I'm not sure you can count safety recalls the same as actual repairs that you had to pay for. Most of these things would have been fine if the recall was never performed, but Toyota decided the risk of a few failing outweighed the cost of issuing a recall. Hard to say how many of those other cars were driving around with similar problems that the manufacturer didn't decide to address.

My opinion is that 80's and 90's Toyotas were way ahead of the competition in terms of reliability, but everyone seems to have caught up by now and it's all pretty comparable.

 

GM and Chrysler product's quality has gone down hill in the last couple of decades, So I wouldn't say it's all pretty comparable these days. A safety recall is a lot different than a trans crapping out before 50,000 miles like on the Chevy Cruzes. I've had many Toyotas they have never let me down.

 

Toyota really mailed it in from like 05-15. An infinite supply of recalls and problems they never should have had. And its not like they were pushing the boundaries particularly hard. Anything you got in 05-15 was just an evolution of something they made just fine in 95. Anything remotely sporty had been killed off and the only new "tech" were ipads in the dashboard.

 

The entire auto industry seemed to be "asleep at the wheel" from the mid 2000s -maybe just recently.

 

Well, I am buying my first new Toyota this year. Deposit on order, so havent bought new one yet.

But for problems? Chryslers back when I worked for them would need tie rod end replacements sometimes under 20k km. Them hemis loved to blow gaskets on transmissions, and it was guaranteed they would have failing clamps on power steering lines to the point I had a box of clamps and part of regular service, we just replaced em.

My GM vehicles though? My Astra had more problems than your whole toyota list. Bro's buick had several issues. Mum got in a serious issue when brand new car decided to go into limp mode while on a two lane mountain highway.

I know many people with toyotas and none have ever had issues like me. The fact my 20 yr old used toyota was better mechanically than my 10 yr old from new car? I dunno, seems not just hype. When my order comes in though, if it doesnt live up to hype, I will rant cause I do not want to spend a bunch of money on another lemon.

 

Katekebo- Toyota has earned its reputation for reliability at 100-200k+ miles.
In 60-80k range any manufacture can be very reliable.

 

...My Astra was essentially undriveable by 75k KM without thousands in work due to compoment failure.

 

Mind telling us which Chevy (incl. model year)

 

It was a 1997 Chevrolet-badged Opel Vectra in Brazil. For some reason, GM used the Chevrolet brand in Brazil, but all their models were actually Opels (all made locally). Very nice car, peppy, comfortable, quiet, excellent ride, high quality interior materials. One of the best cars I ever had, in terms of materials quality, comfort, and handling only second to the BMW. A very "German" car with similar feel to a BMW or Mercedes, but cheaper and less luxurious. Definitely a level above a VW, but not quite an AUDI. Compared with the Vectra, the Toyotas feel cheap and flimsy. Mine was the base model with 2 liter engine, 5-speed manual transmission. Going 100 mph in the Vectra felt like going 75 mph in a Toyota.

 

I also wouldn't count safety recalls against the manufacturer. All cars have problems, nobody's perfect, and the best thing that the manufacturer can do is repair it for free under recall or warranty.
For the record, my mom had a Ford Granada V8 that was driving on 7 cylinders, manual transmission, and the emergency brake failed and it slid down the driveway and into the street. My dad had a 2005 Honda Accord where the automatic transmission failed and had to be rebuilt- both of these were out-of-pocket repairs. A warranty or recall repair can't really be held against the manufacturer.

 

I also wouldn't count safety recalls against the manufacturer. All cars have problems, nobody's perfect, and the best thing that the manufacturer can do is repair it for free under recall or warranty.

It's still a hassle for the owner. Take time off work (or personal time), drive to the dealer, do the paperwork, go to pick-up the car after the repairs - many hours of my time lost on something that shouldn't have happened in the first place. Best thing would be no defects. Fixing something under warranty is not "best thing" - it's a contractual obligation and poor excuse for not doing things right the first time. When I drove a BMW, the dealer would drive a loaner car to my home, take my car for a warranty repair, and bring it back home afterwards. That I call a good warranty service - having to lose several hours of my time to deal with a problem that is Toyota's fault is definitely not something that I would call "good".

 

Best to not buy a Toyota then.

