Toyota sucks

Topic: Toyota sucks (Read 4458 times) previous topic - next topic

Reply #15 – December 29, 2005, 08:51:22 PM

Quote from: srv1

No exciting products? Tacoma, Tundra and 4Runner. When was the last time (in USA) that auto manufacturor offered a rear locking differential for their trucks? Toyota started it in the 90's. No other company even offered it(maybe now, but not sure). If your not into trucks, I can see where you are coming from but they are far, far from GM it is not even funny. If the Supra wasn't so expensive I would have that instead of my Mustang.

I will take a Toyota over just about anything when it comes to reliability.

James

The Tacoma may be nice but is spanked by the Frontier (and the V8 Dakota). The Tundra may be nice but is spanked by the Titan and Hemi Ram. The 4runner may be nice but it's spanked by the Hemi Durango and Grand Cherokee and the V8, independent rear Explorer. Are any of those vehicles as reliable as the Toytas? Maybe not (and that's a big Maybe - some are DEFINITELY not as reliable, some are just as if not moreso), but they offer more excitement. Remember, I said "quality notwithstanding" when comparing boring ol' Toyota to boring ol' GM. And with gas at $3/gallon and only going higher trucks will matter less in the near future anyway (the Honda Civic came within 200 units of toppling the F150 as Canada's top selling vehicle in 2005, the first time a car as come so close in over two decades).

To bring the excitement argument further: Altima and Accord own the Camry (hell, even the Fusion beat it in two recent magazine comparos). Civic and Cobalt own the Corrola. 350Z, RX8, Mustang, GTO and even the Eclipse own any Toyota "sporty" offerings. 300C/Charger own the Avalon. Nobody (including customers) owns the Echo, a failure even by Toyta's own admission. Toyota builds rock solid cars, true, but rocks aren't very exciting. Toyota has even admitted its own boringness by introducing the Scion brand.

There simply are not many young, excitement-seeking people visiting Toyota dealerships. Toyota is becoming an old person's car, a situation Toyota admits and is desperately trying to reverse.

Toyota sucks

Reply #16 – December 29, 2005, 09:20:34 PM

Quote from: Thunder Chicken

Toyota builds rock solid cars, true, but rocks aren't very exciting.

Rocks don't always need to be exciting. I'd guess a large number of Camry/Accord/Altima owners don't really care about "driving excitement". They want a solid, reliable car with a good resale value. In that respect, the Camry and Accord are a toss-up. Look up the specs between the two, it's like they copied each other.

My mother just bought an '06 Camry. She originally went to get and Accord (because the Civic she had previously did well) but the dealer dropped the ball. She ended up getting the Camry.

I thought about sending her off to test-drive a Fusion, but I didn't want to hear her complain if it ever broke down. Toyota and Honda have quite a reputation for reliability, even if it isn't totally true at this time. Plus, if the Fusion takes after most other Fords, the re-sale value is going to be sub-par compared to the Camry/Accord.

Toyota sucks

Reply #17 – December 30, 2005, 03:11:41 AM

Why dont the big 3 kill the UAW, every foreign manufacturer is in better shape than the big 3 UAW DIE, ON THE relaiability part I remember my old 98 lumina that car never gave me a problem only the alternator going bad and the 98 s10 neither those where great cars, 2001 F250 I changed that truck last Januaryfor a new f250 it had 274,000 miles and it had the original clutch, never had a problem, I SAY TOYOTA SUCKS BECAUSE THE SERVICE I RECEIVED FROM THE TOYOTA DEALER SUCKED, when we had the 92 4runner we had some problems with the dealer too and in 2001 with the camry had problems again with the same dealer, never had problems with the ford, chevy or chrysler dealer here:flip:

Quote

Whether the quality gap between puppiesanese and domestic manufacturers is real or only perceived, a great deal of the problem is how the customer is treated

How the customer is treated is a quality issue in itself.

All of the problem is on the assembly line because the big 3 cant spend a lot of money on good car parts because they have to pay $28 an hour or more to the guys from the union, if toyota or any other foreign manufacturer had the unions inside them we will see who builds the better cars

Toyota sucks

Reply #18 – December 30, 2005, 11:00:12 AM

Maybe a little perspective...

Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans, even BMW's are now made in America. The U.S. has opened the doors for its own domestic car competition to come on in, build a plant, build cars, hell, we'll even give them tax incentives to do it. Land of the free? Yes. However, I find it ironic that the U.S. would shoot itself in its own foot just to get businesses to relocate to this country. America is therefore its own competition.

On the other hand...there are a lot of good, hard-working people at those plants. And they have the right, no, the OBLIGATION to drive what they build, at least in brand name. The Chevy Cobalt is built 25 miles from where I live. We are bombarded with ads on TV from car dealers, mostly of GM origin. As a Ford guy, do I complain? No. Those people at the plant keep our sad local economy going. The only way they will continue to do so is to buy what they build. This is a matter of pride, sure, but the economic impact is far reaching, moreso than any other industry I can recall. It doesn't matter if the car is a GM, Ford, Mopar, Nissan, etc.--the net result is the same.

One thing the foreign brands have proven is that the 'old way' of thinking in Detroit will no longer be enough for the Big Three to compete in its own country. It was looooooong overdue, but the typical American consumer ignored that for too long. Now, with new domestic-foreign competition, the American car companies don't look so bright, do they? At the same time the consumers caught onto that, since the level of expectations has risen dramatically in recent years.

A good deal of sales have undoubtedly happened due to the perceived 'quality' issue. I will be the first to admit that American car parts are maybe not the best when viewed globally. But they are inexpensive and usually readily available. A comparable foreign car part, even if made/assembled in America, can arguably be of better quality....but Lord have mercy if you ever need to replace it--it's going to be an expensive bill. Some parts can only be obtained from their source origin countries too---mmmmm, foreign shipping. Lovely. This is the only area where the Big Three can hold its own ground anymore. They will not win the parts war on quality but they will NOT be outdone in price and sheer volume. OK, it's a stalemate that we win by default. Woohoo. But it is at least something to counter the quality Kool-Aid that the foreign automakers expect us to drink without question.

Are foreign (or domestic-foreign) cars made better? Is their quality really that much better? They want you to think that. Truth is, they helped the Big Three close that gap. Again, the bars are constantly being raised, and the level of expectation continues to climb. Well, the American cars are also climbing up the scale, but the media--the unmitigated purveyor of many untruths--never seems to dwell on that. What is sadly obvious is that the Big Three are not innovating so much anymore...they are relegated to playing catch-up in nearly every situation. But they can certainly compete on a quality level. A quick look at the JD Power survey (http://consumercenter.jdpower.com/) will show as much. Even base Fords are above the industry average now. So...that pretty much shoots any argument down from foreign carmakers.

It does boil down to the product. And frankly, there isn't a whole lot to get excited about when looking at what the Big Three are offering. We have some pretty awesome cars available--Corvette, Mustang, 300C, Viper--but they are niche cars, low-volume production, not mainstream as they may have been even 15-20 years ago. In other words, not everyone wants one of those cars. They seem to want something a little more practical. Sometimes the vehicle that gets the job done best, no matter how unattractive the body styling is, will get the sale. How else can the sales of the Camry, Accord, and even the Aztek be explained?!

I think what handicaps Detroit cars is that they usually do one thing great, but other things not as well as the competition. The Accord and Camry aspire to do all things well, with nothing really ever standing out. That's their modus operandii. And apparently there are just truckloads of vanilla, plain-Jane lemmings clamoring for such vehicles. And since these cars are relatively reliable, and every year we're reminded of this, and people "hear good things about them" from others...guess who gets the sale. This completely bypasses any offering from Detroit, even if they actually have a worthy or emerging competitor (such as the Fusion, and perhaps even the new Impala SS). In order for the Big Three to ever regain sales like they did 15 years ago, they must break this aforementioned cycle of ownership, and the only way to effectively do that is to offer product that will outdo their competition. So far that's not happening, but they definitely have the means to do so. It is probably just a matter of time.

