand less than the same-class GM car would have been with similar
horsepower & features (plus the Corolla gets better gas mileage.)
I did a little digging, mike. That they pay no income tax is absolutely
correct but totally misleading.
When a foreign company imports products into the US, they are required to
set up a US sales and distribution subsidiary to sell them locally. If the
company owns both the foreign manufacturing and the US sales subsidiary, it
would be easy for the foreign manufacturing plant to charge the US
subsidiary an amount of money for the imported car so that no profit is made
in the US, and all the profit is made in Japan. Since income tax is paid on
net profits (not sales) then all the taxes would be paid in Japan, and zero
would be paid in the US.
Knowing this, the US government does not charge income tax on foreign
companies, but instead charges a cash flow tax that taxes all net cash flow
that leaves the US and is sent back to Japan. This allows the US to tax
these foreign companies on net cash flow basis, who would otherwise never
pay income taxes in the US because they would always show a loss on a net
profit accrual accounting basis.
Other countries have similar arrangements for foreign companies, including
US companies abroad.
So the answer is that foreign companies do not pay income taxes (because it
is easy to set them up so they never have a positive net income) but instead
the pay a tax on net cash flow, which is typically **more than income
As far as pay and benefits, American companies do may a lot more, but they
can't afford it. That's why they just keep shutting down plant after plant
in the US.
I was wrong, they are the same. In this case, the prices are the same
(adding automatic transmission with OD to the Corolla would make it almost
as expensive as the Cavalier) but the Cav has 10 more horsepower and the
Corolla gets 5 to 8 MPG better in the city and 5 to seven MPG better on the
highway. A pretty even trade-off. Prices are the same, BUT the Cav loses
five thousand dollars resale value as you drive it off the lot, whilst the
Toyota only loses one thousand five hundred:
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.