Re: Toyota loses its way

Chill dude. I can go with your flow. The so-called 3 year "dependability study" is meaningless. What are they thinking with all that fancy statistical stuff? They could just ask the car salesmen at the dealerships. Or ask you to do a quick boneyard finger count to get an answer. Heck, just ask you what's dependable, even if you're wearing mittens. Keep numbers out of that part in case you miscount. Then put what you say in the list. And why fool around with 3 years when you can do 10 years? After all, lots of people buy 10 year old cars. Right? Why didn't I think of that before? Beats me. Just my dumb nature, probably. Hey, I got an idea. You take over from JDPower. JBeam - The 10-Finger Statistical Expert and Boneyard Car-Counter. That should work.

In message , jim beam writes

You've obviously never subscribed to "Which?" But you should be able to get a taste of what they're like from their web site. Because the don't work alone they do test hundreds of cars as the work is shared with other consumer magazines across Europe, and they also send out questionnaires to their readership but they don't pay for them, otherwise they'd get back what people thought they wanted to hear instead of the truth.

i think you only have one finger. or is it thumb.

In message , Bob Cooper writes

Compared to the "Which?" Where the answers in the studies are in two year segments, 2002-2003/2004-2005/2006-2007/2008-2009 so you can see at a glance if a car is improving in quality and reliability or otherwise.

"Which" looks similar to Consumer Reports, which is the long-time - and sometimes disputed - standard measuring device used by those who let magazines select their cars for them in the U.S. They also use their subscribers to measure older cars. It's been pointed out numerous times in these newsgroups that CR and JDPower "track well" against each other. I've never verified that.

In message , Bob Cooper writes

Consumer Reports and JD Power, on this side of the pond are frequently very different

Well, I did it three times in one day, quite often. Never had a problem.

Then again, I made sure the ATF was correct and at the correct level.

Are these the "Initial Quality Surveys"? Any new car I get better pass one of these, because they're conducted within three months of buying a car.

If a car can't pass one of these in 90 days, the automaker needs to go out of business.

But, the governemt shored up GM, didn't they?

Sure Whatever you say. Putz.

1978 Corolla 1200...only 50,000 miles before being done in by a "Rustang"... 1980 Corolla SR5 6 years and 244,000 miles. Finally traded for... 1985 Corolla GTS, 20 years and 258,000 miles. Sits in my back yard... 1988 Supra, 22 years, 215,000 miles...resting until spring. 1985 Celica GTS, 21 years and 245,000 miles.

Real world tests by someone who likes Toyotas for a reason.

you should cross-post to .frod, .gm, etc...

LOL! I don't REALLY want to piss anyone off! I have seen Fords and GMs go like this, too, but they are far between!

Buick does seem to be a pretty good car with the 3.8 as their foundation, Pontic was also a fairly decent brand (but got killed off by Obungler Motors) but that would be about all I would own.

Fords actually have a better track record as long as you stay away from their 3.8 liter...

You need to give up the bottle.

You are becoming a desperate troll. Get back in touch when you return to the land of the rational. Bye bye.

the bottle marked "reality" that makes me call a spade a spade? you need to give up the bottle marked "self delusion is indistinguishable from gullibility".

oh, the guy that claims he can damage a toyota transmission with a full-throttle shift is not a desperate troll - no siree!

I think you either just don't know how to drive, or were trying to drive a Tercel like a Supra.

Either way, you ruined a perfectly good transmission in a perfectly good car all by yourself.

Believe what you want. It's your delusion.

Not mine at all. You must have done something serious to be able to ruin this transmission.

This transmission is rated 131 hp, and is mated to an engine that produces

108. You should congratulate yuourself for being clever enough to ruin an transmission rated 28 HP more than the engine can produce.

The spec for 1st gear is 34MPH. You probably managed to exceed that, and probably the 2nd gear spec, too. Ever hear of an Owner's Manual? It's in there.