 

How are the snazzy electronic doohickeys in these new cars
Are they tested to function properly out to 20,25,30 years?
Guaranteed to not be obsolete like windows95
How long is this guarantee and warranty

My sister drives a somewhat older dodge challenger, she had a computer something malfunction inside the transmission, cost her couple thousands of green paper to fix and the car was not even paid off yet!

 

How are the snazzy electronic doohickeys in these new cars
Are they tested to function properly out to 20,25,30 years?
Guaranteed to not be obsolete like windows95
How long is this guarantee and warranty

My sister drives a somewhat older dodge challenger, she had a computer something malfunction inside the transmission, cost her couple thousands of green paper to fix and the car was not even paid off yet!

It's gonna take 30 years to test them like how it took 30 years to test vehicles from 30 years ago.

 

Rather than relying on anecdotal experiences, try looking at objective data from millions of cars.

Dashboard Light

Automotive Reliability

www.dashboard-light.com

I think you'll find that for most car classes, Toyota leads the pack.

 

I'm quite familiar with dashboard-lite.com (I actually read the master thesis of the guys who created the site), as well as truedelta.com, consumerreports.org, jdpower.com and a few other. Each one of these rating sites has it's limitations.

- dashboard-light.com has two issues. First, it only ranks reliability based on powertrain issues (engine and transmission). It does not take into account any other vital and safety systems: brakes, steering, suspension. A car with good engine and no brakes can hardly be considered reliable . So it's a very narrow point of view. The second issue is that their rating (0 to 100) is relative. "100" does not mean perfect, only best in class. "0" does not mean total failure, only worst in class. So if you look into the details, cars with high score (>90) have somewhere around 10% probability of failure over their lifetime. Most cars with very low rating still have less than 20% probability of failure. The difference between a top rated car and middle-of-the-pack is only a few % points.

- truedelta.com suffers from a very limited number of participants, so their ratings are not necessarily statistically significant. They are more "qualitative" than "quantitative". Also, they don't rank the severity of the issues. A burnt-out light bulb has the same "weight" as an engine replacement.

- Consumer Reports rating systems is one of the best - it looks at almost every aspect of the car and does not skew the results in favor of one system. Its biggest limitation is that it bases the ratings on the first 6-7 years of the car's lifetime.

- JDPower "long term dependability" is useless as it is based on 3 years only. On the other hand, their "initial quality index" is quite representative of owners experience - a bluetooth or A/C problem can be equally frustrating as a jerky transmission. It's a good measure of both - initial quality of manufacturing and (consumer-centric) engineering.

Net, the difference between "reliable" and "average" is very small in real life, hardly noticeable for most drivers.

 

And people will pay upwards of 50k and even more for something destined to be a dodo
Who will be left holding the bag I do wonder
The depreciation in the used vehicles market in 10 or 15 years could be an event

 

The depreciation in the used vehicles market in 10 or 15 years could be an event

There is no good reason to keep cars on the road longer than 10-15 years. Even well-maintained old cars are a risk to other road users because they lack modern safety features and they also pollute much more than newer generation cars. Governments should implement "old car tax" in which cars older than certain age (10 years ???) pay additional, progressive road tax - they older the car the higher the tax - to incentivize owners to replace their old clunkers with modern vehicles. If somebody has the interest (and money) to keep a "classic" that's his/her personal choice. Most people won't be interested. Real "classics" could be exempt as long as they are driven less then certain number of miles per year (for example 1000 miles). It would be good for all road users and the environment. Cars are among the most recyclable products (97% of the car materials can be recycled if there is proper infrastructure and "junk yards" are prohibited), and many car manufacturers already design their cars with recycling in mind.

Some people will argue that they can't afford a new car. But the reality is that most people don't drive a car they really need, but something much bigger (and expensive).

 

I've owned three Toyotas, I never had a drop of oil leak, it doesn't leak coolant like the stupid Dex Cool from the Chevys. I've had 100 problems from the Chevy Cruze when they first came out, from a dying on the highway because the factory didn't ground the battery terminals properly, to the coolant leaking all over the place. They're head units are ridiculous it's hot outside to stop working. Window regulator stopped working, it's just a nightmare. Now if you're talking to Chevy suburban and tahoes that's another story. They are pretty reliable trucks from what I seen. All my neighbors have a equinox and a terrain and a traverse and they all make horrendous noises. Chevy also cost taxpayers money on their bailouts... I believe if it wasn't for the government they wouldn't even be in business. But, that's just my opinion.

