Warranty Increase? "No" says Toyota

In the face of increasing quality problems, Jim Press, president of Toyota North America, revealed at the recent Chicago Auto Show that no discussions have taken place within Toyota about increasing its new or used vehicle warranty coverage. Speaking about the topic to Automotive News, Press said, "It's something you need as a solution to a problem." Hmm... a problem like this (http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/19/553-000-tundra-and-sequoia-models-recalled-for-suspension-fix/), this (http://www.autoblog.com/2006/04/18/bum-steer-nhtsa-investigating-toyota-tundra-for-bad-ball-joints/), or this (http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/17/oil-sludging-atonement-toyota-settles-class-action-suit/)? AN reports that the company has recalled 3.4 million vehicles since 2005, 2.2 million of which occurred in 2005 alone.

more:

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/19/toyota-says-it-wont-increase-warranty-coverage/

I don't understand not increasing the warranty. If you have a quality product (which Toyota is known for) why not back it. Even with the known quality of Toyota or Honda, it would be hard for me to not be drawn to a better warranty by another maker.

As the saying goes: "A longer warranty in never a bad thing for the customer."

It is quite simple. Toyota doesn't need to increase its warranty. Longer warranties are designed to boost things like resale value and consumer confidence in the brand. If you haven't noticed lately, they need no help with either.

^^^ Very true. . . .

I am curious, though, how Jim Press came up with his assertion that Toyota does not "need" to extend their warranties. He says it's "a solution to a problem", however Toyota has admitted that it has not tracked out of warranty repair costs (they just recently changed that policy, and are now tracking these cost/frequency of repairs after the warranty ends). So, honestly, how did Jim Press come up with his conclusion? :confused:

So, honestly, how did Jim Press come up with his conclusion? :confused:

The same way he keeps his job. Magic! :lol:

A lot of Toyota hate on that blog site but people are entiled to their opinion. I really hope Toyota doesn't pull a GM or any of the big three, sure they know what to look for but...its like when an unknown person becomes a superstar then really fucks up their life as they can't handle it or that's how they handle it. Toyota is its worst enemy...we all know its growing so fast and racking up the sales, but its like a kingdom ready to conquer or fall...I'm fan of Toyota, but I worry about them sometimes, I think they get ahead of themselves, obviously no one is perfect. As a buisness its good to be number one but not always and not so fast either, I hope Toyota can see that quality, and customer satisfaction is number one not sales or putting all their energy towards being number one and "we have to beat GM mentality" but rather a quality brand for the masses.:thumbup:

Increasing warranty isn't going to solve the problem of build-faults in products. When a build-fault is discovered Toyota is just going to recall those vehicles. Even if the vehicle is older then five years. I've seen that here in the Netherlands where LC 90's where call back in (i thought) 2001. Increasing warranty is going to cost Toyota a lot of money but isn't going to solve the quality problem. It seems that the bad 2002-2005 season is past. Toyota made some good calls by delaying new models to go over them again to detect faults.
It is just weird that quality problems can change from plant. When we look at the first gen Yaris back here (sold as the Toyota Echo in the US) the one that where build in Japan are ok. But those that are build bij TMMF in France have a lot of problems (most of them arround the steeringcolumn). Same with the '92 Carina. Again those build in Japan are fine but those build bu TMUK in the UK are of less quality. Now I don't want to offend any employee of TMMF and TMUK. It has to do with stupids rules like that when you build a foreign car in a country like the UK some parts have to come from UK companies. So thrusty DENSO parts are replaced with UK manufactured parts which apparently are of lesser quality.

It is quite simple. Toyota doesn't need to increase its warranty. Longer warranties are designed to boost things like resale value and consumer confidence in the brand. If you haven't noticed lately, they need no help with either.

Exactly. Basically, they are running all of thier plants at 110% of capacity, selling every vehicle they make. There's no need to offer incentives to consumers to buy thier product. Now, it would be nice for the consumer, and since Toyota's quality is high, thier costs of increasing the warranty may be less than thier competitors would be if they felt forced to match Toyota's move, but at this point, all it would do would increase costs without increasing sales (since they are capacity-limited on many models).

Warranties have become a marketing gimmick to sell undesireable makes/models. They are not free; the consumer pays for them as consumers pay for everything else. Warranties were originally designed to correct major/expensive defects with new cars.

