Car Situation

[tvguy]

My husband and I have owned four Toyota's in my life, two pontiacs, one kia (the most problematic and expensive, one mercedes, one Ford, one Volkeswagon. We had issues with all but the Toyota's. None of our Toyota's ever had to go in for anything other than maintenance in their life spans and the others were in often for different issues. They have service departments because their are oil changes, and maintenance things that need to be fixed and I am sure something other than that comes up from time to time for some people. As for their customer service in my opinion is they all suck including Toyota. I had the most issues buying my last new Toyota from the dealer, everyone over the salesman were crooks and jerks and I won't be going back to that dealer even for service. I would guarantee that dealer would not replace head head gaskets on V-6 engines there free for the life of the car and would be looking for their money back on the service from the customer. I had the worst time with the service department on my POS Kia. Personally, I feel it depends on who owns the dealership and how they choose to run that dealership.

My friend says his dealership has done over $3 million in warranty repairs on head gaskets. The dealer makes money on warranty repairs, just not as much as if the customer was paying.

 

[kymom99]

Yes, you are high mileage for your car's age. Not enough other folks there yet for Nissan to have to do anything. It's coming. Just Google it, lots of people reporting CVT issues even in the 2016s so Nissan hasn't solve the problem yet.

Carfax:
"The majority of small cars on the market now employ a CVT and with automakers like Nissan, Subaru, and Toyota embracing it across their model lineups. Others are likely to follow as fuel efficiency gains and manufacturing costs for multi-gear transmissions begin to weigh in, especially as vehicles powered by four-cylinder gasoline engines, hybrid powertrains, etc. dominate the market."

I'm not sure how you are qualified to say what improvements have been made in newer versions of these transmissions or have the knowledge to predict the future. Your negative comments are not helpful to the OP or to me.

 

[ellie05]

LOL. My son's Little League Coach is a Toyota Dealer Mechanic, has been since 1969.
His comments on Toyota reliability are two fold. First "If they are as good as people say, why do Toyota dealers all have service departments?". Second "The Toyota difference isn't in better quality, it is in better customer service" The example he cites are the awful head gaskets on V-6 engines. If they blow, Toyota will fix them for free, for the life of the car. Ford had a similar issue, and they didn't extend the warranty on their engines with head gasket issues, but there was a time and mileage upper limit.

This has to be the dumest thing I've heard. EVERY brand has a service departments. Because a brand has a service department that doesn't prove the reliability of the vehicle.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

This has to be the dumest thing I've heard. EVERY brand has a service departments. Because a brand has a service department that doesn't prove the reliability of the vehicle.

The point is that some folks ramble on about Honda & Toyota as if buying one is a guarantee you'll never, ever have a problem with your car. And it's simply not so. It CAN be that way. Of course it CAN be that way with ANY brand. Your odds of it happening with Toyota are greater than with other brands, but only slightly so. For every 108 problems GM cars have, Toyotas have 102 problems.

 

[ellie05]

The point is that some folks ramble on about Honda & Toyota as if buying one is a guarantee you'll never, ever have a problem with your car. And it's simply not so. It CAN be that way. Of course it CAN be that way with ANY brand. Your odds of it happening with Toyota are greater than with other brands, but only slightly so. For every 108 problems GM cars have, Toyotas have 102 problems.

Just because you say it is slightly greater doesn't mean you are right. Toyota and Hondas are known to be reliable cars for a reason,not only that but they retain their value. There absolutely no guarantees in anything in life. Consumers reports would back up the reliability of Toyota and Lexus well GM not so much. If you buy a brand that is highly rated in reliability your chances to get a good vehicle are greater. So advising someone to choose one of those brands if they want a reliable vehicle is common sense, not once did someone said it will be guarantee.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Just because you say it is slightly greater doesn't mean you are right. Toyota and Hondas are known to be reliable cars for a reason,not only that but they retain their value. There absolutely no guarantees in anything in life. Consumers reports would back up the reliability of Toyota and Lexus well GM not so much. If you buy a brand that is highly rated in reliability your chances to get a good vehicle are greater. So advising someone to choose one of those brands if they want a reliable vehicle is common sense, not once did someone said it will be guarantee.

