I wonder what it is in these engines (V6 Camry and V8 Tundra) that has made CR lose faith in Toyota's reliability.

OMG! I'm posting bad news! I must hate Toyota!

That crap is getting pretty old by now. Don't you think?

 

I wonder what it is in these engines (V6 Camry and V8 Tundra) that has made CR lose faith in Toyota's reliability.

Consumer complaints about them?

I wonder if they're referring to the 4.8 or 5.7L???

Aside from the few camshaft snaps, I haven't heard anything negative with the tundra v-8's or camry's v6?

 

In the past, because Toyota (Charts) products have so consistently proved reliable, the magazine would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's brand new cars, without waiting for survey data from owners.

But from now on, the magazine will wait for a full year of reliability survey data to come in before it recommends a Toyota product - as it does with most other manufacturers.

Finally they admit it! This is exactly why domestic fans berate CR...why give some manufacturers special treatment over others?

Ford, in particular, is improving in quality, according to Consumer Reports. In all, 93 percent of Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles showed average or better reliability in the most recent reliability survey.


Among overall brands, Ford's Mercury brand ranked 11th, the Ford brand ranked 13th and the Lincoln luxury brand ranked 14th. Other than Buick, they were the highest-ranking domestic brands.


Mike Hardie, Ford's director of quality, predicted that Ford would take the top position in Consumer Reports reliability rankings in the near future.


Ford's quality has tended to be more consistent, with steady improvement year over year, than that of other domestic manufacturers, said David Champion, head of auto testing for Consumer Reports.

Good to hear.

 

In the past, because Toyota (Charts) products have so consistently proved reliable, the magazine would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's brand new cars, without waiting for survey data from owners.

Wow, this is just amazing!!! No statistically relevant survey should "assume" anything. . . the number should fall where they may. CR truly is rubbish. . . . . .

This does explain CR's recent blunder when they gave the BRAND NEW '07 Tundra a reliability rating (of "good", iirc), while claiming "no data available" for the re-designed (but mechanically similar) '07 Silverado/Sierra. I truly despise this publication. . . . .

One major reason for that difference: J.D. Power only surveys owners of three-year-old vehicles. But Consumer Reports surveys its subscribers about vehicles from all three of the most recent model years, unless the vehicle has changed significantly. If the vehicle has changed in that time, only vehicles built since the change are included.

If I'm reading this right, CR surveys any owner (so long as they are a CR subscriber) of a vehicle, whether it is brand new, or 3 years old (no redesign within those 3 years). This seems to me like the CR survey would skew positive for brand new vehicles (not old enough to have problems), and skew negative for older vehicles (more use/wear and tear). JD Powers ONLY surveys vehicles that are 3 years old, thus leveling the playing field. . . . seems more relevent, and accurate. . . .

 

Wow, this is just amazing!!! No statistically relevant survey should "assume" anything. . . the number should fall where they may. CR truly is rubbish. . . . . .

This does explain CR's recent blunder when they gave the BRAND NEW '07 Tundra a reliability rating (of "good", iirc), while claiming "no data available" for the re-designed (but mechanically similar) '07 Silverado/Sierra. I truly despise this publication. . . . .




If I'm reading this right, CR surveys any owner (so long as they are a CR subscriber) of a vehicle, whether it is brand new, or 3 years old (no redesign within those 3 years). This seems to me like the CR survey would skew positive for brand new vehicles (not old enough to have problems), and skew negative for older vehicles (more use/wear and tear). JD Powers ONLY surveys vehicles that are 3 years old, thus leveling the playing field. . . . seems more relevent, and accurate. . . .

+100. I cannot believe they have done that all the past years :thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

ANyway, at least realistic and more accurate recomendations may come in the future.

 

CR has always said they recommend Hondas and Toyotas without data because of their past consistency. This wasn't a secret, although not everyone digs into the details. Now just Honda. And probably soon not Honda, either.

In their defense, these weren't presented as research conclusions. But usually they won't even recommend a vehicle without reliability data.

It's fine to survey owners of any age car, as long as it's clear what you're reporting on. They do adjust for age of the vehicles, for the most part they compare like with like.