Now, certain manufacturers have targeted the apparently large-sized population of simple-minded folk in a desperate attempt to lure them from better-quality vehicles.

If you require a warranty repair, you have to schedule a date with the dealer, get put on a waiting list, take time off work, etc, etc, etc. Then they say "cannot duplicate", and you have to go through the whole BS again, or suck it up and tolerate the defect. If you want to put up with this crap for the next 100,000 miles, be my frickin' guest.

I'd rather buy a Toyota with an appropriately-sized warranty any day.

C

Warranties have become a marketing gimmick to sell undesireable makes/models. They are not free; the consumer pays for them as consumers pay for everything else. Warranties were originally designed to correct major/expensive defects with new cars.

About the only thing you said there that was even remotely rational was the part about customers paying for longer warranty. Your right, the longer warranty is rolled into the price of the vehicle, whether the customer knows it or not.

As far as it being a "gimmick", not so much. I would say it is more of a "reassurance" to the customer that their vehicle will be fixed for X amount of years, for free (I know there are exceptions to this). And it's not to get rid of "undesirable" models either. GM sells over 1 million 1/2 ton trucks/year. . . . so I would hardly call them "undesirable", yet they are covered under their new 100k mile warranty. Same can be said for Ford.

Now, certain manufacturers have targeted the apparently large-sized population of simple-minded folk in a desperate attempt to lure them from better-quality vehicles.

If you think people buy other brands only because they have been "lured", you are sadly mistaken. It is quite possible that people 1) Don't like the way Toyotas look 2) Don't like the way Toyota's drive 3) Don't like Toyota, period 4) Have no reason to go to a Toyota dealership, because they had great luck with X brand, or 5) They have been burned by Toyota in the past, and refuse to buy another one. :rolleyes:


If you require a warranty repair, you have to schedule a date with the dealer, get put on a waiting list, take time off work, etc, etc, etc. Then they say "cannot duplicate", and you have to go through the whole BS again, or suck it up and tolerate the defect. If you want to put up with this crap for the next 100,000 miles, be my frickin' guest.

I'd rather buy a Toyota with an appropriately-sized warranty any day.

C

Yea, like Toyota owners never have to deal with this. only difference is that after 36k miles, they are stuck with paying for it out of their own pockets. . . . .get real!!!:disappoin

Yeah, warranties are most definitely a marketing function, but they do also provide some piece of mind. And they most definitely can cost automakers a lot of money if their quality is not up to snuff. It takes a lot of research and analysis to come up with a proper warranty period.

So I suppose it all depends on your point of view. But I'm sure that if Brand 'X' owner had a major failure at 61,000 miles on the factory 5/60 warranty, said owner isn't going to care about the politics of longer vs. shorter warranties....he/she isn't even going to care that he/she would have to take the car in if it was covered....they're only going to know that they got screwed and the brand across the street would've covered them in the same instance.

About the only thing you said there that was even remotely rational was the part about customers paying for longer warranty. Your right, the longer warranty is rolled into the price of the vehicle, whether the customer knows it or not.

As far as it being a "gimmick", not so much. I would say it is more of a "reassurance" to the customer that their vehicle will be fixed for X amount of years, for free (I know there are exceptions to this). And it's not to get rid of "undesirable" models either. GM sells over 1 million 1/2 ton trucks/year. . . . so I would hardly call them "undesirable", yet they are covered under their new 100k mile warranty. Same can be said for Ford.

It is most definitely a gimmick. GMs, Chryslers and Fords are much less reliable than Toyotas; that's why they've started offering higher warranties in order to draw in buyers.

There is nothing "reassuring" about higher warranties when one takes more than five seconds to think about what they really imply in terms of reliability. You are simply paying more for a longer warranty period. Toyotas don't need it, on average and resale values and reliability studies bear that out.

If you think people buy other brands only because they have been "lured", you are sadly mistaken. It is quite possible that people 1) Don't like the way Toyotas look 2) Don't like the way Toyota's drive 3) Don't like Toyota, period 4) Have no reason to go to a Toyota dealership, because they had great luck with X brand, or 5) They have been burned by Toyota in the past, and refuse to buy another one. :rolleyes:

Ya, boo-hoo. I figured that your numerous threads that are poorly-concealed mudslinging efforts were in response to some real or imagined slight done to you by Toyota in years past.
Second, if you're going to quote what I wrote, at least try to quote it correctly and in the proper context. I didn't refer to people as "lured"; I referred to them as "simple-minded". That is in reference to longer warranties; no other consideration was included. People buy cars and trucks for all kinds of reasons; some very smart and some not-so-smart.

