The Toyota Witch Hunt

Look, there is an issue. Toyota is being burned at the stake for it I agree. It's like Tiger Woods, too high a pedestal, long way to fall. I would say too much hype, but hype didn't start the mess, it only made it bigger.
Could be that Toyota's are good, not great. BOOHOO.
Or we can all stick our heads in the sand about this stuff.
It started with a whole whack of other recalls first, IE:Rusting frames, and went from there. Fact is Toyota is not producing a world class product recently. The have recalled something like 10 million vehicles in the past 2 years, wake up guys.

 

If a Toyota accelerates out of control, do you think it would be faster than an unlaiden european swallow?

 

not saying that toyota is perfect or anything. but this sticky accel stuff is out of hand, and evidently not true. I still think Toyota>Ford>GM.....>Chrysler, not to say they haven't caught up a bit lately, but I guess we'll see in 10yrs when i've got 200k on my taco and how many of those other's are still running.

 

Agreed. But the Kool-Aid drinkers on this site don't seem to realize that Toyota's quality is similar to other brands. The advantage in purchasing one is resale, longevity, and long term reliability.

 

kool-aid drinkers?? nice lol

-One big advantage that you didn't mention though is our mid-size truck segment. The closest comparison would be Nissan's Frontier, but it's not really a close second in our market.

-i hope all this BS isn't going to hurt our long term resale value... then again, i don't consider my truck an investment, just a vehicle.

 

Thats the thing that people forget.

Toyota Tacoma
Nissan Frontier
Ford Ranger
Dodge Dakota ??

Thats the class... and people Compare Tacoma to F-150 I guess we should be proud.

now out of four small pickups Tacoma is hands down best choice.
When I was lookign at the trucks I did nto go for bigger truck since Iam not construction worker. Don;t have anything to tow above 6500 lb which is enough to tow my trail ready Landcruiser.

 

I agree. The frontier is pretty close; it's a damn good truck with a really great engine. The ranger isn't even in the same ball park though.

Better resale, longevity and long term reliability? So if those things are "better" in relation to other manufacturers why do you say that the quality is similar? I was under the impression that those things pretty much defined quality.

This is not a sarcastic post; I'm legitimately confused.

 

"I cut off your arm!" " it's just a flesh wound.."

 

A product is not good quality merely because it lasts longer or won't die.
Tactile feel of the controls (no squeeky buttons), consistant level of assembly and finish (no rust, mis-programmed trans, 4X4 not working). Or in broader terms not having to ask millions of people to bring their vehicles back for a do-over. As far as being better than the Frontier? The only advantage the Tacoma has (had) over the Frontier was build quality in my opinion. And I have owned a 2005 Frontier King cab SE. So I'm not just speculating like the other 99%.

WIKI : Quality is a perceptual, conditional and somewhat subjective attribute and may be understood differently by different people. Consumers may focus on the specification quality of a product/service, or how it compares to competitors in the marketplace. Producers might measure the conformance quality, or degree to which the product/service was produced correctly.

So to be clear I was not impressed with the "conformance quality"

 

http://pressroom.toyota.com/pr/tms/electronic-throttle-control-154300.aspx
So as predicted ABC "made" Toyota car to accelerate.

 

Yea but some of the problems are subjective. Like how tranny shifts or ABS works or how 4x4 works. Problem for one is not a problem for other.
Also lack or improper maintenance or modifications that are out of the scale will result in different behavior of the vehicle.
Example: Somebody that has truck lifted by 6 inches should not expect his cv bots, his u-joints or his bearings to last.
Now rust is a different story and its not related to Toyota only. My only beef with Toyota is to have better rust protection then other companies and I am convinced they will. Right now they are on par with others.
As of Frontier its a cool truck but amount of after market parts for offloading is limited. I am not particulary happy with Nissan service too. Nissan still has long way to service quality from Toyota.

