What's your beef with Toyota?

[enzl]

Wow. A lot of hate out there.

Here's my advice: Stop blaming Toyota for being an efficient, effective purveyor of machines. They take advantage of the opportunities given to them and exploit them with precision.

I read through this thread thinking to myself: How many of these people are simply racist? How many just don't understand how to run a successful business? How many of these people make the same excuses for themselves in their daily lives that they make for GM here?

This board is alot more interesting when it tackles real issues or analyzes how to IMPROVE GM---when you guys start these bashing threads, you sound exactly like the 12 yr. olds that flame GM on the import-humpers' sites. Is that really who you want to emulate?

I'm not defending Toyota (they don't need it), it's just that the quality of discourse here is sinking, IMHO. This type of thread does nothing to help things.

Maybe a few more of you should come up with some ideas to HELP GM and the rest of the domestics?-- look like they could really use that right now!

[Guest aatbloke]

Please look up the word PROPORTIONATE. The study was definitive: it took into account how many imports versus domestics were sold in a given year and how many of those were still plated on the road. They dredged up hundreds of thousands of registrations over a period of 2 decades. This was far more accurate than merely observing that Civics and Camrys rusted and fell apart in 8 years (true, by the way.) I certainly would expect to see more A-bodies on the road today because GM sold far more of them than Toyota did the Corolla or Camry, back in the '80s.

... and it wasn't my 'little study.' Desrosiers marketing is the JD Powers of Canada.

The only truth is that with the twin oil shocks of the '70s, the bumper standards of the mid- 70s, the pollution controls that started in the early '70s - all of these conspired to form a perfect storm of events that sent Detroit spinning out of control. It took them a decade to recover. It can be easily argued that many of their answers to the problems (the econoboxes of the '80s that we love to laught at today) were wrong-headed thinking, but that is through the advantage of retrospective observation. It is easy to see how a 78 horspower Datsun 210 with a stick, no air and a radio would be more 'fun' to drive to a college student than an overweight, underpowered Buick Skyhawk of the same era; however, Detroit was trying to downsize their land barges without alienating their core customers - no easy task when for 30 years the mantra was 'bigger, faster, longer.'

All of this only helps to explain the media's previous perceptions of Detroit versus the imports. It does not justify their continued carping on Detroit for the past.

I don't have trouble with English, I can assure you of that. All the spin in the world won't alter the reality however, nor will it make you any happier as a consequence and you can keep harping on your little studies until you're blue in the face. None of it alters the truth of the matter, and that is the fact that no single American or European car could match the Japanese in terms of adamantine reliability at an affordable price back in the 1970s and 1980s, even if they didn't have the badge kudos to go with it. It's that reputation which has created the current perception of Japanese cars being the most reliable cars you can buy, despite the fact that both the Americans and European also build cars with the same integrity nowadays. Whatsmore, in global terms, American cars were barely on the radar in the 70's and 80's, and that still runs true by and large even today. The Japanese saw the weakness and capitalised upon it - seems like pretty good business acumen to me.

We all know Japanese cars rusted apart within a decade. Common knowledge, but the engines ran on and on long after the bodywork had rotted away. That's how the Japanese developed their universal reputation for longevity. The sheer steadfastness of Japanese engines became the backbone of their business in terms of public awareness. But the Japanese are businessmen; they're building consumable products which it wants replaced after 3 or 4 years - they're not interested in new car buyers who keep cars for a decade. Their reputation was best served how long their engineering held out more than their tin wrapping.

Your last statement says it all - "no easy task when for 30 years the mantra was 'bigger, faster, longer." Until the North American autoworker is building cars suitable for global markets, as the Japanese autoworker has been doing for decades, then you'll be perpetually blaming Japan for its advantage in the marketplace.

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Guest aatbloke]

Wow. A lot of hate out there.

Here's my advice: Stop blaming Toyota for being an efficient, effective purveyor of machines. They take advantage of the opportunities given to them and exploit them with precision.

I read through this thread thinking to myself: How many of these people are simply racist? How many just don't understand how to run a successful business? How many of these people make the same excuses for themselves in their daily lives that they make for GM here?

This board is alot more interesting when it tackles real issues or analyzes how to IMPROVE GM---when you guys start these bashing threads, you sound exactly like the 12 yr. olds that flame GM on the import-humpers' sites. Is that really who you want to emulate?

I'm not defending Toyota (they don't need it), it's just that the quality of discourse here is sinking, IMHO. This type of thread does nothing to help things.

Maybe a few more of you should come up with some ideas to HELP GM and the rest of the domestics?-- look like they could really use that right now!

This a good post and I agree with every point made. It's easy to blame others for one's own failings, and that's all I see from some of the stoic "domestic" supporters. I've seen it all before; when BL were fading fast in the 1970's, those loyal to the marque also simply blamed jolly foreigner.

[the_yellow_dart]

I don't have trouble with English, I can assure you of that. All the spin in the world won't alter the reality however, nor will it make you any happier as a consequence and you can keep harping on your little studies until you're blue in the face. None of it alters the truth of the matter, and that is the fact that no single American or European car could match the Japanese in terms of adamantine reliability at an affordable price back in the 1970s and 1980s, even if they didn't have the badge kudos to go with it. It's that reputation which has created the current perception of Japanese cars being the most reliable cars you can buy, despite the fact that both the Americans and European also build cars with the same integrity nowadays. Whatsmore, in global terms, American cars were barely on the radar in the 70's and 80's, and that still runs true by and large even today. The Japanese saw the weakness and capitalised upon it - seems like pretty good business acumen to me.

Your last statement says it all - "no easy task when for 30 years the mantra was 'bigger, faster, longer." Until the North American autoworker is building cars suitable for global markets, as the Japanese autoworker has been doing for decades, then you'll be perpetually blaming Japan for its advantage in the marketplace.

30 million Corollas were sold.... I'm betting most on price.

A '77 Corolla rusting out and needing 2 valve jobs in a year and a half is the reason my father still won't even look at a Toyota.

[Guest aatbloke]

"But do we have any choice any more? Japan Inc saw to it that Electrohome, RCA, Philco and the others were either run out of business, bought out, or moved their production overseas."

The sheer cost of manufacturing in the United States - largely due to the avarice of union demands - is not commensurate with the American consumer's desire to get more for less. Therefore business decisions have to be made simply to remain as a business ... or you die.

[Guest aatbloke]

"A '77 Corolla rusting out and needing 2 valve jobs in a year and a half is the reason my father still won't even look at a Toyota."

