Toyota/Honda vs American

There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just run
too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of the
things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles will
last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still be
worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but something
I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit rebates
it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the "out
the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle. My
point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs US
is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many vehicles
go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last about
50% longer).

"D.D. Palmer" <ddpalmer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qaGdnYnZsIhM6fLfRVn-1w@comcast.com...[color=blue]
> There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just
> run
> too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
> thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of the
> things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
> priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
> miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles will
> last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still be
> worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
> worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but something
> I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit
> rebates
> it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the "out
> the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
> Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
> 150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle.
> My
> point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs US
> is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many vehicles
> go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
> build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last
> about
> 50% longer).
>[/color]
Good description in a nutshell!
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

You are entitled to believe whatever you wish. I chose to
disagree with your opinion however, because of my own experiences
over the years. That is after all what we are expressing here,
opinions. I happen to own a 1971 Pinto, that I purchased new in
1970. It has lasted for a lot more than you perceived 100K.
There is currently 298,000 miles on the clock and all original.
The only repairs have been s clutch at 210K and a Carbon and
valve job in February. I own a half dozen old cars that I take
to old cars shows. I see old cars for the US, England, Germany,
even Italy but I have never seen any Japanese cars from the
seventies at any of those shows let alone one with the 150K you
believe they will exclusively achieve. All manufactures build
some on occasion that are not up to their build standards for the
class in which they compete, that is why the all have a
warranty. From what we see in our fleet service business, that
services nearly every brand on the market, is that ANY brand on
the market today will easily run 200K and more if properly
serviced. That is not an opinion but a fact and we have the
records to support that conclusion. The only real difference we
see in todays vehicles is style and price, period. I prefer
a particular style of vehicle and that is RWD and V8 powered. I
want to buy those that will cost me the least amount of money to
replace every two years. That is my choice, others may chose
differently and that is their privilege as well.


mike hunt



"D.D. Palmer" wrote:[color=blue]
>
> There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just run
> too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
> thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of the
> things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
> priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
> miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles will
> last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still be
> worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
> worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but something
> I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit rebates
> it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the "out
> the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
> Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
> 150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle. My
> point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs US
> is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many vehicles
> go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
> build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last about
> 50% longer).[/color]

Actually, you claim to have facts but they are merely antidotes. My
numbers....actual transaction prices of new and used cars...is more FACTUAL.
Those FACTS show that Japanese cars are priced to go about 50% longer than
American cars. You may argue that the Japanese cars DON'T ACTUALLY go 50%
more, and you MAY (but probably are not) be right. But my FACT, which is
undisputable, is that the Japanese cars, both new and used, command a
premium suggesting 50% longer miles per car. And I am talking about actual
transaction-after-rebates prices. True, Taurus and Camry might have similar
window stickers, but the only way to move the Taurus is to cut the price
using rebates while Camry generally can be sold out at window sticker. Same
for used....a 3 year old Taurus will lose 60% of it's value while a Camry
will lose 35% (just guesses on THOSE numbers but you get my point).

And regardless of what you say, the Pinto was just plain garbage. OK, you
may have a rare, exceptional creampuff, but in the real world it was
garbage. And, OK, the early 1970's Toyotas and CERTAINLY the early Hondas
were junk too. And the Detroit Iron of that era, except for Pinto, Vega and
Gremlin, was indeed generally good. But let's get off the ancient history
here. Modern cars, priced by FACTUAL STATISTICS ACCORDING TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE
WILLING TO PAY, show the Japanese cars are priced to go about 150,000 miles
while Detroit (or Mexican or Canadian) metal is only priced for 100,000
miles. If you honestly believe you can get the same mileage out of Detroit
as you can out of Japan with no additional operating costs, then Detroit is
the better deal for you. The market of millions and millions of vehicles
suggests that the average American has learned otherwise.