Where they can slip up is when reporting on models introduced in the late winter or spring. Last year they reported a result for the Honda Fit, even though it went on sale after the survey's cut-off date. Since these people in many cases have only owned the cars for a few weeks, the results can get skewed upwards. This happened with the Honda Ridgeline a couple years ago, and with the large GM SUVs last year.

Because of CR's shortcomings, I started conducting my own research a couple years ago at TrueDelta.com. I update quarterly, not yearly, so any changes are reported promptly. Last August I reported a high repair rate for the Camry V6 in the notes of those results. The problem is not with the engine. It's with the transmission, and perhaps the alternator.

My basic critique of CR is here:

Consumer Reports critique

Many members of this forum have been helping me provide an alternative. Thanks, guys. Next update in a few weeks.

 

Ohhh, I get's it now... derrr :lol:

It's not the engine's they're not recommending, it's the model with the engine :lol:

Ooops

 

Consumer reports is full of crap. I have seen alot of the stuff they have said were NOT at all true, or very few situations... so eh screw em.

 

Toyota has had some slip-ups in quality recently, thats not exactly news.
Look at it this way though, Toyota ranks 3rd behind Honda and Subaru but they rank well better than some of their main competitiors.
#10) Buick
#11) Mercury
#12) Ford
#13) Lincoln
#20) Chrysler
#26) Dodge
#28) GMC
#29) Jeep
#30) Chevrolet
#34) Cadillac
Another key bit of info from that study: 34 of the 39 models named "most reliable" are Asian.
Also, the Pontiac Solstice had worst new car prediction score in the survey.
So, lets not be all "doom 'n gloom" here. Yes, Toyota has some work to do.....but they still rank considerably better than their American competitiors.

 

.....but they still rank considerably better than their American competitiors.

How much of that is due to this:

In the past, because Toyota (Charts) products have so consistently proved reliable, the magazine would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's brand new cars, without waiting for survey data from owners.

But from now on, the magazine will wait for a full year of reliability survey data to come in before it recommends a Toyota product - as it does with most other manufacturers.

Who wants to guess what other manufactures get the same preferential treatment Toyota used to enjoy? I'd say Honda/Acura, Subaru, and Infinity. For a magazine that has so much clout, these types of assumption should not be allowed. A large number of consumers rely on CR for auto buying advise, and these consumers deserve to have actual facts, not assumptions. . . .

 

That's the part that got me laughing -- that "we will now treat Toyota like everyone else and not assume excellent reliability on new models." You would think that a consumer research journal whose methods and measurements are supposed to be beyond reproach would understand that this is not good practice.

Ahh well, I'm just one of those dumb whiny Domestic guys.

 

Oh no!! I must dump my Toyota now!!!

Toyota is going down! We're all going to die! The sky is falling!

Hopefully this will put more of a realistic perspective on things.

I found it amusing Toyota is behind Scion in reliability...Scion is Toyota dumb asses!!:lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

Oh no!! I must dump my Toyota now!!!

Toyota is going down! We're all going to die! The sky is falling!

Hopefully this will put more of a realistic perspective on things.

I found it amusing Toyota is behind Scion in reliability...Scion is Toyota dumb asses!!:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Exactly. IMO there is no shame in placing 3rd behind Honda and Subaru. I have to laugh about the comments of "preferential treatment". Kinda sounds like domestic fanboy sour grapes to me. :lol:

 

the camry 4 cylinder improved from last year's average to above average this year. it's not all doom and gloom.

 

Toyota is still better than GM & ford so it doesn't matter.

 

Anything small like that about Toyota is big news big it has higher expectations. Ford and GM spit out horse shit all the time and it is considered normal... :lol:

 

This piece of "news" makes no difference to me. I never give a crap about CR.

 

Actually, we all knew about this all along. There have been many discussions here in the recent past, and even a thread about how Toyota wasn't going to focus on any new models until they get their quality back up.

As I stated in another thread regarding this subject, everyone has growing pains.

Toyota still makes fantastic vehicles, even at their low point.

They will be the worlds largest and either the best in quality or very close to it. You really couldn't ask for anything more from any manufacturer. Nobody else has ever been able to balance quantity and quality as good as Toyota has, and they are striving to get better.

 

Actually, we all knew about this all along. There have been many discussions here in the recent past, and even a thread about how Toyota wasn't going to focus on any new models until they get their quality back up.

As I stated in another thread regarding this subject, everyone has growing pains.