Likewise, in all four corners of the world you'll find stories of '77 Corollas running for donkey's years long after the bodywork fell apart. I've heard stories of Corollas running with barely any oil in the sump. Thing is, you won't hear similar stories of say, a '77 Skylark, in all four corners - because three of those corners will respond with "a what?"

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Camino LS6]

Toyota has never been, and still is not, the top seller in the US. But ask any joe on the street and you might think that they are, that's the disconnect.

I hate Toyota with a passion, and for a whole host of reasons, but that pales in comparison to one simple fact:

Toyota has never built anything I would ever want.

The same can be said of all Asian manufacturers.

I credit these companies with reducing the most important aspect of car ownership in the US.

Pride.

People used to be proud of their cars and where they were built and who they were built by. They were proud of the style , the power, the way the car fitted to their lives just so. The Japanese (with Toyota in the vaguard) really introduced the notion of the car as an appliance and took that ugly perception to the top of the market. The domestics, in their panic, adopted this unpleasant approach and lost much of their own identity for several decades because of it.

For me that is the real crime I lay at Toyota's doorstep, the diminishing of the art that is the automobile to the rank of appliance like any washing machine or trash compactor. Like a poison, this mentality has spread to the point that many throughout the world now see the automobile as a necessary evil rather than an expression of freedom and individuality.

That's the difference between those who love cars and those that buy them because they have to. And it is the difference between me and those who buy Toyotas.

[Guest aatbloke]

"Toyota has never built anything I would ever want."

Being a rally enthsuiast, I can't say the same myself:

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, I hardly ever see any A-bodies around unless they are in the "ghetto" and in rusted-out shape. I never, NEVER see any old A-body (or similar generation GM products) on the road in any sort of decent condition.

So what? You're in So.Cal.... even the bums there drive rusted out BMWs.

I see A-body Cierras and Centurys all the time. It seems most of the Celebrities and 6000s have gone to the great junkyard in the sky.

I'd say it's a 30/70 garaged/ghetto ratio on the A-bodies I see. The nice ones are very very nice. The ghetto ones range from "well used" to "rolling environmental hazard".

Cierras seem to have a better survival rate and are usually puttering along at 10 mph under the speed limit with Edgar or Mable Bluehair behind the wheel.

Camries and Cressidas pre '92 are basically non-existent. So much so that Dominic and I found it remarkable to see a Cressida on the road last week and even admired the good condition it was in. The older Toyotas simply could not survive the winters in Pittsburgh. The 1992 and above body style seems to be their turning point. The A-bodies, many being ghetto, are still... unfortunately... on the road.

[Guest aatbloke]

"People used to be proud of their cars and where they were built and who they were built by. They were proud of the style , the power, the way the car fitted to their lives just so. The Japanese (with Toyota in the vaguard) really introduced the notion of the car as an appliance and took that ugly perception to the top of the market. The domestics, in their panic, adopted this unpleasant approach and lost much of their own identity for several decades because of it.

For me that is the real crime I lay at Toyota's doorstep, the diminishing of the art that is the automobile to the rank of appliance like any washing machine or trash compactor. Like a poison, this mentality has spread to the point that many throughout the world now see the automobile as a necessary evil rather than an expression of freedom and individuality."

Car manufacturers are businesses. The primary purpose of every mass-produced car you see leaving a dealer's showroom is to make cash - it's that simple.

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Camino LS6]

Car manufacturers are businesses. The primary purpose of every mass-produced car you see leaving a dealer's showroom is to make cash - it's that simple.

Thus art dies.

As true as that may be, it is not the reason we are all here at this website. We are here because we love cars.

The domestics understood the art of the car, and thus many are preserved, restored, and coveted. Toyotas are recycled.

The soulless, bland, pragmatism of the car as appliance is a truly sad thing. Even moreso, when there is no reason that form and function connot both reside in a profitable product.

I have to want a car to buy it.

[Camino LS6]

"Toyota has never built anything I would ever want."

Being a rally enthsuiast, I can't say the same myself:

To each his own, those do nothing for me.

[Guest aatbloke]

Thus art dies.

As true as that may be, it is not the reason we are all here at this website. We are here because we love cars.

The domestics understood the art of the car, and thus many are preserved, restored, and coveted. Toyotas are recycled.

The soulless, bland, pragmatism of the car as appliance is a truly sad thing. Even moreso, when there is no reason that form and function connot both reside in a profitable product.

I have to want a car to buy it.

All fine and dandy, but it doesn't detract from the fact that car manufacturers are businesses and the relentless march of capitalism in the modern world has seen to it that we all want more for less and there's more competition trying to win our hard-earned cash. You can't blame the Japanese for that; all they've done is work as a business should work. You have to blame the consumer.

If an American or European company were to develop a bog-standard family car which encapsulated the "art" of a car in the manner you're inferring - which these days would require extensive attention to detail and perhaps even hand-built componentry, you'd have to charge at least $40K and up for the likes of a basic Cobalt simply to cover the development costs involved in creating such a unique product. Can you blame the Japanese if noone's interested in forking out such moolah? No. Since the Japanese and European mainstreams don't have badge cachet, they're eager to get in on motorsports to spark the public's imagination in an otherwise plain-jane family saloon - hence the reason for such cars as the Escort RS Cosworth, the Impreza STI and the Lancer Evolution over the years.

I love cars. But more to the point I love the industry. I appreciate anything with an engine propelling four wheels and a seat. What I don't do is blindly favour one country's industry and despise that of another.

[Drew Dowdell]

OK.....not to defend Toyota......but let's look at a couple of things......

How is a (admittedly refreshed in '09) Corolla any more "boring" than a Cobalt LS/LT sedan?

How is a Camry any more "boring" than an Impala? Even a V6 Camry will run close to a V8 Impala SS. With all 6 gears or will 2nd and 6th sit this one out...? and if by "close" you mean a 1/2 second behind, then yes.*

Or....how is a Malibu (as much as I like it more than the Camry) that much less boring than a Camry overall? The Malibu has some visual style to the interior and the exterior is big and bold and doesn't look like it got wacked in the face. The tail lights, love them or hate them, look like no other sedan out there.

How is a Lucerne any more "exciting" than an Avalon....? A V6 Avalon will dust a V8 Lucerne....if your definition of "not boring" is performance....? The Lucerne is simply better looking. The Avalon looks like a fat woman on a bicycle. and has a front overhang that would make a W-body blush. And if by "dust" you mean the Lucerne has the same 0-60 as the Avalon, then yes...... *only that doesn't explain why the Lucerne gets "dusted" at the same time the Camry is "close".... but perhaps you can clear that up for me.

just sayin....