 

People will get better at repairing the electronics and that will become more common and less expensive with time. I can already do board level repair of surface mount PCBs within reason, as a hobbyist.

I do share the concern for all the electronic gimmicks that are becoming mandated, and I wish that wasn't the case because I agree there will be major issues, particularly with internet connected vehicles and any systems that augment driver input rather than passively add situational awareness. None of that is unique to Toyota though, so not super relevant to the question of Toyota's quality?

The aftermarket and enthusiasts will find a way, we always do. Best thing we can do is support right to repair legislation.

 

I'm mostly okay with some of them being mandated but the issue is when drivers become to reliant on them. I like rear view camera's, they do have a important use. On the other hand, it's everything after that whether that is blind spot monitoring systems, dynamic cruise control, or lane assist. To me, you need to be able to drive a 2020 vehicle just as well as a 2000 vehicle. Otherwise idiots take advantage of all that and play games on their phone and people wonder why they get into front end collisions or people get ran over.

An old Jeremy Clarkson quote that I can't remember well, "take that self driving car down to the death road in Bolivia and see if it makes it". Or "would you get into a plane without an pilot?".

 

While things on toyota’s do break, the essentials to keep it on the road are much more reliable. with exceptions of course (the entire xZ engine family cause those cam seals rip) but the worst example is probably the 1ZZ-FE or the 5M-GE

 

Interesting why?

 

my newest car is an 06 accord 5speed, 02 highlander, 1990 corolla gts, they are all superior in term of problem free, i do take care of all maintenance right on time so that helps. but i do not own any cars newer than 06 so i couldn't speak on that lol.

 

There are tons of lists out there but toyota and Lexus are still the cheapest as far as service and maintenance costs across the board. Not to mention a new tundra was just bought back with over 1,000,000 miles on it. You tell me who's is better.

 

Interesting. I’ve had a Suzuki SX4 that needed nothing but injectors outside of the usual consumables. It was quirky but very very reliable. I only sold it because someone made me a great deal into it. Owned from 90k-130k miles.
My Corolla has been extremely reliable. The only unplanned maintenance was replacing the water pump - I think the pulley bearing went out because the car was run for too long with a failed belt tensioner. The water pump was still fine but the bearing noise was making me uncomfortable because i didn’t want it failing in the middle of nowhere. Knock on wood - think I might have a Wednesday morning build car. Currently at 142k miles
Also had a Infiniti with the VQ35 - I put about 70,000 miles in 2.5 years. Outside of the terrible gas mileage and the insane amount of rust for a 2002, it needed little to no maintenance and the ATTESA AWD was phenomenal in my 70 miles commute each way commute. I was so impressed with that car, I purchased the next Gen Pathfinder as a replacement. Owned from 130k to 202k miles.
I have a 1991 Volvo 240 which 260k miles. Haven’t had any failures at all outside of a fuel pump that died when I first bought it a decade ago.
Most fun car goes to my w211 aka the garage queen. Hits 130mph no problem and blows the doors off the idiots in their Civics who like to tail gate. Outside of a few design flaws that I know I’ll have to fix when it hits a 100k, it’s been surprisingly a very reliable car.

The absolute worst for me: Subaru. What a POS. It nickled and dimed me so much that I’ve sworn off that brand forever. Absolutely hated that outback. Yet there are plenty of folks who swear by that brand.
Chevy - same experience. Although I purchased it with extended warranty. Pretty much had just about everything worth the car’s value with the warranty. I would have been very upset if I had to pay out of my pocket. Owned from 55k to 80k miles (sold when the first big issue popped up after the warranty expired)

 