<MelvinGibson@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:426FAA3B.60C290A@mailcity.com...[color=blue]
> You are entitled to believe whatever you wish. I chose to
> disagree with your opinion however, because of my own experiences
> over the years. That is after all what we are expressing here,
> opinions. I happen to own a 1971 Pinto, that I purchased new in
> 1970. It has lasted for a lot more than you perceived 100K.
> There is currently 298,000 miles on the clock and all original.
> The only repairs have been s clutch at 210K and a Carbon and
> valve job in February. I own a half dozen old cars that I take
> to old cars shows. I see old cars for the US, England, Germany,
> even Italy but I have never seen any Japanese cars from the
> seventies at any of those shows let alone one with the 150K you
> believe they will exclusively achieve. All manufactures build
> some on occasion that are not up to their build standards for the
> class in which they compete, that is why the all have a
> warranty. From what we see in our fleet service business, that
> services nearly every brand on the market, is that ANY brand on
> the market today will easily run 200K and more if properly
> serviced. That is not an opinion but a fact and we have the
> records to support that conclusion. The only real difference we
> see in todays vehicles is style and price, period. I prefer
> a particular style of vehicle and that is RWD and V8 powered. I
> want to buy those that will cost me the least amount of money to
> replace every two years. That is my choice, others may chose
> differently and that is their privilege as well.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> "D.D. Palmer" wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just
>> run
>> too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
>> thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of
>> the
>> things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
>> priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
>> miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles
>> will
>> last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still
>> be
>> worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
>> worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but
>> something
>> I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit
>> rebates
>> it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the
>> "out
>> the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
>> Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
>> 150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle.
>> My
>> point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs
>> US
>> is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many
>> vehicles
>> go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
>> build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last
>> about
>> 50% longer).[/color][/color]

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 11:05:31 -0400, MelvinGibso wrote:
[color=blue]
> You are entitled to believe whatever you wish. I chose to
> disagree with your opinion however, because of my own experiences
> over the years. That is after all what we are expressing here,
> opinions. I happen to own a 1971 Pinto, that I purchased new in
> 1970. It has lasted for a lot more than you perceived 100K.
> There is currently 298,000 miles on the clock and all original.
> The only repairs have been s clutch at 210K and a Carbon and
> valve job in February. I own a half dozen old cars that I take
> to old cars shows. I see old cars for the US, England, Germany,
> even Italy but I have never seen any Japanese cars from the
> seventies at any of those shows let alone one with the 150K you
> believe they will exclusively achieve. All manufactures build
> some on occasion that are not up to their build standards for the
> class in which they compete, that is why the all have a
> warranty.[/color]

You mean, like just about any Ford from 1976-1982?
[color=blue]
> From what we see in our fleet service business, that
> services nearly every brand on the market, is that ANY brand on
> the market today will easily run 200K and more if properly
> serviced. That is not an opinion but a fact and we have the
> records to support that conclusion. The only real difference we
> see in todays vehicles is style and price, period. I prefer
> a particular style of vehicle and that is RWD and V8 powered. I
> want to buy those that will cost me the least amount of money to
> replace every two years. That is my choice, others may chose
> differently and that is their privilege as well.[/color]


This goes beyond how many miles you can put on a car; like how well it
goes while putting them on. I have had to do very, very little with my
Toyotas to get them to 200,000 miles. One needed a water pump, one needed
an alternator and a fuel pump. The latter still has the original clutch at
260,000 with teaching 2 wives and a daughter how to drive a stick. Sure, I
have seen people get Fords to 250,000, but with a LOT of repairs. I'm
still on the original ball joints in that second Corolla.