[Guest aatbloke]

To each his own, those do nothing for me.

Indeed - these are cars developed for a motorsport which is hugely popular practically everywhere with the exception of North America.

[Camino LS6]

All fine and dandy, but it doesn't detract from the fact that car manufacturers are businesses and the relentless march of capitalism in the modern world has seen to it that we all want more for less and there's more competition trying to win our hard-earned cash. You can't blame the Japanese for that; all they've done is work as a business should work. You have to blame the consumer.

The blame spreads far and wide, but Japan is the source and author of the trend.

If an American or European company were to develop a bog-standard family car which encapsulated the "art" of a car in the manner you're inferring - which these days would require extensive attention to detail and perhaps even hand-built componentry, you'd have to charge at least $40K and up for the likes of a basic Cobalt simply to cover the development costs involved in creating such a unique product. Can you blame the Japanese if noone's interested in forking out such moolah? No. Since the Japanese and European mainstreams don't have badge cachet, they're eager to get in on motorsports to spark the public's imagination in an otherwise plain-jane family saloon - hence the reason for such cars as the Escort RS Cosworth, the Impreza STI and the Lancer Evolution over the years.

BS, cars of the past were artful even in the thriftiest models. It's the least common denominator school of thought that's the trouble.

I love cars. But more to the point I love the industry. I appreciate anything with an engine propelling four wheels and a seat. What I don't do is blindly favour one country's industry and despise that of another.

Nothing blind about it, it's called taste. I do have an affinity for certain European cars, but have yet to be impressed by anythig from Japan. As for the industry, I see nothing wrong with wanting to support the products of one's own home country and make no apologies for that. Especially when they evoke the style and substance which appeal to me. I despise Toyota for their effect on the industry as a whole.

[Camino LS6]

Oh and by the way, I think the most consitently artful cars ever built were built by a certain British automaker. :AH-HA_wink:

[Guest aatbloke]

All fine and dandy, but it doesn't detract from the fact that car manufacturers are businesses and the relentless march of capitalism in the modern world has seen to it that we all want more for less and there's more competition trying to win our hard-earned cash. You can't blame the Japanese for that; all they've done is work as a business should work. You have to blame the consumer.

The blame spreads far and wide, but Japan is the source and author of the trend.

If an American or European company were to develop a bog-standard family car which encapsulated the "art" of a car in the manner you're inferring - which these days would require extensive attention to detail and perhaps even hand-built componentry, you'd have to charge at least $40K and up for the likes of a basic Cobalt simply to cover the development costs involved in creating such a unique product. Can you blame the Japanese if noone's interested in forking out such moolah? No. Since the Japanese and European mainstreams don't have badge cachet, they're eager to get in on motorsports to spark the public's imagination in an otherwise plain-jane family saloon - hence the reason for such cars as the Escort RS Cosworth, the Impreza STI and the Lancer Evolution over the years.

BS, cars of the past were artful even in the thriftiest models. It's the least common denominator school of thought that's the trouble.

I love cars. But more to the point I love the industry. I appreciate anything with an engine propelling four wheels and a seat. What I don't do is blindly favour one country's industry and despise that of another.

Nothing blind about it, it's called taste. I do have an affinity for certain European cars, but have yet to be impressed by anythig from Japan. As for the industry, I see nothing wrong with wanting to support the products of one's own home country and make no apologies for that. Especially when they evoke the style and substance which appeal to me. I despise Toyota for their effect on the industry as a whole.

"The blame spreads far and wide, but Japan is the source and author of the trend."

I disagree. The world's first car to be mass-produced on the cheap, with each model being virtually identical - even down to the colour - thus creating the concept of an appliance in an automobile began with Ford's Model T. And that came from America.

"BS, cars of the past were artful even in the thriftiest models. It's the least common denominator school of thought that's the trouble."

The economy of the 1960's is nothing like what we have today - and car demand wasn't anything like as great. Back then, car manufacturers didn't have to spend a fortune conforming to different legislative dictates around the world either. To spend the time and resources necessary to create something truly unique would create a hugely expensive mainstream car. That's why we have luxury and specialist sporting coachbuilders.

"Nothing blind about it, it's called taste."

That's your opinion. Many people around the world don't find modern American cars particularly tasteful or beautiful; when they think of taste and beauty they're likely to lean towards something created by an Italian holding a pen.

"As for the industry, I see nothing wrong with wanting to support the products of one's own home country and make no apologies for that."

Nothing wrong with that - but if all you do is blame others for your failings then you will ultimately sink. You have to compete to survive. The Japanese excel in promoting their vehicles worldwide, making adaptations in accordance with the markets they sell in. The Americans, on the other hand, throw their products at the world with the expectation that those markets simply fall in line with their own tastes. This practice is slowly changing, thankfully, with Cadillac and Dodge now offering more internationally suited products - but there's a long way to go before they can match the Japanese.

[Guest aatbloke]

Oh and by the way, I think the most consitently artful cars ever built were built by a certain British automaker. :AH-HA_wink:

Makes no odds to me. I love Jaguar's designs, but as a business they're horrendous.

[Camino LS6]

Makes no odds to me. I love Jaguar's designs, but as a business they're horrendous.

Not Jaguar, although some of the best looking cars of all time did wear a leaper.

[LosAngeles]

Why do people think the Sebring and Avenger are built in Mexico?? I had to correct somebody in another forum that said that (was it you ) . They are built in Sterling Heights, Michigan.....my hometown....my friend works there! However, I wouldn't exactly call them a "small" car.

Well, they do look pretty slight for intermediates at many angles (esp. the Avenger)...surely their Lancer roots don't help.

But do we have any choice any more? Japan Inc saw to it that Electrohome, RCA, Philco and the others were either run out of business, bought out, or moved their production overseas. Zenith was the best television manufacturer for decades (I know, we owned 2), but even they could not sustain the onslaught of Japanese televisions that were dumped on our shores in the '70s by Sharp, Hitachi and others - with the full weight and backing of the Japanese government.

When will we ever learn? It is happening now with Boeing. All the might and weight of Europe is being brought against it, in the form of Aerbus. Soon the Chinese will join in the fray. It isn't enough that Americans are envied and hated throughout the world, but the amount of self-hating that goes on is the real culprit.