Toyota isn't perfect. I bought my Taco new and had an intermittent problem that the dealer took a couple thousand miles to correct, under warranty. Besides that frustrating event, I've had all of $200 in unscheduled maintenance done in the following 90,000 miles. If I'd bought a Ranger or S-10, not only would I have paid more in repairs, I would likely be shopping for a new vehicle soon. I'll take Toyota's imperfections over anyone else's any and every day of the week.

Yea, like Toyota owners never have to deal with this. only difference is that after 36k miles, they are stuck with paying for it out of their own pockets. . . . .get real!!!:disappoin

Again, boo-hoo! I'll gladly take post-warranty reliability from my 16-year-old and 10-year-old Toyotas any goddamn day of the week over even a brand-new 100K-warranty domestic slug. They are truly that good, and I am STILL many dollars ahead.

Troll on!

C

So I suppose it all depends on your point of view. But I'm sure that if Brand 'X' owner had a major failure at 61,000 miles on the factory 5/60 warranty, said owner isn't going to care about the politics of longer vs. shorter warranties....he/she isn't even going to care that he/she would have to take the car in if it was covered....they're only going to know that they got screwed and the brand across the street would've covered them in the same instance.

I agree with you. If Toyota started treating the customers as have other manufacturers (not just the domestics), they would find themselves in a similar predicament, and rightly so. If they start selling me lemons on a regular basis you can rest assured I would look elsewhere.

To me, brand loyalty is the manufacturer being loyal to me, the consumer who pays out a lotta cash. They gotta put out the goods to get my money!

Of course, having a major failure at even 60K would be an unusual event for a Toyota. Certainly not unheard of (engine sludge), but unusual. Plus, they seem to be doing a better job of owning up to mistakes lately (engine sludge, again) so hopefully they can resist the warranty-extension gimmick.

C

It is most definitely a gimmick. GMs, Chryslers and Fords are much less reliable than Toyotas; that's why they've started offering higher warranties in order to draw in buyers.

Actually, going back to the whole point-of-view thing, many people would tend to view this as a sign that Domestic quality is up, and to drive the point home they're offering longer warranties. Again, if quality was still in the crapper these longer warranties would be a big money-losing proposition for these companies. So while I agree with you that longer warranties are marketing tools, you cannot ignore the logic that quality gains have to occur in order to form a solid enough business case for these longer warranties.

You don't know how many times I've heard "Well if the Big 3 were really confident in their product they'd extend the warranties to drive the point home." I suppose they're damned either way. :dunno:

On a side note, MSRPs on GM vehicles AFAIK were unaffected after GM announced the 5/100 Powertrain warranty. I also found it really odd that GM is also offering the warranty on Certified Used Cars, since GM does not make a dime off the sale of a used car.

It is most definitely a gimmick. GMs, Chryslers and Fords are much less reliable than Toyotas; that's why they've started offering higher warranties in order to draw in buyers.

There is nothing "reassuring" about higher warranties when one takes more than five seconds to think about what they really imply in terms of reliability. You are simply paying more for a longer warranty period. Toyotas don't need it, on average and resale values and reliability studies bear that out.



Ya, boo-hoo. I figured that your numerous threads that are poorly-concealed mudslinging efforts were in response to some real or imagined slight done to you by Toyota in years past.
Second, if you're going to quote what I wrote, at least try to quote it correctly and in the proper context. I didn't refer to people as "lured"; I referred to them as "simple-minded". That is in reference to longer warranties; no other consideration was included. People buy cars and trucks for all kinds of reasons; some very smart and some not-so-smart.

Toyota isn't perfect. I bought my Taco new and had an intermittent problem that the dealer took a couple thousand miles to correct, under warranty. Besides that frustrating event, I've had all of $200 in unscheduled maintenance done in the following 90,000 miles. If I'd bought a Ranger or S-10, not only would I have paid more in repairs, I would likely be shopping for a new vehicle soon. I'll take Toyota's imperfections over anyone else's any and every day of the week.



