When it comes to cars' reliability, CR uses wide-scale "anecdotal" evidence.
Their reliability surveys make no mention of the sample size for each
vehicle or the percentage rate of problems reported in the survey, not to
mention the effect of owner's bias in the surveys. If I want to buy a
vacuum cleaner or a dishwasher, I'll read CU. If I want to buy a car, I'll
buy what I like.
We owned a Toyota Avalon that had transmission problems and tire problems
(OK, tire problems aren't necessarily the fault of the manufacturer, but
still...) and a brand-new Honda Odessey minivan that had such a bad engine
oil leak Honda had to buy it back under Michigan's Lemon Law.
The careful application of wide-scale "anectdotal" evidence is what we call
"statistics." I like Toyota's stats.
Reliability is just one aspect of your transportation choice. There's
capacity, comfort, value and lots of other dimensions. Buying a the car
that's top rated for reliability just because it's top rated for reliability
However, if you value reliability (and I do), then it's part of the
decision. I might like the looks of A better than B but if they serve
equally well and B is ranked as more reliable, then I know I'm likely to be
unhappy with A in the long run and I'll buy B.
Well, I can certainly understand why you would not buy another Honda or
Toyota and I can't say I blame you. However, it appears that more people
have been turned off by similar experiences with GM, Ford and Dodge than
Toyota and Honda, which would explain their better resale value and higher
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Yeah I looked at CR when I bought my 92 Ranger 171K miles ago. Think they
described my engine as a "primitive but reliable design". The truck didn't
really get great marks as I recall particularly compared to the Toy, but
it's held up better than most of the Toys purchased around the same time by
people I've known. Can't really take CR too seriously since.
Maybe some of you "toyota can do no wrong" people can 'splain to me why it
was ok for toyota to intentionally try to hide the engine sludge problems
they were having for so many years?
Oh, for the love of all that's holy, don't start that sludge shit again.
First of all, I've never seen anyone on the alt.Toyotas forum say Toyota are
never defective. Sure they are. The difference is in how the defect is
handled, and of course, the severity of said defect. From what I've
gleaned, the sludge problem was augmented by poor maintenance, but even so,
that is apparently a true defect in some Toyotas of the past. Haven't heard
of any new ones with that problem.
None of the Toyotas we've owned have ever had sludge, or dangerous (as in
exploding cars) defects, but they've certainly had minor problems. The one
we bought in the 80s had shitty exhaust, until we had that replaced. My
Echo had wimpy floor boards, that Toyota alerted me to, before I even
noticed. Ditto some sort of brake problem (nothing serious)
Ford, GM, etc., have a tendency to blame the consumer when something goes
wrong, until they're backed into a corner. This is one of the many reasons
people don't have the trust they once had. I remember when domestic cars
were all the rage, but that time has passed. I think we can get it back, if
they start treating their customers *and* their employees better. Look at
how many cops went up in flames, driving the Crown Vics before anything was
As for trucks, I personally would lean to a Ford. You see Ford trucks on
the roads all the time, and from all eras. They're quite tough, and
everyone I know who owns one loves it. So if I wanted a truck, I'd check
out Ford first, then probably Dodge. I don't feel the Japanese have a good
grip on large vehicles. Yet.
Thats funny the poor maintanece claim was by Toyota who was turning down
warranty claims even when the owners had reciepts showing every scheduled
service was performed by a Toyota dealership.
The orginal Toyota Van had engine fire issues, thou not as bad as Nissan's
Van which was a roman candle. It also had steering gear bix issues, and
problems with the lift gate staying closed in an accident.. And as far a
dangerous is concerned,
How about the Prius problem with a steering shaft failure as in it breaks,
and while on that note the 89-95 4 Runners and 93-98 T100s had issues with
steering relay rods breaking. and then there are the 2005 Avalons that they
forgot to weld the yokes to the steering shafts.
Toyota truck issues,2001-2002 4 runner, 2001-2003 Tacoma, 2004-2007 Sequoia
and 2004-2006 Tundras experiance premature front lower ball joint failures
And toyota has had an ongoing issue with hub bearing failures.
The camry has had issues with the fuse boxs
defects, but they've certainly had minor problems. The one
I must have a really good dealer. 2003 Cavilear, got hit right front
cornor. 4 months later engine light comes on, take back to dealer, 15
minutes later they are moving everything out of my car into a rental (I do
onsite POS equipment repairs these days for restaurants, the trunk is always
brimming so they moved a lot of stuff) seems the tranny had a problem, they
rebuilt it under extended warranty. My out of pocket cost for all of it,$0.
My esxtended family has been dealing with them 22 years because the service
has always been as such, even though the dearship has changed hands 7 years
And you can prove this? And what was the correct service intervals?
7500 miles, 5000 mile, 3000 miles?
No matter how you spin this, certain Toyota engines sold in certain
years were more likely to development significant internal sludge than
engines from most other manufacturers. I am not going to claim that
all the complaints are valid, but it seems to me there are enough
people complaining about certain Toyota engines compared to other
engines (even Toyota engines from other years) that there was a design
flaw. Claiming otherwise seems to fly in the face of reality.
You're probably right. But, keep in mind that in your last message (the one
I'm replying to now), you were debating with Scott, who is proof of a
condition gerontologists formally recognized many years ago: Minds which
atrophy from lack of use, often as quickly as muscles.
No one has ever posted their service records to prove they developed
sludge if they serviced their car at a dealer.
Only reason I challenged anyone to post them is that most people would
trust that evidence.
There were a lot of people that 'said' they changed their oil at 7500
or less...but no one posted their receipts.
I suggest Scott you do some research , try back issues of the St. Petersburg
Times and the Tampa Tribune as well as the Orlando papers. The States
Atternoy General got involved in the rucus in Florida and there was talk of
a class action suit 3, 4 years ago.
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:08:25 GMT, "Whitelightning"
No one has developed sludge in a Toyota engine if they changed their
oil as recommended by Toyota.
No one has posted valid receipts to prove they changed oil and
One thing Toyota did was install a maintenance reminder light to keep
soccer moms from developing sludge due to not changing their oil.
Always hard to prove a negative. I doubt you can prove that at least
one Toyota owner did suffer from sludge even though they changed their
oil as recommended.
You are addressing a fairly small audience here. Only a small
percentage of people who have read this newsgroup ever had a sludge
problem and an even smaller percentage could produce years worth of
reciepts for oil changes. I do my own oil changes. I can find reciepts
for the filters and oil, and I can even show you entries in my log
book, but I am sure you would not consider these "valid reciepts."
An excellent idea.
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.