Is it just me or does the "All New" Tundra not have a 4.0l engine that's been used for years....or the 4.7l that's been used for years? I would say that qualifies as better than a spark plug. Or the Camry's 3.5l engine that was already in the Lexus RX and the Avalon. Even the "completely redesigned" vehicle do share some parts. Now the 5.7 is all new, but the problems are obviously not in the engine but in other parts like the transmission and the 4wd system. How can I make this claim? Because the V8 4x2 models have above average reliability so far.
Plain and simple, CR should not give a reliability rating to a vehicle if the car is ALL NEW (gen6 Camry, 07 Tundra, 08 Corolla, gen2 Prius, 08 Accord, new Civic, etc.). CR methods should be beyond reproach, and transparent to give customers the confidence that CR is a viable resource. Preferential treatment to certain manufactures ALL NEW vehicle (assigning favorable ratings before survey results are even tallied) result in nothing more than a hypothesis with no data to back it up.
Exactly. You say Toyota has "earned the right" to be given favorable reliability rankings when they introduce a new model? In statistics, there is no such thing as "right-earning." And a magazine that is supposed to be beyond reproach with the way they gather and analyze data should not be deciding who "earns the right" to have their data predicted.
Again I will say, make predictions about everyone or no one. This is basic, analytical procedure here.
__________________
2001 Camaro SS
310 RWHP, 330 RWTQ stock @ 12,000 miles
28 mpg highway
Wow, this is just amazing!!! No statistically relevant survey should "assume" anything. . . the number should fall where they may. CR truly is rubbish. . . . . .
This does explain CR's recent blunder when they gave the BRAND NEW '07 Tundra a reliability rating (of "good", iirc), while claiming "no data available" for the re-designed (but mechanically similar) '07 Silverado/Sierra. I truly despise this publication. . . . .
If I'm reading this right, CR surveys any owner (so long as they are a CR subscriber) of a vehicle, whether it is brand new, or 3 years old (no redesign within those 3 years). This seems to me like the CR survey would skew positive for brand new vehicles (not old enough to have problems), and skew negative for older vehicles (more use/wear and tear). JD Powers ONLY surveys vehicles that are 3 years old, thus leveling the playing field. . . . seems more relevent, and accurate. . . .
+100. I cannot believe they have done that all the past years
ANyway, at least realistic and more accurate recomendations may come in the future.
Toyota has had some slip-ups in quality recently, thats not exactly news.
Look at it this way though, Toyota ranks 3rd behind Honda and Subaru but they rank well better than some of their main competitiors.
#10) Buick
#11) Mercury
#12) Ford
#13) Lincoln
#20) Chrysler
#26) Dodge
#28) GMC
#29) Jeep
#30) Chevrolet
#34) Cadillac
Another key bit of info from that study: 34 of the 39 models named "most reliable" are Asian.
Also, the Pontiac Solstice had worst new car prediction score in the survey. So, lets not be all "doom 'n gloom" here. Yes, Toyota has some work to do.....but they still rank considerably better than their American competitiors.
Yeah, u got a point there. Still playing in another league.
Actually, we all knew about this all along. There have been many discussions here in the recent past, and even a thread about how Toyota wasn't going to focus on any new models until they get their quality back up.
As I stated in another thread regarding this subject, everyone has growing pains.
Toyota still makes fantastic vehicles, even at their low point.
They will be the worlds largest and either the best in quality or very close to it. You really couldn't ask for anything more from any manufacturer. Nobody else has ever been able to balance quantity and quality as good as Toyota has, and they are striving to get better.
Yeah, thats why they recalled 470000 vehicles yesterday for engine tranny problems. I agree its hard to maintain quality when u grow up so much in quantity, I think they are still learning that lesson, now with this drop, with that wake up call maybe they will recover what they have lost. Oh well, GM youre not alone, more quantity, more quality issues.
Anything small like that about Toyota is big news big it has higher expectations. Ford and GM spit out horse shit all the time and it is considered normal...
Exactly, because one of the main reasons toyota sells their cars is the high expectations in quality and reliability. And of course, toyota has now even more higher expectations as trying to sell over 10million vehicles worldwide in a few years.