If you study the data Consumer Reports publishes, you'll see it backs up precisely what I said. Yes, they are the highest rated cars. BUT, if you were to actually check the frequency of issues, you would in fact see that the difference between the "top ranked" and everyone else isn't that significant. And part of the reason they hold their value so well is too many people don't know those FACTS.

It's like this - everyone knows & expects Toyota & Honda to be the valedictorian and salutatorian of the class with a 4.0/3.9. What they fail to recognize is that brands like Buick (for example) are still carrying a 3.8 GPA. And even the cars CR reports as "not recommended" are a solid B in comparison.

One might also look up the fact the Toyota Tundra has the highest cost of ownership in its class. The Scion brand (all Toyota underneath) is ranked poorly as well.

Bottom line, generally speaking, your odds of having a trouble free Toyota are better than the odds of a trouble-free "other". This is true. But, the odds aren't THAT much better.

 

[ellie05]

If you study the data Consumer Reports publishes, you'll see it backs up precisely what I said. Yes, they are the highest rated cars. BUT, if you were to actually check the frequency of issues, you would in fact see that the difference between the "top ranked" and everyone else isn't that significant. And part of the reason they hold their value so well is too many people don't know those FACTS.

It's like this - everyone knows & expects Toyota & Honda to be the valedictorian and salutatorian of the class with a 4.0/3.9. What they fail to recognize is that brands like Buick (for example) are still carrying a 3.8 GPA. And even the cars CR reports as "not recommended" are a solid B in comparison.

One might also look up the fact the Toyota Tundra has the highest cost of ownership in its class. The Scion brand (all Toyota underneath) is ranked poorly as well.

Bottom line, generally speaking, your odds of having a trouble free Toyota are better than the odds of a trouble-free "other". This is true. But, the odds aren't THAT much better.

Well I will take the highest odds and I still don't see how that is bad advice. The difference between 4.0 gpa and 3.8 gpa means less chances into getting in certain colleges. Considering Lexus and then Toyota is leading in reliability in cousmers reports I stand by my original post that was just dumb statement. I don't see why it is bothering you so much that "folks" are rambling how reliable their Toyota or Honda are... Because they are.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Well I will take the highest odds and I still don't see how that is bad advice. The difference between 4.0 gpa and 3.8 gpa means less chances into getting in certain colleges. Considering Lexus and then Toyota is leading in reliability in cousmers reports I stand by my original post that was just dumb statement. I don't see why it is bothering you so much that "folks" are rambling how reliable their Toyota or Honda are... Because they are.

It's not bad advice at all, and it's certainly a reason to choose a brand.

As for why we interject, it's because so many have insinuated that the difference is much larger than it is. Yes, a 4.0 is better than a 3.8. But, let's not assume that all cars are either a 4.0 or a 1.6 with no in between - because again, that's what is being implied.

 

[tvguy]

This has to be the dumest thing I've heard. EVERY brand has a service departments. Because a brand has a service department that doesn't prove the reliability of the vehicle.

You probably won't like his other line that he uses with customers. "I'm not here to defend them, I'm just here to fix them."

 

[tvguy]

Carfax:
"The majority of small cars on the market now employ a CVT and with automakers like Nissan, Subaru, and Toyota embracing it across their model lineups. Others are likely to follow as fuel efficiency gains and manufacturing costs for multi-gear transmissions begin to weigh in, especially as vehicles powered by four-cylinder gasoline engines, hybrid powertrains, etc. dominate the market."

I'm not sure how you are qualified to say what improvements have been made in newer versions of these transmissions or have the knowledge to predict the future. Your negative comments are not helpful to the OP or to me.

My comments apply only to the Nissan CVT. A simple Google search will show you how many unhappy Nissan CVT owners there are out there.
We have Escape Hybrids with CVT's at work, all with over 100,000 miles, not a problem among them with the CVT. So it isn't the type of transmission that is at issue, it is who makes it.

 

[ellie05]

You probably won't like his other line that he uses with customers. "I'm not here to defend them, I'm just here to fix them."

It is not that I don't like them. It is that is just a dumb thing to say, because it doesn't make any sense. As for this one I don't really care about it I do find people that bite the hand that feeds them... well that wouldn't be dis appropriate. Your friend sounds like a real winner.