Again, boo-hoo! I'll gladly take post-warranty reliability from my 16-year-old and 10-year-old Toyotas any goddamn day of the week over even a brand-new 100K-warranty domestic slug. They are truly that good, and I am STILL many dollars ahead.

Troll on!

C

Ignorance is bliss I suppose. . . . and keep up the misinformation and lies. . . . it almost makes you sound credible. . . .almost. :thumbsup:

--Z28Wilson--

I agree, extended warranties are a great marketing tool to show the company has confidence in their product. Businesses make decisions based on money, so you can be sure any company does a very thorough review of extended warranties before they are adopted. I guess if you really wanted to be cynical, you could conclude that Toyota is afraid to extend their warranties because it would cost too much money (more repairs). I know that is not the case, but it is interesting to think about. Either way, extended warranties are never a bad thing for the customer, despite what some buffoons say. . . .
I'd rather buy a Toyota with an appropriately-sized warranty any day.

Right sized warranties!?!?!? It's not a pair of shoes or a T-shirt, it's a warranty!!! :rolleyes: I think if we could, we would all like for our cars to have lifetime warranties.

So I suppose it all depends on your point of view. But I'm sure that if Brand 'X' owner had a major failure at 61,000 miles on the factory 5/60 warranty, said owner isn't going to care about the politics of longer vs. shorter warranties....he/she isn't even going to care that he/she would have to take the car in if it was covered....they're only going to know that they got screwed and the brand across the street would've covered them in the same instance.

Well, if it was a honda, it probably was still covered under warranty, the speedometer was calibrated too fast :lol:

Couldn't resist :D

Longer warranties mean nothing if you don't need to claim against them, but if the vehicle has too many problems, you're probably going to get rid of it before the warranty expires anyway. :lol:

It is most definitely a gimmick. GMs, Chryslers and Fords are much less reliable than Toyotas; that's why they've started offering higher warranties in order to draw in buyers.

Yeah how many 73-87 Chevy Trucks, or 70+ F100/ or 63+ Dodge Pu do you see on the road today compared to how many 82+ Toyota pu's do you see?:confused:

There is nothing "reassuring" about higher warranties when one takes more than five seconds to think about what they really imply in terms of reliability. You are simply paying more for a longer warranty period. Toyotas don't need it, on average and resale values and reliability studies bear that out.

Yeah, I guess not.:rolleyes: Who cares about putting the customer first.


Toyota isn't perfect.

Boy you said a mouth full there.:lol:

Yeah how many 73-87 Chevy Trucks, or 70+ F100/ or 63+ Dodge Pu do you see on the road today compared to how many 82+ Toyota pu's do you see?:confused:

In fairness, how many of those trucks were sold compared to the number of early 80's Toyota trucks? A better measure would be by percentages...not an easy stat to find.

In fairness, how many of those trucks were sold compared to the number of early 80's Toyota trucks? A better measure would be by percentages...not an easy stat to find.

Yeah but I am sure someone on here can find that, right?

Ignorance is bliss I suppose. . . . and keep up the misinformation and lies. . . . it almost makes you sound credible. . . .almost. :thumbsup:

Information is bliss, but Trolls never understand that. You, on the other hand, have nothing but uninformed opinions to spread here, like so many trolls before you.


Right sized warranties!?!?!? It's not a pair of shoes or a T-shirt, it's a warranty!!! :rolleyes: I think if we could, we would all like for our cars to have lifetime warranties.

No, I would like my car to last a lifetime. You can't comprehend the difference.

Thanks for playing.

C

Yeah how many 73-87 Chevy Trucks, or 70+ F100/ or 63+ Dodge Pu do you see on the road today compared to how many 82+ Toyota pu's do you see?:confused:

Around here? Not too many Dodge's and Chevys, which is surprising because Dodge and Chevy together probably outsold Toyota back then by probably 50 to 1. Of course, Toyotas from back then were better built than their contemporaries, big surprise.

Yeah, I guess not.:rolleyes: Who cares about putting the customer first.

Putting the customer first means building a superior car that does not require unscheduled maintenance every month, not band-aiding disease symptoms with lavish warranties.