One thing remains constant: the dealership is the ONLY bridge between the consumer and the car manufacturer, period. How one is treated at the dealer will absolutely make or break the car company. In this respect, the American way of doing business cannot win in its present condition. The Big Three need to get their collective act cleaned up, their commitment to the buyer renewed, and the old way shoved out the door. This is the area where foreign automakers seem to have a great advantage, but it's not like we can't see that. Certainly the Big Three know this. They simply choose not to act upon it, perhaps smug in their current old-school capabilities, that maybe the old way is better, that maybe another heyday of Detroit iron will magically return. While they keep dreaming, American consumers are going with the companies that treat them the best. And they aren't the Big Three.

That being said...I completely agree with the title of this thread. :)

Toyota sucks

Reply #19 – December 30, 2005, 01:42:50 PM

Shouldn't it be "the big two", now that Chrysler is foreign owned..?

Toyota sucks

Reply #20 – December 30, 2005, 05:26:04 PM

WUDDAAYAMEEN workers paid too much??? Do you not understand that management make 2 gazillion times what the assembly line worker makes. Further, as an ex Ford Truck plant assyline worker (1969 - wage was $3.52 per hour - enough to buy new car & house at the time) Why in the world would you blame the worker for the AWFUL MANAGEMENT? EX: If you had the BILLIONS that GM has, do you think YOU WOULD LOSE MONEY? Well, you might if you payed executives $300,000 plus salaries for doing nothing but maintaining their power base, if you stopped innovation in favor of short term cost savings, GRRRR WAKE UP PEOPLE! It is not $60,000 per year line workers that are ruining the industry - they are saving it - along with the job of the local merchant, restaurant, appliance manufacturer etc etc. Stop sounding like parrots and think logically! If $28 per hour was minimum wage, how great would America be then???!!!

Toyota sucks

Reply #21 – December 30, 2005, 05:28:30 PM

Here we go again..

Toyota sucks

Reply #22 – December 30, 2005, 05:56:45 PM

Quote from: thunderblunder

WUDDAAYAMEEN workers paid too much??? Do you not understand that management make 2 gazillion times what the assembly line worker makes.

They may make 2 gazillion more than the line workers, but there are 8 gazillion less of them, so the line workers make up a larger share of the payroll.

The excessive pay the line-workers receive does hurt the company by reducing the amount that can be spend on R&D compared to other manufacturers, but the bottom line is (due mostly to management) that the domestics make cars that don't hold their value when compared to foreign cars. It is going to be hard to sway popular opinion that their "new" cars hold up as well as the foreign cars.

Toyota sucks

Reply #23 – December 30, 2005, 07:35:03 PM

Quote

$60,000 per year line workers

Now that would be nice if I could make that much.

Toyota sucks

Reply #24 – December 30, 2005, 10:12:02 PM

Really, Id love to be in an unskilled assembly line job and get paid $60k a year. Lets get real, blame management? The UAW is choking the out of american car manufacturers and everyone knows it. Guess what, the company writes your paycheck, not the union. Keep that in mind. THe union takes your money, the company makes it. Common sense? Ok look at the successful companies and tell me they are being raped by unions for unskilled labor. Common sense tells you that you cannot have money to overpay workers and also design quality products.

Toyota sucks

Reply #25 – December 30, 2005, 11:30:26 PM

Hey I'm in a union (AFSCME= American Federation of State, County, Munil Employees) and I know we're screwing the city of Chicago (yes I work for the city). I work in a library and all I do is check books out to people and return their books. I work part time (20hours a week) and I make $12 and hour. I'm technically unskilled and I make $12 an hour to do nothing.

Toyota sucks

Reply #26 – December 30, 2005, 11:56:24 PM

Quote

If $28 per hour was minimum wage, how great would America be then???!!!

Well, a gallon of gas would cost about $15, a pack of smokes would be about $20, a bottle of pen 15e would be about $5, a bag of chips would be about $5...

Why? Because if you had to pay all of the workers (the people that drive the trucks, pick the potatoes, pump the gas, etc) $28 an hour everything would have to skyrocket in price to pay those wages. And a new car would cost $200k, because the UAW workers would not be content making minimum wage, they'd demand $150/hour to ensure they are better paid than most others.