Toyota still makes fantastic vehicles, even at their low point.

They will be the worlds largest and either the best in quality or very close to it. You really couldn't ask for anything more from any manufacturer. Nobody else has ever been able to balance quantity and quality as good as Toyota has, and they are striving to get better.

Yeah, thats why they recalled 470000 vehicles yesterday for engine tranny problems. I agree its hard to maintain quality when u grow up so much in quantity, I think they are still learning that lesson, now with this drop, with that wake up call maybe they will recover what they have lost. Oh well, GM youre not alone, more quantity, more quality issues.

 

I gotta say, there is a lot of apathy considering that Toyota dropped five slots while the domestics continue to gain ground. Keep in mind that these stats are for the cars from 2004-2005, before Toyota began the big product push starting in '06. I have ready plenty on this board about problems with the '04-05 Camry, and plenty on the '07 as well. Read the comments over at Yahoo autos for the Camry...not pretty, especially compared to domestic competition such as the Fusion and Impala.

It's easy to say "Toyota is still the best," but growing stats show that Toyota is "moving backward" while the domestics continue to make progress in quality and perception. First JD Power, now Consumer Reports. First Jim Press, now Jim Farley. Something is amiss in Torrance and in the Toyota Way.

 

I gotta say, there is a lot of apathy considering that Toyota dropped five slots while the domestics continue to gain ground. Keep in mind that these stats are for the cars from 2004-2005, before Toyota began the big product push starting in '06. I have ready plenty on this board about problems with the '04-05 Camry, and plenty on the '07 as well. Read the comments over at Yahoo autos for the Camry...not pretty, especially compared to domestic competition such as the Fusion and Impala.

It's easy to say "Toyota is still the best," but growing stats show that Toyota is "moving backward" while the domestics continue to make progress in quality and perception. First JD Power, now Consumer Reports. First Jim Press, now Jim Farley. Something is amiss in Torrance and in the Toyota Way.

YEAH, I said that exactly in a thread posted a few weeks ago. But still, toyota is the best versus american manufacturers.

 

Before I begin, let me state that I am not trying to deliberately bait the domestic-lovers who have posted on this thread, but...

What I noticed, after all the crying (from the Toyota fanboys) and the "told you so" from the Toyota-haters, is that GM, once again, is very inconsistent. They have Buick in the Top 10 most reliable makes, and they have what are considered to be the among the most efficient and highest quality automotive plants in North America; yet, they also have the least reliable car, the Pontiac Solstice.

One question that I have, perhaps a challenge for some, is whether or not there is a difference in quality and reliability between two models that are built on the same assembly line, for example Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable, and Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky. If there is an appreciable difference, then that would point out to me that CR's (or JD Power's) protocols (questions they ask, etc.) may be wrong, or that reliability (at least as measured by CR or JD Power) is a perception thing. Mercury is a more luxurious brand, and so perceived to be higher quality than Ford, so the Mercury Milan will be assumed to be higher quality than its sister, the Ford Fusion, even though both may be built on the same line.

That may also explain the Fall of Toyota: Toyotas are perceived by many to be very reliable, whereas GMs are not. So any minor problem with a new Toyota (e.g. hard plastics in the new Camry) may be perceived to be a big (reliability) problem (when you go and survey new owners), whereas a minor improvement in a GM (e.g. better plastics in their new dashboards) may be perceived to be a great improvement, dragging Toyota down and bringing GM up.

 

Before I begin, let me state that I am not trying to deliberately bait the domestic-lovers who have posted on this thread, but...

What I noticed, after all the crying (from the Toyota fanboys) and the "told you so" from the Toyota-haters, is that GM, once again, is very inconsistent. They have Buick in the Top 10 most reliable makes, and they have what are considered to be the among the most efficient and highest quality automotive plants in North America; yet, they also have the least reliable car, the Pontiac Solstice.

One question that I have, perhaps a challenge for some, is whether or not there is a difference in quality and reliability between two models that are built on the same assembly line, for example Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable, and Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky. If there is an appreciable difference, then that would point out to me that CR's (or JD Power's) protocols (questions they ask, etc.) may be wrong, or that reliability (at least as measured by CR or JD Power) is a perception thing. Mercury is a more luxurious brand, and so perceived to be higher quality than Ford, so the Mercury Milan will be assumed to be higher quality than its sister, the Ford Fusion, even though both may be built on the same line.