Self-hating? While you could possibly be addressing something else, if you're addressing our economy, it's one that isn't protectionist or homogeneous. It's been a competitive one as long as all of us have been alive. Consumers get with what they perceive as the winning products and services.

The Great American iPod commands everyone's desires, with anyone that could possibly compete from any other country not having a prayer (not to mention Walkmen died in the process with no iPod killing replacement in sight)

No doubt Japan was dumping something fierce for quite a while, however....

The Xbox line is taking back the video game industry the U.S. once led the charge in before the crash of '83.

The computers in most homes and briefcases? American brands. Unless Sony VAIO has this egregious amount of market share I was unaware of.

I think it's the fact that cars kind of inspire a politicism and religiosity in opinions.

I read through this thread thinking to myself: How many of these people are simply racist? How many just don't understand how to run a successful business? How many of these people make the same excuses for themselves in their daily lives that they make for GM here?

This board is alot more interesting when it tackles real issues or analyzes how to IMPROVE GM---when you guys start these bashing threads, you sound exactly like the 12 yr. olds that flame GM on the import-humpers' sites. Is that really who you want to emulate?

I'm not defending Toyota (they don't need it), it's just that the quality of discourse here is sinking, IMHO. This type of thread does nothing to help things.

Maybe a few more of you should come up with some ideas to HELP GM and the rest of the domestics?-- look like they could really use that right now!

Like the suits in The Tubes are really listening to a bunch of fanboys on a message board. Bring the kids down to my bridge dealership, let's make a deal.

And don't shoot the messenger for bringing the thread to see why all these Toyota-haters have this passion against them. I hear it so much here, I simply wanted to see where it skewed. All the political crap aside, for me, they're simply not making any cars that scream "undeniable" for my money....too many non-Toyota makes win each segment they play in on my list.

However, I do have to concur that many folks here have opinions that could reek of racism. Imagine if Toyota (or someone else as a frontrunner) was, say, British.

Or German (I never hear many complaints on this board about BMW or Volkswagen, whereas I've seen both gone in on plenty of times elsewhere).

Though it can be said that the hate for Chrysler is pretty irrational also.

The sheer cost of manufacturing in the United States - largely due to the avarice of union demands - is not commensurate with the American consumer's desire to get more for less. Therefore business decisions have to be made simply to remain as a business ... or you die.

Pretty much. Surely a few of you in here run businesses, part of which you had shipped off to India.

Lest we also forget complaints about illegal immigrants (usually the Latino ones....hmmm) picking the fruits and vegetables, packing the pigs and cows, and cleaning our hotels. All of which would cost more if citizens did them, because if we don't all think we're supposed to be doctors, lawyers, actors, and rock stars, rendering the jobs that make this economy go beneath us; we'd be wanting to get paid a king's ransom for them.

This particular model never saw the light of day in the U.S. All we got was some wimpy 145-horse frontie frogmobile.

So what? You're in So.Cal.... even the bums there drive rusted out BMWs.

I'm leaving this one alone beyond saying that both you and OC sound like you guys don't get around much.

these [GT-Four Celicas] are cars developed for a motorsport which is hugely popular practically everywhere with the exception of North America.

Yeah, we're in the land of crummy spec-vehicle NASCAR. I wish touring and rally racing would have taken off here.

[Drew Dowdell]

However, I do have to concur that many folks here have opinions that could reek of racism. Imagine if Toyota (or someone else as a frontrunner) was, say, British.

Or German (I never hear many complaints on this board about BMW or Volkswagen, whereas I've seen both gone in on plenty of times elsewhere).

Though it can be said that the hate for Chrysler is pretty irrational also.

Look up some of my posts then.... I harp on VW/Audi all the time due to prior experiences with them. My complaints about BMW's actual cars are minimal, I just find them to be stylistically unremarkable. The only BMW that catches my fancy is the 7-series. My real beef with BMW is that the badges are worth more than the cars themselves. Jeremy Clarkson has a really good quote in the segment where he compares the Vauxhaul VXR8 and the 5-er. He points to the BMW badge on the hood and says "This right here is worth 30,000£"... because he finds the Vauxhaul and the 5-er to be sooo close in everything else.

If GM threw a BMW badge on a CTS they'd be able to sell for 25% more.

After the 300c, Chrysler really took some big steps backwards in design.

[Camino LS6]

"The blame spreads far and wide, but Japan is the source and author of the trend."

I disagree. The world's first car to be mass-produced on the cheap, with each model being virtually identical - even down to the colour - thus creating the concept of an appliance in an automobile began with Ford's Model T. And that came from America.

Point taken on the Model T, however that stubborn approach was soundly rejected once consumers realized that other choices were available, and even Ford himself had to adapt. What followed was a golden age of diverse design in both form and function which stretched into the early seventies where it met a brick wall of regulation. Enter the Japanese with cheap, economical, cars and the whole industry became lackluster. The domestics attempted to play to the strengths of the likes of Toyota and Honda and abandoned their own set of criteria resulting in several decades of "also rans". They foolishly attempted to "out Japanese" the Japanese. This influence on the industry has disgusted me from that time forward. As I said, the blame spreads far and wide, but the results remain unpleasant.

"BS, cars of the past were artful even in the thriftiest models. It's the least common denominator school of thought that's the trouble."

The economy of the 1960's is nothing like what we have today - and car demand wasn't anything like as great. Back then, car manufacturers didn't have to spend a fortune conforming to different legislative dictates around the world either. To spend the time and resources necessary to create something truly unique would create a hugely expensive mainstream car. That's why we have luxury and specialist sporting coachbuilders.

If "truly unique" is asking too much, how about at least a few notches above "anonymous" for a change?

"Nothing blind about it, it's called taste."

That's your opinion. Many people around the world don't find modern American cars particularly tasteful or beautiful; when they think of taste and beauty they're likely to lean towards something created by an Italian holding a pen.

How European of you, actually the Italian design houses have been in decline for some time ( which I think is a shame). You may be surprised to find that the grand majority of modern American cars disgust me nearly as much as their Japanese competitors. I'm not a blind flag-waver for substandard stuff. That said, entire segments of the market bore me to tears regardless of country of origin. It's the rest of the crop that get me going, and that doesn't include Toyota as they simply don't build that sort of stuff.

"As for the industry, I see nothing wrong with wanting to support the products of one's own home country and make no apologies for that."

