Toyota Reliability Slips behind Honda

To my surprise, my latest CU Reports states that Toyota reliabilty has
slipped behind Honda and Suburu to 3rd place. Apparently, the Camry V6
6-speed automatic has problems. The CU survey of 1.3 million vehicles
apparently revealed serious problem with V6 Camry, the AWD Lexus GS and the
Tundra. I few years ago it was oil gelling engines.

 

Actually, they are 5th, according to the report in Car and Driver.

1. Honda
2. Acura
3. Scion
4. Subaru
5. Toyota

 

Scion is a Toyota brand, using Toyota drivetrains.

 

I ddin't trust CU statistics when the claimed Toyota was super good. I don't
trust them now that they are saying Toyota is not so great. Poor data
collection techinques = poor conclusions.

Ed

 

Doesn't matter, they are seperate, just like Acura and Lexus, etc...

 

And how is C&D collecting statistics?

Ed

 

Until the auto makers start releasing internal data like warranty claims
and replacement parts sales we don't have any better data available.

 

no, same company, same designers, parts suppliers. "acura" models are
even sold as honda in other countries. acura /is/ honda. scion /is/
toyota. lexus /is/ toyota.

 

why ever not??? they are the finest statistics money can buy!

collection techniques? easy - staple the check to the top of the
"report" you've written for them - that way the "collection" is taken
care of.

 

C.E. "Ed" White is a known troll in the Toyota newsgroup. He owned only one
Toyota a long, long time ago that was a rare lemon, and has had a hatred for
Toyota ever since. He's been known to lie and exaggerate to make Toyota
look bad, and disputes any reliability ratings that make Toyota look good
while believing those that make them look not as desirable. Ignore him.

 

?

What the **** are you talking about?

Like hundreds of thousands of others through the last 75 years, I
subscribed to Consumer Reports for years, and filled out the surveys
appropriately when I got them, annually, about the products I owned.
What is it that you are referring to, Jim?

What would be better 'data collection techniques'? Asking people to
rate products they didn't own or use? I fail to see the problem.
Please enlighten the rest of us; surely there are people who
deliberately give poor or false responses, but just as surely they are a
very small minority. What is your complaint?


RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen

 

i read reviews of some products i own, and find them to be wildly
inaccurate. others, i see well reviewed, and find them to be garbage.
bottom line, i don't believe everything i read.

oh, and the other reason why. in a past life, i used to work for a
company engaged in "poor data collection techniques" - they made up data
to suit the guys paying them. big name "reputable" company too. with
detroit fighting for its life, do you really think this stuff is going
to be "fair and balanced"?

 

I had a good friend who bought a Monte Carlo SS in 1980, and based on
Consumer Reports, paid for the extended warranty. He never needed it,
and resented the extra money he paid out. Conversely, because I buy and
own Hondas, I generally eschew extended warranties; one malfunction
could easily make me regret that decision. The difference between my
friend's experience and expectations and CR's data is simply that CR
gathers reports on many (hundreds, thousands) purchases of a particular
product.

For what it's worth, in nearly thirty years of subscribing to the
magazine, where I have often disagreed with opinions and conclusions, I
have never seen CU to be wildly inaccurate in their reviews.

With respect to their conglomerated data, they are simply reporting it,
It cannot be inaccurate - they are not rendering opinions, they are
relaying other users' experiences. Your experience may vary, but that
does not mean their information regarding the experiences of others is
'inaccurate'.

With respect to reliability data, Consumer Reports collects and reports
information given to them by subscribers. Neither the subscribers nor
the company have any possible monetary gain from falsifying information.
This is not to say that no falsification ever happens, but the notion
that they use poor data collection techniques is ignorantly formed and
founded - not because they're any better than anyone else, necessarily,
but because there is no monetary incentive. They don't even take
external advertisements.