It's people that think they're worth $60k/yr for screwing plastic bits to a car body on an assembly line (which, whether you like it or not, is unskilled labour) that are killing the American EVERYTHING, not just the car industry. Know why TV's are assembled in puppiesan and Malaysia? 'Cuz RCA can't afford to pay Americans $60k/yr to screw circuitboards into housings when Malaysian workers will do it for $60/day. Know why cities are contracting out public works services such as garbage collection? Because the can't afford to pay garbage truck drivers $30/hr when the private sector pays 'em $15. Know why Wal-Mart is so anti-union? Because it has low prices by paying employees low wages. Wal-Mart has no problem getting people to work for those low wages, but unions are trying very hard to destroy that. So what will happen when unions eventually muscle their way in? The prices will go up, the revenues will drop, and stores will close.

And what is wrong with executives taking large paychecks? That is what a free market system is al about. The bosses make more money than the workers. If bosses didn't make the big bucks there would be no bosses. With no bosses there would be no big business, and therefore there would be no jobs. The automotive industry (in fact, all industry) is not a charitable organization and aside from the fact that unions essentially forced them to, automakers are not obligated to keep workers living in luxury from cradle to grave. It is a business and it exists to make money. If GM doesn't pay Bob Lutz big bucks Honda will, so GM needs to pay him that much. And if you compared what mamangement makes to what the workers (and retirees) make it would be a drop in the bucket.

Quote

It is not $60,000 per year line workers that are ruining the industry - they are saving it

How, exactly, does forcing an industry to pay its unskilled labour fully three times what it's worth "save it"? If the USA was the only place on earth that cars were made your logic might work, but the Americans are forced to compete with foreign companies that are far more streamlined and far more cost effective. Your "saving" the industry is doing nothing but sending jobs to Mexico. Look at how many idle plants Ford has in the USA (including the recently closed Lorain, OH plant), yet they built a new one in Mexico to make the Fusion. They did that because they get equal (or better) quality labour for much less money. This means higher profits and that, in fact, is what is "saving" the industry.

And if you think the puppiesanese, Korean and European automakers have hit the domestics hard, just wait 'til Chinese cars start hitting our ss. To quote BTO: You ain't seen nothin' yet. IT is quite possible that the entire American industry could be wiped off the face of the earth, to be absorbed by foreign makes. Preposterous, you say? It happened in England, and it is already 1/3 completed here (DaimlerChrysler). The modern American auto industry used to be Packard, Studebaker, AMC, Chrysler, GM, and Ford. Now only GM and Ford exist. Toyota has already toppled Ford as number two and is rapidly gaining on GM. Think about that.

Get off your silly, hobbled high horse before its legs break out from under it and it keels over. We all know what happens to horses with bad legs...

Toyota sucks

Reply #27 – December 31, 2005, 02:32:00 PM

Quote from: Thunder Chicken

Well, a gallon of gas would cost about $15, a pack of smokes would be about $20, a bottle of pen 15e would be about $5, a bag of chips would be about $5...

Why? Because if you had to pay all of the workers (the people that drive the trucks, pick the potatoes, pump the gas, etc) $28 an hour everything would have to skyrocket in price to pay those wages. And a new car would cost $200k, because the UAW workers would not be content making minimum wage, they'd demand $150/hour to ensure they are better paid than most others.

It's people that think they're worth $60k/yr for screwing plastic bits to a car body on an assembly line (which, whether you like it or not, is unskilled labour) that are killing the American EVERYTHING, not just the car industry. Know why TV's are assembled in puppiesan and Malaysia? 'Cuz RCA can't afford to pay Americans $60k/yr to screw circuitboards into housings when Malaysian workers will do it for $60/day. Know why cities are contracting out public works services such as garbage collection? Because the can't afford to pay garbage truck drivers $30/hr when the private sector pays 'em $15. Know why Wal-Mart is so anti-union? Because it has low prices by paying employees low wages. Wal-Mart has no problem getting people to work for those low wages, but unions are trying very hard to destroy that. So what will happen when unions eventually muscle their way in? The prices will go up, the revenues will drop, and stores will close.

And what is wrong with executives taking large paychecks? That is what a free market system is al about. The bosses make more money than the workers. If bosses didn't make the big bucks there would be no bosses. With no bosses there would be no big business, and therefore there would be no jobs. The automotive industry (in fact, all industry) is not a charitable organization and aside from the fact that unions essentially forced them to, automakers are not obligated to keep workers living in luxury from cradle to grave. It is a business and it exists to make money. If GM doesn't pay Bob Lutz big bucks Honda will, so GM needs to pay him that much. And if you compared what mamangement makes to what the workers (and retirees) make it would be a drop in the bucket.