Nothing wrong with that - but if all you do is blame others for your failings then you will ultimately sink. You have to compete to survive. The Japanese excel in promoting their vehicles worldwide, making adaptations in accordance with the markets they sell in. The Americans, on the other hand, throw their products at the world with the expectation that those markets simply fall in line with their own tastes. This practice is slowly changing, thankfully, with Cadillac and Dodge now offering more internationally suited products - but there's a long way to go before they can match the Japanese.

Given that the focus of this site is GM, I'll leave the other domestics out of this for the moment.

GM designs, builds, and competes globally and has the resources (and now the structure) to meet all of the markets appropriately. In many markets they are doing just that, in others they have more work to do. With the company finally thinking in a more global fashion the opportunites to fit product to each market are staggering. In the process, more creativity is possible if leveraged properly. A heavier concentration on what the product is rather than where GM assembles it, allows a diversity of offerings everywhere around the world. What may be volume in one market can be niche in another with the overall effect being that each market's lineup offers a wider array of choices. So, to say that GM is just throwing one design at the world expecting the world to change is rediculous. Western Europe is certainly not the only barometer of GM's market penetration globally.

In contast, I would rate Toyota's global lineup as much less diverse. If anyone has attempted to make other markets conform to their own vision it would be Toyota. Granted, their PR skills are supreme in the industry.

[Guest aatbloke]

"Given that the focus of this site is GM, I'll leave the other domestics out of this for the moment.

GM designs, builds, and competes globally and has the resources (and now the structure) to meet all of the markets appropriately. In many markets they are doing just that, in others they have more work to do. With the company finally thinking in a more global fashion the opportunites to fit product to each market are staggering. In the process, more creativity is possible if leveraged properly. A heavier concentration on what the product is rather than where GM assembles it, allows a diversity of offerings everywhere around the world. What may be volume in one market can be niche in another with the overall effect being that each market's lineup offers a wider array of choices. So, to say that GM is just throwing one design at the world expecting the world to change is rediculous. Western Europe is certainly not the only barometer of GM's market penetration globally.

In contast, I would rate Toyota's global lineup as much less diverse. If anyone has attempted to make other markets conform to their own vision it would be Toyota. Granted, their PR skills are supreme in the industry."

Clearly we aren't on the same page here.

GM utilises its worldwide subsidiaries to develop cars for markets in which those subsidiaries are based. An Opel Astra, for example, is certainly not an American car; neither is a Holden Commodore. In both cases, these cars were developed purely for local markets and tastes in mind by Europeans and Australians respectively. The Astra is a typical mainstream German car which fits the mould of many markets globally. Ford operates in the same way; the '98 Ford Focus was originally a German car developed autonomously by Ford-Werke under the auspices of Ford of Europe; although much of the design was completed in the UK, all of the engineering work was undertaken in Germany. Considerable legislative changes were made to the car in order for it to go on sale in North America two years later.

We get comparatively very few American cars in Europe: the Dodge Caliber, Avenger and Viper; Chrysler PT, Voyager and 300C; Hummer H3; the entire Jeep and Cadillac ranges, plus the Corvette are those that spring to mind. In several cases these are American cars which are assembled in other countries such as Austria and South Africa. The vast majority have a niche appeal; only Chrysler are forward enough to offer a range of diesels, for example, but they remain largely the same product you'll find in the United States.

The Japanese, on the other hand, develop the vast majority of their cars in Japan and then tailor them to different markets worldwide. The previous-gen Corolla was a prime example: the hatchback was offered is the mainstay model in Europe and Australia, for example, while North America received the sedan with styling and mechanicals specific to that market. Honda's Civic and Accord are other good examples of different cars under the same banner being developed for different markets.

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Camino LS6]

Clearly we aren't on the same page here.

GM utilises its worldwide subsidiaries to develop cars for markets in which those subsidiaries are based. An Opel Astra, for example, is certainly not an American car; neither is a Holden Commodore. In both cases, these cars were developed purely for local markets and tastes in mind by Europeans and Australians respectively. The Astra is a typical mainstream German car which fits the mould of many markets globally. Ford operates in the same way; the '98 Ford Focus was originally a German car developed autonomously by Ford-Werke under the auspices of Ford of Europe; although much of the design was completed in the UK, all of the engineering work was undertaken in Germany. Considerable legislative changes were made to the car in order for it to go on sale in North America two years later.

In the case of the Commodore that simply isn't true, it was designed with the intention that it would be exported to the US( and elsewhere) from the start. Additonally, Zeta itself was developed to be a global platform from the start with assembly on several continents. The upcoming Camaro is on a variant of Zeta with other NA-market cars to be based on this updated zeta as well. While CAFE has caused GM to scale back or modify the way that Zeta is deployed, the fact remains that it, and other upcoming architectures, are being developed for both production and distribution worldwide. They will be tailored to each market in a fashion never truly employed by GM before. As much as you may love to draw lines between certain components of GM's global presence, GM is finally acting as a global entity. The results of this may be both positive and negative from certain points of view and in the details of product delivered to any given market, but to deny that this is happening is simply incorrect.

[Newbiewar]

poor experiances and consumer overconfidence.

if you havent heard my story about every toyota that has stopped in my driveway, i dont feel like repeating it now... but it is extremely numerous

[Guest aatbloke]

In the case of the Commodore that simply isn't true, it was designed with the intention that it would be exported to the US( and elsewhere) from the start. Additonally, Zeta itself was developed to be a global platform from the start with assembly on several continents. The upcoming Camaro is on a variant of Zeta with other NA-market cars to be based on this updated zeta as well. While CAFE has caused GM to scale back or modify the way that Zeta is deployed, the fact remains that it, and other upcoming architectures, are being developed for both production and distribution worldwide. They will be tailored to each market in a fashion never truly employed by GM before. As much as you may love to draw lines between certain components of GM's global presence, GM is finally acting as a global entity. The results of this may be both positive and negative from certain points of view and in the details of product delivered to any given market, but to deny that this is happening is simply incorrect.

We seem to have a language barrier. The Commodore was designed completely in-house by Holden, as opposed to being a modified Opel design, as practically all Commodores were previously. The Zeta platform itself - also completely Australia-engineered - was indeed developed to be utilised in various markets worldwide, but the Commodore itself was designed first and foremost to meet the needs and tastes of the local market. There are several succinct styling changes for the North American model, for example, notably at the back.

GM has long acted as a global "entity" in terms of utilising its subsidiaries, however its North American products have largely been separate products to those sold everywhere else. There are notable exceptions of course, namely the 1975 T-Car and 1981 J-Car. The Opel-developed Delta and Epsilon platforms have been in use now globally for a number of years.