I don't intend to imply that Consumer Reports is perfect, but I weary of
the absurd pronouncements made against them. Through the years, they
have found that Honda and Toyota are generally the most reliable
automobiles. So have I. As a computer systems analyst, I find their
information somewhat shallow with respect to computers - but it's not
inaccurate, and will be used by people who don't have the depth of
knowledge in the field that I do. I presume a similar state with, say,
digital cameras - that the expert may make different choices for
different reasons, but the layman would be well-guided by the
information provided.


RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen

 

Like many others, I have completed the surveys CU sends out. Their
assessments for products I have owned parallel my experience. I have always
found them a useful resource. There recent recanting on child's car seats
also indicates that they will admit their mistakes which suggests integrity.

 

You are implying that CU can be bribed. Considering the extensive
efforts CU makes to eliminate commercial influence on its results,
perhaps you could provide some support for this allegation.

 

So, your reasoning is, the data must be wrong since your particular case
differed greatly from the group average?

Under that reasoning, either all their products should be faulty, or none.

Thanks for playing "Why I Don't Believe in Statistics!"

 

As an owner of both Toyota and Honda products, I'd put my money on the
reliability of the older 22RE over any Honda product. Better yet I still
have one with the 20R on the road. These Jap companies should just stick
to the 4-cyclinder engines that originally got them their great
reliability ratings. I wouldn't own another Honda or Toyota that didn't
have a 4 banger in it.

 

I've said for a long time, a 4 cylinder Honda with a manual transmission
is an absolute jewel of a drivetrain. Bulletproof, and will last
forever.

Compare that to the automatic transmissions they put on their V6 cars
during 98-04. I hope they took those beancounters out to a field and
shot them all.

 

I do believe in statistics that are properly collected. I don't feel that
Consumer Reports has a statistically valid method of collecting data. They
only survey their subscribers, and only the subscribers that want to reply
do so. I don't think this can qualify as a valid survey.

As I said before, I didn't trust CR statistics when they claimed Toyotas
were great and I don't trust them now that they claim they are not so great.
The JD Power Surveys are a little better (but hardly perfect since they only
ask about repairs, not cost of repairs). In my opinion the recent decrease
in Toyota's reported reliability has more to do with negative press
attention than an actual decrease in quality.

My opinion is that Toyotas are nothing special when it comes to reliability
(neither especially good nor especially bad). I've owned a Toyota, my SO
owns a Toyota, I've borrowed Toyotas, rented Toyotas, and have many friends
with Toyotas. I've never seen anything to lead me to believe that Toyotas
were especially reliable. I am not saying they are bad, just that they
aren't some sort of super duper ultimate vehicle. I can find plenty of
people who love them and plenty of people who hate them. I think more than
any other company, Toyota has done a great job of managing their image.
Lately there have been cracks in Toyota's veil of secrecy strategy and I
think this has more to do with any perceived reduction in Toyota reliability
than an actual reduction in the quality of the products.

Ed

 

I don't believe in conspriacy theories as they apply to Consumer Reports (or
JD Powers either). However, Consumer Reports clearly has an agenda and they
clearly have opinions. Like everyone else, their opinons, biases, agendas,
etc. affect what and how they report. I am certain that CR and I do not
agree on what makes a good car. For instance, they really liked the current
Toyota RAV4. My SO has one, and I've driven it many miles. It is not a bad
vehcile, however, it has the worst , most illogical array of controls I have
ever seen - CR never mentioned the control layout. Also the seats were not
comfortable, but CR gave them high marks. Finally, I thought the 4 cylinder
engine provided more than adequate power, while CR was steering people to
the V6. Different people can have different opinions and neither position is
wrong. I like to read CR. I enjoy reading their opinions, even when I don't
sgree with them. My late Father loved CR. I can't tell you how many things
we had to buy based on what he read in CR. Some things worked out well,
somethings didn't. When he was shopping for his last new car, he was
absolutely set on buying a Toyota Highlander - right up until he test drove
one. Ten minutes driving it convniced him CR didn't always know what was
best.

Ed