That may also explain the Fall of Toyota: Toyotas are perceived by many to be very reliable, whereas GMs are not. So any minor problem with a new Toyota (e.g. hard plastics in the new Camry) may be perceived to be a big (reliability) problem (when you go and survey new owners), whereas a minor improvement in a GM (e.g. better plastics in their new dashboards) may be perceived to be a great improvement, dragging Toyota down and bringing GM up.

Good points :thumbup:

 

Toyota issues statement in response to Consumer Reports' reliability survey

In a news release following Consumer Reports' reliability survey which showed that Toyota is slipping in reliability ratings, Toyota issued this brief statement:

"Toyota, Lexus and Scion models collectively led the industry with the greatest number of models, 17, ranked "Most Reliable" in this year's Consumer Reports Reliability Survey. With dozens of models from three dozen makes vying for a spot on the magazine's "Most Reliable" list, only 39 were chosen. Toyota, Lexus and Scion models accounted for 44 percent of the list. ..."

Complete news story available at: http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/071017-3.htm

 

How can you guys have it both ways? Either CR is full of crap and it's ratings are worthless OR Hey look Toyota is slipping (according to CR's numbers)

Toyota has 2 vehicles that in 2007 were below average in reliability. Which would put Toyota Camry V6 as the Superstar of the GM line.....and the Tundra as better than average for the pickup category overall. Watch as Toyota actually does something about it and the reliability increases in the next year. As for the doom and gloom:

Top 3 most Reliable Cars (by category) according to CR
Small cars:

Toyota Yaris
Honda Fit
Toyota Corolla

Midsize:
Toyota Prius
Honda Accord
Hyundai Sonata

Small SUV:
Honda Element
Mitsubishi Outlander
Toyota Rav4

Midsize SUV:
Toyota Highlander
Honda Pilot
Toyota 4runner

Large SUV:
Toyota Land Cruiser (only model with above average reliability)

Pickups:
Toyota Tundra (2WD v8)
Toyota Tacoma
Ford F150 (v6, 2wd)

Wagons/Minivans
Pontiac Vibe/Toyota Matrix
Scion Xb
Toyota Sienna

And just to be fair....the ONLY Toyota on the least reliable list...Tundra 4WD V8....


On another note.....BOth the Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice are below average which would seem to confirm at least the consistency of the results. (Just like Matrix/Vibe)

 

How can you guys have it both ways? Either CR is full of crap and it's ratings are worthless OR Hey look Toyota is slipping (according to CR's numbers)

Toyota has 2 vehicles that in 2007 were below average in reliability. Which would put Toyota Camry V6 as the Superstar of the GM line.....and the Tundra as better than average for the pickup category overall. Watch as Toyota actually does something about it and the reliability increases in the next year. As for the doom and gloom:

Top 3 most Reliable Cars (by category) according to CR
Small cars:

Toyota Yaris
Honda Fit
Toyota Corolla

Midsize:
Toyota Prius
Honda Accord
Hyundai Sonata

Small SUV:
Honda Element
Mitsubishi Outlander
Toyota Rav4

Midsize SUV:
Toyota Highlander
Honda Pilot
Toyota 4runner

Large SUV:
Toyota Land Cruiser (only model with above average reliability)

Pickups:
Toyota Tundra (2WD v8)
Toyota Tacoma
Ford F150 (v6, 2wd)

Wagons/Minivans
Pontiac Vibe/Toyota Matrix
Scion Xb
Toyota Sienna

And just to be fair....the ONLY Toyota on the least reliable list...Tundra 4WD V8....


On another note.....BOth the Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice are below average which would seem to confirm at least the consistency of the results. (Just like Matrix/Vibe)

SO, the outlander is more reliable than the rav4? Anyway, great news for this car, I think besides been stylish and very techno , now is realiable as well. As for the tacoma, :lol: just confirmation of all he can do.

 

Theres a reason why I still own the old Cressidas and Supras..


What ever happened to padded dashboards wrapped in vynil? All these new cars with plastic hollow dashes and light weight crap and shit. I don't really give a damn how tight the interior panel gaps are, i give a damn about the quality. Exterior body panels with there gaps is what im picky about.