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Camino LS6]

We seem to have a language barrier. The Commodore was designed completely in-house by Holden, as opposed to being a modified Opel design, as practically all Commodores were previously. The Zeta platform itself - also completely Australia-engineered - was indeed developed to be utilised in various markets worldwide, but the Commodore itself was designed first and foremost to meet the needs and tastes of the local market. There are several succinct styling changes for the North American model, for example, notably at the back.

GM has long acted as a global "entity" in terms of utilising its subsidiaries, however its North American products have largely been separate products to those sold everywhere else. There are notable exceptions of course, namely the 1976 T-Car and 1981 J-Car. The Opel-developed Delta and Epsilon platforms have been in use now globally for a number of years.

Holden is responsible for global RWD car design and depends upon exports for survival. As such, Holden designs to global needs, not merely Australian tastes. In fact, The Holdens of recent memory have emulated what I would call true American design. The hallmarks of the Holden design language have very American roots with a European seasoning added to great effect. Also, GMNA had a great deal to to with the RWD design process at Holden - including supplying personnel.

On Epsilon II the global nature of new GM architectures will be even more pronounced. And that is really the point, GM is using design from around the globe to satisfy markets around the globe.

[enzl]

Toyota has never been, and still is not, the top seller in the US. But ask any joe on the street and you might think that they are, that's the disconnect.

I hate Toyota with a passion, and for a whole host of reasons, but that pales in comparison to one simple fact:

Toyota has never built anything I would ever want.

The same can be said of all Asian manufacturers.

I credit these companies with reducing the most important aspect of car ownership in the US.

Pride.

People used to be proud of their cars and where they were built and who they were built by. They were proud of the style , the power, the way the car fitted to their lives just so. The Japanese (with Toyota in the vaguard) really introduced the notion of the car as an appliance and took that ugly perception to the top of the market. The domestics, in their panic, adopted this unpleasant approach and lost much of their own identity for several decades because of it.

For me that is the real crime I lay at Toyota's doorstep, the diminishing of the art that is the automobile to the rank of appliance like any washing machine or trash compactor. Like a poison, this mentality has spread to the point that many throughout the world now see the automobile as a necessary evil rather than an expression of freedom and individuality.

That's the difference between those who love cars and those that buy them because they have to. And it is the difference between me and those who buy Toyotas.

Your premise is wrong at the outset.

Toyota (the brand) cars outsell every other nameplate with retail customers...take fleet/wholesale out and more individual consumers buy a Toyota.

People "used to" do alot of things. Lots of those things were really stupid in 20/20 hindsight.

Blaming Toyota for 'blanding' cars presumes that GM has been making more interesting ones--which ones are you thinking of? All of GM's mass market offerings for 30 years have been nearly or equally average and boring---that's part of the rut that GM is spending alot of time and $ trying to pull itself out of.

The only poison I'm concerned with is the disdain shown to American consumers by GM management for decades--again, something they're trying to correct, at the cost of $, jobs and potential extinction.

[Camino LS6]

Your premise is wrong at the outset.

Toyota (the brand) cars outsell every other nameplate with retail customers...take fleet/wholesale out and more individual consumers buy a Toyota.

People "used to" do alot of things. Lots of those things were really stupid in 20/20 hindsight.

Blaming Toyota for 'blanding' cars presumes that GM has been making more interesting ones--which ones are you thinking of? All of GM's mass market offerings for 30 years have been nearly or equally average and boring---that's part of the rut that GM is spending alot of time and $ trying to pull itself out of.

The only poison I'm concerned with is the disdain shown to American consumers by GM management for decades--again, something they're trying to correct, at the cost of $, jobs and potential extinction.

As usual, you've missed my point and put my comments into the wrong context.

Toyota does not outsell GM in the US market- period. And last I heard, as a brand Chevy still outsells Toyota as a brand although that was not the context I used in my post.

As for the "blanding" , I blame Toyota for instituting it and the domestics for emulating it. It was exactly the wrong way to meet the competition from Asia. So, you missed that part of what I've been saying. The domestics willingly drank the poison and built cars that were some mutant attempt at Japanese instead of pushing their own identities forward with the result being cars that never measured up to either standard. I don't excuse them for this.

[Guest aatbloke]

Holden is responsible for global RWD car design and depends upon exports for survival. As such, Holden designs to global needs, not merely Australian tastes. In fact, The Holdens of recent memory have emulated what I would call true American design. The hallmarks of the Holden design language have very American roots with a European seasoning added to great effect. Also, GMNA had a great deal to to with the RWD design process at Holden - including supplying personnel.

On Epsilon II the global nature of new GM architectures will be even more pronounced. And that is really the point, GM is using design from around the globe to satisfy markets around the globe.

Until the latest Commodore was developed - a process which began in 1999 - Holden hadn't used a basic design of its own in donkey's years. In the past, it has used everything from rebadged Toyotas to Isuzus to Opels to Daewoos (the latter two still comprise most of the Holden's current model range). It's essentially an Australian Opel outlet by and large and has been for years. Furthermore, Holdens are rarely marketed outside of Australasia - a few HSV examples are occasionally marketed in Europe and for many years it has exported its large sedans to the Middle East as Chevrolets. The last-generation Commodore and Calais were based upon, but heavily modified from, the last-generation Opel Omega, as was the Monaro coupe.

Perhaps its because only very recently that Americans have received a couple of largely rebadged Holdens that suddenly they believe the company to be some sort of staging post between America and Europe. Far from it in my opinion.

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Camino LS6]

Until the latest Commodore was developed - a process which began in 1999 - Holden hadn't used a design of its own in donkey's years. In the past, it has used everything from rebadged Toyotas to Opels to Daewoos (the latter two still comprise most of the Holden's current model range). It's essentially an Australian Opel outlet by and large and has been for years. Furthermore, Holdens are rarely marketed outside of Australasia - a few HSV examples are occasionally marketed in Europe. The last-generation Commodore and Calais were based upon, but heavily modified from, the last-generation Opel Omega, as was the Monaro coupe.

Perhaps its because only very recently that Americans have received a couple of largely rebadged Holdens that suddenly they believe the company to be some sort of staging post between America and Europe. Far from it in my opinion.

Umm,no.