I gotta say, there is a lot of apathy considering that Toyota dropped five slots while the domestics continue to gain ground. Keep in mind that these stats are for the cars from 2004-2005, before Toyota began the big product push starting in '06. I have ready plenty on this board about problems with the '04-05 Camry, and plenty on the '07 as well. Read the comments over at Yahoo autos for the Camry...not pretty, especially compared to domestic competition such as the Fusion and Impala.
It's easy to say "Toyota is still the best," but growing stats show that Toyota is "moving backward" while the domestics continue to make progress in quality and perception. First JD Power, now Consumer Reports. First Jim Press, now Jim Farley. Something is amiss in Torrance and in the Toyota Way.
YEAH, I said that exactly in a thread posted a few weeks ago. But still, toyota is the best versus american manufacturers.
How can you guys have it both ways? Either CR is full of crap and it's ratings are worthless OR Hey look Toyota is slipping (according to CR's numbers)
Toyota has 2 vehicles that in 2007 were below average in reliability. Which would put Toyota Camry V6 as the Superstar of the GM line.....and the Tundra as better than average for the pickup category overall. Watch as Toyota actually does something about it and the reliability increases in the next year. As for the doom and gloom:
Top 3 most Reliable Cars (by category) according to CR
Small cars:
Toyota Yaris
Honda Fit
Toyota Corolla
Midsize:
Toyota Prius
Honda Accord
Hyundai Sonata
Small SUV:
Honda Element Mitsubishi Outlander
Toyota Rav4
Midsize SUV:
Toyota Highlander
Honda Pilot
Toyota 4runner
Large SUV:
Toyota Land Cruiser (only model with above average reliability)
Pickups:
Toyota Tundra (2WD v8) Toyota Tacoma
Ford F150 (v6, 2wd)
Wagons/Minivans
Pontiac Vibe/Toyota Matrix
Scion Xb
Toyota Sienna
And just to be fair....the ONLY Toyota on the least reliable list...Tundra 4WD V8....
On another note.....BOth the Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice are below average which would seem to confirm at least the consistency of the results. (Just like Matrix/Vibe)
SO, the outlander is more reliable than the rav4? Anyway, great news for this car, I think besides been stylish and very techno , now is realiable as well. As for the tacoma, just confirmation of all he can do.
I'm not pro-domestic at all but I agree with them that projected reliability is a bad way to judge any new cars. The only way projected reliability would work is if the car remained almost exactly the same like British Leyland's Mini or the old VW Beetle. Today's Corolla has absolutely nothing in common with the very first Corolla except its name. Mercedes is probably the ultimate example of why you shouldn't do this. A brand that had more prestige and a great name for durability, suddenly drops all the way near the bottom of the list.
As for Toyota, I think things like this are the only way Toyota will know what to fix or what to improve. Its better to have a slip than a free fall like what happened to Mercedes. You should use more than one source to research a car.
WTF??? Really wow........that hurts!!!! U get what u pay for!
Big money, big fall down.
You bring up a very valid point, and this has no doubt contributed to the Camry having uncharacteristic mechanical problems. The thing is, Toyota has introduced new engines, transmissions etc. in new models before, and were able to make them reliable. What exactly changed for the generation 6 Camry is open for endless debate.
I will say this, I don't understand why some people are all up in arms over Consumer Reports and their bias towards Toyota, when in fact they have basically revoked Toyota's hall pass for the Camry. Bias would be if they continued to endorse the model just because it is a Toyota.
Ok now CRfinally is not biased towards toyota, they have learned their mistake. They used to be bias , they arent anymore cause they fucked up. SImple. Why they fucked up, because assumptions arent scientific arent reality and u cannot base an opinion on one without risking to be all wrong.
I never did like how CU "allowed" for so-called predicted reliability in their ratings. That is very unscientific and they have burned their readers by doing that.
However, CU has been in business for over 70 years; the folks in this thread calling CU "irrelevant" are just pissed-off duhmestic fans torqued by all the drubbing CU has given the duhmestics over the years. CU will be around for a long time as no one else provides their service.
I never did like how CU "allowed" for so-called predicted reliability in their ratings. That is very unscientific and they have burned their readers by doing that.
However, CU has been in business for over 70 years; the folks in this thread calling CU "irrelevant" are just pissed-off duhmestic fans torqued by all the drubbing CU has given the duhmestics over the years. CU will be around for a long time as no one else provides their service.