And part of the reason you don't see older Toys at auto shows is that the
cognizenti don't recognize them. They were good, cheap dependable
transportation, nothing more. IMHO, I would rather go to a show where
there were a bunch of nice old Corollas, Corona MKII's, Celicas and 510's
than the usual Chevys and Fords I grew up with.[color=blue]
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> "D.D. Palmer" wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just run
>> too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
>> thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of the
>> things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
>> priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
>> miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles will
>> last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still be
>> worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
>> worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but something
>> I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit rebates
>> it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the "out
>> the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
>> Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
>> 150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle. My
>> point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs US
>> is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many vehicles
>> go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
>> build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last about
>> 50% longer).[/color][/color]

D.D. Palmer wrote:
[color=blue]
> There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just run
> too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
> thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of the
> things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
> priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
> miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles will
> last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still be
> worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
> worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but something
> I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit rebates
> it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the "out
> the door" price of a Toy/Hon.[/color]

MSRP is nonsense. What you pay is what you pay. This is exactly
like those late night ads: "Plus if you act, now, we'll add in
this electric cheese straightener (a $50 value!) for no extra
charge..."

I find it irksome that GM and Ford price their cars with a hugely
inlfated MSRP in order to try to suggest that their cars are somehow
in the league of the others, despite their actual 3-4K lower
selling price.

[email]MelvinGibson@mailcity.com[/email] wrote:
[color=blue]
> You are entitled to believe whatever you wish. I chose to
> disagree with your opinion however, because of my own experiences
> over the years. That is after all what we are expressing here,
> opinions. I happen to own a 1971 Pinto, that I purchased new in
> 1970. It has lasted for a lot more than you perceived 100K.
> There is currently 298,000 miles on the clock and all original.[/color]


This is only one car and we have to assume what you said is the complete
truth. Even so, there are documented cases of two Volvo P1800s with over
1,500,000 miles (slightly more than your 298,000 miles). I can keep a
car running in perfect mechanical condition while letting the interior
and paint show its appropriate age - in others words the car looks like
a POS but still runs. Does this describe your 1971 Pinto? These P1800s
have had mechanical and interior/paint work - but they look like they
were just driven off the showroom floor.

[color=blue]
> <Snip> From what we see in our fleet service business, that
> services nearly every brand on the market, is that ANY brand on
> the market today will easily run 200K and more if properly
> serviced. That is not an opinion but a fact and we have the
> records to support that conclusion.[/color]


I couldn't agree more with you on this point.

The only real difference we[color=blue]
> see in todays vehicles is style and price, period. I prefer
> a particular style of vehicle and that is RWD and V8 powered. I
> want to buy those that will cost me the least amount of money to
> replace every two years. That is my choice, others may chose
> differently and that is their privilege as well.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> "D.D. Palmer" wrote:
>[color=green]
>>There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just run
>>too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
>>thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of the
>>things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
>>priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
>>miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles will
>>last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still be
>>worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
>>worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but something
>>I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit rebates
>>it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the "out
>>the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
>>Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
>>150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle. My
>>point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs US
>>is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many vehicles
>>go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
>>build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last about
>>50% longer).
>>[/color][/color]

Exactly. The MSRP is just a starting point...a "wish" price. In the end
Detroit has to gimmick and rebate those prices down to what will move the
metal. So a Camry and a Taurus with similar equipment will ACTUALLY SELL for
thousands of dollars different (Taurus less) because of the perceived "less
miles-per-car" thing with the Ford. And this extends into the used car
market as well. A Taurus with 100,000 miles is worth just a minimal
"salvage" amount while a Camry is worth much more. Because the market
figures the Taurus is "shot" at 100,000 mi...or is an expensive repair
gamble at best. While the Camry is a good bet to get to 150,000 miles by
average drivers with average maintenance and without extraordinary repairs.



