Toyota CEO Admits Toyota Marketed Camry With Bad Transmissions

009's Recent Submission:

Toyota CEO Admits Toyota Marketed Camry With Bad Transmissions
Has Consumer Reports Tarnished Toyota's Reputation?
Has The Mercedes S63 AMG Knocked The Lexus LS460 Off The Top Rung?
Recall Wednesday: Toyota Recalls 470,000 Japanese Vehicles

You should call it "Toyotaspies.com" ;)

— M35MT (View Profile)

Posted on 10/18/2007 4:13:02 PM | | Votes: 1   

Its ok 009... I actually really appreciate your bold posts. The truth needs to be put out there to bring the "toyo/lex supremacy" group down from their quality cloud.

— w209w114 (View Profile)

Posted on 10/18/2007 4:44:19 PM | | Votes: 3   

Since Toyota/Lexus is still doing quite well compared to other brands even with a slide in current rankings, what does that say for the other guys though?

That "cloud" you speak of might not be so much higher than other companies now, but there was a time it most certainly was.

— answer (View Profile)

Posted on 10/18/2007 5:54:31 PM | | Votes: 4   

Sorry, I do have to speak up for 009 though.

I used to think he was pretty biased for posting all the negative Toyota stuff, but if you really look at his postings in whole, he isn't that bad at all.

He just seems to post the most stuff in general, Toyota-related or not.

— answer (View Profile)

Posted on 10/18/2007 5:57:26 PM | | Votes: 6   

w209,

I dont think Toyota/Lexus is all that supreme, for the following reasons:

No one has yet to de-throne the 3 series
MB has more panache and cache than Lexus
Land Rovers look much better than Toyota's SUVs
That Camry is ugly! I dont care what you think!
The tC could be a better performer in the sub compact segment
No affordable AWD options other than SUV's

— M35MT (View Profile)

Posted on 10/19/2007 8:42:11 AM | | Votes: 2   

I see we have a few insecure people out there. I post articles about all makes usually in waves as it does in the press.

The only people that EVER get bent are the Toyota/Lexus boys.

So what could be the issue?

— Agent009 (View Profile)

Posted on 10/19/2007 9:02:00 AM | | Votes: 2   

answer- Thanks for noticing. But you are correct I am probably the top poster so you will see the most pro and con posts from me.

Human nature is to pick out the negatives. For instance this was a bad PR week for Toyota (sorry but true). But two weeks ago is was a banner week for the IS-F. The others fans were talking about how pro Lexus/Toyota were were for covering it.

So you can't really win when it comes to pleasing everyone. It all ebbs and flows but in the end it balances out.

If Fiat were number one and Toyota was number 5 then all of the press would be about Fiat.

— Agent009 (View Profile)

Posted on 10/19/2007 9:06:21 AM | | Votes: 2   

I'd rather buy GM. At least they deliver on the promise of the brand as far as transmissions are concerned. It takes a real crook to pawn off a whole production run of cars with bad trannys on unsuspecting consumers. I say jail the bastards.

— EnnNorak (View Profile)

Posted on 10/19/2007 10:23:44 AM | | Votes: 1   

Exactly!

Well said LJ745. I said the same thing quite a few months ago and everyone was offended and argued with me that Toyota was not like GM because they had always put quality before production.

— w209w114 (View Profile)

Posted on 10/18/2007 4:46:40 PM | | Votes: 1   

Exactly, They went to production and when they figured out, rather than go public that there was an issue they just let it ride.

This probably was not a safety issue though.

— Agent009 (View Profile)

Posted on 10/19/2007 9:08:56 AM | | Votes: 1   

I'm not worried one bit.

— Will_ (View Profile)

Posted on 10/18/2007 10:10:09 PM | | Votes: 0   

You are right, Toyota will never end up like Mercedes, but that's because no matter how hard they try they will never be able to build cars at such high level of quality and performance. Toyota will always be the car for the blind masses, the cheap appliance made for people who don't care what they drive.

— Star (View Profile)

Posted on 10/18/2007 10:18:01 PM | | Votes: 1   

When will we begin to associate 'quality' with reliability? If you buy a couch and it snaps in half, but was $5000 imported from Italy, is it still 'quality'? No.