Holden drastically changed the Opel platform and took it places it never dreamed of in a synthesis of American/ Australian drivetrains on a re-engineered and expanded form of the original Opel offering. This creativity allowed them to create an entirely new identity from the Opel crumbs that supported a huge range of variants Opel never even dreamed of, including everything from V6 sedans, to commercial trucks, to crossovers to high performance cars capable of regularly embarassing BMW on the track. In various forms, these were exported to every continent with humans on it. Now even the development of the iconic Camaro is largely in the hands of Holden.

An "outpost of Opel" ?

I think not.

Holden has proven to be more resourceful on a tighter budget than any other portion of the GM world.

What they have been able to do with so little is just flat amazing.

[Guest aatbloke]

Umm,no.

Holden drastically changed the Opel platform and took it places it never dreamed of in a synthesis of American/ Australian drivetrains on a re-engineered and expanded form of the original Opel offering. This creativity allowed them to create an entirely new identity from the Opel crumbs that supported a huge range of variants Opel never even dreamed of, including everything from V6 sedans, to commercial trucks, to crossovers to high performance cars capable of regularly embarassing BMW on the track. In various forms, these were exported to every continent with humans on it. Now even the development of the iconic Camaro is largely in the hands of Holden.

An "outpost of Opel" ?

I think not.

Holden has proven to be more resourceful on a tighter budget than any other portion of the GM world.

What they have been able to do with so little is just flat amazing.

Umm yes, actually.

Over the past thirty years Holden have sold the Opel Rekord, Commodore, and Senator as its Commodore and Calais respectively, the Corsa/Barina, the Astra, the Ascona/Camira, the Vectra, Tigra, and Zafira. Most of these models were exported from Europe, and the Holden Astra to this day is built primarily in the UK. The Frontera came straight from the UK as well, although it was essentially an Isuzu. The Jackaroo was locally produced but again, a straightforward Isuzu.

It was only the last generation Commodore which Holden significantly changed the Opel basis of. Sure, they also supplanted a few V8s for local consumption, but the cars themselves were not completely indigenous Australian products from the ground up.

Opel never even dreamed of? I take it you are familiar with the likes of Omega/Carlton Lotus?

[LosAngeles]

Do you two care to get a room? LOL

[Camino LS6]

Well LA, I admit that the topic has veered far from it's original intent.

I'll just say this one last thing, I can now see that the anti-Holden thing seems to be a European disease. And that it still amazes me to see anyone attempt to discount the ingenuity of our friends in Australia - who can take junk and turn it to gold in my view.

[Guest aatbloke]

Well LA, I admit that the topic has veered far from it's original intent.

I'll just say this one last thing, I can now see that the anti-Holden thing seems to be a European disease. And that it still amazes me to see anyone attempt to discount the ingenuity of our friends in Australia - who can take junk and turn it to gold in my view.

Ah so now we're down to the bare bones - you're seemingly anti-Japanese and anti-European. Good grief. I'm not anti-Holden by any means - I've followed that company for donkey's years and driven a number of its products. The majority of its model range has for several decades been primarily rebadged Vauxhall-Opel products from Corsas to Vectras, and that's a fact. The first two generation Commodores up to the VS were essentially straightforward Opel Commdores and Senators with styling tweaks and a range of larger engines. With the VT-VZ third-gen cars, the Opel basis was greatly diluted.

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[enzl]

As usual, you've missed my point and put my comments into the wrong context.

Toyota does not outsell GM in the US market- period. And last I heard, as a brand Chevy still outsells Toyota as a brand although that was not the context I used in my post.

As for the "blanding" , I blame Toyota for instituting it and the domestics for emulating it. It was exactly the wrong way to meet the competition from Asia. So, you missed that part of what I've been saying. The domestics willingly drank the poison and built cars that were some mutant attempt at Japanese instead of pushing their own identities forward with the result being cars that never measured up to either standard. I don't excuse them for this.

I was merely trying to point out that ---where it counts--Toyota is already winning--in fact, the war is over. RETAIL sales that generate real profits on a per-unit basis already favor Toyota---simply take fleet rates of 25% and 10% and discount sales accordingly---Chevy's 2nd. The lead is only increasing, as the 13% hit GM took this month was twice the decline of Toyota's---while all of the peanut gallery celebrates, they don't even realize that Toyota still took more share!

I didn't misunderstand, I just took the real numbers, rather than the joke that is the gross sales numbers...1 of 4 GM vehicles aren't sold to individuals--and haven't been for some time. No wonder they went bland--they had to please the guy in accounting, not the guy spending his hard earned cash. It actually makes perfect sense in that context.

[Camino LS6]

Ah so now we're down to the bare bones - you're seemingly anti-Japanese and anti-European. Good grief. I'm not anti-Holden by any means - I've followed that company for donkey's years and driven a number of its products. The majority of its model range has for several decades been primarily rebadged Vauxhall-Opel products from Corsas to Vectras, and that's a fact. The first two generation Commodores up to the VS were essentially straightforward Opel Commdores and Senators with styling tweaks and a range of larger engines. With the VT-VZ third-gen cars, the Opel basis was greatly diluted.

I am not anti- European whatsoever.

[LosAngeles]

Well LA, I admit that the topic has veered far from it's original intent.

I'm just clowning around. It's nice to see a post I start have passion within.

I'll just say this one last thing, I can now see that the anti-Holden thing seems to be a European disease.

S'funny, could have sworn Pontiac Custom-S was American.

Ah so now we're down to the bare bones - you're seemingly anti-Japanese and anti-European. Good grief. I'm not anti-Holden by any means - I've followed that company for donkey's years and driven a number of its products. The majority of its model range has for several decades been primarily rebadged Vauxhall-Opel products, and that's a fact. The first two generation Commodores up to the VS were essentially straightforward Opel Commdores and Senators with styling tweaks and a range of larger engines. With the VT-VZ third-gen cars, the Opel basis was greatly diluted.

Actually, the Commodore chassis was heavily modified from Rekord, Senator, and Omega respectively. The difference is clear. Holden had to beef up the suspension for Australian conditions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_VB_Commodore

[ZL-1]

I take it you are familiar with the likes of Omega/Carlton Lotus?

Shhhhhhh... don't tell them about the Omega/Carlton Lotus, or people here might start liking GME products. Then the sky will fall on our heads

EDIT - Links to pictures. That car was one people my age drooled over when we were younger.