"Joseph Oberlander" <josephoberlander@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:wVQbe.223$BE3.115@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...[color=blue]
>
>
> D.D. Palmer wrote:
>[color=green]
>> There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just
>> run
>> too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
>> thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of
>> the
>> things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
>> priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
>> miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles
>> will
>> last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still
>> be
>> worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
>> worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but
>> something
>> I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit
>> rebates
>> it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the
>> "out
>> the door" price of a Toy/Hon.[/color]
>
> MSRP is nonsense. What you pay is what you pay. This is exactly
> like those late night ads: "Plus if you act, now, we'll add in
> this electric cheese straightener (a $50 value!) for no extra
> charge..."
>
> I find it irksome that GM and Ford price their cars with a hugely
> inlfated MSRP in order to try to suggest that their cars are somehow
> in the league of the others, despite their actual 3-4K lower
> selling price.
>[/color]

D.D. Palmer wrote:[color=blue]
> Exactly. The MSRP is just a starting point...a "wish" price. In the end
> Detroit has to gimmick and rebate those prices down to what will move the
> metal. So a Camry and a Taurus with similar equipment will ACTUALLY SELL for
> thousands of dollars different (Taurus less) because of the perceived "less
> miles-per-car" thing with the Ford.[/color]

Compare a GM truck with a Tacoma or Tundra, or even a Titan or Frontier,
as I recently did.

GM had every rebate, financing incentive, "Smart Buy", 24 hour test
drive, "Hot Button", you name it, on a similarly MSRP'd truck. This is
done because they HAVE TO. <G>

I bought the Tacoma with a slight discount ($25,500 on a sticker of
$27,4-something as a cash buyer with no trade) from Toyota's MSRP, and a
6 week wait for the truck to arrive, as that's as good as it got with my
local dealers. One dealer stated "the price is on it". I paid more for
a Tacoma, because under close inspection the Colorado / Canyon wasn't
even in the same league. Driving them made the difference even wider. I
would have paid a similar price for the Frontier if I couldn't get the
Tacoma.

The Toyota salespeople actually let me leave the dealerships during
negotiations without even taking my phone number. I wasn't used to
that. Typically, every time you leave the price gets better, to the
final price. Negotiating spanned two weeks and involved three dealerships.

I typically keep vehicles cradle to grave. The GM product certainly
seemed like that grave was a lot closer.

It is your money but for what you paid for a mid size truck you
could have purchased a REAL truck, a full size F150 LOL


mike hunt



B a r r y wrote:[color=blue]
>
> D.D. Palmer wrote:[color=green]
> > Exactly. The MSRP is just a starting point...a "wish" price. In the end
> > Detroit has to gimmick and rebate those prices down to what will move the
> > metal. So a Camry and a Taurus with similar equipment will ACTUALLY SELL for
> > thousands of dollars different (Taurus less) because of the perceived "less
> > miles-per-car" thing with the Ford.[/color]
>
> Compare a GM truck with a Tacoma or Tundra, or even a Titan or Frontier,
> as I recently did.
>
> GM had every rebate, financing incentive, "Smart Buy", 24 hour test
> drive, "Hot Button", you name it, on a similarly MSRP'd truck. This is
> done because they HAVE TO. <G>
>
> I bought the Tacoma with a slight discount ($25,500 on a sticker of
> $27,4-something as a cash buyer with no trade) from Toyota's MSRP, and a
> 6 week wait for the truck to arrive, as that's as good as it got with my
> local dealers. One dealer stated "the price is on it". I paid more for
> a Tacoma, because under close inspection the Colorado / Canyon wasn't
> even in the same league. Driving them made the difference even wider. I
> would have paid a similar price for the Frontier if I couldn't get the
> Tacoma.
>
> The Toyota salespeople actually let me leave the dealerships during
> negotiations without even taking my phone number. I wasn't used to
> that. Typically, every time you leave the price gets better, to the
> final price. Negotiating spanned two weeks and involved three dealerships.
>
> I typically keep vehicles cradle to grave. The GM product certainly
> seemed like that grave was a lot closer.[/color]

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 15:40:59 -0400, RustyFendo wrote:
[color=blue]
> It is your money but for what you paid for a mid size truck you
> could have purchased a REAL truck, a full size F150 LOL[/color]

Right. But this is a Toyota NewsGroup. You know what makes it a Toyota NG?
Most of us are Toyota Owners.