Remember the 1964 Comets, 100,000 miles at 100 MPH on the banks of the rugged BIG D (Daytona speedway). A modern version is the 300k Tesla that just runs from La to Las Vegas, every day.
Young high mileage cars are always less prone to failure. Not the best way to claim longevity.
Are current Toyotas going to be as reliable as those from 20-30 years age and don't even tell me about what does not count as a reliability issue.
The more modern a car, you would think they would get better at building it and make it more reliable. The other side of that coin is a manufacturer who "rides" their reputation into the ground before their customer base evaporates. I can think of many manufacturers who followed this philosophy and suffered the consequences.
Chrysler offered a 5-50 warranty 55 years ago. Today some manufacturers offer 10-100. Does that make them better or is it just a selling point.
Several Rogues, Murano's, and a Kia Sorento later the wife is keeping her car longer and driving less. Of course she has no problems when she trades it in at 40-55k miles.
Toyota has been on the top of the reliability heap for decades. Now the competition is improving while Toyota seems to be slipping, so the playing field is much more level.
A GM service manager told me that they used to never do customer work, warranty work kept them in business, using their customers for guinea pigs. I remember 40 Vega engines a month at one larger GM dealership. That's from a company that had 50% of the US market before the Japanese showed them what their arrogance could cost them.
When it comes to reliability I like to wait a couple of decades and see how they hold up the snag the best one with the FEWEST PARTS to fail in the first place. I have a complete steering rack for my Echo. When I bought it I could not get a right inner shaft bushing from Toyo, so I bought a parts car, which after selling parts from it, cost me nothing but some time. From 147 to 178k miles I have had NO part failure and the car will be 21 years old in July (from production date). Without a pump, lines, belts, or fluid to contain and with a perfect replacement sitting there waiting for a failure (wax the paint it looks like new, not much rust here) there is little chance it decides to crap out this year.
I tried new cars 06 Corolla, defective rear axle. 15 Mitsubishi, defective rear axle. Sold both of them and bought an Echo. I bought the Echo to keep the miles down on the Mirage, ended up selling the Mirage and keeping the Echo.

My answer to your question is no one knows how reliable any car will be in 20 to 30 years time. You can only predict based on past experience. I am 70 and Pop will be 100 in less than two months, will I make it to 100?

I HOPE NOT!!!!!!

Why should any manufacturer make cars that last 30 years when most of them will rust away in 10? What is the economic benefit of making cars so good that the customer only buys a new one every 3 decades? The computer age has taught us an important lesson. Anyone here use a 30 year old computer as their primary information source?
As far as technology, Mercedes recommends replacing the complete air bag system in their cars every 15 years.
Who the hell is going to do that, has to be the most ignored maintenance recommendation is history.

Lets visualize the service writer when that customer comes into the service department.
Customer:
"I need my complete air bag system replaced since it is recommended at 15 years age".
Service writer:
"Uh, we have never done that job sir-maam. I may not even be able to get the parts. It will take over an hour to even prepare the estimate. My best guess is the cost would be much more than the car is worth."
Mercedes even told owners in the 1930s that they should have their SSK completely disassembled and have every part showing wear replaced at an interval I do not remember, but it was probably less than 10 years.
Price out a 15 year old Mercedes. Talk about depreciation.
The used market for Echos is going up now while a hybrid that costs twice as much new is worth less that that Echo and a MB 230 SLK will sell for less than the ECHO soon enough and it cost 4 times what the Echo did new.
"The best or nothing" seems to apply for about 14.99 years.
The sheer complexity of computerized systems will kill new car values, probably sooner than 15 years, so the lock is ticking on new cars no matter who builds them.
I will not replace my Echo or Sienna with a new car. They don't make ones like them anymore.

 