 

[ellie05]

It's not bad advice at all, and it's certainly a reason to choose a brand.

As for why we interject, it's because so many have insinuated that the difference is much larger than it is. Yes, a 4.0 is better than a 3.8. But, let's not assume that all cars are either a 4.0 or a 1.6 with no in between - because again, that's what is being implied.

Well but by your example above you are talking about a 5.5% difference while 6 cars might not seem bad a 5.5% difference it is quite a bit to me. This 5.5% difference might be the make it or break it for some families like the OP. The difference between no repair or $1000 is huge. As it also has already been pointed out in the difference between Ford and Toyota is that Toyota takes better care of their costumers. So lets say you car needs the repair, but because they know it is faulty Toyota picks up the bill vs Ford lets you pay for it, another huge difference. So maybe Toyota looses points in reliability since that could be one the the 102 cars that needs repair, yet the owner doesn't end with the bill. I think OP is smart enough to understand that just because she got many suggestions about toyota or honda it is not a guarantee.

 

[NotUrsula]

When I was a kid, our cars were always old, but my Dad was gifted with them, and he used to rebuild them from the ground up on a regular basis; he was into restoration maintenance. (This was a man who replaced the upholstery every two years!)

I tend to buy new cars, but I drive them forever; I like to get as many years after the payments end as it took to pay it off, and if I pay to make a major repair, I make it a point to get the equivalent out of that, too.
However, I'm not my dad, and I don't personally do more than routine maintenance work on my vehicles. What that adds up to is that after a while, the car becomes a rattletrap because the body loosens up; it gets noisy and less comfortable to ride in. That's a factor for me. If the car has reached that point, I'm not going to invest in another major repair to keep it running. Of course, I can afford to do that; if I couldn't, I'd be back to driving anything that runs.

In the OP's case, if her husband truly needs a work truck, then they should retain the truck they have or buy a new one, plus keep the smaller vehicle that is in the best running shape. The others should go; insuring vehicles that are not being driven nearly every day is a total waste of money.

 

[tvguy]

It is not that I don't like them. It is that is just a dumb thing to say, because it doesn't make any sense. As for this one I don't really care about it I do find people that bite the hand that feeds them... well that wouldn't be dis appropriate. Your friend sounds like a real winner.

Oh, he is a winner, which is why he has worked at the same Toyota dealer since 1969. Customers love his honesty and sense of humor.

 

[manning]

Just because you say it is slightly greater doesn't mean you are right. Toyota and Hondas are known to be reliable cars for a reason,not only that but they retain their value. There absolutely no guarantees in anything in life. Consumers reports would back up the reliability of Toyota and Lexus well GM not so much. If you buy a brand that is highly rated in reliability your chances to get a good vehicle are greater. So advising someone to choose one of those brands if they want a reliable vehicle is common sense, not once did someone said it will be guarantee.

There is one...you die. No one gets out of this world alive.

 

[BabiesDaddy]

Even if they bought it used, you should never still be making payments on a car that is 10+ years old.

I know right. She should just have her butler drive her around....

 

[tnklvr]

This has to be the dumest thing I've heard. EVERY brand has a service departments. Because a brand has a service department that doesn't prove the reliability of the vehicle.

I agree every new car dealership legally has to have a service department to be in business.

 

[tnklvr]

My coworker raved about her Toyota van for years & how all it ever needed was "maintenance". Of course, many of the things they called "maintenance" would be called "repairs" on other brands. $500 here, $1,200 there. It did get her to 180,000 miles, but by then only one of the back doors functioned correctly and several other items were in need of "repair", er "maintenance".

Here's the thing people forget about all those top ratings Toyota gets. Even though they have the fewest issues on average, they are NOT fail proof. In actuality, they have 5-10% fewer issues than cars that are rated "fair" or "poor".

My first car was a Toyota that was 10 years old and I drove it for 7 more years till a door fell off. When I say maintenance I mean oil changes, brakes, tires, and belts nothing other than that ever had to be done to my Toyota's including the 17 year old one, which I felt very lucky with. Oh I did have one recall on my second Toyota, a chip they fixed again while the oil was being changed. All brands will have lemons including Toyota's and Honda's and I am thankful not to be someone who got one. I did have a boss with a Honda lemon that they finally gave her a new one in exchange for.