There are a couple Ford NewsGroups available. You are cordially invited to
go talk about Fords there, if you wish...
[color=blue]
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> B a r r y wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> D.D. Palmer wrote:[color=darkred]
>> > Exactly. The MSRP is just a starting point...a "wish" price. In the end
>> > Detroit has to gimmick and rebate those prices down to what will move the
>> > metal. So a Camry and a Taurus with similar equipment will ACTUALLY SELL for
>> > thousands of dollars different (Taurus less) because of the perceived "less
>> > miles-per-car" thing with the Ford.[/color]
>>
>> Compare a GM truck with a Tacoma or Tundra, or even a Titan or Frontier,
>> as I recently did.
>>
>> GM had every rebate, financing incentive, "Smart Buy", 24 hour test
>> drive, "Hot Button", you name it, on a similarly MSRP'd truck. This is
>> done because they HAVE TO. <G>
>>
>> I bought the Tacoma with a slight discount ($25,500 on a sticker of
>> $27,4-something as a cash buyer with no trade) from Toyota's MSRP, and a
>> 6 week wait for the truck to arrive, as that's as good as it got with my
>> local dealers. One dealer stated "the price is on it". I paid more for
>> a Tacoma, because under close inspection the Colorado / Canyon wasn't
>> even in the same league. Driving them made the difference even wider. I
>> would have paid a similar price for the Frontier if I couldn't get the
>> Tacoma.
>>
>> The Toyota salespeople actually let me leave the dealerships during
>> negotiations without even taking my phone number. I wasn't used to
>> that. Typically, every time you leave the price gets better, to the
>> final price. Negotiating spanned two weeks and involved three dealerships.
>>
>> I typically keep vehicles cradle to grave. The GM product certainly
>> seemed like that grave was a lot closer.[/color][/color]

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:59:10 -0400, ma_twain wrote:
[color=blue]
> [email]MelvinGibson@mailcity.com[/email] wrote:
>[color=green]
>> You are entitled to believe whatever you wish. I chose to
>> disagree with your opinion however, because of my own experiences
>> over the years. That is after all what we are expressing here,
>> opinions. I happen to own a 1971 Pinto, that I purchased new in
>> 1970. It has lasted for a lot more than you perceived 100K.
>> There is currently 298,000 miles on the clock and all original.[/color]
>
>
> This is only one car and we have to assume what you said is the complete
> truth. Even so, there are documented cases of two Volvo P1800s with over
> 1,500,000 miles (slightly more than your 298,000 miles). I can keep a
> car running in perfect mechanical condition while letting the interior
> and paint show its appropriate age - in others words the car looks like
> a POS but still runs. Does this describe your 1971 Pinto? These P1800s
> have had mechanical and interior/paint work - but they look like they
> were just driven off the showroom floor.[/color]

I had an 1800ES w/125,000 (just before I flipped it...OVER that is...)
all I did was clean it. It did need a LOT of repair! But all I did to keep
it looking good was wash, wax and clean the interior. If I hadn't put it
on the roof I may still well be driving it...

[color=blue]
>
>[color=green]
>> <Snip> From what we see in our fleet service business, that
>> services nearly every brand on the market, is that ANY brand on
>> the market today will easily run 200K and more if properly
>> serviced. That is not an opinion but a fact and we have the
>> records to support that conclusion.[/color]
>
>
> I couldn't agree more with you on this point.
>
> The only real difference we[color=green]
>> see in todays vehicles is style and price, period. I prefer
>> a particular style of vehicle and that is RWD and V8 powered. I
>> want to buy those that will cost me the least amount of money to
>> replace every two years. That is my choice, others may chose
>> differently and that is their privilege as well.
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>>
>> "D.D. Palmer" wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just run
>>>too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
>>>thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of the
>>>things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
>>>priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
>>>miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles will
>>>last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still be
>>>worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
>>>worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but something
>>>I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit rebates
>>>it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the "out
>>>the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
>>>Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
>>>150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle. My
>>>point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs US
>>>is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many vehicles
>>>go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
>>>build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last about
>>>50% longer).
>>>[/color][/color][/color]