— M35MT (View Profile)

Posted on 10/19/2007 8:44:30 AM | | Votes: 3   

LOL!

excellent point! for all the "quality," mbs are NOT anywhere as reliable as TOYOTAS, to say nothing of lexuses.

— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 10/20/2007 2:13:09 AM | | Votes: 1   

for the record, from the 04/07 CR auto issue:

average test score of all toyotas (including lexi) tested: 70
percentage of models recommended: 85

average score of MBs tested: 77
percentage of models recommended: 0

— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 10/20/2007 2:19:36 AM | | Votes: 2   

Who cares if it is design, manufacturing, or problems in the supply chain and faulty selection of component suppliers -- the bottom line is that Toyota screwed up royally and should be punished for it. A public apology with crocodile tears is simply not good enough.

— EnnNorak (View Profile)

Posted on 10/26/2007 12:09:25 PM | | Votes: 2   

ALL mfgrs tend to have more problems with the first year's production of a new model. toyota (and honda) do tend to work out the bugs a lot quicker than others.

in the past, when chrysler was struggling, they laid off a bunch of engineers BEFORE some cars were fully debugged, and left it for the customers and dealers to sort 'em out.
in the well written up case of the pontiac fiero, gm even let a foundry CONTINUE to crank out engine blocks with a KNOWN 40% defect rate, so as not to lose out on the sales momentum. they "justified" this by saying the warranties will handle the problem later.

— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 10/20/2007 5:28:54 AM | | Votes: 1   

" they "justified" this by saying the warranties will handle the problem later."
I love that! "We can't afford to fix it now ... let's wait till it costs 10 times as much to fix" :)
Sounds like an upper-management decision.

— DieselRules (View Profile)

Posted on 10/20/2007 12:47:48 PM | | Votes: 2   

you would be surprised--and MIGHTILY AMUSED-- at all the upper mgmt decisions behind the pontiac fiero.

1. gm HQ initially prohibited pontiac from offering a v6 in it, for fear of that setup stealing sales from corvette. pontiac only got approval by pushing it as basically a 4-cyl "commuter" car.

2. to shoehorn the Iron Duke 4 in the engine bay, it was given a smaller oil pan. along with a screw up in the orientation of a cooling fan, the engine tended to run hot. sometimes, VERY HOT.

3. with the delay in resolving the hairline cracks in the engine blocks, many of the engines BLEW and spewed HOT engine oil, which would IGNITE and set the car afire. the car being plastic (fiberglas), often the cars would BURN DOWN TO THE TIRE RIMS!

4. it was calculated that if all the pontiac fieros were on the Jersy Turnpike at the same time, the no. of potential firebombs were such that, you'd see a BURNING FIERO every 1/4 MILE and people running around like crazy all over the place!

5. gm's cheapo "lawyers' fix:" they printed up a decal that dealers were to install on the gas filler caps. it basically advised owners to CHECK THE OIL on each fillup.

— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 10/21/2007 12:55:09 AM | | Votes: 2   

at it's initial price point, the fieros sold very well. which is why gm DID NOT WANT to delay production by taking care of the foundry problem.

however, DESPITE it's army of beancounters, they screwed up and priced it too low. when they EVENTUALLY became aware of this and repriced the cars so they could at least break even, if not make a profit, the public was most reluctant to pay the higher prices.
this, along with all the initial problems gettin publicized, put a severe damper on sales.

gm eventually got all the problems resolved. but by the time the car was finally put right, gm decided to just pull the plug on it.

when a union plant rep was given the news, he wailed: "This morning the car was merely sick. Now you're telling me it's DEAD!?"

— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 10/21/2007 1:10:40 AM | | Votes: 1   

...

— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 10/21/2007 5:28:13 PM | | Votes: 1   

no, their engine engineers simply ran ahead of the tranny engineers, squeezing 268 horses out of 3.5 v6.

note, there were NO problems with trannies for the I4.

and, the tranny is new, and likely not made robust enuff this 1st year.

— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 10/28/2007 8:35:05 AM | | Votes: 1