Remember the 1964 Comets, 100,000 miles at 100 MPH on the banks of the rugged BIG D (Daytona speedway). A modern version is the 300k Tesla that just runs from La to Las Vegas, every day.
Young high mileage cars are always less prone to failure. Not the best way to claim longevity.
Are current Toyotas going to be as reliable as those from 20-30 years age and don't even tell me about what does not count as a reliability issue.
The more modern a car, you would think they would get better at building it and make it more reliable. The other side of that coin is a manufacturer who "rides" their reputation into the ground before their customer base evaporates. I can think of many manufacturers who followed this philosophy and suffered the consequences.
Chrysler offered a 5-50 warranty 55 years ago. Today some manufacturers offer 10-100. Does that make them better or is it just a selling point.
Several Rogues, Murano's, and a Kia Sorento later the wife is keeping her car longer and driving less. Of course she has no problems when she trades it in at 40-55k miles.
Toyota has been on the top of the reliability heap for decades. Now the competition is improving while Toyota seems to be slipping, so the playing field is much more level.
A GM service manager told me that they used to never do customer work, warranty work kept them in business, using their customers for guinea pigs. I remember 40 Vega engines a month at one larger GM dealership. That's from a company that had 50% of the US market before the Japanese showed them what their arrogance could cost them.
When it comes to reliability I like to wait a couple of decades and see how they hold up the snag the best one with the FEWEST PARTS to fail in the first place. I have a complete steering rack for my Echo. When I bought it I could not get a right inner shaft bushing from Toyo, so I bought a parts car, which after selling parts from it, cost me nothing but some time. From 147 to 178k miles I have had NO part failure and the car will be 21 years old in July (from production date). Without a pump, lines, belts, or fluid to contain and with a perfect replacement sitting there waiting for a failure (wax the paint it looks like new, not much rust here) there is little chance it decides to crap out this year.
I tried new cars 06 Corolla, defective rear axle. 15 Mitsubishi, defective rear axle. Sold both of them and bought an Echo. I bought the Echo to keep the miles down on the Mirage, ended up selling the Mirage and keeping the Echo.

My answer to your question is no one knows how reliable any car will be in 20 to 30 years time. You can only predict based on past experience. I am 70 and Pop will be 100 in less than two months, will I make it to 100?

I HOPE NOT!!!!!!

Why should any manufacturer make cars that last 30 years when most of them will rust away in 10? What is the economic benefit of making cars so good that the customer only buys a new one every 3 decades? The computer age has taught us an important lesson. Anyone here use a 30 year old computer as their primary information source?
As far as technology, Mercedes recommends replacing the complete air bag system in their cars every 15 years.
Who the hell is going to do that, has to be the most ignored maintenance recommendation is history.

Lets visualize the service writer when that customer comes into the service department.
Customer:
"I need my complete air bag system replaced since it is recommended at 15 years age".
Service writer:
"Uh, we have never done that job sir-maam. I may not even be able to get the parts. It will take over an hour to even prepare the estimate. My best guess is the cost would be much more than the car is worth."
Mercedes even told owners in the 1930s that they should have their SSK completely disassembled and have every part showing wear replaced at an interval I do not remember, but it was probably less than 10 years.
Price out a 15 year old Mercedes. Talk about depreciation.
The used market for Echos is going up now while a hybrid that costs twice as much new is worth less that that Echo and a MB 230 SLK will sell for less than the ECHO soon enough and it cost 4 times what the Echo did new.
"The best or nothing" seems to apply for about 14.99 years.
The sheer complexity of computerized systems will kill new car values, probably sooner than 15 years, so the lock is ticking on new cars no matter who builds them.
I will not replace my Echo or Sienna with a new car. They don't make ones like them anymore.

The SLK230 might have been an odd ball. Was there a certain years range they needed that? I have 2 Volvos from 1990-1991 both of which have a sticker on the B pillar stating that the “SRS” system should be checked at 25 years and replaced as necessary. But the SRS system includes the seat belts and the 1 airbag that the cars came with. My ‘09 W211 doesn’t have any such requirement or stickers or anything.

 

 

It's gonna take 30 years for a 30 year old car to be considered "reliable". Just like how it takes 20 years for a 20 year old car to be 20 years old. Or how it takes 10 years for a 10 year old car to be 10 years old. Or how it takes 1 year for a 1 year old to be 1 year old.

 

People commenting newer cars today the computers will be outdated in 20 years. What are they referring to the info system displays? There will always be a supply of aftermarket with newest technology available for every model.

 

Yes, though many laptops are outdated way before then

 

I'm curious to hear the opinion of other Toyota owners.

My personal experience with Toyota cars has been a mixed bag. I have owned and have first-hand experience with vehicles from many different manufacturers, and Toyota does not stand out as particularly better than any other car brand I had. Actually, my 2016 RAV4 has been the most problematic car I ever had, and Toyota's response to a recurring problem has been less than satisfactory. I always buy cars new, and keep them between 4 and 7 years (60-80k miles). Here is my personal experience with both Toyota and non-Toyota cars:

