Toyota Reliability Slips behind Honda

To my surprise, my latest CU Reports states that Toyota reliabilty has slipped behind Honda and Suburu to 3rd place. Apparently, the Camry V6

6-speed automatic has problems. The CU survey of 1.3 million vehicles apparently revealed serious problem with V6 Camry, the AWD Lexus GS and the Tundra. I few years ago it was oil gelling engines.
Reply to
tww1491
Loading thread data ...

Actually, they are 5th, according to the report in Car and Driver.

  1. Honda
  2. Acura
  3. Scion
  4. Subaru
  5. Toyota
Reply to
Thom

Scion is a Toyota brand, using Toyota drivetrains.

Reply to
mjc1

I ddin't trust CU statistics when the claimed Toyota was super good. I don't trust them now that they are saying Toyota is not so great. Poor data collection techinques = poor conclusions.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Doesn't matter, they are seperate, just like Acura and Lexus, etc...

Reply to
Thom

And how is C&D collecting statistics?

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Until the auto makers start releasing internal data like warranty claims and replacement parts sales we don't have any better data available.

Reply to
John Horner

no, same company, same designers, parts suppliers. "acura" models are even sold as honda in other countries. acura /is/ honda. scion /is/ toyota. lexus /is/ toyota.

Reply to
jim beam

why ever not??? they are the finest statistics money can buy!

collection techniques? easy - staple the check to the top of the "report" you've written for them - that way the "collection" is taken care of.

Reply to
jim beam

C.E. "Ed" White is a known troll in the Toyota newsgroup. He owned only one Toyota a long, long time ago that was a rare lemon, and has had a hatred for Toyota ever since. He's been known to lie and exaggerate to make Toyota look bad, and disputes any reliability ratings that make Toyota look good while believing those that make them look not as desirable. Ignore him.

Reply to
High Tech Misfit

On 11/2/2007 7:41 PM jim beam spake these words of knowledge:

?

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Like hundreds of thousands of others through the last 75 years, I subscribed to Consumer Reports for years, and filled out the surveys appropriately when I got them, annually, about the products I owned. What is it that you are referring to, Jim?

What would be better 'data collection techniques'? Asking people to rate products they didn't own or use? I fail to see the problem. Please enlighten the rest of us; surely there are people who deliberately give poor or false responses, but just as surely they are a very small minority. What is your complaint?

RFT!!! Dave Kelsen

Reply to
Dave Kelsen

i read reviews of some products i own, and find them to be wildly inaccurate. others, i see well reviewed, and find them to be garbage. bottom line, i don't believe everything i read.

oh, and the other reason why. in a past life, i used to work for a company engaged in "poor data collection techniques" - they made up data to suit the guys paying them. big name "reputable" company too. with detroit fighting for its life, do you really think this stuff is going to be "fair and balanced"?

Reply to
jim beam

On 11/2/2007 11:42 PM jim beam spake these words of knowledge:

I had a good friend who bought a Monte Carlo SS in 1980, and based on Consumer Reports, paid for the extended warranty. He never needed it, and resented the extra money he paid out. Conversely, because I buy and own Hondas, I generally eschew extended warranties; one malfunction could easily make me regret that decision. The difference between my friend's experience and expectations and CR's data is simply that CR gathers reports on many (hundreds, thousands) purchases of a particular product.

For what it's worth, in nearly thirty years of subscribing to the magazine, where I have often disagreed with opinions and conclusions, I have never seen CU to be wildly inaccurate in their reviews.

With respect to their conglomerated data, they are simply reporting it, It cannot be inaccurate - they are not rendering opinions, they are relaying other users' experiences. Your experience may vary, but that does not mean their information regarding the experiences of others is 'inaccurate'.

With respect to reliability data, Consumer Reports collects and reports information given to them by subscribers. Neither the subscribers nor the company have any possible monetary gain from falsifying information. This is not to say that no falsification ever happens, but the notion that they use poor data collection techniques is ignorantly formed and founded - not because they're any better than anyone else, necessarily, but because there is no monetary incentive. They don't even take external advertisements.