C
So that makes their rating practices ok? Silly me!
So that makes their rating practices ok? Silly me!
Anyone who thinks that "predicted reliability" and "reliability" are the same thing is a moron anyway.
Here's some definition for all:
Predict
v. tr.
To state, tell about, or make known in advance, especially on the basis of special knowledge.
v. intr.
To foretell something; prophesy.
That second one doesn't sound like it's 100% now does it. Let's use it in a sentence or two....
1. I predict the Sox will win the world series.
2. I predict that next years reliability for v6 camry's will improve.
3. I predict that the Supra will be unveiled next week and be in dealers next month with 600hp and cost $16700!
Which of those statements have the highest likelyhood? I'll use my special knowledge so lets see...
1. Everyone knows God likes the Rockies in this one.
2. Years of previous reliability, Toyota having already fixed the 6 speed on current models, reliability of other Toyota models using the same engine, other camrys having good reliability etc.
3. Everyone knows the new supra will have 750 hp.
Predicting reliability going forward based upon past reliability is merely forecasting, and it is not unscientific. Forecasting is done all the time.
It was done in Denver and Atlanta and Toronto to justify spending great amounts of money to build new airports or airport terminals, because, based upon the past growth of air traffic, they forecast that future traffic would overload existing facilities, and new, larger facilities would have to be built to service the predicted new, higher traffic levels.
It was done by Toyota to justify building a properly full-sized pickup truck, the 2007 Tundra. They forecast that there was demand at the time of the forecast, and would be enough demand in the future, that they could get into the market and still make money.
It is done on Toyota Nation each month when the monthly sales figures are posted, and the Toyota fans try to prove that Toyota's annual sales figures for the new Tundra will be met; and by the domestic fans who try to prove that the annual Tundra sales figures will not be met.
It was done by GM and Ford when they decided to no longer build minivans; they forecast that minivan sales would continue to drop. They forecast again to justify the decision to gamble on crossover vehicles; they forecast that sales of crossover vehicles would continue to climb.
Some forecasting is accurate, some not, or rather, some of the decisions made based upon forecasting is accurate, while others decisions are not. Chrysler's decision in the mid-1980s to invest in the minivan was a good decision. The decision by the Detroit 3 to invest heavily in trucks and SUVs, but invest so little in cars, was not a good decision.
CR's decision to predict future Toyota models' reliability based upon past reliability was valid. The forecasting of good future reliability held true in the past, but this time, the forecasting did not hold true; it is very difficult right now to know whether or not next year's predictions will hold true. What was not valid was CR's bias, and the resulting decision not to forecast future reliability for all automakers. If they forecast for Toyota, they should have forecast for Mercedes-Benz, Pontiac, Audi, and all others, regardless of history of good or bad reliability.
So that makes their rating practices ok? Silly me!
[Ahem] Actually, I did note my objections to how CR predicted reliability, even with reliable Toyotas. It was in the part where I wrote in English.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmehes
Anyone who thinks that "predicted reliability" and "reliability" are the same thing is a moron anyway.
!
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmehes
Here's some definition for all:
Predict
v. tr.
To state, tell about, or make known in advance, especially on the basis of special knowledge.
v. intr.
To foretell something; prophesy.
That second one doesn't sound like it's 100% now does it. Let's use it in a sentence or two....
1. I predict the Sox will win the world series.
2. I predict that next years reliability for v6 camry's will improve.
3. I predict that the Supra will be unveiled next week and be in dealers next month with 600hp and cost $16700!
Which of those statements have the highest likelyhood? I'll use my special knowledge so lets see...
1. Everyone knows God likes the Rockies in this one.
2. Years of previous reliability, Toyota having already fixed the 6 speed on current models, reliability of other Toyota models using the same engine, other camrys having good reliability etc.
3. Everyone knows the new supra will have 750 hp.
So I guess it's #2 then.
Great post; and I must compliment you on your use of sarcasm. Topped me on this one, you did!
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
ToyotaNation.com is an independent Toyota/Lexus enthusiast website. ToyotaNation.com is not sponsored by or in any way affiliated with Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. The Toyota, Lexus and Scion names and logos are trademarks owned by Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.
Really wow........that hurts!!!! U get what u pay for! 
Linear Mode