Clicky 001

Clicky 002

Clicky 003

Clicky 004

Edited April 3, 2008 by ZL-1

[Guest aatbloke]

Actually, the Commodore chassis was heavily modified from Rekord, Senator, and Omega respectively. The difference is clear. Holden had to beef up the suspension for Australian conditions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_VB_Commodore

Stiffening a suspension isn't "heavily modifying" the chassis. The VB Commodore was essentially a straightforward rebadged Opel Commodore (an Opel Rekord with the Senator's nose) with a different range of engines. Many cars in production get suspension tweaks or upgrades for different markets.

The VT Commodore models onward - which were derived from the Omega - were heavily modified chassis by virtue of the fact they were structurally widened and practically re-engineered.

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Guest aatbloke]

Shhhhhhh... don't tell them about the Omega/Carlton Lotus, or people here might start liking GME products. Then the sky will fall on our heads

LOL, talk about a blistering machine. It was the fastest 4-door production saloon in the world until the BMW M5 stole the title in 1991.

[A Horse With No Name]

Well, I hardly ever see any A-bodies around unless they are in the "ghetto" and in rusted-out shape. I never, NEVER see any old A-body (or similar generation GM products) on the road in any sort of decent condition.

Cars rust out around you in Cali?

Chris

[ZL-1]

LOL, talk about a blistering machine. It was the fastest 4-door production saloon in the world until the BMW M5 stole the title in 1991.

I remember buying a British car magazine just to read a half-page review of that car. As a kid in Lisbon, seeing tons of small cars, there was nothing more exciting than a big, fast, powerful car like that.

Edited April 3, 2008 by ZL-1

[LosAngeles]

Actually, the Commodore chassis was heavily modified from Rekord, Senator, and Omega respectively. The difference is clear. Holden had to beef up the suspension for Australian conditions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_VB_Commodore

Stiffening a suspension isn't "heavily modifying" the chassis. The VB Commodore was essentially a straightforward rebadged Opel Commodore (an Opel Rekord with the Senator's nose) with a different range of engines. Many cars in production get suspension tweaks or upgrades for different markets.

The VT Commodore models onward - which were derived from the Omega - were heavily modified chassis by virtue of the fact they were structurally widened and practically re-engineered.

I can't imagine this part being an exaggeration:

"When driven at speed over harsh Australian roads, Holden quickly realised that the Rekord would effectively break in half. This forced Holden to rework the entire car for local conditions. Such a task blew development costs beyond expectations to AU$110 million"

And as far as carlton vs. M5, different road tests can obviously yield different results. A favorite issue of Motor Trend, September 1991, saw the Carlton (Omega) as quicker and faster than both the M5 and 500E.

[Guest aatbloke]

"I can't imagine this part being an exaggeration:

"When driven at speed over harsh Australian roads, Holden quickly realised that the Rekord would effectively break in half. This forced Holden to rework the entire car for local conditions. Such a task blew development costs beyond expectations to AU$110 million" "

The suspension was stiffened. The Ford Fiesta received similar treatment for the Indian market, along with an increase in ride height, but it's still essentially the same car. Despite the sizeable engineering costs, this isn't the same deal as the VT Commodore, re-engineering and re-sizing the entire floorpan and widening the bodyshell.

"And as far as carlton vs. M5, different road tests can obviously yield different results. A favorite issue of Motor Trend, September 1991, saw the Carlton (Omega) as quicker and faster than both the M5 and 500E."

In late 1991 the European-market M5 had its engine uprated from the existing old 3.5 litre engine (which could be traced back to the old M535i) to a 3.8 litre unit which was officially clocked at 177mph, and some magazine tests clocked it at just over 180mph. This beat the Carlton/Omega Lotus' official record of 176mph. This is actually a well-known fact among British car enthusiasts in particular, and the story was widely covered in the motoring press at the time - which I'm sure you're more than aware of.

Edited April 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Blake Noble]

You need to remember that by and large, most mainstream Toyota models are built for global markets - which is where they differ to North American Chevrolets, for example.

Future Chevrolets will be designed for markets outside of North America in mind and they will still offer plenty to be excited about. :AH-HA_wink:

And as for the Camry being built to be acceptable in a market outside of North America, well, I am sure that you are aware of a certain brand of negativity attached to the Camry among the European auto press and European buyers. I have an issue of Car from November 2003 that claims the Camry is, "Totally unsuited to Europe" in the buyers guide at the back of the issue. Of course, that was a different generation of Camry, but I do not think the sentiment would change much, really, with the newer generation model.

Edited April 4, 2008 by YellowJacket894

[Guest aatbloke]

Future Chevrolets will be designed for markets outside of North America in mind and they will still offer plenty to be excited about. :AH-HA_wink:

And as for the Camry being built to be acceptable in a market outside of North America, well, I am sure that you are aware of a certain brand of negativity attached to the Camry among the European auto press and European buyers. I have an issue of Car from November 2003 that claims the Camry is, "Totally unsuited to Europe" in the buyers guide at the back of the issue. Of course, that was a different generation of Camry, but I do not think the sentiment would change much, really, with the newer generation model.

I didn't say the Camry was necessarily acceptable in a market outside North America. What I did say that Toyota modifies its models for different markets. The Camry has always done well in North America, Australia and the Far East.

The Camry suffered in Europe for two main reasons: a) it become too large after the first-generation model for European tastes which don't generally favour large Japanese saloons with comparatively bland styling; and b) its suspension, though stiffened, was still too soft for European driving conditions. In addition to this, the European market has changed considerably in the past decade, with high-depreciating E-segment saloons from mainstream manufacturers falling largely out of favour as buyers turned to smaller D-segment executive saloons from BMW, Audi et al for the same money. Opel, Ford, Toyota, Fiat, Renault and Mitsubishi have all pulled out of the European E-segment during that time.

Edited April 4, 2008 by aatbloke

[biff]

Noone said they won any beauty contests. But sorry, Toyotas in the 1980's would run on next to nothing, and did so effortlessly. GM's Corsica and Lumina were no match for the Camry in terms of mechanical longevity. Yes, they rusted before they stopped running, but the average punter doesn't keep a car for 20 years and 300K miles, either. As a business, Toyota knew this: as such, they gained their reputation for near flawless reliability, not flawless bodywork.

I guess I still see celebritys old lesabres and such still on the road. The 80's GM cars in my family were great, put 300k on some of those cars. Corsicas and Luminas were mainly from the 90's and I think that's where they lost it for a while.

[turbo200]

If I had to choose a Toyota today, I'd plump for an Auris SR180 with its 175bhp 2.2 litre turbodiesel good for almost 50mpg (US) at highway speeds.

that sounds and looks real nice.