Toyota #1 displaces GM

[MorningGaser]

Originally Posted by VetteOwner

lol euro cars are built strong and to last.(most) and personally i think they look 10X better...id buy a VW or volvo (super reliable and safe) over a honda/toyota/ whatever anyday. in not sure why but i just never relaly liked the asian imports...

Actually, most Euro brands are worse then Chevy's in regard to dependabilty, reliability, and longevity, and quality.

$80,000+ Mercedes, BMW's, and Audi's are actually lower the average with dependability....why people buy these cars amazes me....Lexus makes a MUCH better product, heck, even the US's Cadillac have better reliability then most of those Euro brands....

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Originally Posted by MorningGaser

Lets deal in facts....the fact is, VW make horribly unreliable cars, especially those built in Mexico...just read ConsumerReports....I'd stay clear of them...and the Beatle was never known for reliability...often the engines siezed at 50,000 miles, especially in very hot climates....VW make horrible product...not even close to Japanese cars in durability and reliability, to be sure....but to be fair, when running right, VW's often have great handling and performance.

If we're dealing in facts, we should also include year, model, timespan, and severity of problem. Since this isn't exactly common data, I don't think there's really much grounds for anything. The gap between the best and the worst, for example VW and Toyota, is only about 1 extra problem per car over 10 years. I'm pretty sure I can fix one thing... Certain brands may have slightly more trouble, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that any manufacturer makes a horrible product. Certain engines, transmissions, suspensions, electrical components, etc... may be bad, but all manufacturers have their versions of that.

[SVOboy]

If you look at the most recent CR reliability rankings, you'll not Toyota is at the top and VW doesn't even make the top 10: http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/28/auto...lity/index.htm

The rankings are done by problems reported per 100 cars, the average is usually around 18, with the best being around ten...so I wouldn't say the difference is one problem per car per 10 years...

[omgwtfbyobbq]

According to consumer reports it is.

Among 10-year-old vehicles, owners of Japanese cars report the fewest problems overall. Toyota, Honda, and Subaru lead the way with an average of 65, 89, and 90 problems per 100 vehicles reported, respectively. The average of all 10-year-old vehicles is 132 problems per 100 vehicles.

Of the domestic 10-year-old vehicles, those from Ford (including Lincoln and Mercury) remain most reliable, at about 120 problems per 100 vehicles. Ten-year-old vehicles from GM and Chrysler are nearly neck and neck with about 160 problems per 100 vehicles. Volkswagen (including Audi) owners reported about 175 problems per 100 vehicles, by far worse than any other brand.

If you just look at the first year, or few, I think it's going to be very different from manufacturer to manufacturer, since problems will probably manifest relatively quickly, but as time goes by, stuff tends to converge. The manufacturer defects will be sorted out, and then it just comes down to wear and tear. So the average Toyota has .65 problems per 10 year old vehicle, and VW has 1.75 problems per 10 year old vehicle. What this says to me isn't that one manufacturer may be any better than another, it says that I shouldn't buy new, since that's a crap shoot. If I buy used, the relative quality isn't as bad as it is when new.

[SVOboy]

Ah, I'm sorry, I misunderstood what you meant by one per car,

[mrmad]

Certainly the unions and pension costs have caused a large part of the American car company's decline, but I think the overall quality of their products over the past 20-30 yeard has been inferior to the Japanese cars. Their attitude towards customers is also a large reason. I remember reading somewhere years ago that the big three in Japan (Toyota, Honda, Nissan) have an overall attutide that they want you to be so satified with your car that you will be a loyal, lifetime customer. And they will do what they can to make this happen. The American car companies don't seem to get it that it pisses customers off to be paying large repair bills before the vehicle is paid off.

For example, my wife has a 1990 4Runner. It is a well known fact Toyota had quality problems with the headgaskets on the V6 engines. In 1998, Toyota contacted us and said they wanted to check it out. They not only replaced the headgaskets on an 8 year old vehicle that we bought used, they gave us a rent a car while the work was being done. Because they had to remachine the block, they ended up rebuilding the entire engine. All for free. Had we owned an Explorer (which probably would not lasted 8 years in the 1st place), the local Ford dealer may have offered a "good" deal on a new Explorer.

Another good example of this is Nissan's 1st attempt at a minivan in the late 80s (can't remember what it was called). They had enough quality issues with the vehicle that by the time the 1st Quests were being sold, Nissan believed the old minivans were hurting their reputation. They had a nationwide program to buy everyone of them back from their current owners at high bluebook value just to get them off the road. Chrysler would have to buy back nearly every car they've ever made to imporve their reputation in quality.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Originally Posted by SVOboy

Ah, I'm sorry, I misunderstood what you meant by one per car,

That threw me at first too. Besides, what's a .65 repair? Pull out the bad part and let it sit for a year?

[SVOboy]

*shrug* for the VW's I've worked on it takes about a year to figure out what the problem is and then another to get to the part that's broken (MKIII and MKIV jetta's spent a lot of time in the shop I worked at last year).

[Bill in Houston]

The other problem is that as far as counting problems, my Dad's two blown brake master cylinders in his Tahoe (that he had to pay to replace) probably count the same as the rocking drivers seat and clicking clutch master cylinder on my Element (both of which were fixed for free).

Look at any magazine's long-terms tests. American cars go to the shop over and over for bizarre and scary and expensive stuff. Japanese cars go back for little itty bitty tiny things, if ever. I don't pay attention to European cars, so I can't comment on those.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Originally Posted by SVOboy

*shrug* for the VW's I've worked on it takes about a year to figure out what the problem is and then another to get to the part that's broken (MKIII and MKIV jetta's spent a lot of time in the shop I worked at last year).

Man, that's a pita. The local shop did the same kinda thing with the Camry when my grandpa had it. Brake light indicator's on? We don't how to fix that... Throwing a CEL? Why check it when you can replace the PCV valve and have it stay on? Your shop shoulda hit up the vwvortex forums, although, having an MKI is nice, since everything that could go wrong, has, and someone knows how to fix it for cheap. But there's still probably something useful for MKIII/IV's.