Boy you said a mouth full there.:lol:

Yeah, thanks for the half-quote. Proof of Toyota's "faults" is sitting in my garage right now; one vehicle 10yr/90K; the other 16yr/130K, both with very little unscheduled maintenance even today.

Thanks for playing,
C

(Goddamn, but there's a bunch of trolls here today! Where'z the Billy Goat's Gruff?)

Information is bliss, but Trolls never understand that. You, on the other hand, have nothing but uninformed opinions to spread here, like so many trolls before you.
C

Alright, I'll play your little game, and call your bluff. . . . . . Give me one instance I have had an "uninformed" opinion, just one. I'll wait. . . . . .

We all have an opinion, the only difference is I, and several others here, have based our opinions on experience and raw data (from a multitude of sources, not just TN), while you and the other boy wonder here (I wonder who that could be) do nothing but praise every move by Toyota and sit around feeding each other all the made up (or manipulated) BS that fits your "pie-in-the-sky" view of ToMoCo. Your inability to be objective, alone, has ruined your credibility. . . . well, that and your idea that longer warranties are somehow bad for the customer. . . . WAKE UP!!!!!:rolleyes:

BTW, I'm still patiently waiting for you to find an "uninformed" post of mine. . . . .

(Goddamn, but there's a bunch of trolls here today! Where'z the Billy Goat's Gruff?)

First, your intelligence (and frustration) is showing with your vocabulary.

Second, I think your definition is a little skewed (what's new?) as to what a Troll is. I do not hate Toyota, and often praise them, when praise is warranted. However, I am also critical of Toyota (and any other manufacture) when they screw up and do not perform to the best of their ability, no matter what badge it wears. . . . . That, my friend, is not a Troll. . . . it's called being fair, and objective. . . . . and not a "fanboy". ;)

Around here? Not too many Dodge's and Chevys, which is surprising because Dodge and Chevy together probably outsold Toyota back then by probably 50 to 1. Of course, Toyotas from back then were better built than their contemporaries, big surprise.

WOW!!:confused: You live where there's not many Chevy's and Dodge's? What about Ford's?
And oh of course they were built better back then. Thats why you still see alot of them around. :rolleyes:



Putting the customer first means building a superior car that does not require unscheduled maintenance every month, not band-aiding disease symptoms with lavish warranties.

Hmmm, I have an '04 Camry that lived in the svc dept for 6 months. Yeah customer svc alright. :lol: Now there's a joke. No Toyota doesnt band-aid the problem they just ignore it. Case in point.... can you say oil sludge.:lol:



Yeah, thanks for the half-quote. Proof of Toyota's "faults" is sitting in my garage right now; one vehicle 10yr/90K; the other 16yr/130K, both with very little unscheduled maintenance even today.

Ok, very good, I have a 221k Dodge Ram 5.2 and a 270k Trans Am w/ the original motor and it has been ran hard( and raced) since 1994.
So we both get a cookie.:lol:

Thanks for playing,
C

(Goddamn, but there's a bunch of trolls here today! Where'z the Billy Goat's Gruff?)

Nice talk GI, and no I dont consider myself a troll.

Sheesh, it's just a difference of opinion. I can't say that anyone is "right" or "wrong" here. Some people are always a little skeptical of longer warranties, but on the other side if you want to convince people your product is good you have to artificially inspire confidence in it. And logic dictates that you can't serve up longer warranties if you're just going to exponentially drive up your warranty costs.

I can see Corona's overall point, though he does a good job at being confrontational. :lol: His Toyotas haven't been anything other than stellar for many years, so why should he try something else? I understand that. Why should a longer warranty on someone else's product interest him?

I do disagree with Domestic trucks of that era (or any era really) being anything less than solid. Pick on the cars all you want (Lord knows they deserved it in that era). Chevy has a website www.chevy200k.com (http://www.chevy200k.com) with many examples of their trucks running 200,000 miles and well beyond. I have tried to find percentages of production vs. still registered but that information may only be given to the automakers. R.L. Polk does this kind of research and has consistantly declared GM to be the leader in this area, but I have never found anything concrete on my own.

Carry on the madness.