That is fine if your goal is to spend more to buy your new car,
to help the dealer and manufacture earn more money. I prefer to
spend less to get a new car every two years, not more

Glad you mentioned the Taurus. A two year old top of the line V6
Taurus actually returns MORE of it actual drive home price than a
similar V6 Camry. Sure the Camry has a higher resale value than
the Taurus, of about $4,000 according to NADA, but the Camry cost
$6,000 more to drive home when new so you lost $2,000. When you
trade Taurus on Taurus you save on the next one as well ;)


mike hunt


"D.D. Palmer" wrote:[color=blue]
>
> My numbers....actual transaction prices of new and used cars...is more FACTUAL.
> Those FACTS show that Japanese cars are priced to go about 50% longer than
> American cars.[/color]

<snip>

I am talking about actual[color=blue]
> transaction-after-rebates prices. True, Taurus and Camry might have similar
> window stickers, but the only way to move the Taurus is to cut the price
> using rebates while Camry generally can be sold out at window sticker.[/color]

,snip>

[color=blue]
> <MelvinGibson@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:426FAA3B.60C290A@mailcity.com...[color=green]
> > You are entitled to believe whatever you wish. I chose to
> > disagree with your opinion however, because of my own experiences
> > over the years. That is after all what we are expressing here,
> > opinions. I happen to own a 1971 Pinto, that I purchased new in
> > 1970. It has lasted for a lot more than you perceived 100K.
> > There is currently 298,000 miles on the clock and all original.
> > The only repairs have been s clutch at 210K and a Carbon and
> > valve job in February. I own a half dozen old cars that I take
> > to old cars shows. I see old cars for the US, England, Germany,
> > even Italy but I have never seen any Japanese cars from the
> > seventies at any of those shows let alone one with the 150K you
> > believe they will exclusively achieve. All manufactures build
> > some on occasion that are not up to their build standards for the
> > class in which they compete, that is why the all have a
> > warranty. From what we see in our fleet service business, that
> > services nearly every brand on the market, is that ANY brand on
> > the market today will easily run 200K and more if properly
> > serviced. That is not an opinion but a fact and we have the
> > records to support that conclusion. The only real difference we
> > see in todays vehicles is style and price, period. I prefer
> > a particular style of vehicle and that is RWD and V8 powered. I
> > want to buy those that will cost me the least amount of money to
> > replace every two years. That is my choice, others may chose
> > differently and that is their privilege as well.
> >
> >
> > mike hunt
> >
> >
> >
> > "D.D. Palmer" wrote:[color=darkred]
> >>
> >> There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just
> >> run
> >> too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
> >> thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of
> >> the
> >> things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
> >> priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
> >> miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles
> >> will
> >> last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still
> >> be
> >> worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
> >> worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but
> >> something
> >> I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit
> >> rebates
> >> it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the
> >> "out
> >> the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
> >> Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
> >> 150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle.
> >> My
> >> point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs
> >> US
> >> is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many
> >> vehicles
> >> go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
> >> build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last
> >> about
> >> 50% longer).[/color][/color][/color]

You may prefer to but that is not ever going to happen.
I have never seen ANY of those cars at old cars shows let alone a
chance you will ever see all of them LOL

mike hunt


hachiroku wrote:[color=blue]
>
>I would rather go to a show where
> there were a bunch of nice old Corollas, Corona MKII's, Celicas and 510's
> than the usual Chevys and Fords I grew up with.[/color]

Since perception is reality, why is Toyota percieved to be a better value to
the private owner?

[email]RustyFendor@mailcity.com[/email] wrote:[color=blue]
> It is your money but for what you paid for a mid size truck you
> could have purchased a REAL truck, a full size F150 LOL
>
> mike hunt[/color]