Engine-wise, thats one of the main reasons I love Toyota and Honda. Always the most reliable cars under abuse i've ever owned period. And when I say abuse... ABUSE!

 

Consumer Reports Reliability = Poor

This article makes EVERYTHING they rank unreliable...

but people will still take there word as fact...

 

Solstice as a POS? I'd never imagine that in a year :lol: Pontiac did set its own bar a little too high by comparing that POS to a Boxster though :rofl:



71Corolla: Why even bother arguing with someone who might or might not be a real engineer? :lol: I'd safely "assume" that an engineer should have real jobs to do, like engineering something, NOT arguing with a bunch of Toyota fans in a Toyota Enthusiasts forum :lol:

 

Relax....crack open a beer, think about the Patriots going 16-0...anything... but relax.

 

:lol:

 

Imagine, if you will, that CR actually did apply the same rules (using past reliability statistics to predict how reliable an "all new" model will be) to ALL vehicles, not just the models that were previously recommended...

Imagine that it is 2011 / 2012 and the Gen7 Camry comes out. Imagine that the final years of the Gen6 Camry have been very reliable and recommended by CR each of the past few years. CR recommends the Gen7 Camry, based upon its past history.

Imagine that at the same time, Pontiac introduces a new Solstice (I told you all to IMAGINE!), and that the Solstice has always been near the bottom of CR's reliability list. Now, if CR applied the same rules to all, they would not recommend the Gen2 Solstice, because, based upon its reliability history, it is predicted that the new generation model will be just as bad.

Does CR do this, and apply its rule of predicting future reliability from past reliability (which may be valid, I would say) for all models, good or bad?

... One thing that I think was missed (or perhaps I missed it in all the back-and-forth sniping) is that the Gen6 Camry 4-cylinder model is not "all new". Its engine and transmission were both carried over from the Gen5 Camry. The Gen6 Camry V6, however, is "new" because the 3.5 litre V6 was not previously used in the Camry, and the 6-speed transmission is an all-new transmission. So, would it be a complete surprise that the Camry V6 with 6-speed transmission turns out to have "poor" reliability?

 

... One thing that I think was missed (or perhaps I missed it in all the back-and-forth sniping) is that the Gen6 Camry 4-cylinder model is not "all new". Its engine and transmission were both carried over from the Gen5 Camry. The Gen6 Camry V6, however, is "new" because the 3.5 litre V6 was not previously used in the Camry, and the 6-speed transmission is an all-new transmission. So, would it be a complete surprise that the Camry V6 with 6-speed transmission turns out to have "poor" reliability?

You bring up a very valid point, and this has no doubt contributed to the Camry having uncharacteristic mechanical problems. The thing is, Toyota has introduced new engines, transmissions etc. in new models before, and were able to make them reliable. What exactly changed for the generation 6 Camry is open for endless debate.

I will say this, I don't understand why some people are all up in arms over Consumer Reports and their bias towards Toyota, when in fact they have basically revoked Toyota's hall pass for the Camry. Bias would be if they continued to endorse the model just because it is a Toyota.

 

Is it just me or does the "All New" Tundra not have a 4.0l engine that's been used for years....or the 4.7l that's been used for years? I would say that qualifies as better than a spark plug. Or the Camry's 3.5l engine that was already in the Lexus RX and the Avalon. Even the "completely redesigned" vehicle do share some parts. Now the 5.7 is all new, but the problems are obviously not in the engine but in other parts like the transmission and the 4wd system. How can I make this claim? Because the V8 4x2 models have above average reliability so far.

 

I never did like how CU "allowed" for so-called predicted reliability in their ratings. That is very unscientific and they have burned their readers by doing that.

However, CU has been in business for over 70 years; the folks in this thread calling CU "irrelevant" are just pissed-off duhmestic fans torqued by all the drubbing CU has given the duhmestics over the years. CU will be around for a long time as no one else provides their service.

C

 

I never did like how CU "allowed" for so-called predicted reliability in their ratings. That is very unscientific and they have burned their readers by doing that.

However, CU has been in business for over 70 years; the folks in this thread calling CU "irrelevant" are just pissed-off duhmestic fans torqued by all the drubbing CU has given the duhmestics over the years. CU will be around for a long time as no one else provides their service.

C

So that makes their rating practices ok? Silly me!