Why increase the warranty Toyota knows there cars are reliable. Why does Toyota have to make a point by increasing the length in there warrany so people can believe that there vehciles are reliable. Does a longer warranty suggest a vehicle is reliable, does it grab a customers attention into buying a automakers car because it hasa long warranty? I dont think so. As a matter of fact most automakers that have longer warranties usually have unreliable cars (the ones that come into my mind not saying no names before someone flames me). Toyota is a very respectable company IMO. Look at there commercials, they never compare there vehicles with other cars/trucks at all. They just promote what product they have.

I just think everyone on this forum needs to have open mind. Every car has there ups and downs some have more some have less...

Sorry I think have might have gone off topic :lol:

Does a longer warranty suggest a vehicle is reliable, does it grab a customers attention into buying a automakers car because it hasa long warranty?

Actually, there is some historical evidence to support that. Look at Hyundai.

As a matter of fact most automakers that have longer warranties usually have unreliable cars

Again, logic wouldn't necessarily dictate that....I don't care what the product is -- cars, widgets, whatever -- a longer warranty on junk is going to cost the manufacturer big-time down the line. No company just says "let's offer a longer warranty, what a great marketing ploy!" There is a ton of research done to make sure it is justifiable.

And I'm right there with you, there is no reason for Toyota to offer a longer warranty.

Cmon people....if you want an extended warranty then buy a toyota extended warranty!

example of a good deal:

Toyota Platinum Extended Warranty 7yr/100k miles, $0 deductible, $805

Troy Dietrich at Greenfield Toyota
Phone 413 772-0231 or 800 255-0212

I thought GM increased warranty protection to increase consumer confidence (and I assume boost sales). Toyota has no lack of sales. Toyota most likely has production teething problems due to the rate ramp ups. If/when production stabilizes the quality issues should go away. Unless Toyota forgets how to build cars (this does happen to manufacturers).

Cmon people....if you want an extended warranty then buy a toyota extended warranty!

example of a good deal:

Toyota Platinum Extended Warranty 7yr/100k miles, $0 deductible, $805

Troy Dietrich at Greenfield Toyota
Phone 413 772-0231 or 800 255-0212


Thanks, but no thanks. I already have one and it dont stop you from being at the dealer for 6 months.:lol:

Does a longer warranty suggest a vehicle is reliable, does it grab a customers attention into buying a automakers car because it hasa long warranty? I dont think so. Yeah.. take a look at Mitsu Canada. They're offering the longest bumper-to-bumper warranty and even opened another new dealership here but I don't see very many Mitsubishis =(.

Thanks, but no thanks. I already have one and it dont stop you from being at the dealer for 6 months.:lol:

sorry bout your bad luck with toyota...maybe their's a forum for those who just want to complain. good luck

sorry bout your bad luck with toyota...maybe their's a forum for those who just want to complain. good luck

I prefer a single forum that encourages subscribers to share both their good and bad experiences with Toyota products.

As to extended warranties, I agree with several previous posters that they probably wouldn't make sense at this time for Toyota. Despite some recent slips, there is still a strong public perception that Toyota quality is at or near the top in the industry and therefore potential buyers aren't likely to need the reassurance of an extended warranty period. OTOH, such warranties are also not a good choice for a manufacturer with a poor quality product since any additional profits from sales would be more than made up for in costs of added warranty claims.

The best case for extending the warranty period would be for a manufacturer who has had a mediocre past record of quality but has recently turned things around. Extending the warranty is then a tangible indication to the potential buyer that the manufacturer has increased confidence in the product. If there are lots of buyers who like the product but might otherwise be reluctant to purchase it because of past reliability concerns then the extended warranty can be the deciding factor. Of course for this strategy to work the manufacturer should make sure that they really have improved the reliability.

sorry bout your bad luck with toyota...maybe their's a forum for those who just want to complain. good luck

You think I am the only one complaining about Toyota? The way I see it you have to take the good with the bad.

The best case for extending the warranty period would be for a manufacturer who has had a mediocre past record of quality but has recently turned things around. Extending the warranty is then a tangible indication to the potential buyer that the manufacturer has increased confidence in the product. If there are lots of buyers who like the product but might otherwise be reluctant to purchase it because of past reliability concerns then the extended warranty can be the deciding factor. Of course for this strategy to work the manufacturer should make sure that they really have improved the reliability.

Precisely! This is exactly what Hyundai is doing, and is undoubtedly why Toyota considers them to be Threat #1

C