Last post on Dec 30, 2011 at 9:54 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Toyota ECHO, Chevrolet Aveo, Kia Rio, Nissan Sentra, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Toyota Yaris, Kia Spectra, Suzuki Forenza, Sedan
#142 of 3871 Watch the fine print!!!
Jun 21, 2001 (3:50 am)
The Nissan dealer here has "all" 2001 Sentras at $10,699." Then, you get your magnifying glass and read:"All model #42151 in stock without dealer added options at this price." Try to find one without $2000.00 worth of "dealer installed" floor mats $900.oo pin stripes and a $500.00 paint protection treatment!!!
There's a term for that kind of advertising known as "bait and switch". The car exists "somewhere", but we ordinary slobs will never see it. Somehow,"We just sold that one; but we DO have a nicely equipped [fill in the blank] for $16,999.99
before freight, taxes, dealer installed glamour package, documentation fees and prep.We can have you out the door today for $19,275....if you act NOW!"
Would that they actually had more cars WITHOUT all the extraneous junk available. 1 "package" with one item you can actually USE only comes with 7 or 8 others and quickly runs up the price.
I miss the days when you could essentially tailor a car to your specific needs via the options list.
Jun 21, 2001 (6:19 am)
It is fine that you don't like the looks of my car. Not everyone does. People apologize to me about that like it is going to hurt my feelings or something.
I am somewhat confused about your statement on the 7500 mile checkups. Are you saying a checkup at 7500 miles or a checkup every 7500 miles?
My Scheduled Maintenance Guide does suggest maintenance every 5k or 7.5k miles. The maintenance is the same if your Toyota has 5k miles or 7.5miles on it. At this amount of miles, the first maintenance is oil change (with oil filter change, of course) and tire rotation. Therefore if your statement applies to the former, I don't know what your friends are having done when they hit 7500 miles.
I am following intervals of 5k and so my next service is due at 10k. All I have to have done at that point is oil change and tire rotation.
At 15k, I will have the oil changed, rotate tires, and inspect various components.
At 20k, I will have the oil changed and the tires rotated.
The first "major" maintenance is not until 30k where they replace the engine air filter, replace the engine coolant, replace the oil, replace the spark plugs, and rotate the tires.
I don't know about the Sephia, but do you know when I have to replace my drive belt? Never, because the Echo has a drive chain.
Granted I have only had my Echo for about six months, but you want to know how many times I have had it at the dealer for unscheduled maintenance? None.
I am not trying to be insulting but just pointing out that if the past is any future indication, it looks like you will be at your dealer with your car more than I will be at my dealer with mine.
#145 of 3871 protegextwo: Toyota IS reliable....other Japanese cars less reliable than American brands
Jun 21, 2001 (7:29 am)
Not one Toyota has had problems...of the many owned by friends. Honda, Nissan, Mazda, etc. do NOT have the long term reliability of Toyota and in fact, have less long term reliability than most American brands.
The most unreliable American brands are those where there is Japanese content such as Chevy Chevette, Chevy Tracker, Ford Probe, etc. However, the Chevy Prizm (Toyota clone) is very reliable.
Daughter and son in law's 1984 Honda Accord has so many problems at 177,000 miles (and has engine AND transmission rebuilt/replaced) they cannot afford to fix it. Meanwhile, their 1978 Impala with 187,000 miles on original engine and transmission runs well...but needs to have grille, fender, lights, etc. fixed after he was in 2 wrecks with it. Japanese quality? Only Toyota.
#146 of 3871 i find i funny that...
Jun 21, 2001 (8:55 am)
people compare the reliability of a 17 year old car to todays cars. They are nt even in the same leaguw as the new models. Its kinda like comparing a high school baseball team to a major league team. MAnufacturing processes have improved greatly since the mid 80's as well as quailty issues. You just cant compare old cars to new. its a different car than mine and and much older to0 with diffenent parts and 1980's technology (carbs, etc)
Jun 21, 2001 (9:43 am)
A reliable car is a reliable car no matter when it was made.
#148 of 3871 My comparison of the 17 year old Honda Accord was with a 23 year old Chevrolet Impala
Jun 21, 2001 (10:02 am)
And the Impala is and has been MORE reliable than the Accord. Both were purchased used with over 100,000 miles on each so we do not know the history on either.
I have never owned a Toyota but all research indicates Toyota is THE most reliable brand. Not one unreliable Toyota in the numerous ones of all ages owned by friends. Can not say that about any other brand. I have had Chevrolet that had problems and Chevrolet that were almost perfect. All 5 Volkswagens we owned gave us problems. Our NEW Volvo was unreliable and expensive to maintain. A co-worker had same experience with a new, later model Volvo. So far, our 1999 Grand Caravan SE in 27 months is acting as if it were built by Toyota...completely reliable with zero problems.
#150 of 3871 Research: Discuss vehicle reliability with everyone who will and read all literature available
Jun 21, 2001 (12:42 pm)
Toyota is THE only brand with zero problems. I agree that Toyota styling can sometimes be off the target. Toyota has no "duds" like other makers. Here are a few examples: Ford: Pinto, Roll-over-Explorers, 1996 Taurus, Edsel, etc. Mazda: undesireable Miller engine, underpowered MPV. Suzuki: Roll-over-Samaurai. GM: Corvair, Vega, Cimarron by Cadillac, Catera by Cadillac,etc. Honda: too unreliable and expensive to keep running.
Jun 21, 2001 (2:08 pm)
Since when did an "undesireable Miller engine" and "underpowered MPV" make an entire brand unreliable? If underpowered makes a car unreliable, then Toyota would certainly NOT be the most reliable brand. Can we say Tercel, older Corolla's, and the non-supercharged 4-cyl Previa minivan? What's so undesireable about the Miller-cycle engine? It's a V6 with a supercharger and delayed intake valve timing. It runs exactly the same way as any other 4-stroke piston internal combustion engine.
If I recall, Toyota's V6 had a really bad reputation a while back and even Consumer's Reports rated it as a bad buy. MSN's CarPoint rated the previous generation Camry with only 3 points of 5 possible. There were several engine problems that ended with "V6 only."
Toyota makes good vehicles and they probably have the highest reliability on the market, but they are certainly not perfect and the other manufacturers are not very far behind. Virtually every car sold today will run past the 200,000 mile mark.
As far as "duds"... Has anyone seen the crash-test ratings on the Toyota Previa? Notrotious at best. Just as bad, if not worse, than the Ford Aerostar. That's why the Sienna came around so quickly. The MR-Spyder is a nice vehicle, but someone forgot to design in everyday liveability (virtually no trunk space). And the Celica with it's VVTi-L engine is quick if you rev it past 6,000rpm. Where did the torque go? I like to drive hard, but revving well beyond 6,000rpm all of the time?
But I'll discuss it with everyone. I know about a dozen people that will never buy a Toyota again because of their bad experiences with them. I have never had a problem with any of the Ford's or Mazda's I have owned and I will continue to buy from them. Toyota? I'll consider them, but they're priced a bit high and they're just plain boring to drive (IMHO).