• 2005 Corolla – radiator leak, fixed under warranty
• 2005 Sienna:
  • Safety recall – 2nd row safety belt molding
  • Service campaign – rear hatch struts replaced (premature failure)
  • Powered sliding door intermittent failure – started after warranty expired so I didn’t fix it
• 2008 FJ Cruiser:
  • Safety recall – seat belt support
  • TSB – clutch throw-out bearing noise
  • Driver seat “sinking”, replaced under warranty
• 2010 Highlander – safety recall, unintended acceleration
• 2013 RAV4 - right front door panel delamination, replaced under warranty
• 2014 Venza
  • Safety recall – rear hatch closing mechanism
  • Oil consumption (>1 qt between oil changes) – never solved as it was deemed “normal” by Toyota
• 2016 RAV4:
  • Safety recall – power rear hatch ECU
  • Oil leak from front differential / transfer case (persistent problem, 4 repair attempts, finally solved by replacing entire transmission and transfer case at 40k miles, >$10k and 20+ days for the 4 repair visits, paid by Toyota under warranty)
• 2018 Highlander: safety recall – fuel pump

In contrast:

• Chevrolet: no problems
• Suzuki: fuel injection failure at 1k miles – repaired under warranty
• Renault #1: starter motor relay – replaced under warranty
• Renault #2: no problems
• VW #1: no problems
• VW #2: turn signal relay – replaced under warranty (in 15 min)
• BMW – sunroof issues – repaired under warranty
• Ford #1:
  • Engine supports – replaced under warranty
  • Belt pulley torsional vibration absorber – replaced under warranty
• Ford #2: no problems
• Nissan: transmission “whine” – replaced under warranty
• KIA: no problems
• Dogde (actually my son's car) - "cylinder #1 misfire", fixed by replacing "premium" platinum spark plugs with cheap copper ones.

None of the non-Toyota vehicles I have owned was subject to a single safety recall.

The only reason I have bought so many Toyotas is because the dealer has always offered my a good deal - trade-in value $2-3k above KBB and a good discount on a new vehicle (me employer had a deal with Toyota - my price has been $100 over invoice minus any applicable incentives and 0% financing). But now that I no longer work at that company I find it hard to justify another Toyota - their quality appears to not be any better (and in some cases worse) than the cars from other brands I have owned in the past.

What has been your experience?

My experience with every single Toyota I’ve owned has been stellar. And I don’t just say that as a fan of the brand. I won’t list all of the Toyota’s I’ve owned, but aside from normal maintenance I haven’t had to spend a single dime on them. I mean cars are very complex machines with so many things that can go wrong. It’s incredible to me how Toyota, and especially Lexus, create such reliable vehicles at reasonable prices.
Many of the Toyota’s I’ve owned did not have factory warranty on them any more, and I never worried about it. I have owned at least 10 different vehicles, and none had problems. Not even our really high mileage 1997 4Runner. I keep up with maintenance though. And that can be an issue, people think you can drive Toyota’s forever without taking care of them. They are machines that still require preventative maintenance.
I’m sorry your experiences haven’t been as good. And it’s funny because our 2016 RAV4 has been so reliable it’s crazy. My wife has beat the heck out of that car, and it’s been on many road trips. It laughs at the abuse. Lol
Maybe go back to Ford, Chevy, or Nissan. And good luck. [emoji1]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

If you bought a new car and took it completely apart and laid out all those parts next to a pile that came from a car like my Echo, it would be easy to see why new cars will not last as long. There would probably be close to a thousand more parts and correspondingly greater odds of failure solely due to the higher parts count.

 

If it was up to a car manufacture to safely get you to the moon and back which auto maker would you trust? Toyota, Lexus, Mazda, Subaru, Honda, Ford, GM, Dodge, Yugo, Nissan, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, Volvo, Lamborghini, Mercedes, Ferrari, Tesla, BMW, Kia, Geo, Opel or Smart?

 

You answered your own question. Don't buy Toyota.

 

My problem with consumer reports is that they don't always have reviews for the cars I want to look at. Especially any Kia/Hyundai stuff I noticed was really hit or miss.

 

Yeah, it can be tough, especially when there is a new model or new tech. Example is newest generation of F150, apparently ones only a couple years old are experiencing serious rust issues.

I have only judged Toyota though on the real world experiences of myself and friends/family around me or others I meet. The only two things of relevance that I have seen or had experienced is rusting on older ones, and head gaskets weeping coolant on some v6s like an FJ a family member has.