I don't intend to imply that Consumer Reports is perfect, but I weary of the absurd pronouncements made against them. Through the years, they have found that Honda and Toyota are generally the most reliable automobiles. So have I. As a computer systems analyst, I find their information somewhat shallow with respect to computers - but it's not inaccurate, and will be used by people who don't have the depth of knowledge in the field that I do. I presume a similar state with, say, digital cameras - that the expert may make different choices for different reasons, but the layman would be well-guided by the information provided.

RFT!!! Dave Kelsen

Reply to
Dave Kelsen

Like many others, I have completed the surveys CU sends out. Their assessments for products I have owned parallel my experience. I have always found them a useful resource. There recent recanting on child's car seats also indicates that they will admit their mistakes which suggests integrity.

Reply to
tww1491

You are implying that CU can be bribed. Considering the extensive efforts CU makes to eliminate commercial influence on its results, perhaps you could provide some support for this allegation.

Reply to
Gordon McGrew

So, your reasoning is, the data must be wrong since your particular case differed greatly from the group average?

Under that reasoning, either all their products should be faulty, or none.

Thanks for playing "Why I Don't Believe in Statistics!"

Reply to
Russell

As an owner of both Toyota and Honda products, I'd put my money on the reliability of the older 22RE over any Honda product. Better yet I still have one with the 20R on the road. These Jap companies should just stick to the 4-cyclinder engines that originally got them their great reliability ratings. I wouldn't own another Honda or Toyota that didn't have a 4 banger in it.

Reply to
chuck

I've said for a long time, a 4 cylinder Honda with a manual transmission is an absolute jewel of a drivetrain. Bulletproof, and will last forever.

Compare that to the automatic transmissions they put on their V6 cars during 98-04. I hope they took those beancounters out to a field and shot them all.

Reply to
Elmo P. Shagnasty

I do believe in statistics that are properly collected. I don't feel that Consumer Reports has a statistically valid method of collecting data. They only survey their subscribers, and only the subscribers that want to reply do so. I don't think this can qualify as a valid survey.

As I said before, I didn't trust CR statistics when they claimed Toyotas were great and I don't trust them now that they claim they are not so great. The JD Power Surveys are a little better (but hardly perfect since they only ask about repairs, not cost of repairs). In my opinion the recent decrease in Toyota's reported reliability has more to do with negative press attention than an actual decrease in quality.

My opinion is that Toyotas are nothing special when it comes to reliability (neither especially good nor especially bad). I've owned a Toyota, my SO owns a Toyota, I've borrowed Toyotas, rented Toyotas, and have many friends with Toyotas. I've never seen anything to lead me to believe that Toyotas were especially reliable. I am not saying they are bad, just that they aren't some sort of super duper ultimate vehicle. I can find plenty of people who love them and plenty of people who hate them. I think more than any other company, Toyota has done a great job of managing their image. Lately there have been cracks in Toyota's veil of secrecy strategy and I think this has more to do with any perceived reduction in Toyota reliability than an actual reduction in the quality of the products.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

I don't believe in conspriacy theories as they apply to Consumer Reports (or JD Powers either). However, Consumer Reports clearly has an agenda and they clearly have opinions. Like everyone else, their opinons, biases, agendas, etc. affect what and how they report. I am certain that CR and I do not agree on what makes a good car. For instance, they really liked the current Toyota RAV4. My SO has one, and I've driven it many miles. It is not a bad vehcile, however, it has the worst , most illogical array of controls I have ever seen - CR never mentioned the control layout. Also the seats were not comfortable, but CR gave them high marks. Finally, I thought the 4 cylinder engine provided more than adequate power, while CR was steering people to the V6. Different people can have different opinions and neither position is wrong. I like to read CR. I enjoy reading their opinions, even when I don't sgree with them. My late Father loved CR. I can't tell you how many things we had to buy based on what he read in CR. Some things worked out well, somethings didn't. When he was shopping for his last new car, he was absolutely set on buying a Toyota Highlander - right up until he test drove one. Ten minutes driving it convniced him CR didn't always know what was best.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.