 

What about those of us who don't particularly need 4x4, but want a vehicle that's still good for moderate off-roading? Looking at Nissan's web site, it looks like there's no Frontier equivalent to a PreRunner, and no factory locker on anything but the 4x4 (not to mention the apparent non-availability of oil/tranny coolers for towing or other situations where extra cooling is a plus (driving to Lake Tahoe in July comes to mind, 8500 ft and 110F ambient air can really diminish radiator performance). I've got no beef with Nissan as a brand, but in my experience they tend not to offer the options which I think are the most important; when I was looking at sports cars, the only two stick-shift 350Z's on the lot were an absolute base model (at the time Nissan considered ABS, and LSD as options on a coupe among other functional features) and a fully-loaded roadster (they did offer to remove the $3k Nav system from the car since I didn't want it, but still would have charged for it plus the cost of removing it), only way to get the diff and brakes I wanted would have been to accept an auto tranny, which should be illegal in a sports car IMO.

As for the subjective nature of "quality", I've read "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintainence" a few times and can't argue that point, but for me durability and reliability in a machine are the bigger part of it compared to fit/finish (not that I've ever had complaints with either of the Toyotas or the Mazda that I've bought). Either way, form is a much easier to fix than function anyway, and fit&finish won't get you very far down the road in a pinch.

 

That doesn't make any sense. Their "quality is similar to other brands" and then you say "The advantage in purchasing one is resale, longevity, and long term reliability." If the quality is the same, how could there be any advantage? Kind of a conflict there, don't you think?

The fact is, their quality is far superior to other brands such as those mentioned in this thread and the facts prove it:

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/02/13/edmunds-puts-toyota-recall-into-marketplace-percentage-context/

As you can see, Toyota is 17th out of 20. Yeah, their quality is superior.

 

Okay, my truck is high quality, because you tell me it is. What does that make my trouble free 15 year old rust free dakota? The paradigm of automotive engineering? Or the one before that with 298 000 kms, all original mechanical...
Denial is more than just a river in Egypt, apparently.

 

I have been telling people that I wanted to see what that "expert" did and always questioned his motives. I am a technical instructor too. I have said that I could hook up stuff to any ETC car and produce what it thought was a valid WOT (wide open throttle) request.

Thanks for posting that link. Now an engineering company has proven it.

The point of this thread was not to say that Toyota is flawless. The point of this thread was to point out that the current media storm may be artificial.

And in my personal opinion, if you join a site with a screen name that is a tag line for a competing product, you have no right to tell anyone they are a coolaid drinker.

I work on almost every brand of vehicle. I see the problems, durability and functionality over YEARS not just what the new car reviews point out. Do not pee on my leg and tell me it is raining.

 

Dodge Dakota directly from the NHTSA and manufacturers. NHTSA Recall History

1990 light-duty 4x2 and club-cab w/V8: Frame can crack at steering-gear attachment and/or mounting bolts can fracture, allowing steering gear to separate.
1990: Valve cover gasket may allow oil leakage.
1991 2WD: Right front-brake hose may rub against tire during full-left turn.
1991 w/4-speed automatic: Fuel hose may contact wiring harness, resulting in leakage.
1991: Premium steering wheel could crack and separate from hub.
1991-92 w/A500 automatic transmission: Inadvertent placement of shift lever in "Reverse" can occur when driver believes it has been placed in "Park."
1993: ABS could become inoperative when hard pedal effort is applied.
1994: Control-arm attaching bolts were not properly heat treated. If they break, steering control could be lost.
1994: Dealers will install a redesigned steering-wheel back cover to keep extra keys from getting caught behind the wheel when the key is in the ignition.
1994: Fuel-tank support straps could separate resulting in fuel leak and increased risk of fire.
1996 w/2.5-liter engine: Power-brake-vacuum hose in some trucks could be improperly installed; disconnected hose can cause increase in idle speed and loss of power assist.

 

So of my 2 Dodges, (92 & 95) 1 may have had a condition whereby I wasn't sure the shift lever was in park. WOWSERS! I guess that cancels out a cumulative 522 000kms of trouble free, RUST FREE, driving.
I'm really starting to regret ever having owned a Dodge.

 

Ironically the throttle did stick once on my Dakota, when a tech left something dangling in the throttle body. Miraculously, I was able to stop the truck using the magic mystery pedal to the left of the longer skinny one on the right.

 

^^Can you post pics of your rusted frame ?

 

That's too funny!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!