How, exactly, does forcing an industry to pay its unskilled labour fully three times what it's worth "save it"? If the USA was the only place on earth that cars were made your logic might work, but the Americans are forced to compete with foreign companies that are far more streamlined and far more cost effective. Your "saving" the industry is doing nothing but sending jobs to Mexico. Look at how many idle plants Ford has in the USA (including the recently closed Lorain, OH plant), yet they built a new one in Mexico to make the Fusion. They did that because they get equal (or better) quality labour for much less money. This means higher profits and that, in fact, is what is "saving" the industry.

And if you think the puppiesanese, Korean and European automakers have hit the domestics hard, just wait 'til Chinese cars start hitting our ss. To quote BTO: You ain't seen nothin' yet. IT is quite possible that the entire American industry could be wiped off the face of the earth, to be absorbed by foreign makes. Preposterous, you say? It happened in England, and it is already 1/3 completed here (DaimlerChrysler). The modern American auto industry used to be Packard, Studebaker, AMC, Chrysler, GM, and Ford. Now only GM and Ford exist. Toyota has already toppled Ford as number two and is rapidly gaining on GM. Think about that.

Get off your silly, hobbled high horse before its legs break out from under it and it keels over. We all know what happens to horses with bad legs...

Finally, someone else who has more brains than greed. Look guys, I have no problem with someone having ambition and wanting to make more money, but atleast try to earn the money. If we pay everyone $28hr for doing the most unskilled labor possible, than what do we pay the jobs that are actually skilled? $100k? All you would be doing is jacking up prices for everything else and the cost of living ratio would still be the same.

Instead of trying to demand more money that they arent really earning or worth to start with, why dont they work to make themselves worth a $60k/yr job. America is the only country that we let this type of fly. puppiesan, China, India, etc if you are in a low skilled job, you know it and expect a low pay. As a result, they work to be very good at what they do or seek education and work their way up. They actually earn it. And people wonder why all the jobs go oversees. I wouldnt pay underskilled americans who think they are worth more money so they do a py job(and stop assembly lines on purpose to cost the company money) when I could pay a foreigner to do it better and cheaper. The uaw and everyother union needs to get over themselves, I love to see when a union goes on strike and the company replaces all of them.

Toyota sucks

Reply #28 – December 31, 2005, 02:37:34 PM

Quote from: thunderblunder

WUDDAAYAMEEN workers paid too much??? Do you not understand that management make 2 gazillion times what the assembly line worker makes. Further, as an ex Ford Truck plant assyline worker (1969 - wage was $3.52 per hour - enough to buy new car & house at the time) Why in the world would you blame the worker for the AWFUL MANAGEMENT? EX: If you had the BILLIONS that GM has, do you think YOU WOULD LOSE MONEY? Well, you might if you payed executives $300,000 plus salaries for doing nothing but maintaining their power base, if you stopped innovation in favor of short term cost savings, GRRRR WAKE UP PEOPLE! It is not $60,000 per year line workers that are ruining the industry - they are saving it - along with the job of the local merchant, restaurant, appliance manufacturer etc etc. Stop sounding like parrots and think logically! If $28 per hour was minimum wage, how great would America be then???!!!

All I have to say is your ignorance really shows. The management makes "gazillion" times more? Are you just blabbing what other ignorant employees have been telling you? I bet your supervisor makes the same you do, if not slightly more, and yet actually has some responsibility trying to keep his greedy employees doing their job. In fact, I will say that most supervisors probably dont make that much more than their employees if the employees make $28/hr. $28/hr for unskilled labor is a robbery, and is just plain wrong.

Toyota sucks

Reply #29 – December 31, 2005, 03:15:08 PM

Quote from: Bird351

Shouldn't it be "the big two", now that Chrysler is foreign owned..?

Yes since Daimler benz owns them, but they are still concidered part of the top 3. just because you put your name behind Chrysler does not make you american Daimler.