Posted on 07/07/2005 8:20:29 PM PDT by MamaDearest
Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. Who buys more cars? I can just see the Toyota adds now. We know you Americans are stupid, but we want you to bbuy our CANADIAN built cars. Yeah, that'll work.
Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. Who buys more cars? I can just see the Toyota adds now. We know you Americans are stupid, but we want you to bbuy our CANADIAN built cars. Yeah, that'll work.
Consumer Reports (published by the very liberal Consumer's Union) is notoriously anti-American manufacturing in its outlook and methods. Comparatively speaking, they suffer from small sample size error, and they've also been criticised for sammpling large-city markets only. Also, note that they only survey vehicles that they "recommend", a very subjective criteria. In comparison, J. D. Powers has considerably broader data and focuses solely on the automotive industry.
As for the information about Hyundai, what this says is that, using last year's initial quality data, they were more reliable than the Europeans. Given the drop in European vehicle quality that Mercedes and BMW owners know all too well, this isn't saying much. Finally, note that you're comparing not only initial quality, but Init Q for first-time buyers, as opposed to the longer term quality metrics for the broader market.
Screw the Japs none of thier cars or bikes can hold a speed record longer than a week.
You're often lucky to find a person who can run a cash register to make correct change. Sometimes it's hard to find a cash register that can make correct change.
Those J.D. Powers data you cite are only useful for evaluating the first year or two of a vehicle's life. If a person only keeps a car for 3 or 4 years and then trades it in he will likely have little or no more mechanical problems with a current model American nameplate vehicle than with a Japanese vehicle. But for those of us who keep our cars for a long time and lots of miles, Japanese cars and trucks are the only way to go if you want a relatively trouble free vehicle. That has been so well proved over the course of the last 30+ years that it isn't even debatable.
Before retiring, my job required me to drive my personal cars 70-80K miles per year, year in and year out. I have owned scores of American cars and trucks since my first used Ford in 1954, almost all of them American until the late 1980s. (except for one horrible experience with a German Audi) I realize that American cars are better built and engineered now than they were in the disastrous period between the late 1960s and the late-1990s, but practically anyone who has owned several Japanese cars or trucks will tell you that they are still simply unbeatable as far as durability over the long haul.
Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything I suppose, but every one of my older friends and relatives (I should say my contempories) who still buy only American cars invariably have numerous mechanical and other problems with them after the first couple of years or so. OTOH, my younger friends and relatives usually buy Japanese vehicles, and their experiences are radically different. I jumped ship in the early '90s myself and have been driving a Nissan car and a Mitsubishi pickup ever since. Both vehicles have been virtually trouble free, except for the time I filled up the Nissan with watered down gas in TN. My 94 Altima has 157K on it, and other than routine maintenance, one alternator replacement, and a valve cover gasket it has been trouble free. (I don't count the trouble caused by watery gas in the fuel injection system as a Nissan problem) The Mitsubishi truck has somewhat fewer miles but more years on it, and it too has been very dependable. So far the clutch disc has been replaced and a front wheel bearing replaced. My son has owned a Honda Odyssey since 2000 and a Mazda before that, and my daughter has owned one Nissan and one Mitsubishi since she graduated from college in 1991. All of their cars have been at least as trouble free as mine, with her Nissan doing somewhat better in that regard than her Mitsubishi.
Before switching to Japanese cars my experience with American cars since the 1960s was one unmitigated disaster after another. The best of the lot was a '78 Grand Marquis which I coaxed along for 172K mostly highway miles before unloading it on an unsuspecting neighbor for the exorbitant sum of $200. I didn't keep repair records, but I would be willing to bet that I spent as much on repairs and replacement parts for that car as I paid for it brand new. Everything else from a '71 LTD to an '85 Chevy was so bad they made the Mercury look almost good.
My wife and I have good driving habits and we don't put any undue stresses on our cars. I also went right by the book regarding maintenance for every car I have ever owned, and always used the "severe service" maintenance schedules and top quality oil, fluids, and filters. Even so, I was plagued by continual mechanical troubles with every American car I owned during that time period. As for the Audi, I don't even want to go there, the memories are too painful.
I usually drive my cars much longer and farther than the average car owner before replacing them, and that's the kind of usage where the Japanese nameplates really shine. And as long as I have good luck with Japanese cars I have no intention of buying another Detroit product until I see absolute proof that they are at least as reliable and durable as that first old used Ford convertible I bought over 50 years ago.
Come to think of it, that car was a pain in the unowat itself. Detroit will have to do better than it to get me back.
No, actually. JDP does both; an "initial quality" survey which, as you suggest, looks that the first year or so. The survey I've quoted is actually the three-year "long term quality" study published a few weeks ago; this is actually for the 2002 model year.
It will take some time and track record, however, for the US automakers to erase the memories of the SUX 6000 generation of cars from the public's mind. I'd still take Ford over the other "Big Three" manufacturers.
As has been pointed out, anecdotal evidence is of subjective value at best, but our family is in the business of driving and delivering automobiles between sellers, and I can tell you unequivocally from personal experience of many years that American cars are on average worse engineered, more shoddly built, and far less reliable than Japanese vehicles.
Of course, the true test of an automobile's actual value is the price it will bring at market. I invite you to compare the resale values of Japanese and American equivalent-model vehicles at the 3, 5, and 10-year sales points. Which retains its resale value better -- a ten-year-old Honda Civic or a ten-year-old Chevy Cavalier?
That has to be a trick question. The right answer is too obvious for that to be a serious question.
If one must drive a US vehicle, he should lease it. That way it's always under warranty and you turn it in right before it completely falls apart.
The definition of of "long term" depends on who is setting the parameters. To me, long term car ownership means more like 10 years and 200+K miles. As I mentioned before, durability over the long haul is the area in which most Japanese cars stand head and shoulders above the crowd.
If Americans are to dumb to build them. Then this American is to dumb to buy one.I agree.
I hate spoil that kind of finale but that was felt three threads over.
A few points (some of might have been mentioned already):
- No source from Toyota said a thing about difficulty of training Americans, only Canadian union reps and "industry experts." Don't be manipulated by a journalist's attempt to make you read something that isn't there.
- What Toyota is doing here is moving production of one type of car from Japan to North America -- not moving it out of the U.S. Why assume that the U.S. should get every one of those jobs? Why is it an insult when we don't?
- Toyota already builds lots of cars in southern states, including Alabama. They are not blind to the advantages, but maybe they think it's smart not to place all of their North American manufacturing in one area.
- I don't think we can blame the unions for this one. Last I checked (let me know if this is no longer true) Toyota's existing plants in the U.S. are ALL NON-UNION, with the exception of one plant they share with GM in California. Unions haven't kept Toyota out of the U.S. in general and I'm not sure why they would start now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.